What do you think?
Rate this book
The Sistine Secrets: Unlocking the Codes in Michelangelo's Defiant Masterpiece
Profusely illustrated with monochrome photographs on virtually every page, and with 25 color plates, this is a work of ingenious, provocative scholarship based on hitherto unused Talmudic literature, the Midrash commentaries on the Bible, and the Kabbalah.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2008
609 people are currently reading
1397 people want to read
About the author
Benjamin Blech
33 books13 followersBenjamin Blech, born in Zurich in 1933, is an Orthodox rabbi who now lives in New York City.
Rabbi Blech has been a Professor of Talmud at Yeshiva University since 1966, and was the Rabbi of Young Israel of Oceanside for 37 years. In addition to his work in the rabbinate, Rabbi Blech has written many books on Judaism and the Jewish people and speaks on Jewish topics to communities around the world.
Rabbi Blech received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Yeshiva University, a Master of Arts degree in psychology from Columbia University, and rabbinic ordination from the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary.
Rabbi Blech has been a Professor of Talmud at Yeshiva University since 1966, and was the Rabbi of Young Israel of Oceanside for 37 years. In addition to his work in the rabbinate, Rabbi Blech has written many books on Judaism and the Jewish people and speaks on Jewish topics to communities around the world.
Rabbi Blech received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Yeshiva University, a Master of Arts degree in psychology from Columbia University, and rabbinic ordination from the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 201 reviews
June 13, 2008
I'm tempted to say that there is a lot to learn from this book. However, it is marred by a procession of errors and mistakes so bad that the editor should be fired and the authors should be embarrassed.
And, I'm not talking about any of the controversial stuff. Before I even get to the Jewish history and so-called secrets, I am distracted by a level of factual inaccuracy that had previously been reserved to just Dan Brown - but he writes novels. That an academic book would be so riddled with problems is insulting to the reader and the wider public that don't have the ability or interest to fact-check their casual reading.
Here are some examples:
On page 156 the authors state that Pope John XXIII has become a saint. This is false. It is simply mistaken. It is not controversial or secretive, it is simply incorrect. The language is very clear: "Four decades after his death, Pope John XXIII underwent a name change. He is now officially Saint John XXIII..." This is the equivalent of saying that Al Gore is President of the United States: It's just not true. THEN the mistake is REPEATED on page 289!!
On pages 118, 219, and 286 the authors refer to Saint Peter's Basillica in Rome as a Cathedral. It is NOT a Cathedral. A Cathedral is a church that is the seat of a bishop. The pope is bishop of Rome, and his seat is Saint John in Lateran Church (a simple wikipedia search, or any guide book, on the two churches will testify to this fact.)
On page 93 the authors, writing of how Michelangelo somewhat scandalously signed his name to his Pieta sculpture in Rome in 1499 (other sources claim 1501), claim, "He escaped before the Swiss Guardsmen, who most likely would have decapitated any intruder on the spot, could catch him." Well, there are indeed Swiss Guards in Saint Peter's Basilica today, but any high level knowledge of Vatican history would tell you that they arrived first in 1506. When Michelangelo was signing his name to the Pieta, THE SWISS GUARDS WEREN'T THERE YET. To not rely on just Wikipedia for confirmation of this (as the authors of this supposedly academic book sometimes do in one of their shockingly rare citations), i checked two respectable sources: Ross King's acclaimed book Michelangelo and the Pope's Ceiling, which on 206, tells of Pope Julius II initiating the Swiss Guard in 1506; and the actual Guardia Svizzera Pontificia Rapporto Annuale 2003 (Pontifical Swiss Guard Annual Report 2003), which in a table titled I Commandanti della Guardia Svizzera Ponteficia (The Commanders of the Pontifical Swiss Guard), traces the lineage of their leadership back to one Kaspar von Silenen, who began in 1506!!
Sistine Secrets explores previously ignored or avoided aspects of the history of the Sistine Chapel and of Michelangelo, and it is perhaps likely that the authors bring to us treasure troves of background and knowledge about the Talmud, Kabbalah and Midrash of Jewish culture. But, how can I trust them about those subjects about which I previously knew nothing when on the things that I AM familiar with they are so unattractively mistaken?
Dan Brown we can forgive for his many falsehoods, because he is a novelist. But, that a rabbi and a Judaica expert write an academic book with so much uncontroversial sloppiness - if it is true that Michelangelo was hiding secret messages of Jewish background into his work, certainly tihs book does a great disservice to it. For these reasons, despite great excitement and eagerness to learn at the outset, I found the book to be a great disappointment.
And, I'm not talking about any of the controversial stuff. Before I even get to the Jewish history and so-called secrets, I am distracted by a level of factual inaccuracy that had previously been reserved to just Dan Brown - but he writes novels. That an academic book would be so riddled with problems is insulting to the reader and the wider public that don't have the ability or interest to fact-check their casual reading.
Here are some examples:
On page 156 the authors state that Pope John XXIII has become a saint. This is false. It is simply mistaken. It is not controversial or secretive, it is simply incorrect. The language is very clear: "Four decades after his death, Pope John XXIII underwent a name change. He is now officially Saint John XXIII..." This is the equivalent of saying that Al Gore is President of the United States: It's just not true. THEN the mistake is REPEATED on page 289!!
On pages 118, 219, and 286 the authors refer to Saint Peter's Basillica in Rome as a Cathedral. It is NOT a Cathedral. A Cathedral is a church that is the seat of a bishop. The pope is bishop of Rome, and his seat is Saint John in Lateran Church (a simple wikipedia search, or any guide book, on the two churches will testify to this fact.)
On page 93 the authors, writing of how Michelangelo somewhat scandalously signed his name to his Pieta sculpture in Rome in 1499 (other sources claim 1501), claim, "He escaped before the Swiss Guardsmen, who most likely would have decapitated any intruder on the spot, could catch him." Well, there are indeed Swiss Guards in Saint Peter's Basilica today, but any high level knowledge of Vatican history would tell you that they arrived first in 1506. When Michelangelo was signing his name to the Pieta, THE SWISS GUARDS WEREN'T THERE YET. To not rely on just Wikipedia for confirmation of this (as the authors of this supposedly academic book sometimes do in one of their shockingly rare citations), i checked two respectable sources: Ross King's acclaimed book Michelangelo and the Pope's Ceiling, which on 206, tells of Pope Julius II initiating the Swiss Guard in 1506; and the actual Guardia Svizzera Pontificia Rapporto Annuale 2003 (Pontifical Swiss Guard Annual Report 2003), which in a table titled I Commandanti della Guardia Svizzera Ponteficia (The Commanders of the Pontifical Swiss Guard), traces the lineage of their leadership back to one Kaspar von Silenen, who began in 1506!!
Sistine Secrets explores previously ignored or avoided aspects of the history of the Sistine Chapel and of Michelangelo, and it is perhaps likely that the authors bring to us treasure troves of background and knowledge about the Talmud, Kabbalah and Midrash of Jewish culture. But, how can I trust them about those subjects about which I previously knew nothing when on the things that I AM familiar with they are so unattractively mistaken?
Dan Brown we can forgive for his many falsehoods, because he is a novelist. But, that a rabbi and a Judaica expert write an academic book with so much uncontroversial sloppiness - if it is true that Michelangelo was hiding secret messages of Jewish background into his work, certainly tihs book does a great disservice to it. For these reasons, despite great excitement and eagerness to learn at the outset, I found the book to be a great disappointment.
May 9, 2020
This journey through the art, politics, and history of Renaissance Italy was both interesting and exciting. The authors provided a nice summary of Michelangelo’s early life as well as the early history of the Sistine Chapel before giving the reader a detailed tour of the hidden secrets of Michelangelo’s masterpieces. Some of the authors’ hypotheses are a bit of a stretch, but the vast majority of their discoveries are backed by facts and research. The only major problem I had with the overall book was a frustrating lack of editing. There are literally entire paragraphs that were “copied and pasted” numerous times throughout the narrative. The authors did a convincing job in making their case without the cringe-y repetition. Overall, though, this was a great analysis of Michelangelo’s genius that made his masterpieces accessible to everyone, especially those of us who have ever wanted to “stick it to the Man!” Michelangelo gave us permission in the 16th century in a stunningly beautiful way.
March 4, 2015
Imprescindibile
Sorprendente è questa nuova lettura che i due Autori forniscono, in modo dettagliato e (quasi) sempre convincente, degli affreschi michelangiolesci della Cappella Sistina: una lettura a... "quattro occhi", dunque, a distanza molto ravvicinata; una lettura illuminante per scoprire particolari nascosti (non solo per lo sporco dei secoli); una qualificata lettura storico-artistica, grazie alle competenze del rabbino Benjamin Blech e di Roy Doliner, entrambi profondi conoscitori di storia ebraica e del Talmud; una lettura critica e completa su tutta la produzione di Michelangelo, in relazione alla sua formazione, alla sua vita, alle sue esperienze artistiche e umane. Una lettura con un punto di vista modificato, cioè quello presumibile dell'Artista, in un gioco di ricerca appassionata e appassionante. (Per comprendere tutti i messaggi segreti di Michelangelo bisogna chiudere gli occhi di fronte alle interpretazioni tradizionali, avanzare con coraggio, compiere un vero e proprio salto intellettuale e aprire quindi gli occhi su una nuova realtà). Una lettura che dà un valore in aggiunta a quello artistico: si legge infatti un gigantesco autoritratto di Michelangelo, una coraggiosa autobiografia che riflette la sua vita e la sua visione del mondo, ...le turbolente passioni, gli amori e gli odi, uno sfogo represso contro le corruzioni della Chiesa e che oggi, dopo cinque secoli, può prendere liberamente voce; ma vi si legge anche, con cinque secoli di anticipo, il suo più profondo messaggio: un desiderio di riconciliazione, di costruire un "ponte" tra le fedi, tra il cristianesimo e l'ebraismo, tra Dio e l'umanità, tra gli uomini....
E molto interessante è stata per me, di riflesso, la lettura di questo saggio. L'ho centellinato, gustato, apprezzato, e ruminato. Alla fine ho anche gradito le numerose ripetizioni di concetti che mi permettevano un ripasso ...in itinere.
