The Raphael show at the NYC Met

This is self-recommending if there ever was such a thing.  What I found so striking is how many mini-exhibits were embedded in the broader show.  Those include:

1. The early large pieces from Colonna and Castello — how many of you are going to get there to see them in situ?

2. A mini-exhibit of works from Perugino, Raphael’s teacher and mentor, and a wonderful painter in his own right.

3. A small set of knockout Leonardo drawings.

4. Two Roman sculptures that showed some background influences behind Raphael’s work.

5. Three full-size “derivations” based upon the Vatican tapestries, from 16th century Flemish studios.

6. Plenty of light-sensitive drawings, which are not displayed much or are held in very scattered locales.

It is rare to have so much original content in a single exhibit, and of such high quality, and unrelated to previous exhibits one might have seen.  This was an event.

The Alba Madonna, in DC’s National Gallery, still strikes me as Raphael’s best creation.

My main beef: the opening panel of explanation for the show was just plain, flat out stupid, and started by referring to Raphael as “One of the most important influencers of all time…”, followed by nothing of any substance.

This exhibit needs no endorsement from me, but ultimately it did not elevate Raphael into the tier of my very very favorite painters.  He is at the top for beauty and charm, but very few of his paintings confound me in say the way that a top Leonardo or Velazquez might.  Perhaps the Castiglione portrait from the Louvre would qualify there, but the others not.  His was nonetheless a remarkable achievement, and this is very likely the best view of it you will get in this lifetime.

It was crowded, but on a Monday not intolerable and I had good views of the art works most of the time.