Paragone

During the time of Michaelangelo, Leonardo, even as late as Rubens and Bernini, artists engaged in a dialogue called the paragone. The paragone can be seen as battle between disciplines...which is better, painting or sculpture? The painters argued that their art was better because it is an art of vision rather than matter. When you see a painting of fruit, there is nothing there but color and design. It is a purely visual sensation and requires great ingenuity to decieve the senses into believing that matter exists. The sculptors claimed that their art was the "true" art. The work of their hands produced a verifiable object that could be touched and felt. As you can see, the conversation went beyond a discussion of painting and sculpture; the significance of the debate between the superiority of either vision or touch included philosophers with interests beyond the arts.

The paragone is relevant today and perhaps it even continues in the form science versus spirituality. We might say that actually, both are important and that painting actually requires matter in the form of pigment and sculpture requires the deception of sight in the same way that our nation needs both the ingenuity of of disegno, of design, even of planning and foresight. But, that these things mean nothing without the hands to carry out the vision.