Ciò che invece non sono riuscita a digerire è la poca cura di traduzione e/o editing: diversi refusi ed errori ortografici, alcune sviste grossolane e contraddizioni evidenti, come sottintendessero una fretta eccessiva di passare alla stampa. Inoltre numerose immagini in bianco e nero sono scure e illeggibili e quelle a colori nell'inserto risultano spesso "pre restauro" (restauro reso pubblico già da una decina di anni, prima della pubblicazione del libro; il web per fortuna ha ampiamente compensato ciò che l'economicità dell'edizione non aveva permesso *).
Sono le due facce del testo. E una ha pesato sull'altra, abbassando il numero di stelline.
...e ora non mi resta che andare ad osservare gli affreschi coi miei occhi! :)
P.S. (dopo la "mia" Sistina):
Sono sicura che, se non avessi letto questo saggio, non avrei provato la stessa intensa emozione che ho conosciuto nel momento in cui ho alzato gli occhi in "Casa Michelangelo". Ogni affresco, dalle lunette alle vele, dalla volta alla parete del Giudizio, è stato una (ri)scoperta e una comprensione, alla ricerca dei particolari nella visione di insieme, distinguendo i singoli alberi in quella foresta sovrastante delle centinaia di figure in movimento e della complessa composizione. Un testo che mi ha aiutato ad analizzare e "vedere", cioè a leggere le pagine di quell'affascinante "libro" che si apriva tutto intorno a me.
D'altra parte nessuna guida, per quanto preparata e appassionata, a conclusione della tradizionale visita agli immensi Musei Vaticani, può raccontare in quindici minuti, con dovizia di dettagli, i mille metri quadrati di capolavori che portano la firma di un solo Genio.
(La "firma" di Michelangelo sta nell'autoritratto anamorfico contenuto nella pelle che San Bartolomeo reca in mano, nella parete del Giudizio Universale).
* A compensare la scarsa qualità delle foto di questo libro, ho trovato La Cappella Sistina , di Antonio Paolucci: un testo "classico", sintetico e preciso, e con immagini molto belle, ad un prezzo relativamente accessibile.
Sorprendente è questa nuova lettura che i due Autori forniscono, in modo dettagliato e (quasi) sempre convincente, degli affreschi michelangiolesci della Cappella Sistina: una lettura a... "quattro occhi", dunque, a distanza molto ravvicinata; una lettura illuminante per scoprire particolari nascosti (non solo per lo sporco dei secoli); una qualificata lettura storico-artistica, grazie alle competenze del rabbino Benjamin Blech e di Roy Doliner, entrambi profondi conoscitori di storia ebraica e del Talmud; una lettura critica e completa su tutta la produzione di Michelangelo, in relazione alla sua formazione, alla sua vita, alle sue esperienze artistiche e umane. Una lettura con un punto di vista modificato, cioè quello presumibile dell'Artista, in un gioco di ricerca appassionata e appassionante. (Per comprendere tutti i messaggi segreti di Michelangelo bisogna chiudere gli occhi di fronte alle interpretazioni tradizionali, avanzare con coraggio, compiere un vero e proprio salto intellettuale e aprire quindi gli occhi su una nuova realtà). Una lettura che dà un valore in aggiunta a quello artistico: si legge infatti un gigantesco autoritratto di Michelangelo, una coraggiosa autobiografia che riflette la sua vita e la sua visione del mondo, ...le turbolente passioni, gli amori e gli odi, uno sfogo represso contro le corruzioni della Chiesa e che oggi, dopo cinque secoli, può prendere liberamente voce; ma vi si legge anche, con cinque secoli di anticipo, il suo più profondo messaggio: un desiderio di riconciliazione, di costruire un "ponte" tra le fedi, tra il cristianesimo e l'ebraismo, tra Dio e l'umanità, tra gli uomini....
E molto interessante è stata per me, di riflesso, la lettura di questo saggio. L'ho centellinato, gustato, apprezzato, e ruminato. Alla fine ho anche gradito le numerose ripetizioni di concetti che mi permettevano un ripasso ...in itinere.
Ciò che invece non sono riuscita a digerire è la poca cura di traduzione e/o editing: diversi refusi ed errori ortografici, alcune sviste grossolane e contraddizioni evidenti, come sottintendessero una fretta eccessiva di passare alla stampa. Inoltre numerose immagini in bianco e nero sono scure e illeggibili e quelle a colori nell'inserto risultano spesso "pre restauro" (restauro reso pubblico già da una decina di anni, prima della pubblicazione del libro; il web per fortuna ha ampiamente compensato ciò che l'economicità dell'edizione non aveva permesso *).
Sono le due facce del testo. E una ha pesato sull'altra, abbassando il numero di stelline.
...e ora non mi resta che andare ad osservare gli affreschi coi miei occhi! :)
P.S. (dopo la "mia" Sistina):
Sono sicura che, se non avessi letto questo saggio, non avrei provato la stessa intensa emozione che ho conosciuto nel momento in cui ho alzato gli occhi in "Casa Michelangelo". Ogni affresco, dalle lunette alle vele, dalla volta alla parete del Giudizio, è stato una (ri)scoperta e una comprensione, alla ricerca dei particolari nella visione di insieme, distinguendo i singoli alberi in quella foresta sovrastante delle centinaia di figure in movimento e della complessa composizione. Un testo che mi ha aiutato ad analizzare e "vedere", cioè a leggere le pagine di quell'affascinante "libro" che si apriva tutto intorno a me.
D'altra parte nessuna guida, per quanto preparata e appassionata, a conclusione della tradizionale visita agli immensi Musei Vaticani, può raccontare in quindici minuti, con dovizia di dettagli, i mille metri quadrati di capolavori che portano la firma di un solo Genio.
(La "firma" di Michelangelo sta nell'autoritratto anamorfico contenuto nella pelle che San Bartolomeo reca in mano, nella parete del Giudizio Universale).
* A compensare la scarsa qualità delle foto di questo libro, ho trovato La Cappella Sistina , di Antonio Paolucci: un testo "classico", sintetico e preciso, e con immagini molto belle, ad un prezzo relativamente accessibile.
September 10, 2009
The premise of this book is two fold: first, Leonardo was a closet Jew … or a Jew wannabe. Second, since he painted under duress, he had four years to come up with all kinds of hidden symbols in the frescos. And why not? The Pope and his minions where corrupt politicians and the Catholic Church was essentially a secular oligarchy and Michelangelo was pissed most of the time.
While the point was well made within the first few pages, it is really enlightening and fun just to see how far the artist went with his subversives. And there are lots of interesting tidbits.
The Sistine was built to the exact measurements of the first Temple which is highly insulting to Jews yet there is Jewish symbolism throughout the building. (Michelangelo had nothing to do with the building of the chapel.) As a matter of fact, throughout the entire ceiling, there is not a single Christian image.
There was a keen interest in Sign Language during the Renaissance. In the Madonna of the Rocks (daVinci) three of the figures spell out L. D. V. I always thought the hand positions in this painting were weird. Now it is so obvious. This subversive little trick persisted into modern times—the Daniel French sculpture in the Lincoln Memorial: the hands spell. A.L. Oh, man—how come I never noticed that?
Many of the images on the ceiling have had to be reevaluated and reinterpreted after the great twelve year cleaning in the 90’s. New characters emerged, scrolls with written messages hadn’t been seen in 400 years, hand and arm positions all of a sudden sprouted obscene gestures, previously thought male characters became female, a couple angels bump genitals and there is a famous panel showing, perhaps, the first Renaissance blow job (putting aside the Egyptian, Greeks and Romans).
The book is a full semester study—with a great professor. He guides you through some complicated things the casual observer would never know. The direction in which fresco characters look is important. The color of their clothes is symbolic. There is a single spot in the chapel where all the trompe l’oeuil are aligned perfectly, which is the center of a ten ring circle of life mosaic on the floor where the Pope kneels during services (behind the partition which has seven lanterns in the shape of a menorah).
Pope Julius II commissioned the artist for a series of frescos depicting the life of Christ. The fact not one image from the New Testament adorns the ceiling is amazing. This is during the time of the Inquisition—and just how Michelangelo got away with this is part of the fun.
It’s not a definitive study of the frescoes and I suppose I would have to call it ‘Renaissance Lite.’ But it is packed with fascinating facets.
The frescos are sixty feet from the viewer and many of the minute details were never meant to be seen. Now, with million pixel cameras and the ability to get within inches from the paint and plaster, Michelangelo’s temperament and humor are brilliantly exposed.
The book abounds with photos of the murals—most in black and white (and many photos taken before the cleaning, which I don’t understand and kind of ticked me off).
I went on line and bookmarked the Virtual Sistine Chapel and viewed the images there as I read. This is a Vatican website and the detail is amazing. Even if you don’t read the book check this out: www.wga.hu/tours/sistina/index.html I encourage you, and Michelangelo thanks you.
While the point was well made within the first few pages, it is really enlightening and fun just to see how far the artist went with his subversives. And there are lots of interesting tidbits.
The Sistine was built to the exact measurements of the first Temple which is highly insulting to Jews yet there is Jewish symbolism throughout the building. (Michelangelo had nothing to do with the building of the chapel.) As a matter of fact, throughout the entire ceiling, there is not a single Christian image.
There was a keen interest in Sign Language during the Renaissance. In the Madonna of the Rocks (daVinci) three of the figures spell out L. D. V. I always thought the hand positions in this painting were weird. Now it is so obvious. This subversive little trick persisted into modern times—the Daniel French sculpture in the Lincoln Memorial: the hands spell. A.L. Oh, man—how come I never noticed that?
Many of the images on the ceiling have had to be reevaluated and reinterpreted after the great twelve year cleaning in the 90’s. New characters emerged, scrolls with written messages hadn’t been seen in 400 years, hand and arm positions all of a sudden sprouted obscene gestures, previously thought male characters became female, a couple angels bump genitals and there is a famous panel showing, perhaps, the first Renaissance blow job (putting aside the Egyptian, Greeks and Romans).
The book is a full semester study—with a great professor. He guides you through some complicated things the casual observer would never know. The direction in which fresco characters look is important. The color of their clothes is symbolic. There is a single spot in the chapel where all the trompe l’oeuil are aligned perfectly, which is the center of a ten ring circle of life mosaic on the floor where the Pope kneels during services (behind the partition which has seven lanterns in the shape of a menorah).
Pope Julius II commissioned the artist for a series of frescos depicting the life of Christ. The fact not one image from the New Testament adorns the ceiling is amazing. This is during the time of the Inquisition—and just how Michelangelo got away with this is part of the fun.
It’s not a definitive study of the frescoes and I suppose I would have to call it ‘Renaissance Lite.’ But it is packed with fascinating facets.
The frescos are sixty feet from the viewer and many of the minute details were never meant to be seen. Now, with million pixel cameras and the ability to get within inches from the paint and plaster, Michelangelo’s temperament and humor are brilliantly exposed.
The book abounds with photos of the murals—most in black and white (and many photos taken before the cleaning, which I don’t understand and kind of ticked me off).
I went on line and bookmarked the Virtual Sistine Chapel and viewed the images there as I read. This is a Vatican website and the detail is amazing. Even if you don’t read the book check this out: www.wga.hu/tours/sistina/index.html I encourage you, and Michelangelo thanks you.
January 20, 2013
Se anche alcune delle teorie esposte in questo saggio non fossero condivise, o condivisibili, non si può dire di avere visto la Cappella Sistina senza essere passati prima... anche 'per di qua'. E' un testo affascinante, scorrevole e sobrio. Non ha un tono pettegolo, né quello presuntuoso di chi ti sta rivelando segreti ...massonici. Accompagna il lettore in un'osservazione attenta, documentata e colta; propone deduzioni logiche; suggerisce una teoria credibile, raccordandola bene ai documenti, alle Sacre Scritture e alla Storia dei papi; in particolare di quelli con cui ebbe a che fare il Maestro. Osserva le miserie degli uomini senza acrimonia, alla luce di quella che resta una delle opere d'ingegno più alte mai concepite dalla mente umana, e fornisce un'infinità di stimoli. Primo tra tutti un'ulteriore visita agli affreschi.
September 25, 2009
I love reading about art, and the codes in art, but this book took a wee bit of Cabbala and turned it into an entire book. They were not the first to notice no Christian characters are on the ceiling, nor were they the first to notice that the Last Judgment was shaped at the top rather like two stone tablets.
Throughout the book I found myself going "duh." Only the most naive of art lovers would miss a star of David anywhere, in any work from that period. To me, the look lacked a solid enough premise to warrant a book of some 320 pages. If the book had been half as long, and not so concerned with proving that Lorenzo de Medici had Jewish teachers in his house, which any student of that period already knows, and gone one with the esoteric teaching Michelangelo received, it might have made a good 200 pager. As it is, I rejoiced to finish it.
To give some due, David slaying Goliath does form a Hebrew letter. And at the same time, so?
Throughout the book I found myself going "duh." Only the most naive of art lovers would miss a star of David anywhere, in any work from that period. To me, the look lacked a solid enough premise to warrant a book of some 320 pages. If the book had been half as long, and not so concerned with proving that Lorenzo de Medici had Jewish teachers in his house, which any student of that period already knows, and gone one with the esoteric teaching Michelangelo received, it might have made a good 200 pager. As it is, I rejoiced to finish it.
To give some due, David slaying Goliath does form a Hebrew letter. And at the same time, so?
February 15, 2019
As knowledgeable as Rabbi Blech and Mr. Doliner are, all the 'decoding' that they write about with regards to the Sistine Chapel - the ceiling and the Last Judgment - are all based on conjecture. Michelangelo had all his notes, cartoons, private sketches as well as the unique flying arch bridge destroyed upon completion of the ceiling. Whatever he truly thought, died with him. Even examining his writings that survived to today, one must remember that intolerance and religious persecution as well as the influence of the rich and powerful patrons were a major influence on every aspect of life during that time.
Even keeping that in mind, the authors not only set the stage with history of the Vatican, the Catholic Church as well as some of the popes in the years before Michelangelo Buonarroti along with the de'Medici's, who exposed Michelangelo to Lorenzo's Garden of San Marco. The teaching, the discussions, the training that blossomed into the Renaissance.
Although he insisted he was not a painter - much less a fresco painter - Michelangelo produced the largest fresco painting in the world. As opposed to his original contract, he provided a masterpiece that was filled with Old Testament figures - there is not one New Testament/Christian image - but also pagan figures as well.
There is some discussion of painting techniques utilized to help with perspective as well as breaking up the ceiling in panels in order for the stories to be told in a coherent manner. Most of the symbolism discussed is connected with various Jewish texts and beliefs - the Midrash, the Kabbalah but there are also some pointed insults painted there. Not only does Michelangelo paint some putti (cherubs or simply naked children) 'giving the fig' to the pope (flipping the bird in today's vernacular) but he also has God mooning those within the chapel.
It's massively interesting. There are numerous pictures - in black and white as well as color. The authors are very knowledgeable in their fields and could be completely correct in their interpretations.
2019-020
Even keeping that in mind, the authors not only set the stage with history of the Vatican, the Catholic Church as well as some of the popes in the years before Michelangelo Buonarroti along with the de'Medici's, who exposed Michelangelo to Lorenzo's Garden of San Marco. The teaching, the discussions, the training that blossomed into the Renaissance.
Although he insisted he was not a painter - much less a fresco painter - Michelangelo produced the largest fresco painting in the world. As opposed to his original contract, he provided a masterpiece that was filled with Old Testament figures - there is not one New Testament/Christian image - but also pagan figures as well.
There is some discussion of painting techniques utilized to help with perspective as well as breaking up the ceiling in panels in order for the stories to be told in a coherent manner. Most of the symbolism discussed is connected with various Jewish texts and beliefs - the Midrash, the Kabbalah but there are also some pointed insults painted there. Not only does Michelangelo paint some putti (cherubs or simply naked children) 'giving the fig' to the pope (flipping the bird in today's vernacular) but he also has God mooning those within the chapel.
It's massively interesting. There are numerous pictures - in black and white as well as color. The authors are very knowledgeable in their fields and could be completely correct in their interpretations.
2019-020
June 4, 2013
There really is nothing I can say that hasn't been touched on by other reviewers. If you liked "The Da Vinci Code" you'll definitely like this book. But while the Da Vinci Code was obviously fiction, the authors of this book have classified it as non-fiction which becomes pretty problematic when one is attempting to prove a thesis with very few cited sources and a heavy dash of speculation.
Actually, let me rephrase that; like Holy Blood Holy Grail, The Sistine Secrets, could be in a class I like to call "speculative non-fiction." Benjamin Blech and Co. wish the reader to take a journey with them to Renaissance Italy, during the height of Michelangelo's popularity, where he chooses to give the Vatican the ultimate "fig" by filling their most prized sacred space with symbols and figures drawn directly from Judaism.
The hypothesis, by itself, isn't that bad. But from chapter one you're expected to take quite a few suppositions at face value from Michelangelo's education within the Medici household to his "secret" feelings about Judaism and Anti-Semitism. Mix this with repetition and undercurrents of anti-Papacy sentiment and it became easy enough to lose sight of the actual purpose/point of the book.
Fortunately, the writers' are capable of spinning together threads of religious philosophy, art history, and Renaissance politics without coming across as pretentious or boring. This was probably this texts only saving grace. I finished with a resounding "Well, that was interesting."
That's pretty good, all things considered.
Actually, let me rephrase that; like Holy Blood Holy Grail, The Sistine Secrets, could be in a class I like to call "speculative non-fiction." Benjamin Blech and Co. wish the reader to take a journey with them to Renaissance Italy, during the height of Michelangelo's popularity, where he chooses to give the Vatican the ultimate "fig" by filling their most prized sacred space with symbols and figures drawn directly from Judaism.
The hypothesis, by itself, isn't that bad. But from chapter one you're expected to take quite a few suppositions at face value from Michelangelo's education within the Medici household to his "secret" feelings about Judaism and Anti-Semitism. Mix this with repetition and undercurrents of anti-Papacy sentiment and it became easy enough to lose sight of the actual purpose/point of the book.
Fortunately, the writers' are capable of spinning together threads of religious philosophy, art history, and Renaissance politics without coming across as pretentious or boring. This was probably this texts only saving grace. I finished with a resounding "Well, that was interesting."
That's pretty good, all things considered.
November 26, 2019
Well, I set out to use Goodreads as a way to read outside my comfort zone, and boy is this book it.
While I was convinced that there were some snappy hidden messages in the Sistine Chaple artwork, some interpertations were a bit far fetched to me.
Still, it was a nice book about art history, the history of the art of the time and of Michelangelo's life and work. That part I certainly enjoyed.
The book was, to someone who reads a LOT of history books, very different in style. Some information was repeated several times as if written by two uncoordinated people. Sometimes the judaic stuff were shoved a bit where they don't belong. I am convinced that Michelangelo knew some Talmud, just not sure he knew quite that much kabala.
Still, a nice book altogether.
While I was convinced that there were some snappy hidden messages in the Sistine Chaple artwork, some interpertations were a bit far fetched to me.
Still, it was a nice book about art history, the history of the art of the time and of Michelangelo's life and work. That part I certainly enjoyed.
The book was, to someone who reads a LOT of history books, very different in style. Some information was repeated several times as if written by two uncoordinated people. Sometimes the judaic stuff were shoved a bit where they don't belong. I am convinced that Michelangelo knew some Talmud, just not sure he knew quite that much kabala.
Still, a nice book altogether.
January 24, 2010
My family and I were privileged to travel with author Roy Doliner throughout Rome. We saw the Sistine Chapel and the hidden secrets in person with him. His research and knowledge blew us away. I highly recommend opening your mind to the possibility of these revelations! Mysterious and intriguing, whether or not you fully embrace these secrets as truth. This book and the authors were featured on Good Morning America and 20/20! The intro of the book was written by Enrico Bruschini, "one of the most esteemed art experts in all of Rome and the Vatican Museums."
February 26, 2019
What is one to make of this fascinating yet frustrating book?
The world has been mesmerized by the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel ever since it was unveiled over half a millennium ago. Michelangelo’s masterpiece has been viewed, adored, analyzed, and dissected sixteen million ways from the proverbial Sunday, and it will continue to captivate the world long after our children’s children’s great-grandchildren are long in their graves. The authors of The Sistine Secrets make the case that the painter who gave the ceiling its singular place in history drew on an extensive knowledge of Judaism and, in particular, the Kabbalah, to incorporate several insults to the monomaniacal pope, Julius II, who commissioned the work and forced the artist whose first and only true love was sculpting marble to spend more than four years working in an art form—painting—that he considered inferior.
However, the book is flawed. The authors’ linguistic ignorance is outright shocking to anyone with access to a dictionary. These may seem like niggling points, but for example:
1. They misspell the Latin “inter-legere” with two Gs instead of the correct one G; add the extra G and the word becomes Italian.
