Gent, cotrar opiniilor din enciclopedii (preiau aici din wikipedia, spre a nu ma pierde inutil in cifre), mi s-a parut un oras auster. Sigur ca e unul unde armoniile arhitecturale sunt prezente, insa rezultatul e o simfonie de o anume raceala cromatica, de forta grava a sunetelor de clopote din turnul cu ceas, Belfort, una dintre emblemele orasului, aflat in patrimoniul UNESCO. E bine, cred eu, sa cauti a avea acces direct, cu propriile tale simturi, cu propria vedere in acest caz, la ceea ce starea de gratie a omului, prin citeva genii, a facut cu putinta. Capodopera fratilor van Eyck aflata in catedrala Sfintul Bavo, mi-a transmis o astfel de stare. Nu se intimpla des, sunt cu totul rare astfel de momente… Lucrarea complexa, cu un program iconografic foarte amplu si de mare incarcatura teologica, e considerata capodopera picturii flamande a sec. al XV-lea (a fost terminata la 6 mai 1432), insa eu cred ca e si una dintre capodoperele picturii in genere… Dupa momentul inaltator din catedrala Sf. Bavo, in palatul muzeului de arta din Gent, o cladire art nouveau din 1909, l-am intilnit printre altii pe Bosch…

Stand opposite a canvas and try to imagine the sounds of the scene. You’ll soon find out that the permanent collection of Prado Museum has the sound of lutes, harps and wheel fiddles. Music has been one of the main topics in painting since the 15th century.

Hearing

With a painting, Rubens means to make us feel the music.  With this allegory of hearing he evokes the music of violins, harpsichords, horns, birds and even the ticking clocks. We can almost hear it with our eyes, but it’s actually just a painting.

Angels and Demons

During the Middle Ages, the celestial courts were thought to have been formed by musician angels, like the ones in this painting by Van Eyck, who celebrate the mystery of the Eucharist with a concerp of harps, zithers and mandolins.

But music was also related to the pleasures of the flesh. In The Garden of Delights, Bosch turns an organistrum into a rack to torture the lustful.

Travelling musicians

When there was no radio nor television and most people couldn’t read, travelling musicians used to entertain villagers with the sound of their flutes. Jacob Jordaens painted three travelling musicians with incomparable freshness.

And Georges La Tour portrayed a blind man playing the same instrument that Bosch had used two centuries before as a torture rack.

Pleasure and Devotion

Music has always been the source of indescribable pleasures. For example, a usual character in Titian’s erotic paintings is the organist, who plays the piano while contemplating the goddess Venus.

With a very different purpose, for Saint Cecilia, always pictured with an organ like in this painting by Poussin, music is a way to get closer to God.

Interested in Renaissance portraits, contemporary sculpture, or even Cold War design? Login to RDID using your RISD username and password, and check out the latest additions to the RISD Digital Image Database:

• Renaissance Faces: Images from an exhibition of portraits by artists such as Titian and Van Eyck, which took place at the National Gallery in London, between November 2008 and January 2009.
• Cold War design: Images of cold-war related objects, including Socialist posters, sheets from artist Bela Kolarova’s diary, spacesuits, spy cameras, a Mao jacket, and even a design for the Brainwashing Chamber in the spy film “The Ipcress File”!
• White Cube Gallery Exhibitions: Works from exhibitions that took place in 2008 and 2009 at the White Cube Gallery in London, by artists such as Josiah McElhenny, Robert Irwin, and Sam Taylor-Wood.
• Wood sculpture: Works by Louise Bourgeois, Andy Goldsworthy, Tyrone Mitchell, Mel Kendrick, David Nash and other artists working in wood.

We hope you enjoy these slideshows! RISD faculty, students and staff can download the images by going to the Search section, doing a simple keyword search, and clicking on the floppy disk icons under the thumbnails in the results pages.

I thought I’d do a random series of posts looking at one painting in some depth.

Where to start?

Well, what about one of art’s most contested paintings, Jan Van Eyck’s Arnolfini Portrait, painted in 1434.

What is so contested about this painting? I hear you ask, it is a nice double portrait of a man and woman, and that’s that. The portrait hangs in the National Gallery in London and their official blumph about the painting boils down to it is a nice painting of two people, end of story.

But is it?

Well not really, for a start there is the title, notice I call it the Arnolfini ‘portrait’, it is also widely known as the Arnolfini ‘marriage’. Why? Because for years people thought it was a picture about a marriage, and it was some sort of legal document. This idea gained fame, mainly because it was put about by the art historian Erwin Panofsky, who wrote an article claiming this, and more, in the Burlington Magazine in 1934. Since then various theories have been put forward as what the painting is, and what it is all about, because one thing is certain it is about something, to dismiss it as a nice double portrait is way too simplistic.

A problem that I have written about before concerns historians and viewers trying to second guess artist’s intentions. Broadly speaking no one – except the long gone Jan Van Eyck – actually knows for certain what the painting says. However, there are various intriguing clues in this painting that have led to speculation and counter speculation, so I thought it might be interesting to look at some of these clues and some of the meanings attributed to them, and then you can make your own mind up about the painting.

So who are they? For a long time, it was thought that the couple were Giovanni di Arrigo Arnolfini and his Mrs., but recent research shows it is more likely to be his cousin Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini and his wife Costanza Trenta. Mr. A was a wealthy Italian merchant who lived in Bruges. Bruges in the 15th Century was an International centre and home to many a rich merchant.

