CLICK HERE FOR ITALIAN VERSION
Francesco Mazzaferro
Gino Severini and the Sacred Art in a European Context:
The Influence of Cennini’s Book of the Art
Part Two
[Original Version: May 2016 - New Version: April 2019]
 |
Fig. 14) The second edition of La décadence de l'art sacré by Alexandre Cingria (1930)
|
Go back to Part One
Gino Severini and the Compagnie de Saint-Luc
Years
followed when Severini decided to devote himself almost exclusively to make religious
painting and to cooperate with the Compagnie
de Saint-Luc, a group of French-speaking Swiss artists led by the painter
Alexandre Cingria (1879-1945) and created by him in 1919, with the task of
renewing the religious iconography in French-speaking Switzerland. Severini dedicated
himself to a decorative and monumental art for the new modern churches around
Fribourg and Geneva (Severini frescoed five of them). Cingria (whose art had a
clear symbolist and probably neo-baroque imprint) certainly had a very
different style from Severini, but his support (along with that of Maritain)
allowed Severini to get important commissions in French-speaking Switzerland for
a decade. The hospitality that Severini received was also largely due to the far-sightedness
of the local clergy, and especially of the Bishop of Fribourg and Geneva,
Marius Besson (1876-1945). Perhaps Severini’s commitment to Switzerland was also
a reflection of the difficulties that his new religious and classical course
met in Paris. It is at this stage that Severini set into practice Cennino’s
techniques on fresco painting, trying simultaneously to upgrade them to the new construction materials with which new churches were built [37].
Here too,
there were tight links between the local developments and the European
dimension. Maurice Denis [38] was once again the common denominator of the renaissance
of the fresco technique (and more generally of mural painting) in religious art
across Europe, since he worked with Alexandre Cingria in the church of
Saint-Paul à Grange-Canal in Geneva 1916. One year after, in 1917, Cingria
published the Décadence de l'art sacré [39], with an introduction (also in the form of a
letter) by the French poet Paul Claudel. Despite being a short text (and
published with very limited edition) it was another important programmatic
text, written to counter the return to neo-Gothic art, but also to denounce the
'Protestant' influence on Catholic sacred art (and in clear opposition to
Geneva Calvinist world). The second edition (1930) contained, in a chapter
entitled "The renaissance of the religious art in French-speaking
Switzerland", a tribute to Severini, now considered the champion of a new,
at the same time refined and labouring art. In particular, commenting on his
work in the church of Semsales, Cingria wrote: "The creation of Severini consists in having at one time applied all
trends in contemporary art to a style of architecture which is in my opinion
not modern enough. Yes, all trends of the post-war European art, whose spirit -
with all its research - is summed up in these figures and ornaments in an
unexpected, and really modern, combination. Whether it is the prodigious piece
of the Holy Trinity, who is enthroned on the apse with the majesty and power of
a Byzantine mosaic; whether it is this so touching Last Supper, placed on the choir wall as a large image;
whether they are the symbols, composed like a trophy or a still life (fish,
sheep, deer, grapes or wine glasses), arranged with so much science between the
arches or in the vaults; whether they even are a sheer molding, a colour game
or a combination of simple solid colours that spread so accurately through the
different planes of the walls, everything is made in a unitary effect. And the
entire project benefits from it, with the help of infinitely varied means, but
always based on some essentially modern principles: the use of descriptive
geometry for the composition, instead of the line; the introduction of
chiaroscuro obtained by small solid colour surfaces together, interspersed with
lines (and not with hatching) or by regular points that change the volumes, them
illuminating. This is a witty and new craft, at the same time inspired by
cubism and futurism and also by the workman tradition of the set-square using painters,
of the wallpaper designers, of all those whose work has achieved directly the design
of tools without going through decorative arts" [40].
The cooperation
with Cingria and his group was an important page in the artistic life of
Severini: between 1924 and 1934 he devoted himself almost exclusively to the
production of frescoes, stained glass and mosaics in the French-speaking
Switzerland. At that time, his cooperation with Jacques Maritain was really
intense, to the point that Severini became the vehicle of the important spreading
of his aesthetics in Italy, thanks to contacts with Italian artists, writers
and philosophers [41].
