Goya’s Ghosts

 

“Fantasy, abandoned by reason, produces impossible monsters; united with it, she is the mother of the arts                                                    and the origin of marvels”.

Francisco de Goya

In 1819 Francisco de Goya, the influential Spanish artist, was struck once again by a serious illness from which he recovered only thanks to the Madrid doctor Eugenio Garcia Arrieta.

4. Francisco de Goya, Self-portrait with Dr Arrieta, Oil on canvas, 114.62 cm × 76.52 cm, Minneapolis Institute of Arts, Minnesota

Out of gratitude he painted a double portrait showing Goya on the verge of death being supported by Doctor Arrieta, offering him the medicine. In the background are some sinister figures half-hidden in the dark. This dark subject matter is later explored more deeply in The Black Paintings, a series of 14 paintings, painted directly on the walls of his new bought house between 1819 and 1823. The House was called Quinta del Sordo or The House of the deaf man.

The Black Paintings were created by the artist for his personal purposes, as internal decorations, not meant to be viewed by anybody else. This is why they were painted directly on the walls, he did not name them and also the symbolism is more obscure, since he did not need to worry about other people understanding them.

The Dog is possibly the most enigmatic of them, originally located on the upper floor, situated next to the door, lonely and abandoned.

5. Francisco Goya, The Dog, 1819–1823, Oil mural on plaster transferred to canvas, 131.5 cm × 79.3 cm, Museo del Prado, Madrid

It is sometimes called The Drowned Dog or The Half-submerged Dog, but like all the paintings in Quinta del Sordo they were named after Goya’s death, if Goya had a different name in mind, we will never know.

The composition is very minimal, divided horizontally in the upper and the below. The upper part is golden yellow and takes up most of the painting, the lower part is dark brown and it is just a shallow strip going up from left to right in a kind of wave. We do not know if it is a sand dune, or the sea, we would not know that it is a landscape at all if it was not for the dog in between. Same with the upper part we presume it is a sky but it might be just as well a huge rock. We can see the influence or maybe just only a parallel to Caspar Friedrich’s The Monk by the Sea (1808). It is also a figure dwarfed by its surroundings, but while in Monk we can still clearly identify the land, the sea and the sky, Goya breaks away with the tradition of landscape painting and uses just colours to create a feeling.

6. Caspar David Friedrich, Monk by the Sea, 1808 or 1810, oil on canvas, 110 x 171.5 cm (Alte Nationalgalerie, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin)

In the midst of it we can only see the dog’s head; his body is either buried or half-drowned. His ears are folded back and he is looking with a hopeful sad expression at someone or something outside the composition. It is amazing how much feeling could Goya convey in the expression of the dog.

7. Detail of Francisco Goya, The Dog, 1819–1823, Oil mural on plaster transferred to canvas, 131.5 cm × 79.3 cm, Museo del Prado, Madrid

Because it is so minimal, it is also highly ambiguous. “Never before had an artist exercised such radical renunciation in order to portray solitude.”[1]

There are countless theories surrounding Goya’s The Dog. It could be seen as a futile struggle of an individual against natural forces, a reoccurring theme in Romantic paintings, and the artwork does indeed radiate a strong sense of the sublime. This is intensified by the shape of the artwork itself, it was oblong and unusually tall especially for a landscape painting, making the “sky” even more intimidating. Maybe the dog represents the artist himself, struggling to keep his head “above water” as it were, lonely and abandoned in his old age. It could be a reference to the people without a proper “master” inspired by the current political situation in Spain. We do not know what is going on, but it has a deep emotional impact on us as the viewer nevertheless. It is even more menacing than Saturn Devouring his Son, another from the Black Paintings, without being so explicit. It evokes a feeling of loneliness, hopelessness, surrender to faith and abandonment.

8. Francisco de Goya, Saturn Devouring His Son, c. 1819–1823. Oil mural transferred to canvas, 143cm x 81cm. Museo del Prado, Madrid

The dog was always a symbol for loyalty in the past, if this were true here as well, it is a loyalty betrayed. The dog is unable to move, waiting for help from outside, that will never come. An allegory maybe to the whole of humanity’s relationship to God, waiting for divine intervention, which will also never come. “God is dead”, a sentiment that starts to spread out through Europe, made famous by the German Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche decades later, although used several times before him in philosophical works.

