The Most Masterful Master
Join Free Art WorkShopJoin Premium Art Workshop

Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: The Most Masterful Master

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 88 Times in 87 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    The Most Masterful Master

    I was confused by a question my life drawing teacher asked the class on the first day. "Who was the best artist in the Renaissance?"

    Now me being a big fan of Michelangelo i raised my hand and voiced my opinion. But of course I was wrong, apparently it's well understood that Raphael is the most masterful master.

    I accepted that answer because how could someone that teaches this stuff be wrong? Thinking about it know however...is this question even possible to answer?

    Well i raise the question on to you fine people from ConceptArt.org, who is the best artist from the Renaissance period? Is this question rational even possible to answer? Is there a way to gauge art based on the technical skill of the artist?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    528
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 215 Times in 141 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Personally, for me, I'll pick Caravaggio even though Michaelangelo and Raphael were awesome in their abilities. But to narrow it down to one sublime, absolute artist as the pinnacle of the Renaissance is all opinion, I think. They all worked as a whole and contributed ideas across the board.

    I don't think there can be a definite answer in this case. And it sounds like your own teacher's bias coming through. Perhaps he loves Raphael's work but unless he can point out why he believes he's the best artist from the Renaissance period, it's all through his rose-colored glasses.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  3. #3
    OmenSpirits's Avatar
    OmenSpirits is offline Commercial-Illustrator in-training, NOT an artist. Level 13 Gladiator: Retiarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Birth Place of the World, NYC
    Posts
    2,825
    Thanks
    2,621
    Thanked 1,042 Times in 680 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Should have questioned him. I find if you challenge someone that makes a blanket statement like that has a limited reason for it other than what they like.

    Even a teacher. You ask why, how, point it out to me, then you bring your own examples and ask what makes this better than this, using an artist from the same period in comparison. If he stops after awhile, it was his own bias as was stated. ( I question the hell out of authority!)

    As a teacher, he shouldn't say definitives, and work from the whole of the Renaissance as a contributing factor of great art. Not narrowing it down to one. One is too subjective to the person making that statement.

    "Everything must serve the idea. The means used to convey the idea should be the simplest and clear. Just what is required. No extra images. To me this is a universal principle of art. Saying as much as possible with a minimum of means."
    -John Huston, Director
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #4
    Elwell's Avatar
    Elwell is offline Sticks Like Grim Death Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,666 Times in 5,020 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Stupid question.
    Stupid teacher.


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  6. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 88 Times in 87 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    He's nice enough, but a little silly.

    Should have questioned him. I find if you challenge someone that makes a blanket statement like that has a limited reason for it other than what they like.
    I was being semi sarcastic when i said i accepted it.

    I agree that it's a little stupid to say one artist is the best or most important during any time period.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to DeeLock For This Useful Post:


  8. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Outside Toronto
    Posts
    542
    Thanks
    276
    Thanked 349 Times in 125 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Well, you can argue that certain artists may have been the most important to a specific period or art development, but the Renaissance? A period when the art world was exploding (in a good way) in all directions while reclaiming what was lost and developing the new.

    When it comes down to it, he may have been the most technically proficient of the Renaissance painters, but that alone wouldn't stake your teacher's claim considering the competition.

    That aside, Raphael was the best Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle.

    ~R
    (kowabunga, dudes!)

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,091
    Thanks
    1,795
    Thanked 1,555 Times in 607 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Wrong. Donatello.


    On topic: How was there a right or wrong answer to that question? It's just a matter of opinion. Now if was on the lines of "most influential" or something like that, then maybe there's a right answer.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    671
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 29 Times in 22 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ShroudStar View Post
    Personally, for me, I'll pick Caravaggio even though Michaelangelo and Raphael were awesome in their abilities. But to narrow it down to one sublime, absolute artist as the pinnacle of the Renaissance is all opinion, I think. They all worked as a whole and contributed ideas across the board.

    I don't think there can be a definite answer in this case. And it sounds like your own teacher's bias coming through. Perhaps he loves Raphael's work but unless he can point out why he believes he's the best artist from the Renaissance period, it's all through his rose-colored glasses.
    Caravaggio was Baroque not Renaissance.
    However, historically, Raphael was considered to be the most acclaimed artist at the time and was considered the ideal for several hundreds years after his death. It should also be noted that when he died so did the Renaissance. Mannerism took its place at the time of his death.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    528
    Thanks
    409
    Thanked 215 Times in 141 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sweetoblivion314 View Post
    Caravaggio was Baroque not Renaissance.
    Yeesh, thanks. I must've mixed the two up after a cursory glance through my art history book.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Philly PA
    Posts
    3,393
    Thanks
    108
    Thanked 1,475 Times in 469 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    is this question even possible to answer?
    sure it is, there just isn't a right answer

    "Every little step considered one at a time is not terribly daunting" - Ethan Coen

    New books and process DVD available NOW!

    www.dvpalumbo.com

    Quickie blog (nudity)
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    699
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked 173 Times in 120 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    If it was the Renaissance, I'd pick Da Vinci. Not so much for the paintings (I don't find the Mona Lisa all that awesome, really) but his drawings were fantastic and his ideas were awesome.

    Myself, though, I prefer stuff with a bit more dynamic, like some of the Baroque stuff or especially the Impressionists and later. Light and color! It's awesome stuff. I'm a big fan of a bit of the surreal stuff, too... Magritte rocks my socks.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    280
    Thanks
    25
    Thanked 50 Times in 30 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I view Caravaggio as a little pre-Baroque, but that's just me..
    Maybe your teacher was just trying to see how much you all knew about Renaissance artists? Or maybe he/she really is just bad. It's definitely an opinion question, so why can't your teacher just teach you guys about all the Renaissance artists?

    Check out my sketchbook? updated 02.01
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •