What do you think?
Rate this book
Michelangelo: His Epic Life
At thirty one, Michelangelo was considered the finest artist in Italy, perhaps the world; long before he died at almost 90 he was widely believed to be the greatest sculptor or painter who had ever lived (and, by his enemies, to be an arrogant, uncouth, swindling miser).For decade after decade, he worked near the dynamic centre of the vortex at which European history was changing from Renaissance to Counter Reformation. Few of his works - including the huge frescoes of the Sistine Chapel Ceiling, the marble giant David and the Last Judgment - were small or easy to accomplish. Like a hero of classical mythology - such as Hercules, whose statue he carved in his youth - he was subject to constant trials and labours.In Michelangelo Martin Gayford describes what it felt like to be Michelangelo Buonarroti, and how he transformed forever our notion of what an artist could be.
648 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 24, 2013
168 people are currently reading
1145 people want to read
About the author
Martin Gayford
57 books138 followersMartin Gayford is an art critic and art historian. He studied philosophy at the University of Cambridge, and art history at the Courtauld Institute of Art at the University of London. Over three decades, he has written prolifically about art and music in a series of major biographies, as well as contributing regularly to newspapers, magazines and exhibition catalogues. In parallel with his career as an art historian, he was art critic of The Spectator magazine and The Sunday Telegraph newspaper before becoming Chief Art Critic for the international television network, Bloomberg News. He has been a regular contributor to the British journal of art criticism, Modern Painters.
His books include a study of Van Gogh and Gauguin in Arles, The Yellow House: Van Gogh, Gauguin, and Nine Turbulent Weeks in Arles (Little Brown, 2006), which was published in Britain and the USA to critical acclaim, and has been translated, to date, into five languages; Constable in Love: Love, Landscape, Money and the Making of a Great Painter (Penguin, 2009), a study of John Constable’s romance with Maria Bicknell and their lives between 1809 and 1816; and A Bigger Message: Conversations with David Hockney (Thames and Hudson, 2011).
His books include a study of Van Gogh and Gauguin in Arles, The Yellow House: Van Gogh, Gauguin, and Nine Turbulent Weeks in Arles (Little Brown, 2006), which was published in Britain and the USA to critical acclaim, and has been translated, to date, into five languages; Constable in Love: Love, Landscape, Money and the Making of a Great Painter (Penguin, 2009), a study of John Constable’s romance with Maria Bicknell and their lives between 1809 and 1816; and A Bigger Message: Conversations with David Hockney (Thames and Hudson, 2011).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
May 30, 2021
Michelangelo: An Epic Life by Martin Gayford is an insightful and objective portrait of one of the greatest artists. We are taken into the heart of 15-16th century Florence, the backdrop to one of the biggest cultural revolutions and to the genius of a man who was one of those who made Renaissance what it was. Written more like a story, we are given an in-depth look into Michelangelo’s insecurities and triumphs; his jealousies and fears, as he was living and working in a time marked by wars and political turbulence one one hand, and vision and creativity on the other.
Visit my Bookstagram for more book reviews:
Literarianism
Visit my Bookstagram for more book reviews:
Literarianism
April 18, 2024
This is a reread, and I've upped my score from three stars to four. Because it's a perfectly decent read. If you haven't read a biography of Michelangelo before. If you have you won't find much that's new. But it's an excellent starting point. And the writing is pretty good. Okay, many of the more incisive insights are quotes from other people. And like nearly every biography of the past 20 years, the ending is rushed (and jumps backwards and forwards in time). Over time I've become more of a da Vinci fan than a Michelangelo. But there's no doubting the immense talent. La Pietà is a stunning masterpiece. It has a da Vinci refinement, which is quite unlike Michelangelo's more muscular work. And provides proof that he was capable of recreating womankind in all her femininity. The female figures that come after it - whether they be in stone or paint - look like something from the Miss Universe contest. The man had obviously not seen or been intimate with too many women's breasts. Not altogether surprising.
June 17, 2021
There are those who think biographies are unnecessary, that the work/oeuvre of a person by itself is already enough to understand and interpret it. Others enjoy it and think biographies bring a wider vision to the work being developed/produced by the individual. I am in the second group, I enjoy biographies and I believe they can give us a much better comprehension of the context (historical/social/artistic/humanistic/political/scientific/etc.,) that surrounds the individual. We were not born alone, we don't create out of the vacuum (nothingness). There is always a context, a pre-existent knowledge, a public domain, and those and much more guide any of us into developing our capabilities and creating, inventing, bringing out oeuvres into existence. Sure, not all biographies are good, there are those rubish, editorial ones that are meant to bring revenues mostly. But when a good biography is brought out, it shall be appraised.
This is the case with Gayford's Michelangelo. I admit that I had my doubts in the beginning. It had its flaws, but even then, it is understandable. In the case of Michelangelo, regardless of the documental sources that we have today, still, much of it has to be guessed or interpreted in the light of the life of the artist.
Michelangelo was one of a kind. He was known for his terribilità, translated both in his quite difficult character, but also in the awe his art provoked in the beholder. Different from his contemporaries Leonardo da Vinci and Rafaello Sanzio, who never minded being courtesans to achieve protection and financial support to sponsor their work and their lives, Michelangelo hardly needed that. Pope Julius II knew it very well, having to almost bend over the artist to achieve his acceptance to work for him. And so he did it with most of the other 6 popes he worked for. But this is where biography is necessary to understand the reasons why.