The art historian Fred Licht has written that it is as ”essential to our understanding of the human condition in modern times as Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling is to our grasp of the 16th century.”[2] We might never know the true meaning of Goya’s El Perro, but that doesn’t affect the emotional impact this painting has even after so many years. Robert Hughes says “We do not know what it means, but its pathos moves us on a level below narrative.”[3]

---

[1] “Web Gallery of Art, Image Collection, Virtual Museum, Searchable Database of European Fine Arts (1000-1900).” Web Gallery of Art, Image Collection, Virtual Museum, Searchable Database of European Fine Arts (1000-1900). N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.

[2] Lubow, Arthur. “The Secret of the Black Paintings.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 27 July 2003. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.

[3] Hughes, Robert, and Francisco Goya. Goya. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2003. Print. PAGE 382

 

First year of Art history revisited: artwork one – The Belvedere Torso

BELVEDERE TORSO – Artist unknown

“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.

 It is the source of all true art and science.”

Albert Einstein

 

The Belvedere Torso, marble, c. 2^nd century BC, Vatican Museum (picture taken with my phone May 2013)

There were many fascinating artworks when we were looking at ancient Greece and Rome, but somehow the one that made the strongest impression on me was a legless, armless and even headless fragment of a statue, The Belvedere Torso. Presently “sitting” in the Vatican, the favourite piece of the grand master Michelangelo, it served as inspiration not only to him but many other artists since its discovery in 15^th century.  The Torso was Michelangelo’s chief sitting model when he was painting the Sistine Chapel.  On the ceiling and the wall, the Torso can be found with added limbs and a head, in Adam, in St. Bartholomew, even in the angels that line the panels on the ceiling.  In fact, art historians have counted at least twenty different appearances.[1]

According to the legend, Michelangelo was asked on several occasions by Pope Julius II to restore it with prosthetic limbs, but each time Michelangelo refused saying, that it is prefect as it is. And I have to agree, because what is so attractive about the Belvedere Torso, is that so much is left to our imagination, the whole piece is shrouded in mystery. Who was the subject? Who was the sculptor? When was it made? The inscription on the base indicates a Greek sculptor Apollonius, son of Nestor, but his name is not mentioned in any of the historical records and art historians now believe that it is in fact a copy of a much older statue.

There are several theories as to who the subject is. The most prominent one is that of a sitting Hercules, based mostly on the lion skin the Torso is placed upon. But recent studies revealed that it is actually a panther skin, suggesting different explanations. Other candidates are Dionysius, Polyphemus and Marsyas among others. I personally prefer the latter, the Greek satyr who challenged Apollo to a musical competition. The hole in the lower back suggesting a tail would also support this theory. Marsyas was an expert player on the double piped instrument called Aulos and he boasted about his superior skills. There are various versions of the story, either the god challenged Marysas to a contest or Marsyas challenged the god. Apollo won and claimed the prize of the victor that they had agreed upon before beginning the contest. So Marsyas paid for his hubris by being pinned to a tree and flayed alive by Apollo, who perhaps intended to turn his skin into a wine flask.[2] In Crawford Gallery the Torso is placed right next to the Apollo Belvedere, which would place Marsyas next to his executioner.

But no matter who the subject is, the statue is an absolute masterpiece. The naked male figure with its contrapposto had a huge impact on Renaissance, where the artists return to the ideal human body and later was closely studied by Mannerism and Baroque artists; in fact it never lost its appeal to the present day. I was fortunate enough to see it just recently on our trip to Rome as you can see from my profile picture.

Michelangelo is on record saying: “This is the work of a man who knew how to do it better than nature!”[3]

---

[1] “The Belvedere Torso.” Rome Diary. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2013

[2] “Apollo And Marsyas.” About.com Ancient / Classical History. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.

[3] “The Belvedere Torso.” Rome Diary. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2013

 

How I fell in love with a dead girl ( First Year Art History revisited – artwork three: Johannes Vermeer – Girl with a Pearl Earring)

THE GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING by Johannes Vermeer

“To love beauty is to see light.”

Victor Hugo

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

Johannes Vermeer, The Girl with a Pearl Earring, c.1665, Oil on canvas, 44.5cm×39cm, The Hague

“I was paralyzed, I couldn’t move or talk. I knew at that moment She is leaving my life forever, my brain was screaming at me to do something but I just stand there speechless. My mother and father were standing behind me with their indifferent expressions watching them leave. She was escorted towards the door, her arm  tightly gripped by her obese guardian’s fingers. When they reached the door, She turned her head to look at me and I could see all the pain and longing in her face, asking me with her eyes to save her. But I was a young man then and a coward no matter how much I try to tell myself I had no other choice. I can never forget that look, the look that will come to haunt me for the years to come and will continue to haunt me till the day I die. Even my father must have felt it, because he touched my shoulder and squeezed it lightly. The only time this cold society man showed me any affection, ever since I could remember. And then the guardian pulled her softly and they were gone. I remember I kept standing there for a long time looking at the closed door.

