Vividness, voice, and the imagination according to Petrarch. Issue 2 (3rd April 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chen, Andrew
• Is Part Of: Word & image. Volume 33:Issue 2(2017)
• Page Start: 127
• Page End: 137
• Publication Date: 2017-04-03
• Subjects: Petrarch -- portraiture -- Quintilian -- vividness -- ekphrasis -- sound -- imagination; Arts -- Periodicals; Communication in art -- Periodicals; 700.5
• DOI: 10.1080/02666286.2016.1276822
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0266-6286

Abstract

Abstract: The silence of Petrarch's picture of Laura lamented in poem 78 is normally viewed as an argument for the superiority of poetry over painting. It is true that in this poem the image of Laura seems to listen but not to speak, whereas, in other poems, the verbal representation of the woman speaks freely. This article argues that Petrarch's writings about images employ fragile silences for carefully deliberated expressive purposes. It is shown that attention to questions of sound in vivid description was something that Petrarch learned from Quintilian. He would also have noted the sounds reported in the ekphrases of Homer, Virgil, and Catullus. Dante and Petrarch used the subjunctive in their writings on vivid images to convey the idea that pictures only seemed like they could speak. The almost-speaking topos was taken up by later humanist poets. The article examines the different configurations of verbal and visual description and argues that potential discrepancies between them were resolved using the imagination.