2. They claim that the modern word “sibyl” comes not from the Greek word “Sibylla” but from a Babylonian/Aramaic word, “sabba-il.” There may be a connection between the Aramaic and modern English words, but you can’t just dismiss the Greek one wholesale as they attempt to do.
3. They write that “the word jubilee comes directly [italics mine] from the Hebrew word yovel…”. Not true; the Hebrew word is the ancestor of the English word, but only by side-trips through first ancient Greek and then Latin.
Granted, these are only linguistic errors; but they do worse than annoy the reader; ultimately they cast doubt on the authors’ scholarship throughout the whole book. This is tragic, because the question of why the world’s most famous ceiling, which happens to cover the Pope’s own private chapel, contains almost all Jewish figures with so few Christian ones, is absolutely worth examining.
Further, the tone of the beginning section, which lays out the history behind the painting of the world’s most famous ceiling and describes the cultural background in which Michelangelo was raised and which contributed to the way he viewed the Church and the world around him, leaves the reader with the impression that the authors have something of an axe to grind. For example, they claim that the Renaissance began with the flowering of Jewish thought in Florence, completely ignoring the Greek texts that also jump-started western Europe’s intellectual re-awakening; they also go so far as to point out that the physician who saved the pope’s life (and therefore also the whole ceiling project) when he fell gravely ill was, you guessed it, a Jew. Their constant emphasis of the Jewish and Kabbalistic influences in Michelangelo’s upbringing, adult sympathies, and just about everything else ultimately becomes almost unbearably strident; the reader is left feeling as if they are standing on a rooftop, screaming: “This was Jewish! That was Jewish! This other thing was Jewish! Everything is Jewish! It’s ALL SOOOOO JEWWW-ISHHHHH!!!!!” Apparently Judaism had a very strong impact on Michelangelo; all very well and good, but the authors would have made their point more effectively had they written in a less insistent tone. (Nota bene, this reviewer has always appreciated and admired the many fine qualities of Judaism, and has many lifelong friends who are Jewish. I am not complaining about either the religion or its followers, only the writing style in one section of the book.)
And finally, although a bibliography is included, the tiny handful of footnotes is not anywhere near enough; far more are needed. For example, how do we know, centuries after Michelangelo’s death, what he truly thought of the Kabbalah? The average reader, no matter how passionate he or she may be about the Sistine Chapel ceiling decorations, will probably not read through every single book in the list at the end to find out where this and all the rest of the authors’ claims originate.
All of which is a shame, because the section that discusses the individual ceiling panels and their hidden meanings is truly fascinating. Messrs. Blech and Doliner go into extensive, enlightening, and often hilarious detail about the various insults to Pope Julius and the Catholic Church that Michelangelo painted throughout all the panels on his famous ceiling in such a way that they are indiscernible from the floor of the chapel. Even their interpretations of panels and artistic elements that do not contain blatant insults to the Church or the pontiff often disagree with the official Vatican version, and provide insightful reading. Take the linguistics claims with a boulder of salt, do your own research on the historical and cultural zeitgeist in which the artist grew up, and read the book despite its questionable scholarship. Whether you are lucky enough to have visited the Sistine Chapel in person, or have only seen photos of it, chances are you’ll never look at the world’s most famous ceiling in the same way again.
The world has been mesmerized by the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel ever since it was unveiled over half a millennium ago. Michelangelo’s masterpiece has been viewed, adored, analyzed, and dissected sixteen million ways from the proverbial Sunday, and it will continue to captivate the world long after our children’s children’s great-grandchildren are long in their graves. The authors of The Sistine Secrets make the case that the painter who gave the ceiling its singular place in history drew on an extensive knowledge of Judaism and, in particular, the Kabbalah, to incorporate several insults to the monomaniacal pope, Julius II, who commissioned the work and forced the artist whose first and only true love was sculpting marble to spend more than four years working in an art form—painting—that he considered inferior.
However, the book is flawed. The authors’ linguistic ignorance is outright shocking to anyone with access to a dictionary. These may seem like niggling points, but for example:
1. They misspell the Latin “inter-legere” with two Gs instead of the correct one G; add the extra G and the word becomes Italian.
2. They claim that the modern word “sibyl” comes not from the Greek word “Sibylla” but from a Babylonian/Aramaic word, “sabba-il.” There may be a connection between the Aramaic and modern English words, but you can’t just dismiss the Greek one wholesale as they attempt to do.
3. They write that “the word jubilee comes directly [italics mine] from the Hebrew word yovel…”. Not true; the Hebrew word is the ancestor of the English word, but only by side-trips through first ancient Greek and then Latin.
Granted, these are only linguistic errors; but they do worse than annoy the reader; ultimately they cast doubt on the authors’ scholarship throughout the whole book. This is tragic, because the question of why the world’s most famous ceiling, which happens to cover the Pope’s own private chapel, contains almost all Jewish figures with so few Christian ones, is absolutely worth examining.
Further, the tone of the beginning section, which lays out the history behind the painting of the world’s most famous ceiling and describes the cultural background in which Michelangelo was raised and which contributed to the way he viewed the Church and the world around him, leaves the reader with the impression that the authors have something of an axe to grind. For example, they claim that the Renaissance began with the flowering of Jewish thought in Florence, completely ignoring the Greek texts that also jump-started western Europe’s intellectual re-awakening; they also go so far as to point out that the physician who saved the pope’s life (and therefore also the whole ceiling project) when he fell gravely ill was, you guessed it, a Jew. Their constant emphasis of the Jewish and Kabbalistic influences in Michelangelo’s upbringing, adult sympathies, and just about everything else ultimately becomes almost unbearably strident; the reader is left feeling as if they are standing on a rooftop, screaming: “This was Jewish! That was Jewish! This other thing was Jewish! Everything is Jewish! It’s ALL SOOOOO JEWWW-ISHHHHH!!!!!” Apparently Judaism had a very strong impact on Michelangelo; all very well and good, but the authors would have made their point more effectively had they written in a less insistent tone. (Nota bene, this reviewer has always appreciated and admired the many fine qualities of Judaism, and has many lifelong friends who are Jewish. I am not complaining about either the religion or its followers, only the writing style in one section of the book.)
And finally, although a bibliography is included, the tiny handful of footnotes is not anywhere near enough; far more are needed. For example, how do we know, centuries after Michelangelo’s death, what he truly thought of the Kabbalah? The average reader, no matter how passionate he or she may be about the Sistine Chapel ceiling decorations, will probably not read through every single book in the list at the end to find out where this and all the rest of the authors’ claims originate.
All of which is a shame, because the section that discusses the individual ceiling panels and their hidden meanings is truly fascinating. Messrs. Blech and Doliner go into extensive, enlightening, and often hilarious detail about the various insults to Pope Julius and the Catholic Church that Michelangelo painted throughout all the panels on his famous ceiling in such a way that they are indiscernible from the floor of the chapel. Even their interpretations of panels and artistic elements that do not contain blatant insults to the Church or the pontiff often disagree with the official Vatican version, and provide insightful reading. Take the linguistics claims with a boulder of salt, do your own research on the historical and cultural zeitgeist in which the artist grew up, and read the book despite its questionable scholarship. Whether you are lucky enough to have visited the Sistine Chapel in person, or have only seen photos of it, chances are you’ll never look at the world’s most famous ceiling in the same way again.
March 23, 2024
Silly awful book whose utter lack of reliability is manifestly demonstrated by Ryan in his review of May 2008 which I strongly suggest you read as well. The real problem with this book is its intent on finding 'secrets' hidden by Michelangelo - the problem is that if you read any knowledgeable book by an art historian - or even a popularizer like Ross King's 'Michelangelo and the Pope's Ceiling' - you will learn that the whole content of the ceiling was one that was minutely planned beforehand not just with the Pope but with various theologians - this was common with all art works because no one would rely on an artist to know, understand, or plan the vastly complex allegorical message that any major artistic work had at that time. Although the authors think that the time spent in the Medici household would have equipped Michelangelo with an in depth knowledge of Latin, Greek and the Hebrew Kabala the fact is that he would not have had time to acquire a knowledge comparable to those of the many Vatican theologians. I don't doubt that there are many elements from the Kabala and other esoteric texts - that was the whole point of the Renaissance - the rediscovery of so much ancient learning through original languages - but the interpretation of what is included, what it meant to those at the time, what it was meant to say to others is very complex and can not be reduced to a ridiculous game of Michelangelo painting 'secrets' into the ceiling unknown to anyone else in the Vatican court.
Nor do the authors seem to understand that for Christians of that time (and for many today) the old testament was a Christian and text to say that there are no 'Christian' figures on the Sistine Ceiling and to find in that something special is just absurd. Do you imagine fundamentalist Christians who talk of Noah and the Ark as actual historical facts think they are dealing with a Jewish person?
I could keep going on - but one of the most creepy aspects of the book is the oleaginous sucking up they do to Pope John Paul II and how wonderful he is/was and portray him as some great open minded person - really? That would come as a surprise to all those Catholics he tried to silence or whose opinions he condemned - never mind the comprehensive cover up he allowed of the sexual abuse scandals - but all they do is go on about the great favor the old monster did them by meeting them and allowing them access to various papal apartments. As a final blast against this dreadful book it strikes me as significant that the illustrations are all of the unrestored ceiling - presumably using non copyright pictures or pictures that could be got very cheap because why look at them when the cleaned ceiling co clearly shows Michelangelo's intent - secrets and all - if any.
Nor do the authors seem to understand that for Christians of that time (and for many today) the old testament was a Christian and text to say that there are no 'Christian' figures on the Sistine Ceiling and to find in that something special is just absurd. Do you imagine fundamentalist Christians who talk of Noah and the Ark as actual historical facts think they are dealing with a Jewish person?
I could keep going on - but one of the most creepy aspects of the book is the oleaginous sucking up they do to Pope John Paul II and how wonderful he is/was and portray him as some great open minded person - really? That would come as a surprise to all those Catholics he tried to silence or whose opinions he condemned - never mind the comprehensive cover up he allowed of the sexual abuse scandals - but all they do is go on about the great favor the old monster did them by meeting them and allowing them access to various papal apartments. As a final blast against this dreadful book it strikes me as significant that the illustrations are all of the unrestored ceiling - presumably using non copyright pictures or pictures that could be got very cheap because why look at them when the cleaned ceiling co clearly shows Michelangelo's intent - secrets and all - if any.