Michelangelo's work is authorial, he had to believe in what he was creating, thus be given free course to create it. There is a reason why the virgin is bigger than the Christ in the Pietà; there is a reason why David's head seems bigger than his body; there is a reason for the nudes in the Sistine Chapel. The horns in the head of Mose have their reason to be. The cornice in the Palazzo Farnese does not respect Vitruvius laws (so dear to da Vinci)? Well, let's do it anyway. Michelangelo was almost an anatomist, he could see a body inside a marble stone. And this conception involves almost all of his work, even the way he drew Saint Peter's Basilic. And it is because of this that his oeuvre outshone and broke with the traditions. His work pre-announces a new era, the baroque, and has had influence even in the works of modern artists like Matisse. He considered himself a sculptor, yet his paintings and architecture are heavenly. He was not an engineer, yet, it was the fortress he drew that allowed Florence to stand against the forces of the emperor Carlos V. He didn't have a good acknowledgment of Latin and the letters, yet he was a praised poet.
On the other hand, he was a traditionalist when it came to family matters, he was his family breadwinner, with a family that always asked more and more of him (financially speaking, too). He was told to be a miser for the way he lived and for not spending much on him himself, being one of the richest artists of the renaissance. Yet, he would help those who were around him. For those, one has to consider his life was centered in his creation and the well-being of his beloved ones, and he had horror just to think of being a courtesan, spending precious time talking nonsense with the pope or high authorities of the church. Even his beloved ones, Tommaso dei Cavalieri and Vittoria Colonna had to endure his terribilità. Yet, it is because I understand his character that Michelangelo became even greater to me. His art is glorious, universal.
Another point of interest in this biography is that Gayford sheds light on the social and political setting that permeates Michelangelo's long life (he died close to be 89), allowing the reader to have important clues to understand Italy in the renaissance and Michelangelo tendency for a republican government.
Of course, the book is much more than this simple review, and the last comment is that Gayford doesn't commit a serious mistake that Isaacson did in his Leonardo da Vinci: to compare both artists. Gayford has a chapter in his book about the ever discussed conflict between the two artists, but whereas Isaacson, who seemed to me to have fallen deeply in love with his biographed subject, elects Leonardo above all, Gayford simply and interestingly describes the settings and happenings concerned the two great artists, not electing his preferred one and this, by itself, talks wonders to me. Both are simply great but in each in their own way. Leonardo proclaimed himself an engineer and was more of a scientist, whereas Michelangelo considered himself a sculptor and was more of an artist. Both brought a new breath of clearer air to the world they belonged to and to posteriority. I am unable to compare both of them, though I clearly appreciate Michelangelo's troubled character. But this is not the case for comparing their oeuvre, because their lives were not a match, a competition, a soccer game we have our preferences and cheer for the victory of one upon the other. This is all nonsense. For, when we take both for their greateness, the world is much much more rich and glorious.
This is the case with Gayford's Michelangelo. I admit that I had my doubts in the beginning. It had its flaws, but even then, it is understandable. In the case of Michelangelo, regardless of the documental sources that we have today, still, much of it has to be guessed or interpreted in the light of the life of the artist.
Michelangelo was one of a kind. He was known for his terribilità, translated both in his quite difficult character, but also in the awe his art provoked in the beholder. Different from his contemporaries Leonardo da Vinci and Rafaello Sanzio, who never minded being courtesans to achieve protection and financial support to sponsor their work and their lives, Michelangelo hardly needed that. Pope Julius II knew it very well, having to almost bend over the artist to achieve his acceptance to work for him. And so he did it with most of the other 6 popes he worked for. But this is where biography is necessary to understand the reasons why.
Michelangelo's work is authorial, he had to believe in what he was creating, thus be given free course to create it. There is a reason why the virgin is bigger than the Christ in the Pietà; there is a reason why David's head seems bigger than his body; there is a reason for the nudes in the Sistine Chapel. The horns in the head of Mose have their reason to be. The cornice in the Palazzo Farnese does not respect Vitruvius laws (so dear to da Vinci)? Well, let's do it anyway. Michelangelo was almost an anatomist, he could see a body inside a marble stone. And this conception involves almost all of his work, even the way he drew Saint Peter's Basilic. And it is because of this that his oeuvre outshone and broke with the traditions. His work pre-announces a new era, the baroque, and has had influence even in the works of modern artists like Matisse. He considered himself a sculptor, yet his paintings and architecture are heavenly. He was not an engineer, yet, it was the fortress he drew that allowed Florence to stand against the forces of the emperor Carlos V. He didn't have a good acknowledgment of Latin and the letters, yet he was a praised poet.
On the other hand, he was a traditionalist when it came to family matters, he was his family breadwinner, with a family that always asked more and more of him (financially speaking, too). He was told to be a miser for the way he lived and for not spending much on him himself, being one of the richest artists of the renaissance. Yet, he would help those who were around him. For those, one has to consider his life was centered in his creation and the well-being of his beloved ones, and he had horror just to think of being a courtesan, spending precious time talking nonsense with the pope or high authorities of the church. Even his beloved ones, Tommaso dei Cavalieri and Vittoria Colonna had to endure his terribilità. Yet, it is because I understand his character that Michelangelo became even greater to me. His art is glorious, universal.
Another point of interest in this biography is that Gayford sheds light on the social and political setting that permeates Michelangelo's long life (he died close to be 89), allowing the reader to have important clues to understand Italy in the renaissance and Michelangelo tendency for a republican government.
Of course, the book is much more than this simple review, and the last comment is that Gayford doesn't commit a serious mistake that Isaacson did in his Leonardo da Vinci: to compare both artists. Gayford has a chapter in his book about the ever discussed conflict between the two artists, but whereas Isaacson, who seemed to me to have fallen deeply in love with his biographed subject, elects Leonardo above all, Gayford simply and interestingly describes the settings and happenings concerned the two great artists, not electing his preferred one and this, by itself, talks wonders to me. Both are simply great but in each in their own way. Leonardo proclaimed himself an engineer and was more of a scientist, whereas Michelangelo considered himself a sculptor and was more of an artist. Both brought a new breath of clearer air to the world they belonged to and to posteriority. I am unable to compare both of them, though I clearly appreciate Michelangelo's troubled character. But this is not the case for comparing their oeuvre, because their lives were not a match, a competition, a soccer game we have our preferences and cheer for the victory of one upon the other. This is all nonsense. For, when we take both for their greateness, the world is much much more rich and glorious.
