Category: Uncategorized (Page 43 of 48)

During Wednesday’s class, we began by continuing our discussion of 15th century art in Northern Europe. We first looked at Sluter’s Wall of Moses which depicts six life-sized prophets. The figures were originally painted which we learned is known as polychromy. The color, lifesize scale, and realistic rendering of the figures are representative of artists’ desire to make art look as life-like as possible.

Next, we discussed “The Arnolfini Portrait” by Jan van Eyck. Although there are some religious themes, the work is secular. As artists show an increasing desire to achieve naturalism in their work, we learned how artists such as van Eyck used disguised symbolism as a system of conveying meaning. van Eyck incorporates many details that can be interpreted as disguised symbolism. For example, the figures in the portrait are not wearing their shoes, and two pairs of shoes are visible on the floor to emphasize this. We learned that the removals of shoes can indicate holy ground and in this case, the figures have removed their shoes to show they are aware of the holiness of the ritual they are participating in. I thought the imagery used to demonstrate the public and private spheres and the different roles that men and women were expected to assume at that time was especially interesting. We also discussed van Eyck’s “Man in a Red Turban.” The image is likely a self portrait, as the figure is looking directly at the viewers, or how van Eyck would have seen himself while he was painting from his own image in a mirror. We also noted how, should this be a self portrait, van Eyck is wearing a red scarf around his head. In “The Arnolfini Portrait,” one of the figures in the mirror is seen wearing a red turban, indicating that van Eyck may have placed himself in the scene. He also signed “The Arnolfini Portrait” to say ‘Jan van Eyck was here’ which supports the theory that he painted himself into the scene and/or witnessed the scene himself.

In today’s class we continued exploring Fifteenth-Century Art in Northern Europe. We started with the “Well of Moses” and learnt about how the six life-sized depictions of prophets holding scrolls about Christ’s coming represent different aspects of the Christian faith. This conversation on symbolism continued into the discussion on Jan van Eyck’s The Arnolfini Portrait. We were introduced to the idea of “disguised symbolism” and how artists started incorporating various themes into their art pieces during this time period. I found it very interesting how our discussion started off with noting the aesthetic features and then gradually delved into symbolic aspects of the painting. We observed the clothes, slippers, chandelier, mirror and other objects positioned across the room. I really liked how these objects in the painting symbolized themes of marriage, fidelity, and faith.

We also noted how the paintings were getting more and more realistic. The convex mirror in “The Arnolfini Portrait” with its lighting and highlights were some of the most intricate of such realistic features. We also discussed how Jan Van Eyck’s turban could be made out in the mirror, a feature he included in some of his works as a self expression.

We also studied realism in “Diptych of Martin van Nieuwenhove” When we look closer at both paintings we realize that they depict the same scene. A mirror was also included in this painting. I wonder if this feature was being added by artists to showcase their technical mastery during that age. While we continued the exploration of religious themes through artworks we also spoke about marriage customs and how it was essential to understand societal expectations and customs surrounding marriage during the period like in “The Arnolfini portrait” where the the one lit candle on the chandelier and various other objects surrounding the two figures depicted such themes.

Today we continued our focus on the Northern Renaissance and focused on a few artists, most prominently Jan Van Eyck and his painting “The Arnolfini Portrait.” This painting was used to highlight the idea of disguised symbolism, an important topic that often goes unnoticed. The fact that Van Eyck can hide so much commentary inside one painting is awe-inspiring, and it has opened my eyes to the fact that he is certainly not alone in this.

Van Eyck expertly crafted “The Arnolfini Portrait,” and I was fascinated by the mirror that he puts in the background of the painting. Several other symbols, such as the dog, make the painting mean so much more than it seems at face value. I find such artistry incredibly impressive, and am fascinated to dive deeper into a painting than I would originally interpret.

One aspect of this lecture that I found particularly interesting was the notion of “disguised symbolism” – particularly notable in Jan van Eyck’s “The Arnolfini Portrait.” I think that the very concept of having cultural symbolism deliberately embedded in art shows how important art is to gleaning human history. Additionally, it shows how a large breadth of information – including contemporary marriage customs, religious symbolism, and attire – can be contained within a single, relatively small painting.

