The book review, which Kate has quoted, shows us where Berger had first introduced his revisionist reading of "The Book of the Courtier".
Berger dismisses the "The cliches about learning the arts", as his focus moves from "the production and evaluation of artifacts to the production and evaluation of courtly behavior as a performance of 'nature"", and "the more complex implications embedded in the concept of sprezzatura". But why must we agree with Berger? Here is what Castiglione, himself, had to say about painting: "I wish to discuss another mater, which I deem of great importance and therefore think our Courtier ought by no means to omit: and this is to know how to draw and to have acquaintance with the very art of painting" "so let it be enough to say that it is fitting for our Courtier to have knowledge of painting also, as being honorable and useful and highly prized in those times when men were of far greater worth than now they are. And if he should never derive any other use or pleasure than the help it affords in judging the merit of statues, ancient and modern, of vases, buildings, medals, cameos, intaglios and the like" Castigione did not suggest that one should only *appear* to have such knowledge -- but he did suggest that the courtier appear to have acquired it without much effort. (as if he were born into the aesthetic class instead of having to work his way up to it) The courtier should still know how to draw -- and know a good painting from a bad one. A kind of knowledge which Berger dismisses -- presumably because he can't relate to it. Instead, he wants to pursue "the more complex implications embedded in the concept of sprezzatura" (which are as boundless as the topic of human psychology), where "the explicit theme is learning how to represent oneself to others". Such a purpose is " full of apprehensiveness, distrust of hidden motives, fear of exposure, and a general sense of the weakness of the courtier's position" -- which "is the aporia that early modern portraiture can be shown both to confront and reproduce when it is approached as a practice of presenting and representing acts of self representation, a member of the performative genre I call "fictions of the pose" So "The Book of the Courtier" can serve as an introduction to "The Fictions of the Pose" But it can also serve to document the aesthetic life of the Renaissance -- and probably every other aristocratic court, from Kyoto to Benin , where the judgment of beauty is both ann enjoyable pastime, as well as a way to build relationships among peers. And eventually, in these small, close-knit communities -- the actual level of taste is going to become apparent -- regardless of any heroic effort to fictionalize it. BTW, what do you all make of the statement that "The principal problem (with Berger's writing) appears to be the density and specificity of its author's references both to the primary texts ..and also to secondary texts of theory and criticism" Do you also consider that a "problem" ? Because it makes him tedious to read? Or because he really has very little to say, and like the kind of courtier he finds in Castigione, he is trying to conceal that with an outward flourish of pretended learning? ____________________________________________________________ Senior Assisted Living Put your loved ones in good hands with quality senior assisted living. Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=kB77oQ81oBQtYfAbw-1jEwAAJz6c l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASUQAAAAA=
