Art History Today

Cordon Sanitaire.

Foucault writes in Surveiller et punir,

“In this way the hospital building was gradually organised as an instrument of medical action: it was to allow a better observation of patients, and therefore a better calibration of their treatment; the form of the buildings, by the careful separation of the patients, was to prevent contagion; lastly, the ventilation and air that circulated around each bed was to prevent the deleterious vapours from stagnating around the patient, breaking down his humours and spreading the disease by their immediate effects”.

In this instance, paintings should be regarded as patients, and visitors as the life-threatening diseases that must be marked off by a cordon sanitaire in the gallery. Though the “miasma theory” has been discredited, its residue remains in some security measures. And it did feature in the history of the National Gallery in the 19^th century, when concerns were raised about miasma harming paintings, or diseases brought in by visitors from Trafalgar Square.

In the Barocci exhibition guards followed me from painting to painting, like a doctor in attendance?

Notes on the Barocci Exhibition.

CLOUD. Barocci isn’t really a cloud painter; interesting, because he’s supposed to be the natural heir to Correggio, cloud painter par excellence [see Damisch in Théorie du nuage]; or the “first baroque painter” (Mengs). Barocci’s use of cloud is understated; and when he uses it it’s reminiscent of Spanish visionary artists like Zurbaran who structured the vision not only with clouds, but architecture, e,g. Vision of Blessed Gatekeeper. Compare his “Perdona” with Zurbaran’s vision. There is a division between earth and heaven, but it’s defined by the cherubs under Christ, not clouds. Figures crowd out the clouds (Assumption, not in exh; or Immaculate Conception). Doesn’t need clouds in IC to define mandorla; does that with the heads of Cherubs who form a pear shape. - n.b. there are more clouds in Barocci’s studies for the IC, so his need to diminish this cloud machinery (see Damisch) reflects his realistic approach in his finished pictures? Compare Barocci’s Crucifixions with Scipio Pulzone who reduces everything to bare essentials. Yet Barocci’s “realism” isn’t as stark as Pulzone. Perhaps in Barroci we see a dissipation of the real, a spreading thin, a scattering rather than the solid figurative ensembles of Scipio, yet not full-blown pictorial dissolution as in Rubens.  Barocci expends generously, luxuriously with his brushwork, and the viewer responds, but is not overawed. Unlike Pulzone, B’s realism does not = pictorial austerity.

DRAWING. Overproduction of drawing in an economic sense; over determination in a psychological sense, possibly. Different modes of drawing: able to produce a furia- driven Leonardoesque boiling cauldron of the mind drawing; or a meticulous, fussy, worked sheet. “Outworking” (Lingo); working the figure out of traditional/archaic sources (Madonna in Crucifixion fr Michelangelo’s drawings of the same subject). Drawing in process as presented to the viewer: Berlin study of Madonna shows him working fr problem to solution; a serial kind of composition, drawing figures in a sequence and editing them as required. Huge variety of media in his graphic work- presumably he still thinks in terms of colorito even when he’s drawing. Attempt to resolve the disegno/colorito conflicts? Here’s a chalk study of his cat.

COLOUR. The golden gateway to Barocci’s art. Beauty of colours, in (a) a natural sense, (b) a theological sense. Colour and delight; but not delight in Poussin’s sense (delectation/delectatio boni (Bonaventura and the neo-Augustinians)); NP’s more colder, and Barocci’s more warmer, a modified cangianti concession to “shifting colour” (Lingo). Colour not as saturated as the mannerists. Reform, colour and the Counter-Reformation; problem of colour and theology in the late 16^th century; where does Barocci fit in with like artists like Santi di Tito, Jacopo Ligozzi, the mannerist reformers (Freedberg). Santi too allied to disegno (Florentine Academy) than Barocci. Devotion and colour, and audiences knowledgeable about colour through reading Dolce (Lingo). Vaghezza and delight (extensive research of Lingo on the former). REALLY needed the Madonna del Popolo in the show to analyse Barocci’s colour strategies. Tradition of writing about colour (Dolce, Borghini). Cosmetics, colour and women: the beautiful, yet artificial doll like faces of his women.

PLACE IN ART HISTORY. Is Barocci a baroque painter? Not really, lacks the bombast and the pictorial dissolution associated with artists like Rubens or Cortona- controlled dissipation. Is he a rococo painter avant la lettre? That honour is usually bestowed on Correggio who certainly was a huge influence; the impact of his Madonna della Scodella on B’s Rest on the Flight. Barocci was popular in the 18^th century- no wonder, his chalk drawings have that lightness you associate with Watteau and Tiepolo. His place in the development of art history: influence on Rubens is very evident, and not just in colour; rows of observing heads emulated by PPR in his Jesuit altarpieces. Bellori more appreciative of him than the Carracci at one point, but though popular with art historians,[lots of papers at recent conferences]  B remains largely unknown to the public despite commercial radio advertising campaigns on Classic FM and the like- low attendance at exhibition. Provincial factor, though he worked in Rome for a time. Clearly learnt much from the Urbino tradition; his Entombment owes much to Raphael’s Baglione Entombment. Needs to be rescued from semi-obscurity by a small number of devoted art historians. Barocci for the happy few! Wonder if Stendhal mentions him in his writings- too much in thrall to Correggio who isn’t that known to the general public either. Is Barocci the ultimate art history anomaly?

Margaret Thatcher on Francis Bacon

MT “That man who paints those dreadful pictures.”

 

FB. “You can't be more horrific than life itself.”

 

Proust on the Museum.

“ A picture is nowadays “presented” in the midst of furniture, ornaments, hangings of the same period, a second-hand scheme of decoration…; and among these, the masterpiece at which we glance up from the table while we dine does not give us that exhilarating delight which we can expect only from it in a public gallery, which symbolizes far better by its bareness, by the absence of all irritating detail, those innermost spaces into which the artist withdrew to create it.”

A current American collector.

“My friends said to me “Just go to museums and SEE all the art you want.” But for me, I wanted to own the pieces. I wanted to experience what it is what like to have a cup of coffee in the morning with a great work of art in front of me".