I'm currently taking a class at my university called That's So Gay: An Exploration of Homophobia and Camp in Art. My topic of choice is the The Male Form: Automatically Homoerotic? I'm currently researching how different societies view the male body as gay, whether as negatively or positively.
Right now I'm fascinated by Italy during the Renaissance. It seems like many of the artists during this time were gay, like Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci. How did they "get away" with creating so many homoerotic works of art when there were literal night police that would arrest gay men? In my research I've discovered that Leonardo was actually arrested twice for sodomy with a "notorious prostitute" Jacopo Saltarelli. He was soon released afterwards.
Even still, how were they able to create such works of art while their personal lives were "illegal"? Or am I thinking something incorrectly? Any input would be absolutely wonderful!!
Before we can look at the correlation between the sexuality of the artists in the Italian Renaissance and their art, it is important to look at the overall context of the art of the period. One key element of the culture of that era, which is certainly reflected in art, is the interest in the revival of classical antiquity. We see it in literature, in architecture, and in the visual arts. When it comes to Greco-Roman art, what was available for artists of the renaissance to look at for inspiration was marble statuary. Two very influential examples are the Laocoon group and the Belvedere Torso. The Laocoon was rediscovered in 1506 and was very influential on Michelangelo's art. You have contorted, muscular figures showing through their bodies the intense pathos of the event. The classical and Hellenistic sculptures that renaissance artists were emulating displayed the nude male figure in all its power, while the female nude was more polished and subdued, essentially a reflection of the difference in the prevailing ideas of virtues and roles of males and females in antiquity.
Fast forward a millennium and a half or so, let's take a look at some of the male nudes from the Italian Quattrocento.
Masaccio's Adam and Eve (1425) shows Adam as indisputably male, and with a well-defined, muscular torso that helps convey the pain and suffering of the two figures as they are banished from the Garden of Eden. Eve's torment is clear from her distorted face, rather than her classical body.
Pollaiolo’s engraving of the Battle of the Nudes is almost a catalog of male nude poses, a study of male muscular anatomy. All of the ten male nudes are very athletic and the bodies give a sense of the movement and tension of the scene.
Botticelli’s Venus and Mars (1485) shows a mostly-nude, sleeping, reclined Mars. An absolutely stunningly beautiful young man, in a way that the photographs of the painting don’t do justice to.
Donatello’s darkened bronze David (1430) shows not simply a male nude, but a prepubescent male nude. It was commissioned by Cosimo de Medici and displayed atop a column in a central place in his palace. When the Medici were exiled, both this David and Donatello’s Judith slaying Holopherne were moved to the public areas of Palazzo Vecchio. Does it mean that the Medici and the people of Florence liked naked prepubescent males? Not really. In addition to being a classical nude from one of the most sought-after sculptors of that era, the David was both a political statement, showing victory over tyranny (which is also the theme of the Judith), and also a role model for the young males of Florence that were going to be the future of the city.
It is certainly fair to look at Michelangelo’s paintings and sculptures and wonder if his sexuality had anything to do with his prolific depictions of the male nude. But we can’t really make the same connection for all the artists of the previous century of Italian renaissance art. The link to classical Roman and Greek art and culture was a key element of the art of the renaissance and needs to be considered.
