Paragone Discussion: Painting vs. Sculpting

On Thursday, October 15, 2009, our group participated in a Renaissance style Paragone, in which we discussed the merits of painting vs. sculpting via the 21st Century as we all met in the virtual world instead of a grand coliseum as the great Leonardo da Vinci had done.
In doing so, our group came to some interesting conclusions about Leonardo’s Paragone. Leonardo began his discussion by claiming that painting and sculpting have no difference between them except how the artist executes the work; that the sculptor is more physical and the painter is more intellectual. Leonardo soon made it very clear that in his opinion, painting and the painter was far superior to sculpting and the sculptor.
Our group came to immediate agreement that Leonardo is very arrogant in delivering his argument. However, he delivered his message well and used language to “paint” strong imagery regarding his idea of a painter being very refined and almost regal, while a sculptor was a brute merely living in dirt. And so our group discussed if one art was really superior to the other, as Leonardo so strongly seemed to think. Based on our recent “Standing in the Shoes” assignment, all of us had recently tried either sculpting or painting and we came to the conclusion that the two arts really aren’t comparable merely because the artist must approach them completely differently. For example, and as Leonardo pointed out in his Paragone, if a sculptor “takes too much off” of his material, they aren’t able to simply add to it with paint and color as a painter can in an attempt to correct the mistake. Instead, they will have to completely start over, or deal with an art piece with imperfections. For those of us in the group who did the Michelangelo project: myself (Heather), Carolyn and Shabaz, we all faced this issue when trying to “sculpt” our bars of soap and had to start over a few times. In that sense, we all thought that sculpting was more difficult than painting and just required more planning in general. However, as our painters Shama and Justin pointed out, with painting there is more room for mistakes to occur, so more creative flow can be experienced. So in the end, our group agreed that the thought processes between the two arts that the artist must take is completely different. And as our group member, Justin, pointed out, he thinks architecture is really the most influential art because all cultures need a form of shelter, and therefore, the style and function of their buildings says a lot about a certain society. How fitting for the Frank Lloyd Wright group!
When concluding our discussion, each group member quickly stated their opinion on whether or not a Paragone was useful. We were not able to reach a consensus on this issue, as some of us thought yes, and some of us thought no. I personally said that paragones were useful just because they got an individual thinking and discussing topics they would not normally think and talk about. In the end, we feel that our group’s own personal Renaissance Paragone was quite a success.