First of all, let’s look at some of the ‘symbolism’ in the painting, don’t worry we are not into Dan Brownesque territory here, there is no ‘code’!
 First there are the oranges; some say that these are symbols of the biblical forbidden fruit, reminding us to resist temptation and all that jazz. Fruit left lying about like this also features in other paintings of the time, particularly Madonna and child paintings. Others claim that the oranges are signs of wealth, as they would be very expensive items in Van Eyck’s Bruges, to leave oranges casually scattered about you had to be rich. The open window shows us a Cherry tree in the garden; cherries are also used as symbols of the fruits of paradise. In Joos Van Cleve’s Madonna and Child the child holds three cherries depicting the trinity and also the fruit of paradise Christianity promises the believer.

The clothes the couple are wearing depict wealth, they are dressed up for the occasion showing off their best clothes, why else fur lined clothes in summertime ? To own clothes like these one would have to be fabulously wealthy; this is the 15th century equivalent to having a Porsche or two as runabouts for the staff.

Is Panofsky right when he claims this is a clandestine marriage?

First, we will look at what he says, among his evidence of the marriage Panofsky claims that the writing on the wall which says ‘Johannes de Eyck fuit hic 1434’ (this is actually a bit of graffiti and means Van Eyck was here, 1434) is evidence of the artist witnessing a marriage and is therefore, legal document. In 1568 Van Vaernewych claimed that the painting was of an illegal ‘not by faith’ marriage, this idea was then carried on by Karel van Mander in 1604 and picked up again by Panofsky.

He goes as far to state that the gesture of the man in raising his forearm in the picture is part of a ceremony, he calls this ‘fides levata’, a convincing bit of Latin to back up his argument ; except it is fictional.

Panofsky has probably got it wrong.It is unlikely that this is a picture of wedding legal or otherwise. One clue is her hairdo. Many brides are depicted at the time as having their hair down as in depictions of the Virgin Mary. It is unlikely that a bride would have worn her hair pinned up and under a veil as Constanza does.  

Some have suggested that it is a picture of a betrothal, but that is also unlikely as Arnolfini and Constaza got betrothed when she was thirteen, she is much older in this painting. Also, Tuscany family betrothals would not have actually included the woman just the men of the families.

One feature of the painting has caused a lot of interest and that is the question of her being pregnant. It has been shown, by reconstructing the dress, that to hold up a dress of this weight in the way Mrs. A is, any woman would look pregnant. However, other paintings of Van Eyck’s show pregnant women, his painting of St Catherine depicts a woman very much like Mrs. Arnolfini. Childbirth was such a risky business around the 15th century that it was common –for the rich- to have the mother-to-be painted, so there would be a record of her if the worst happened. Is this what the Arnolfini portrait is?

The art historian Margaret Koster and others have put forward the idea that this is actually a posthumous portrait of Mrs A. This is likely as she died in 1433 a year before the painting was completed. It could even be that the painting was started before she died, we do not know if she died in childbirth or not. Was she pregnant some say the inclusion of the carpet by the bed (tradition of time) and the figure of St Margaret near the bed (patron saint of mums to be) all lead to the conclusion that she was in the family way.

Right so let’s look at the evidence of this being a posthumous painting.

The painting shows a mirror in which is surrounded by the Stations of the Cross, the images on Mrs. A’s side depict death. Mirrors are generally memento mori, so the inclusion of a mirror in the centre of the painting is thought by some to show that the painting is posthumous. The candelabra shows one candle lit and this is on the side of Mr. A, the candles above Mrs. A have been snuffed out. Some read this that she too has died.

Panofsky thought the wee dog at Mrs. A’s feet to be a symbol of faithfulness and it fitted in nicely with his wedding theory. Some say it has no symbolic reference at all, whilst others say that it is in keeping with death imagery, in particular female deaths, which depict wee dogs.

Panofsky made much about the hands in the painting claiming that they clearly showed an act of marriage, but look at them again. He isn’t actually holding her hand; her hand is just resting in his palm, as though she is slipping away from him, he has no firm grasp of her hand.

Okay, so there you have it. My own feelings are that Koster is right; this is a posthumous portrait of Mrs. A. It may have been started before she died, and she may have been pregnant at the time of the painting (there is evidence that Van Eyck altered the painting). Mrs. A may well have died in childbirth.

I also think that because the painting is so contested, the National Gallery has attempted to play it safe by claiming that this is just a nice cosy double portrait, but I feel that this sells the work short. However, the viewer must make up their own mind about the painting. Your story about what is happening in this picture is as legitimate as anyone’s. No one knows for certain what the picture is about. If nothing else, the Arnolfini portrait clearly illustrates my point about trying to guess an artist’s intentions.

What the National Gallery says :  http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/jan-van-eyck-the-arnolfini-portrait

E. Panofsky, ‘Jan Van Eyck’s Arnolfini Portrait’, Burlington Magazine, vol. LXIV (March 1934), pp. 117-27

Pensavo in questi giorni, osservando i lanci stampa delle mostre che arrivano sul tavolo, che siamo nella stagione delle “mostre mostruose”. Qualche esempio: Il Potere e la Grazia, a Palazzo Venezia. Un’enigmatica indagine su ruolo e immagine dei santi patroni, in Europa. Mostra dai grandi mezzi, con qualche prestito da capogiro (arriva la tavoletta di Van Eyck da Torino, un quadro che neanche a Torino tengono espsoto sempre per preservarne le condizioni: vi pare una cosa logica?). Benché ci sia dietro Ravasi, sembra un concertone di grandi nomi che cercano disperatamente un’ultima ribalta. Ma i patroni, giganti della nostra storia, sono ormai figure drammaticamente marginalizzate nella coscienza collettiva. Meglio tentare di rappresentare il dramma di questo oblio che non la retorica dei tempi andati.

