Propiedades del grafeno

A Felicitous Discovery

Sometime around 1480, construction crews refurbishing the Basilica di S. Pietro in Vincoli discovered the ruins of the Domus Aurea (64-68 CE), the palace of Nero.100 _Though initially misidentified as the Palace of Titus, the Domus Aurea gripped the imagination of Renaissance Rome. Artists such as Raphael and Giovanni da Udine participated in tours of the rooms, only accessible by tunnels. The subterranean frescos, left unexposed atmospheric

variations in temperature and humidity, retained their brilliant colors and fine details in a way not seen in ancient painting before this time.101 _{The frescos are rich in ornament. Friezes, coffers,} and bands surrounded by patterns of figures frame the mythological scenes of the ceilings (Fig. 14).102 _{The initial fascination with these ornamental framing devices, which developed at their} discovery, continued to impact artistic and architectural practices in the sixteenth and early- seventeenth century. Pinturicchio’s Piccolomini Library in the Siena Cathedral (c. 1501-1506), with its dizzying array of encircling ornamental bands stands as one example (Fig. 15).103 _The framing elements of the ceiling of the Domus Aurea was part of the matrix of the visual arena of

100 _{Michael Squire, “‘Fantasies so Varied and Bizarre’: The Domus Aurea, the Renaissance, and the ‘Grotesque,’” in}

A Companion to the Neronian Age, ed. Emma Buckley and Martin Dinter (Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley- Blackwell, 2013), 446-447.

101 _{Ibid, 450.} 102 _{Ibid, 444.} 103 _{Ibid, 452.}

display façades. Quotations of this enframing ornament exist in the predecessors and

contemporaries of the Casino dell’Aurora discussed in previous chapters. The framing devices of the antique fragments emulate the frescos of the Domus Aurea. The façade of the Casino

dell’Aurora implements framing devices; however, it draws on the imagery of the sarcophagi panels themselves to create a composition that hinges on the ornamental effect of the panels.

A Framework for Ornament

In the past few decades, architectural historians, particularly those interested in early modern Europe, have developed a renewed interest in engagement with ornament.104 _{In a move} that builds upon the detailed formal studies of Alois Riegl in the nineteenth century, new scholarship seeks to critically analyze the relationships between ornament and the fundamental facets of human experience, including power structures, self-defining practices, and cross- cultural exchange.105 _{Architecture receives particular focus in the new study of ornament, in part} because it is such a public and visible art. Architectural ornament also comes to the fore in response to the twentieth century condemnation of ornament incited by the work of Adolf Loos.106 _{In this section, I examine three authors’ theorization of ornament to situate my} discussion of the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora.

I look to Coomaraswamy’s 1939 essay, “Ornament,” for the foundations of the art historical analysis of the significance of ornament.107 _{According to Coomaraswamy, the modern}

104 _{Necipoğlu and Payne, 1.} 105 _{Ibid, 1-4.}

106 _{In his 1913 essay, “Ornament and Crime,” Loos responds to the highly ornamented architecture of Art Nouveau.}

He advocates for smooth surfaces, devoid of ornament. For Loos, ornament dated buildings and would eventually render them obsolete. Furthermore, he attributed a sense of degeneracy and immorality to ornament. By suppressing such degeneracy, Loos argued that modern society could be regulated. He concluded that “…Freedom from

ornament is a sign of spiritual strength.”

understanding of decoration is that it is not an essential or necessary part of an object. Words used to describe ornament in 1939 connoted luxuriousness does not add to the utility or efficacy of the object. Coomaraswamy challenges the application of this modern notion of ornament to premodern art, arguing that these words originally implied “a completion or fulfilment” of the object. Essentially, he finds that to conceptually divorce ornament from utility would have been inconceivable in pre-modern periods.108 _{Coomaraswamy guides us through a series of}

philological observation for the Indo-European language family that articulate how ornament fulfills objects. His understanding of the Sanskrit word, alamkāra, which translates to ornament, is his most effective example. Coomaraswamy notes that the word is broken down to “sufficient” and “make,” or in other words, to make sufficient.109 _{Ornamenting an object makes it sufficient;} it completes its articulation. In completing the articulation of the object, ornament empowers the object.

In The Mediation of Ornament (1992) Oleg Grabar argues that decoration and ornament differ fundamentally. Decoration comprises anything applied to the structure of an object that is not necessary for the stability, use, or understanding of the object.110 _{Ornament, as a definition, is} a motif that has no referent outside of the object on which it is found.111 _{Grabar then explains} that ornament is an aspect of decoration with the sole purpose of enhancing the object or structure.112 _{He notes that decoration and ornament are identified by what they do not do –}

108 _{Ibid, 375-376.} 109 _{Ibid, 377.}

110 _{Grabar, xxiii-xxiv.}

111 _{Grabar makes an exception for technical manuals demonstrating ornament, xxiv.}

represent or signify something else.113 _{Grabar argues that artists do not repeat formulas when} making ornamented work, but consciously create.114 _{He finds that formal distinctions carry} multitudinous meanings, even if we do not possess the tools to understand why. In the study of the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora, Grabar’s understanding allows for characterization of the creation of multivalent meanings in the ornamental quality of the abstracted sarcophagi reliefs.