May 20, 2014
Don't even think of reading this in non-color electronic form--illustrations are stunning.
Out-damn-standing. Seamlessly weaves the politics and art of 15-16th Cent. Italy. My sole complaint is unusual for me--I would have preferred a bit more art on top of the politics. Still, that's a trifle.
Out-damn-standing. Seamlessly weaves the politics and art of 15-16th Cent. Italy. My sole complaint is unusual for me--I would have preferred a bit more art on top of the politics. Still, that's a trifle.
July 31, 2017
I was absolutely shocked at the amount of 5-star reviews this book received everywhere. I gave up after a short while as the book is just painful to read/make sense of. The author jumps around in a bizarre erratic fashion, not only from fact to fact, but from various ages in the artist's life. One moment he's describing something from the teenage years, the next he goes off on a completely random tangent into something not even remotely related, and jumps ahead into the artist's later years. Writing a biography should have at least some structure, surely. This has none at all. I even skipped ahead into other chapters and found the same random bouncing there too. It's as if there's too much information, and the author can't decide how to go about organising it, so he just throws information into the chapters randomly. Consequently it makes no sense at all, it's the weirdest attempt at a biography I've ever seen. I'm not sure where the editor was before this book went to publication, but if I was their boss, I'd be sending out a "sorry but we have to let you go" letter. Very disappointing.
April 7, 2024
Substantial treatment of the long life and vast accomplishments. Very effectively illustrated, with the work broadly well, if thinly, covered. Could do with more art criticism but the man lived 89 years and it's 700 pages already.
September 3, 2022
Todo lo que le pido a una biografía.
July 10, 2023
a bit hard to read
July 25, 2014
A very well written biography of one of the most complex and free-spirited artists ever to have lived. Michelangelo's long life allows us to look closely into the Renaissance, its cultural, political and religious aspects all intertwined. This is Florence, Rome; this is the time of the nepotistic and corrupt papacies, the aristocrats turned patrons of the arts; the struggle for power over Europe between the royal houses and the Vatican; this is, specially, a time that called for reform within the shamefully perverted and corrupt Roman Catholic church. A time for change that would split Europe, north and south, spiritually. There were so many rivalries, national and familial, that it was a dangerous time to live in, and your life depended on whose side you had taken at every turn of events. Michelangelo's life is so interesting because he happened to be an oddity for his time. He managed to save a remnant of independence in his life and his work in a time when independence, financial or spiritual, was not possible unless tolerated by the spiritual powers of the dominant church or by the temporal powers of the aristocrats. And if Michelangelo managed it was through the marvelous quality of his work. Dukes and popes admired and tolerated him in the interest of having his art as their possessions. The author does a good job revealing all the details that are known of his life, but never making conclusions from them, because -and that is the key to the man- even added up through a long life they never are concluding evidence to reveal who Michelangelo really was. That is the weird thing: we know what he worked on, what he did, who his friends were, what made him angry and what made him happy, but we still cannot come to conclusions as to add a single adjective next to his name. His sexual life -or lack of it, is a clear example of how hard it is to judge the man. There seem to be hints enough to think he was homosexual, but never anything conclusive, he even was a pious man, someone who towards the end of his life would have fitted better within the camp of the Lutheran reformers than with the Catholic sellers of indulgencies and worshipers of relics. His sexual or asexual life is open to everyone's own conclusions, and the author does very well in leaving those conclusions, as it is proper in this case, to the reader.
His life is full of ambiguities. Was he a greedy man, a miser man? He did earn a lot of money, and by the standards of his time, was quite a rich man, and he saved it up mostly. He was keenly interested in being paid and being paid well, and recognized. But we cannot say conclusively that we was greedy or a miser because he did give away much too, to those he loved most dearly. He was a grumpy old fellow, he didn't keep his friends for long, always breaking up good and lasting relations, but we cannot assume that in all those cases he was not justified in doing so. If one adjective seems to come closer to describe the man I guess it could be ambiguous, which is not properly a description of him but an acknowledgment of how little we understand about him. My impression is that, aside from his public life, which is absolutely interesting and truly epic, the man Michelangelo was an artist who fought all his life for his artistic independence. He worked hard, even obsessively on his art, whether it was painting, sculpture or architecture, knowing well that only achieving perfection could he earn some degree or independence and be able to choose his next master, rather than being himself chosen and told what to do. Individualism was, I believe, his credo. He did something no artist had done before, in the words of the author: “He transformed the notion of what an artist could be.” That's what puts him above other great artists like Raphael or Titian. Being requested by the powerful oligarchy and well paid was not an end in itself, it was a means towards another end, the acknowledgment of his own dignity as an individual, the dignity of man who values freedom first.
And if he was a strange person, or a hard to understand person, it was because he was struggling hard to be that free man in a world where only the powerful could be so. Michelangelo had in his mind and through his hands the tools that could earn him his freedom. Well thought, it is indeed weird: he became free without having power; within that freedom he was equal to his powerful masters the popes and the dukes. Maybe he wasn't so strange; maybe the strange were everybody else.
His life is full of ambiguities. Was he a greedy man, a miser man? He did earn a lot of money, and by the standards of his time, was quite a rich man, and he saved it up mostly. He was keenly interested in being paid and being paid well, and recognized. But we cannot say conclusively that we was greedy or a miser because he did give away much too, to those he loved most dearly. He was a grumpy old fellow, he didn't keep his friends for long, always breaking up good and lasting relations, but we cannot assume that in all those cases he was not justified in doing so. If one adjective seems to come closer to describe the man I guess it could be ambiguous, which is not properly a description of him but an acknowledgment of how little we understand about him. My impression is that, aside from his public life, which is absolutely interesting and truly epic, the man Michelangelo was an artist who fought all his life for his artistic independence. He worked hard, even obsessively on his art, whether it was painting, sculpture or architecture, knowing well that only achieving perfection could he earn some degree or independence and be able to choose his next master, rather than being himself chosen and told what to do. Individualism was, I believe, his credo. He did something no artist had done before, in the words of the author: “He transformed the notion of what an artist could be.” That's what puts him above other great artists like Raphael or Titian. Being requested by the powerful oligarchy and well paid was not an end in itself, it was a means towards another end, the acknowledgment of his own dignity as an individual, the dignity of man who values freedom first.
