Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't recall reading about him doing any dissecting. What for? Leonardo was the scientist and did dissect and study internal organs. And draw them. I think Michaelangelo put have put it to paper if he had.I'm sure whores were available but probably frowned on a bit since most art was paid for by the church and high society types.it is very likely that Michelangelo did not have the opportunity to study female
anatomy. ------available corpses for study were usually dead criminals. It
might have been difficult to get nude female models
Michelangelo hanged out in the homes the MEDICIS and in the Vatican----AND
you do not get to DISSECT whores-----he bought his autopsy materials from potter's
fields.
I don't recall reading about him doing any dissecting. What for? Leonardo was the scientist and did dissect and study internal organs. And draw them. I think Michaelangelo put have put it to paper if he had.I'm sure whores were available but probably frowned on a bit since most art was paid for by the church and high society types.it is very likely that Michelangelo did not have the opportunity to study female
anatomy. ------available corpses for study were usually dead criminals. It
might have been difficult to get nude female models
Michelangelo hanged out in the homes the MEDICIS and in the Vatican----AND
you do not get to DISSECT whores-----he bought his autopsy materials from potter's
fields.
I don't recall reading about him doing any dissecting. What for? Leonardo was the scientist and did dissect and study internal organs. And draw them. I think Michaelangelo put have put it to paper if he had.I'm sure whores were available but probably frowned on a bit since most art was paid for by the church and high society types.it is very likely that Michelangelo did not have the opportunity to study female
anatomy. ------available corpses for study were usually dead criminals. It
might have been difficult to get nude female models
Michelangelo hanged out in the homes the MEDICIS and in the Vatican----AND
you do not get to DISSECT whores-----he bought his autopsy materials from potter's
fields.
But I honestly think it was just the accepted female form of the day. Rubens gals were always a bit heavy, as was common to them then for a healthy look. Skinny gals were dirt poor.
Rubenesque is the proper term. And artists are more honest than diplomatic. I still don't think Michaelangelo did any human dissecting though. That wasn't Leos purpose when he did it.I don't recall reading about him doing any dissecting. What for? Leonardo was the scientist and did dissect and study internal organs. And draw them. I think Michaelangelo put have put it to paper if he had.I'm sure whores were available but probably frowned on a bit since most art was paid for by the church and high society types.it is very likely that Michelangelo did not have the opportunity to study female
anatomy. ------available corpses for study were usually dead criminals. It
might have been difficult to get nude female models
Michelangelo hanged out in the homes the MEDICIS and in the Vatican----AND
you do not get to DISSECT whores-----he bought his autopsy materials from potter's
fields.
But I honestly think it was just the accepted female form of the day. Rubens gals were always a bit heavy, as was common to them then for a healthy look. Skinny gals were dirt poor.
Michelangelo shows the anatomy of the MUSCLES under the skin-----which is
why his forms look so MALE LIKE (boys got more muscle----anabolic testosterone ---etc.) Rubens girls have ROTUND limbs and asses and even
bellys (a personal anecdote----hubby is an artist-----when young I had---well anyway---- that and reddish hair (mixed with very dark----not trump like---more like rubens like) so the jerk paid me a "compliment"-----"you look like a rubens"-----
I RESTRAINED MYSELF FROM SLAPPING HIM
For a fee, there have been females available since day one.i'm also thinking female nude models were not available at the time....Leonardo is also accused of homosexuality. However, all the females looked that way back then probably because it was the accepted norm. All artists couldn't have been gay. And more likely more into the message than getting guys all hot and bothered. They had male models and stuck boobs on the art.
Rubenesque is the proper term. And artists are more honest than diplomatic. I still don't think Michaelangelo did any human dissecting though. That wasn't Leos purpose when he did it.I don't recall reading about him doing any dissecting. What for? Leonardo was the scientist and did dissect and study internal organs. And draw them. I think Michaelangelo put have put it to paper if he had.I'm sure whores were available but probably frowned on a bit since most art was paid for by the church and high society types.it is very likely that Michelangelo did not have the opportunity to study female
anatomy. ------available corpses for study were usually dead criminals. It
might have been difficult to get nude female models
Michelangelo hanged out in the homes the MEDICIS and in the Vatican----AND
you do not get to DISSECT whores-----he bought his autopsy materials from potter's
fields.
But I honestly think it was just the accepted female form of the day. Rubens gals were always a bit heavy, as was common to them then for a healthy look. Skinny gals were dirt poor.
