“There is, however, another most interesting feature in the policy of Venice which will be often brought before us; and which a Romanist would gladly assign as the reason of its irreligion; namely, the magnificent and successful struggle which she maintained against the temporal authority of the Church of Rome. It is true that, in a rapid survey of her career, the eye is at first arrested by the strange drama to which I have already alluded, closed by that ever memorable scene in the portico of St. Mark’s, the central expression in most men’s thoughts of the unendurable elevation of the pontifical power; it is true that the proudest thoughts of Venice, as well as the insignia of her prince, and the form of her chief festival, recorded the service thus rendered to the Roman Church.”
Venice’s skirmish with the Roman Church is attributed the portrayal of religious philosophies in its architecture and artwork. Venice’s disregard for the ‘Papal Influence’ renders it an insubordinate city which overlooks the religious boundaries in the construction of its character. Seemingly, the Roman’s church’s austerity towards Venice amplified the regard of Protestantism in Venice. St. Mark’s Venice flouts the church by uplifting Pontifical power which disregards the Roman Church’s aspiration. Unquestionably, the clash between Venetian architecture and the Roman Church outlines Venice’s history for Venice was not disposed to submit to the church’s demands occasioning the subsequent excommunication of the Venetians.
“The Rationalist kept the arts and cast aside the religion. This rationalistic art is the art commonly called Renaissance, marked by a return to pagan systems, not to adopt them and hallow them for Christianity, but to rank itself under them as an imitator and pupil. In Painting it is headed by Giulio Romano and Nicolo Poussin; in Architecture by Sansovino and Palladio.”
Here, the ‘Rationalism versus Religion’ binary designates that rationalistic art does not ratify religion for it frames works which would be regarded as paganist. Accordingly, the church would neither patron nor champion architecture (and art works) which they regarded as irreligious occasioning the divergence between religious conviction and architecture.
“The vital religion, observe, not the formal. Outward observance was as strict as ever; and doge and senator still were painted, in almost every important instance, kneeling before the Madonna or St. Mark; a confession of faith made universal by the pure gold of the Venetian sequin. But observe the great picture of Titian’s in the ducal palace, of the 12Doge Antonio Grimani kneeling before Faith: there is a curious lesson in it. The figure of Faith is a coarse portrait of one of Titian’s least graceful female models: Faith had become carnal. The eye is first caught by the flash of the Doge’s armor. The heart of Venice was in her wars, not in her worship. The mind of Tintoret, incomparably more deep and serious than that of Titian, casts the solemnity of its own tone over the sacred subjects which it approaches, and sometimes forgets itself into devotion; but the principle of treatment is altogether the same as Titian’s: absolute subordination of the religious subject to purposes of decoration or portraiture.”
Peripheral form edicts whether art or architecture is devout or not. Venetian paintings illustrate the juncture between politics and religion due to the incorporation of ‘dodges and senators’ ( who are demonstrative of politicians) in the spiritual settings with St. mark exemplifies. Accordingly, a combination of nonreligious logos such as the armor subordinates the religious association of the art. Titian’s painting subverts the Roman church’s overemphasis on unqualified religious messaging in the art.
“The two virtues of architecture which we can justly weigh, are, we said, its strength or good construction, and its beauty or good decoration. Consider first, therefore, what you mean when you say a building is well constructed or well built; you do not merely mean that it answers its purpose,—this is much, and many modern buildings fail of this much; but if it be verily well built, it must answer this purpose in the simplest way, and with no over-expenditure of means.”
The measurability of architecture’s substance is based on the exterior. Overspending on a building is not a warranty that the end result will be honorable. Virtuous architecture should flawlessly accomplish the resolve for which it was erected. Evaluation of virtue should rise above the outward facade.