And if he was a strange person, or a hard to understand person, it was because he was struggling hard to be that free man in a world where only the powerful could be so. Michelangelo had in his mind and through his hands the tools that could earn him his freedom. Well thought, it is indeed weird: he became free without having power; within that freedom he was equal to his powerful masters the popes and the dukes. Maybe he wasn't so strange; maybe the strange were everybody else.
June 29, 2018
I FINALLY FINISHED.
I loved this book so dearly. I once heard an art teacher talk about how Michelangelo believed that figures existed inside of marble and he just needed to carve them out. That's what set me out on this adventure. I didn't think it would take me over a year to finish it and I'm kind of sad to no longer have the phrase "I'm reading this biography on Michelangelo" as a fallback phrase, but man. This book is something else.
As a real review: Martin Gayford is a stellar writer. Sometimes biographies are dry, but Gayford leans into Michelangelo's absurdities and uses them to make the writing playful. There were a few parts where I was like "I have lost track of the people here because every Italian name sounds the same" but! Overall it was a great ride. Michelangelo lived just shy of his 89th birthday and dang. What a life. Honestly. Read this book if you want to have some sense of Michelangelo as a whole. It is well worth the time spent.
I loved this book so dearly. I once heard an art teacher talk about how Michelangelo believed that figures existed inside of marble and he just needed to carve them out. That's what set me out on this adventure. I didn't think it would take me over a year to finish it and I'm kind of sad to no longer have the phrase "I'm reading this biography on Michelangelo" as a fallback phrase, but man. This book is something else.
As a real review: Martin Gayford is a stellar writer. Sometimes biographies are dry, but Gayford leans into Michelangelo's absurdities and uses them to make the writing playful. There were a few parts where I was like "I have lost track of the people here because every Italian name sounds the same" but! Overall it was a great ride. Michelangelo lived just shy of his 89th birthday and dang. What a life. Honestly. Read this book if you want to have some sense of Michelangelo as a whole. It is well worth the time spent.
November 17, 2020
I was looking for an insightful biography on Michelangelo, for a greater understanding of and connection to his works. I was not disappointed. This is a major work, wonderfully written and wonderfully researched, where all aspects of Michelangelo's life are explored and where, to the best of my knowledge, none of his artworks are left out. What really got to me about it is that it shows how little has changed within
January 5, 2015
I was surprisingly (because of the great reviews) disappointed. I found it a bit dull--all of the discussion of deadlines and promises broken, etc. I also found it strange that Gayford would sometimes make critiques of the work that sounded like he didn't like it but then would refer to it as a great work.
June 11, 2016
Probably, the best biography I have ever read. It is very fluid and always put the particular facts in a more broad and historic perspective.
January 6, 2015
I bought and read this on my Kindle and it was immediately obvious I should have got a paper copy instead. Not so much for the pictures and photos, which are in effect best viewed in the near to perfect HD electronic format than on paper, but because the last 25% of the book (which is overall 800 or so pages long!) is taken by lists and lists of Bibliography, exhibition catalogues, and numerous Notes and References, all referred to in form of clickable links throughout the other 75% of the book, at the frequency of 2 or 3 links per paragraph at the beginning, thus making it frustratingly impossible to turn the pages or touch the screen without jumping to the end of the book and from there finding it hard to get back to the page I was actually on and interrupting the flow CONTINUOUSLY, ruining the experience.
The biography was somewhat confusing to begin with, for example it strangely starts from the end ... really ... it begins more or less with the account of Michelangelo's death and the aftermath of his death, including the smuggling of his body from Rome to Florence after his (first) funeral and the mystery surrounding the fact that when, a good few weeks after he had died, it was decided to open his coffin to satisfy all present that Michelangelo was really back in Florence where he belonged, to great surprise of all, the artist's corpse was not in the least spoiled or decomposed but wholly intact and perfectly preserved, as if he was simply asleep. Miracle? Well I suppose it is all just very apt for someone who was called and considered by most "Divine" during his, at least for that time, astonishingly long life.
Apart from strangely starting from his death rather than his birth -- no spoiler there after all, we all know Michelangelo eventually died (or not?) -- Gayford seems to, rather annoyingly, jump back and forth in time during the first chapters, making it a little confusing to get a coherent picture and chronological account of the historical events and the frame of mind of the artist during the creation of his most stunning works of art. On top of that, during the first third or so of the book, I couldn't help noticing that most of all accounts of his earlier life were effectively taken from extracts from the two biographies written while the great man was still alive ... biographies which are often conflicting and which were even amended (or indeed embellished!) by Michelangelo himself. It's all very well to mention and to use the two previously written, and approved by the artist himself, biographies, however I felt I should perhaps be reading straight from the original Vasari or Condivi works since most of these pages seemed to be coming from there.
Later on the book slowly takes a life of its own, the pace becomes in my opinion less erratic and the account of the artist's life (which is most strangely very long while all around him 7 popes, rivals, lovers, servants, foes, friends and close or distant family members were dropping dead one after the other, at a comparatively young age, due to plagues, persecutions, murderers, incurable illnesses and so forth) becomes more linear and more the author's own words.
In particular I very much enjoyed learning about the rivalry and love/hate relationship between the young Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci, whom I started to see in a very different light to what I had grown to know, all quite amusing in fact in their attempts to copy/outdo each other: I was left with the feeling that both these geniuses were after all also half human.