June 17, 2010
Forget Dan Brown and the fictional "Davinci Code". This is a description of Michelangelo's hidden messages in the frescos of the Sistine Chapel. Authors Ray Doliner and Rabbi Benjamin Blech contend that the entire theme of the Sistine paintings is anti-clerical, with insults aimed at the commissioning Pope, Julius II. This is a richly detailed story that starts with the background to the Sistine Chapel; the hiding of messages by artists in their work; and Michelangelo's life story.
The second half deals specifically with the paintings and how they were done, as well as their history since Michelangelo Buonarroti completed them. Among the hidden messages they identify are:
* insults directed at the Pope by the puti or angels surrounding him
* extensive symbols and story lines from the Hebrew Kabbalah, including differences between the Christian and Jewish telling of the story of the Garden of Eden
* Hebrew letters hidden in the outlines of characters in the paintings
* why God's backside is shown in the central painting where the Sun is created
* how outlines of human body parts, including the kidney and the brain appear within the images.
The authors note that in the Creation panel, it took until 1975 for an Indiana doctor, Frank Mershberger, to realize that the cape and cloth in the famous "Creation of Adam" panel outline the cross-section of the RIGHT side of the human brain.
The reason? Blech and Doliner say that it echoes the Kabbalistic belief that the right side of the brain is linked to wisdom and that Michelangelo deliberately imbedded the image knowing that fact.
There are dozens of other messages in these huge frescos and hidden reflections on the life and times of Michelangelo. It includes reflections on Michelangelo's secret dissections of dead human bodies at a time that it was prohibited. And they argue that they even represent Michelangelo's bisexuality or love of male figure.
This is a very good read for Renaissance history, art history and the history of religion.
The illustrations support the book well but this story cries out of an interactive DVD with color closeups of the Sistine ceiling.
The second half deals specifically with the paintings and how they were done, as well as their history since Michelangelo Buonarroti completed them. Among the hidden messages they identify are:
* insults directed at the Pope by the puti or angels surrounding him
* extensive symbols and story lines from the Hebrew Kabbalah, including differences between the Christian and Jewish telling of the story of the Garden of Eden
* Hebrew letters hidden in the outlines of characters in the paintings
* why God's backside is shown in the central painting where the Sun is created
* how outlines of human body parts, including the kidney and the brain appear within the images.
The authors note that in the Creation panel, it took until 1975 for an Indiana doctor, Frank Mershberger, to realize that the cape and cloth in the famous "Creation of Adam" panel outline the cross-section of the RIGHT side of the human brain.
The reason? Blech and Doliner say that it echoes the Kabbalistic belief that the right side of the brain is linked to wisdom and that Michelangelo deliberately imbedded the image knowing that fact.
There are dozens of other messages in these huge frescos and hidden reflections on the life and times of Michelangelo. It includes reflections on Michelangelo's secret dissections of dead human bodies at a time that it was prohibited. And they argue that they even represent Michelangelo's bisexuality or love of male figure.
This is a very good read for Renaissance history, art history and the history of religion.
The illustrations support the book well but this story cries out of an interactive DVD with color closeups of the Sistine ceiling.
March 17, 2014
I love the blend of Art History and Jewish Mysticism. The forward starts with this maxim: conoscersi è il miglior modo per capirsi
capirsi è il miglior modo per amarsi
(to know each other is the best way to understand each other,
and to understand each other is the only way to love each other.)
It is refreshing to examine the paradox of religious intolerance (and its ability to violate the sacred) through the genius of an artist who stood up against the authority of a pope. A thoughtful and instructive book filled with fascinating insights, whether drawing on the multiple meanings of Pieta, or detailing the meanings of the number seven (seven Jewish Prophets; seven lights (Eyes of God looking in all directions) in the Holy Menorah, the seven sides (N,S,E,W, above, below and within ourselves), the seven Middot (the lower part of the Kabbalistic Tree of Life) (p. 179-80), the Middle Path (p. 189).
How to "read a painting" , the discovery of sign language, or lungs filled with love and life are well-detailed in the first part of the book. The next sections unfold the layers of complexity in the frescos: symbolism, the background history of the Renaissance and personal story of Michelangelo and the gift of his genius.
capirsi è il miglior modo per amarsi
(to know each other is the best way to understand each other,
and to understand each other is the only way to love each other.)
It is refreshing to examine the paradox of religious intolerance (and its ability to violate the sacred) through the genius of an artist who stood up against the authority of a pope. A thoughtful and instructive book filled with fascinating insights, whether drawing on the multiple meanings of Pieta, or detailing the meanings of the number seven (seven Jewish Prophets; seven lights (Eyes of God looking in all directions) in the Holy Menorah, the seven sides (N,S,E,W, above, below and within ourselves), the seven Middot (the lower part of the Kabbalistic Tree of Life) (p. 179-80), the Middle Path (p. 189).
How to "read a painting" , the discovery of sign language, or lungs filled with love and life are well-detailed in the first part of the book. The next sections unfold the layers of complexity in the frescos: symbolism, the background history of the Renaissance and personal story of Michelangelo and the gift of his genius.
January 25, 2016
An interesting book. The authors are both apparently Jewish scholars whopresent a fascinating version of Michaelangelo and his work on the Cistine Chapel in Rome, among other of his works of art and cities where they are found.
It must be read from a position of mild scepticism at the very least. As a Catholic, I neither doubt nor accept most of the information presented, particularly since it is slanted very decidedly to encourage the reader to believe that Michaelangelo's work was primarily based on everything Jewish.
It is one viewpoint and I would need to read works which challenge, expand, clarify and otherwise provide a more balanced view of the many points raised in this book. It strikes me as the extreme view which always leaves me with lingering suspicions that the whole story has not been revealed.
It must be read from a position of mild scepticism at the very least. As a Catholic, I neither doubt nor accept most of the information presented, particularly since it is slanted very decidedly to encourage the reader to believe that Michaelangelo's work was primarily based on everything Jewish.
It is one viewpoint and I would need to read works which challenge, expand, clarify and otherwise provide a more balanced view of the many points raised in this book. It strikes me as the extreme view which always leaves me with lingering suspicions that the whole story has not been revealed.
Read
February 16, 2009Through this book, I have been learning one of the many interpretations of Michelangelo's painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. The book is part biography of the life of the artist and part hidden messages in Michelangelo hidden within the painting. The main message is of religious tolerance, with ideas that all religions stem from one place and person in history; according to the authors' research, Michelangelo knew this, and therefore painted his hidden Judaic messages in a painting that should have been strictly Christian.
August 30, 2009
Although interesting at many points, the author(s) take too much liberty allowing conspiracy theories and their own imaginations override the facts.
If you want an actual book on the mind of Michelangelo during the creation of his famous frescoes in the Sistine Chapel, read: Michelangelo and the Pope's Ceiling (King).
If you want an actual book on the mind of Michelangelo during the creation of his famous frescoes in the Sistine Chapel, read: Michelangelo and the Pope's Ceiling (King).
August 15, 2019
Wow. This was utterly fascinating. Amazing research and a real page-turner. You want to know what the author will unearth next. If you are fascinated by the Vatican and its Jewish connection, you will be dazzled by the information presented in the book. It is revealed in a thoroughly entertaining manner that really keeps you flipping pages to find out what happens next. If you are planning to visit the Vatican, postpone the visit until you have read this book.
February 6, 2016
Interesting book. The authors, both Jewish, try really hard to connect the Sistine Chapel and much of the Renaissance architecture, art, and thought, to Jewish and secret Hebrew teachings. Intriguing, but felt somewhat forced and self-serving.
January 21, 2017
Wonderful book
I learned many things about the Sistine Chapel and I will not mention any spoilers. There are so many facts and the book has a very reputable group of scholars as the authors. I highly recommend this book.
I learned many things about the Sistine Chapel and I will not mention any spoilers. There are so many facts and the book has a very reputable group of scholars as the authors. I highly recommend this book.
August 6, 2014
This is a must read for anyone who has been to the Sistine Chapel and felt overwhelmed by the power of the art, architecture, and history. It's part history, part biography, and part art lesson.
January 10, 2015
Fascinating.
March 20, 2023
Oh! Had I discovered this book before I visited the Sistine Chapel, rather than after it. On the other hand, it's possible that if I did so, I would still be in there staring up at the ceiling. The authors make *such* a marvelous case, and fill in so many supporting backstory details, that it does feel that it is absolutely open-and-shut. Nevertheless, they still responsibly dedicate the opening chapters to explain that protest art itself is a thing, and provide sterling examples, including the art already present on the walls of the sistine chapel before Master Buonarotti began his work. Once that's established in its own right, the rest of what's going on with the ceiling and the front wall is just mind-bending stuff.
In my own experience with writing a WW2 memoir on my grandfather's experiences, and reading several others as part of the preparatory process, the concept of "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:8) truly came to life. Michelangelo's art was subject to the whims of various rulers coming and going, with numerous edicts, with multiple close calls, and we have what we have through glorious events, accidents, and histories. Awareness of this makes absorbing this book that much of a richer experience.
I also fell in love, as it were, with Michelangelgo himself. I learned a world about him that I was ignorant about before, but my eyes were opened to his will, desires, drive, accomplishment, delicious chutzpah, and unimaginably divine talent.
When I regrettably closed the book after reading the last page, I was compelled to reach out to both authors, declaring that I had uncovered a grand detail of the ceiling that they might have overlooked. This is my letter:
"Gentlemen! I have just finished reading your marvelous book, the Sistine Secrets, and I was in thrall the whole time. Adding to the experience was the fact that I had visited the Sistine Chapel just months before. Had I read the book before my visit, I might still be there staring at the ceiling.
I think I might be able to add one more discovery that you might have overlooked, and that I'm thrilled to bring to your attention.
In the fresco "The Creation of the Sun, Moon and Vegetation," there is much conjecture around God showing his behind. Some say it's a "moon" pun, some say it's a final insult to Michelangelo's overlords, but I think what's happening is a living, artistic embodiment of Exodus 33:20-23, as follows:
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock:
And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen."
Now look at the fresco carefully, and see if all this is not depicted in the painting:
1) God hides his face.
2) Four figures surround him in the margins which are in different poses of standing on a rock pedestal.
3) This is certainly God's glory passing by, and when he does, Moses is hidden from direct view!
4) Look at God's hands. Don't both look like they've just been removed from action ("take away my hand"), in opposition to the very active hands of God on the right side of the creation painting?