We discussed ten different hidden symbols in the portrait, including the fruit on the windowsill, shoes on the floor, and the singular candle burning in the chandelier. I wonder if there is still more symbolism in the piece that we did not get a chance to discuss.

Today, we started class by finishing our discussion on the Well of Moses and then began talking about Jan van Eyck, who was a dominant figure in this lecture. He is known for his disguised symbolism by a system of conveyed meaning. The Duke sends him secret travels, implying he could be a spy? He also traveled to Spain and Portugal as an ambassador and searched for the Dukes’ wife. There was a myth that he invented oil painting as well. We then discussed the Arnolfini Portrait. We discussed the different aspects of the painting and what some of the signs mean. We first learn that Giovanni Arnolfini is in the painting, and he is a wealthy Italian merchant. The woman next to him could be his wife, but they were married later than 1434, which was when this painting was created. Although the woman is in an odd stance, she is not pregnant. It is more of a common pose during these times. We can also see that the woman has a lot of material possessions, which, during this time, can be a means of displaying wealth. We also noticed there was only one candle stick lit in the room. This was a wedding tradition and is also referred to as snuffing out a candle. In the back of the painting, we noticed the signature of Johannes de Eyck fuit hic 1434, which is beautifully written. We also see a mirror with many different scenes behind it resembling the passion of Christ. Inside the mirror, we notice there are two more individuals in the room. This is because marriage requires two witnesses since there isn’t a priest. Marriage during this time was more of a ritual that required the joining of hands and taking an oath. We also see some different symbols, such as the bed, the dog, the fruit, and Giovanni on the side of the window. The bedroom during this time is not a private room. The dog next to the bed resembles loyalty and fidelity. It can also be seen as a status symbol of wealth. The fruit is peaches and it could possibly resemble fertility. And finally, Giovanni, next to the window, refers to him as a businessman being close to the city.

We then discussed Rogier van der Weyden and his St. Luke drawing of the Virgin. This drawing was a silverpoint drawing, which is pretty unique. The point of it is for the touch of the silver to oxidize the layer it is written on. In the background of this drawing, we see Northern Europe and contemporary people.

The most prominent figure in this lecture, at least for me, was Jan van Eyck. Recognized even by his contemporaries as one of the best and most influential (artistically and otherwise, since he’s working at service of the Duke of Burgundy). Despite not having invented oil painting, Jan van Eyck had created some highly foundational pieces of art, his detailed, realistic and natural manner of painting as well as his usage of disguised symbolism has become a great source of inspiration and admiration. One distinct example of this being the wonderful Arnolfini Portrait. Secular as its subject matter is, this painting retains a sense of otherworldliness and divinity by the artist’s symbolist portrayal of love, marriage, and fidelity, rendered to the most minute of detail, up to the point where if we close in quite enough, we could see the painter himself standing at the couple’s door as one of their witnesses. 

We could see clearly his influence on other younger artists of the same period, one being Hans Memling. His Diptych of Maarten van Nieuwenhove, with the implementation of a mirror and the revelation of the coexistence of the two depicted figures clearly being inspired by that of van Eyck’s, still managed to engender a sense of development. By using a clearly naturalistic and familiar space (as opposed to van Eyck’s dark, detail-less background), the artist situates their figures into a believable, existing world, thus allowing the observers to engage in the reality of the piece of work. This is made even more incredible by the fact that that exactly was the point of this commission: it’s a religious diptych that Martin himself uses to pray with.

An artist that has both a similar and completely contrasting stylistic approach to van Eyck is Rogier van der Weyden, the official painter of the town of Brussel. Rogier’s St. Luke drawing the Virgin is one instance where this artist depicts the divine and classic, but through a contemporary scenery and style: the garments of the characters, their manners, the buildings, all is put into the painting to represent this fresh, new way of veneration. Rogier’s way of creating symbols is also distinct from Jan van Eyck. Other than making these symbols subtle and barely noticeable, he decides to put them right next to the main subjects, aligning them with the meanings while leaving no room for misinterpretation.

