Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Panel

Khrystyne Wilson

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000205 EndHTML:0000013305 StartFragment:0000002771 EndFragment:0000013269 SourceURL:[file://localhost/Users/khrystynewilson/Documents/Winter%20Course%20Response%201-4-12.docImage Removed|file://localhost/Users/khrystynewilson/Documents/Winter%20Course%20Response%201-4-12.doc]

Today's readings in Renaissance Art provided a good introduction into how one studies the Art Market, by focusing on the beginnings of the Art Market during the Italian Renaissance. The authors convincingly explained the Art Market in contemporary economic terms, for example: applying the game theory to the artists and patrons participating in the art market at this time. I found their examples extremely helpful, and through their demonstrations, it is clear what to look for when examining art that may be helpful in determining their value through the art market. For example, in Italian Renaissance art, we can clearly determine the motive of the Patron through what he/she is exhibited doing, i.e. praying, reading etc or wearing: i.e. furs, jewelry. The use of the game theory to explain the art market in the Italian Renaissance was quite informative. I found this analogy to be the most convincing. In the Italian Renaissance, there were the players, i.e. the patrons, artists, and intended audience, and the principal players, the patrons and artists, would either rise, or decline in society based on the art they either commissioned or created. Overall this reading was very interesting, and I can see how the methods in which the authors examined the Italian Renaissance art market, will prove useful in all locations and eras up into the modern art market. 

1)    The patrons of the Art market in the Italian Renaissance were those who paid for the art. These could be private patrons, who were individuals commissioning work for themselves, their family, guild or brotherhood, or corporate patrons, such as religious groups, governments, and also brotherhoods. The private patrons were often merchants, aristocrats and rulers. Private and corporate patrons sometimes overlapped, as in a brotherhood could be either a private or a corporate patron. Mostly, private patrons were individuals within these corporations, which often encompassed those who could and could not afford to become private patrons. These patrons would commission artwork with a audience in mind, thus they commissioned work that would benefit them in some way, either to their immediate audience, future audience or heavenly audience. Because of this, the patrons would commission work to represent the family, brotherhood, guild or corporation. Patrons were in charge of choosing the kind of art (painting, sculpture, relief etc), its purpose, and other details, thus they played a significant role in the commissioning game. 

2)    Both the artist and patrons could either be benefited or harmed by the commissioning game, due to the outcome of their commissioned or created art. The audience played a large role in deciding whether a piece of art was worth its cost, by their reaction to the artwork. By choosing what was included in an artwork, a patron can decide what he/she wants to portray to the audience, and through the artists work, this portrayal could either be achieved or not. Through commissioning a piece of art, the patron could show himself as elevated in status, or pious in nature, strong, victorious, etc. etc. Thus, one had to weigh the cost financially with the social benefits one might gain by having a well-known artist create a portrait of him or her looking financially secure. Another cost of commissioning a work of art was the potential that the artwork would be received negatively. This could occur if the patron, or artist, reached too far beyond their current position and portrayed themselves as higher above their status, political connections, or finances. Patrons were hardly ever financially compensated for these pieces of art, thus the benefits were never financial, but rather were social through their demonstration within the work of art of wealth, power and political connections. 

3)    There were many incentives for the Patron to commission a work of art. By having a certain caliber of art, or a personal piece of art made by a well-known artist, patrons could distinguish themselves as above the norm. For private patrons, this means they could distinguish themselves as financially, or socially above the general population. This was especially true in some regions of Italy, such as Florence, where social strata were not as rigidly enforced, and there was potential for social mobility. Thus, by possessing a piece of art that demonstrated power, or wealth, one could potentially elevate them within the social world. For corporate patrons, such as a religious group, they could distinguish themselves as above the general populace in their piety and regard for religious figures and events. 

4)    Three of the most important avenues for expenditures and conspicuous consumption were paintings/portraits, architecture and chapel/tomb decoration. Other avenues were through clothing, banquets and parties, sculpture, frescos, and reliefs. All of these avenues could portray a desired quality, such as wealth and status in portraits, power in reliefs or frescos describing battles, and piety within chapel or tomb decorations. 

5)    Signaling was a patron's way of demonstrating the desired attribute through a piece of artwork. The quality of the work, along with the portrayal as wealthy, high in status, and pious could all be determined by signaling to demonstrate an overall portrayal of the characteristics the patron wanted to impress upon his audience. For example, to signal wealth within a painting, one might be wearing certain clothing, or jewelry, or be positioned in front of impressive architecture. Another example of signaling is when a patron wants to be portrayed as pious the could be shown in a painting as reading a piece of religious work, or praying. 

The term sign-posting describes specific signaling in order to show specific information about the patron, but omit other information. One example of this would be in political art demonstrating a war, the patron could exhibit how they won a specific battle, but could omit the fact that they lost the war. 

Stretching is exhibited through a patron's desire to increase his social, or financial appearance, however he/she exaggerates or misrepresents their real status. An example of this is when a baker created a magnificent tomb for himself, however it was looked down upon because he had over-extended his social status as a baker. 

6)    Audiences were primarily put into one of three categories: the contemporary audience, the future audience, and the heavenly audience. The contemporary audience consisted of the people that the patron would like to immediately impress upon. Examples would be, nobles, elites, political figures, other artists etc etc. The patron could also want to impress the future audience, and example of this was when political leaders would commission works of art to be made regarding wars or battles won, in order to preserve the power and prestige of a specific ruler or country, for future generations. The last group is the heavenly audience. Many patrons, specifically when designing chapel/tomb decorations would be commissioned with the aim to impress God or his messengers with the patrons' piety. 

