**2.4. From object of exploiting desire (fig leaf) to saintly body (icon): the Michelangelesque perspective**

It was the contention of George of Cyprus [33] that the word *eikōn* signifies inter alia the 'saintly body': bodily images as representations of spiritual and divine elements in life. And this is more or less what is meant by a Michelangelesque perspective.

In my view, it was Michelangelo who made a kind of 'breakthrough' in the sense that he viewed the perfect human figure as a representation of human dignity and eternal divinity. The naked human figure is portrayed as a 'perfect' and classic reflection of nobility and dignity.

One can say that it was Michelangelo who made the first authoritative statement in art that the naked human body—that body which, in Gothic times, had been the subject of shame and concealment—could be made the means of expressing noble sentiments, life-giving energy and God-like perfection [34]. The Sistine ceiling therefore passionately asserts the unity of the human body, mind and spirit. In his depiction of the creation of Adam, when Adam stretches out his hand so that it almost touches the hand of God, it is as if 'an electric charge seems to pass between the fingers. Out of this glorious physical specimen, God has created a human soul' [35]. The body becomes a soul, and the soul embodied physicality.

For Leonardo da Vinci, beauty was the moment of mystical encounter (*der Augenblick des Mysteriums*), and for Michelangelo, it was the interrelatedness of the parts within the harmonious whole of embodiment; embodiment as determined by the principle of torment and moral suffering [36]. For Michelangelo, aesthetics thrives within the tension and conflict between Hellenism (the classical ideals) and Christian thinking (the eternal idea).

From Socrates, Michelangelo learned that the purpose of painting was to present the human soul, the life of human souls, as an expression of the very internal being of humans. According to Néret [37], Michelangelo was interested only in the people he painted because perfect bodies were the carriers and containers of the idea of eternity and sacred soulfulness. Real art is actually only possible in sculpture when the artist reveals the essence (the soul) which is already embodied in the marble.

An example of the sexualised beautification of male nudity is the statue of David by Michelangelo. Western society often used a fig leaf to protect the male genitals. 'In an effort to hide *David's* nudity, the fig leaf draws attention to its relevance as an object of sexual desire. Furthermore, it casts nudity primarily as a matter of sexual desire, ignoring a whole spectrum of cultural, social and political ideas associated with the body' [38]. The fig leaf makes it seem as though David's body is only relevant as an object of desire. 'To the contrary, Michelangelo depicts David in a context completely unrelated to sexual desire, in the moment before he encounters the giant Goliath, right when he is focused on the awaiting battle' (**Figure 7**) [38].

Michelangelo's portrayal of David had both a spiritual and political meaning. David's nudity reflects an inner tension and spirited resourcefulness in his pose and musculature so that the good of spiritual courage can conquer the bad of unfaithful blasphemy. It represents divine faithfulness rather than violent destruction and folly (Goliath). The statue draws attention to the inner qualities of courage' resolve, and faith necessarily presupposed by David's victory. On a second level, the nude pose presents political freedom for the authorities of Florence.

The tragedy, however, was that the clergy and contemporaries of Michelangelo responded with the ugliness of moralism and skewed images of promiscuity. See in this regard, the response of the papal master of ceremonies, Biago da Cesena, when he saw the fresco of the *Last Judgement*. He declared it to be 'most disgraceful that in such a sacred place those nude figures should have been depicted all exposing themselves so shamefully' [39].

The point is that with the fig leaf, David's aesthetic beauty is changed into the ugliness of commercialised sexuality and the promiscuity of sexual desires without courageous fidelity. Nudity becomes politicised and is associated with reckless power, the vice of domination and the promiscuity of sexual exploitation. Under strict censorship, sexuality is deployed for aims of social and political powerful control.

During Pius V's pontificate, the Congregation of the Council of Trent decided, on 11th January 1564, to have the private parts covered. This was the most pornographically oriented decision in the history of Christian spirituality! Pope Paul IV therefore summoned the House of Carafa Daniele da Volterra to cover the genitals. The artist who did the covering up was given

**Figure 7.** David facing Goliath projecting noble courage (aesthetics of the human soul expressed in the beauty of male nudity) over against brutal violence (the ugliness violence and destruction). Michelangelo, copy in front of Royal Plaster Museum, Copenhagen; photo: D.J. Louw.

the name 'Braghettone', meaning 'trouser painter' [40]. The 'trouser painter' transformed the beauty of physical beauty into the ugliness of promiscuity. The fig leaf reduced the beauty of the genitals into pornographic phallicism.

of cultural, social and political ideas associated with the body' [38]. The fig leaf makes it seem as though David's body is only relevant as an object of desire. 'To the contrary, Michelangelo depicts David in a context completely unrelated to sexual desire, in the moment before he encounters the giant Goliath, right when he is focused on the awaiting battle' (**Figure 7**) [38]. Michelangelo's portrayal of David had both a spiritual and political meaning. David's nudity reflects an inner tension and spirited resourcefulness in his pose and musculature so that the good of spiritual courage can conquer the bad of unfaithful blasphemy. It represents divine faithfulness rather than violent destruction and folly (Goliath). The statue draws attention to the inner qualities of courage' resolve, and faith necessarily presupposed by David's victory. On a second level, the nude pose presents political freedom for the authorities of Florence.

The tragedy, however, was that the clergy and contemporaries of Michelangelo responded with the ugliness of moralism and skewed images of promiscuity. See in this regard, the response of the papal master of ceremonies, Biago da Cesena, when he saw the fresco of the *Last Judgement*. He declared it to be 'most disgraceful that in such a sacred place those nude

The point is that with the fig leaf, David's aesthetic beauty is changed into the ugliness of commercialised sexuality and the promiscuity of sexual desires without courageous fidelity. Nudity becomes politicised and is associated with reckless power, the vice of domination and the promiscuity of sexual exploitation. Under strict censorship, sexuality is deployed for aims

During Pius V's pontificate, the Congregation of the Council of Trent decided, on 11th January 1564, to have the private parts covered. This was the most pornographically oriented decision in the history of Christian spirituality! Pope Paul IV therefore summoned the House of Carafa Daniele da Volterra to cover the genitals. The artist who did the covering up was given

**Figure 7.** David facing Goliath projecting noble courage (aesthetics of the human soul expressed in the beauty of male nudity) over against brutal violence (the ugliness violence and destruction). Michelangelo, copy in front of Royal Plaster

figures should have been depicted all exposing themselves so shamefully' [39].

of social and political powerful control.

52 Perception of Beauty

Museum, Copenhagen; photo: D.J. Louw.
