42 research outputs found
Utjecaj Frane PetriÄa na Romeijevo razumijevanje ljepote i ljubavi
With their works Frane PetriÄ (Francesco Patrizi da Cherso) and Annibale Romei contributed to the Late Renaissance trattatistica on beauty and love. PetriÄ (Cres, 1529 ā Rome, 1597) outlined his views on beauty and love in two manuscripts: the dialogue Il Delfino, overo del bacio (before 1560, editio princeps in 1975) and an unfinished manuscript, Lāamorosa filosofia (ca. 1577, editio princeps in 1963) composed of four dialogues. PetriÄ also wrote about these topics in a more concise form in his printed āDiscorsoā included in Le rime di Messer Luca Contile (1560), whose focus was not on love and beauty, but on the process of poetic creation. However, in the mentioned treatise PetriÄ comes forward with his main views on love and beauty.
Annibale Romei (Ferrara (?), between 1523 and 1530 ā Ferrara, 1590), a noble man of Ferrara, published his Discorsi ... divisi in cinque giornate in 1585, and its extended version Discorsi ... divisi in sette giornate in 1586. This paper analyzes the first two treatises in RomeiŹ¼s Discorsi: Della bellezza and Dellāamore humano. Frane PetriÄ, commended as an excellent connoisseur of issues regarding beauty and love, was invited in Romeiās Della bellezza to hold an introductory speech about beauty. In the second treatise on love, this honour was bestowed upon Battista Guirino, who in his speech draws directly upon PetriÄās teaching on beauty elaborated the day before.
Romei was familiar with PetriÄās writings on beauty and love. In his Della bellezza, Romei adopts PetriÄās views as presented in his Discorso on Luca Contileās love sonnets. In Romeiās treatise Dellāamore humano, on the other hand, one may detect not only the influence of PetriÄās Discorso, but also significant similarities with PetriÄās views as outlined in both his Il Delfino overo del bacio and Lāamorosa filosofia, some of which can also be found in PetriÄās early works from 1553. While PetriÄās impact on Romeiās first treatise is irrefutable, solid arguments in favour of indisputable influence of PetriÄās unpublished works on Romeiās treatise on love cannot be provided. However, the correlations in their views cannot be disputed. All the similarities highlighted here clearly confirm that PetriÄ and Romei deal with beauty and love within the Platonic and Neoplatonic tradition.
Despite the fact that the influence of PetriÄās views can be easily recognized in a number of Romeiās arguments, Romei confirms himself as an original thinker when he argues that physical beauty is a matter of subjective opinion. Romeiās original views also include his consideration of the relationship between beauty and ugliness, and, finally, his insistence on emphasizing the role of the intellect and free free will in the experience of love.Frane PetriÄ (Francesco Patrizi da Cherso) i Annibale Romei sudjelovali su u kasnorenesansnim raspravama o ljepoti i ljubavi. PetriÄ (Cres, 1529 ā Rim, 1597) je svoje stavove o ljepoti i ljubavi izložio u dvama rukopisima: dijalogu Il Delfino, overo del bacio (prije 1560, editio princeps 1975) i u nedovrÅ”enom rukopisu Lāamorosa filosofia (oko 1577, editio princeps 1963) sastavljenom od Äetiri dijaloga. PetriÄ je o navedenim temama takoÄer pisao u kraÄoj formi u svom tiskanom āDiscorsoā pridodanom djelu Le rime di Messer Luca Contile (1560), u kojem glavna tema nisu ni ljubav ni ljepota, veÄ sam proces pjesniÄkog stvaranja. Ipak, u toj raspravi PetriÄ izražava svoje glavne stavove o ljepoti i ljubavi.
Annibale Romei (Ferrara (?), izmeÄu 1523 i 1530 ā Ferrara, 1590), plemiÄ iz Ferrare, objavio je svoje Discorsi ... divisi in cinque giornate 1585. godine, a proÅ”irenu verziju Discorsi ... divisi in sette giornate 1586. Rad analizira prve dvije rasprave toga Romeijeva djela: Della bellezza i Dellāamore humano. Frane PetriÄ, hvaljen kao vrstan poznavatelj pitanja koja se tiÄu ljepote i ljubavi, pozvan je da u Romeijevoj raspravi Della bellezza zapoÄne govor o ljepoti. U drugoj raspravi o ljubavi, Äast da prvi govori pripala je Battisti Guirinu, koji se u svom izlaganju izravno naslanja i nadovezuje na PetriÄevo uÄenje o ljepoti o Äemu se raspravljalo dan ranije.
Romei je bio upoznat s PetriÄevim djelima o ljepoti i ljubavi. U svojoj raspravi Della bellezza Romei je usvojio PetriÄeva glediÅ”ta izložena u teorijskom komentaru Contileovih ljubavnih soneta, dok se u raspravi Dellāamore humano, pored utjecaja spomenutog komentara, mogu uoÄiti sliÄnosti s PetriÄevim stavovima izloženima u Il Delfino overo del bacio i Lāamorosa filosofia. Dok je PetriÄev utjecaj u prvoj Romeijevoj raspravi nedvojben, u drugoj raspravi nije moguÄe, s izuzetkom njegova Discorso, argumentirati u korist neporecivog utjecaja PetriÄevih neobjavljenih djela na Romeijevu raspravu o ljubavi. MeÄutim, sve ovdje istaknute sliÄnosti jasno potvrÄuju da PetriÄ i Romei o ljepoti i ljubavi promiÅ”ljaju iz okvira platoniÄke i novoplatoniÄke tradicije.
