Following on from the previous week's discussion of Parmigianino, we will look at the art of the 16th Century - and potentially later - to give a broader picture of the term 'Mannerism'. 

Although most Art Historians nowadays would argue that the 'traditional' terms which we apply to artistic styles are both anachronistic and inaccurate, there is yet more disagreement about the status of this particular period of artistic production, which can be seen as applying to painting, sculpture and architecture. If it is possible - or even relevant - to differentiate between styles, is Mannerism a style in its own right? Or is it just a 'taste' within the broader scope of the Renaissance? 

In order to consider this problem we will look at the development of the style (if that is what it is), the reasons why it may have come into being, and its temporal geographical scope. Given that one of my favourite mannerist artists was working in the Netherlands in the early 17th century, it may well spread further and last longer than you thought...