Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sistine Chapel

vatican.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 246 posts

Re: Sistine Chapel

#221

Post by EzGraphs »

cgore wrote: post #160
dredmorbius wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't make that attribution error of associating the patron with the artist. Yes, religion was the primary patron of visual, sculptural, and musical arts for much of the period from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment. But it wasn't the only. And you'll find beautiful works among the secularist of the Classical and Romantic periods, say, the Pre-Raphaelites. Of whom neither the artists, models, nor subject are gener…

Bach was deeply religious, and not just because of some lap-dog sense of "that's who's paying the bills." He signed most of his works as "SDG", short for "Soli Deo Gloria", which roughly translates as "to God alone belongs all glory. His meaning being that any ability Bach thought he had was solely just God showing off: Bach made beautiful music, but God made Bach, and he knew it.

That is a great quote. I used it in the dedication section of a book I wrote recently. Bach is fascinating on many levels - lots of C.S. types quickly appreciate the structure/counterpoint in all of his instrumental music. But because so much of his music was written for a worship context, a whole additional dimension can be seen where he uses musical devices to comment on or support words being sung.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#222

Post by drjesusphd »

Locke1689 wrote: post #13
jacquesm wrote: post #6

Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…

Having tried the Oculus Rift, the potential to experience this would be incredible. Although there's nothing quite like just sitting on a worn stone bench alone in a cathedral, just the chill air around you. It often makes me wish for a non-religious religion -- just a refuge of tranquility.

I agree, I've thought about this often. I find old universities provide something close. If it weren't for all the damn students...

Re: Sistine Chapel

#223

Post by switch007 »

adambenayoun wrote: post #41

Funny - I just got back from Rome 2 days ago and was in the Vatican - imagine the surprise when I saw this on top of of Hacker News. The experience of being in the sistine chapel is nice but a bit spoiled by the fact that there are hundreds of tourists in the chapel as well and Italian guards are pushing you to move and be in the center (Often yelling at tourist who aren't moving fast enough and throwing out of the c…

I was there last week but we did the evening tour (8pm). Not very crowded at all - I had time to sit on the benches and stand as long as I liked in the centre.

The evening tours are seasonal I believe.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#224

Post by drjesusphd »

Istof wrote: post #111
jacquesm wrote: post #6

Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…

very nice, but the textures look somewhat cartoonish/unreal... is that how it really looks?

Yes!

Re: Sistine Chapel

#225

Post by Shivetya »

I would hope that museums across the world along with locations like this would have this technology applied. I would not mind small fees to use on private collections.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#226

Post by darasen »

pavanred wrote: post #173
jacquesm wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mankind has made the most incredible art inspired by religion. Along the same lines, Bach's Chorales and in fact quite a bit of his other work. Try this, if you feel like some really nice classical music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MC3Upv8DuRQ

I don't think you can attribute most incredible art to be inspired by religion, considering that during those times, art (sometimes just ideas) that lacked religious conformity were dealt with severity. Perhaps the reason there is so much art that is inspired by religion because not much else survived. This brings a famous bit by George Carlin (I think) to my mind - ...It start's when we are kids, we are told to be c…

Let us not forget that this concept doesn't just apply to Christianity, or religion in general, though.

Monet struggled with the Académie des Beaux-Arts fot painting the way they thought people should paint.

There is a long history of Ballet dancers in the USSR who struggled because they good communists.

Today character assassination is the norm for for so many people (especially in the arts) who don't strictly adhere to progressive politics.

I attended an art school for time where I was frequently shunned for dressing well, (apparently you can't be an "artist" if you wear slacks and dress shirts,) and adhering to Christian principles.

Look at the movie Moms' night out. Highly panned by critics because because the characters are not "feminist" enough. Yet highly rated by the audience.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#227

Post by return0 »

Locke1689 wrote: post #13
jacquesm wrote: post #6

Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…

Having tried the Oculus Rift, the potential to experience this would be incredible. Although there's nothing quite like just sitting on a worn stone bench alone in a cathedral, just the chill air around you. It often makes me wish for a non-religious religion -- just a refuge of tranquility.

You'd have to be actually working in the Vatican and have exclusive access to the chapel to do that.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#228

Post by laichzeit0 »

bane wrote: post #25
jacquesm wrote: post #6

Very nice. In fact, almost nicer than being there (though you should do that anyway if you get the chance). Because now you can experience the details for as long as you want without a hundred other people around you who are just as annoyed at you as you are at them. I get it that a tourist complaining about tourist attractions being too crowded is total hypocrisy on my part. But at the same time what I wouldn't give…

And without the guards yelling "NO PHOTO!!!" every 10-20 seconds at people who dare to try to get a photo of the chapel that's not nearly as nice as this. Copyright is maddening sometimes. [1] 1 - http://mentalfloss.com/article/54641/reason-why-no-photograp...

It's also annoying as hell being around a group of people interested in nothing more than documenting the fact that they're at said place, instead of actually just enjoying the moment.

There's hundreds of photos of the crap you're taking photos off. Just enjoy the moment and make it less touristy for everyone around you as well.

Re: Sistine Chapel

#229

Post by Natsu »

laureny wrote: post #194
Natsu wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by 'inspired' here? When looking at the chapel I see a large number of religious figures and imagery, so it seems odd to say that art depicting religious subjects, in a religious setting, sponsored by a religious patron was not inspired by Christianity.

It was ordered and paid for by the catholic church, of course it's going to represent concepts of the catholic creed. If NASA ordered their rockets to be painted with science based themes, you could hardly call such paintings "inspired by science". "Inspired" implies that the artist woke up with an idea and painted it.

Why not? They would be the genesis of the idea, after all. It just seems bizarre to me to say that religion did not urge him to do this, which is the usual meaning of 'inspire.'
Post reply on HN