Matsui 1

Was Mannerism More than Just a Tradition between

Renaissance and Baroque?


Emi Matsui










Matsui 2
In order to determine if Mannerism is a style of its
own equal to the Baroque and Renaissance or if it is merely
a transitional phase between them, one has to understand
what exactly Mannerism is. This is accomplished by learning
about the development of Mannerism, what aspects make it up
and about the artists, who practiced it. It is my belief
that although Mannerism does act in some ways as a bridge
between the Renaissance and Baroque that Mannerism can stand
on its own.
Mannerism coincided with a period of upheaval that
included such events as the Reformation, plague and sack of
Rome in 1527. After its beginning in central Italy around
1520, Mannerism spread to other regions of Italy and to
northern Europe. In Italy, however, it was most strongly
adhered to by artists in Florence and Rome. The character of
Mannerism has been long debated, and is often discussed
and/or judged, in relation to the High Renaissance that
immediately preceded it. Some scholars including, John
Shearman, see Mannerism as a reaction to Renaissance
classicism, while at the same time there are others, who
regard it as a logical extension of it. To the latter,
Mannerism is seen as a natural outgrowth of Michelangelo's
emphatic modeling and/or Raphael's refinement. At any rate
by 1600, Mannerists were criticized for having willfully
Matsui 3
broken the unity of classicism. Today, since classicism no
longer has a unique claim on "perfection," Mannerism emerges
more clearly as a link between the High Renaissance and the
emotionally charged and dynamic Baroque art that followed.
It is important to keep in mind that just because Mannerism
is a link between two other styles that does not make it any
less of a style on its own.
This argument has already been carried out as can be
seen in the following. Arnold Hauser said that Anti-
Classicism was such an important feature of Mannerism that
it was easy to error and regards it as a mere epilogue to
classical periods and thus a regularly recurrent phenomenon
in the history of styles. Heinrich Wolfflin described the
Baroque as a typically recurring trend, and accordingly
developed the theory that in almost every period throughout
the history of art a Classical phase is followed by a
Baroque one. In the same way Mannerism is regarded today as
a general stylistic tendency not bound to any specific
historical conditions, but as invariably appearing in
similar circumstances.
1

Hausers Rebuttal to Wolfflins remarks was that there
could be no such thing, as a periodicity of that kind.
Because a regular recurrence of styles in the history of art,
Matsui 4
as every artistic style is to an extent the result of
preceding developments, and every development takes place at
a different phase of the total historical process there
could not be a cyclical pattern. The end of one phase is the
starting-point of the next, and every phase uses as its raw
material the work of its predecessor. This is taken
possession of, improved and transformed into something new.
2

Mannerism can now be described in more detail. The term
Mannerism comes from the Italian maniera, which means,
"style." This leads to a direct translation of Mannerism as
the "stylish style," which fits because of the emphasis on
self-conscious artifice over realistic depiction. During the
sixteenth-century, artist and critic Vasari, a mannerist,
thought that great painting demanded the following three
things: 1) refinement, 2) richness of invention and 3)
virtuoso of technique. Based on these points, one can tell
that the artists intelligence was more important than his
attention to recreating observed details of nature. This
intellectual bias was a natural consequence of the new
societal status of artists. They ceased to be craftsmen and
became the equals of scholars and poets during a time period
that had a great admiration of elegance and complexity. This

1

& 2
Arnold Hauser, Mannerism: The Crisis of the Renaissance &
the Origin of Modern Art (New York: Alfred A Knopf, 1965) 37 & 38.