Michelangelo's epic life is well worth reading. He was most certainly an incredible man, surrounded by mystery and full of contradictions, with an irascible temperament and yet most sensitive soul, and with an incredible imagination and richness of thought. He seemed to be proud, arrogant and irascible one minute and unreasonably modest, generous and pious the very next. Conflicted about his sexuality and - to me endearingly - very much antisocial, yet fiercely attached and loyal to his young beautiful friends and platonic loves, lovers and even servants of his life. He very inexplicably escaped death quite a few times, managing to flee at the right time, avoiding various assassination plots and also surviving deadly diseases and strong fevers, and making lots of enemies along the way. He was very wealthy and yet lived most of his life humbly, almost in squalor. Never afraid to voice his opinion, his 'terribility' was felt by all who came close to him, including the several popes he worked for, his rivals and his helpers and apprentices (I could just picture him, 80 years old in his workshop, losing his temper and taking a mallet to his last Pieta' and smash it to pieces, to his helper's consternation, in his frustration when the huge block of marble suddenly revealed a crack). Understandably, like most highly gifted people, Michelangelo had far too many projects on the go at the same time, starting an overambitious project only to take another even more ambitious one half way through, and then another, losing interest a little over the grandeur of one, to start planning the next even more grand work of art, effectively lacking the time to complete all, and so it is no surprise that so many of his major works rest sadly unfinished.
What is astonishing is that for someone who claimed that painting was not 'his profession' and so looked sometimes scornfully upon this form of art, Michelangelo left us with what must be the most breathtaking frescoes known to man (far superior in my very modest opinion to Leonardo's or another one of his rivals, Raphael's, both of whom believed painting was a more divine form of art than sculpting), never repeating the same expression or pose in the hundreds nudes he painted.
Later in life he even took the sometimes controversial role of architect, even though he would still claim that it also wasn't 'his profession', creating some astonishingly innovative plans for buildings such as San Lorenzo with the Medici Chapels and the Laurentian Library in Florence, and St Peter's in the Vatican itself amongst others.
He was also an accomplished poet, with his numerous, at times very humourous, at other times moving or simply stunning, sonnets.
And yet he always claimed that 'his profession' was liberating those divine angels from huge blocks of marble (which he would personally jealously supervise excavation and transportation of), chisel in hand, hacking away until his very last days, even when quite old and frail.
Overall I felt it was a worthwhile read and Gayford portrayed quite well how Michelangelo thought of himself and his time, and how he lived and I would recommend this to anyone who, like me, has recently been to Florence and felt the amazingly strong, still very much alive, impression Michelangelo left all around the city, or quite simply has ever admired any of his incomparable works of art, or even more strongly to those who know nothing of this great artist (mmmm ... does that leave anyone out?).
My favourite passage from the book:
"Michelangelo believed that he had a temperamental affinity for the dark, ‘il tempo bruno’. Night was the time of shadows, melancholy and thoughts of death – but also of soothing oblivion and dreams. ‘ Oh night, O sweetest time , though black of hue,’ he wrote in sonnet no. 102, ‘you cut the thread of tired thoughts, for so/ You offer calm in your tired shade.’ In sonnet no. 104 he described how ‘he who created time from nothingness’ gave one half to the sun, the other to the moon: ‘I was assigned the dark time for my own,/ As what my birth and cradle suited best.’
This was an intriguing and – for the time – startling series of reflections. The year of the poems is unknown, but they seem to date from later than the period of the Medici Chapel, in which the most imaginatively extraordinary figure was that of Night. It was literally true, as recorded by his father, that Michelangelo was a child born in the night: ‘at the 4th or 5th hour before daybreak’; this is around 1.30 to 2.30 a.m. But also at a deep level he came to identify himself with the hours of darkness, and secrecy."
The biography was somewhat confusing to begin with, for example it strangely starts from the end ... really ... it begins more or less with the account of Michelangelo's death and the aftermath of his death, including the smuggling of his body from Rome to Florence after his (first) funeral and the mystery surrounding the fact that when, a good few weeks after he had died, it was decided to open his coffin to satisfy all present that Michelangelo was really back in Florence where he belonged, to great surprise of all, the artist's corpse was not in the least spoiled or decomposed but wholly intact and perfectly preserved, as if he was simply asleep. Miracle? Well I suppose it is all just very apt for someone who was called and considered by most "Divine" during his, at least for that time, astonishingly long life.
Apart from strangely starting from his death rather than his birth -- no spoiler there after all, we all know Michelangelo eventually died (or not?) -- Gayford seems to, rather annoyingly, jump back and forth in time during the first chapters, making it a little confusing to get a coherent picture and chronological account of the historical events and the frame of mind of the artist during the creation of his most stunning works of art. On top of that, during the first third or so of the book, I couldn't help noticing that most of all accounts of his earlier life were effectively taken from extracts from the two biographies written while the great man was still alive ... biographies which are often conflicting and which were even amended (or indeed embellished!) by Michelangelo himself. It's all very well to mention and to use the two previously written, and approved by the artist himself, biographies, however I felt I should perhaps be reading straight from the original Vasari or Condivi works since most of these pages seemed to be coming from there.
Later on the book slowly takes a life of its own, the pace becomes in my opinion less erratic and the account of the artist's life (which is most strangely very long while all around him 7 popes, rivals, lovers, servants, foes, friends and close or distant family members were dropping dead one after the other, at a comparatively young age, due to plagues, persecutions, murderers, incurable illnesses and so forth) becomes more linear and more the author's own words.
In particular I very much enjoyed learning about the rivalry and love/hate relationship between the young Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci, whom I started to see in a very different light to what I had grown to know, all quite amusing in fact in their attempts to copy/outdo each other: I was left with the feeling that both these geniuses were after all also half human.
