Re: What's in it for you
Flavius Galarius said:
As far as I know, Bishop was the first to suggest in mainstream media (late 1950's, early 1960's--I can't remember exactly) that people who were crucified were nailed through the wrists and not the hands. He was also the first (again, as far as I know) to dispel the myth of the stoic, passive victim of crucifixion. . .meaning that he was the first author that I know of to describe 'the dance" on the cross.
There were other mainstream artist who painting Chirst nailed by the wrists (even nude) long before Bishop, though not many.
14 century works show him in a nearly see through strip of cloth about the hips. One of those is a tempera on wood painting by Jean de Beaumezt and has Christ pretty much naked, but the blood flow from the spear wound has run down to cover his shame. A few from that period are even close to those "hanging low" images Apostate enjoys so much.
Jan Van Eyck's 1424 a.d. crucifixon is a amazing crowd scene with, for all intensive purposes, a nude figure of Christ receiving the vinager, while at the same time, the spear in the side.
Skip ahead a few centuries, and Albrecht Altdorfer's 1526 painting shows the son of man in a flowing loin cloth, but flanked by two very naked thieves who almost look as if they could have been two of Makar's models.
Peter Paul Rubens 1612 painting shows a nearly naked Christ nailed by the wrists. His JC is still in that classic "spread and crossed foot" pose, but it's a pretty impressive looking piece of art in general. At least he got the nails right!
German artist Max Klinger failed to place the nails correctly, but his entirely nude Christ raised a number of eyebrows when it was unveiled in 1890. The figure was considered so shocking, that the figure's naughty bits were covered with a cloth during a show at the Glass Palace in Munich, 1893. His painting even includes a sedile!
Lovis Corinth painted a very realistic figure of Christ in the process of being nailed in 1907. He caused a sensation with the gritty physical horror of his depliction, as well as showing Jesus nude.
Although Klinger placed the nails in the wrong place, and his cross is questionable, and Corinth's painting doesn't show his idea of the nail positions, their's are about the closest to the way most of us here think of a crucifixion.
Sorry to say my research hasn't dug up many decent females on the cross from ages past. It's a pity Waterhouse didn't leave St. Eulalia on the cross for his late 19th century masterpiece.
It took a number of centuries before artists started to "get it right" and for a while, the idea was lost when great art was considered splattering pots of paint all over the place. Even so, many main stream artists today stick with the tired old crossed-legged-loin-cloth-wearing-nails-through-the- hands-look that's been done to death.
One of these days I'll paint a Passion of the Christ the way I see it...And most likely get crucified in a different fashion should I ever make it to the main stream!
