Saturday, November 10, 2012

The Statues of David

I was studying the 3 statues of David that we looked at by Danatello (1430), Verrochio (1472-1475), and Michaelangelo (1501-1504), and began to wonder why all three had very different influence (which is unsual since the statues by Danatello and Verocchio were both made during the Renaissance peirod in Florence, and the statue by Michaelangelo was created during the Italian Renaissance which was highly impacted by Florence as many of the artist simply flocked their after Florence was taken over in 1494). Why are these three statues so different? For example, Michaelangelo's "David" has a very Hellenstic influencee to it given the idealized body, where as Verrochio's "David" is realistic in the actual size David would have been and has a more classical influence.

5 comments:

Austin Falk said...

That is a very interesting point. I also found it kind of confusing and interesting that the latest statue of David by Michaelangelo in 1501 seems to have a more ideal approach while earlier statues have a hellenistic looking approach. The hellenistic period did come after the Hellenic Period (ideal art) in Greek times. It looks like the sculptures went full circle and seemed to return to the ideal characteristics present during the Hellenic Period instead of sticking with Hellenistic Characteristics. Was this true for all art or is this just Michaelangelo's preference?

Madeline Davis said...

Well I think they were all so different because as time went on, the statues were made to look more "ideal", although they still portrayed realistic figures and people. Michelangelo's statue of David was considered nearly perfect. Although his form was extremely idealized in beauty and strength, his figure strayed from the traditional story of David as a small, physically weak, pubescent boy with a slingshot. Both Donatello's and Verrocchio's statues remained close to the original Biblical portrayal of David.

Lindsay A said...

I think it's interesting that Michelangelo chose to stray from the original image of David. I know he was representing Florence with that statue, and Florence would love to have the image of a city-state able to overcome any obstacle no matter how giant it seems; however, Michelangelo then makes David into this hunk of a man where the miracle of David seems less like a miracle. But then again, perhaps Michelangelo was simply portraying Florence in the height of its power, where Florence was no small city-state but the center of the Renaissance.

Tyler Dean said...

I think that both Donatello's David and Verrocchio's David were actually quite similar. The only real outlier is Michelangelo's David, which i agree goes back to the Hellenistic idea of the perfect man. Personally i just think the difference in the 3 came down to the artists choice. Most art dutring the Renaissance was more like Donatello and Verrocchio's David. It comes down to what the artists wanted to portray, and in Michelangelo's case, he decided to go with the powerful hero image rather than the traditional David image.

wkuehne said...

It's also important to point out the limitations of technology and the difference in material between Verrochio and Donatello and Michelangelo. Michelangelo's statue obviously uses different material than its parralels, but there must have also been some advances in technology through the time that allows michelangelo to carve an ideal and even platonistic sculpture.