I don't think Michelangelo's art was inspired by a bogus religion. I
think that
he probably adapted his technical and expressive artistic prowess to the
agendas
of the Church. It's like many artists today who create art for corporate
interests, are not necessarily inspired by those interests. They just
adapt
their talent to them.
*********************************************************************
I still disagree. Many artists of the middle to late rennaissance (as
well as the early baroque) layered subversive texts into their art work,
especially when they were meant to support corporate interests. (Check
out the portrait of pope Leo X by (blah blah can't remember the name and
too lazy to look it up.)
Michelangelo, as a humanist and a maker of sacred art did not sell out--
his memeset worked well with the new movement of the church-- the
*celebration* of the divine as flesh. (People just got soooo sick of
that calvinistic crap.)
I see no evidence of him supporting any other ideas, requiring him to
*adapt* to something else.
You:
I suppose you could say that Michelangelo "sold out" by
going for a greater amount of temporary fame and fortune by devoting
himself to
the intentions of the clergy.
*********************************************************************
I would love to be as "temporarily" famous.
-- Regards +--------------------------------------------------------+ Ken Pantheists http://www.lucifer.com/~kenpan +--------------------------------------------------------+