Research Paper
The Minerva Christ – A nude Christ or a nude Michelangelo?
Harvard University
Extension School
11 January 1999
Carlos Rafael L. Souza
4 Davis Ave #2C
Brookline, MA 02445
(617) 734-4419
I.
Introduction
The male nude is a constant in Michelangelo’s work. From his Cupid, in
the beginning of his sculptor’s career to the painting of the Last Judgment in the
Sistine Chapel, it appears in profusion in almost all of his works. This paper is
about one of his pieces: the Minerva Christ made to be put in the Church of
Santa Maria sopra Minerva, in Rome. My topic is the Christ’s nudity in this work.
Why did he have to be nude? An answer to this question may add some new
insights into the complex personality of Michelangelo, and this is why it is worth
studying. My thesis is that Michelangelo depicted a nude Christ because of both
conscious influences and unconscious motivations. Most of the works hitherto
focus on the conscious aspects, external to the artist. My work will be original
because I will use the psychoanalytical tool to identify some unconscious
elements in the Minerva Christ. These elements will, then, be added to what I
consider the critical external influences in Michelangelo: the religious preaching
of friar Girolamo Savonarola in Florence and the impact on Michelangelo of the
neo-platonic philosophy. If I successfully prove my thesis, it may be applied, in
other studies, to a comprehensive understanding of the nude in Michelangelo’s
work.
II.
The Work
On June 14, 1514, Michelangelo signed a contract with the patrons of one
of his most controversial works: a full size Christ to be put in the church of Santa
Maria sopra Minerva. This work became known as the Minerva Christ (Figure 1 –
Souza -
1
Annex I). The patrons were a group lead by the Porcari family, from Rome, and
their influence on the work can be inferred to be restricted to the terms of the
contract. They were in Rome while Michelangelo was in Florence during the
manufacturing of the sculpture, and there is no evidence of exchange of letters
among them during the five-year period the artist took to finish it.
The terms of the contract
1
can be summarized in the following five
elements: it was supposed to be a marble sculpture of Christ, life-size, nude,
holding a cross in his arms and in a position that would please Michelangelo. For
the purpose of this paper, the aspect of being a nude Christ is most relevant. In
the original Italian text the word used for nude was “ignudo,” which may not have
the connotation it has nowadays. According to Steinberg, men without their shirts
could be considered “ignudi.”2 However, it is difficult to believe that the patrons
expected to have a full nude Christ. I would rather agree with Agoston3 that this
was probably something requested by Michelangelo, who already had a model in
his mind and who may not have wanted any litigation because of its nature.
The work was finished in 1520 and sent to Rome. Michelangelo did not
participate in its installation, which was left to his assistants. In the
correspondence they exchanged it is clear that Michelangelo concentrated his
efforts in the abdominal part of the statue, leaving the rest to his assistants. It is
clear that it was the artist’s original intent to have the figure of Christ completely
naked. Some years after its installation, however, still during the sixteenth
1
Laura Agoston. Michelangelo's Christ : the Dialectics of Sculpture. (Harvard PhD Dissertation, 1993.), p.
5, based on Le Lettere di Michelangelo Buonarroti coi Ricordi ed I Contrati Artistici (Florence, 1875),
pp. 641-642.
Souza -
2
century, the work suffered a radical mutilation. Christ’s originally visible genitalia
were covered by a gross brass drapery (Figure 2 – Annex I). This may have been
due to the moralizing movement started at the Council of Trent in which all
lasciviousness had to be removed from religious places.4
A careful look at the work reveals some details that will be very important
for my interpretation. Strangely enough for a work of Michelangelo, this sculpture
does not give an impression of movement, but shows a static Christ. It seems
that Michelangelo did not want to point to any action Christ was doing at that
moment, but to the state in which he was. The piece is very simple in its
elements: besides the Christ and the cross there are also a reed, a sponge and a
rope. They are all items related to his Passion, but their presence in his hands
motivated a debate on the religious meaning of the sculpture.
