Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Francesco Gobetti - evolution, revolution or haos?


Renegade
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's high time not only to appreciate, but also understand how much knowledge you have.
I don't understand at all, how can you find common features on a Gobetti violin?
I know, it's just a scroll. But it is the same year - 1720.

I know, apparently he was influenced by many artists (the second scroll is like a Stainer), but yes, overnight?

That's why my post has this title.
Can you share your observations?

PS: Pictures are taken from Tarisio.

Francesco Gobetti, Venice, c. 1720.jpg

Francesco Gobetti, , c. 1720.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

Nobody is going to write an essay on Gobetti, for you to go looking for one on Ebay

It's not about the essay, it's not about Ebay ... (I'm collecting money for a good violin).
In general, in famous creators there were elements of evolution, sometimes 'experiments'. And in this case, they are completely, two different scrolls from the same year.

PS: don't treat me down front ... other people can be intelligent too.
(Let's end the old threads)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, martin swan said:

You are sure both scrolls are original?

Me? ... absolutely not.
The photos are from Tarisio.

'In general', you approach all creators as researchers, 'discoverers', as if each of them had a 'mission' to fulfill. (on the whole).
But since Gobetti is not associated with none 'master's workshop' (there is no knowledge that he studied with one of the contemporary masters, and in addition he was supposed to be the boss), then maybe he was creating his violin without some 'mission' to be fulfilled, without the ambition of an 'explorer', but, he built his violin, 'a bit by accident' ... he saw Stainer, took the scroll from him, saw another artist, imitated another element ...
In other words, can one speak of any consequence, any direction, looking at his sparse works?

And also such different proportions of the thickness of the fingerboard ... it was possible that they were exchanged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Renegade said:

...evolution, revolution or [c]haos?

While some of your posts might evoke thoughts of Darwin {the Awards for certain), or Trotsky, I incline more towards the last factor to explain them.  ;)  :lol:  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

While some of your posts might evoke thoughts of Darwin {the Awards for certain), or Trotsky, I incline more towards the last factor to explain them.  ;)  :lol:  :)

Maybe because you have no idea what to answer my question.
Was the lack of knowledge being made up for by wit and sarcasm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Renegade said:

Maybe because you have no idea what to answer my question.
Was the lack of knowledge being made up for by wit and sarcasm?

No, that wasn't it.  You'll have to look elsewhere for the wellsprings of my wit and sarcasm.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Renegade said:

Ego?

[Yawns] Wrong again.  :D

5 minutes ago, jezzupe said:

Hope springs eternal  :lol:

There's a point, in reading an endless stream of "Whatizzits?", at which hope becomes tiresome, and risible.  :rolleyes:  :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Renegade said:

Maybe because you have no idea what to answer my question.
Was the lack of knowledge being made up for by wit and sarcasm?

You are quite right, she doesn’t know what she's talking about, and thinks she’s being witty. On the other hand, you “question” isn’t one that one could answer. You're best place to start would be to read up this maker in Prof. Pio’s book Venice Research - Articles You can’t start a thesis on two nicked pictures of the side of a scroll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

You are quite right, she doesn’t know what she's talking about, and thinks she’s being witty. On the other hand, you “question” isn’t one that one could answer. You're best place to start would be to read up this maker in Prof. Pio’s book Venice Research - Articles You can’t start a thesis on two nicked pictures of the side of a scroll

Jacob, why are you always such a jerk? Go have a drink and kick some stray animals or something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the OP-- it's not so strange. I saw a Gobetti scroll on a Montagnana violin recently. It, and these, bear similarities in the length and flow of the pegbox. Photos won't let you see how the tools were used, either. Look up Ben Hebbert's wordpress and read about expertise and identification-- he says you have to watch for the bones, not the shapes laid over them. Listen to the Omo podcast episodes just arced on the same subject.

If you saw scrolls of mine side by side photographed online you'd likely be right when you chose "chaos" as the answer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

[Yawns] Wrong again.  :D

There's a point, in reading an endless stream of "Whatizzits?", at which hope becomes tiresome, and risible.  :rolleyes:  :lol: 

Lolol :lol: I prefer irksome, just cause I like the word irk it's right up there with ire 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

Just did. She has no reason to be so condescending if she cant contribute anything

I've got some stray animals down by the river you could practice your soccer on.  How's your running game these days?  :ph34r: :lol:

Or for less excitement, you could direct a few at the OP.  My valuable contribution is to point out that the OP makes a habit of wasting our research and posting time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OPs question is a good one. The scrolls do look different, hard to believe they are from the same hand. I think Martin's suggestion about questioning the originality of the scrolls is worth considering.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, deans said:

I think the OPs question is a good one. The scrolls do look different, hard to believe they are from the same hand. I think Martin's suggestion about questioning the originality of the scrolls is worth considering.  

I'd need a larger number of closer shot scroll pics, including other angles, from dated and authenticated examples, to attempt any serious decision.  So, probably, would anyone else.  What was said about tool marks has bearing here.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, JacksonMaberry said:

These days, makers carve all sorts of scrolls on all sorts of models. Why would we think the old cats did any different? 

Because our ancient predecessors generally learnt making as thirteen year-olds, who then proceeded to do the same thing over and over for the whole of their lives, whereas today, people learn as teens & twenties, and even older, and have their heads in the way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, jacobsaunders said:

Because our ancient predecessors generally learnt making as thirteen year-olds, who then proceeded to do the same thing over and over for the whole of their lives, whereas today, people learn as teens & twenties, and even older, and have their heads in the way

Jerk or not, I agree with Jacob.

Therefore Renegade makes a fair point - can these 2 scrolls really be bu the same hand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

Jerk or not, I agree with Jacob.

Therefore Renegade makes a fair point - can these 2 scrolls really be bu the same hand?

From looking at the two pictures given us, I have the following thoughts:

1. No way, especially regarding the eyes, and that bothers me.  It suggests to me that a standard reference is contaminated.

2.  This is some kind of a trick question, with an example deliberately cherry picked, just to create a stir.

3.  We've seen fakes and misattributions get into auction databases before, even Tarisio's, but is it worth a thread? 

I'd still like to see more photos to get a better handle on what happened here.  Is this due to replacement, fakery, or what? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...