5) Finally, we are seeing His back parts! Artscroll and others interpret this politely as just "back," No. It's "Achorai," which almost literally means "my hindquarters."
6) "but my face shall not be seen."
I think the evidence points in the direction of my case, rather than it being the boldest jest and mockery ever. Michelangelo is merely interpreting the verses literally.
Very eager to hear your thoughts on the matter, and very pleased to perhaps have possibly added, in a small way, to your gorgeous masterwork of an investigative, revealing book.
All the best,
With admiration,
Martin Bodek"
I was so pleased when they both responded, in opposite ways! One said indeed, I may have found something, but the book alas, hath been written! The other said the Vatican itself actually raised my point, and it was already countered with their interpretation of Michelangelo's intent. I stand by my statement, and the door is not closed on the subject. I've got some research to do!
In my own experience with writing a WW2 memoir on my grandfather's experiences, and reading several others as part of the preparatory process, the concept of "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:8) truly came to life. Michelangelo's art was subject to the whims of various rulers coming and going, with numerous edicts, with multiple close calls, and we have what we have through glorious events, accidents, and histories. Awareness of this makes absorbing this book that much of a richer experience.
I also fell in love, as it were, with Michelangelgo himself. I learned a world about him that I was ignorant about before, but my eyes were opened to his will, desires, drive, accomplishment, delicious chutzpah, and unimaginably divine talent.
When I regrettably closed the book after reading the last page, I was compelled to reach out to both authors, declaring that I had uncovered a grand detail of the ceiling that they might have overlooked. This is my letter:
"Gentlemen! I have just finished reading your marvelous book, the Sistine Secrets, and I was in thrall the whole time. Adding to the experience was the fact that I had visited the Sistine Chapel just months before. Had I read the book before my visit, I might still be there staring at the ceiling.
I think I might be able to add one more discovery that you might have overlooked, and that I'm thrilled to bring to your attention.
In the fresco "The Creation of the Sun, Moon and Vegetation," there is much conjecture around God showing his behind. Some say it's a "moon" pun, some say it's a final insult to Michelangelo's overlords, but I think what's happening is a living, artistic embodiment of Exodus 33:20-23, as follows:
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock:
And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen."
Now look at the fresco carefully, and see if all this is not depicted in the painting:
1) God hides his face.
2) Four figures surround him in the margins which are in different poses of standing on a rock pedestal.
3) This is certainly God's glory passing by, and when he does, Moses is hidden from direct view!
4) Look at God's hands. Don't both look like they've just been removed from action ("take away my hand"), in opposition to the very active hands of God on the right side of the creation painting?
5) Finally, we are seeing His back parts! Artscroll and others interpret this politely as just "back," No. It's "Achorai," which almost literally means "my hindquarters."
6) "but my face shall not be seen."
I think the evidence points in the direction of my case, rather than it being the boldest jest and mockery ever. Michelangelo is merely interpreting the verses literally.
Very eager to hear your thoughts on the matter, and very pleased to perhaps have possibly added, in a small way, to your gorgeous masterwork of an investigative, revealing book.
All the best,
With admiration,
Martin Bodek"
I was so pleased when they both responded, in opposite ways! One said indeed, I may have found something, but the book alas, hath been written! The other said the Vatican itself actually raised my point, and it was already countered with their interpretation of Michelangelo's intent. I stand by my statement, and the door is not closed on the subject. I've got some research to do!
May 23, 2020
IT’S DONE! Thank goodness!
That might seem a little harsh, but I know I’m not alone in my opinion of this book. I’m disappointed because it presented itself as one thing and was entirely another. It looks like a nonfiction art history book, but it’s actually a work of religious speculation. And I’m sure the scholars behind it would argue that it’s nonfiction, but dude—where are the sources?? Where is literally anything to back up what you’ve presented??
My first issue with this book is that, not including the ending materials (ie acknowledgments) it’s 306 pages long. Yet, it doesn’t actually start talking about the Sistine Chapel symbolism until page 126. That’s very nearly halfway through the book! And I get it—context!! Great!! But large chunks are repetitive or unrelated. It reads like the 2 authors wrote the chapter separately and then put them together at the end. Disjointed and unpleasant. They also end each chapter—to an almost comic degree—with sentences like “BECAUSE MICHELANGELO WAS PAINTING SECRETS ON THE CEILING” as if they realize that it’s taking them a while to get there and they don’t want you to forget what you came for in the first place. Also like a bad piece of persuasive writing.
Now, because I struggled through this book and because I’m nitpicky and because it feels wrong to insult this book without evidence, I’m going to present examples. I’ll preface this by saying that the entire book isn’t like this. Certain concepts were great and definitely plausible. The Jewish people being saved depicted in the four corners?? Cool! Michelangelo depicting Jewish people among the righteous in The Last Judgement? Rad! These sorts of things, which either were self evident or proven based on analysis of the art, were totally fine and interesting. But then the authors just kept reaching. And that is how we got things like:
-I first began to see problems on page 77, during an analysis of a carving of Mary done by Michelangelo. There are five steps. The authors refute the common understanding of this choice (which, honestly....maybe there’s just five steps because it fit nicely in there. Call me crazy) and goes on to explain how this could relate to Jewish mysticism. And they phrase it like “it’s possible” which, yeah. It is possible, and I was interested to learn about it. But then the authors go on to state that this is the more “logical” explanation and discuss it like we must accept it. And it’s just...how?? Why?? On what grounds?? You offer no sources! It’s a possibility, but what makes it more likely?
-Later in the book, the authors state that Michelangelo made Mary young in his Pieta because he was also depicting Sarah (à la Sarah and Abraham). Once again, it’s like...maybe!!!! But they give you no reason to think this, no sources for the theory, and no reason why it’s more likely than the more common ideas, or why it’s more likely than literally any theory you could come up with.
-At one point while mentioning figures who may have influenced his symbolic choices, they mention a doctor. Michelangelo is not known to have known this man, but they literally state that it would be super odd if he didn’t, so probably he was an influence. Seriously?
-Any depiction of men & women is stretched to reflect the spiritual aspect of both genders being balanced. Without evidence
-Talking about alterations to the wall: “the real reason” is something completely unproven!! Which they will state and then move on from as if it’s accepted fact
-And the biggest piece of proof for all of this...is that the Sistine Chapel fresco has no title???
I bring up these specific points because they exemplify my problem with this book. My problem isn’t the subject matter, which is interesting as theory. It’s the way it was framed and presented, as fact but without any proof. It’s also the fact that I didn’t come into this book expecting it to be what it was, and I think it would be better served if they made it more evidently specific in its subject matter. If they wrote this book as what it was—an attempt to persuade others towards a theory—I’d be down. But it’s written somewhat poorly and handled wrong and as a result I totally hate it! Thanks bye
That might seem a little harsh, but I know I’m not alone in my opinion of this book. I’m disappointed because it presented itself as one thing and was entirely another. It looks like a nonfiction art history book, but it’s actually a work of religious speculation. And I’m sure the scholars behind it would argue that it’s nonfiction, but dude—where are the sources?? Where is literally anything to back up what you’ve presented??
My first issue with this book is that, not including the ending materials (ie acknowledgments) it’s 306 pages long. Yet, it doesn’t actually start talking about the Sistine Chapel symbolism until page 126. That’s very nearly halfway through the book! And I get it—context!! Great!! But large chunks are repetitive or unrelated. It reads like the 2 authors wrote the chapter separately and then put them together at the end. Disjointed and unpleasant. They also end each chapter—to an almost comic degree—with sentences like “BECAUSE MICHELANGELO WAS PAINTING SECRETS ON THE CEILING” as if they realize that it’s taking them a while to get there and they don’t want you to forget what you came for in the first place. Also like a bad piece of persuasive writing.
Now, because I struggled through this book and because I’m nitpicky and because it feels wrong to insult this book without evidence, I’m going to present examples. I’ll preface this by saying that the entire book isn’t like this. Certain concepts were great and definitely plausible. The Jewish people being saved depicted in the four corners?? Cool! Michelangelo depicting Jewish people among the righteous in The Last Judgement? Rad! These sorts of things, which either were self evident or proven based on analysis of the art, were totally fine and interesting. But then the authors just kept reaching. And that is how we got things like:
-I first began to see problems on page 77, during an analysis of a carving of Mary done by Michelangelo. There are five steps. The authors refute the common understanding of this choice (which, honestly....maybe there’s just five steps because it fit nicely in there. Call me crazy) and goes on to explain how this could relate to Jewish mysticism. And they phrase it like “it’s possible” which, yeah. It is possible, and I was interested to learn about it. But then the authors go on to state that this is the more “logical” explanation and discuss it like we must accept it. And it’s just...how?? Why?? On what grounds?? You offer no sources! It’s a possibility, but what makes it more likely?
-Later in the book, the authors state that Michelangelo made Mary young in his Pieta because he was also depicting Sarah (à la Sarah and Abraham). Once again, it’s like...maybe!!!! But they give you no reason to think this, no sources for the theory, and no reason why it’s more likely than the more common ideas, or why it’s more likely than literally any theory you could come up with.
-At one point while mentioning figures who may have influenced his symbolic choices, they mention a doctor. Michelangelo is not known to have known this man, but they literally state that it would be super odd if he didn’t, so probably he was an influence. Seriously?
-Any depiction of men & women is stretched to reflect the spiritual aspect of both genders being balanced. Without evidence
-Talking about alterations to the wall: “the real reason” is something completely unproven!! Which they will state and then move on from as if it’s accepted fact
-And the biggest piece of proof for all of this...is that the Sistine Chapel fresco has no title???
I bring up these specific points because they exemplify my problem with this book. My problem isn’t the subject matter, which is interesting as theory. It’s the way it was framed and presented, as fact but without any proof. It’s also the fact that I didn’t come into this book expecting it to be what it was, and I think it would be better served if they made it more evidently specific in its subject matter. If they wrote this book as what it was—an attempt to persuade others towards a theory—I’d be down. But it’s written somewhat poorly and handled wrong and as a result I totally hate it! Thanks bye
August 28, 2024
It is quite shocking that the author of this book is a professor, seing how many glaring mistakes his book contains. To just give two: examples:
Anyone with a faintest idea of history know that the pope didn't lead the Fourth Crusade to sack Constantinople, but the doge of Venice.