There are at least four different iconographic interpretations of the Minerva
Christ.5 Firstly, Wolfgang Lotz considers it the resurrected Christ. Secondly,
Henry Thode and Erwin Panofsky see it as a representation of the man of
sorrows (thus before his death). Charles de Tolnay and Colin Eisler combined
the two interpretations above. Finally, Gerda Panofsky proposed a new
approach, considering it the new Adam. I lean toward Lotz’s interpretation
because the statue did not originally have marks on the back of Christ, denoting
he was beaten, or any appearance of suffering in his face. Also, by analyzing
2
3
4
5
Leo Steinberg. The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern Oblivion. (2nd ed. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1996), p. 146.
Agoston, op. cit., p. 6.
Anthony Blunt. Artistic Theory in Italy, 1450-1600. (London; New York: Oxford University Press,
1978), p. 118.
Agoston, op. cit., is the one who originally compiled all four approaches in her dissertation.
Souza -
3
other works of art of that period,6 there are at least two instances where the
figure of Christ is similar to the one Michelangelo used, holding a cross in his
arms, clearly denoting a risen Christ.
Yet the fact that the Minerva Christ is fully nude makes it very unusual. It
is fairly common to find in Renaissance Italy nude figures of Christ during his
crucifixion. A living nude Christ, not in a context of suffering, was very rare, if not
unique. I have already mentioned above that the sculpture is in a static position
denoting a state of being. The following is a singular explanation for it, originally
presented in the Encyclopedia of Comparative Iconography 7, with which I
strongly agree: for Michelangelo, Christ was the incarnation of God. His death on
the cross was the moment in which he called to himself the sins of all humankind.
In his resurrection, his body was transformed and all sins were redeemed. The
risen Christ had purified human nature, which was once corrupted by the original
sin in the lapse of men. Therefore, the fallen shame related to human nudity was
not in him anymore. He would not have to hide any part of his body as
indecorous or impure. He was freed from the burden of his clothes as the means
to deprive others from seeing his shameful nature. Michelangelo would not, and
did not, show in any of his works a dead, or dying, Christ nude. This seems to be
possible only for a risen Christ.
If we put the Minerva Christ in perspective within Michelangelo’s total
work, the importance of his nudity becomes clearer. I consider the Minerva Christ
6
James Clifton. The Body of Christ in the Art of Europe and New Spain, 1150-1800. (Munich; New York:
Prestel, 1997). In this work there are reproductions of the paintings of Lambert Lombard: Scenes of
Passion and Resurrection of Christ (1541), p. 90, and Girolamo da Santacroce: The Resurrection
(1525), p.93. Both Christs are in the same position as Michelangelo’s Minerva Christ.
Souza -
4
to be the apex of the humanistic experience of Michelangelo. Before it, he was
free to depict male nudity in many of his pieces. Both mythological and religious
subjects allowed it. Even in the Sistine Chapel’s ceiling he seemed to be
completely at ease with the nude. Four of his sculptures from this period also
clearly depicted the sexual organs of male figures: Cupid, Bacchus, David, and
The Sleeping Captive. However, when he was portraying Christ, he seemed to
be more careful. His first Pietà, from the beginning of the sixteenth century,
shows a dead Christ covered in his indecorous parts. In the period after the
Minerva Christ, Michelangelo’s work became much more religious than it once
was, especially with the drawings for Vittoria Colonna and the late Pietàs. What
happened during the decade of 1520 that marked the artist so deeply?
Two important events took place during this decade: the beginning of the
Protestant Reformation (1521) and the subsequent Sack of Rome (1527).
Michelangelo was a very religious man, as we will see later on. Also, as a
famous artist he had free access to the pope, whoever he would be. In other
words, he lived in the heart of the Catholic Church and was deeply influenced by
it. He may have been moved by the excommunication of Martin Luther in 1521,
and the way it quickly undermined the power of the Church in Europe. The Sack
of Rome was surely a consequence of the weakness of the papacy, and
Michelangelo attached himself to more solid religious grounds by joining,
together with his newly met spiritual mentor Vittoria Colonna, a group in Rome
headed by a cardinal – the “spirituali.” His humanistic/neo-platonic background
7
Helene Roberts (ed.). Encyclopedia of Comparative Iconography : Themes Depicted in Works of Art.
(Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998.), p. 643.
Souza -
5
seemed not to be his support anymore. Michelangelo’s work became much more
focused on religious symbols.
Most of Michelangelo’s subsequent works, at least the public ones, are
much more careful in dealing with nudity. The Conversion of Paul and the
Crucifixion of Peter show no nudes at all. None of the late Pietàs show a nude
Christ. The Rondanini Pietà may leave this impression, but it was not finished, so
it is hard to interpret it. The only place where the nude is still present, and in
profusion, is in the Last Judgment. However, I am inclined to agree with Blunt
that “they are heavy and lumpish, with thick limbs, lacking in grace,”8 very
different from the grace of, for example, Adam in the Creation of Man.
In addition, Michelangelo showed a consistent concern for the
representation of the figure of Christ during his work. The only occurrences of
Christ’s genitalia in his work are in four Madonna sculptures and in the Minerva
Christ. In the Madonnas, the baby Jesus is without clothes, a very common and
innocent motif. However, the only full-grown Christ’s penis is in the Minerva
Christ.
In summary, the Minerva Christ represents a unique piece in
Michelangelo’s work as well as in Renaissance Italy. Its nudity epitomizes a
strong theological position assumed by Michelangelo: the risen Christ has freed
us from the shame of our indecorous parts. Therefore, he may be portrayed with
no clothes at all. However, I believe that it embodies not only this theological
premise, but also all the conscious influences and unconscious motivations that
will be further developed in the following two sections.
Souza -
6
III.
The Conscious Influences
In this section of the paper, I will analyze what I consider the two most
important influences over Michelangelo: Savonarola and Ficino. I also want to
relate their impact on him with the Minerva Christ and with the nudity of Christ. I
am calling them conscious, external influences in contrast to the unconscious,
hidden stimuli from within the artist, which will be fully covered in Section IV.
Before he celebrated his twentieth birthday, Michelangelo had already
experienced a deep immersion into the humanist tradition through his mentor
Marsilio Ficino, as both lived in the court of Lorenzo de Medici. On the other
hand, Condivi, one of his most important biographers, recorded the following
statement by Michelangelo just before his death: “More than fifty years later… he
could still remember the friar’s voice.”9 This is a clear reference to the friar of the
Cathedral of Florence at the end of the century, Girolamo Savonarola, who was a
prominent figure in the Florentine life. It is, as well, strong evidence of his
influence in the formation of Michelangelo’s personality. What did that “voice”
say?
Savonarola was a very controversial spiritual leader. He started his
preaching with an apocalyptic discourse: the Catholic Church had to be renewed,
Italy had to be punished for its moral shortage, and the world would then come to
8
9
Blunt, op. cit., p. 65.
Ascanio Condivi. The Life of Michelangnolo Buonarroti. (Trans. by Charles Holroyd. London:
Duckworth, 1904), p. 105 (quoted by James Saslow in The Poetry of Michelangelo: An Annotated
Translation by James M. Saslow, p. 10).
