Section 1 of 1  |  Question 1 of 8 0:27:39   Hide Time
Select one or more choices from the given options.
1
Who was Caravaggio, in truth? The artist who—along with the Carraccis, and much more powerfully, in fact—returned to the gaze its right of control over painting? Yes, certainly: and like them, he even accepted that reality, restored thereby to the things we perceive, should have a structure before that gaze, a character like the world's—and accordingly, should be arranged like a scene.
But that is where his path starts to diverge. For the things he paints—and the beings, even more—refuse to mean anything beyond their immediate figures: they do not attest to an additional truth, a reason for being a hope. While in the Bolognesi, everything that exists seems made in order to manifest the divine, to retain it on earth, in Caravaggio everything cries out that there is only nothingness in this world of lost souls—whose sole recourse is Grace, the ways of which are enigmatic. Whatever this painter depicts, he does so only to bear witness to pain. And so in tracing a figure, he does not stress those aspects of sensuous beauty that could nourish some proposal of exalting life.

It can be inferred that the author of the passage would agree with which of the following about Caravaggio and his style?

His paintings do not invoke the viewer to look further than the contents of the painting.
His paintings consist of structured figures that are meant to reflect the reality of the world.
He went one step further than the artists of the same genre in depicting a particular impression.