"On an art for the Church"
In 1927
Severini published two articles in the journal "Nova et Vetera",
founded in Freiburg a year before by the theologian Charles Journet, one of the
reformers in the Catholic Church of those times (it would become cardinal and one
of the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council). They are: D'un
Art pour l'Eglise (On an Art for the Church) [42] and Peinture
Murale. Son esthétique et ses moyens (Mural Painting: Its
Aesthetics and its Means) [43]. The texts were translated and included in the Ragionamenti sulle arti figurative
(Reasoning on fine arts) in 1936 [44].
They proved the influence of Jacques Maritain’s Art et scolastique on the painter's thoughts. They offered a
genuine reading of the thoughts of the Italian painter in those years on the
basic issues of this post: respectively, sacred art and the role of mural
painting.
"Let us start, first, by resolving this
important issue: is there a fundamental difference between art in general and
art addressed to the Church?" [45] Severini’s answer reflected the
thought of Jacques Maritain, and therefore the idea that, in formal terms, the
same patterns can be used for the creation of sacred art and art in general, as
it is called by Severini: "I do not
think so. These are not two different activities, but one and the same
activity; the two forms belong to the same 'virtue'. There may be therefore
only a difference of intensity, quality, but on the same line. And still, there
is a difference on the destination of the work as an object, since the art in
general has an independence that religious art cannot have" [46]. And here Severini introduced
Maritain’s language, as he spoke of religion and poetry as "sisters", and explained that in
both cases the "artist must
undertake at any time a struggle to get to the perfection as man and to his
perfection as artist" [47].
And yet the
religious artist had higher requirements. "We cannot be content to ask a person who undertakes an artwork designed
to trigger prayers, to praise the saints, to honour the Lord, only to be an
artist, but we must also request that he possesses human and natural qualities of the first order. He
must also be a 'believer', and his whole inner life must be leaning towards mother Church, whose significance he must understand in comparison to God, the
individual and the society. One can manufacture a masterpiece by painting a
'Maternity', and this masterpiece, simply from the fact of its authenticity,
will rise spontaneously to God; but it may be the case that this motherhood
never was a Madonna: between motherhood and Madonna there may appear to be a
simple hair, but in reality there is an abyss, and the artist will never overcome
it if he does do not believe in the Virgin Mary as a child may believe in her" [48].
Two
observations are immediately needed. First: "Motherhood", painted in
1916, was one of the paintings by Severini which is considered one of his
masterpieces, for the early recovery of the classics, anticipating by a few
years the ‘retour to order’ art movements Valori
Plastici (1918) and Novecento Italiano
(1922 ). But "Mater dolorosa" is also a (much less known) fresco by
Severini in the church of Semsales, 1926. In his 1921 essay "From Cubism to Classicism", the artist
had used the example of the 1916 canvas to explain the fundamental role of
geometric construction and the golden section in painting, and had therefore
set that picture at the very centre of his intellectual reflection on art. In this
1927 article, however, he seemed instead to reverse his priorities, since a religious
theme became more important than motherhood itself. Second, the general tenor
of the text - inspired by a sincere and natural religious belief - was here really
not very different from the tone with which Cennino had opened the first chapters
of the Book of the Art. The tone would become more sophisticated only a few pages
later, with reference to Maritain‘s Neo-Thomism: "So much, that in order to make religion the art animator, to translate
its beauty in the work, one must have ‘God in the soul' (Jacques Maritain:
Answer to Jean Cocteau). Art can exist only by means of a communion between the
object, the artist and the work. And where art is not satisfied with a purely
formal radiation, the 'subject' always resumes its rights" [49].
Severini
then considered whether there was a replacement relationship between the substantive
content of religious art on the one hand ("its direct and safe way to go to God, without getting lost in
intellectual complications" [50]) and its formal requirements on the
other hand ("the perfection of the
'means' and the splendour of art considered in itself" [51]). The
answer was that an inverse relationship exists, because "the more the artist falls in love with the
beauty of nature for its own sake, and does not think of his Creator, the more
he comes closest to the formal perfection of his art, and the least he will worry
for his own perfection as a man and as a Christian" [52].
