Giorgione | Page 4

600).
[8] The name "Giorgione" signifies "Big George." But it seems to have
been also his father's name.
[9] This visitation claimed no less than 20,000 victims.
[10] See Gronau, op. cit. Tradition has been exceptionally busy over
Giorgione's affairs. The story goes that he died of grief at being
betrayed by his friend and pupil, Morto da Feltre, who had robbed him
of his mistress. This is now proved false by the document quoted in the
Appendix.
CHAPTER II
GENERALLY ACCEPTED WORKS
Such, then, very briefly, are the facts of Giorgione's life recorded by the
older biographers, or known by contemporary documents. Now let us
turn to his artistic remains, the disjecta membra, out of which we may
reconstruct something of the man himself; for, to those who can
interpret it aright, a man's work is his best autobiography.
This is especially true in the case of an artist of Giorgione's
temperament, for his expression is so peculiarly personal, so highly

charged with individuality, that every product of mental activity
becomes a revelation of the man himself. People like Giorgione must
express themselves in certain ways, and these ways are therefore
characteristic. Some people regard a work of art as something external;
a great artist, they say, can vary his productions at will, he can paint in
any style he chooses. But the exact contrary is the truth. The greater the
artist, the less he can divest himself of his own personality; his work
may vary in degree of excellence, but not in kind. The real reason,
therefore, why it is impossible for certain pictures to be by Giorgione is,
not that they are not good enough for him, but that they are not
characteristic. I insist on this point, because in the matter of
genuineness the touchstone of authenticity is so often to be looked for
in an answer to the question: Is this or that characteristic? The personal
equation is the all-important factor to be recognised; it is the
connecting link which often unites apparently diverse phenomena, and
explains what would otherwise appear to be irreconcilable.
There is an intimate relation then between the artist and his work, and,
rightly interpreted, the latter can tell us much about the former.
Let us turn to Giorgione's work. Here we are brought face to face with
an initial difficulty, the great difficulty, in fact, which has stood so
much in the way of a more comprehensive understanding of the master,
I mean, that scarcely anything of his work is authenticated. Three
pictures alone have never been called in question by contending critics;
outside this inner ring is more or less debatable ground, and on this
wider arena the battle has raged until scarcely a shred of the painter's
work has emerged unscathed. The result has been to reduce the figure
of Giorgione to a shadowy myth, whose very existence, at the present
rate at which negative criticism progresses, will assuredly be called in
question.
If Bacon wrote Shakespeare, then Giorgione can be divided up between
a dozen Venetian artists, who "painted Giorgione." Fortunately three
pictures survive which refuse to be fitted in anywhere else except under
"Giorgione." This is the irreducible minimum, [Greek: o anankaiotatos]
Giorgione, with which we must start.

* * * * *
Of the three universally accepted pictures, first and foremost comes the
Castelfranco altar-piece, according to Mr. Ruskin "one of the two most
perfect pictures in existence; alone in the world as an imaginative
representation of Christianity, with a monk and a soldier on either
side ... "[11] This great picture was painted before 1504, when the artist
was only twenty-seven years of age,[12] a fact which clearly proves
that his genius must have developed early. For not even a Giorgione
can produce such a masterpiece without a long antecedent course of
training and accomplishment. This is not the place to inquire into the
nature and character of the works which lead up to this altar-piece, for a
chronological survey ought to follow, not precede, an examination of
all available material; it is important, nevertheless, to bear in mind that
quite ten years had been passed in active work ere Giorgione produced
this masterpiece.
If no other evidence were forthcoming as to the sort of man the painter
was, this one production of his would for ever stamp him as a person of
exquisite feeling. There is a reserve, almost a reticence, in the way the
subject is presented, which indicates a refined mind. An atmosphere of
serenity pervades the scene, which conveys a sense of personal
tranquillity and calm. The figures are absorbed in their own thoughts;
they stand isolated apart, as though the painter wishes to intensify the
mood of dreamy abstraction. Nothing disquieting disturbs the scene,
which is one of profound reverie. All