Abstract EN:

Is the frame only a contingent parergon of the painted surface, and the painting on easel of the quattrocento the mere reflection of the rising power of the merchant class, or else, on the opposite, the opposite, the symbolical and metaphysical shape in which and through which painting, finally coming into being as a complete art, fulfils and unveils its true essence? what then is the nature of painting, the centrifugal and centripetal force that gives life and magnetizes all pictorial poiesis? through an analysis of the laws of the development of painting, from the tombs of ancien aegypt to the roman-aegyptian portraits from fayoum, this first volume will show that painting is the most adequatte art to express the feeling of spiritual individuality. Colouring will always undermine the rules of the arts that try to jugulate it, announce political upheavals or new visions of the world, as if magnetized by the paradigmatic shape of the painting that will come to life during the peloponnesian war, which exacerbates the individualism praised by the sophists, through the brushes of the greek painters of the second half of the fifth century before christ. Plato, who thinks of painting in terms of the philosophy of protagoras, is the first to see in it the katoptron of individuality, and therefore bans from the city both doxocalos painter and sophist doxomimetos. What then does the painter paint? what visions from painter, model and spectator are here patiently interwoven? therefore shouldn't one see in the portrait, or, more precisely, in self portrait, the core of painting and in the narcissus in pompei and in ovide the telos of all ancient painting?