Erwin Panofsky on Renaissance Art, Essay Example

In his work on the study of the Medieval and Renaissance art, Erwin Panofsky explicated the fundamental difference between the subject matter (or meaning) and form. By analyzing the simple case of a greeting with a man in the street accompanied by hat lifting, Panofsky illustrated that each object, action, or phenomenon has three strata of meaning: the primary (or natural) meaning, the secondary (or conventional) meaning, and the intrinsic meaning or content (Panofsky 26-28). According to the author, the same strata of meaning can be transferred on any artwork: the primary or natural subject matter (conceived through apprehension of pure forms), secondary or conventional subject matter (understood through connecting artistic motifs with themes and concepts), and the intrinsic meaning or content (comprehended by uncovering the underlying principles of a nation’s, class’s, period’s attitudes revealed and condensed in the work) (Panofsky 28-30).

The same division can be applied to any modern medium of art, or simply speaking, visual representation, including a magazine advertisement, a newspaper photograph, or a commercial on TV. The reason for this is that every creator of a visual image also includes the primary and secondary meanings into the work that can be understood through simple observation thereof; however, at the same time, they include their own philosophy, culture, and intentions in the work that may be uncovered only through a more in-depth, informed analysis. For instance, when one sees a commercial depicting a person drinking Coca Cola, the analysis can also be performed at three levels. First, it is a person holding a bottle with some liquid and drinking it. Second, it is a young and active person holding a fashionable, popular, cold drink. Third, it is the youth culture favoring comfort and speed, drinking Coca Cola to be active, fashionable, and tuned to the modernity. Moreover, the image may symbolize the ability of Coca Cola to satisfy the human thirst, which is often transmitted in a deeper cultural plane of search for satisfaction of the thirst for fun, happiness, adventure, etc.

To make sense of the subject matter of an artwork at each discussed stratum, the viewer has to possess a certain amount of information. Since the primary subject matter is the world of pure forms, the viewer only needs to be able to see the object and comprehend its size, shape, material, and color, as well as a range of other physical characteristics, to compose a primary understanding (Panofsky 28). It also means that the viewers have to recognize the image depicted in the artwork based on their personal experience of seeing it before (Panofsky 33). To be able to conduct the iconographic analysis, the viewers should be familiar with specific themes and concepts transmitted through literary sources that would inform them about the overall understanding of the artistic tradition underlying that particular piece (Panofsky 35). Iconological interpretation, however, requires a much wider set of knowledge and skills – “more than a familiarity with specific themes and concepts as transmitted through literary sources” (Panofsky 38). This type of analysis requires the viewers to posses the form of “synthetic intuition” that enables the analysts to grasp the basic principles of motifs’ choice and presentation, the interpretation of metaphors and allegories employed in the artwork, etc. (Panofsky 38).

After considering iconography and iconology in general, Panofsky went on to the analysis of iconography and iconology in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. The author indicated that many scholars regarded the classical forms of art overthrown in the Middle Ages until their return as the foundation of the Renaissance style; however, Panofsky held a different opinion, stating that “there had not been a complete break of tradition during the Middle Ages” (Panofsky 40). He claimed that the medieval artists also widely used the visual techniques of the classical art and literature. However, which is notable, the high-medieval period (13^th-14^th centuries) artists disunited the classical motifs and classical themes, using each of them independently (Panofsky 41).

The reason for such disunity was in the direct and intentional borrowing of pagan themes by the Christian artists and their transformation into Christian themes while the form was still retained with some slight alterations. Therefore, in the Middle Ages, it turned out that classical motifs were presented in art with non-classical meaning, while classical meaning could be found in the works with non-classical motifs (Panofsky 43). The medieval creators took the visual models they saw before their eyes, and did not introduce any culturally sensitive analysis and adaptation in their replication of classical works, thus enlarging the gap between form and subject matter of the classical art.

Panofsky repeatedly noted the strange relationship that existed between classical motifs and classical themes in the high-medieval period, and pointed out that

“even when there had been a representational tradition in certain fields of classical imagery, this representational tradition was deliberately relinquished in favor of representations of an entirely nonclassical character as soon as the Middle Ages had achieved a style of their own” (Panofsky 48).

The present observations mainly related to the incidental representation of natural forces in the Christian artistic tradition, and illustration of scientific writings, especially the constellations’ depictions in which the mythological figures were depicted.

However, as soon as the Middle Ages gave way to the new era of Renaissance, the classical art’s forms reemerged in the artistic tradition of European artists. Though the Renaissance art heavily relied on the classical art forms, Panofsky admitted that it was surely a new integration of classical form and content. As the author stated, the classical art forms were “partly invented, partly derived from oriental sources” (Panofsky 49). The images from Antique art were modernized and altered to suit the modern fashion in art; moreover, the classical art form as such was reintegrated in the social culture.

The reason for which the classical art form and content returned to the cultural tradition of Europe in an altered form is that the centuries-long disruption in the history of the humanity emerged in the form of the Middle Ages, and it introduced certain changes in the classical art, which were irreversible. Hence, the Renaissance artists could not undertake a simple reversion to the classical past; they could not turn into pagans again (Panofsky 54). Since the art always embodies the culture of creators, people of the Renaissance period were surely not the classical artists of Antiquity, which caused an unavoidable change and evolution of classical art form though its accuracy of representation was surely much higher than in the Middle Ages.

Works Cited

Panofsky, Erwin. “Iconography and Iconology: An Introduction to the Study of Renaissance Art.” In Meaning in the Visual Arts: Papers in and on Art History. By Erwin Panofsky, 26–54. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1955.