...
| Panel |
|---|
Daniel Chazen 1) The patrons were those that typically purchased artwork, satisfying their need for what Nelson and Zeckhauser term "self-promotion" and "value" (Nelson 1). Patrons could be either individual or corporate. Individual patrons included those acting not only for themself, but also as a representative of a "family, brotherhood or guild" (Nelson 18). Merchants, aristocrats and rulers were amongst the private patrons. Corporate patrons were made up of city governments, religious orders, as well as brotherhoods. The interaction between patron and artist has been compared to a game in which "the payoff for each player depends on the behavior of the other" (Nelson 17). For example, there is a relationship between the principal and the agent, with the principal paying for requested work to be completed by the agent in return for compensation. But it was not that simple. There were several needs and relationships at issue. A desire for honor or negotiating with clergy was often a requirement of families and institutions. Sometimes, the patron also acted as an agent for his family and fellow citizens. As Nelson writes, many "individuals and groups influenced the strategies of the patron and the artist" (Nelson 18). Both patron and artist used contracts and negotiations to facilitate the transaction. Renaissance patrons specified such criteria as material, dimension, budget, and even had an impact on the viewing conditions of a work, such as framing and lighting. It was clearly the patron who played the central role in commissioning the work. *2) * The stakes were high in the commission of renaissance artwork. Social, as well as financial benefits and costs, were both at issue. Social benefits included prestige, honor and power. Social costs included the possibility of the artwork being negatively received. Financial benefits included signaling political connections, which often "led to economic benefits" (Nelson 50). Financial costs were made up of expenditures for labor and materials. However, financial costs brought its own benefit - the higher the cost, the more wealth that was conveyed. The key goal of the patron who commissions a work is that the benefit exceeds the cost. Yet, as Nelson writes, "commissions rarely bring direct financial gain to patrons" (Nelson 5). The benefit sort by Renaissance patrons was therefore not necessarily financial, but varied depending on the circumstances. 3) The incentive for the patron's payoff included being distinguished as members of the elite, as opposed to lower status. The payoff for the patron was distinction, prestige and image. It was certainly a strong incentive for the patron as relative prestige and availability of disposable income served to define the "norms of behavior and appearance in their society," behavior that has been described as "self-fashioning (Nelson 5). Another incentive for the patron was that he could use art to secure goodwill from the local rulers, as illustrated in Botticelli's Adornation of the Magi (Nelson 49). Here is a photo of the painting: --Architecture, such as public buildings, private chapels, tombs or country villas. --Ceremonies, such as marriages, funerals and festivities. --Artwork, including frescoes, portraits and decoration. 5) Signaling: Clients need to "see signs of quality" before making purchases (Nelson 74). There is a need to portray ("signal") something in a favorable and impressive way, for example a magnificent palace. In Renaissance Italy, for example, shoppers were concerned about deception, which resulted in merchants signaling that their goods were genuine by offering a certificate. (I guess similar in nature to a provenance for a piece of art.) With regard to the Renaissance era, grand statues or palaces was a very likely and strong signal that the patron "fit the criteria of magnificence" (Nelson 76). In other words, something grand importantly signaled a patron with status. Stretching: Basically what we sometimes refer to as an exaggeration or over-embellishment. Stretching, which was common in the Italian Renaissance, was used to put the patron in a favorable light by overstating his success. One example is how Gonzaga used art to portray a major battle against the French as a significant victory, while there were many that thought the "results were mixed at best" (Nelson 8). Signposting: This is the omission of significant and truthful information when indicating specific and important characteristics – in other words, not giving the full story. An example of signposting was when sculptor Leone Leoni referenced his ties to learning and the emperor in the façade for his home, but failed to reveal that he made his name and fortune as an artist. 6) Audiences included: --People living in the future – thus providing a durable legacy for the patron. --Contemporaries – basically the target audience, such as fellow nobles and elites. --For God – Heavenly, inspirational and uplifting to the soul. 7) For the affluent and noble in the Renaissance era, a central part of the image they sort to portray was that of magnificence. This was important as their image defined the "norms of behavior and appearance in their society." It's importance was described by Pontano, who wrote that noble people are particularly intent "to realize the long lasting of their name and reputation..." (Nelson 5). In the renaissance era, it was key to signal something of grandeur, as that in turn portrayed an individual of magnificence. Amongst the attributes of magnificence is an association with greatness and a public display or indication of decorum. Attributes of signaling included exclusiveness and appropriateness. While signaling and magnificence were distinct concepts, they essentially worked hand in hand to achieve distinction for the patron. |
...