I'm more and more sympathetic to your argument. But to play devil's advocate, couldn't one argue that the Renaissance style derives, in some ways, from the Aristotelianism (and its more positive view of the flesh vs Platonism) that began to make its way onto the scene in the 12/13C? This brings in its train (arguably) a greater focus on the humanity of Christ. We see statues and crucifixes get more common around this time too. So perhaps Renaissance 'naturalism' is part of this trend.
On another note, I remember hearing Alan Fimister (on a podcast somewhere) argue that the Renaissance/classical style of architecture involved a great loss of confidence, and Faith, compared to the gothic style. Instead of Christians doing their own thing, they just copied the ancients. The first 'pastiche', as it were. This seems to backup what you're writing above.
And on yet another note, I thought one view of the Renaissance was that it resulted (in part) from the fall of Constantinople, and the resulting exodus from the East benefiting Italy with its culture. This would suggest that the East and West moved <i>closer</i> at this point, not further, as you're writing above.
So many currents to trace. But for sure, things were going seriously wrong by the Baroque era... there's an kind of arrogance about its art.
I thank you for your efforts of mind and physical labour to share this with us. Folding in Roger Scruton puts the seal on what already seems quality to me.
Robert Graves was also a deep thinker and a plowman of straight lines: third chapter ‘Dame Ocupacyon’ of his book ‘The Crowning Privilege’ seems to belong with your argument, and may interest you.
I'm more and more sympathetic to your argument. But to play devil's advocate, couldn't one argue that the Renaissance style derives, in some ways, from the Aristotelianism (and its more positive view of the flesh vs Platonism) that began to make its way onto the scene in the 12/13C? This brings in its train (arguably) a greater focus on the humanity of Christ. We see statues and crucifixes get more common around this time too. So perhaps Renaissance 'naturalism' is part of this trend.
On another note, I remember hearing Alan Fimister (on a podcast somewhere) argue that the Renaissance/classical style of architecture involved a great loss of confidence, and Faith, compared to the gothic style. Instead of Christians doing their own thing, they just copied the ancients. The first 'pastiche', as it were. This seems to backup what you're writing above.
And on yet another note, I thought one view of the Renaissance was that it resulted (in part) from the fall of Constantinople, and the resulting exodus from the East benefiting Italy with its culture. This would suggest that the East and West moved <i>closer</i> at this point, not further, as you're writing above.
So many currents to trace. But for sure, things were going seriously wrong by the Baroque era... there's an kind of arrogance about its art.
"Between Giotto (d.1337) and Donatello (b.1386) a scant 50 years lies."
And the Black Death and the Western Schism.
This was interesting. Thank you very much.
I thank you for your efforts of mind and physical labour to share this with us. Folding in Roger Scruton puts the seal on what already seems quality to me.
Robert Graves was also a deep thinker and a plowman of straight lines: third chapter ‘Dame Ocupacyon’ of his book ‘The Crowning Privilege’ seems to belong with your argument, and may interest you.
I'm trying to find Part 3!