Susanne Thürigen

Katalog zur gleichnamigen Ausstellung im Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte, München. Die Renaissance gilt gemeinhin als Initialzündung der Moderne, als Neuanfang und „Entdeckung der Welt und des Menschen“ nach dem Mittelalter. These der Ausstellung „Was war Renaissance?“ ist dagegen, dass es eine Pluralität von Renaissancekonzepten gibt, die an unterschiedlichen Orten, zu unterschiedlichen Zeiten angesetzt werden. Renaissance soll hier verstanden werden als eine Erzählform, die von Künstlern, Kunstschriftstellern und schließlich Kunsthistorikern herangezogen wird, um sich oder ihren Gegenstand durch Tradition zu legitimieren: Statt auf historische Brüche fokussieren diese Erzählungen auf Kontinuität und das Moment der Übertragung. Der die gleichnamige Ausstellung begleitende Katalogband gibt einen systematischen Überblick über die Zeitpunkte, Orte und Individuen, denen die ‚Wiederbelebung‘ der Kunst zugeschrieben wurde. Erstmals wird hier das Spektrum unterschiedlicher Visualisierungen von Renaissance-Metaphern und –Modellen in der Kunstgeschichtsschreibung präsentiert. Publisher: Dietmar Klinger Verlag Publication Date: 2013

essay on the collection history, there are two more preliminary essays, an introduction by Wilson, and an essay on function by Luke Syson. Wilson’s introduction makes the critical point—which unfortunately still needs to be made, even today—that maiolica was a vital art form in the Renaissance. The hierarchy that places paintings, sculpture, and architecture above all other art, dating back to Giorgio Vasari and reiterated over the centuries, is a faulty but persistent construct. Wilson’s introduction ably demonstrates maiolica’s complexity and influence, while the catalogue shows its great diversity. Syson’s essay tackles the similarly lingering notion that maiolica was decorative rather than functional. Although some of the larger plates have piercings in the foot ring to facilitate wall hanging (nos. 34 and 85), there is no reason to assume the plates were not also used at table. The diverse shapes—many of which made the objects quite difficult to paint—and carefully calculated compositions have been seen as evidence that maiolica was meant to be admired rather than used. But these very same reasons can be used to argue function, as Syson does in his essay and Wilson does in many of his entries. For example, the jars with what seems to be tare weight scratched on the undersides (nos. 30 and 36) enabled pharmacists to easily calculate the contents. Each object is represented by at least one large-scale color photograph, and more when the undersides or additional views, details, or comparanda are relevant; one entry includes an evocative photograph of the potter’s thumbprint (no. 16). Wilson’s catalogue sets a high standard, incorporating the most up-to-date scholarship with a vivid and readable text to demonstrate the great importance of maiolica in Renaissance life, as well as its connections to contemporary painting, sculpture, works on paper, glass, metalwork, and textiles. This interdisciplinary examination emphasizes the movement of people, objects, shapes, and designs across Europe and at times further afield; in doing so, it goes well beyond a specialist catalogue and will find a wide and enthusiastic audience.