This one is really bad. Constantine I didn't create a permanent divide in east and west. That was Theodosios I in 395. He didn't let the pope rule the west; it is pretty amusing to read an academian implying that he believes that the donation of Constantine is true. Here we're likewise told that the Eastern empire called itself Byzantium, which isn't true. They called themselves Romans even after the fall of Constantinople in 1453.. The adjective Byzantine is more based on how scholarship in the 1800s viewed the Eastern Roman Empire than any facts. He has apparently also missed that Romulus lived in Ravenna, not Rome. Julius Nepos is neither fond of this claim (emperor until 475, then claimant until his death in 480).
----------------------------
The author also spends forever before he comes to the point. I really couldn't care less about the political status of Florence and Rome when Michelangelo lived. I really couldn't care less about how Michelangelo grew up. I, and probably the majority of people reading the book, already know the basic biography of Michelangelo and the Medici family; I specifically need an interpretation of the ceiling and wall of the chapels, nothing else.
I many years ago learned that I cannot watch documentaries on e.g. Roman history or church history, because I only find mistakes everywhere. This book is the same and hardly one I would trust: if he makes glaring mistakes in what I know (history), how can I be sure that he's right about what I don't know (interpretation of art)?
Strangely enough, it was the Church itself that dealt one of the worst blows to Christian Constantinople. The Western knights of the Fourth Crusade, under the direction of the autocratic Pope Innocent III, sacked the city and ripped it to shreds in the early thirteenth century, as part of the pope’s plan for absolute world domination by the Vatican. (p. 49)
Anyone with a faintest idea of history know that the pope didn't lead the Fourth Crusade to sack Constantinople, but the doge of Venice.
He permanently split it into the Christian West, ruled spiritually by Rome and the pope, and the pagan Orient (East), ruled politically and militarily from his new Christian capital city Constantinopolis (Constantinople), named for himself. Less than a century later, the barbarian hordes overran Rome in the horrific sack of 410. Less than a century later, the barbarian hordes overran Rome in the horrific sack of 410. Rome never recovered from this trauma, but staggered along until its absolute end in September 476, when a young emperor was forced by a barbarian king to abdicate the throne. Through an ironic twist of fate, this very last emperor was called Romulus, after the founder of Rome. Thus the history of Rome came full circle after thirteen centuries. Thankfully, in the Orient, Constantinople survived and kept the flame of Western civilization going, in spite of much infighting and political intrigue. The Eastern empire took the name Byzantium. In a reflection of its torturous history, when we today want to refer to deep corruption mixed with doubledouble-and triple-crossing political schemes, we use the adjective byzantine. (Not surprisingly, this word is also often used to describe the Vatican court during the time of Michelangelo.) (p 49)
This one is really bad. Constantine I didn't create a permanent divide in east and west. That was Theodosios I in 395. He didn't let the pope rule the west; it is pretty amusing to read an academian implying that he believes that the donation of Constantine is true. Here we're likewise told that the Eastern empire called itself Byzantium, which isn't true. They called themselves Romans even after the fall of Constantinople in 1453.. The adjective Byzantine is more based on how scholarship in the 1800s viewed the Eastern Roman Empire than any facts. He has apparently also missed that Romulus lived in Ravenna, not Rome. Julius Nepos is neither fond of this claim (emperor until 475, then claimant until his death in 480).
----------------------------
The author also spends forever before he comes to the point. I really couldn't care less about the political status of Florence and Rome when Michelangelo lived. I really couldn't care less about how Michelangelo grew up. I, and probably the majority of people reading the book, already know the basic biography of Michelangelo and the Medici family; I specifically need an interpretation of the ceiling and wall of the chapels, nothing else.
I many years ago learned that I cannot watch documentaries on e.g. Roman history or church history, because I only find mistakes everywhere. This book is the same and hardly one I would trust: if he makes glaring mistakes in what I know (history), how can I be sure that he's right about what I don't know (interpretation of art)?
July 15, 2018
"The Sistine Secrets" is a book that had a daunting challenge: in the introduction it says that despite the fact that Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel paintings are world-famous and have had numerous books written about it, only now have Blech and Doliner figured out what the artist truly meant 500 years after the fact. Obviously, that's a virtually impossible proposition to prove, and they do not prove it. Michelangelo was too smart and innovative an artist and there is too much going on in the painting that I do not doubt that he put some hidden messages in his work (and some of the strange hand positionings are very intriguing, although other interpretations are possible), but the authors often go way too far in their inferences. Does the fact that Michelangelo used only Jews in the painting and probably relied upon Jewish teachings for ideas mean that he respected Jews more than most in his time? Certainly, but that doesn't prove he secretly favored mystical Jewish Kabbalism over Catholicism. In the same way, might he have put in a few secret criticisms of Pope Julius II and other Catholic leaders? Sure, but that doesn't prove he was trying to completely denounce them and that he was a secret Kabbalist/Protestant/Universalist (the authors seem inconsistent and to vary in what exactly they thought Michelangelo's true religious leaning to be).
The prose is written in a very readable manner, although, probably because there are two authors, it occasionally repeats itself unnecessarily.
I shall include 3 types of factoids. First, some interesting facts/inferences: Michelangelo (possibly) used a fig tree as the Forbidden Tree because of a Jewish theory that God gives someone the way to take away the sin of guilt with the thing that caused it, and Adam and Eve used fig leaves to cover up; and the exact center of "The Last Judgment" is the bottom of a ladder, possibly a reference to Jacob's Ladder (which Kabbalism says is the exact center of the universe).
Second, some highly skeptical claims: there are 7 Hebrew prophets to represent the 7 aspects of the Kabbalistic Tree of Life; there are lots of Christian symbolic reasons to use 7, and the connections are circumstantial at best. They say the Eritrea Sibyl was really from Babylon (not the Red Sea as the name suggests), and she represents liberation from Babylon, which is also represented by the David and Goliath section because, like Babylon, the Philistines were a nearby enemy nation (if you didn't follow that logic, neither did I).
Third, some outright wrong, easily verifiable facts, which do not mean that the whole book is flawed but casts serious doubt: Pope Leo X (Giovanni de Medici) was the son of Lorenzo's brother Guiliano, when he wasn't, he was Lorenzo's son (Pope Clement VII is the Medici Pope who was Guiliano's son); the Sack of Rome was by Protestant Lutheran German barons, when it wasn't. There were some German mercenaries involved, but it was led by the very Catholic Charles, Duke of Bourbon operating under the very Catholic Charles V.
Overall, an intriguing read if one is interested in Michelangelo and art history, but I doubt very many are totally convinced by the premise.
The prose is written in a very readable manner, although, probably because there are two authors, it occasionally repeats itself unnecessarily.
I shall include 3 types of factoids. First, some interesting facts/inferences: Michelangelo (possibly) used a fig tree as the Forbidden Tree because of a Jewish theory that God gives someone the way to take away the sin of guilt with the thing that caused it, and Adam and Eve used fig leaves to cover up; and the exact center of "The Last Judgment" is the bottom of a ladder, possibly a reference to Jacob's Ladder (which Kabbalism says is the exact center of the universe).
Second, some highly skeptical claims: there are 7 Hebrew prophets to represent the 7 aspects of the Kabbalistic Tree of Life; there are lots of Christian symbolic reasons to use 7, and the connections are circumstantial at best. They say the Eritrea Sibyl was really from Babylon (not the Red Sea as the name suggests), and she represents liberation from Babylon, which is also represented by the David and Goliath section because, like Babylon, the Philistines were a nearby enemy nation (if you didn't follow that logic, neither did I).
Third, some outright wrong, easily verifiable facts, which do not mean that the whole book is flawed but casts serious doubt: Pope Leo X (Giovanni de Medici) was the son of Lorenzo's brother Guiliano, when he wasn't, he was Lorenzo's son (Pope Clement VII is the Medici Pope who was Guiliano's son); the Sack of Rome was by Protestant Lutheran German barons, when it wasn't. There were some German mercenaries involved, but it was led by the very Catholic Charles, Duke of Bourbon operating under the very Catholic Charles V.
Overall, an intriguing read if one is interested in Michelangelo and art history, but I doubt very many are totally convinced by the premise.
February 22, 2023
The premise of this book is that Michelangelo was trained in Kabbalism by neo-Platonists in Lorenzo de’ Medici’s palace and that he later included Kabbalistic insults to the papacy in his Sistine Chapel paintings. The important point in judging this book is whether the premise is right. Unfortunately the authors do not cite the sources for their claims so we cannot check whether the sources are accurate. Just because Michelangelo told Condivi something doesn't mean it's true and that's just a genuine contemporary source.
However, there are plenty of other things that should make us suspicious.
The claim that Michelangelo received a thorough education from the neo-Platonists is undermined by the admission that it was only when he was an adult that he was taught the Greek and Roman classics, subjects core to the neo-Platonists.
The supposedly Kabbalistic elements the writers have discovered are questionable – the Tree of Knowledge is shown as a fig tree not an apple tree but such a depiction is not unique - Durer also did this. The authors say that Eve emerges from Adam’s side, not his rib. But his rib is in his side! Mary in the Pieta is shown as young and, to fit in a Kabbalistic explanation, the authors have to dismiss Michelangelo’s actual explanation. The Last Judgement wall is supposedly the shape of the tablets of the Law. Michelangelo didn’t do that. Michelangelo shows the ancestors of Jesus in an unusual way, with a woman and one or more children prominent and a man in the background. The authors think this is because of the Kaballah. However, it is also the standard way of depicting the Holy Family so it could just be pictorially linking the families. If the cross and crown of thorns form a Venus symbol why are they not placed together? The ceiling is best viewed from the centre of ten concentric circles. These circles( which were made long before Michelangelo) are supposed to be a Kabbalistic representation of the Earth at the centre of the universe. However, anybody who has looked at a plan of Dante’s paradise will recognise the circles as the bog-standard medieval concept of the six known planets, the sun, the moon, the fixed stars and the Primum Mobile. Nothing Kabbalistic at all!
And talking of Dante, why do they believe that Dante thought pre-Christian Jews could not do better than Limbo and suggest that it was considered heresy to depict them as getting into Heaven? Have they not read even as far as the Harrowing of Hell description in Canto 4 of the Inferno? In Paradise, David is the pupil of the Eagle and Moses is in the White Rose.
And why do they think a Borgia supporter probably poisoned Pius III? Why would somebody do something so massively detrimental to Borgia interests as to open a papal vacancy for Della Rovere?