Michelangelo's epic life is well worth reading. He was most certainly an incredible man, surrounded by mystery and full of contradictions, with an irascible temperament and yet most sensitive soul, and with an incredible imagination and richness of thought. He seemed to be proud, arrogant and irascible one minute and unreasonably modest, generous and pious the very next. Conflicted about his sexuality and - to me endearingly - very much antisocial, yet fiercely attached and loyal to his young beautiful friends and platonic loves, lovers and even servants of his life. He very inexplicably escaped death quite a few times, managing to flee at the right time, avoiding various assassination plots and also surviving deadly diseases and strong fevers, and making lots of enemies along the way. He was very wealthy and yet lived most of his life humbly, almost in squalor. Never afraid to voice his opinion, his 'terribility' was felt by all who came close to him, including the several popes he worked for, his rivals and his helpers and apprentices (I could just picture him, 80 years old in his workshop, losing his temper and taking a mallet to his last Pieta' and smash it to pieces, to his helper's consternation, in his frustration when the huge block of marble suddenly revealed a crack). Understandably, like most highly gifted people, Michelangelo had far too many projects on the go at the same time, starting an overambitious project only to take another even more ambitious one half way through, and then another, losing interest a little over the grandeur of one, to start planning the next even more grand work of art, effectively lacking the time to complete all, and so it is no surprise that so many of his major works rest sadly unfinished.
What is astonishing is that for someone who claimed that painting was not 'his profession' and so looked sometimes scornfully upon this form of art, Michelangelo left us with what must be the most breathtaking frescoes known to man (far superior in my very modest opinion to Leonardo's or another one of his rivals, Raphael's, both of whom believed painting was a more divine form of art than sculpting), never repeating the same expression or pose in the hundreds nudes he painted.
Later in life he even took the sometimes controversial role of architect, even though he would still claim that it also wasn't 'his profession', creating some astonishingly innovative plans for buildings such as San Lorenzo with the Medici Chapels and the Laurentian Library in Florence, and St Peter's in the Vatican itself amongst others.
He was also an accomplished poet, with his numerous, at times very humourous, at other times moving or simply stunning, sonnets.
And yet he always claimed that 'his profession' was liberating those divine angels from huge blocks of marble (which he would personally jealously supervise excavation and transportation of), chisel in hand, hacking away until his very last days, even when quite old and frail.
Overall I felt it was a worthwhile read and Gayford portrayed quite well how Michelangelo thought of himself and his time, and how he lived and I would recommend this to anyone who, like me, has recently been to Florence and felt the amazingly strong, still very much alive, impression Michelangelo left all around the city, or quite simply has ever admired any of his incomparable works of art, or even more strongly to those who know nothing of this great artist (mmmm ... does that leave anyone out?).
My favourite passage from the book:
"Michelangelo believed that he had a temperamental affinity for the dark, ‘il tempo bruno’. Night was the time of shadows, melancholy and thoughts of death – but also of soothing oblivion and dreams. ‘ Oh night, O sweetest time , though black of hue,’ he wrote in sonnet no. 102, ‘you cut the thread of tired thoughts, for so/ You offer calm in your tired shade.’ In sonnet no. 104 he described how ‘he who created time from nothingness’ gave one half to the sun, the other to the moon: ‘I was assigned the dark time for my own,/ As what my birth and cradle suited best.’
This was an intriguing and – for the time – startling series of reflections. The year of the poems is unknown, but they seem to date from later than the period of the Medici Chapel, in which the most imaginatively extraordinary figure was that of Night. It was literally true, as recorded by his father, that Michelangelo was a child born in the night: ‘at the 4th or 5th hour before daybreak’; this is around 1.30 to 2.30 a.m. But also at a deep level he came to identify himself with the hours of darkness, and secrecy."
December 25, 2021
"The world has many Kings, but only one Michelangelo"
I think the first thing which struck me as a surprise was that like Picasso and unlike Van Gogh, Michelangelo was famous and successful during his life and maybe that's why he got the projects which he did, but I tend to tilt towards the fact that it was his extraordinary talent and imagination(which the books confirms).
I liked how the book explored the lives of so many famous Italians and more importantly Florentines, which were alive during his reign - Da Vinci, Raphael, Machiavelli, Titian, Savonarola to name a few. The book has explained in great detail the Papacy and the effect different Popes during his life had on his work and life.
The book however suffers from offering surprisingly little insight on what Michelangelo thought when he made his works or his imagination - but it clearly points out that Michelangelo never wanted to discuss his ideas and works and drawings with others. Maybe there is no proof but only accounts from different people to speculate what he really thought - either ways, it leaves an itch, an itch you feel a 600 page book would scratch.
Secondly(and this is totally personal) there are just way too many references to people I am sure you have never heard of, so much so that at times it became a regular to and fro between the book and Wikipedia to learn more about the person mentioned, maybe that could have been kept low or maybe that's just Martin's style of presenting the entire picture and letting you be the judge of it - but for me it was a little annoying at times.
All in all a very detailed read for anyone interested in the man, art history or simply about one of the most influential artists ever.
I think the first thing which struck me as a surprise was that like Picasso and unlike Van Gogh, Michelangelo was famous and successful during his life and maybe that's why he got the projects which he did, but I tend to tilt towards the fact that it was his extraordinary talent and imagination(which the books confirms).
I liked how the book explored the lives of so many famous Italians and more importantly Florentines, which were alive during his reign - Da Vinci, Raphael, Machiavelli, Titian, Savonarola to name a few. The book has explained in great detail the Papacy and the effect different Popes during his life had on his work and life.
The book however suffers from offering surprisingly little insight on what Michelangelo thought when he made his works or his imagination - but it clearly points out that Michelangelo never wanted to discuss his ideas and works and drawings with others. Maybe there is no proof but only accounts from different people to speculate what he really thought - either ways, it leaves an itch, an itch you feel a 600 page book would scratch.