Souza -
7
its end.10 He believed he was chosen by God to prepare the people of Florence
for such calamity. He preached a very strict moral code, exposing the
Florentines’ sins, out of which sodomy (meaning male homosexuality) was the
worst. At that time sodomy was, besides a sin, a criminal offense and had to be
prosecuted by the local authorities. As I will further develop later on,
Michelangelo had a strong homosexual orientation, and hearing such discourse
from the Church officials must not have been easy for him. Such restriction,
however, never prevented him from using the male nude in his works from the
beginning as a sculptor. Yet, deep inside, the idea of sin was, little by little,
building a sense of inadequacy and nonconformity with the accepted moral
standards. This would become very clear in his later poems, which although
explicitly representing love toward other men, always carried the conscience of
an eminent punishment by God.11
Savonarola, closer to the end of his life, changed the tone of his discourse
from the end of the world to its transformation through politics. He became very
famous by performing the role of a Florentine ambassador towards the invading
emperor Charles V, from France. His republican ideas, however, did not please
the local ruling power, and he was, because of them, eventually excommunicated
from the Catholic Church and burnt at the stake. He also bothered the local
artists and intellectuals with his moral attacks on their behavior. In at least two
instances, he supported public bonfires known as Bruciamenti delle Vanita
(bonfire of vanities) in which books considered profane, as well as some
10
Donald Weinstein. Savonarola and Florence; Prophecy and Patriotism in the Renaissance. (Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1970), pp. 61, 65, 144-145.
Souza -
8
indecorous paintings, were destroyed. Even daily things like cosmetics, mirrors,
false hair, playing cards and dice were burnt, causing a profound dissatisfaction
in some educated people.12 There is no evidence of the impact such bonfires had
on Michelangelo, but he surely saw them and they must have caused some
reactions in him.
Finally, Savonarola definitely influenced Michelangelo with his opinion
about the proper art, the one that he would not burn as indecorous: he believed
religious paintings could work as books for women, children and men who could
not read. In a passage from Francisco de Hollanda’s Roman Dialogues,
Michelangelo shows his opinion about the proper role of an artist. It seems he
assimilated the spirit of Savonarola’s preaching. He was considering himself as
someone chosen by God to perform his artistic work:
… in order to imitate to some extent the venerable image of our
Lord it is not sufficient merely to be a great master in painting and
very wise, but I think that it is necessary for the painter to be very
good in his mode of life, or even, if such were possible, a saint, so
that the Holy Spirit may inspire his intellect.13
And in another part:
And therefore if God the Father willed that the ark of His Covenant
should be well ornamented and painted, how much more study and
consideration must He wish applied to the imitation of His Serene
Face and that of His Son and Lord… Frequently the images badly
painted distract and cause devotion to be lost, at least in those who
possess little; and, on the contrary, those that are divinely painted
provoke and lead even those who are little devout and but little
inclined to worship to contemplation and tears…14
11
12
13
14
See p. 14.
Jane Turner (ed.). The Dictionary of Art. (New York: Grove's Dictionaries, 1996), p. 894.
Condivi, op. cit, p. 319.
Ibid., p. 320.
Souza -
9
Michelangelo was assuming his artistic duty almost as a prophetic one,
appointed directly by God in order to instigate the devout worship. I do believe
this is the same spirit that led him in the sculpting of the Minerva Christ.
Otherwise, the words above can only be interpreted in a very cynical connotation.
Yet, despite their godly appearance, they hide another religion, different from
Christianity, moving inside Michelangelo: neo-platonism. His mentor in this field
was Marsilio Ficino.
Humanism, the restoration of the classical values as proposed in the
previous century by Petrarch and Boccaccio, found faithful followers in Florence
one hundred years before Michelangelo. Some chancellors of the Republic of
that time, such as Salutati, Bruni and Bracciolini, planted the seed that flourished
all over Europe. However, Michelangelo was deeply influenced by a branch of
humanism, neo-platonism, which may be regarded as humanist, though it kept
the metaphysics introduced by Plotinus in Greece before the Common Era.
As both Michelangelo and Marsilio Ficino lived in the court of Lorenzo de
Medici during the same period at the end of the fifteenth century, the former may
have participated in the informal Platonic Academy in Florence, led by Ficino,
who proposed a synthesis of philosophy and theology. Based on Plotinus, he
built a new paradigm for philosophy, art and mysticism. For the former, “art could
not reveal the highest reality, but must be superseded by philosophical
understanding and mystical experience.”15 Ficino also recovered some concepts
in Plotinus’ metaphysics, which gave neo-platonism its aura of a semi-religion.