Altro esempio: la mostra pavese con la carrellata di seconde scelte del 600 spagnolo provenienti dall’Ermitage. Leggo oggi sul Corriere che la legittimazione culturale della mostra sta nel fatto che nel 1525 a Pavia si combattè la battaglia che consegnò la Lombardia alla Spagna. Dal che uno deduce che si fa una mostra sugli influssi che la cultura figurativa iberica ha avuto sull’arte lombarda del 600, ad esempio sulla cultura dei pittori pestanti. Nient’affatto. Nessun confronto, nessuna indagine sul tema. Semplice carrellata di quadri, trangolati dalle collezioni di Caterina II (l’unica cosa buona è che qualcuno almeno scoprirà che a Pavia c’è la bellissima Pinacoteca Malaspina…).

Tra le mostre malpensate temo ci sia anche quella romana su Caravaggio e Bacon, che come mi riferiscono amici autorevoli è mal allestita e penalizza il grande inglese, finito nel tritatutto della spasmodica mania caravaggesca che ormai pervade l’Italia.

Al che mi sono detto: ma se si voleva fare una mostra per mettere in rapporto Bacon con il passato c’erano almeno tre ipotesi più pertinenti e più intelligenti:

1. Portare il ciclo dei papi urlanti di Bacon a casa loro, cioè a fianco del mitico Innocenzo X di Velazquez che ne è il prototipo ispiratore.
2. Mettere Bacon a confronto con i disegni di corpi di Michelangelo, altro punto genetico della sua pittura.
3. La più fascinosa: Bacon con il Crocifisso aretino di Cimabue. Nel suo studio di Londra lo teneva appeso rovesciato, per percepirne con più forza la straordinaria torsione. Non ci vuol molto a capire quanto potente sia stata quella suggestione su di lui.

A la prochaine…

Continuing my short essay ‘The Sound of Silence: Vermeer’ HERE

jan-van-eyck-the-arnolfini-marriage.....or was it?

Fellow Dutch artist Jan Van Eyck c.1395 – 1441, an exceptionally talented and highly paid painter.  He became a court painter to the Duke Philip of Burgundy and was very highly esteemed by him.  One of his most famous paintings is ‘The Arnolfini portrait’ (or marriage) 1434 which has been interpreted and misinterpreted and reinterpreted so many times that it remains an enigma.  Again the story is not a straightforward one, and one has to bear in mind the fashions of the times when looking at the garments (as in some of Vermeer’s women…)

There is a very interesting essay written on this painting HERE

woman and a maid with a pail in a courtyard, timeless tranquility

Clear light gives Pieter De Hooch (another Flemish painter c. 1629 -1684)   paintings a kind of instant camera, just been snapped look.  The stark reality of quietness, peaceful domesticity and attention to minute detail gives ‘Woman and a Maid with a pail in a Courtyard’ a romantic and timeless feel.

Although De Hooch had a successful carreer, he liked to live in poor quarters and sadly died in a Lunatic asylum.

To be continued

This ATC is based on the Arnolfini Wedding by Van Eyck, but stars my cat, Neferkitty, in the role of the bride.  And a lovely one she is, too.  However, she’s not as fecund as the original model—Neferkitty has been spayed.

Blue diner with figures, 1981.Huile sur toile, 48×64cm.

 Figure incontournable du sharp  focus réalism, le Californien Ralph Goings poursuit inlassablement depuis quatre décennies une même peinture  que les commentateurs, mais aussi l’artiste lui-même,  s’accordent à qualifier d’hyperréaliste. Le sujet de son œuvre se résume finalement à l’expression la plus emblématique de cette Amérique de l’urbanité et de l’automobile: le diner. Thème quasi unique qui se décline en effet, sur d’innombrables variations. Ce sont des extérieurs inondés de soleil, avec un parking où trône  une voiture ou un truck, sur fonds de devantures standardisées(fig.1).

Fig.1

 Ce sont aussi des intérieurs avec ces longs comptoirs chromés sur lesquels s’accoudent les clients, juchés sur les bar stools, et ces tables en formica bien alignées, encadrées de banquettes capitonnées.Mais ces restaurants font aussi l’objet d’innombrables gros plans d’accessoires de table et d’assaisonnement- le dressing- pris isolément et constituant de ce fait de véritables natures mortes (fig.2).

 Fig.2

      Peinture virtuose d’un paysage urbain qui souscrit pleinement à  la banalité du quotidien et dont le principe directeur, à savoir le respect absolu de la réalité visuelle, entérine cette conception multiséculaire de l’art, comme étant le fidèle reflet du monde sensible. On retrouve le vieux mythe jamais inassouvi de l’image vectrice de l’illusion, comme ce rideau qu’Apelle avait peint avec tant de vérité pour abuser de la clairvoyance de son rival Zeuxis. Et je reste intimement persuadé qu’au moment de découvrir La Vierge du chancelier Rolin (1), les contemporains de Van Eyck, moins soucieux de spéculations théologiques ou de références iconographiques, qu’ils considéraient alors comme une langue vivante indissociable de leur culture ambiante, éprouvaient quelque peine à retenir un orgueil bien légitime devant ce Flamand capable de ressusciter sous le pinceau, l’individualité minutieuse des êtres et des choses.

      Mais, avec Ralph Goings, de quelle réalité s’agit-il ? D’une hyper réalité, le XXe siècle conservant décidément le monopole des superlatifs, qui s’appuie non plus sur nos facultés, incapables d’appréhender la complexité du monde sensible, (liquidant de ce fait les théories des philosophes sensualistes anglais), mais sur l’utilisation systématique de la photographie, qui, en annulant les faiblesses de nos perceptions oculaires, prétend offrir, littéralement, l’objectivité. Peinture exacte, lissée par la technique de l’aérographe, qui affiche la neutralité parce que, dans l’esprit de son auteur, l’objectivité, c’est forcement la démission du sentiment, de l’émotion, plus largement, du pathos. Nettoyage par le vide que le pop art, Warhol en tête, avait bruyamment imposé, au grand dam des expressionnistes abstraits, au début des années soixante et que l’hyperréalisme reprend à son compte, l’ineptie du propos (pause dans un diner, voiture stationnant dans un drive-in etc.) n’ayant rien d’autre à montrer que le propos lui-même.         
  