Matsui 5
artificial qualities of Mannerism--its bizarre, occasionally
acid color, its illogical use of space, the elongated
proportions and exaggerated physical characteristics of
figures in snaking poses--frequently created a feeling of
anxiety. These works appear strange and unsettling, despite
their superficial naturalism.
Mannerism, a style of art developed in Florence that
is known as Mannerism or, as some would have it, Anti-
Classicism,
3
began with the idea of conscious rejection of
the normative and the natural through an almost exclusive
employment of rhythmic feeling. The High Renaissances
regular, symmetrical harmony of parts became unbearable to
those adhering to the anti-classical style. Thus there arose
a new beauty, no longer resting on real forms measurable by
the model or no forms idealized on this basis, but rather on
an inner artistic reworking of the basic harmonic
requirements. Walter Friedlaender states that
with Raphaels death classic art- the High
Renaissance- subsided, though to be sure, like the
divine Raphael himself it is immortal and will
always come to life again in a new form. Mannerism
is not a mere transition, not merely a conjection
between Renaissance and Baroque, but an
Matsui 6
independent age of style, autonomous and most
meaningful.
4

As mentioned previously, Michelangelo is credited as
the greatest artist of the High Renaissance and as being
more or less the creator of the new style, Mannerism. By
general consensus of the books I have read, his first
distinctly Mannerist piece was The Medicean Madonna(fig.1).
He was working for the de Medici's again after having
painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel for Pope Leo X.
Michelangelo created The Medicean Madonna(fig.1) in Florence.
It is at this time that the most distinctive point of
Mannerist sculpture appears the figura serpentina. This
allows for a variety of viewpoints to be interesting, rather
than only a singular frontal view as had previously been the
norm. It also created tension, which either implied movement
in progress or eminently followed motion. This sometimes
awkward twisting of the bodies required true mastery to
maintain a realistic result. The interior of the Medici
chapel in which the Madonna now rests was also largely
designed by Michelangelo thus there are a host of other
interesting statues. The statues of the two Medici brothers

3
Ernest T. DeWald, Italian Painting 1200-1600 (New York: Hacker Art
Books, Inc., 1961) 553.
4
Walter Friedlander, Mannerism and Anti-Mannerism in
Italian Painting (New York: Columbia University Press, 1957) 43.

Matsui 7
are the most striking in my opinion. Once again,
Michelangelo created this poised, deeply thoughtful style
that is so typical of him. Late in his life Michelangelo
attempted another Piet(fig.2), this time being a group.
This group was not carved for a Pope or the de Medici, but
for Michelangelo himself. It is believed that the uppermost
figure, supporting the dead Christ is a self-portrait of the
master. Like many of his works, this statue is unfinished,
though one of his assistants tried to finish the
Magdalen(fig.2) after his death, but without achieving
Michelangelo's warmth. Although the work is unfinished, the
power of the composition shines through.
The 16th century did not consist entirely of
Michelangelo alone. Benvenuto Cellini and Giovanni da
Bologna are perhaps the best known Mannerists besides
Michelangelo.
Cellinis life can be roughly divided into three
periods. The first, was spent mainly in Rome, nothing
survives except a few coins and medals and the impressions
of two large seals. During the second period from 1540-5, he
was in the service of Francis I of France, where he created
the famous salt-cellar of gold enriched with enamel,
exquisitely worked with two principal and many subsidiary
figures. This is considered to be the most important piece
Matsui 8
of goldsmiths work that has survived from the Italian
Renaissance. He also made a large bronze relief, The Nymph
of Fontainebleau(fig.3) for the king. The remainder of
Cellinis life was spent in Florence working for Cosimo I de
Medici, and it was in this period that he took up large-
scale sculpture whole-heartedly. The bronze Perseus(fig.4),
from 1545-54 is his masterpiece. His other sculptures
include The Apollo and Hyacinth(fig.5), Narcissus(fig.6) and
The Crucifix(fig.7) all in marble. His two portrait busts,
Bindo Altoviti(fig.8) and Cosimo I(fig.9) were made in
bronze. Their somewhat dry quality shows that the exquisite
precision of handling of his goldsmiths work did not always
transfer easily to a larger scale. Because of his fame, many
pieces of metalwork have been attributed to him, but rarely
have these claims been confirmed.
Bologna was quite prolific and was probably the best
known artist to bridge the gap between Michelangelo and the
Baroque. More than anyone else before and for centuries to
follow Bologna believed that a statue should be a three-
dimensional work, enjoyable from all angles. Hence his
bodies twist more than Michelangelo's. His most outstanding
piece is The Rape of the Sabines(fig.10). Three figures
twisting upwards in such a way as to form a Spiral, allowing,
if not demanding, a 360 degree view of the work. Bologna's
Matsui 9
sculpture took on a flamboyant self-confidence, which
clearly proved him to have at least one foot firmly placed
in the next era, the Baroque. This goes to show how hard
Mannerist artists are to define, as perhaps the two greatest
among them, Michelangelo and Bologna appear to also belong
to other defined eras of sculpture.
Does Mannerism actually possess the qualities necessary
to be called its own style? Mannerism rejected the clarity
and logic of the High Renaissance and substituted ambiguity
and intuition.
5
This helps to separate Mannerism from its
close ancestor the High Renaissance to some degree, and the
following will help to drive that wedge still deeper. An
interpretation based on the concept of a reaction against
the prevailing classicizing style is but one possible way to
read Mannerism.
6
These two statements basically say what
should by now be very clear, Mannerism does of course come
from the High Renaissance, but there are clearly large
differences between the two.
Whether one subscribes to the notion that Mannerism was
a rebellion against classicism or a super refinement of the
Renaissances techniques, one cannot deny that Mannerism and

