The Fallacy of Bellori's Views on Caravaggio

759 Words2 Pages

It does not seem to be true that Caravaggio, as stated by Giovanni Bellori, “advanced the art of painting”. At first, based off of Caravaggio’s primary contribution to art, tenebrism, one may conclude that he was an innovative painter of his time. This happens to be very similar to the views of Bellori, who argues that Caravaggio was innovative in that he introduced realism and abandoned the conventions of preceding painters. In this case it seems that Caravaggio’s “Boy with a Basket of Fruit” would, perhaps, be the most suitable work to use in order to prove Bellori’s claims, as it contains imagery and techniques which pertain to all of the qualities of which Bellori believed to be inherent in Caravaggio’s works; and thus also serves as the perfect springboard for debunking his assertions. Basically, Giovanni supports his claims with two main generalizations of Caravaggio’s works, of which both appear to be true upon first glance, but neither happen to survive upon deeper inspection.
To start, Bellori had said that, “he [Caravaggio] came upon the scene at a time when realism was not much in fashion”. First, one must note that it is true that most art previous to Caravaggio was dominated by the Classical idealism of the Renaissance. This was exemplified, for example, in Michelangelo’s massive and heavily muscled Classical nudes, such as those of the Sistine Chapel. Thus, upon examining Caravaggio’s painting, it appears that he had introduced the artistic quality of realism, as he is very meticulous in the details put into the fruit basket and the boy, who has individualized and distinct facial and bodily features; all the while lacking the Herculean body of Renaissance and Classical figures. However, despite the fact that all of ...

... middle of paper ...

... to vitalize his paintings.
To conclude, at first, it may seem logical for one to hold Giovanni Bellori to be true; believing that Caravaggio truly was an innovative painter, due to his usage of realism, tenebrism and lack of linear perspective. However, these claims are simply inaccurate, as multiple artists had already performed such feats, including Northern Europeans such as Durer, and Mannerists such as Tintoretto. Therefore one must realize that Bellori’s statement cannot be an entirely valid assumption. Yet, one must not forget, that at the same time, Giovanni happens to be correct in his assumption that Caravaggio’s lack of Rubenesque vibrancy helps to liven up his imagery. All in all, though Caravaggio was quite effective in his employment of Bellori’s aforementioned “advances”, none of these prove to be unique from the artworks and styles preceding him.

More about The Fallacy of Bellori's Views on Caravaggio

Open Document