He spent a
few pages to document the difficult relationship between substance and form.
Miniature, fresco and mosaic "are
developed and continuously enrich each other remaining pure until the time of
Giotto and beyond, until the pre-renaissance. The first blow to religious art,
was, perhaps without his knowledge and against his will, led by Giotto. With
Giotto's revolution, mural painting ceases to be ornamental, and gradually
becomes easel painting, and directs us towards another end that distracts it from
the main purpose” [53]. With Giotto
started what Severini (in line with the thinking of Renoir) considered the start
of the "decadence of religious art"
[54] (the same term used by Cingria): "Everyone
knows that the reaction of this artistic revolution was enormous. Of course,
the art of Giotto does not cease to belong to a spiritual level which is among
the highest, but it is no less true, therefore, that his passion to express
embossed volumes according to the optical laws of the three dimensions, led subsequent
painters to look at reality more closely" [55].
With the
exception of Beato Angelico, the development of art from Giotto to Carracci was
thus marked by a regressive movement ("the
excess of art and the decadence of sacred art" [56]) that only ended
with the era of Ingres and Delacroix. To this involution corresponded the decadence
of fresco: "After all, one works
less and less on walls, because it is difficult to create on large surfaces (and
on a difficult material to treat) all the coloured radiation dreamed by the
painter. the mosaic becomes more pictorial and ornamental, and the fine craft
of fresco deforms equally becoming a watercolour painting." [57] The art became pure virtuosity: "During the period from Raffaello to the
seventeenth century, the art enjoys its own splendour; everything becomes a
pretext for beautiful colours and beautiful shapes, beautiful in themselves;
subjects are painted, regardless of whether they treat mythology, the Bible, or
the life of Christ. The subject, in art, becomes an excuse, and since we are
now at the same point, I am emphasizing strongly this finding" [58]. And
to better explain, Severini made a comparison between a Madonna in the Church
of Vicchio di Rimaggio (then attributed to Taddeo Gaddi, and now to the Master of
Vicchio di Rimaggio) and the Madonna of the Chair by Raphael: "From this Madonna originates (despite the
transformations that several restorations may have caused) a truly human
poetry, yet it is a 'Madonna', because the religious content dominates the
realistic element, which is here a simple mean. In Raphael, however, the
Madonna could be a pretty nanny who takes care of a nice baby. Art and the
realistic element dominate the content" [59].
The worst religious
art, according to Severini, occurred with the school of the Carracci: "The Bolognese school painters were
naturalists and psychologists with the glasses of 'ideal beauty' on the nose.
The important fact to note is that these painters, who wanted to do first of
all 'painting', did not believe at all to the hereafter, and figured God
according to their human measure. If it came to paint a dying Christ or the
Blessed Virgin at the foot of the Cross, or the martyred saints, they were
trying to reach a human expression; God and the saints had to truly suffer like
the poor mortals. All human faces - deified après-coup, but resulting from
psychological studies, amplified and exaggerated - gave all those twisted and
grotesque creatures with askew mouths and contorted epileptic eyes. All those
forced attitudes introduced by virtue of an idea, which was exterior to art,
all those affectations, those sentimentality and mannerisms, are harmful to
both art and religion. When we look for the expression and the feeling of God
who dies, of the Blessed Virgin and the saints who are suffering, we must not
search in rear and always harmful ideas or in the psychological study of human
nature; we have to take them in our heart, deeply sympathizing with the
sufferings of Christ and the Saints" [60]. As an example of the worst
degeneration, he quoted the Head of the
Crucifix by Guido Reni: "For
Guido Reni, the 'subject' of the dying Christ is a pretext to enforce a completely exterior skill which has been put at the service of a literary-naturalistic
concept" [61].
