How David shrank as he faced Goliath

[emad]

John Hooper in Rome
Saturday January 22, 2005
The Guardian

One of the most intriguing, if least openly discussed, mysteries in art has been resolved.
Michelangelo's David is meant to be a representation in marble of the perfect male form. So why did his creator not make him - how would one say - a little better endowed?

As every visitor to Florence will know, the modest dimensions of David's "pisello" are a running joke with Italians, and the stuff of irreverent postcards.

But, in a paper to be published at the end of this month, two Florentine doctors offer a scientific explanation: the poor chap was shrivelled by the threat of mortal danger. Michelangelo's intention was to depict David as he confronted Goliath.

What the new study shows is that every anatomical detail - right down to the shaping of the muscles in his forehead - is consistent with the combined effects of fear, tension and aggression.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,12576,1396034,00.html

[Bobweigh]

1. David is a grower

Not a show-er.

[ooglymoogly]

2. perfect hineys and tiny weenies..... let me give you another possibility

Michael angelo like most gay romans was an ass man. almost all the ancient statues have perfect hineys and tiny weenies and just as an aside there has been much written about david being out of realistic proportion anatomically. hands feet head etc.