Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pluto and Proserpina (Persephone), 1621-22, Carrara marble, 225 cm high (Galleria Borghese, Rome) A conversation between Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker
Don Kapsalon actually a lot marble sculptures has. But some statues of other materials such bronze, they made the eyes with separated materials like glass or porcelain, then they missed or broke out. But the intention is all old statues have eyes.
Thats so hard to decide for me if Bernini is as great as Michelangelo. Both fulfilled different desires in the art.. Michelangelo is anatomical superior to Bernini in my opinion - but that doesnt makes Bernini necessarly less - because: Bernini captures the crescendo of a moment of feeling and living and breathing much better than Michelangelo did. On the other hand, that wasnt Michelangelos need. Michelangelo wanted (also according his own words) show the 'creations of god' in the most dignity way - in that sense Michelangelo seemed for me much more like a cristallization of the ''biggest way'' how forms can shown. Even if his sistine chapel has a lot of barock elements he puts in 100 years before barock, the ground tone stays : to show the monumental soul of forms - while Bernini catches us in a total different way... He let us forget about dignity, and he catches us as humans... we can relate to his artworks, because they are like ourselfs: breathing the moments... living the moments.. living our flesh nature... feeling and enjoying these fleshy moments...connecting with our heart. Its so hard for me, to tell, who was greater... Bernini is for me a master of time... While Michelangelo is the master of forms. Dont get me wrong: its incredible how much Bernini understood about anatomy. But at Bernini i saw, that he begin to idealize - a thing which will much more important in the Rokokko later...And the idealizing elements (say for instance the face) can be boring fast - from an artistic view. Michelangelo often sacrificed beauty to his artistic expression. At his artwork i see rough manly bodis of females , often also non-finitos, or even lazy worked out faces (also in his sistine chapel work). Often he gives elements of non finitos in his art, which will appreciated and used much later by Ronin. In that case, Michelangelo was much more bold artisticly spoken. But on the other hand, Michelangelo isnt as lightweighted as Bernini. Bernini can make us believe, that stone can be light as a feather. Where Michelangelo is heavy... often as heavy, that he squishes us, with his art, Bernini feels like he take us with his stoney wings,and flies away with us... Its easy.. we dont need to look long, to be catched. The Brugger Madonna of Michelangelo is a good exampel for this heavyweighted serious stiffness... which makes us some kind of hard, to enjoy this artwork, even if we are impressed from it. Its just so hard to compare both ... or say: wether they are both great on the same level...or did someone of the both expressed and understood art in a better, bigger way... Maybe - but thats really a matter of taste, at so small differences : i would choose Michelangelo... There is something sacred about his artwork for me.. a beauty i dont really understand - and therefore it hooks me somehow more. Bernini's beauty i understand much more - because its easier - and therefore nothing is left, which isnt fully explained by the artwork itself.
@@PygmalionFaciebat I feel like the best comparison is David. While Michaelangelo's David is anatomically more accurate, he looks like some dude. Meanwhile Bernini's David looks like a man who could kill a giant in one strike. Full of raw anger and intent.
Ever since I saw a print and slide of this breathtaking sculpture in my Art Appreciation class twenty years ago, I have been dying to see it in person!!! Every time I look at it and see Pluto's fingers dig into Persephone's thigh, my heart flutters. I frequently remind my husband that I must get to Rome before I die so I can see it in person with my own eyes!
When you pointed out the swirl of fabric - it caught my breath. I'd always been so focused on the real flesh like feel that I'd not noticed that a piece of the fabric flies out in one layer - imagine him carefully chipping away at stone to achieve that - the delicacy and skill. Amazing.
I stood before this extraordinary piece, shook my head and muttered, “Impossible.” Oh, to watch the master turn a block of marble into this! Thanks for your wonderful series of presentations.
How does a Bernini or a Michaelangelo do the modeling to get the proportions and expressions and intricacy so precise before they commit to Marble???!! Needless to say that just to imagine what they eventually sculpt is genius beyond comprehension!!!
I would think they worked from a scale clay model, perhaps switching to a live model to add the fine details, or maybe the clay sculpture was completely detailed. They used dividers to transfer measurements. Alongside mallet and chisel, a lot of the detail was done with drills and hand held scraper tools, if you’ve ever scraped the peel off a carrot with a knife blade, that sort of action. Drills allow you to rough out very deeply recessed areas like the folds in fabric and hair, now after drilling out the bulk you can use chisels. Carving this would have involved hundreds of tools, but most not fancy or hard to make, even in those days.
This is really really late but yknow just in case anyone else is wondering. Yes Pluto and Hades are the same person. Hades is the Greek name and Pluto/Pluton is the Roman name. Bernini was an Italian so he would've used Pluto instead of Hades but at the end of the day they're essentially the same person
You'd think a guy looking like that could just pull if he wanted to pull, lol. Look at his thick curls and the muscles in his back.. Anyway, this is another incredible work by Bernini - so intense and beautifully detailed. The note about the composition being an X was funny, given the circumstances. I bet it is...😅
I know y'all do art but I thought you might be interested to know that not all of the myths refer to Proserpina's father, suggesting she doesn't have one; the she is the result of parthenogenesis or "virgin birth".
Its important to keep in mind that there are almost always numerous variants of Greek and Roman myths, often with opposing narratives. Thanks for calling that out.
I reckon a lot of scraping was involved. Like shaving with a straight razor. They’re used by wood carvers and on bone, ivory, horn, etc. All different shapes and profiles, like chisels and gouges. A little talked about tool that gives you much much more control and exerts less pressure so you don’t snap off a lock of hair or something.