Does highlighting
the risks of an excessive realism mean that the religious artist should ignore
the nature? The issue was far from theoretical, because Severini strongly contrasted
(and did so throughout his life) abstract art whose first manifestations were
spreading in those years (and, in fact, he always stated that neither futurism
nor cubism, the movements in which he participated, ever denied the figurative
reference to reality). To this end, he quoted Cennino: "From the foregoing considerations, it should
not be inferred that the artists of ancient times, in which we find
unquestionably the religious spirit, did not consult the nature, and that,
consequently, it is forbidden for artists today to ask from nature certain
indispensable elements of art. These would be serious errors. Whether you
observe the mosaics of Ravenna of the sixth century, or read the chapter XXVIII
of the famous book by Cennini (the disciple of Giotto, via Agnolo and Taddeo
Gaddi), everywhere we will find confirmation of this general rule: the artist
must extract that closely intrinsic beauty that is the reason of art from the
real world.” [62]
Mural painting: its aesthetics and its means
The mural painting must live in symbiosis with the architecture, and indeed be submitted to it. On
this issue, Severini had very detailed ideas: "One has to think the mural decorative works according to their own
laws, according to the needs of the material to be used, and in absolute
dependence of architecture" [63]. "It is clear that the [mural] decoration has at the same time a
destructive and a constructive role; this is why architects have partly reason
to be wary of painters. If, however, the painter knows his art as it is
appropriate, there is nothing to fear from his intervention, because he has
knowledge of the science of destroying the surfaces to rebuild them richer,
decorated, but not transformed in what it is essential to them, namely the
homogeneity of their plan" [64].
So the worst error was the one made by Pozzo at the Church of St. Ignatius in Rome, i.e. "to break through the
wall and to act as if the architecture does not exist." [65] And to
prove this, the Ragionamenti
reproduce the same Alinari photo of
the Entrance of St. Ignatius in Paradise,
now present in the photographic archive of the Zeri Foundation.
 |
| Fig. 15) Andrea Pozzo, The St. Ignatius entering Paradise (detail at the great arc), 1691-1694. Source:http://catalogo.fondazionezeri.unibo.it/scheda.jsp?id=99956&apply=true&titolo=-+particolare&tipo_scheda=F&decorator=layout_S2 |
The
stylistic consequences of the theoretical framework, within which Severini acted,
created another link between him and both medieval religious art as well
contemporary art; in fact, the mural should not create a sense of depth, but
rather be displayed on a single level, like Byzantine art and, to Severini’s
times, the artists of the Beuron school, but also the Cubists did: "I consider it as a fundamental error to make
use of perspective and to paint foreshortenings, when it comes to wall painting,
because this would undoubtedly break through the wall and destroy the
architecture, and also belongs, as a spiritual attitude, to that optical
realism that we saw in the period of religious decadence" [66]. The painter was very proud to have
succeeded, in the fresco of the apse in the Basilica of Notre-Dame du Valentin
in Lausanne, to display different levels (the coronation of the Virgin and the
Annunciation; the views of St. Peter and of the city of Lausanne, the faithful)
without creating a false impression of depth, and indeed "carrying certain conclusive experiences of
modern art in the domain of mural art" [67]. He reproduced an image of
it in the Ragionamenti. Fabio Benzi
wrote about the apse fresco of Lausanne: "The fresco is a summa of the artist's experiences: angels of mechanical
features echoing Léger and Cubism are married with cut-out and pointed shapes,
mindful of late Byzantine art; other elements are derived from solutions tested
by Severini in the twenties in La Roche. It already shows the particular
solution to solve the surfaces synthetically through flat resawn backgrounds,
independent of the basic design, as simplifications from Futurist and Cubist
experiences. It is the beginning of a new style, developed by Severini in the thirties,
which consists in combining avant-garde experiences with classicist instances,
Thomistic and neo-medieval simplicity with 'social' monumentalism, solving
everything in abstractive geometrical forms" [68].
The mural
painter is therefore required to exercise self-control: "The spirit of sacrifice is thus one of the
virtues that the decorator must have, since, of course, one should not paint a
wall so that only that wall can be seen in the monument (this would meet the
interest of the painter to the damage of the whole work); and, besides, not all
the surfaces, not all the volumes require to be decorated; some of these
surfaces, some of these volumes being beautiful in themselves, as the figures
and the 'solid' of the geometry (in particular the sphere) must not be
destroyed without strong reasons. If there is an absolute need to do so, it is
a must that the ornament will always rebuild these figures in their shades. The
fine ensemble of a monument very often depends on the sobriety and the justification
of its ornaments, which does not exclude the richness" [69].