Secondly(and this is totally personal) there are just way too many references to people I am sure you have never heard of, so much so that at times it became a regular to and fro between the book and Wikipedia to learn more about the person mentioned, maybe that could have been kept low or maybe that's just Martin's style of presenting the entire picture and letting you be the judge of it - but for me it was a little annoying at times.
All in all a very detailed read for anyone interested in the man, art history or simply about one of the most influential artists ever.
May 8, 2023
Here's what I learned about Michelangelo reading this:
- His last name: Buonarroti
- He was 89 (!!) when he died
- He was most likely gay (even if he never had sex) but the men he was interested in were always Much Younger than him (though still consensual)
- He died in Rome and his body was smuggled in a car of hay back to Florence
- Sodomy was rampant in Florence
- Servants were expected to run alongside their masters on horses and some men could actually KEEP UP WITH HORSES RUNNING AT FULL TILT?? (this is likely the type of muscular man David is based on)
- He did not want to paint the Sistine Chapel and was a total drama queen about it, writing to his father: ‘I lead a miserable existence and do not care of life nor honour – that is, of this world; I live wearied by stupendous labours and beset by a thousand anxieties. And thus have I lived for some fifteen years now and never an hour’s happiness have I had, and all this have I done in order to help you, though you have never either recognized or believed it.’
- He finished very few works / would agree to finishing things but wouldn't actually do them
- He had a feud with da Vinci about what was better -- drawing or sculpting
- He was a poet and wrote a variety of things, including this poem about a woman: ‘You have a face sweeter than boiled grape juice,’ it begins, ‘it looks as if a snail had walked across it/It shines so much – and prettier than a turnip … When I look down upon each of your breasts they look like two watermelons in a bag.’
I enjoyed this, especially being in Rome/Florence while reading it. I was a bit lost in the timeline at times, but I feel like I have a better understanding of Michelangelo as a person and artist now.
- His last name: Buonarroti
- He was 89 (!!) when he died
- He was most likely gay (even if he never had sex) but the men he was interested in were always Much Younger than him (though still consensual)
- He died in Rome and his body was smuggled in a car of hay back to Florence
- Sodomy was rampant in Florence
- Servants were expected to run alongside their masters on horses and some men could actually KEEP UP WITH HORSES RUNNING AT FULL TILT?? (this is likely the type of muscular man David is based on)
- He did not want to paint the Sistine Chapel and was a total drama queen about it, writing to his father: ‘I lead a miserable existence and do not care of life nor honour – that is, of this world; I live wearied by stupendous labours and beset by a thousand anxieties. And thus have I lived for some fifteen years now and never an hour’s happiness have I had, and all this have I done in order to help you, though you have never either recognized or believed it.’
- He finished very few works / would agree to finishing things but wouldn't actually do them
- He had a feud with da Vinci about what was better -- drawing or sculpting
- He was a poet and wrote a variety of things, including this poem about a woman: ‘You have a face sweeter than boiled grape juice,’ it begins, ‘it looks as if a snail had walked across it/It shines so much – and prettier than a turnip … When I look down upon each of your breasts they look like two watermelons in a bag.’
I enjoyed this, especially being in Rome/Florence while reading it. I was a bit lost in the timeline at times, but I feel like I have a better understanding of Michelangelo as a person and artist now.
April 11, 2024
Loved reading this book. After Walter Isaacson's Leonardo Da Vinci I picked up this book... The another reason to read this book is we cannot only read about one person like Michelangelo and make our conclusions. We need to understand his times, the way heblived, the people woh affected his life the way he acheived great things against all ods and devoid of latest technologies like ours yet produced works that we cannot do it admirable and something to learn from.
This book describes the life of Michelangelo and his greatness as legendary Painter, Sculptor, Architect, Poet and Designer.
You will get lost in his world and in 1500s to write of that era and justify to the life of that era requires lots of hard work and research which Martin Gayford has done with extensive hard work and with help of his team...
Reduced one star my opinion the images and pictures could have been described with more info but over all it was good, also the language was bit casual which is again good for understanding.
Highly recommended for those who want to know life of the great Artist of the Renaissance Michelangelo, Who shit blood in his works.
This book describes the life of Michelangelo and his greatness as legendary Painter, Sculptor, Architect, Poet and Designer.
You will get lost in his world and in 1500s to write of that era and justify to the life of that era requires lots of hard work and research which Martin Gayford has done with extensive hard work and with help of his team...
Reduced one star my opinion the images and pictures could have been described with more info but over all it was good, also the language was bit casual which is again good for understanding.
Highly recommended for those who want to know life of the great Artist of the Renaissance Michelangelo, Who shit blood in his works.
November 16, 2023
Michelangelo oli mees nagu orkester, kelle esimesed elulood ilmutati juba tema eluajal. Olen umbes nelja lugenud ja Gayfordi oma jääb paremuselt kusagile keskele.
Kunsti oli palju, aga minu jaoks jäi ajastu vaimu ja olustikku puudu. Kohati kiskus lugu (sorry, narratiiv!) tuimaks ja kordas seda, mida nii mõnigi teine on juba varem paberile pannud. Natuke rohkem originaalsust ja emotsioone oleks sellele raamatule igal juhul kasuks tulnud. Kohati ärritas ka tõlge, eriti originaali lauseehituse järgimine ja seda just lõpu poole.
Huvitaval kombel ei maini juba 2013 ilmunud elulugu poole sõnagagi Lynn Cattersoni teooriat Laokooni autorluse kohta, kuigi „Uinuva Cupido“ afääri kohta on mitu lehekülge ja 2 Cattersoni artiklit on bibliograafias ka ära toodud. Cattersoni võib uskuda või mitte, aga ära märkida oleks teda ikka võinud.
Kisub ka sinnapoole, et itaalia keel pole autori kõige tugevam külg, sest selles keeles allikaid on häbematult vähe ja nt lk 49 on paonazzo'st ootamatult saanud pronazzo. Väike viga, aga suur vahe.
