Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
Thank you, Titus.
My pleasure.
Some links, folks: First, go here for all the details & magnifications & broad views of the fresco! Of course, go to Florence, if you can, this is actually on display for free! Only thing of it’s kind, I think…
Secondly, here is a slightly later Last Supper fresco by another great talent, Ghirlandaio: You will see the similarities & the great differences as to technical choice regarding the use of perspective. & another by Perugino, also a talent. Again, you can see the use of the wall as a window or opening into another room & the world beyond–but none of the stuff I’m belaboring in this essay.
It’s unique…
Titus Techera
We are not really in the same world as that of the Gospel miracles and the act of redemption. Our assumption of proximity rests on no known natural power. It is only the grace of God that might bestow on any of us a miracle, a divine presence.
That’s just wonderful, Titus. Thanks for this post; it’s a keeper.
I was just watching an art history lecture (from The Great Courses – one of Ricochet’s former (?) sponsors ) that featured this work!
I am headed to Florence this fall. I will visit this church because of your article.
Almost fifty years ago I took an art appreciation class to satisfy a credit requirement, and the class pretty much consisted of watching slides of works of art while the professor droned on. Funny thing…I remember so much of those works and the class itself; you just never know what will capture your imagination and stay with you. That class and the fetal pig I mangled in biology are among of my college highlights.
Vasari embellished? NO! It CAN’T be!
I appreciate these discussions; great work. But I have an alternate view on the middle ground perspective problem. You wrote:
The contradiction in the perspectival construction is meant to deal not merely with the unreality of depiction, a mere use of color and shape, but also with the mysterious character of the Gospel stories
Perhaps. But I think he just couldn’t pull it off. You look at his foreshortening on the Trinity; not well-executed. Granted, I’m a bit biased on Castegno; he’s not a favorite. His drapery can look like extruded concrete. This is his best work, but he wouldn’t be the first to combine first-rate portraiture with second-rate surroundings.
Well, it’s possible but he is really famous for his design. As I said, just compare with the Ghirlandaio & Perugino–you see it’s perfectly possible to simply avoid the problem with the middle space that’s concentrated. That was a deliberate choice & it’s unique to him.
As for St. Jerome’s vision–you at least have to admire the way the bodies are turned & sent into depth, so to speak. It’s rare & startling, but a great choice. Few have done it. The rendering of the body of the Christ is really very good.
Well, that’s rather on the serendipitous side! So what do they say!
Well, that’s high praise! I’m pleased–I’ve loved showing it to people & I hope more people learn of it. It’s very close to one of the famous sites, St. Mark, due West of it, & free, & often open, & never busy. You can move around the old expanded refectory & stare at the large wall. The fresco was a constant companion, you come to see, to the nuns–you can go back to the opposite wall & still the concentration of space would push you back still more, in search of an illusory true vantage point–presumably the nuns were meant to remember that they could not get a privileged position that would cause everything to fall into place & arrange all the elements of the perspective. You can never be at home with that painting in that place…
That’s true, & a part of our inability to predict what our experience will be, or how it will affect us. Really, we’re right to marvel at ourselves–we are very strange…
Wow. That’s quite a juxtaposition!
It is a fun coincidence! Actually, he said rather a lot! But I was making a fruit galette while I watched, so I’m afraid my attention was divided – I promised myself I’d go back and rewatch that lesson. I do remember his saying this work didn’t have the influence it might have had if it hadn’t be commissioned for a convent. He also spoke about the work around – just above – not shown in your picture. I really must go back and watch the lesson with my full attention!
The lecturer also asked us to notice that the artist differentiated each of the figures with their individual beards and cloaks – very careful attention to this detail, apparently.
How many people “on the outside” would think that the Rightweb sustains this kind of cultural discourse? Thank goodness there’s always been a place for it at Ricochet; Titus and Lileks dress it up a little, bring it some flash to match its class!
That’s all true. Above is a kind of large scale triptych–left to right, resurrection, crucifixion, deposition. That was never covered in plaster, so it’s deteriorated quite a lot, unfortunately. It’s integrated with the Last Supper in a strange painterly way that was somewhat common in the age–it’s made to seem as though it’s happening in the hinterland, so to speak. In the landscape behind the building.
