Posted on 09/07/2004 7:00:47 AM PDT by presidio9
We do know that Shakespeare used poetry as a means for developing monologues for his character. He did need to write long, romantic pieces for his female characters, and indeed certain of his man-longing sonnets found their ways into his plays. The safe presumption is, therefore, that his sonnets were an exercise in female characterizations. In the case of Shakespeare, they never fueled any speculation about his homosexuality outside of modern Assriding Studies programs.
Nah... at least some other quotes from Mickey would stir up some heterosexual discomfort. That fails even that. I've had enough of this topic... you're getting lame.
See post 125
"It seems mighty relevant to you. In fact, you seem desperate to prove a great artist couldn't have been a homosexual." -prion
You sound desperate. Give it a rest.
In my experience, the quickest way to give a thread a rest is to cease posting to it.
I could say the same for you. From where I sit, it looks like you used a historic anniversary to repeat a gay-rights talking point in a conservative forum and have then spent 200 posts spinning.
You could, if I were one of the ones complaining about the thread. Actually, I've enjoyed it.
Michelangelo's sexuality has been a matter of gossip since Michelangelo still walked the earth. His homosexuality is such a well-worn idea, I mentioned it in passing with no idea it would be challenged, let alone so fiercely. I guess I wasn't prepared for the extent to which wishful thinking would trump all.
Michelangelo was my favorite artist when I was a kid, so I read a great deal on the subject. He was a fascinating and difficult personality. But he was what he was.
In fact, the quintessential modern novel starts with Cervantes making wry fun of such heroism. Quintessential modern politics starts with Machiavelli freeing boldness from its connection to moral purpose, with disasterous consequences. You will find praise of heroism in Augustine, whom the author derides as a pessimist. You won't find it in the Foucault today's students read instead.
As for prison in the body and all that, it was in fact a heresy of the gnostics not catholic doctrine, and pushed by neo-platonist "freethinkers". The Albigensian crusade, centuries before Michelangelo, was fought to wipe out such views in southern France. It is fundamentally an eastern metaphysical idea with roots back to the Manicheans. The promotion of them to speakers for "the" supposed "medieval world view" is entirely the article writer's, and innaccurate as a matter of intellectual history.
You really are dense. I said artistic community. As an art historian, he qualifies. Enough with the semantical points. Come up with some concrete points or accept an honorable man at his word.
BTW, you certainly DID accuse me of being desperate.
Which honorable man? Robert Clements?
Robert J. Clements, one of the foremost authorities on Michelangelo, is the author of Michelangelo's Theory of Art (which has appeared in three countries) and The Poetry of Michelangelo (being published in Italy and the U.S.); co-author of Michelangelo Scultore, he has written four additional books on Renaissance literature and aesthetics. Dr. Clements received his Ph.D from the University of Chicago and a Litt.D. from the University of Rome for his work on Michelangelo. He is currently Professor of Romance Languages and Director of Comparative Literature at the Graduate School of New York University.
Doesn't sound like much of a beatnik to me. As someone who has clearly read a great deal of Michelangelo's work in manuscript, he explicitly speaks of Michelangelo's homosexuality in a matter-of-fact and unsensational way, with supporting quotes. I get the distinct impression he found the topic distasteful and glossed over it as much as possible.
This is only the one non-art book about Michelangelo I happened to have in my collection. It squares nicely with all books that I've read on the topic. Not including Irving Stone, who was a writer of fiction, and a sloppy one at that.
In the two examples he gives, Michelangelo writes of a fifteen year old boy as "idol" and "the flame that consumes me," and speaks of being gentle in bed. If this won't do, I suspect you won't take anything less than an affadavit starting, "I, Michelangelo Buonarroti, hereby confess that I am a dedicated buttsexual..."
Which honorable man? Robert Clements?
Robert J. Clements, one of the foremost authorities on Michelangelo, is the author of Michelangelo's Theory of Art (which has appeared in three countries) and The Poetry of Michelangelo (being published in Italy and the U.S.); co-author of Michelangelo Scultore, he has written four additional books on Renaissance literature and aesthetics. Dr. Clements received his Ph.D from the University of Chicago and a Litt.D. from the University of Rome for his work on Michelangelo. He is currently Professor of Romance Languages and Director of Comparative Literature at the Graduate School of New York University.
Doesn't sound like much of a beatnik to me. As someone who has clearly read a great deal of Michelangelo's work in manuscript, he explicitly speaks of Michelangelo's homosexuality in a matter-of-fact and unsensational way, with supporting quotes. I get the distinct impression he found the topic distasteful and glossed over it as much as possible.
This is only the one non-art book about Michelangelo I happened to have in my collection. It squares nicely with all books that I've read on the topic. Not including Irving Stone, who was a writer of fiction, and a sloppy one at that.
In the two examples he gives, Michelangelo writes of a fifteen year old boy as "idol" and "the flame that consumes me," and speaks of being gentle in bed. If this won't do, I suspect you won't take anything less than an affadavit starting, "I, Michelangelo Buonarroti, hereby confess that I am a dedicated buttsexual..."
Tsss! Post stutter again! Didn't there used to be a filter that caught dupes?
I'll tell you, the day this thread started I went over to Amazon to look for some books on Michaelangelo and I was looking for the author in question, mainly so I could read the reviews. I am not finding him readily nor the book titled "Michelangelo's Theory of Art" but it does not mean it is not there. But on top of this we are told the poems book are to be published. I could use some search engines too but most everything is on amazon.
Personally, I think, the Pieta is one grand work of art and this BBC article has some frank words concerning David. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3638054.stm As well as try Google news, there were dozens of stories on this yesterday.
It's hard to judge, though I may have taken a college anatomy art class in a podunk town our teacher was from Cooper Union, a cutting-edge art school. There seems to be various points of reference for this work.
Oh, long out of print, I should imagine. The book I'm quoting from was published in 1963, and it's a slim volume of quotations from Michelangelo's writing. Not exactly a work of ground-breaking scholarship. Generations of academics have come and gone since then. I'm sure I picked it up in a library sale or something, and I quote it here because it's the only book on Michelangelo I have that isn't just an art book.
The BBC link is interesting. Note that they spend almost as much time taking digs at Americans as they do talking about David. Typical!
Right. He's trying to sell books. And he is a member of the artistic community, so he is someone who is comfortable around homosexuals. A sonnet wrote for the grave of a bedridden dying young friend is a terrible example to use to defame a person.
I guess 500 years from now people like you will be positively convinced that George Bush was a stupid draft-dodging drug addict. It has to be true. His enemies keep repeating it.
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.