Abstract

The triad of decline-metamorphosis-rebirth constantly reappears in the history of civilisation, it is current in all historical periods and cultural environments, in different areas and the most diverse contexts. Its manifestations are countless and the same is true of its interpretations. They are especially frequent in the area of art, because the evolutionary model, grounded in the idea of cyclic development comes very handy for explanations and illustrations which seek to present complicated things in a simple and clear way. The history of art, mainly in the 19th century, advocated a tripartite development of art which seeks greater perfection and maturity and reaches its peak just to be then inevitably followed by a decline in artistic originality and power. Already for some time now the evolutionary model has been shown too ineffective in addressing scholarly questions, especially due to oversimplification and a priori classification of subject matter which cannot possibly be classified. The perception that the art of the Early Renaissance was a preliminary period for more mature and accomplished achievements of High Renaissance which at some point began to lose its drive and went into decline either by repeating outmoded forms or their decomposition, is not only naive, but simply wrong and represents a misunderstanding of the essence of art. In much the same way it would be equally wrong to label in advance the early works of a certain artist as not-mature-yet or possessing less artistic authenticity.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call