There’s something similar in Perugino painting I linked above: Behind the Last Supper scene, in the background, is the Gethsemane garden scene!
How was the galette?
Titus, thank you again for another wonderful set of insights.
I have a technical question: do you know how they remove the plaster without destroying the painting?
I want to say that I’ve heard of Castagno – his name sounds familiar – but I can’t say that I’ve heard of him before, and I’ve never seen that Last Supper. My first reaction is that it’s nowhere as good as Da Vinci’s. Your analysis of the space, Titus, is spot on. The setting is such a closed in area, claustrophobic actually, unlike the Da Vinci that opens out. Placing Judas on the opposite side of the table is interesting. It certainly communicates. I dislike the way John is lays down on Christ’s arm, but I can’t say why. Perhaps because it seems so out of place with the other disciples and rather forced. The other disciples seem to lack any characterization; they are just people. The only thing that strongly appeals to me about this painting are the colors, soft and pastel, and they have a sense of balance. The colors seem to accentuate the story line of Judas’ betrayal, seeming to focus the viewer to Judas’ dark clothing and black hair.
Thank you for introducing me to Castagno and this painting Titus.
Thanks for the compliments, folks.
As for the plaster removal–I do not know how it is removed! You need archeological skills &, I imagine, to know your masonry! There’s a lot of such work done–or rather such work has already been done to a great extent, trying to dig up or reveal Florence’s splendid past. Going around Florence, it’s hard to miss how much mediocre 18th & 19th c. stuff was done over far more impressive earlier work.
One is recalled of the Roman situation–one of the founding stories of the Renaissance is the adventure of Pippo & Donatello! In the year 1400, or so, Filippo Brunelleschi, who had lost a contest to design the bronze sculpted plates on the Southern gates of the Baptistery, went to Rome with his friend Donatello. They spent maybe two years, if I recall & were the first to really look at the ancient stuff, draw it up, & decide to redo it.
At the time, columns and any number of other artifacts of antiquity were popping up everywhere in Rome, & apparently next to nobody cared. People had this marvelous stuff & did nothing about it but ruin it in whatever mundane way…
As for the painting–yeah, that’s how Last Suppers are almost always done, from the Gospel of John, so that John is supine or asleep nearest Jesus, & you have Judas across–you can see from the other two paintings I linked to, usually Judas is on the other side of Christ. But most of the Apostles get even less characterization than in the Gospels, which also don’t do much for most of them. I guess you can see Thomas looking upward–that may be part of his doubting… The confusion among some of the others, & the discussion, seems to be tied up with Jesus having just said to them one of them will betray! The two on the left side are debating it, it would seem.
Just a small point, Titus. I expect that the “bread” handed to Judas was likely matzah. Don’t you think so, since it was supposed to have been a seder?
I expect so. Of course, the Gospels do not use the Jewish terms, but now that I think about it, I’ve no idea what the words are in Greek or Latin for John 13!
So the Greek is, arton for bread at John 13:18 & psomion for morsel at 18:26, 27, & 30.
I think we are failing to face the real truth about what this painting says about the patriarchy. Notice that not only do the apostles have assigned seats but their names are etched in the marble base symbolizing the rigid immutable class and identity strictures of white cis-male-centered ideation. Judas did not get an assigned seat so he should have known that his exclusion from the social construct was imminent (as if the micro-aggressive look of disdain from one of the Simons at the end of the table were not enough of a clue.)
As for tiresome issues of perspective debated by @titustechera and @jameslileks, the simple fact is that all of the good males are on the other side of the table and the intended viewing audience (cloistered nuns) are on the same side of the table as Judas. Enough said.
Lastly, there is the detail and skill level (AKA “showing off”) of a kind that fosters the illusion of cognizable “excellence” which is merely a competitive predisposition ultimately used to rationalize rape.
I think we can all see why the forces of enlightenment once sought to cover up this political atrocity and may yet do so again.
It was Passover. It would have to be. The Communion hosts at a Catholic Mass must be unleaven.
You give me a lot to think about, and a work of art I have never seen to focus my reflections– thank you! And thank you, @old bathos, for the (wry) laugh… you are almost frighteningly good with that language!