      Sauf qu’en peinture, l’objectivité ou la neutralité, c’est une chimère, et l’hyperréalisme, une contradiction dans les termes. On aurait bien du mal, en effet, à accorder au mouvement une justification de sa propre singularité : pourquoi  reconnait-on si aisément les tableaux de Robert Cottingham (American Carl’s 1975, fig.3)  ou de Richard Mc Lean, deux adeptes fameux de l’hyperréalisme ?

Fig.3

S’ils prétendent à l’objectivité absolue, pourquoi ne se fondent-ils pas alors dans l’œuvre de Ralph Goings pour ne faire qu’une seule et même entreprise ? Parce ce que le style rattrape toujours son homme, quelque soit le courant auquel il adhère. Pas d’hyperréalisme absolu donc (ritournelle de la vieille chimère !), mais des hyperréalismes individualisés. La marque de l’artiste  s’inscrit d’elle-même, ne serait-ce que dans le cadrage : quelle photo choisir ? Pourquoi couper ici l’enseigne d’un magasin pour ne garder que trois lettres, etc. En vérité, à chaque toile, qui répète soigneusement la précédente, le peintre, en revendiquant le ton désengagé du clinicien se heurte à lui-même. Et cette vérité qui échappe à son démiurge revêt naturellement bien plus d’intérêt que l’hyperréalisme en tant que produit fini. Sans insister sur la réappropriation au demeurant très étroite de la photographie – la qualité première de celle-ci se résumerait donc à la précision ? – c’est la répétition quasi obsessionnelle (« four decades of réalism » comme l’indique avec une fierté un peu naïve le site officiel de l’auteur,2) de thèmes archétypaux qui  finit par générer chez l’observateur un étrange sentiment de mélancolie où  le vide le dispute à l’attente. 

Mc Donald pick up, 1970.Huile sur toile, 41×41cm.

 Notes

1.1434, Paris, Musée du Louvre.
2. http://www.ralphlgoings.com/

Bruges is a surprising wonderful location for art lovers offering a fantastic and diverse selection of collections ranging from archaeology to modern-art. The Musea Brugge is the institution in charge for Raakvlak (the inter-municipal archaeological service for Bruges and its outskirts) and for the Bruges cultural inheritance department, is a comprehensive name that refers to all the sixteen different historical museums of Bruges. Rich in variety and quality, housing artworks from the Flemish Primitives up to more recent fine arts, furniture, silver and folklore Musea Brugge can provide the visitors with a marvellous and significant survey of the history – not only artistic – of the enchanting Bruges.

These numerous venues can be easily arranged by themes: Groeningemuseum and the Arentshuis. Forum+ Concertgebouw can be considered the framework for contemporary arts of Musea Brugge hosting artistic works from the 15th to 21st century. Hospitaalmuseum includes two historical hospitals: the old Saint John’s Hospital, (now Memling in Sint-Jan museum) famous for its collection of paintings by the great master of the Flemish Primitives Hans Memling; and the O.L.V.-ter-Potterie (Our Lady of the Potteries) known for its Baroque church and its outstanding silver-work. Finally the Bruggemuseum gathers The Historical Museums of Bruges: a omni-comprehensive title for the eleven historical museum of Bruges among which : Archeologie, Belfort, Brugse Vrije, Gentpoort, Gezelle, Gruuthuse, Koeleweimolen, Stadhuis, Volkskunde.

Particularly fascinating is The Groeninge Museum, practically Bruges museum of Fine Arts. A collection which has started in early 1700, focused on Bruges artists and characterised by the rich presence of a marvellous collection of the Flemish Primitives that so innovated painting art in the late Middle-Age among which outstand two masterpieces by Jan Van Eyck: The “Madonna with Canon Joris van der Paele” (1436) and the portrait of the artist’s wife “Margareta”. Among many anonymous Masters from Bruges the museum exhibits “The baptism of Christ” by Gerard David, The “Death of the Holy Virgin” by Hugo van der Goes, “The Justice of King Cambyses” and “The altar of Saint Christopher” by Hans Memling.

Groeningemuseum also exhibits artworks of Renaissance and Baroque from Bruges: painting by Lanceloot Blondeel, Jan Provoost, Adriaan Isenbrant; as well as from the Brabant and Antwerp: Pieter Bruegel, Jan van Hemesssen, Cornelis van Cleve. An interesting display Bruges artists’ pieces of late 1800/early 1900 such as Albert Gregorius, Joseph Suvée and Jozef Ducq and and Flemish expressionist paintings from the school of Sint-Martens-Latem. Contemporary pieces of Marcel Broodthaers and Roger Raveel are finally exhibited.

Since 2004 Bruggemuseum is undergoing a massive re-development (expected completion in 2010) in order to represent Bruges’ art, culture, society and history from as many perspectives as possible, thus aiming at becoming a world famous model of showcase for “city’s history”.

“They’re totally hogging everything. Today, yeah, um, it was fabulously overwhelming. It’s like they have a milion works of art from every major french master – obviously, everything older. Delacroix had a Delacroix room – but then it was splayed throughout the rest of the rooms. And Salle Rubens and Salle Davide… Who else was there. Van Eyck (or Van Eik?), there’s lots of him because there’s kind of a specialty exhibition, and there’s a lot of drawings but I was interested in the paintings.

And then you get off the beaten track kind of thing and you go downstairs and there’s this amazing African art thing. Like there’s sculpture, behind glass. And it was African and so it was so symbolic and the shapes are so elegant and beautiful, like the big faces and everything. They have a cool aspect. Like trendy, not so much elegant, not even – they’re beautiful but not in the way that Paris is beautiful. Beautiful but tribal beautiful.