15
Turner, op. cit., p.750, summarizing Plotinus’ ideas present in the Ennead (V.viii.1).
Souza - 10
God was regarded as the One, and humans should surpass material reality to
find him.
However, it was the concept of beauty, as developed by Ficino, that was
probably the strongest attracting factor for Michelangelo. God, for the neoplatonists, in his glory, decided to be made known to men through beauty. Any
form of beauty, then, may be a gate to the divine sphere. Once in such a realm,
the soul could be in contact with God himself, and through this apparition love
would be produced and would work as the linkage between humanity and
divinity. Michelangelo’s work may be regarded as the attempt to embody such
beauty, especially the one of human bodies.
Blunt attributed to Michelangelo the realization that beauty would be a
reflection of God in the material world, and that the human figure is God’s most
clear manifestation.16 For me, based on this statement and that God was
incarnated in Christ, the Minerva Christ turned out to be a unique chance for
Michelangelo to make the following point: a beautiful Christ unites the marvel of
men and God in one entity. I think this is what he had in mind during the sculpting
of the Minerva Christ. Yet, it had to be a risen Christ to portray such beauty. A
dead or suffering Christ would mix the supernatural attraction for him with the
repulsion caused by the sin put on him during the redeeming achievement.
Therefore, the Minerva Christ was a unique chance for Michelangelo to depict a
glorious Christ, fully human, yet risen and closer to God.
16
Blunt, op. cit., p. 62.
Souza - 11
Together with these above-mentioned two influences of Savonarola and
Ficino, I believe Michelangelo was also influenced by hidden stimuli
unconsciously produced.
IV.
The Unconscious Motivations
Michelangelo’s personality is very complex. Therefore, the analysis of its
conscious influences may not uncover all of its riches. This section of the paper
will take a psychoanalytical approach to his personality in order to bring more
light to the interpretation of the Minerva Christ.
Sigmund Freud proposed a division of human personality into three main
parts: the id, the ego and the super-ego. The id is our part related to the
instinctual forces from our animal legacy. It embodies all the drives moving in us,
out of which the libido, or sexual energy, is the strongest. The super-ego is the
part of us that reproduces the social limitations to our conduct. It is our internal
repository of the moral code of the society we live in. It is a built-in judge telling
men what they should or should not do. The ego is the resulting interaction of the
id and the super-ego. The ego is our selves.17
Michelangelo’s super-ego was carefully molded in him by the combined
influence of Savonarola and the neo-platonic legacy. Inside him there was
condemnation and repression of his innermost feelings. Saslow states that he
was always concerned about his public image and never wanted to see it related
17
Sigmund Freud. The Ego and the Id. (London: Hogarth Press, 1950), pp. 19-53.
Souza - 12
to morally reprehensible acts like sodomy, for example.18 This may also be
inferred from poem No. 56. According to Gilbert, in it “Michelangelo’s fears that
people would apply their own standards to him were all too justified.”19
Michelangelo’s id may also be inferred from his work and biography. Many
scholars consider him a homosexual, although all agree that there is no evidence
of any genital relationships with other men. He was not like Leonardo da Vinci,
who carefully hid his emotional life from the public. On the contrary, he made it
very open, especially through his poetry. However, some scholars surmise that
he had a more intimate relationship with at least two men: Gherardo Perini and
Tommaso Cavalieri.20
In the many dozens of poems written by Michelangelo, clearly
autobiographical, some deserve our attention in order to confirm his relationship
with Perini. No. 36 is the first of them to clearly relate his love to another man,
though there is no mention of Perini. Saslow suggests, based on Charles de
Tolnay, that it was he, and that the former poems directed to an unnamed figure
were written for him. At the same time, within these first poems, Michelangelo’s
super-ego is already present: sin and vengeance, according to Saslow, may be
found at least twice21, in poem 22:
Earth has claws out for every creature born,
and mortal beauty must dwindle day by day.
The lover knows; he struggles - just the same fails.
