The transformation occured in Nicolas Poussin’s oeuvre between the end of the 1630s and the beginning of the 1640s, after which he moved form neo-venetian and titianesque language of his beginnings toward classicism, is here interpreted as the result of his knowledge of Girard Desargues’ method of perspective. Even if Poussin probably did never applied rigorously this method as other “Atticist” painters and follower of Abraham Bosse like Le Sueur or Le Hyre, Poussin’s testified relationship with Bosse, who was the main disseminator of Arguesian perspective, so important in the France of Richelieu and of Sublet de Noyers, seems to have had a decisive role for the birth of the “classicist” Poussin firstly in landscape. It is therefore possible to give a new interpretation of the relationships between Poussin and the Académie de Peinture et de Sculpture, and to understand some reason of the big censorship directed by the Academy and André Félibein against Poussin’s perspective culture.
La trasformazione avvenuta nell’opera di Nicolas Poussin tra la fine degli anni Trenta e il principio degli anni Quaranta, in seguito alla quale egli abbandonò il linguaggio neoveneto e tizianesco per aderire al classicismo, è qui intepretata come il risultato della sua conoscenza del metodo prospettico di Girard Desargues. Sebbene probabilmente Poussin non applicò mai questo metodo rigorosamente, come fecero altri pittori dell’atticismo francese allievi di Abraham Bosse come Le Sueur e La Hyre, la documentata ralazione di Poussin con Bosse, che fu il massimo divulgatore della prospettiva arguesiana, tanto importante nella Francia di Richelieu e Sublet de Noyers, sembra avere avuto un ruolo decisivo per la nascita del Poussin classicista, innanzi tutto nel paesaggio. Diventa dunque possibile fornire una nuova interpretazione delle relazioni tra Poussin e l’Académie de peinture et de sculture, e comprendere alcune delle ragioni della massiccia censura diretta dall’Académie e da André Félibien contro la cultura prospettica di Poussin.
Ginzburg, S. (2009). Poussin « refusé » (2). REVUE DE L'ART, 163, 11-21.
Poussin « refusé » (2)
GINZBURG, SILVIA
2009-01-01
Abstract
The transformation occured in Nicolas Poussin’s oeuvre between the end of the 1630s and the beginning of the 1640s, after which he moved form neo-venetian and titianesque language of his beginnings toward classicism, is here interpreted as the result of his knowledge of Girard Desargues’ method of perspective. Even if Poussin probably did never applied rigorously this method as other “Atticist” painters and follower of Abraham Bosse like Le Sueur or Le Hyre, Poussin’s testified relationship with Bosse, who was the main disseminator of Arguesian perspective, so important in the France of Richelieu and of Sublet de Noyers, seems to have had a decisive role for the birth of the “classicist” Poussin firstly in landscape. It is therefore possible to give a new interpretation of the relationships between Poussin and the Académie de Peinture et de Sculpture, and to understand some reason of the big censorship directed by the Academy and André Félibein against Poussin’s perspective culture.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.