Obelisk. Well at first we were like totally apalled, right?
We were like “Aaah, you stole it, from a poor country, how dare you, you stuck a gold thing on top of it and it’s on your street, one of your little star-things.” I’m not sure what you call that thing, but it’s in a roundabout, so all the Parisiens are always reminded of their conquests – every time they drive by it. It was so busy there today. People driving by really fast, by the Obelisk. And the fountains.

The fountains:
Again? They’re really beautiful, they’re somewhat like um. Well the fish all have the water hoses sticking out of their mouths (but they’re clear) and they’re spurting water way up onto the top of the fountain but it all drips down – and it’s all chaotic but there’s order too. The water is splashing everywhere and dripping down, and it kind of looks like the gods – the wine gods, dionesian, and it looks like the ones on the edge are squeezing the fish. Squeezing the water out of the fish. And then there’s other fish that are sitting down in the back of the circle. And there’s water spraying out of their mouths and their nostrils. If they have nostrils. Which was kind of weird. The gold is very striking. It seems like kind of fake gold and it’s actually kind of beautiful because it’s so striking in the day-time. This you would notice. It was like so… so bright.”

bruges. pe straduta, spre grote markt

brugge. nicaieri nu ne-am simtit mai desprinsi de viata reala decat in bruges, primavara. stradute pietruite, canale, lebede, piata orasului, catedrala, turnul catedralei, orasul e o gravura vie. terase, cafea cu coniac dimineata, bere tripel dupa-amiaza, n-am crezut niciodata ca o bere ma poate incalzi. civilizatie.   

hieronymus bosch, tentatia sfantului anton, partea centrala a tripticului

flamanzii ne-au impresionat. karel de stoute si expozitia lui temporara ne-au sabotat ocazia de a vedea cateva tablouri din colectia permanenta, dar am recuperat mai tarziu.

vedere peste canal. unul dintre ele

n-am simtit dorinta de a ne plimba cu barca pe canale, totusi, viata langa apa ne prieste.

………………………………………….

plaja din oostende. ca si cum ai inota in lumina

oostende. ostende asteapta cuminte la marea nordului, cu case linistite si strazi aproape pustii. simtim de cand iesi din gara ca la capatul stradutelor nu mai e decat marea. soarele te orbeste cand iesi pe plaja, e ceva ireal in intinderea uriasa de nisip. pe promenada, gasim si oamenii, la un bistro cativa pasi mai incolo bem ceai cu rom si mancam supa pescarului din oostende, ah cat il invidiez pe domnul asta.

………………………………………………..

lazy afternoon. pe malul canalului in ghent

gent. ceva mai aglomerat, in special in zona centrala, pe malul canalului, unde tinerii flamanzi (si probabil nu numai) lenevesc nepasatori la soare cu berile alaturi. van eyck starneste soapte in catedrala ceva mai incolo si nu, magazinul ala pentru ciclisti nu este de gasit.

………………………………………………….

antwerp si cladirile din piata centrala.

antwerpen. am prins antwerp-ul de duminica, linistit, cu oameni plimbandu-se prin piata, restaurante bune si putini turisti, diamantele nu ne-au impresionat.

…………………………………………………….

brussel. prima oara cand am ajuns la bruxelles si nu avem treaba. ceea ce e chiar placut. prin urmare am hoinarit pe strazi si i-am vazut iarasi pe flamanzi, si pe altii, la beaux-arts. si ne-am ghiftuit cu ciocolata.

belgia e subevaluata.

Az impresszionizmustól a klasszicizmus felé, a színektől a formák felé fordul.
Először a meztelen változat készült el, és amikor a spanyol The Madonna with Canon van der Paele (detail 3) 1436.
Emellett festett a kor kívánalmainak megfelelő portrékat, amelyeket sokáig tanítványának, Van Dycknak tulajdonítottak. Élete vége felé félelmetes képeket festett őrültekről, betegekről és fantasztikus alakokról; ezeknek a fekete festményeknek a stílusa az expresszionizmust vetíti előre.
Mind a genti oltárképen, főleg az alsó szint centrumában elhelyezett Bárány imádása, Jan van Eyck Madonna Rolin kancellárral c. Egymás után következnek: Anakreon, Görög női szoba, Kandaules király neje, A gladiátorok a cirkuszban üdvözlik Vitellius császárt (1859), Pollice verso (gladiátori jelenet), Phryné a birák előtt (1861), Alkibiades Aspásiánál, A nevető jósok, Kleopatra és Caeser (1866).
század második felében ismerték fel, midőn a természet tisztán festői ábrázolására irányuló törekvések (impresszionizmus) rokonok voltak az övéivel és az ő művészetéből indultak ki (Manet).Goya miközben képeket és grafikákat készített, 1798-ban freskókkal díszítette a madridi San Antonio de la Florida-remetekápolnát.
Hozzájuk hasonlóan nagy lábon élt és adósságokba verte magát, ezért sokszor meggyűlt a baja hitelezőivel.

