Artistic Theory in Italy

Michelangelo was all about beauty. He was a sculpture and painted like a sculpture. He thought the male form was the ultimate definition of beauty. He didn't care about the science of things. He studied what people looked like but not like Leonardo Da Vinci as far as their anatomy or how things worked. He wrote out his thoughts about his art in poem form. He thought God was responsible for everything and defined what beauty is to us. Later on in his life he realized how much outside beauty is temporary and how its what inside that lasts. Like "The Last Judgment" no one looked beautiful. They are all waiting for their fate to heaven or hell. Where you spend eternity is what really matters and it is real. For Michelangelo he wasn't too sure which direction he was going to go; if he had done enough to make into heaven. Your outside looks weren't going to get you there, even though, Michelangelo based most of his career, including the Sistine Ceiling, on the idea of beauty.

Leonardo Da Vinci was very scientific. He painted with the idea of how the body worked, or how nature flowed. He painted hair like it moves. He painted grass like it was swaying in the wind. He did studies on the movements of hands and plants and water. This, in turn, I think makes his art better. His art is more precise and realistic. He thought that if science wasn't apart of art than there was no point in it. He focused on anatomy and muscle function. He drew from an engineering perspective. Leonardo wasn't big on feelings so he didn't write figuratively. All his journals were made up of experiments with hypotheses and conclusions.

I like Leonardo Da Vinci's work more than Michelangelo's. He captures beauty better than Michelangelo ironically, I think. By knowing how the body works he could capture it on paper better. Michelangelo paints like he would carve a sculpture. The bodies are too lumpy and the poses, all though inspiring, are unrealistic. But, for example, the Sistine Ceiling was supposed to be ethereal and out of this world. If he didn't think figuratively and with emotion that idea wouldn't have come across as successfully as it did. So I don't know if you can say one is better than the other, in general, they are just different. The way they think shaped their artistic styles.