Michelangelo shows the anatomy of the MUSCLES under the skin-----which is
why his forms look so MALE LIKE (boys got more muscle----anabolic testosterone ---etc.) Rubens girls have ROTUND limbs and asses and even
bellys (a personal anecdote----hubby is an artist-----when young I had---well anyway---- that and reddish hair (mixed with very dark----not trump like---more like rubens like) so the jerk paid me a "compliment"-----"you look like a rubens"-----
I RESTRAINED MYSELF FROM SLAPPING HIM
I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.I will check-----I seem to recall that he did dissection-----Of course Da Vinci who was his CONTEMPORARY did ---yes---but hubby's mother tongue is not English------he probably did not say "RUBENESQUE"----but I got the idea-----
as in----KINDA ---'slighty' obese
I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.I will check-----I seem to recall that he did dissection-----Of course Da Vinci who was his CONTEMPORARY did ---yes---but hubby's mother tongue is not English------he probably did not say "RUBENESQUE"----but I got the idea-----
as in----KINDA ---'slighty' obese
We do have that advantage but men have been drawn for a long time. There's no reason to dissect below what your eyes can see and dissection is a bloody business. I don't know why you feel it's necessary.I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.I will check-----I seem to recall that he did dissection-----Of course Da Vinci who was his CONTEMPORARY did ---yes---but hubby's mother tongue is not English------he probably did not say "RUBENESQUE"----but I got the idea-----
as in----KINDA ---'slighty' obese
silly boy------YOU GOT GREY's ANATOMY
We do have that advantage but men have been drawn for a long time. There's no reason to dissect below what your eyes can see and dissection is a bloody business. I don't know why you feel it's necessary.I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.I will check-----I seem to recall that he did dissection-----Of course Da Vinci who was his CONTEMPORARY did ---yes---but hubby's mother tongue is not English------he probably did not say "RUBENESQUE"----but I got the idea-----
as in----KINDA ---'slighty' obese
silly boy------YOU GOT GREY's ANATOMY
For a fee, there have been females available since day one.i'm also thinking female nude models were not available at the time....Leonardo is also accused of homosexuality. However, all the females looked that way back then probably because it was the accepted norm. All artists couldn't have been gay. And more likely more into the message than getting guys all hot and bothered. They had male models and stuck boobs on the art.
Just like Melania, women are taught from an early age that they're sitting on a gold mine.
The Greeks and Egyptians used a stylized form, clearly they knew what muscles looked like. The origional Olympics were done bare naked. The whole thing about the Renaissance was it's movement towards science and reality.We do have that advantage but men have been drawn for a long time. There's no reason to dissect below what your eyes can see and dissection is a bloody business. I don't know why you feel it's necessary.I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.I will check-----I seem to recall that he did dissection-----Of course Da Vinci who was his CONTEMPORARY did ---yes---but hubby's mother tongue is not English------he probably did not say "RUBENESQUE"----but I got the idea-----
as in----KINDA ---'slighty' obese
silly boy------YOU GOT GREY's ANATOMY
I am not an artist----I cannot draw a straight line------hubby has Grey's anatomy. The greeks did not get them muscles down as did Michelangelo and Da Vinci---
nor did the Egyptians. PS----my drafting ability is so poor that exams that required me to make a sketch------SCARED ME
I normally have your retarded rants filtered but wanted to see who PC was responding to. I can find some very fucked up libs but you think an offended conservative is the right wing. You're just a deranged asshole. Goodbye again.You RWNJs get stranger and stranger. I written before that I had two bookstores in Denver malls. As usual, remainders were put on tables near the entrance. I would have my clerks rearrange them, clean the tables, that sort of thing. One day, a woman came storming in, all but hysterical about the huge Michelangelo art book that faced out to the mall because the cover was the David statue. She ranted cover the penis or move the book. We all had a good laugh about her but I did move the book. Wanna bet she voted for King TrumpleThinSkin?
At the Louvre, you walk past gazillions of incredible sculptures, really stunning art. And then you see Michelangelo's Slaves and the difference is beyond words.
His work truly glows from within.