In today’s class, we began discussing the artistic developments occurring in northern Europe during the 15th century. Artists in the north were particularly concerned with realism and reflecting reality, in a way their Italian counterparts were not yet. Not only did they want to depict life in their works, but they also wanted them to convey meaning. They did this through the use of “disguised symbolism” which involved placing small, ordinary objects in the background of the scene that would convey a certain meaning. They wanted these objects to blend into the rest of the scene, but a trained eye could spot them and get at what the artist was trying to say in this piece.

This is seen best of all in Jan van Eyck’s “Arnolfini Portrait“. This work has a number of disguised symbols throughout the piece. One example is the two pairs of shoes visible on the ground. This is supposed to represent that a sacramental moment is taking place, or that they are standing on holy ground. There is a small dog, which is not only meant to represent loyalty but also the exotic breed of the dog is meant to show the wealth of the couple. There is also a bowl of fruit sitting by the window that represents fertility. There are many other symbols in the work and they are all meant to represent the qualities of an idle marriage – loyalty, prosperity, dedication, and so on.

The Arnolfini portrait was a good example of art in Northern Europe. The artist Jan Van Eyck was considered the greatest artist of his time, and it is apart in comparisons between his work and others representing the northern style. It depicts a couple standing in their bedroom. His use of disguised symbolism seamlessly integrates symbols into his work. The dog represents loyalty and fidelity while also being a status symbol because of the expensive breed. Also, the peaches on the table represent fertility which aligns with the positive and important qualities of a wife in this time period. He does this with so many of the objects in this work creating so much deeper meaning behind the painting without ruining the work.

Rogier van der Weyden was another oil painter who was the official painter of Brussels. His painting of “St. Luke Drawing the Virgin” depicts that moment. St. Luke is drawing in silver tip which alludes to the usage of this depiction as only a reference for another work. He also includes disguised symbolism. In the corner behind a door frame there is an ox which is the symbol of St. Luke. This symbolism is random unlike van Eyck’s. Also, this work was a much larger and didn’t showcase the extremely small details that was in the Arnolfini portrait. Overall, these differences show how Van Eyck was correctly regarded as the best of his time.

The first portrait of a place was done in Northern Europe by Conrad Wits. His work “The Miraculous Draught of Fishes” depicts a location in Geneva. Seeing St. Peter twice shows the multiple events that are taking place. The depiction of him in the water showing him sinking and needing help makes the political statement that the bishops should have more power.

The visual language greatly expanded during the Renaissance, when painters like Jan van Eyke began packing their paintings full of symbols, and expanding the possibilities of oil painting. Now, the language of paintings became covert and subtle, as opposed to the more obvious symbols of prior works. Scrolls indicating relationship the Old Testament and prophecy are prevalent, but now there are small carvings of saints, dogs representing fidelity, and discarded shoes representing holy ground. However, despite all of the innovation during this time, there is nothing being ‘reborn’ or rediscovered. The Renaissance was really more a resurgence in certain aspects of Ancient Rome.

You have to die to be reborn– so it’s much closer to a rejuvenation.

One of the areas of class that struck me the most was the discussion over bell towers in Florence and Siena with both the Piazza della Signoria and the Piazza del Campo respectively. The concept of ‘campanilismo’ was intriguing given the placement of these edifices in big squares in towns and the positioning of sigils specifically upon the Piazza della Signoria of significant families in the area. It is clear to visualize how development of towns and cities around these types of buildings occurred with government, church, and marketplace all converging into one central area. It’s hard to imagine that in a modern United States context, as if you were to take Waterville as a comparative example our Piazza would be the local Walmart. With the Palazzo della Signoria Firenze, I was taken by the architectural design and the symbolism of the structure given the ideals of the Uberti family to maintain the rustication of the stones and the pietra forte with crenellations and battlements to give off a very strong appearance whilst also the positioning of the trefoil arched windows to add elegance to the boldness of the rest of the building.