HART2207 Caravaggio and the Baroque Unit Coordinator: Dr Susanne Meurer
LEONIE HART
‘“What they abhor in real life, they like to see in a picture”. Salvator Rosa and the Bamboccianti’ In early modern Europe, satire was an artistic convention, which performed the role of moral reformer; it gave an author a literary avenue in which to channel his indignation and horror regarding the follies and vices of mankind. Satire was to extract “the fruit of reformation” and the ability to use satire was “majestic and learned” as it required the author to direct his critique toward the vice rather than the individual.1 Around 1650, philosopher painter Salvator Rosa employed this convention to pen Satire in Painting; a critique that called attention to the degradation observed in the high art of painting and the patronage that was supporting it.2 An obvious target in his satire, although not the only one, was the group of northern artists called the Bamboccianti who had popularised the subject matter of bambocciate. The Bamboccianti painted small-scale genre scenes, which captured a slice of life among the lower social classes of Rome. They were criticised for depicting only the “vulgar and ugly” aspects of daily Roman life rather than following the academic rules of elevation and idealism.3 On a superficial reading of Rosa’s satire, one might be mistaken for thinking that he was simply being petty and was jealous of the success the Bamboccianti were experiencing. As is the very nature of Italian Baroque, however art was rarely one-dimensional and the superficial was not the only interpretation. Using the verse “what they abhor in real life, they like to see in a picture”, 80
this essay will examine how the Bamboccianti’s consistent choice of subject matter subverted the hierarchy of artistic conventions and how, through their indifference to the grandeur of classical antiquity, these artistic foreigners initiated a social critique on the city of Rome. Rosa started his career painting Neapolitan landscapes and genre scenes before progressing towards biblical iconography and larger philosophical works.4 Seeking to align himself as a worthy member of the art establishment, Rosa strove for recognition in the genres of historical and allegorical scenes. Rosa hoped that his philosophical content would appeal to an intellectual circle and that his moralising themes would reveal him as a great artist.5 Despite this conscious effort, his critics stated that he was “incapable of bringing his works to that level of perfection”; his paintings lacked design and detail, use of colour was inappropriate and his forms were “rustic” and disorganised.6 He was however praised for his earlier paintings, small figures with intriguing scenes of “vile subjects [such as] rogues, limekilns and sailors”.7 Paintings which unfortunately for Rosa described a genre that the Bamboccianti were well-known for and that he was trying to distance himself from.8 Considered inferior in the academic profession of painting, genre scenes fell short of the higher forms of heroic and religious themes. The successful proliferation of the Bamboccianti’s genre paintings, which portrayed the disreputable life of daily Rome, was seen by Rosa and his contemporaries as the root of corruption and decline of the high art of painting.9 Rosa knew any connection to the low nature of these genre paintings would inhibit him from pursuing his goal of become a great artist. In using his satire to criticise the content of their paintings, Rosa could distance himself from the Bamboccianti and their
