![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
-8- In the far left of Dossi's painting, Jupiter is over-engrossed in butterfly creation. We sense the diffident, out-of-it, distanced character of artistic creation, an attitude common to both Dossi and Kandinsky. The butterflies are coy and disingenuous, aggravatingly decorative and fruity, in much the same way that the figuration in Kandinsky feels like a display of amoeboid jellyfish. IT IS! Finally, in the figuration on the right of Kandinky's painting, which could be seen as being a figure of the artist at work, we feel the emergency of a chunky, affected muscularity which we also experience in Dosso Dossi's painting. The bulky definition in Dossi's painting makes for a nice play of weighty human flesh against a transparent, ephemeral background rendition of nature, while it continues to remind us of the blunt, squarish character of the incidents in Kandinsky's painting. The slightly blockish, awkward character of Kandinsky's figuration represents in itself a kind of contradiction. We would expect Kandinsky's floating, movable pictorial space to populate itself with a more appropriate figuration, figuration drawn in lighter, more slender, more aerodynamic profiles, figuration which would be consistent with Dossi's iconography; as in the related drawing to which Panofsky gave the title Nature as Painter of the World, Challenging the Moral Artist by the Statement that She Can Predict the General Principles of Motion whereas He Can Depict only Individualized Events, as if to make sure we kept Kandinsky in mind. Still, motion and events not withstanding, Kandinsky manages with an uncharacteristically chunky style to say something special about pictorial composition in this picture, and although there is an undeniable narrative underpinning to this painting, what Kandinsky