I learned something very interesting from my brother's art history class. They were talking about the differences between Michelangelo and Da Vinci and there was one difference that no one really payed attention to and it was their different views on nature.
Michelangelo viewed nature as something to be fought against. For example you see his statues fighting against the wind or the elements. Da Vinci doesn't do that. Da Vinci believes that nature is used to inspire, to help and not hinder man.
I just thought about how this is relative to our relationship that we have with nature. Obviously, Michelangelo didn't have good experiences with nature, while Da Vinci probably had some of his best experiences in nature.
¡Finzamos!
The Official Blog for the University of Arkansas at Little Rock's Spanish 4362/Language 7313.
3 comments:
Que intersante de saber esto en cuanfo a Da Vinci. Primero para mi no es lógico tratar de pelear contra la naturaleza. Digo esto porque ella tiene mas poder de cualquier de nosotros y cualquier máquina que podemos inventar como hombres. Entonces lo que quiero decir es Da Vinci tenía mucho sentido en ser amigo de la naturlaeza, no enemigo.
Wow! You're so right! I didn't realize how different they were! I also can really identify with the perspectives represented in DaVinci's paintings, like this one (http://www.allartclassic.com/img/Leonardo_LEV024.jpg). The guy is naked, in the most natural way in the middle of nature. He looks at ease and comfortable where he is, not threatened or afraid of his surroundings. Fantastic.
Did you know that Leonardo invented the scissors. Yeah, I can see the difference between the two. Michealangelo was a very mean subborn artist from what I remember and think he was pretty much against everything and everyone. No really I see that leo seemed to be more open when it comes to nature and tryed to allow himselt to be taught by it.
Post a Comment