18
19
20
21
James Saslow. Ganymede in the Renaissance: Homosexuality in Art and Society. (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1986), p.48-49.
Michelangelo Buonarroti. Complete Poems and Selected Letters of Michelangelo. (translated, with
foreword and notes, by Creighton Gilbert; edited, with biographical introduction, by Robert N.
Linscott. 3rd ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1980), p. xvi (Translator’s Foreword).
Saslow, The Poetry of Michelangelo, op. cit., p.13.
Ibid., p. 13.
Souza - 13
Sin and vengeance are blood-brothers sworn.22
and in No. 32:
I live for sinning, for the self that dies,
My life being mine no more, this life in sin.
Heaven made me good; I dug the pit I'm in.23
Another clear object of Michelangelo’s homosexual attraction was
Tommaso Cavalieri, and this can be easily proven by many of his poems, mainly
No. 98:
If capture and defeat must be my joy,
It is no longer that, alone and naked,
I remain prisoner of a knight-at-arms.24
However, Michelangelo decided to demonstrate his affection through
some drawings. In one of them, Michelangelo recovered an old Greek myth –
Ganymede – as a metaphor for his love towards Cavalieri. In it, Zeus is
represented as an eagle responsible for the rape of the young Ganymede, a
shepherd, who was then taken to Olympus because of his outstanding beauty
and kept there as Zeus’ lover. It is noteworthy that when Michelangelo met
Cavalieri he was already fifty-seven years old, while the latter was only twentythree.25 The reference is clear: Michelangelo felt like Zeus captivated by
Cavalieri’s beauty.
Assuming Michelangelo’s homosexuality, how can it be related to the
Minerva Christ? Throughout his work, he clearly preferred to portray males nude.
In the Sistine ceiling, the “ignudi” are everywhere. The most prominent and
22
23
24
Michelangelo Buonarroti. The Complete Poems of Michelangelo. (Trans. By John F. Nims. Chicago:
Chicago University Press, 1998), p. 18.
Ibid., p. 22
Gilbert, op. cit., p. 96.
Souza - 14
famous figure is Adam in the Creation of Man, fully nude. I believe Michelangelo
wanted to show that male nudity is beautiful, and if Adam was already beautiful in
the beginning of mankind, how much more attractive the New Adam, Christ,
would have to be after the redemption from the Adamic sin. Again, the risen
Savior can be depicted fully naked because in him there was no more sin.
Therefore, the Minerva Christ is how Michelangelo wanted to see his Savior: a
nude male in which there is no sin or punishment.
The Minerva Christ was probably an attempt of the artist to identify some
logic in the contradictory world he lived in: his sinful homosexual flesh fighting
with the supreme purity in God. The Minerva Christ may have been his way of
saying that there could be peace in his ego.
Michelangelo’s homosexuality is also related to another aspect of his life
that affected his work, a process that Freud called sublimation.26 Michelangelo
worked so much that he considered his work as his wife in one of his writings.27
The above-mentioned latent homosexuality may have forced him to sublimate his
libido, that is to transfer the power of his sexuality to other non-sexual activities
such as his work, for example. The process of sublimation may be satisfactorily
successful in other occupations: for example, celibate Catholic priests try to
sublimate through prayers and other disciplinary exercises. An artist, however,
ends up manifesting all his inner conflicts in his work, whether in paintings,
sculptures or poems. That is intrinsic to the artistic process. Michelangelo may
25
26
Saslow. Ganymede in the Renaissance, op.cit., p.17.
Sigmund Freud. Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. (Trans. and edited by James Strachey. New
York: Norton, 1966), pp. 428-429.
Souza - 15
have sublimated in his work, and the Minerva Christ could be seen as an icon of
this process. In it, the artist showed his appreciation for the nude male form,
unconsciously hiding behind the iconographical reference to the risen Savior.