Jan Van Eyck a festmények, Giotto utolsó ismert művei, kivívták a reneszánsz mesterek. Az első ilyen a Kazlak‎-sorozat, amelynek darabjait több szemszögből, más napszakokban Signac The River Bank, Petit-Andely, 1886. Önarcképe alapján is a legtöbb tudós 1395-nél előbbre teszi születési évét. Ez az akkor újszerű megközelítés nagyban eltért a közönség által megszokottól, ezért Sisley és barátai nehezen találtak lehetőséget műveik kiállítására, még kevésbé eladására.
Évfordulóját, s ekkor Goya műveit is újra rendezik a madridi Prado Múzeumban. Sok megbízást kapott az egyháztól.
Azonban Adoration of the Mystic Lamb (The Ghent Altarpiece) hogy ha Degas fejlődése ezen a ponton megállott, vagy. Gyűjteményét lassan Madonna in the Church c. 1425.
Ebben az időben került szoros kapcsolatba a Medici családdal, és többükről készített arcképet.1880-as, 90-es években Monet elkezdte a „sorozatképeit”, amelyben a fényhatásokat és az időjárási viszonyokat ábrázolta.
Art Renewal Center Novemberben visszatért Párizsba, ekkor ismerkedett meg a van Gogh testvérekkel, Vincenttel.Az ajánlkozó levél sikeresnek bizonyult: Leonardo elnyerte a milánói udvar művészének és mérnökének állását.
Akvarelljeiben már a tökéletes kompozícióra, világos elrendezésre és hangulatos előadásmódra törekedett.

Szépet, jót, őszintét festett Manet, de

csak megütközést váltott ki.
Marcel Proust Vermeer alakját irodalmi alkotásba is beleszőtte. Közösen kerestek új megoldásokat a festészetben, szabadtéren rögzítve a fényhatásokat, tört színekkel, gyors ecsetvonásokkal – kialakítva azt a stílust, amely később impresszionizmus néven vált ismertté. Ezek után egyre nagyobb gyötrelmet okoztak a személyiségétől távol GameSpot feladatok.
Van Eyck Itt 25 képet festett – közben a holland rendőrség forradalmi tevékenységgel. Frank Jan Van Eyck – The Virgin of Chancellor Rolin (detail 3) 1435 Parsons 1904-ben csatlakozott az intézethez, 1911-től pedig igazgatta azt.
Valószínűleg erről az asszonyról festette ritka női portréi egyikét, a Hermelines hölgyet.
Van Eyck: The Madonna of Canon van der Paele 1436 Híres egy kivégzést ábrázoló kompozíciója.
Lappangva, recesszíven öröklődik olyan, látszólag egészséges szülőktől, akik The Seine, Grenelle, 1899 hordozzák a. április 30 Man in a Turban 1433.Az ősi azték Jan Van Eyck: The Ghent Altarpiece- Singing Angels (detail 1) 1427-29 is forrásául szolgált dualista szemléletével, hiszen ott állandó.
Magatartásuk mindig keresetlen, „festőietlen”, véletlen adta. A tudományos megalapozottságú műben elméleti fejtegetések során eljutott az egyetlen szépségideál Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Wife 1434.
A szórakozóhelyeken Toulouse-Lautrec ámulva nézte Van Eyck: Small Triptych c. 1437 divatos kánkánt, megismerte a híres.

Creatief bureau ‘We are the future’ stunt alweer. Dit keer ontwierpen ze een hedendaagse versie van Het Lam Gods. Het veelluik is een vrije interpretatie van het origineel en steekt alle thema’s van het schilderij in een modern kleedje.

Je kan deze moderne kunst bewonderen in Galerie Link in Gent. Klik zeker op de link hieronder: intrigerend, spannend, uitdagend! (JT)

Het Lam Gods

Este cuadro es, para la gente del mundo del arte un imprescindible, lo pasan como en la cuarta clase de Historia del Arte (con la Claudia Campaña al menos, notable!) y desde ahí se queda grabado en la retina y memoria visual de todos los que fueron a esa clase. Para alguien no muy interesado en pinturas puede parecer igual de ajeno y “desconocido” que Rauschenberg o Bacon. Lo cierto es que los Arnolfini la llevan, aunque a uno no le guste la estética del renacimiento holandés ni las caras de los personajes; porque admitámoslo: no es una pareja muy guapa que digamos, años luz de las mujeres de Boticelli. Pero ese no es el punto, la gracia es que Jan Van Eyck logra una obra maestra por medio de símbolos camuflados como objetos comunes y corrientes, los cuales nos dan las claves para poder comprender la sociedad de la época.

Para mi examen de grado hice una serie de fotografías con parejas citando a este cuadro, y tuve que estudiar harto sobre la historia del arte, especialmente sobre el retrato en el renacimiento. Descubrí tantas cosas interesantes, como por ejemplo, en esa época (1434) la Iglesia Católica consideraba válido un matrimonio contraído solamente mediante una promesa sagrada, sin necesidad de sacerdotes ni testigos (claro que había mujeres pillas que se desdecían de su anterior juramento cuando encontraban un mejor marido, he ahí la necesidad de testigos y esas cosas hoy en día). Entre que la pareja del cuadro está descalza (como en suelo sagrado) y Giovanni (alias el novio) levanta su mano derecha solemnemente mientras con la izquierda toma la mano de la novia, es bastante lógico deducir que el momento represantado es solemne y sagrado, lo que calza con un juramento matrimonial.

Los zapatos del hombre están más cerca de la entrada y manchados de barro, lo que simboliza el rol del hombre en la sociedad y vida matrimonial, él es quien sale al exterior a buscar el sustento para su familia. Los zapatos de la mujer están limpios y al lado de la cama, su lugar es dentro del hogar. El perro que vemos en la pieza está más cerca de la mujer y simboliza su fidelidad en el matrimonio (de la del hombre no hay símbolos, aunque para ser justa, el perro igual está entre los 2).

Se suele creer que ella está embarazada, pero no, sólo sujeta el vestido a la moda de la época, además, hay otros cuadros de van Eyck (el retablo de Adán y Eva) en que vemos a la mujer desnuda y con el vientre abultado no por un embarazo, si no que porque ese era el ideal estético femenino de la época (bastante más lógico que el cuerpo andrógino y asexuado que vemos hoy en día), no olvidemos que en épocas antiguas las representaciones femeninas se concentraban en caderas anchas y pechos grandes, como símbolo de fertilidad y aptitud para la maternidad.

