Compare And Contrast The Death Of Marat And Michelangelo's Pieta

Michelangelo was born on March 6, 1475 in Caprese, Italy. Michelangelo was known to be one of the best artists during the renaissance. Michelangelo never was interested in school work. He was always amazed by the painters and artist that were around him. Thus, igniting the flame and desire of him becoming a painter, artist, poet and sculptor. At the age of sixteen Michelangelo sculpted two reliefs, Battle of the Centaurs and Madonna Seated on a Step. Two of Michelangelo’s famous works was the Pieta and David. David is meant to symbolize a young, courageous warrior with a bow and arrow ready to take down his enemy. Michelangelo mad David out of discarded stone, a fact which most people are not aware of. Some other works that Michelangelo did

During this painting, Michelangelo didn’t have the drive he usually did, but when his greatest enemy, Perugino started to work on it with him, that drove him to another level. Michelangelo’s interest in portraying the human body, reflected how the people in this time period felt, and that made the people who viewed his art interested in his work. Also, his sculptures reflect how dramatic of a shift it was to the Renaissance Period from the Middle Ages, and shows how the

David paints in the neoclassical style. Neoclassicism was an era in art where artists were inspired by Greek and Roman style. Socrates was of course Greek, so the subject matter in itself can represent the painting era. Another important aspect which is surely presented in this particular painting is the focus on the thought processes rather than sensuality of art. Subject matter was more thought provoking, dark and morally driven than it was an appeal to emotion during this era. Socrates’s calmness while dying represents that clearly. His almost divine like quality also alludes to that.

In this research paper I will be looking at two different artworks by the same artist. The two I will be looking at are the Sistine Chapel Ceiling (1508-1512) and The Last Judgment (1534). Both of these painting are painted in the Sistine chapel which is located in the Vatican. I am going to attempt to evaluate these two pieces of art painted by Michelangelo and explain the cultural and religious aspects of them. I will also look to other scholars to get their perspective and their reactions to the paintings. The last step of my research will be to formulate a theory about the relationship between culture and religion and use my topic to help defend my theory.

The character of David has been the inspiration for many works of art throughout history. The young David, armed with only a sling, defeated the gigantic warrior, Goliath, and became the hero of the human people. This story became very popular during the Italian Renaissance, the period of 14th-16th centuries. During the Italian Renaissance, Florence was under constant change and turmoil however David remained the people with faith for the people. Many other artists have expressed their own depictions of the young boy but two stand out among all. Donatello and Michelangelo both created masterpieces on the biblical subject although the approaches of each artist were completely different in some ways this caused unique reactions.

The pieces of art I will be comparing and contrasting are the three statues of David, by Donatello (Donato di Niccolò di Betto Bardi), Michelangelo (Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni), and Bernini (Gian Lorenzo Bernini). The statues are modeled after the biblical David, who was destined to become the second king of Israel. Also most famously known as the slayer of the Philistine giant Goliath with a stone and a sling. The sculptures are all based on the same biblical hero, but differ from one another. Each David is unique in its own certain way.

In the scope of this paper two works of art would be compared and contrasted - David’s Oath of the Horatii and Painting of Giovanni Arnolfini and His Bride by Van Eyck.

Throughout time, many men and women have made legendary contributions for mankind today. Two of those people are Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo. Da Vinci and Michelangelo given society many new styles of education. They both specialized in science, mathematics, and modern art. They each lived completely different lifestyles yet they have impacted many others.

Every painting is a unique experience for each individual person, therefore two of the artists that offered some of the most unique experiences where Leonardo da vinci and Michelangelo. While both of these painters are today well regarded and remembered, during their time they both had achieved such status in vastly different ways. Therefore even though these two artists lived during the same time these two are nothing alike. With their unique take on the world and events around them they were able to shape how the average person thought about the world around them.

The works of Leonardo Da Vinci and Michelangelo influenced the art of the 16th century in Italy and Europe in many ways. Three of Michelangelo’s works such as: The Last Judgment, Pieta, and David were great works during his time. Leonardo da Vinci also contributed great works to the 15st century such as: The Last Supper, St. James in the Wilderness, and The Mona Lisa. Although there were some similarities in Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo’s works, their differences and uniqueness is what made their works great masterpieces of the 15th and 16th century.

As I closely approached the painting I began to realize the differences between Jan van Eyck and Michelangelo’s “Last Judgment”. Contrary to Michelangelo’s “Last

In 1498, Michelangelo relocated to Rome, where he caught the attention of another cardinal, Jean Bilheres de Lagraulas, who was also a representive of the french King Charles VIII to the pope. Michelangelo during this time created his “Pieta”, which is now presently in the St. Peter’s Basilica, in Vatican City

On the Boston College art history website they describe how David also uses some of the techniques of light and dark similar to the Entombment of Christ by Caravaggio. The light is softer as it hits Marat’s face and the light is harsher as it hits the weapon to accentuate the tragedy of the murder. David also keeps some of Marat’s body in shadow that allows for the viewer to feel compassion and outrage at different parts of the painting (Neo-Classicism). David using the medium of painting was very important in his message reaching a lot of people. In the 18th century there was no radio or television so there was limited ways to get information to a large amount of people. Nowadays one could tweet something and it can literally reach the world. David had the twitter of the 18th century, art. David using paint was the appropriate way in that time period to successfully complete his goal of persuading and informing people of the horrible murder and his

This is a beautiful, haunting painting. Yet I question the approach here. The narrators here seem to be taken in completely by what David has portrayed. This was, in part, propaganda. He's idealizing this man who was less than ideal--yet the video seems to almost agree with David about Marat. It seems odd to present what seems to be a slight bias in favor of Marat and the revolutionaries when in truth, the whole situation was intensely complicated and difficult for us to comprehend entirely today. This analysis seems very interested in analyzing the art (and that part is wonderful) while ignoring part of the historical context. For example, Charlotte Corday was in favor of the revolution--just a more moderate version. She sympathized with the

David was a supporter of the French Revolution and this may be his political influence on the painting even though Napoleon was a son of the Revolution as well.