References to Laocoön in Baroque

[EXAYBACHAY]

Can you help me find some (in relation to the human figure)?

 

I've found some obvious references to the Belvedere torso, which has many things in common with the main figure of the Laocoön group. Some of these references include:

• Velazquez' Mars
• Michelangelo's prisoners*

 

Would it be a stretch to also argue that these reference Laocöon, too?

 

 

 

*I realize Michelangelo isn't Baroque, but the way the prisoners were used (grotto) was quite baroque.

[Loric]

So you're saying these other works are based on the forms presented in the L group? Interesting.

I never thought if it that way, and when someone would say L was "Hellenistic baroque" I assumed they meant baroque as the derogatory term for excess (which it is, was).

I guess if anything you'd have to look for areas where L is beyond physical possibility - the eyebrows for example - and try to find those traits in later works.

[EXAYBACHAY]

Not necessarily directly based off of but definitely referenced (homage) because Laocoön was, after its 1506 discovery, considered one of the greatest masterpieces of antiquity.

 

It was found without its right arm + shoulder. Italian artist Montorsoli reconstructed the arm in 1533. When the real arm was discovered long after it was revealed that while Montorsoli's reconstruction was admirable the composition was quite different. Montorsoli had Laocoön stretching his arm upwards entangled by a serpent, while the original arm is bent sharply at the elbow.

 

Consider the reconstruction and then look at Rubens' The Elevation of the Cross and compare it to Montorsoli's reconstruction. The composition of Christ and Laocoon from the waist up is nearly identical. Also the muscularity, the emotionalism (both traits of hellenism and baroque). Stong evidence suggesting Rubens, like many others of his time, studied Laocoön amongst the classics.

[m-ttl]

You know this isn't really an undergrad homework help forum, right? 

 

Sorry, but the actual work of finding, making, and researching comparisons should be your own. Go check out books and resources on Baroque art like all of the rest of us would do. You don't seem to have trouble with this, so why are you asking us to do more work for you? This is part of taking an art history class. You have to do this work yourself. 

[manierata]

Hey!  I'm happy to add my two cents, because I love this sculpture so much and love to talk about it, and because it was so important to Michelangelo.  I also love that someone is using this forum to actually talk about ideas!  

 

I would say with reference to Michelangelo there are 2 places you need to look besides the slaves: the Julius II tomb sculptures and the Last Judgment (Christ).  There are also interesting theories that the Lacoon was a actually a forgery created by Michelangelo, and that article is available on Jstor.  It always also seemed to me that there's something very Lacoon-y going on in Rubens' Descent from the Cross, though I've never really thought much about it.  I have the same hunch about some of Tintoretto's work (esp. the Golgotha in the Scuola Grande di San Rocco) but again, I haven't really thought it through, and it's not Barqoue.  Even more strangely, I think there's an argument to say that's something is going on in Goya's Saturn Devouring his Sons (the position of the legs, the diagonal of the shoulders, the expression), which is super cool to think about because it's a total perversion of the subject matter.   Another thing to think about are the later-century sculptures of Ugolino and his Sons, a subject which comes from a Canto in Dante.

 

http://www.kingsgalleries.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/raising-of-the-cross-pieter-pauwel-rubens1.jpg

 

Please keep me abreast of any of your findings.  I'd love to continue the conversation via private message, if you want to blow through some ideas.  Again, these are just impressions I've had, and may not stand up to close-looking.  Thanks for the great question!  Sorry that you originally posted so long ago and I missed it!

[EXAYBACHAY]

I first accounted for the perception of the human figure in antiquity in terms of 1) body by ways of culture (olympians, Spartan militarism, beauty contests) and then by 2) physiognomy/portraiture depicting characteristics of the subject rather than realism by ways of the head of the Constantine giant, a bust of Homer, which both have traits that transcend actual portraiture but convey aspects of their personalities instead -- so all three works are idealized in some manner. I then contrasted these to works in baroque, specifically the Rubens' piece (used the argument that it was directly inspired by the Montorsoli-reconstructed Laocoon because of its upperbody composition) and lastly moved on to Velazquez' Las Meninas comparing Constantine and Homer to the newly developed introspective/psychological (self) portrait that had sprung from the Age of Enlightenment of which Las Meninas is groundbreaking in expressing.

 

Of the more well-known theorists I ended up citing: Foucault, Pliny the Elder, Spivey, Winckelmann plus a bunch of contemporary scholars.

 

Got an A+ which is good because in this school system the exam grade accounts for 100 % of the course grade.

 

Thanks for your response, manierata. Really didn't think people would be bothered by "off-topics" like this. I will refrain from posting like this in the future.

 

Anyone knows of any appropriate forums? Most AH forums I've found just seem really inactive.

[manierata]

It sounds like youre doing really interesting work!  Keep it up!  Honestly, I think it would be great if we could use some of this infinite internet space to talk about ideas with other young scholars, but I fear we are in the minority.  Always feel free to PM me with your ren/ baroque questions!