by Jeremy Miller | 7 June 2011 | Books, Career, Renaissance
When I learned of John T. Spike’s Young Michelangelo: The Path to the Sistine after it was published last year, I immediately thought of Andrew Graham-Dixon’s 2008 book Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel, and Ross King’s Michelangelo and the Pope’s Ceiling of 2003. While I admit that much of the publishing world remains obscure to me, it is surprising to me that three books would be published over a relatively short time span which cover essentially the same period of the same artist, without great differences of methodology, content, or conclusions.
It is true that the books do emphasize different aspects of the story (each of them treats Michelangelo’s career in the years leading up to his painting of the Sistine chapel ceiling as a narrative). King’s book describes a troubled three-way relationship involving Michelangelo, Pope Julius II, and the ceiling itself, with various supporting cast members. It’s narrative arc is strong, and it is a quick, engaging read. The first half of Graham-Dixon’s book is essentially a condensed version of the first third of King’s, while the second half contains a concise and thoughtful analysis of the subjects, form, and content of the ceiling itself, which somehow remains in the background of King’s book. Spike’s work focuses closely on the artist’s life and works before the Sistine, providing a fuller account, but one which is inevitably somewhat repetitive to readers of King and Graham-Dixon.
Is the market for Michelangelo big enough to support such frequent publication? Are the three studies fundamentally different, mutually supportive, and hence each worthy of publication, economics aside? Or does the repetition of subject matter actually support each of the books, both in terms of esteem and sales?
I read Ross King’s book a year or two ago, and I recalled a Vatican museum “tour guide” I engaged for my art history class in ’05. As far as I can remember, His information is well-corroborated in King. In April, I made a quick and somewhat shallow perusal of a book of Michelangelo’s writings/letters/poetry, and decided that I know enough for now. Rona Goffen’s 2002 “Renaissance Rivals” (Yale) pretty much puts M. as the man to beat in those days. I haven’t finished it, but it’s a fun read.