Learning from Caravaggio
April 2, 2010
We have a curious habit of thinking that what we are accustomed to is the way things should be. We are inclined to accept conventional forms as facts, and as meaningful reference points, when facing novelty.
Artists are often the people who want to see the world afresh. It is not easy to get rid of preconceived ideas, but the artist who best discards accepted notions and prejudices often produces the most remarkable works of art. However, a painting that represents a traditional subject in an unexpected way is often condemned. Normally there is no good reason, apart from the work of art just not following tradition.
There have been a few times in history that a great artist looked carefully at what was visible to everybody, but in fact saw things very different from the way others saw them.
Very few artists have caused as much shock and outrage as Caravaggio. A famous story is told about the commissioning of a painting of Saint Matthew for the altar of a church in Rome. This happened around 1600. The saint was going to be represented writing the gospel that was later going to be named after him. As gospels were the word of God, there was also going to be an angel in the picture, giving guidance to Matthew. Caravaggio read the old texts very carefully and tried to figure out what it must have been like when an old man suddenly had to sit down and do something that he had never done, or never dreamed of doing: writing a book, and being guided by an angel!
Caravaggio painted an elderly workingman, seemingly from a poor background. A man with a bald head and muscular legs, writing awkwardly! Beside him was a child with white wings. A young angel was guiding Matthew’s hand just like a teacher would do to a pupil doing something for the very first time. Caravaggio’s painting was a fantastic portrait of a human being in a very, very special situation. But it was also a completely new way of expressing an old topic. The painting was to be placed on the altar of a church in Rome. This never happened because Caravaggio’s work created a huge scandal. The painting was not accepted because it was claimed that it showed a lack of respect for the topic and the saint! What Caravaggio had done, for the first time in history, was to create a simple expression and give a human face to something that was highly formalized. Caravaggio may have been the first human-centric painter.
People thought that Caravaggio was out to shock them. They also thought that he had no respect for beauty and tradition. In fact, Caravaggio may have been the first artist in known history who was labeled both a rebel and a naturalist at the same time. He was the first painter of the “ugly” true reality. The curious thing is that seeing Caravaggio’s paintings today; one still encounters the same boldness and power that must have shocked people over four hundred years ago.
Caravaggio’s art is very much alive today, although the altar painting described here was never accepted for the altar and was eventually destroyed in Germany during the Second World War.
The question remains whether the human-centric approaches today meet the same kind of opposition as Caravaggio encountered. It is not about challenging the conventions carried forward by the church, or representations of what is holy. Human-centric thinking questions the conventions carried forward by corporate thinking and the idealized representations of leadership/management. The pattern is the same.
Nothing has changed, when it comes to the importance of Caravaggio! Being human-centric is as difficult today as it was in 1602.
Thank you @cshirky
Akram Khan and Sylvie Guillem
January 9, 2010

Paul Cézanne once wrote that beauty in art is not created by the objects that are represented but by the relationships of line and colour. Relationships create tensions: tensions between line and colour, artistic perfection and “émerveillement”, meaning being enchanted like only a child can. Rigidity and fluidity. Shiva and Krishna. Kathak dance and classical ballet, and especially Akram Khan and Sylvie Guillem. To me, Akram Khan is the most gifted choreographer and dancer of his generation. Sylvie Guillem is perhaps the world’s most celebrated ballerina today.
An evening at the Finnish National Opera provided all this. “Sacred Monsters” was the meeting of two superstars (sacred monsters) and two dance forms, two different vocabularies. It was interesting to compare the speech vocabulary with the dance vocabulary: Khan a bit flippantly worrying about losing his hair, Guillem casually reflecting on learning Italian from children’s cartoons. And then the superb dance vocabulary of Khan’s fluid Kathak beat, combined with Guillem’s beauty and balance. Wonderful moments that perhaps only these two dancers can achieve: Guillem with her feet locked behind Khan’s back, leaning back, with both their arms in a flowing wave. A remarkable combination of strength and poetry.
Akram Khan, speaking about this project, said: “I have spent my life studying and performing Kathak (the ancient North Indian dance tradition). It is the source of my creative process. Working with Sylvie Guillem is an exciting new challenge, giving me the opportunity to explore another classical dance language with one of its greatest practitioners, and as a result, creating a situation that will unearth the things that are most often lost between the old and modern world.” When Khan and Guillem danced side by side, it was interesting to note that I was often drawn to Khan’s dance rather than to Guillem’s, despite her beauty and grace. Is it a reminder that elsewhere too, there is inspiration, energy and richness in the things we forget – the sources of our creative process?






