Plato & Giotto

Plato's articles about art were somewhat confusing to me. In the essay "The Republic,” Socrates discusses how art is used as an imitation. More specifically, he poses the question of is art “designed to be an imitation of things are they are...or as they appear?” To me this questions raises the debate between realism and idealism. By painting things as they actually are, you are entering into the world of realism. When you start to paint things as they appear, you get into the argument of what a person sees. If i looked at a pot of flowers, they could appear ideal and perfect to me. If a professional gardener looked at a pot of flowers, they might find the flaws of the wilting petals. Plato and Socrates are arguing that painting pulls away from reason and instead focuses on reproducing ideas that are already present (through imitation). As we discussed in class, Plato and Socrates didn’t want artists in their republic. But if artists CAN depict idealism and reason, why shouldn’t they be allowed in the society?


Vasari describes Giotto very interestingly and seems to follow the “Schematic Structure of the Artist’s Biography” quite accurately. Vasari opens up the biography on Giotto by telling the reader that he was born to a “simple peasant.” This description falls into the “Schematic Structure of the Artist’s Biography” under birth (family lineage). Vasari then goes on to discuss how Giotto exhibits “extraordinary vivacity and quickness of mind,” demonstrating signs of early promise according to the schematic structure worksheet. Vasari continues on by discussing how Cimabue (a recognized artist) “found Giotto” and “marveled of him.” This falls into the youth category of the schematic structure and recognition by an artistic authority. Continuing on in the biography we learn that Giotto surpassed Cimabue in talent, and “brought back to life the true art of painting.” Vasari details the works that Giotto did, including painting frescoes in churches and having his work sought after for St. Peter’s. Vasari says that they (the Pope and his courtiers) saw that, “Giotto must surpass greatly all the other painters of his time,” which is quite a compliment considering who his competitors were during this time. Giotto was called a “king” and was beloved during his time. While Vasari doesn’t detail Giotto’s death or the fate of his works, it can be argued that perhaps Vasari didn’t believe he needed to include this details. Perhaps Vasari knew Giotto would be known for his work for centuries to come so he didn’t need to write about the fate of his works. By following the “Schematic Structure” a writer is able to form a coherent description of the artist’s life. Most artists have recognizable talents at a very young age, so by describing their skill set it prepares the reader to know that the artist will be great. I think the schematic structure is necessary because it gives the reader an easy to way to follow an artist’s life and to see how they became the great master of art that they were during their time. By saying they displayed extraordinary behavior at a young age, it makes it seem like they were born special, but they weren’t categorized as special until someone who was higher in the artistic community came along and found them.

To me, Vasari depicts Giotto in a very personable way. Nowhere in the biography did Vasari talk about Giotto being power hungry or desperate for money. Only one time was wealth even brought up in the writing. Vasari also discusses being “rounder than the O of Giotto,” saying it is used to describe a slowness or heaviness of mind, indicating the Giotto probably put a lot of time and effort into his works, especially the ones done for the churches. Giotto seems like he enjoyed his work very much and the people who were lucky enough to be his patrons also enjoyed his work. He was beloved by people of his time, so that indicates the kind of person he could be. To me it was hard to figure out what his personality would be. Since he was born to a peasant he was probably grateful for being discovered by Cimabue. Yet as we discussed in class, an artist is stubborn, impressionable, and independent. Vasari doesn’t discuss him collaborating on any projects with other artists. His work was loved by many people and very impressionable (as it is still studied and used today).