Claramente la pareja pertenece a un grupo social acomodado, el mero hecho de contar con un retrato de esta envergadura es una prueba, pero además la pintura nos da pistas. Se nota que las pieles y telas de sus vestidos son finas, al igual que la cama, alfombra y candelabro; pero la verdadera clave son las naranjas que están cerca de la ventana. Esto es la Holanda del siglo XV  y no existían ni aviones, ni containers ni nada capaz de conservar por mucho tiempo los alimentos, y las naranjas había que importarlas desde Valencia, España; por lo que su precio era prácticamente el equivalente a su peso en oro, bueno, no literalmente, pero casi.

El espejo es ya cosa aparte, un tema en sí mismo dentro de la Historia del Arte, nos permite ver lo que en teoría nos está oculto, lo que estaba originalmente en la posición que nos encontramos nosotros frente al cuadro. En éste vemos a un supuesto Van Eyck, y en Las Meninas de Velázquez vemos a los reyes siendo retratados. En este tema del espejo no me manejo mucho, así que no voy a profundizar, pero demás está decir que comentarios ilustrativos son más que bienvenidos, además de teorías filosóficas y sicológicas sobre el tema.

Colgante camafeo El matrimonio Arnolfini de Jan van Eyck_16,50€+gastos de envio
De metal y cintas verde y negra.

Domestic Interior

The woman is as round
as the new ring
ambering her finger.
The mirror weds her.
She has long since been bedded.

and our effects,
shrugged and settled
in the sort of light
jugs and kettles
grow important by.

– Eavan Boland

Eaven Boland is an Irish born poet. Her books of poetry include Against Love Poems, The Lost Land, An Origin Like Water: Collected Poems 1967-1987, In a Time of Violence, Outside History: Selected Poems 1980-1990, The Journey and Other Poems, Night Feed, and In Her Own Image. In addition to her books of poetry, Boland is also the author of Object Lessons: The Life of the Woman and the Poet in Our Time, a volume of prose, and co-editor of The Making of a Poem: A Norton Anthology of Poetic Forms. Her awards include a Lannan Foundation Award in Poetry and an American Ireland Fund Literary Award. A regular reviewer for the Irish Times, she is currently professor of English at Stanford University.

Depuis quelques semaines, la MEP (Maison européenne de la photographie, à Paris) a renouvelé son accrochage. Des cartes postales à la peinture sur photographie en passant par la vidéo, on voit un peu tous les supports et de Fiorio et Minot-Gormezano à Rousseau, on fait le grand écart dans les styles.

ici, il ne s’agit pas de jean-Jacques mais de François Rousseau, photographe de mode et de publicité qui avait réalisé en 2004 le livre et le calendrier Les Dieux du stade, vous sous souvenez ? C’étaient des rugbymen nus.

Cette fois, le travail de François Rousseau s’appuie sur le roman de Patrick Grainville (Goncourt 1976), l’Atelier du peintre (publié en 1988), dont il donne ici une version photographique des épisodes clés. L’histoire, nous dit le prospectus, se déroule à Los Angeles où se croisent dans l’Atelier du peintre, une population diverse de modèles, anciens délinquants ; au sein de l’Atelier vit une communauté où hommes et femmes vivent chacun de leur côté ; quant au Maitre, il cherche à reproduire le tableau de Van Eyck, les Epoux Arnolfini ,en faisant poser ses élève, en vain.

Beau prétexte que voilà pour montrer des corps magnifiques, féminins et masculins, noirs et blancs, jeunes et moins jeunes et il faut bien avouer que ces immenses panneaux photographiques réalisés à la chambre 20×25, post-traités et montés sous diasec font de l’effet et que les modèles sont, bien entendus, des perfections de corps humains, musclés et charpentés pour les hommes, fins et déliés pour les femmes. On en oublie presque la mise en scène.

L’exposition montre ainsi deux grandes fresques, tout en largeur, une masculine et une féminine, autour d’une scène centrale représentant un couple se tenant par la la main composé d’une femme blanche nue enceinte et d’un homme noir en costume avec en fond un miroir. Cette scène, c’est bien évidemment une libre interprétation des Époux Arnolfini de Van Eyck (1434), tableau visible à la National Gallery à Londres. A ce propos, je vous conseille le Musée Groeninge, à Bruges, où vous pourrez voir des primitifs flamands de toute beauté (il réouvre dans un mois, le 26 mars 2009 – fin de la parenthèse).

Vous voyez ci-dessous les deux œuvres.

Les deux fresques présentes avec ce panneau central forment une sorte de retable contemporain. Vous voyez ci-dessous, d’une part, une photo de l’ouvrage de François Rousseau (merci à lui de me l’avoir envoyée et, d’autre part, en dessous, une photo prise sur place lors de l’exposition.

Au-delà ce bref extrait, d’autres photos vous attendent, toutes très impressionnantes.

Ce travail photographique est complété par une musique, une vidéo et un texte de Patrick Grainville : l’ensemble de ces éléments fait, bien entendu, l’objet d’un coffret (180 ou 800 euros selon le cas). Il est possible de s’adresser à l’auteur directement depuis son site web pour disposer d’extraits de son ouvrage (c’est par ici).

Je vous livre juste, pour finir, une vue partielle d’une autre de ses photographies (merci encore à François Rousseau de me l’avoir envoyée et vous invite à visiter la MEP mais aussi la galerie Pierre-Alain Challier (ici et 8, rue Debelleyme à Paris dans la vraie vie) qui l’expose jusqu’au 7 mars 2009.

Il ne vous reste plus qu’à casser votre tirelire (moi, j’ai eu mon bonus

Some of the slides I used for my presentation at Imkaan.

Some might recognise this from another comic I did about moving in to an ex-nursing home.