The nature
of mural painting was not narrative, but decorative. "Without falling into the excess to see in nature nothing but forms and
colours, one has to solve plastic problems by thinking them in terms of lines
and colours, and not as objects or bodies; this, in my opinion, does not impede
to draw the most authentic poetry from the represented object or body. We say
indeed that the only way to create this pictorial poetry is to know how much
can be gained from the lines, tones and colours" [70]. "I find more clearly greatness and purity in
addressing the problem of decorating in a very direct way: with arabesques,
lines combinations and colours that leave the surface intact, while making it
richer. I think therefore that between the Sistine Chapel or the Italian
churches of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (whose false perspectives
raise the ceiling), and the churches of Ravenna, it is absolutely necessary to
prefer, as an example and as a base, the spirit of the latter. This ornamental
art is truly the purest and the most grandiose that I know" [71]. It
is interesting that the same predilection for ornamental art and the Early
Christian and Byzantine mosaic art, preferred to the Renaissance and especially
the Baroque, can be found in the memoirs of Paul Klee (which Severini still
could not have read in those years, because they were released in 1957 only).
How to use
lines and colours? As to the former, "in
the conception of the line or of the design, the curve must have a primary role. A
greater effort of thought is required to express a curve rather than a straight
line, and for this reason the latter is less expressive, while the other is
richer in 'meaning', more 'charged of being'." [72] The considerations
on the use of colour were all concentrated on the idea of acquiring a "monumental decorative painting"
based on a combination of spot colours. "It's about creating an atmosphere, an environment (...) choosing first
of all beautiful colours in themselves and then combining them (...) as an
element of harmony and not as imitation instrument; in this respect, it is not
important whether we make a yellow face, blue leaves, a red sky, etc.
Everything lies in creating a harmony. (...) In decorative art, it is rather
necessary to proceed with harmonic chords of large areas, that will live and
vibrate through the above mentioned means of painting, in short for the quality
of their matter (...) The 'soft' obtained in painting with passages from light
to shadow and vice versa, are rendered in this ornamental art through the wise
distribution of light and dark coloured surfaces, through greys, blacks,
whites, the contours and edging" [73].
Experiments on technique
The
spiritual and iconographic themes were flanked also by new technical problems,
as mentioned above. On the one hand, new colours for the wall painting were
offered in the market in those years (many of which were industrially
manufactured by large chemical complexes). They facilitated the lives of artists
and allow them to paint dry, and therefore in a much simpler way than with the
fresco technique, but they posed the question of how to provide an
"antique" effect to sacred art scenes. On the other hand, churches
and public buildings to be frescoed were increasingly made with new materials
(cement), raising the need to experiment with techniques that ensure the
stability of the works. It was on this that Severini worked for many years with
the architect Fernand Dumas (1892-1956), the manufacturer of fifteen churches
in French-speaking Switzerland, all decorated by painters of the Compagnie de Saint-Luc.
Here is
what Ornella Casazza wrote: "Severini
will be the authentic starting point of a new Italian concept of mural
painting. In his writings, he expressed his views on how to unite painting and
architecture in a harmonious relationship obtained according to «gold»
correspondences studied in the ancient texts and reflecting on the circles
which were most committed to geometric rationalism and on Le Corbusier. While
knowing the ancient technique, which he had meditated on Cennini and Vasari,
and studying the writings of Signac and the scientific texts on colour by
Helmholtz, Chevreul, and Blanc, he adopted and elaborated different systems and
processes as in the frescoes of Montegufoni of 1921-1922. In fact, he followed
the rule of transferring an image through pounce, of using portions of
well-conducted and masked plaster in the «junctions» along the profiles of the figures, making
proper use of stable colours which would resist to the action of lime in the
pointing; however, on the advice of an expert bricklayer, he added a small
amount of cement to slow down the drying of lime. Soon after, in 1925-1926, for
the fresco of Fribourg (church of Semsales), Severini used «modern» silicate techniques, which he
described like this: «On the concrete, one can paint with silicate colours and in
fresco, after having covered the concrete with a lime of hydraulic plaster»" [74].