Grabar concedes that decoration “seems to complete an object,” through the quality that it provides.115 _{Each example of decoration may provide a different “quality” to the work. He finds} that organizational and compositional characteristics of decoration, such as sizes or locations of marks, exist in a separate sphere of logic from the subject matter of the work of art. For Grabar, these visual components demonstrate a hierarchy of importance of the decorative motifs to the viewer.116 _{He also introduces the term “terpnopoietic,” which he describes as a “neologism to} mean ‘providing pleasure.’”117 _{Decoration and ornament, until proven otherwise, at least provide} pleasure. Because the Casino dell’Aurora sits within the garden of a luxury palace, meant to provide an escape from summer heat, the role of pleasure cannot go unnoted.

The third approach that I look to is Jonathan Hay’s essay, “The Passage of the Other: Elements for a Redefinition of Ornament” (2016). Hay proposes that ornament is the

“affirmation and articulation of surface.”118 _{As an articulation of surface, ornament and surface}

113 _{Ibid, 9.} 114 _{Ibid, 16.} 115 _{Ibid, 25.} 116 _{Ibid, 30.} 117 _{Ibid, 37.} 118 _{Hay, 64.}

are one. Thus, ornament participates in the articulation of the form of the object. It is a three- dimensional logic, rather than a two-dimensional pattern applied to the surface. 119 _{He also} asserts that treatment of iconographic elements of ornament can efface the sensory experience of form.120 _{In this essay, Hay advocates for a more holistic approach to ornament as an integral} aspect of an object or structure – ornament as part of the artwork, rather than a veneer. Hay’s conception of ornament is vital to the study of the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora. The façade of the Casino dell’Aurora presents the viewer with narrative reliefs brimming with iconography. Researchers have expended great efforts to interpret the iconography and narrative presented in sarcophagi panels, as seen in the brief surveys of the Casino dell’Aurora and the work of Bober and Rubinstein.121 _{In this effort, scholarship focusing on the iconography of the sarcophagi} panels can minimize the importance of the sensory experience of the composition of the façade.

In pursuing ornament, my overall goal is to move beyond an examination of the

iconography of the sarcophagi as a locus for meaning and attraction in the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora. I aim for a more holistic approach to the façade that incorporates both the

antiquarian significance of the sarcophagi panels and their abstracted, ornamental function. I posit that ornament, a quality of the surface of the structure, is one way in which the façade is articulated and made complete. As in Grabar’s characterization, the reliefs carry multivalent and mutable meanings rooted in their iconography, their reuse value, and their usage as ornament.122

119 _{Hay also remarks that the aforementioned motifs may contribute to that limit, 62-64.} 120 _{Grabar, 18-19.}

121 _{Koortbojian, Myth, Meaning, and Memory on Roman Sarcophagi, 4-5.}

122 _{In Refiguring the Post Classical City: Dura Europe, Jerash, Jerusalem and Ravenna, Wharton notes that}

research seeking to identify singular meanings of iconographic images often give too much power to literary texts and can repress alternative interpretations. She terms these acts “scholarly policing”; 42-45. In recognizing the multiple, dynamic meanings of the sarcophagi panels and the façade, I hope to avoid such issues. Annabel Jane

Working in concert with the iconographic nature of the sarcophagi panels, ornament is critical to the aesthetic of the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora.

Casino dell’Aurora

The liveliness of the imagery of second- and third-century Roman sarcophagi is

undeniable. Figures actively twist, bend, leap, and gesture across the deeply carved surfaces of the sarcophagi as they act out auspicious myths. As I have noted previously, the iconographic and narrative imagery of sarcophagi panels allowed sarcophagi to operate as functional and appropriate tombs in Roman society. In their original cultural context, their iconographic imagery articulated the sarcophagi and created a culture-specific meaning. The lengthy journey through time and/or space that the panels embedded in the Casino dell’Aurora façade embarked upon to reach the point of reuse may have made them more alluring and valuable, but also may have rendered the iconography unreadable as it would have been to ancient Romans.123 _{In each} stage of reuse, whether in the collection of a church or incorporated into the wall of a structure, the iconography of the panels is reinterpreted within the frameworks of its current cultural context.