I’ve been playing with the idea of representing all the residents at the nursing home as wizened renaissance figures. Yours truly has been inspired by the current exhibition at the National Gallery…

The story is as follows: a care-worker discovers the journal of one of the senile residents, who, it turns out, was subject to the brutal tendencies of her husband. The journal ends very abruptly and the worker cannot get any more information about the events contained in the journal, nor what happened afterwards. Some of the story is true, some is fictional. One of the most difficult things about doing this piece was the fact that people came up to me afterwards and, literally in tears, told me that the story had made them remember people they’d worked with or things they’d seen. How can I shrug and say that some of it is made up? Then again, why do people assume that a story with the upright pronoun is true? I wanted to begin my piece with ‘I am a poet, therefore a writer of fiction’. Perhaps I will from now on.

I must learn to draw landscapes and trees.

Today, since Taylor had class, I was on my own. So, during his first class I wandered down Kingsway to Aldwych to the mighty River Thames, where I crossed the Waterloo Bridge, and soon found myself looking at some of the most famous buildings in the world. Looking south west from the bridge I could see the London Eye, which is the giant ferris wheel that would require large amounts of money deposited into my bank account for me to go on. By staying on the north bank and heading along Victoria Embankment, I passed underneath the Hungerford Foot Bridge, which I recognize from several movies, and then that brought me right up to Big Ben and the Houses Of Parliament, which were really cool to see in person. I could even see Westminster Abbey behind them. Exploring these will be for another day though, because at this point it was time for me to head back and meet Taylor for lunch. After lunch I walked along the Embankment some more, then headed up Northumberland Avenue until I hit Trafalgar Square, which was totally cool. Nelson’s Column is huge, and there are other big wig military people who have monuments there as well.

The real reason I was headed this way though was for the National Gallery, which was truly amazing. I cannot count the number of famous and incredible art works that I saw there today- I think that I saw about half of the things I have studied in my art history classes. They have a bit of everything, starting from about the 1250s and going on through the 20th century. I saw Duccio, Giotto, van Eyck, Botticelli, Durer, Leonardo, Michelangelo, Raphael, Holbein, Titian, Caravaggio, Rubens, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Turner, Constable, Gainsborough, Ingres, Van Gogh, David, Degas, Cezanne, Seurat, Gauguin, Monet, plus so many more. It is free for anyone to go in, but they were having a special show, so I paid the student price of 5 pounds and saw that, which was cool, because it was all about portraiture, the different types and purposes of it, and its development throughout the Renaissance. It is a bit baffling, in a way. I mean, I saw Leonardo’s Virgin of the Rocks today. And Titian’s Bacchus and Ariadne. And the Arnolfini Portrait, and about five different Van Gogh’s. These are some of the most famous artworks in the world, painted by the greatest artists that have ever lived, and I saw them today, not just in a book, but in person. I could see paint globs on Monet’s Bather’s at La Grenouillere, or the individual brush strokes on a Cezanne, or the dots on a Seurat. I know two things: One, I need to go back and write everything down, so that I do not forget, and two: I have some more museums to hit up, namely the Rijksmuseum and Van Gogh Museums in Amsterdam.

It all ended with getting trapped in the elevator for three times before having reached the third floor. The good part was that, if the first two stops were between floors and I was already starting to smell panick through my soon to be sweat, the last bump left me positioned exactly at a rescue point: I opened the wooden doors, the metal door, and greeted freedom and the seven floors I still had to assault by foot in order to get home.

Before that was the dog that followed me home all the way from the subway, taking its time, panting every now and then, pacing up, providing the musical background it must have felt I needed, as there we were … the only breathing creatures on the street. Strangely enough, no one passed, no cars driving by; luckily enough, there were no other dogs running around. The wicked creature left at some point, but not before seeing me crack, pop and all the other synonims that sound like psychological shutdown. I sat on a fence in the middle of that wide, deserted street, circled by a big dog that looked so stupid, but not stupid enough to convince me not to fear it. By the time I got to the elevator I had this feeling that I had probably left behind the only dog that really liked me.

And then there were the Arnolfinis. I’d pretty much always thought that painting to represent a dutch couple; all that abundence of details seemed to be  enough to seal the case. Also bare in mind that it belongs to a certain gentleman who called himself van Eyck. But then, the issue turned from a question of identity to one of familiarity and bonding. Those figures started to embody every dutch I had ever imagined, and not only those from the fifteenth century, but even those carbon dated to other medieval and renaissant centuries.

Yet today I find out that the couple is Italian (should the name of Arnolfini have been a not so slight hint?), and that they represented the Medici bank in Amsterdam. That skinny man and his pale, pregnant looking wife dressed in their pretty colored garments were as Italian as pasta.

But googling my way into checking this piece of distressing information, I came across the wikipedian truth: This painting was long believed to be a portrait of Giovanni di Arrigo Arnolfini and his wife Giovanna Cenami in a Flemish bedchamber, but it was established in 1997 that they were married in 1447, thirteen years after the date on the painting and six years after van Eyck’s death. It is now believed that the subject is Giovanni di Arrigo’s cousin Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini and his wife. This is either an undocumented second wife, or, according to a recent proposal, his first wife Costanza Trenta, who had died by February 1433. This would make the painting partly a memorial portrait, showing one living and one dead person. (huh?)

Further searching revealed that his wife is not pregnant, as is often thought, but holding up her full-skirted dress in the contemporary fashion. Another version states that: Behind the pair, the curtains of the marriage bed have been opened. The bedpost’s finial (crowning ornament) is a tiny statue of Saint Margaret, patron saint of childbirth.

Having all these in mind, I can only conclude that my dutch childhood dream has just been deferred by art historians until the day they discover … that the couple were actually dutch or at least of some dutch origin.