The Greeks and Egyptians used a stylized form, clearly they knew what muscles looked like. The origional Olympics were done bare naked. The whole thing about the Renaissance was it's movement towards science and reality.We do have that advantage but men have been drawn for a long time. There's no reason to dissect below what your eyes can see and dissection is a bloody business. I don't know why you feel it's necessary.I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.I will check-----I seem to recall that he did dissection-----Of course Da Vinci who was his CONTEMPORARY did ---yes---but hubby's mother tongue is not English------he probably did not say "RUBENESQUE"----but I got the idea-----
as in----KINDA ---'slighty' obese
silly boy------YOU GOT GREY's ANATOMY
I am not an artist----I cannot draw a straight line------hubby has Grey's anatomy. The greeks did not get them muscles down as did Michelangelo and Da Vinci---
nor did the Egyptians. PS----my drafting ability is so poor that exams that required me to make a sketch------SCARED ME
I think that's probably it, and what I meant by the times they lived in. Christianity was the driving force for the culture. A sexy woman was not going to pass muster. I am sure they great artists of the day knew the difference and could depict them. The Greeks had penis shaped jewelry and no such inhibitions.The Greeks and Egyptians used a stylized form, clearly they knew what muscles looked like. The origional Olympics were done bare naked. The whole thing about the Renaissance was it's movement towards science and reality.We do have that advantage but men have been drawn for a long time. There's no reason to dissect below what your eyes can see and dissection is a bloody business. I don't know why you feel it's necessary.I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.
silly boy------YOU GOT GREY's ANATOMY
I am not an artist----I cannot draw a straight line------hubby has Grey's anatomy. The greeks did not get them muscles down as did Michelangelo and Da Vinci---
nor did the Egyptians. PS----my drafting ability is so poor that exams that required me to make a sketch------SCARED ME
Here's one take on the difference...
"What’s creepy about Michelangelo’s women is that they literally have breasts stuck on a male torso–the breasts are too small, baseball-round,and separate from each other to be real. The bodies are deliberately de-sensualized and denaturalized and made to be repulsive nudes, in a way Greek female bodies are not (the naked Aphrodite of Praxiteles horrified Greeks who though female images should be clothed, but that apparently didn’t prevent men from trying to have sex with the statue, which is indeed pretty yummy).
You just can’t help thinking that, other than a demure clothed Virgin Mary, Christian SPIRITUAL concepts of women at that time were just plain repulsed by the sensuality of the body and couldn’t deal with it. Michelangelo just can’t seem to transfer the same freedom from medieval convention to female bodies as he can to male ones–he can’t figure out how to combine the feminine sensual with the feminine spiritual. The Greeks never had that problem in their concepts of the gods."
https://renresearch.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/men-with-breasts2//comment
It wasn't easy to have a nude model at that time.
I've read the Catholic Church didn't allow anybody to have corpses for artistic purpose.
Maybe that's why Michaelangelo's female sculptures were like "men with breasts"
Anyway he was a genius and his works are wonderful!
Nope. He was well respected by then, a very valuable member driving the whole movement into science and study. The most valued really. He had all the access he wanted.It wasn't easy to have a nude model at that time.
I've read the Catholic Church didn't allow anybody to have corpses for artistic purpose.
Maybe that's why Michaelangelo's female sculptures were like "men with breasts"
Anyway he was a genius and his works are wonderful!
the artists----eg Da Vinci-----BOUGHT corpses from cemetery guards----it was
VERY illegal
Nope. He was well respected by then, a very valuable member driving the whole movement into science and study. The most valued really. He had all the access he wanted.It wasn't easy to have a nude model at that time.
I've read the Catholic Church didn't allow anybody to have corpses for artistic purpose.
Maybe that's why Michaelangelo's female sculptures were like "men with breasts"
Anyway he was a genius and his works are wonderful!
the artists----eg Da Vinci-----BOUGHT corpses from cemetery guards----it was
VERY illegal
Leonardo da Vinci: Anatomy of an artist
The 18 sheets from the Royal Collection at the heart of the Edinburgh exhibition probably date from the winter of 1510-11, when Leonardo collaborated with the Veronese anatomist Marcantonio della Torre in the medical school of the university of Pavia, 20 miles south of Milan. Leonardo was filled with optimism and purpose. “This winter of 1510 I believe I shall finish all this anatomy,” he wrote.
Sorry Snookums:sweetums it was illegal and DaVinci BOUGHT corpses from grave diggers and robbers------I do not know the anatomist Marcantonio---but such people bought them too-------Edinburgh is in Scotland.--------amazing what one finds in
MEDICAL SCHOOL LIBRARIES---------the old ones in Philadelphia are amazing too. CANON law------no dissections of the baptized dead----or even the unbaptized-