5
Edmund Eglinski, The Art of the Italian Renaissance (Dubuque Iowa: WM.
C. Brown Company Publishers, 1968) 76.
6
John T. Paoletti and Gary M. Radke, Art in Renaissance
Italy (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc., and Harry N. Abrams,
Inc., 2002) 378.
Matsui 10
High Renaissance are quite distinguishable. Mannerism - A
style most commonly associated with the arts of central
Italy during the sixteenth century, characterized by its
extreme artificiality and elegance.
7
Perhaps, that
statement sums it up best, and who knows, without Mannerism
the Baroque may never have even happened. This last is
possibly truer than some would care to admit, especially if
one considers the influence that Bologna had on the Baroque.
The pre-eminent artists in the Baroque inherited an
interest in the classical tradition via Mannerism and were
deeply influenced by such masters as Michelangelo, Titian
and Raphael. However, in some other ways the Baroque can be
considered an Anti-Mannerist style as Friedlaender points
out in, an instinctive opposition was directed against
the spiritualism, which sought a deepening of content
through primitivism and spatial and corporeal abstraction.
8

Basically the Baroque saw a new emphasis upon Naturalism and
Emotionalism and a new boldness in combining different art
forms to achieve a complete balanced work of art. This in
turn strengthens the case for Mannerism being considered an
independent style, since it was influential enough that the

7
John T. Paoletti and Gary M. Radke, Art in Renaissance
Italy (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc., and Harry N. Abrams,
Inc., 2002) 494.
8
Walter Friedlander, Mannerism and Anti-Mannerism in
Italian Painting (New York: Columbia University Press, 1957) 50.
Matsui 11
artists of the Baroque both learned from it and rebelled
against it.






















Matsui 12
Bibliography


DeWald, Ernest T. Italian Painting 1200-1600. New York:
Hacker Art Books, Inc., 1961.


Eglinski, Edmund. The Art of the Italian Renaisance.
Dubuque, Iowa: WM. C. Brown Company Publishers, 1968.


Friedlander, Walter. Mannerism and Anti-Mannerism in
Italian Painting. New York: Columbia University Press,
1957.


Hauser, Arnord. Mannerism: The Crisis of the Renaissance &
the Origin of Modern Art. New York: Alfred A Knopf,
1965.


Paoletti, John T and Radke, Gary M. Art in Renaissance
Italy. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc., and
Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 2002.


Shearman, John. Mannerism. New York: Penguin Books, 1967.










Matsui 13
(fig.1)








Matsui 14
(fig.2)





Matsui 15
(fig.3)














Matsui 16
(fig.4)





Matsui 17
(fig.5)



Matsui 18
(fig.6)





Matsui 19
(fig.7)





Matsui 20
(fig.8)







Matsui 21
(fig.9)







Matsui 22
(fig.10)