Musca depicta ("painted fly" in Latin; plural:muscae depictae) is a depiction of afly as a conspicuous element of various paintings.[1] The feature was widespread in 15th- and 16th-century European paintings, and its presence has been subject to various interpretations by art historians.[1][2]
James N. Hogue, writing in theEncyclopedia of Insects, lists the following reasons behindmusca depicta: as a jest; to symbolize the worthiness of even minor "objects of creation"; as an exercise in artistic privilege; as an indication that the portrait ispost mortem; and as an imitation of works of previous painters.[1] Many art historians argue that the fly holds religious significance, carrying connotations of sin, corruption ormortality.[3]
Another theory is that Renaissance artists strove to demonstrate their mastery in portraying nature, withAndré Chastel writing thatmusca depicta became as an "emblem of the avant-garde in painting" at the time.[4] There exist several anecdotes from the biographies of various artists who, as apprentices, allegedly painted a fly with such skill as to fool their teacher into believing it was real.[3][5] Well-known examples are those aboutGiotto as an apprentice ofCimabue andAndrea Mantegna and his masterFrancesco Squarcione.[3][6] Kandice Rawlings argues that since these anecdotes were widespread, they contributed to the humorous interpretation of sometrompe-l'œil flies.[6]
Commenting on the Czech portrait ofFrancysk Skaryna, Ilya Lemeshkin brings attention to the fly painted on a corner of a page of Skaryna's Bible. He argues that the function of the fly is to secularize the image – in other words, to indicate that the depicted object is not a cult object to be venerated, but simply a painting.[7]
Andor Pigler surmises that the painted fly served anapotropaic function, that is to serve as a type ofmagic intended to turn away harm or evil influences, as in deflecting misfortune or averting theevil eye.[8] Kandice Rawlings challenges this notion, writing that Pigler fails to take into account other traditions associated with flies.[6]
Both Konečný, writing about Dürer'sFeast of the Rosary (copy), and Lemeshkin, writing about Skaryna's portrait, observe the flies painted in each do not exactly "sit"on the underlying painted objects, but rather sitabove them. Based on this observation, as well as noting the disproportionately large relative size of the flies compared with the other depicted objects, Konečný argues that this was intended as atrompe-l'œil (illusion), that the fly sitson the painting. He also remarks that the fly in thePortrait of a Carthusian (picturedabove) serves to intensify the illusion of thetrompe-l'œil frame.[5][7] ThePortrait of a Carthusian, dated about 1446, is the earliest known example ofpanel painting with atrompe-l'œil fly.[6]
Trompe-l'œil flies are recognized in over twentyNetherlandish, German, and north Italian paintings dated between 1450 and the 1510s, and are analysed byAndré Chastel in a book eponymously dedicated tomusca depicta.[4][6] Of them, eight are portraits, thirteen are religious miniatures, and only two are large-size works.[6] Chastel remarks thattrompe-l'œil flies were a passing fad, with artists later having found other ways to demonstrate their skill.[9]
Themusca depicta is a recurring topic in the 2019 film,The Burnt Orange Heresy. The main character, an art dealer, explains to a woman he meets that it signifies corruption.[10]
_-_Museum_Boijmans_Van_Beuningen.jpg)
But he adds a tiny fly image to each painting, a metaphor for sin and evil. For this, his masters send him to the gas chamber. You can be sure flies will figure prominently in the rest of this dark fable.
| Aspects ofinsects in culture |
| ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pioneers | |||||||||||||||
| Concerns | |||||||||||||||
| Categories, templates | |||||||||||||||