Other psychoanalytical aspects of Michelangelo’s personality are well
described in some scholars’ work: the fact that his mother died when he was still
very young,28 and the lack of a strong father figure.29 They all contribute to the
explanation of a very disturbed ego. Nevertheless, I think that one of the most
relevant psychoanalytical aspects of Michelangelo’s personality has yet to be
further analyzed: why does he use nude male forms so many times in his work?
Using the Minerva Christ example, I want to contribute to this subject.
In one of his most celebrated books, The Interpretation of Dreams, Freud
mentions some unusual dreams, among them the one in which one is naked in
public. He pays attention only to the cases that cause discomfort to the dreamer.
In other cases, dreaming of being naked in public may not be that problematic:
This age of childhood, in which the sense of shame is unknown,
seems a paradise when we look back upon it later, and paradise
itself is nothing but the mass-phantasy of the childhood of the
individual. This is why in paradise men are naked and unashamed,
until the moment arrives when shame and fear awaken; expulsion
follows, and sexual life and cultural development begin. Into this
paradise dreams can take us back every night; we have already
ventured the conjecture that the impressions of our earliest
childhood (from the prehistoric period until about the end of the
third year) crave reproduction for their own sake, perhaps without
27
28
29
Robert Linscott, as the Biographical Introduction to the translation of Creighton Gilbert, op. cit., p.
xxxv: “I already have a wife who is too much for me; one who keeps me unceasingly struggling on. It
is my art, and my works are my children.”
Nathan Leites. Art and Life: Aspects of Michelangelo. (New York and London: New York University
Press, 1986), pp. 1-7.
Saslow. The Poetry of Michelangelo, p. 9.
Souza - 16
further reference to their content, so that their repetition is a wishfulfilment. Dreams of nakedness, then, are exhibition-dreams.30
How does this explanation relate to Michelangelo and the Minerva Christ?
I believe that the artist was willing to take us, through the nude in the course of
his work, back to what Freud called “the paradise.” There is no evidence that
Michelangelo had such dreams, but Freud himself pointed out that the artistic
process is very similar to the dream process. Therefore, the Minerva Christ may
be regarded as the unconscious manifestation of Michelangelo’s childish desire
for a Christ free of shame. Perhaps this is true for all of the male nudes in his
work. In this sense, the Minerva Christ may be regarded as an exhibition-dream.
Freud
also
relates
repression
with
the
exhibition-dreams,
and
Michelangelo’s life is one full of repression, as already mentioned above,
pertaining to his homosexuality:
Furthermore, repression finds a place in the exhibition-dream. For
the disagreeable sensation of the dream is, of course, the reaction
on the part of the second psychic instance to the fact that the
exhibitionistic scene which has been condemned by the censorship
has nevertheless succeeded in presenting itself. The only way to
avoid this sensation would be to refrain from reviving the scene.31
As in an exhibition-dream, the condemned scene of a beautiful nude adult
male – Christ – has succeeded in presenting itself. Michelangelo was at ease, at
least with this work, with the fact that he felt attraction for other men and that he
could portray his Savior nude without moral restrictions.
In summary, the three inner stimuli in Michelangelo, his homosexual drive,
his sublimation and the artistic nude as exhibition-dreams contribute to the
30
Sigmund Freud. The Interpretation of Dreams. (4th ed. London: G. Allen & Unwin ; New York:
Macmillan, 1915), chapter V.
Souza - 17
consolidation of a complex personality. The Minerva Christ was a reification of
such personal contradictions. Christ had to be nude in this work in order to be a
symbolic representation, even unconscious in some of its elements, of the
conflicting elements in permanent altercation in the genius life of Michelangelo.
V.
Conclusion
Not long after its first public appearance, the Minerva Christ was mutilated.
Christ’s genitalia were never again seen as originally planned by Michelangelo.
Reproductions of the “covered” Christ were distributed throughout Europe.
However, that nude Christ could have been an alternate reference to the troubled
Catholic Church, which overreacted to the Protestant Reformation by abandoning
its past history of tolerance in religious art manifestations. The Jesuits took over
the orthodoxy of the church in the counter-reformation movement, and with them
sexual repression became the norm. On the other side of the religious spectrum,
the Protestants abandoned almost completely any form of religious art. In the
middle of these two extremes was a nude Christ pointing to the release of sin
and shame, to a higher degree of love, to a new possibility of union with God.
Michelangelo’s psyche was the battlefield of all these conflicts. He suffered both
conscious and unconscious influences, and they are all present in his work. I do
not believe either in the Catholic Christ, or in the Protestant’s. However, I would
like to have had the chance to worship the Minerva Christ together with
Michelangelo in his inner “paradise.”
31
Ibid., chapter V.
Souza - 18
Bibliography
Agoston, Laura Camille. Michelangelo's Christ : the Dialectics of Sculpture.
Harvard PhD Dissertation, 1993.
Ames-Lewis, Frances and Bednarek, Anka (eds.). Decorum in Renaissance
Narrative Art: Papers Delivered at the Annual Conference of the Association
of Art Historians, London, April 1991. London: Department of History of Art,
Birkbeck College, University of London, 1992.
Blunt, Anthony. Artistic Theory in Italy, 1450-1600. London; New York: Oxford
University Press, 1978.
Clifton, James. The Body of Christ in the Art of Europe and New Spain, 11501800. Munich; New York: Prestel, 1997
Condivi, Ascanio. The Life of Michelangnolo Buonarroti. Trans. by Charles
Holroyd. London: Duckworth, 1904
Freud, Sigmund. On Dreams. Trans. James Strachey. New York: Norton, 1963.
_________. Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. Trans. and edited by
James Strachey. New York: Norton, 1966.
_________. Leonardo da Vinci and a Memory of His Childhood. Trans. by Alan
Tyson. 1st American ed. New York : Norton, 1964
_________. The Interpretation of Dreams. 4th ed. London: G. Allen & Unwin ;
New York: Macmillan, 1915.
_________. The Ego and the Id. London: Hogarth Press, 1950.
Hofstadter, Albert and Richard Kuhns (eds.). Philosophies of Art and Beauty.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.
Leites, Nathan. Art and Life: Aspects of Michelangelo. New York and London:
New York University Press, 1986.
Liebert, Robert. “Michelangelo’s Mutilation of the Florence Pieta: a
Psychoanalytical Inquiry”. The Art Bulletin 59 (1977). Reprinted in William
Wallace, ed. Michelangelo: Selected Scholarship in English. 5 Vols. New
York: Garland, 1995.
Souza - 19
Michelangelo Buonarroti. The Poetry of Michelangelo: An Annotated Translation
by James M. Saslow. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991.
Michelangelo Buonarroti. Complete Poems and Selected Letters of
Michelangelo; translated, with foreword and notes, by Creighton Gilbert ;
edited, with biographical introduction, by Robert N. Linscott. 3rd ed.
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1980.
Michelangelo Buonarroti. The Complete Poems of Michelangelo. Trans. By John
F. Nims. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1998.
Panofsky-Soergel, Gerda. Michelangelos "Christus" und sein romischer
Auftraggeber. Worms: Wernersche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991.
Roberts, Helene (ed.). Encyclopedia of Comparative Iconography : Themes
Depicted in Works of Art. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998.
Saslow, James M. Ganymede in the Renaissance: Homosexuality in Art and
Society. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986.
Steinberg, Leo. The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern
Oblivion. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Turner, Jane (ed.). The Dictionary of Art. New York: Grove's Dictionaries, 1996.
Vasari, Giorgio. Vasari's Lives of the Artists: the Classic Biographical Work on
the Greatest Architects, Sculptors and Painters of the Italian Renaissance,
abridged and edited with commentary by Betty Burroughs. New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1946.
Wallace, William E. Michelangelo and his Drawings. By Michael Hirst. New
Haven, London, 1988.
Weinstein, Donald. Savonarola and Florence; Prophecy and Patriotism in the
Renaissance. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1970.
Souza - 20
Annex I
Figure 1
Figure 2
Souza - 21