Accuracy Is Overrated
This article is about a painting called “The Liberation of Andromeda” by Piero Di Cosimo.
This painting lives in Florence, Italy. I’m pretty sure I saw this work IRL, though don’t quote me on that. It was many years ago now (2011-12) and there were so many galleries, churches and other old stuff there you’ll struggle to absorb it all if you are just a visiting tourist. Nevertheless I ended up with this convenient postcard.
It’s an oil-on-panel, and I paint oil-on-panel so that’s the first helpful reference for me.
More to the point though is how it represents a mythical creature: in this case, the sea-monster.
What the hell is a sea-monster?
Shark? Whale? Dragon? Left-behind old dinosaur?
Piero is painting a myth from Ancient Greece. I am discussing a guy who lived 500 years ago who painted a creature from a story from thousands of years ago. You can see the foggy layers of history here.
It looks like a walrus/dragon hybrid.
No such creature is known to exist today. I’m not sure what the evolutionary scientists say, but i’ve not heard of this one being an extinct creature either (research it and get back to me, or don’t, and accept the myth for what it is).
Piero must’ve been wondering the same thing. All he has to go by is that its a vicious monster in the sea. Could’ve been anything.
He would’ve seen/heard accounts of other weird exotic beasts that live in/near the sea, via travellers, sailors, zoologists of the day. But there’s no google images, no encyclopaedias, no photos, no video docos, no magazines. Florence is inland. Getting to the coast is tough, working out what lives in the deep blue sea, let alone seeing it, was beyond the possibility of most people.
He might also have had verbal descriptions, or illustrations of other people who claim to know. And what they know could be anything. How he interprets this knowledge could be anything. How to represent it within the limits of his skillset is another problem still.
He winged it, along with the odd way he represents a giant vicious animal in “the sea” (which looks more like a quaint inland pond or lake).
Point is, he rolled with those shortcomings of understanding, if he was even aware of them, and made the painting anyway.
And it’s an awesome painting. And still appreciated and displayed to this very day. I love it at least.
Does anyone get too concerned about the questionable accuracies? Not really. Though it’s interesting to discuss.
Should you worry about inaccuracy in your work? That depends on how much accuracy you think you need. Put it on a spectrum, and decide on how much is enough.
Hanging somewhere in Florence. Over 500 years old. Still good. Around here, we respect good work no matter when/where it was made.