Equally
important was its work to ensure the recovery of the manual capacity of the artists
to make mosaics, as a necessary tool for the renovation of the art of mosaic.
He believed that "this divorce
between art and craft, this inability to think the work in accordance with the
'means', produced the loss of the mosaic. As we see, this decline or crisis
concerns not only the craft, is not only a technical problem, but also concerns
the art, so it is a technical and aesthetic problem" [75]. And the
fact that the State Institute for the Art
of the Mosaic in Ravenna is entitled to Severini testifies that he is considered
today the artist who most contributed to the rebirth of contemporary mosaic.
Go to Part Three
[Unfortunately, due to copyright issues, images of the artworks by Gino Severini cannot be shown anymore in the new version of this article.]
NOTE
[37] See:
Greff, Jean-Pierre – Art sacré en Europe 1919-1939: les tentatives d’un
«renouveau», in: Monnier, Gérard e Vovelle, José, Un art sans
frontières, Paris, Publications de la Sorbonne, 1995, p. 157-174. The text is
available in the internet: http://books.openedition.org/psorbonne/450#ftn18
[38] The
influence of Denis was felt even in Italy. He participates, for example, in the
conference at the Royal Academy of Italian architecture on Relations of
architecture with figurative arts, held in Rome in 1936 and organized by
Marcello Piacentini. Among Italians artists, we note the participation of Carlo
Carra, Giò Ponti, Gino Severini and Mario Sironi. See also: Zappia, Catherine -
Maurice Denis and Italy: Journal, correspondence, carnets, University of
Perugia, 2001.
[39] Cingria, Alexandre - La Décadence de l'art
sacré. Préface de Paul Claudel. Nouvelle édition corrigée et augmentée de
notes, Paris, A l'Art catholique, 1930, 126 pages.
[40] Cingria, Alexandre - La Décadence... (quoted), pp.
116-117.
[41] Viotto
Piero, Great friendships: the Maritains and their contemporaries, Roma, Città
Nuova, 2008, 479 pages.
[42] Severini, Gino - D'un art pour l'église,
in Nova et Vetera, 1926, N.3, pp.319-330.
[43] Severini, Gino - Peinture murale. Son esthétique et ses moyens, in Nova et Vetera, 1927, N.2, pp. 119-132.
[44] Severini, Gino - Ragionamenti sulle arti figurative, Milano, Editore Ulrico Hoepli, 1942, 270 pages, 43 tables.
[45] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti sulle arti
figurative, Milano, Editore Ulrico Hoepli, 1942, p. 299. Quotation at p. 45.
[46] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
45.
[47] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
46.
[48] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
47.
[49] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
57.
[50] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 48.
[51] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 48.
[52] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 52.
[53] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 49.
[54] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 48.
[55] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942,
pp.49-50.
[56] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 50.
[57] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 50.
[58] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 51.
[59] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942,
Tab.XIII and Tab.XIV.
[60] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
58.
[61] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, Tab.
XII.
[62] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942,
pp.52-53.
[63] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
78.
[64] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
77.
[65] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, Tab.
XV.
[66] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
77.
[67] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, Tab.
XXVIII
[68] Benzi, Fabio – Gino Severini. Affreschi, mosaici,
decorazioni monumentari (Gino Severini.
Frescoes, mosaics, monumental decorations), 1921-1941, Roma, Galleria Arco
Farnese, 12 May-30 June 1992, Roma, Leonardo-De Luca Editori, 119 pages.
Quotation at page 65.
[69] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942,
pp.78-79.
[70] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
81.
[71] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, pp.
83-84.
[72] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p.
90.
[73] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, pp.
88-90.
[74] Memorie
dell’Antico nell’arte del Novecento, edited by Ornella Casazza and Riccardo
Gennaioli. Catalogue of the
exhibition at Palazzo Pitti, Florence, Museo degli Argenti, 14 March – 12 July
2009, 288 pages. Quotation at pages 37-38.
[75] Severini, Gino – Ragionamenti … (quoted) 1942, p. 96.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento