Jules Coignet: Paestum (1860)
Those boobs don't look very convincing. And neither do these:Michelangelo, Tomb of Giuliano de’ Medici (Florence, San Lorenzo, New Sacristy)
allegory of night (left) and day (right)
@Hemo Rusticus @Laurentius @Agrippa
Caro m’è ’l sonno, e più l’esser di sasso,
mentre che ’l danno e la vergogna dura;
non veder, non sentir m’è gran ventura;
però non mi destar, deh, parla basso.
In both cases those female bodies look ver much manly-athletic alike My guess is that gender swap was a last minute decision.... or perhaps
Terry S. dixit:Those were the days when men were men and so were the women.
But Caravaggio did distort proportions although he wasn't trying to from what I've read. Which means they're mistakes? Dunno.It's idealism. I think this style held sway until the emergence of realism and artists like Caravaggio.
I think it's safe to assume Michelangelo's ideal was the male rather than the female form.It's idealism. I think this style held sway until the emergence of realism and artists like Caravaggio.
Interesting, a fair few there I'm still not familiar with. But on form, I'll take one of Rubens' lovely lumps of femininity over those chiselled babes, all day long.I think it's safe to assume Michelangelo's ideal was the male rather than the female form.
Michelangelo's contemporaries Leonardo da Vinci, Sandro Botticelli, Benvenuto Cellini and Giovanni Antonio Bazzi (Il Sodoma) were publicly charged with sodomy (Leonardo was even imprisoned for two months), and Michelangelo, like them, was offered sexual "services" by the ragazzi or street boys who worked as apprentices in the art studios. (Rictor Norton, "Michelangelo and the label "Homosexual")