Tomasso Cavalieri is apparently depicted in a Medici statue on the grounds that the model doesn't look like a Medici. Why should Michelangelo not have based his model on some assistant who would model for him? Tomasso is supposedly portrayed in the Last Judgment but the authors admit that he looks too old. They try to get around this by finding a copy where he looks younger but this is undermined by the fact that Aretino, next to the supposed Tomasso, is also portrayed as much younger than in the original.
And why do they think the prophet Zechariah is based on Julius II when he looks nothing like him and Ezekiel (the prophet on the cover of my edition) does?
So, not a very convincing book.
However, there are plenty of other things that should make us suspicious.
The claim that Michelangelo received a thorough education from the neo-Platonists is undermined by the admission that it was only when he was an adult that he was taught the Greek and Roman classics, subjects core to the neo-Platonists.
The supposedly Kabbalistic elements the writers have discovered are questionable – the Tree of Knowledge is shown as a fig tree not an apple tree but such a depiction is not unique - Durer also did this. The authors say that Eve emerges from Adam’s side, not his rib. But his rib is in his side! Mary in the Pieta is shown as young and, to fit in a Kabbalistic explanation, the authors have to dismiss Michelangelo’s actual explanation. The Last Judgement wall is supposedly the shape of the tablets of the Law. Michelangelo didn’t do that. Michelangelo shows the ancestors of Jesus in an unusual way, with a woman and one or more children prominent and a man in the background. The authors think this is because of the Kaballah. However, it is also the standard way of depicting the Holy Family so it could just be pictorially linking the families. If the cross and crown of thorns form a Venus symbol why are they not placed together? The ceiling is best viewed from the centre of ten concentric circles. These circles( which were made long before Michelangelo) are supposed to be a Kabbalistic representation of the Earth at the centre of the universe. However, anybody who has looked at a plan of Dante’s paradise will recognise the circles as the bog-standard medieval concept of the six known planets, the sun, the moon, the fixed stars and the Primum Mobile. Nothing Kabbalistic at all!
And talking of Dante, why do they believe that Dante thought pre-Christian Jews could not do better than Limbo and suggest that it was considered heresy to depict them as getting into Heaven? Have they not read even as far as the Harrowing of Hell description in Canto 4 of the Inferno? In Paradise, David is the pupil of the Eagle and Moses is in the White Rose.
And why do they think a Borgia supporter probably poisoned Pius III? Why would somebody do something so massively detrimental to Borgia interests as to open a papal vacancy for Della Rovere?
Tomasso Cavalieri is apparently depicted in a Medici statue on the grounds that the model doesn't look like a Medici. Why should Michelangelo not have based his model on some assistant who would model for him? Tomasso is supposedly portrayed in the Last Judgment but the authors admit that he looks too old. They try to get around this by finding a copy where he looks younger but this is undermined by the fact that Aretino, next to the supposed Tomasso, is also portrayed as much younger than in the original.
And why do they think the prophet Zechariah is based on Julius II when he looks nothing like him and Ezekiel (the prophet on the cover of my edition) does?
So, not a very convincing book.
December 17, 2024
***Review for personal recollection and reflection***
The authors--Rabbi Benjamin Blech, a Talmud scholar, and Roy Doliner, a Vatican docent--argue that Michelangelo hid "secret" Jewish messages in the Sistine Chapel ceiling. This is an interesting premise. Unfortunately, the book reads more like The Da Vinci Code than a scholarly work. Citations are rare and reliance on primary sources is basically nonexistent. Of course, this was by necessity because Michelangelo, on his deathbed, ordered that all of his documents (including notes, plans, etc.) be destroyed. Without Michelangelo's contemporaneous thoughts and plans, Blech and Doliner end up speculating about Michelangelo's intentions.
Several other posts commented on the factual inaccuracies contained in The Sistine Secrets, so I will not belabor those here. However, those mistakes about simple, uncontested, uncontroversial fact do make me further question Blech and Doliner's accuracy about the more speculative areas of their novel. Some of their observations were interesting and definitely plausible. Yet, Blech and Doliner did not present their observations as plausible. They presented them as fact. They presumed Michelangelo's intent. Blech and Doliner significantly overreached. Given their overreach and factual errors, I simply did not believe them by the end of the book.
I also had a problem with the structure of the book and the way the argument was presented (in addition to the argument just overreaching by a lot). Blech and Doliner were terribly repetitive. Without the needless repetition, this book would have been far shorter. The photographs were also not used effectively. There were a few color photographs in the middle of the book. The rest were black and white. The figures in the photographs were very small. This made it difficult to even visually check Blech and Doliner's claims. On many occasions, I did not actually see what Blech and Doliner claimed the ceiling showed. And on some other occasions, I disagreed with their observations (e.g., when Blech and Doliner claimed that Michelangelo's presumed lover was used as a secret model, yet the image looked nothing like him). This book would probably be much better as a lecture, in which the authors could present the images on a large screen and zoom in as necessary. It certainly was not effective as a book.
Overall, this read as speculative nonfiction. I was not convinced by the argument and was annoyed by the lack of citation.
The authors--Rabbi Benjamin Blech, a Talmud scholar, and Roy Doliner, a Vatican docent--argue that Michelangelo hid "secret" Jewish messages in the Sistine Chapel ceiling. This is an interesting premise. Unfortunately, the book reads more like The Da Vinci Code than a scholarly work. Citations are rare and reliance on primary sources is basically nonexistent. Of course, this was by necessity because Michelangelo, on his deathbed, ordered that all of his documents (including notes, plans, etc.) be destroyed. Without Michelangelo's contemporaneous thoughts and plans, Blech and Doliner end up speculating about Michelangelo's intentions.
Several other posts commented on the factual inaccuracies contained in The Sistine Secrets, so I will not belabor those here. However, those mistakes about simple, uncontested, uncontroversial fact do make me further question Blech and Doliner's accuracy about the more speculative areas of their novel. Some of their observations were interesting and definitely plausible. Yet, Blech and Doliner did not present their observations as plausible. They presented them as fact. They presumed Michelangelo's intent. Blech and Doliner significantly overreached. Given their overreach and factual errors, I simply did not believe them by the end of the book.
I also had a problem with the structure of the book and the way the argument was presented (in addition to the argument just overreaching by a lot). Blech and Doliner were terribly repetitive. Without the needless repetition, this book would have been far shorter. The photographs were also not used effectively. There were a few color photographs in the middle of the book. The rest were black and white. The figures in the photographs were very small. This made it difficult to even visually check Blech and Doliner's claims. On many occasions, I did not actually see what Blech and Doliner claimed the ceiling showed. And on some other occasions, I disagreed with their observations (e.g., when Blech and Doliner claimed that Michelangelo's presumed lover was used as a secret model, yet the image looked nothing like him). This book would probably be much better as a lecture, in which the authors could present the images on a large screen and zoom in as necessary. It certainly was not effective as a book.
Overall, this read as speculative nonfiction. I was not convinced by the argument and was annoyed by the lack of citation.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 8, 2017
Ehhhhhh. This book was really heavy on speculation, as I would assume any book on the topic would be, since, apparently, Michelangelo destroyed his notes and sketches regarding the ceiling before his death. I don't mind the speculation so much, but the authors made it impossible to tell what was history based on actual documents, what was speculation based on documents, and what was pure authorial speculation. That is highly, highly annoying.
There were also some pretty extreme leaps, especially when comparing the ceiling to previous works and some of the "looks like" statements made by the authors. For instance, they emphasize the "mirroring" of the serpent and the angel in the Temptation and Exile from Eden panels, but when you look at the images, the two figures aren't in any way "mirrored". Nor are the faces identical, as asserted. The body shapes are similar, that's true, but not mirrored. Another comparison is the torso of Jesus in The Final Judgment panel with a carved pagan torso that Michelangelo was reportedly fascinated with. Other than the fact that it is a reasonably muscular male torso, they don't look at all similar to me in shape or posture. When the authors make statements that clearly (at least to me) are untrue when you look at the images that the authors themselves provide, it's hard to take them too seriously. I don't have the background to analyse the "these figures look like this Hebrew letter, which stands for this" statements, but I am less than willing to take the authors at their word when I don't see legitimate comparisons made that I can judge for myself.
A sort of interesting read, but it would have been better if I had known what was actual, established history, and what was "looks like" speculation on the part of the authors. I'd like to see a more skeptical treatment of the topic, for sure.
There were also some pretty extreme leaps, especially when comparing the ceiling to previous works and some of the "looks like" statements made by the authors. For instance, they emphasize the "mirroring" of the serpent and the angel in the Temptation and Exile from Eden panels, but when you look at the images, the two figures aren't in any way "mirrored". Nor are the faces identical, as asserted. The body shapes are similar, that's true, but not mirrored. Another comparison is the torso of Jesus in The Final Judgment panel with a carved pagan torso that Michelangelo was reportedly fascinated with. Other than the fact that it is a reasonably muscular male torso, they don't look at all similar to me in shape or posture. When the authors make statements that clearly (at least to me) are untrue when you look at the images that the authors themselves provide, it's hard to take them too seriously. I don't have the background to analyse the "these figures look like this Hebrew letter, which stands for this" statements, but I am less than willing to take the authors at their word when I don't see legitimate comparisons made that I can judge for myself.
A sort of interesting read, but it would have been better if I had known what was actual, established history, and what was "looks like" speculation on the part of the authors. I'd like to see a more skeptical treatment of the topic, for sure.
May 22, 2017
This was very cool! I love books that unearth and reveal lost secrets from history, and this was a really good one. I have never taken more than a cursory glance at photographs of the famous Sistine Chapel ceiling frescoes, and have never been to Italy -- though now I am on fire to go: Florence, Rome..... I even love the questionable 'secrets' -- crackpot theories about ancient aliens, secret societies, and the like. But the authors of this book are experts and scholars in their own right, and their discoveries seem rock-solid. Old Michelangelo played his cards close to his chest by painting them onto a ceiling 65 feet above the floor of the chapel, where no one but he could take a close look at his secret messages and in some cases, rude commentary on the corrupt popes and other high church officials he worked for.
When I read books like this, I am so grateful to have Google on my iPad close by, to supplement the necessarily limited illustrations included in the book. What an incredible story -- Michelangelo's entire life, really -- and what a master he was. Well duh. But there was more to him than a genius sculptor.
When I read books like this, I am so grateful to have Google on my iPad close by, to supplement the necessarily limited illustrations included in the book. What an incredible story -- Michelangelo's entire life, really -- and what a master he was. Well duh. But there was more to him than a genius sculptor.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 201 reviews