In order to provide you with a better experience, netivist uses a limited amount of cookies. Learn more about the way we use them by reading our Cookies Policy. By continuing to browse netivist you are agreeing to our policy.

The ultimate Renaissance artist: Da Vinci or Michelangelo?

Channel:


Renaissance artists: Da Vinci or Michelangelo

Source: Composite image by G_marius

Da Vinci and Michelangelo are the most famous Renaissance artists. But who deserves to be considered the "archetypal Renaissance man"?

Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo Buonarroti were exceptional men and probably the most famous renaissance artists that exerted unparalleled influenced on the development of Western art. Both were polymath. Da Vinci (1452-1519) was a painter, sculptor, architect, musician, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist and writer. Michelangelo (1475-1564) was sculptor, painter, architect, poet, and engineer. Da Vinci and Michelangelo artworks have impressed the world. Some of all time masterpieces were created by one them such as The Mona Lisa, The Last Supper, The David and The Sistine Chapel. Michelangelo was a more prolific artist but Da Vinci's inventions and scientific works were more important. 

Overall who do you think deserves the title of "the archetypal Renaissance man" Da Vinci or Michelangelo? Who was the most impressive genius of the Italian Renaissance?

The ultimate Renaissance artist: Da Vinci or Michelangelo? Vote in our poll and comment about their artwork.


Vote to see result and collect 1 XP. Your vote is anonymous.
If you change your mind, you can change your vote simply by clicking on another option.





Join the debate

In order to join the debate you must be logged in.



Already have an account on netivist? Just login. New to netivist? Create your account for free.





View all comments

You are viewing a filtered list of comments. Click the button above to view all comments.

...
Lvl 8
1651 xp

475 posts
#15  |  BG Canada  27 January 2015 @ 21:12    Karl van der Bal  (#14)

I did not mind the Comrade. I still think that any kind of tool (art included) that promotes religious ideas is a tool of propaganda. It could look very impressive, that doesn't take away the reason why it's been commanded by the church and created...

...
Lvl 8
1360 xp

344 posts
#14  |  Karl van der Bal  27 January 2015 @ 15:54

First and foremost, i do enjoy our sparring matches, so the whole ''Comrade' is but a sign of respect (and a bit of joke) for a worthy opponent. Although I am an atheist and humanist (my first reaction towards religious dogma is allergic in nature)> however, i do see a massive difference between someone producing one of the most remarkable pieces of human achievement (one that more-than trascends whatever religious purpose it may originally had) and, say, the workings of evil establishment that devise fucked up propaganda like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion -used as a primary justification for initiating tsarist and soviet pogroms, Nazi holocaust and stirring up anti-semitic hatred these days.


Join the debate

In order to join the debate you must be logged in.



Already have an account on netivist? Just login. New to netivist? Create your account for free.


Next Article