Posted on 09/07/2004 7:00:47 AM PDT by presidio9
Michelangelo was a master at capturing the human form. His David is a masterpiece of art. It would not have withstood the test of time as great art if anyone thought of it as a homosexual fantasy. Great art is great art, irregardless of whatever sins or flaws may exist in the artist. Let's not forget the human form (at least in youth) is a beautiful thing and a medical and scientific marvel, to boot.
When we say God created man and woman, we need to appreciate what that means. He was no slouch in the creativity department.
Brunelleschi's Dome was also "described" in the consecration motet by Dufay. The music is constructed in the same ratios as the Dome.
All man's work is vanity.
As soon as the MOSLEMS take over Europe the statues of the last 3000 years will be broken and ground to dust as the ststues of Buddha in Afghanistan were.
See them while you can.
From the comment about taking the daughters off continent, you aren't one of those who believe England is the modern Israel, are you? I thought replacement theology was pretty much dead.
The buttsex crowd has been trying to claim him as one of their own for several decades now. They love "outting" dead people who can't defend themselves, but there's a problem: There is no evidence whatsoever to back up their claim other than the fact that he created the most beautiful male nude in history and he never married. However, he has been romantically linked to at least 3 women, the fact that he never married is understandable when you take the time to lear about his personal habits. Michelangelo was OBSESSED with his work. It was not uncommon for him to sculpt for 20 hours a day. He completed the Sistine Chapel Ceiling (a body of work that could have taken several artists working together a lifetime) in four years. By himself. Homosexuals define themselves by their perversion and can not relate to people who have more normal interests.
This is patently ridiculus. Michelangelo was the artist of some of the most profound and moving Christian art ever created.
The pretty posers come and go
Speaking of Michelangelo
Q: Why do you say Michelangelo was gay?
A: Because you have been brainwashed by the homosexual agenda.
There is a movie; that is what I mainly remember includes painting the Sistine Chapel, a sort of '50s-60s movie. Maybe Kirk Douglas is in it.
I am not sure if the movie is about some other subject or about Michaelangelo.
"As expressed by one of the leading Christians of the time, Saint Augustine, man is “crooked and sordid, bespotted and ulcerous.”"
Zhheesh! This guy's only off BY MORE THAN A THOUSAND FRICKIN' YEARS!!! St. Augustine lived at the close of the fourth century, AD, and a little beyond. Typical of Western art in the interim was precisely the opposite: iconography, which typically portrayed only saints, and only in their most ideal form. But even still, Michelangelo was not the first to revolt against iconography, by about a century.
>>and the personal firearm was near production..."David" announces a New Age!<<
Good insight... David does announce an age of radical individualism, and his solitary, confident pose depicts it quite well.
>>Michelangelo was the first sculptor in the West to demonstrate such high skill since 538 AD.<<
You've affixed a realist value to what you consider achievement. Iconography is very beautiful and requires much skill. What is great about David is that he has captured the moment of choosing greatness, rather than iconographers who would show once greatness has been acheived. The author of the article sorta got this right. But the critical point of why this is such a great work is also that you can, through the mastery of Michelangelo's own craft, see the glory present within David, even before he has acheived his gloriuos deed. Michelangelo doesn't show a young boy gathering his courage, but rather a reflective, yet confident pose of someone who know he is up to whatever task is laid before him.
The Agony and the Extacy - Charlton Heston
The movie is "The Agony and the Ecstasy," and it stars Charlie Heston. But read the book instead. It's by Irving Stone and it is a fascinating portrayal of everyday life in Rome and Florence 500 years ago.
Donatello tried to capture a more realistic portrayal of David as a youth. Michelangelo's work is about metaphore.
"did I mention the "Pieta", thta he sculpted at age 24?"
I was lucky enough to go to Rome in college. Aside from the sight of my newborn babies, nothing I have ever seen in my life has moved me as much as this profoundly beautiful sculpture. Well, maybe the sight of the sun going down over the Rocky Mountains or the sun coming up over the Atlantic ocean. But they're in different categories.
Was he really only 24!? Wow..
Eh? I've been a great fan of Michelangelo for years, but dude, he was gay. There's little room for doubt in contemporary documentation.
There's a whole a string of poems he wrote for a friend (he was rather good at poetry, too, if you can trust the translations) to commemorate the death of a young man with whom they had both been intimate.
Thanks, I will rent the AGony and the Ecstasy sometime.
I too, would not pay any heed to any negative comments.
Michaelangelo did all of these other works. The Creation scene, you know the finger of God touching Adam I believe in the Sistine Chapel is so wellknown and indeed, an Icon.
I guess that's why I liked it better. It actually looked like it could have been a young boy who killed Goliath.
read later bump
That argument is basless when you understand how people communicated back then. Read some of Shakespeare's Sonnets sometime and tell me if you think he was gay too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.