UnatoÄ brojnim Romeijevim argumentima u kojima se može lako prepoznati PetriÄev utjecaj, Romei je pokazao i svoju originalnu misao koja se najbolje uoÄava na onim stranicama gdje tumaÄi da je tjelesna ljepota stvar subjektivnog miÅ”ljenja. Tomu treba pridodati i Romeijev interes za promiÅ”ljanje odnosa ljepote i ružnoÄe te, naposljetku, njegovo inzistiranje na isticanju uloge intelekta i slobodnog izbora, tj. slobodne volje u ljubavnom iskustvu
Understanding beauty and love in the lyrics of Fran Krsto Frankopan
U radu se istražuje gdje se Fran Krsto Frankopan u opisu ženine ljepote i vlastita doživljaja ljubavi približava petrarkizmu, a gdje, i u kolikoj mjeri, iz estetiÄke perspektive, usvaja platonovske i novoplatonovske koncepte ljepote i ljubavi. Frankopanovo pjesniÄko djelo dokaz je njegova znaÄajnog prinosa razvoju barokne estetiÄke misli u kontinentalnoj Hrvatskoj. U vrijeme kada u kulturnom, javnom životu i književnom radu kontinentalne Hrvatske, koja se nalazi u teÅ”kom položaju uzrokovanom dugogodiÅ”njim ratovima i nepovoljnim politiÄkim okolnostima, prevladavaju djela religioznog i moralno-pouÄnog, didaktiÄkog sadržaja, usmjerena na vjersku tematiku, na isticanje pobožnosti i kreposti, na opominjanje i odvraÄanje od grijeha i zemaljskih slabosti, Frankopan se, iako je pokazao da je itekako religiozan, izdvaja svojom poezijom u kojoj slavi život, mladost, ljepotu žene i tjelesne užitke. SlaveÄi ljubav, tjelesnu ljepotu i putene užitke, Frankopan zapravo promiÅ”lja smisao života, položaj Äovjeka u ovom svijetu, odnos ovozemaljskog i onozemaljskog, tjelesnog i duhovnog, stavljajuÄi tako svoje pjesniÅ”tvo u službu otkrivanja prave istine ovoga svijeta i upuÄivanja na pravu narav i izvor ljepote.he paper explores where Fran Krsto Frankopan, in his description of womanās beauty and his own experience of love, approaches Petrarchism, and where, and to what extent, from an aesthetic perspective, he adopts Platonic and Neoplatonic concepts of beauty and love. Frankopanās poetic work is a proof of his significant contribution to the development of baroque aesthetic thought in the continental Croatia. At the time when works with religious, moral and didactic content, focusing on religious themes, highlighting piety and virtue and warning about sin and worldly weaknesses, dominated cultural and public life and literary works in continental Croatia, which found itself in a very difficult position caused by long-lasting wars and unfavourable political conditions, Frankopan, even though he showed himself to be very religious, stood out with his poetry celebrating life, youth, the beauty of women and sensuous pleasures. In this way, Frankopan actually reflects on the meaning of life, the position of man in this world, the relationship of the earthly and the ethereal, the physical and the spiritual, thus putting his poetry at the service of revealing the truth of this world and the true nature and source of beauty
Polemics about Secession in Croatia: Franjo Ksaver KuhaÄ and Ivo Pilar
U Älanku se izlažu osnovni nazori i stavovi o secesiji u Hrvatskoj koje su 1898. godine u svojim spisima iznijeli Franjo Ksaver KuhaÄ, zastupnik tradicionalnih i Ivo Pilar, pobornik modernih estetiÄkih i umjetniÄkih tendencija. Kronologija njihove polemike odvijala se na sljedeÄi naÄin: nakon KuhaÄeva spisa Anarkija u hrvatskoj književnosti i umjetnosti. Poslanica umjetniÄkim secesionistima i književnim dekadentima, Pilar je objavio studiju Secesija. Studija o modernoj umjetnosti, poslije Äega je KuhaÄ reagirao tekstom O secesiji. Odgovor gosp. J. Pilaru. Novoj umjetniÄkoj struji KuhaÄ se žestoko protivio, dok je Pilar napisao apologiju modernoj umjetnosti. Na temelju analize njihovih stavova i argumenata, u Älanku je ponuÄen uvid u hrvatsku estetiÄku problematiku s kraja 19. stoljeÄa.In this article two opposed views of the Secession in Croatia are contrasted. Franjo Ksaver
KuhaÄ was a representative of the traditional approach to aesthetics. On the other hand, Ivo Pilar was a promulgator of modern aesthetic and artistic tendencies. Chronology of their controversies took place in the following way: after KuhaÄās text The Anarchy in Croatian literature and art. An epistle to the artistic secessionists and literary decadents, Pilar published a study entitled On Secession. A study of modern art. To this text KuhaÄ replied with his text On Secession. An answer to Mr. I. Pilar. In his articles KuhaÄ vehemently opposed the new artistic tendencies, whereas Pilar was apologetic for the modern art. Based on an analysis of their views and arguments, the article offers an insight into Croatian aesthetic problems of the late 19th century