M. A. Gukovsky and A. Parronchi

Androsov S. O.
M. A. Gukovsky and A. Parronchi, in: Proslogion: Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Social-History and Culture, 2024. Vol. 7 (2). P. 49–62.

Androsov Sergey Olegovich, Doctor of Art History, Chief Researcher, Department of Western European Fine Arts, State Hermitage Museum (190000, Russia, St. Petersburg, Dvortsovaya Embankment, 30-34)

Language: Russian

In the late 20th century the history of art as a science was divised to «museal» and «academic» one. Matvej Aleksandrovich Gukowsky (1898–1971) and Ales sandro Parronchi (1914–2008) are professors of university (Leningrad and Flor ence), but also authors of different attributions of paintings and sculptures of the Renaissance. Gukowsky had studied the activity of Leonardo da Vinci, but his attempt to attribute the painting «Flora» (or «Colombina») from the Hermitage was refuted. Parronchi had published five books, dedicated to unknown sculp tures of Michelangelo, but only one attribution later was confirmed. It seems that the scientific method of two savants have some similarity and must be used by new generations of historians.

Keywords: Gukowsky, Parronchi, Italy, Renaissance, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, painting, sculpture

URL: http://proslogion.ru/72-androsov/

10.24412/2500-0926-2024-72-49-62

Creative Commons License

Epicurean Detective. Stephen Greenblatt’s «The Swerve: How the World Became Modern»

Kovalev, V. A. Sledstvie ob Epikure: Retsenziya na monografiyu Stivena Grinblatta «Renessans: U istokov sovremennosti» [Epicurean Detective. Stephen Greenblatt’s «The Swerve: How the World Became Modern»], in: Proslogion: Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Social History and Culture, 2018. Vol. 4 (1). P. 169180.

Viktor Aleksandrovich Kovalev, doctor of History, assistant professor, Saint-Petersburg State University of the Humanities and Social Sciences (192238, Rossiya, Sankt-Peterburg, ulitsa Fuchika, 15)

Language: Russian

In the review of Stephen Greenblatt’s «The Swerve: How the World Became Modern» criticist argues that many of the monograph’s features are linked with neohistoricism pattern. It is apparent because author is one of neohistoricism patriarchs. Emphasis on the political and ideological aspect of historical events along with projection of author’s political prejudices frames all the scheme of the text. Reviewer points that the main theme of the monograph is author’s denying of postmodern concept of an «author’s death». Neither an author, nor the idea can not die, argues Greenblatt, because all things forgotten can return in the history of thoughts. Exemplified by the history of Epicureanism, this thesis runs like a golden thread through all substance of investigation. Along with this filled with humanistic pathos idea the key question of the scale of influence of the elite book-learned culture on the popular one remains unanswered by Greenblatt. Author sophisticatedly intertwines the storyline of Epicurean philosophy invention, oblivion and rediscovering in the Renaissance with historical, bookish, dramaturgical and even with his own biographical facts and events. But sometimes, as reviewer points, Greenblatt is unfair to the characters of his text blaming them in ideological imperfection. Also due to the concept of ideas’ immortality, he remains undiscovered a great part of historical process.

Key Words: neohistoricism, history of literature, the Renaissance, history of thoughts, Neomarxism, the early Modern history, history of the Middle ages, history of philosophy

URL: http://proslogion.ru/41-kovalev/

Creative Commons License