7)    In the Renaissance period, it was important for patrons to demonstrate their "magnificence" whether it be their individual or family magnificence, the magnificence of their position, or their corporation's magnificence. This magnificence would not only serve to demonstrate the individual strength and power of a person, family or corporation, but also that of the community that it is encompassed within. The magnificence was often compared with the other patrons of the time, and thus one had to portray maximum greatness in order to distinguish oneself from the crowd. Architecture, clothing, banquets and receptions could all be used to signal grandeur, thus demonstrating the magnificence of the patron. By using signaling to set one apart from the general populace, one could achieve this goal of becoming magnificent.

 

Panel

Nicholas Kristov

1. Who were the patrons specify and corporate patrons – and what was their relationship to one another and their significance in the commissioning game? 

Patrons and artists fulfilled a principal- agent situation found commonly in economics. Partrons hired artists (commissioned) them to build ornate pieces of art, tombs, palaces, churches in tribute to the patron, religious figures, battles- or anything else the patron wanted to highlight to society.  

Private patrons could be an individual who wants to celebrate a battle win, or show they are part of a famous family - as often done in the Midici clan. These included merchants, Popes, government leaders, and the elite. 

Corporate patrons were groups of people- often governments, religious sects, or societies which wanted to collectively commission an artist. Instead of doing this individually- just like corporations today- corporate patrons commissioned artists to complete work on behalf of the organization. 

Each patron had to prove to society and the other patrons their social standing, and a commissioning was a common way to do so. It became a competition however, with judgements based on the end product (or failings) on the patron. So, if a project was the best of its kind- the patron would be seen in a better light or if it was not completed, the patron would not be as highly regarded 

2) What were the stakes (costs and benefits) of the commissioning game? 3) What provided incentives for the Patron's Payoff?

The stakes were quite large for the commissioning game. Commissions were seen as one of the main factors which showed that a patron was part of the elite sect of society. By creating exquisite paintings, sculptures palaces and other pieces of art, patrons could be seen as wealthy and powerful. Some religious commissions  assured a better afterlife. However, often it was to impress upon the other elite of a patron's status. These served as monuments to people, ideas, families, battles and almost anything else which was worth bragging about. A good piece could mean recognition from current and future generations for your family- cementing elite status. 

The costs, however were great for these commissioning. Just as the glory came to those who had an exquisite commissioning, the opposite befell those who failed to commission a quality piece. This could mean a fall from grace with the elite, a loss of future business( if a patron was a merchant)  from the state or others in high society. The costs for the commissioning were quite large compared to a laborer's yearly salary. Often taking many years to complete, the financial risk did not compare to the risk in status if the work was not well received or if it was not actually completed. 

Name and describe at least three avenues for expenditures and conspicuous consumption (i.e. art: portraits, frescoes, tomb/chapel decoration).

Conspicuous consumption was a tactic used by patrons to show status, wealth and power. This was done through many avenues such as

Paintings- portraits, battles, religious themes

Architecture- community buildings, palaces, religious buildings

Sculptures

Processions- Funerals, weddings 

5) Detail and give examples of

Signaling-  a tool to signal to society regarding a certain characteristic about a patron this could be indication wealth, status or power. A statue or large palace was often an easy way to signal to society about a patron's large wealth. One example of this is the use of family shields within commissions in the church. Savonarola exaplained that shields were shown behind the altar because "when the priest stands...the arms can be seen well by all the people." This display was not for God, but to signal to society regarding the holiness of the patron. 

when the priest
stands at the altar, the arms can be seen well by all the people:
Stretching is a use of exaggeration in terms of certain facts about the patron. An example is that many families streghteched or purposly changed their coat of arms in order to play up their wealth, power and familial status.

Sign-posting- was a more selective form of signaling. By using sign-posting a patron was trying to show a certain aspect of themselves, group or family and omit others. It could be as subtle as who appears in the painting, or as blatant as showing that you are part of the medici family but ignoring any misgivings. 

6) Who were the audiences?

Nobel and Elite-  Often patrons used commissions to prove to the contemporary elite and nobel that they were of common status. Aristocrats and rulers were also part of the audience as impressing all of the individuals with high status was greatly sought after. By producing a beautiful piece, patrons were seen in the contemporary high society as deserving of status, wealth and power. As it was highly competitive for patrons at this time, judgements of their contemporaries were taken with great magnitude. 

Heavenly- Using commissions to honor God was used by patrons in order to gain a better afterlife and show their devotion. Building beautiful tombs, personal chapels and other religous work which would primarily be only "seen" by God was extremely common, and used to honor the heavens. 

Future generations- Showing future generations of the Elite was something to be sought after. Leaving a permanent legacy on earth showed the highest honor. 

7) Discuss the attributes of "being distinguished" with reference to magnificence and signaling.

One of the most common attributes of being distinguished when it comes magnificence and signaling is how tasteful it needs to be to be considered truly magnificent. The work had to ultimately be for the greater good and yet still tasteful, despite signaling great power and wealth. This can be seen in achitechture which despite being commissioned by the elite still could not be seen as "vulgar" by exuberant wealth for ones selfish gain. The ability of the parton to commission an artist to create something beautiful, useful and lasting created a legacy for the patron for future generations and religious eternality. 

 

Panel

Panel

 
Consider & comment:

...