Letters from abroad

BOLOGNA, Italy – When you think of medieval times, the first thing that probably comes to mind is knights in shining armor on their valiant steeds, off to the joust to win the hearts of their ladies fair. \nI always thought that this period was known as the “Dark Ages” because the people were too busy creating subject material for future Disney movies. There existed little to no focus on new scientific advancements and art. Indeed, this is usually what we are taught in history courses. The Italian word for the Renaissance is “rinascimento,” which literally translates to “rebirth.” Scholars have decided that world culture actually died during medieval times and was not “reborn” until Giotto and Boccaccio came along to save the day.\nI had agreed with these scholars up until Saturday, when my class took a field trip to the Museo Civico Medievale in the heart of Bologna. This city actually saw much of its growth during the Middle Ages, and the museum housed a fine collection of municipal art pieces from that time. The museum also contained a large collection of suits of armor and weaponry, but these were so masterfully crafted that they could be considered art in their own right.\nWhen you compare a rough gothic style piece to the brilliant, life-like qualities of a work from the Renaissance, it is easy to say that Renaissance art is “better.” But it is important to remember that art from different periods cannot be compared. Each epoch in art history has its own stylistic standards and diverse concepts of skill and beauty. During the Middle Ages, it was not that the artists lacked the ability to create pieces that were full of life, but that they chose not to. The art of medieval times had different rules and was intended for a different purpose. Renaissance art, to my eye, is far more pleasing than that of any other period in art history. But while I prefer to view the art of this period, I can still fully appreciate the works of another.\nSome modern scholars have said that we are currently in another Dark Age. Many of my friends have expressed their disgust for what “passes as art these days.” They wonder how the digital media and performance-based work that is often seen in the SoFA Gallery can be compared to the work of the Neoclassicists and the Romantics. The short answer is that it can’t be. Even for modern and contemporary art there exist vast differences in style and theory. While it may not be easy to appreciate the aesthetics of a contemporary piece, it is important to understand the concept behind it. Art today has become more about the idea of art; pieces are no longer created simply for their visual value. \nArtists in the medieval times were considered skilled laborers. They even worked in guilds like the blacksmiths and bakers did. Their art was meant to serve a practical purpose, and it reflected their social status. During the Renaissance, artists were still considered more highly skilled and their work reflected life in paint or marble. Aesthetics was their main concern. Today, artists are thought to be elite members of society and they are valued for their original ideas and revolutionary concepts. \nCulture never actually dies. It never has to be reborn out of a period of “darkness.” Quite simply, art changes with the times. It reflects the values of its creators and the theories of the day.