In cultures that value antiquarianism the acts of collecting, possessing, curating, and displaying objects from the past are significant. As we have seen, palaces and villas

contemporaneous with the Casino dell’Aurora utilize sarcophagi panels in a public display of patrons’ ability to collect fashionable art-objects. Implicit in the collections are the wealth and status of the collectors. Not only were they able to collect stylish antique statuary, they were also able to disburse large amounts of funds to construct palaces displaying said antiquities. In the

Wharton, Refiguring the Post Classical City: Dura Europe, Jerash, Jerusalem and Ravenna (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995).

façades and courtyards of buildings such as the Palazzo Mattei and the Villa Medici, the separation between the sarcophagi panels allows for individual viewing of iconography and narrative, a function of the collection-style display of the panels.

The composition of the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora allows for allows for another type of viewing. Because of the sarcophagi panels’ arrangement within the façade, they function multivalently. Unlike in the courtyard of the Palazzo Mattei, the panels in the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora are not provided with large amounts of space for separate viewing. Instead, they are compressed within the façade in a way that creates an active composition. The

sarcophagi panels no longer act as images of iconographic narrative alone; they also operate as ornament. In this ornamental mode, they continue to reflect the wealth, power, and prestige of Cardinal Borghese.

Less accessible to the unaided eye, the detailed iconography of the mythological figures can transform into abstracted textures woven into the surface of the façade, while still maintain legibility as repurposed antiques. This transformation does not mute the panels. The highly energetic lines of the panels contrast distinctly with the repeated rectangular forms that construct the façade, retaining and transforming their vibrant potency. Their animated surfaces attract the gaze of the viewer and affirm the high quality of the luxurious reliefs. Cardinal Borghese’s ability to obtain and display such costly antiquities in the courtyard of his palace speaks to his place within the society of Rome and the Church, as well as his family’s wealth and nobility. The sarcophagi panels in the façade of the Casino dell’Aurora denote this reality through their

existence as ornament. In capturing the viewer’s attention through this tension, the façade seizes a moment in which it can fulfill the action of conveying a message about the social status of Cardinal Borghese. Ultimately, the composition of the façade relies on the visual tension created

by the integration of rectangular, geometric forms and the blurring of the relief carvings into organic, ripple-like forms.

Regardless of the viewer’s awareness of the mythology presented in the reliefs of the sarcophagi panels, they act to communicate Cardinal Borghese’s prestige. A knowledgeable viewer, for example, a humanist scholar or another prince of the Church, standing in the garden would be familiar with the textured reliefs of pagan sarcophagi and their function as containers for the dead. For this viewer, the reliefs would create an aura of antique refinement essential for visual pleasure in a garden of the period. However, he would also know that these revetments cost Cardinal Borghese a great deal to obtain and install, and would develop an understanding of the cardinal from this knowledge. Viewers less conversant in the classical revival style might be familiar with the general nature of antiquities – or fashionable copies – and would also glean an understanding of Borghese’s social and financial command.124 _{The sarcophagi’s action can be} effective for even the most unfamiliar viewers. As Michael Baxandall makes clear, premodern laypeople of their time were acutely aware of both the time and financial cost of producing material goods.125 _{The rich relief carvings of the casino façade, convey intricacy from their} height above the viewer. This intricacy can only be obtained through many man-hours of skilled labor, which was especially expensive in the early seventeenth century. Cardinal Borghese’s ability to afford building with such lavish materials, regardless of their period of origin, speaks volumes to his status within Roman ecclesiastical and aristocratic society.

124 _{Greenhalgh, 90. Greenhalgh reminds us that it is “not necessary to believe that every…Christian in the Italian}

peninsula had any clear ideas about the pagan or early Christian past.” They lived in a landscape populated with ancient structures, especially within the city of Rome.

None of these proposed viewing scenarios require Borghese to verbally explain the iconography or figural representations of the panels for the ornamental sarcophagi to do their work. The abstracted figures, now fully realized as architectural ornament, effectively

communicate without distinctive references to a narrative. Standing before the one-story façade of the casino, the viewer is able to read the panels of sarcophagi in multiple ways. Still legible as narrative imagery to the learned viewer, the carvings can also be received as architectural

ornament. The inclusion of sarcophagi panels in the walls of a building, as seen in the Casino dell’Aurora, is a common occurrence from the fifteenth through seventeenth centuries, especially in regions occupied by the Roman Empire in the late second and third century, during the peak of the popularity of carving-rich sarcophagi. Along with the value arising from their rich

iconography and connections to the Roman past, the sarcophagi panels can also be understood in their new context, as architectural ornament vital to the communicative purposes of the Casino dell’Aurora. In their current context, the figures of the panels can become non-figural, melding into ornament critical to the structure and visual tension of the façade. Through their

iconography, value as antiquities, and ornamental function, the panels demonstrate the elevated social standing of the casino’s patron within the larger framework of the façade.

CONCLUSION