Galilée critique d’art | Erwin Panofsky

Once again, Erwin Panofsky returns to the publishing scene. In 2016, Galilee critique d’art was again published by Les impressions nouvelles. But, in fact, it is not just Panofsky’s return. In the French-speaking world, his text was hardly ever published alone. It was almost always accompanied by either Nathalie Heinich’s foreword or Alexandre Koyré’s review, or by these two works whose considerations gained a weight almost equivalent to Panofsky’s own text. On the one hand, Heinich elucidates, in the wake of Pierre Bourdieu, the fruitful method implied in the analyzes of the art historian. On the other, Koyré affirms and unfolds the reach of Panofsky’s statements that surpass his place of comfort, those based on the field of the history of the sciences, in which Koyré is considered an authority. And this is how the texts of Heinich, Panofsky and Koyré configure what comes to us as the book Galilee critique d’art.

In this work, Panofsky presents us with a series of statements that, in any way, could be included in the foreseeable assertions. It is in the midst of a disputatio over the superiority of painting or sculpture, a field where Leonardo da Vinci once engaged, which he places the mathematical physicist Galileo Galilei. In describing him, he does not speak of physical and astronomical theories, but of artistic tastes, he speaks of a character who knew by heart the latin classics, who loved Ariosto and repudiated Tasso, who was a designer and profound connoisseur of painting – even more inclined to study it than mathematics – who was a close friend of the painter Ludovico Cigoli, and for this very reason he was involved in the battle between the partisans of the painting and the sculpture, initiated in century XV. Leia Mais