PSA: The Names of Old Masters Are Not Interchangeable
(Blogging between rounds of grading has proved difficult. My thesis research is consuming, and as I struggle to put thoughts into sentences coherent by academic standards, I have little desire to re-translate into summary or self-critical form for my reading public. But, lucky for you, faithful, returning reader of this blog…the second exam is in hand, providing me with ample fodder for nerdy giggles.)
A public service announcement regarding this painting:
I freely admit that this is not the most famous of paintings. The colors are dark, the subjects look sad, and the suggested narrative is reasonably obscure. And yet, cultured reader and member of the public, there are a few things I would like you to know.
Contrary to the answers of several of my students, this is not a fine example of the Early Renaissance period. This is not, in fact, painted by Masaccio. A work by Masaccio, Early Renaissance master as he was, looks more like the this:
Further, the painting in question is not, as reported by other students, painted by Peter Paul Rubens. Although you, fine reader, were not in attendance during the class lecture on Rubens — where his penchant for rosy, fleshy, tumbling women was repeated ad nauseum — you may be familiar with the common reference to a “Rubenesque” build. Upon careful examination of first painting, I would argue, quite strongly, that there is nary a peaches and cream confection of a woman in sight. The absence of such plump femininity would, I hope, temper any desire to attribute this work to Rubens. It was not so for my students, but perhaps, now, you will choose more wisely.

The painting in question is, in fact, by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, The Death of the Virgin, from 1606. It is not, as another student proclaimed, A Suicide, and it is most definitely not The Deposition. The painting is remarkable in several aspects, not least of which is the uncharacteristically somber and realistic treatment of Mary’s death. Instead of a shiny, floating Virgin being ushered into the heavens by putti, Caravaggio paints a pale, slightly green, and decidedly dead woman surrounded by stricken mourners. This unflinchingly naturalistic depiction of death likely contributed to the decision by Caravaggio’s intended patron, Laerzio Cherubini, to reject the painting. Ironically, Peter Paul Rubens — who painted a rather luscious Assumption of the Virgin himself — appreciated Caravaggio’s skill and innovation and convinced the Duke of Mantua to buy the work instead.
This message is sponsored by the Society of Type A Art Historians and Tired TAs with the hope for a brighter future where our young people remember that the names of old masters are not, in fact, interchangeable.


funke said:
on November 4, 2007 at 6:52 am
I suppose if it is any consolation, at least these these uninitiated undergrads limited their choices to artists? I see no predilection to suggest that these works were the product of Monteverdi’s genius…
Krista said:
on November 4, 2007 at 5:46 pm
I always enjoy your writing, but especially when you write about teaching! Thanks so much!
Anyway, your dilemma reminds me of how frustrated Ian gets over his high school students’ confusion of All Those British Writers. I remind him that a deeper knowledge of worldview is more natural to us older and more educated people. The more we know about history/Western culture/stages of historical and cultural artifact development, the easier it is to remember the difference between Carravaggio and Rubens or between Donne and Milton.
Keep up the good work!
april said:
on November 10, 2007 at 6:44 pm
yes master. good work. i think i’d like you as my teacher.
Rachel said:
on November 13, 2007 at 9:21 am
You are an amazing woman, my friend. Proud of you for challenging and stretching the minds and hearts of many. Thank you too for giving me a needed artistic escape while in my apologetics class at 8:30 this a.m.
Here’s to sushi, turkey, pizza for thanksgiving!!
What can I bring - SERIOUSLY?
Can’t wait!!
Rebekah said:
on November 26, 2007 at 9:21 am
Ouch.