Michelangelo's Captives Essay

Michelangelo's statues could be said to personify ideas found in Philosophy. To what extent do the statues of the captives develop themes of the Renaissance, the artist, as well as reflect dualist ideas about human identity?

Michelangelo di Lodovico Buanarroti Simoni, or as we know him, Michelangelo was an artist whom embodied the Renaissance more than any other master of his time. Works of art such as the David, the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and the Creation of Adam are the pinnacle of this. Compared to his ethereal statue of David, Michelangelo’s Slaves seem less than exciting. But they reveal ideas that extend beyond the confines of their stone. The captive forms of Michelangelo’s “Slaves” embody what it means to be a human during the Renaissance on a historical, personal and moral level.

In the 21^st century, Michelangelo is a household name and a very well-known man. But perhaps there was another side to him, a side that can be seen in the crude stone of the captives. In the finished statue of the “Dying Slave”, the man has a free and almost erotic air. He is stripping himself of his clothes, his eyes closed, a hip tilting outward and his hands touching his chest and head. Michelangelo has created a human in the deep end of its desire, which is in itself another form of being prisoner, something that will be touched on later. Contrastingly, this man surrounded by crude stone weighing down on him expresses an energy of trying to shed his stone weights. It is this man that I would see as being identified with Michelangelo himself. He may have allowed this figure to remain bound to the stone for a very personal reason. Michelangelo was a rumoured homosexual, closeted, as would be expected at the peak of a heavily Christian society. Perhaps the bearded man in this statue, with no identifiable face, whom is not only trapped but weighed down by the stone, could be a very heavy (literally and figuratively) metaphor for the trapped state of Michelangelo’s sexuality in the years of the Renaissance. In this circumstance Michelangelo would be ashamed of his sexuality, which would not be surprising, for as was before mentioned, society was predominantly Christian and Michelangelo a very religious man. But if we are to dispel the snag of sexuality in the bible, which Michelangelo may very well have done to reconcile his homosexuality, then perhaps the captive in the stone is not being held back by this crude weight. Perhaps it is the fact that Michelangelo is willing to allow the raw stone to remain visible that should be recognized. Michelangelo has said: “I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free.” This captive is being carved from himself, into himself and the stone that is left is still a part of him. It may remain there, shrouding himself and perhaps he is struggling against it, but he cannot be captive by a part of himself. He must only allow himself to accept it.

The finished statue of the “Dying Slave” would be my model for the embodiment of dualist ideas about the human identity. This erotic man has a very internalized air. His eyes are closed, he seems to be lost, or captive, in another place. As seems the natural way of things, we will return to Plato for this comparison. For Plato, desire and sensation, which materializes as the body, must be controlled by reason, the mind. The body is the machine and the mind is the driver, the captain and the mechanic. As they were described before, the Slaves can both be seen as being captive of their desires. One, in his trance-like, almost erotic state, seems to be cut off by his sensations from the outside world. The other is perhaps more metaphorical, the raw stone being desire and the man being reason, suppressed by it, the only way to get out is if the mind of the sculptor is put to use and frees him from his hefty desires.  Drawing from Kantian morality we can also critique the nature of Michelangelo’s slaves. Kant says: “Unless reason takes the reins of government into its own hands, the feelings and inclinations play the master over the man.” This slave is most certainly mastered by his sensations. But the natures of the slaves could be praised by some philosophers as well. For Hume, the duality is flipped and these statues would be seen as very human indeed. As Michelangelo’s David is the ‘ideal man’ in a physical sense, the Slaves would represent the ideal of the human spirit. In the Dying Slave’s captivation in his sensation, he is simply realizing his human nature. His reason comes second to his base desires, inclinations and experiences and it is these things that motivate his behaviour.

The statues also embody wider social concerns of the Renaissance. Humanism was a system of thought fundamental to the nature of the Renaissance. “Man is the measure of all things” and other new philosophical ideas related back to this idea that highlighted man as the ultimate and perfect power. In the most obvious dissection of the statues, humanism is still present. As you look at them, you begin to forget, with the incredible anatomical detail that they behold, that they were once stone. It is clearly a remarkable human achievement that someone could sculpt his own image from a rock. The statues have expressive bodies, showing the physical extension of humanity. Taking from the idea that the unfinished rock in the statues seems to be what is imprisoning these captives, we can imagine another metaphor in their construction. The title “Dying Slave” is given to the finished model while the “Undying Slave” is grotesquely imprisoned in his rock. From a humanist perspective, the rock would be the suppressant confines of religion. The “Undying Slave” is confined in his rock, religion holding him back from the glory that he could be on his own. He is “undying” because of this belief in religion, of something further beyond, but it is something that makes him less of what he is, less human and it physically holds him back from his potential. On the other hand, the “Dying Slave”, the mortal man, lives freely in his human form, unrestricted by any external force.

Michelangelo may have had in mind some very deep and engaging philosophies, metaphors and ideas when creating the “Slaves”. On a personal level, the captives could be a way of either condemning or expressing his homosexuality. When relating the nature of the statues to dualist ideas on human identity, we judge them in a Platonic, Kantian and Humean sense. Finally, when looking at the grander scheme of things, the statues represent the humanist thoughts that prevailed throughout the Renaissance. Though the carved forms of the Slaves may be overshadowed by other great works of the time, their undeniable humanity makes them a work of art that extends beyond their material and their age, and gives us much to reflect on what it meant to be a human like Michelangelo during the years of the Renaissance.