This is everything Burning Man 2. Renaissance. On October 2. Burning Man announced that their art theme for 2. Italian Renaissance in Florence, which they are calling, “Da Vinci. After spending the first 343 days of 2016 asleep. Man Who Slept Through 2016 Finds Out Everything He Missed. Man Who Slept Through 2016 Finds Out Everything He.Man Who Slept Through 2016 Finds Out Everything He Missed Repost Like. Everything coming and going on Netflix for August 2016. Holding the Man (2015) Two Harbors couple say man bled them dry. An elderly Minnesota couple lost everything to a man they viewed as the son they never had. It is so rare to see the Italian Renaissance in pop culture that I got excited. This was a mistake. The fanciful utopian history Burning Man has written to underpin this journey is an utter farce. In fact, almost every clause has an error. It’s not that I expect Burning Man to have an exhaustive knowledge of the period, but it’s frustrating that they. Even if it was a family name, it could refer as well to Leonardo. However, to Burning Man. I’m guessing Burning Man is trying to refer to what is sometimes considered to be the golden age of the Medici family, whom they extol in the rest of the intro. However, in that case, their time frame is too broad. I also wonder if Burning Man knows that its history has included the period in which a fire- and- brimstone- type preacher named Savonarola spoke vigorously against the wealth that the Medici family were accumulating and inspired a mass uprising in which they were exiled. Savonarola, it must be said, was not at all a fan of art. Perhaps this is because they want to celebrate Florence. Really, more of just a kill- kill, since the Medici family dismantled the republican government and installed themselves as dukes in the 1. Interestingly, Burning Man is, however, including the reign of the first Medici pope, Leo X (r. Martin Luther was to criticize so famously in 1. It is clearly influenced from histories written in the Renaissance about the period before the Renaissance for self- serving purposes and cannot be taken at face value as being accurate.? Could anyone really believe that so little of consequence happened in 1,0. Let’s not forget that this period in European history is marked by the building of some of the most beautiful churches in history, some of the greatest theological writings in history, the reign of Charlemagne and his successors, and on and on and on. Saying that Florence cared about humanism is deeply misleading unless you also acknowledge that it was a deeply religious city as well. So, Italy didn? The medieval period was deeply engaged with mathematics, optics, geometry, astronomy, chemistry and alchemy as much as they were able. They were deeply interested in Greek philosophy and in Aristotle’s scientific writings. It may seem quaint to us, but it is not fair to suggest that science did not exist before the Renaissance. Unfortunately, the idea that this is what occurred in the Renaissance comes from Renaissance writers themselves. It is a mistake to take them at face value. They must be referring to Michelangelo. The Florentines were very proud of their governmental system, this much is true: but it did not look like any form of utopian government that Burning Man would want to emulate. First of all, the only people who were eligible to serve on the government were people from the most important and richest families. Therefore, even in the best of times, the Florentine republic was much more of an oligarchy than a democracy. The main governing body was a group of nine men. These men were (not joking) “elected” to serve by having their names drawn from a bag, lottery style. The terms were very short, two months each. They ruled essentially as princes and this was hardly a secret. As I mentioned earlier, after their second exile, the Medici family did away with the fiction of a republican government entirely and from then on called themselves dukes. In other words, Renaissance Florence was far from what we would consider a democracy. The elite always considered artists essentially as skilled craftsmen and treated them as such. Though it is hard from documents alone to piece together what the relationship between artists and patrons was, to me, it always seemed a bit more like the relationship between a Wall Street banker and his skilled tailor. Artists might be respected and cherished, but they were hardly considered equal to the nobles and very few were trained in Latin, which would be essential to be accepted in the upper intellectual classes. Michelangelo, for example, who actually did belong to a noble family, needed vigorously to assert this fact to his patrons who sometimes tried to treat him as a lowly artisan. Furthermore, he really had to convince his father to let him become an artist! Fra Filippo Lippi’s father was a butcher; and Fra Bartolomeo’s father was whatever a “muleteer” is. But this doesn’t necessarily prove that being an artist was a means of social advancement. It may have been a means of economic advancement for some talented people, though. To be patronized by princes or popes, an artist would have to leave Florence- Utopia, though! Simply false. This is true, if a bit overstated. This is a more difficult statement to prove than it seems on face value. Again, it seems to be diminishing the cultural importance of Christianity at this time. I’ve never studied the Vitruvian man drawing in particular, but it would be interesting to see Burning Man contextualize this within Leonardo’s other drawings. Why does grass look like hair? What happens to water as it flows out of a pipe? They are really wonderful. That said, to our modern eyes, the drawings sometimes look a bit naive in their form of empirical scientific analysis. That seems like a lot of unnecessary effort to make a big thing spin. I can’t imagine that Brunelleschi or Leonardo would be interested in putting so much effort into such a stupid task. Or is it more likely that Burning Man’s organizers don’t know the difference between a church and a cathedral? Also, . This was no small task, as it was the largest dome in Christendom and he made it without using scaffolding. It took nearly four centuries for art historians to learn just how Brunelleschi was able to do this. What is equally amazing, if also a little puzzling, is that for more than 1. Florentines were building their cathedral knowing that it was too large to put a dome over it, but trusting that they would figure out the science when it came time to build it. I think Burning Man is confusing Leonardo and Brunelleschi here. Leonardo made lots of cool machines. Brunelleschi was no slouch when it came to engineering, but to my knowledge, the only true invention he is credited with is drawing in one- point perspective. If this is true, this is not a small feat. This drawing is of a flying machine and it looks really cool and amazing for its time, but calling it the prototype of a helicopter is a giving a lot of credit to Leonardo. Again, contextualization would be nice. Of course, in the Renaissance, none of these words had their current meanings. What Burning Man organizers mean by “art,” “science” and “technology” pretty much all would have fallen under the umbrella of philosophy or liberal arts in the Renaissance. Additionally, some scholars think that Lorenzo didn.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
April 2019
Categories |