Kunsti oli palju, aga minu jaoks jäi ajastu vaimu ja olustikku puudu. Kohati kiskus lugu (sorry, narratiiv!) tuimaks ja kordas seda, mida nii mõnigi teine on juba varem paberile pannud. Natuke rohkem originaalsust ja emotsioone oleks sellele raamatule igal juhul kasuks tulnud. Kohati ärritas ka tõlge, eriti originaali lauseehituse järgimine ja seda just lõpu poole.
Huvitaval kombel ei maini juba 2013 ilmunud elulugu poole sõnagagi Lynn Cattersoni teooriat Laokooni autorluse kohta, kuigi „Uinuva Cupido“ afääri kohta on mitu lehekülge ja 2 Cattersoni artiklit on bibliograafias ka ära toodud. Cattersoni võib uskuda või mitte, aga ära märkida oleks teda ikka võinud.
Kisub ka sinnapoole, et itaalia keel pole autori kõige tugevam külg, sest selles keeles allikaid on häbematult vähe ja nt lk 49 on paonazzo'st ootamatult saanud pronazzo. Väike viga, aga suur vahe.
September 11, 2023
Nogurdinoši detalizēti.
Interesanti sīkumi:
- Mikelandželo regulāri dabūja un graizīja līķus, lai labāk saprastu cilvēku anatomiju
- Mikelandželo rakstīja dzeju
- Mikelandželo kašķējās ar Leonardo da Vinči, kurš, protams, visiem stāstīja, ka glezniecība, nevis tēlniecība, ir "visdižākā" mākslas forma. Leonardo da Vinči arī domāja, ka "Dāvids" nekam neder, jo neattēlo reālistisku, dzīvē iespējamu cilvēku
- Mikelandželo tik ilgi staigāja un arī gulēja ar vieniem ādas apaviem, ka to āda saauga kopā ar viņa ādu
- Mikelandželo bija noskatījis savus mīļākos marmora bluķus, pie kuriem gadu desmitus mēģināja tikt
- Tā laika pāvesti bija ļoti imperiālistiski, egocentriski ļaudis
Interesanti sīkumi:
- Mikelandželo regulāri dabūja un graizīja līķus, lai labāk saprastu cilvēku anatomiju
- Mikelandželo rakstīja dzeju
- Mikelandželo kašķējās ar Leonardo da Vinči, kurš, protams, visiem stāstīja, ka glezniecība, nevis tēlniecība, ir "visdižākā" mākslas forma. Leonardo da Vinči arī domāja, ka "Dāvids" nekam neder, jo neattēlo reālistisku, dzīvē iespējamu cilvēku
- Mikelandželo tik ilgi staigāja un arī gulēja ar vieniem ādas apaviem, ka to āda saauga kopā ar viņa ādu
- Mikelandželo bija noskatījis savus mīļākos marmora bluķus, pie kuriem gadu desmitus mēģināja tikt
- Tā laika pāvesti bija ļoti imperiālistiski, egocentriski ļaudis
March 6, 2025
Extraordinary, not just the man, but the book. Michelangelo is, definitely, someone worth knowing. This book is very long, but it won't feel heavy (figuratively, literally it will if you're holding its 700 pages above your face while you read in bed every night like I did). If you're interested in getting a peek at this grand artist's life, passions, and turmoils, read this. You won't regret it.
Thank you, Martin Gayford, for all the research you did and the immense effort to write this colossus of a book.
Thank you, Martin Gayford, for all the research you did and the immense effort to write this colossus of a book.
August 10, 2025
Pesquisa extremamente apurada. Muito interessante a maneira respeitosa, mas também convicta, que o autor aplicou para tratar da sexualidade de Michelangelo, através não só das suas criações na escultura, seus estudos anatômicos, mas também seus poemas dedicados a diversos homens que cruzaram sua vida. Um dos maiores artistas que tivemos, que um dia se apaixonou por uma pedra de mármore e a transformou em Davi, a mais bela escultura já feita (para muitos).
October 1, 2020
Besaida Sanchez
Este libro lo recomendaría a todo aquel que tenga interés en aprender y al mismo entretenerse. El autor narra la vida de Miguel Ángel con datos históricos verificables en las notas que contiene el libro, pero lo hace de forma que parece una novela. Excelente libro.
Este libro lo recomendaría a todo aquel que tenga interés en aprender y al mismo entretenerse. El autor narra la vida de Miguel Ángel con datos históricos verificables en las notas que contiene el libro, pero lo hace de forma que parece una novela. Excelente libro.
February 18, 2022
This book is beautifully designed, with thick smooth paper and stunning full colour images and close ups of the work of Michelangelo and others this book discusses.
The text itself is dry and hard to get through. While it's fascinating, it's tedious, and often goes on tangents. But if you're interested, it may be worth flipping through at the very least.
The text itself is dry and hard to get through. While it's fascinating, it's tedious, and often goes on tangents. But if you're interested, it may be worth flipping through at the very least.
October 26, 2025
Una excelente biografía de uno de los mayores artistas de la Historia del Arte. Extensamente detallada y amena por igual. Y un viaje a la Italia de los siglos XV y XVI de la mano de uno de los mejores escritores y observadores de Arte de nuestro tiempo.
August 20, 2017
An excellent biography that brings you closer to both the artist and the person.
August 24, 2017
this was a good read at the beginning but once you get at the half way point of this book it becomes very repetitive and the author has no way on making it more interesting
July 8, 2018
Great book. Well researched and very readable. In patches it felt that it rather traced the contemporary biographies, but that is understandable.
December 31, 2018
Best biography I've read about Michelangelo.
July 26, 2019
A comprehensive collection of facts that doesn't quite bring Michelangelo to life.
December 12, 2019
Martin Gayford should quit writing books.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews