Savoldos sogenanntes "Bildnis des Gaston de Foix." Zum Problem des Paragone in der Kunst und Kunsttheorie der italianischen Renaissance.

Andrew John Martin. Zum Problem des Paragone in der Kunst und Kunsttheorie der italianischen Renaissance. Studi-Schriftenreihe des Deutschen Studienzentrums in Venedig, 12. Sigmaringen: Thorbecke Verlag, 1995. DM48,000. ISBN 3-7995-2712-5.

References by Girolaimo Savoldo's contemporaries Paolo Pino and Pietro Aretino to the north Italian painter's work give the impression of an artist highly praised and sought after by a few of the most distinguished collectors and critics of his day, but who was otherwise relatively unknown. Vasari praised his nocturnal scenes yet disparaged him for having made "simili fantasie" rather than "cose grandi." Unlike the vast output and fame of his contemporary Titian, Savoldo seems to have made few works, and did not seek renown. Yet appreciation of and scholarly attention to the work of Savoldo has greatly increased since Creighton Gilbert's 1955 dissertation (still the most complete catalogue and analysis of the painter's oeuvre and documents related to the painter's career) also noted the painter's undeserved obscurity in modern times. An exhibition held in Brescia and Frankfurt in 1990, and publication of the catalogue and conference proceedings related to the exhibit have been particularly strong manifestations of deservedly increased interest in this painter of often psychologically compelling compositions. Andrew John Martin's exhaustive book-length treatment of one of the most intriguing paintings by Savoldo, the so-called Portrait of Gaston de Foix (now in the Louvre) is therefore also most welcome.

The Louvre portrait depicts a man wearing armor, who looks at the viewer yet points to his own reflection in a mirror behind him as part of his forward hand is reflected in the gleaming neck piece of the armor on a table in front of him. Part of the sitter's back is reflected in a third reflecting surface, another large mirror. Thus, from one vantage point, we are able to see several aspects of the sitter. In the nineteenth century, Cavalcaselle placed the painting in the context of the paragone, or the rivalry of the arts of painting and sculpture, widely argued in the mid-sixteenth century, and the experiments of Giorgione alleged by Vasari, among others, which aimed to show how painting could simultaneously show more aspects of a subject than sculpture. Although Leonardo's "treatise on painting" - actually a collection of notes compiled by a follower - was unpublished during his lifetime, it may be seen as one of the departure points for the paragone, and it apparently circulated in Venice in manuscript form as early as 1500. Martin notes a lacuna of paragone literature between Leonardo and the numerous theoretical writings of the 1540s, suggesting that the vacuum was filled in part by paintings such as Lorenzo Lotto's Portrait of the Collector Andrea Odoni (1527), Parmigianino's Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror, which Aretino brought to Venice in 1527, and Savoldo's portrait. Martin thus contends that literary analyses were replaced by visual treatises.

Martin notes that previous interpretations of the Louvre portrait were based on theoretical writing published in the 1540s, focusing on Giorgione's mirror images. He points out contradictions in these arguments and concludes that the alleged invention of Giorgione was only a theoretical construct. This allows Martin to privilege Savoldo in advancing the visual discourse on the possibilities of painting over sculpture, which would be, as it were, translated and reprised by Paolo Pino, Vasari, and Benedetto Varchi.

Martin's book is exemplary in its thoroughness and attention to detail, as well as in advancing an important thesis. A lot of information is laid out in rather technical fashion, and perhaps could have been integrated into the general argument, but this format is apparently standard for the series of book-length studies on Venetian history, art, and culture published under the auspices of the Centro Tedesco di Studi Veneziani. This excellent series offers both "quaderni," or shorter essays published in paperback, as well as full-length studies. We should hope for broader distribution of these texts in America, and a similar project of publishing new work by American scholars of Venetian studies.

HELENA KATALIN SZEPE University of South Florida