CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION
Roberto Salvini (edited by)
La critica d'arte moderna:
la pura visibilità
[Criticism of modern art: the pure visibility]
Florence, Arco Editions, 1949
[1] Text of the strip:
"The most important pages of criticism of modern art are collected and collated by Salvini in a work that illuminates the foundations of modern aesthetics, following gradually the most valid and original applications.
From Fiedler to Hildebrand, from Riegl to Schmarsow, from Woellflin to Brinckmann, from Berenson to Fry, from Focillon to Longhi, from Stokes to Venturi: it is the first comprehensive overview of the critique of "pure visibility" that we have in Italy.
To the key pages on the theoretical framework, Mr Salvini has added each time the most vivid and illuminating interpretations and views. The most characteristic representatives and movements of the art of all times and all countries are examined and judged in the context of a penetrating and fierce critical vision: the periods of ancient art, the early Christian mosaics, the relations between Italian and German art, the drawings by Dürer, the works of Masaccio and Uccello, Botticelli and Ghirlandaio, Raphael and Tura, the black sculpture and the French Romanesque, the art of Piero della Francesca and the sfumato of Leonardo, the design of Rembrandt and the painting of Ingres and Renoir,
Roberto Salvini, the brave critic of medieval and Renaissance art, the author of the valuable Guida all'arte moderna [n.d.t. Guide to modern art] published by Arco Publishers, has premised a wide and organic historical-critical introduction to the anthology of modern criticism, which is of great help to the reader."
[2] All texts in a foreign language are translated into Italian by Salvini. The sole exception consists of two works: first the writing on the Italian Renaissance Painters of Bernard Berenson, of which Emilio Cecchi provides the translation, and second the Aphorisms of K. Fiedler, for which the Italian version by A. Banti is used.
[3] We report the review of the work published on 21 April 1950 at the signature of Anna Maria Brizio in the newspaper La Stampa. The original article is conserved in the Collection of articles and other clippings by Luciano Mazzaferro, preserved at the City Library Giulio Cesare Croce of San Giovanni in Persiceto.
LA STAMPA
Art criticism
by Anna Maria Brizio
The reading of an anthology of criticism of modern art, recently published by Roberto Salvini (Arco Publishers, Florence), made me think of the divergence of the methods that are usually followed today in producing history of art or rewriting the history of art criticism.
Since romanticism passionately affirmed the subjective character and the unrepeatable individuality of each artistic expression, artists have each taken a distinct personality for us. Each artist needs to be studied separately, in his intimate moments and in his particular accent, outside of each classification of schools, taste and trends. But when the object of study is the personality of a critic, instead of an artist, too often theoretical premises take over, so that the contours and individual character of his work are eventually diluted and confused, subject to more general considerations on orientation and method.
The stubborn disregard of the critical quality of Vasari by scholars educated according to Benedetto Croce’s theories has no other reason, but their view that Vasari cannot otherwise justify his (in itself acute) judgments and intuitions, if not with the ancient concepts of verisimilitude and imitation of nature. On the other hand, even Ghiberti, though so magnified as opposed to Vasari in last thirty years, has finally - I think - been misunderstood in the effort to adapt him to Croce’s concepts: see the interpretation by Schlosser.
Also the anthology of Salvini, although interesting, accurate and rich, is subject to this conceptual setting: it is exclusively composed under the mark of "pure visibility"; and in his name are gathered and lined up - one close to the other - Fiedler and Hildebrandt, Riegl, Schmarsow, Woelfflin and Brinckmann; and then, in groups by nationality, Bernhard Berenson, Clive Bell, Roger Fry and Adrian Stokes; Jacques Mesnil and Henry Focillon; Roberto Longhi and Lionello Venturi. But what a difference in preparation, culture and talent of these men! It is certainly not worth to equalise their work by the mere fact that, in a period of their lives, they may have made the experience of pure visibility; indeed, having included this premise to make the choice for the anthology ends up leading to more confusion than clarification, because it induces more than once Mr Salvini to select not the most acute, free and significant passages from each of them, but those most typically informed by the principles of pure visibility; as a result, the true physiognomy of the individual critics is consequently altered, also characterising them, sometimes, according to a very early moment of their activity.
In the case of Roberto Longhi, for instance: while the pages on Mattia Preti and Piero della Francesca, transcribed in the anthology, are enlightening and brilliant, there is some injustice in presenting him only through pieces of his writings dating back to 1913 and 1914. In fact, in the following decades, he went beyond the pure analysis (and the almost bitter figurative dissection of artworks), in order to reinforce and invigorate their interpretation within an increasingly complex historical discussion.
Longhi himself, in a recent written, opening the first issue of Paragone, the new magazine directed by him (Sansoni Publishers, Florence), entitled Proposte per una critica d’arte (Proposals for an art critic), gives us an example of what he considers the main achievements: and reading him, it is clear how much he has moved away from pure visibility. This does not mean that he has taken distance from the artwork: on the contrary! Indeed, he goes deeper into the historical connections. On the frescoes of the dying Gothic in Lombardy: "On the walls, dukes and servants, adorned in the fashion masterpieces of the Lombard 'zibelari’, ride in a dream of brilliant and absurd profanity. At their feet and by magic, the meadows are transformed in the edges of a tissue produced through a vertical loom: the woods of their distant feuds are displayed in a firmament, which is now marked by the hieroglyphic adventures of heraldic family constellations; beyond the Alpine foothills, as brown as embossed leather, crowned with castles in pastle gilding, the sky in white and black lozenges creaks, like the windows of the Court in the pewter framework also do...". It is obvious that, following this road, a writer who is not Mr Longhi can go lost into irrelevant literary digressions: every path may lead away or divert from destination; but, in fact, once again, this means that even in the field of criticism, history must be conducted on the live experience of individual personalities, and not in the abstraction of theoretical programs. And when, at the end of his proposals for an art critic, Longhi expresses the need for criticism, and therefore the history of art, to be returned to the heart of literary activity, we would like to understand the statement in the highest sense. Since art criticism makes use of the word, the need for this to be used in the fullness of its value and its expressive power is legitimate: and like the good painter will be recognized by the strength of his style, whatever he represents, so also for the writer - and therefore for the art critic - the truest sign of the quality of his thought will be, once again, his style."
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento