Zachary Milone
ART 261
04 July 2021
Writing Assignment 2
When people think of art, they usually associate the term with activities and pieces of
drawing and painting. Each medium has its own approaches, flexibility, and flaws, but there is
also no right or wrong answer either. When I read the statement “a thing well drawn is always
adequately painted”, I couldn’t help but be a little taken aback by it. It feels so far-fetched but
also hit close to home, which doesn’t make a lot of sense. The artist that we have recently looked
over that captures what I personally think is a good counter argument for this statement ic
Caravaggio. Caravaggio has a very wide range of both drawn and painted art pieces, and the
pieces that I want to talk about are his portrait pieces.
The first piece that I want to bring up is his Portrait of Alof de Wignacourt, which
appears to be painted. This piece features a knight holding his sword and what appears to be
some sort of apprentice, or servant with his belongings. The facial expressions of each of these
characters are very convincing, showing that the knight is proud of something or someone,
whatever it may be. You can see each hair in great detail, almost as if you are there, the armor
has a shine to it, and the clothing pieces inspire depth within this illustration. The painting and
color inspired great detail with this piece, and almost looks like it is a picture that was taken with
a camera, and a lot of the success with the minute details may have to do with the precision and
flexibility of the medium that was used.
The second piece that I want to talk about isn’t the same portrait in a different medium,
but it is still a similar style of art piece which I feel is acceptable when it comes to comparing
two different mediums. The Chalk Portrait of Caravaggio was, as the name of the piece
suggests, made with chalk. This piece holds many similarities to the previous one. Hair and
facial features are presented in great detail, going down to the small hair strands in his hair or the
bags underneath his eyes. Even a reflection of light in his eyes is present, which is a very minute
detail that not everyone will notice at first glance, but provides a very convincing sense of
realism. The only major difference that I noticed was how the chalk portrait looks a little more
“scratchy”, as if it was made for a quick commission rather than a professional piece.
Recentering our focus while using the chalk portraits details to the Portrait of Alof de
Wignacourt, and we recreate this portrait in a chalk medium, you can assume that the quality of
this piece and it’s detail would remain, for the most part, intact. However, if we do apply the
same “scratchy” flaw to it, then that would change the entire piece almost completely, despite it
being one small difference that comes with said medium. That leads to my interpretation of the
statement above, while it does hold some truth depending on the piece you are talking about, a
piece can be recreated with stunning accuracy and still be considered equal, if not, pretty close to
equal. And while it does stand true that recreations of pieces aren’t always on par with their
predecessors, the same can be said about vice versa. A thing well painted is always adequately
drawn. In my opinion, this quote would be a lot better if it was “A thing well drawn is usually
adequately painted”.