Abstract
Historically, the marble sculptures of Antonio Canova (1757-1822) have been criticized from two opposite standpoints. On the one hand, Canova's severely neo-classicist contemporaries were critical of the exquisitely finished surfaces and the quality of sensuality of his work. Modernist art historians, on the other hand, decried a cold academicism in Canova's work. We should note, however, that these apparently divergent criticisms both take as their essential premise the transparency of the material surface. Moreover, they adhere to Albertian notions regarding the proper distance between the viewer and the work and the appreciation of simple sculptural outline (neo-classicists) on the one hand and the perception of the artist's self beneath the surface of the work (modernists) on the other. In Quatremere de Quincy's (1755-1849) defense of Canova's work, however, we find a fluid approach to sculptural appreciation which is bound to neither of these fixed views. In some cases, Quatremere sought out sculptural outline and in others he strained his eyes to see the modulation of the surface. Although we should not limit Quatremere's attitudes merely to the issue of the criticism, we should recognize that it was only by being stimulated by the surfaces of canova's sculpture in the first place that Quatremere formulated his approach.