Many times I was thinking of painting her, but the pain was too strong and I felt my skill not worthy enough to capture her beauty. But now almost twenty years later, her image is following me not only in my dreams anymore but every time i close my eyes, distracting me from my work and my family. And I know if I don’t paint her I will loose my mind so I stand here in front of the empty canvas, closing my eyes to evoke her face and start crying and paint…”

This is my response to the challenge published in The Guardian asking to imagine a story behind the painting of Johannes Vermeer. Follow the link to see 25 stories chosen by The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/interactive/2013/feb/01/vermeer-girl-with-pearl-earring-your-stories

Often called the Mona Lisa of the North, “The Girl with a Pearl Earring” by Johannes Vermeer is surrounded by mystery same as Leonardo’s masterpiece. It is an absolutely fascinating portrait of a girl looking at you over her shoulder , with her electrifying gaze. Her look transcendence time and connects you with her on an emotional level through the 400 years that are between you. Her eyes are the focal point of the painting, they giving her an innocent yet sensual expression, the sensuality underlined by the slightly parted lips. It is amazing how such a simple portrait can raise so many questions. Who was that girl? Why is she wearing a turban? What was her relationship with the artist? We know very little about the artist himself, and we can only guess who the subject was. It inspired many polemics, some suggesting it was his eldest daughter, but judging by the sensual expression, this interpretation seems unlikely. Tracy Chevalier, inspired by this mystery, wrote a book with a fictional story behind the painting, which was recently made in a movie.“Within three days I had the whole story worked out. It was effortless; I could see all the drama and conflict in the look on her face. Vermeer had done my work for me. “[1]

watch her TED Talk here (http://www.ted.com/talks/tracy_chevalier_finding_the_story_inside_the_painting.html)

Yet another interesting fact is that Vermeer might have used camera obscura, a precursor of modern photographic camera, to create the painting. This was suggested already 100 years ago, and since then many scholars have tried to solve this mystery. This hypothesis has been recently corroborated by Phillip Steadman’s in-depth study of Vermeer and the camera obscura. Steadman has produced convincing evidence that Vermeer not only employed the camera obscura as an aid to composition but may have used it to trace the projected camera.

http://vermeer0708.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/vermeers-camera-by-philip-steadman/

But no matter what technique Vermeer used, he created an absolute masterpiece. And the fact we know so little about him or his subject only adds to the fascination. The more I look at the painting, the more I am falling for her. Falling in love with a girl dead for centuries, experiencing the power of Art. 

 

---

[1] “Inspiration.” Girl With a Pearl Earring. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2013.

 

4 artworks from first year art history – Artwork Two : Giorgione’s The Tempest

THE TEMPEST by Giorgione

“There are some things you learn best in calm, and some in storm.”

Willa Cather

 

Giorgione, The Tempest, c. 1508, oil on canvas, 83 cm × 73 cm, Gallerie dell’Accademia, Venice

When we look at the paintings in the Renaissance period, the theme of the second module, there is rich symbolism included in all these works and we can find the allegorical meaning of the scenes, either mythological or religious. But then Giorgione comes around with its beautiful The Tempest which seems to be inspired by neither. Or at least not an obvious one and that is why many art historians and amateurs alike are trying to find the allegory behind the scene since. And it is this ambiguity which borders on the mystical, which draws my attention to this masterwork of Venetian art. The multitude of symbolism offers many interpretations and in that lies the power of the image, that everybody can come with their own story. I think this was the intention of Giorgione in the first place, his other works contain this mystical element as well, but nowhere is it as profound as here. Giorgione was a musician and it shows in his paintings and especially in The Tempest, because he managed to create a mood more than a visual scene, the meaning of the picture is more lyrical than allegorical, it is about the transient effects of the weather, the sense of incoming storm, all appealing to your feelings in the same way as music might. The most important element here are the colours and his amazing skill with the oil paints creating the imposing landscape, The Tempest is considered the first landscape painting in Western history. It is also a meditation on duality, man and woman, life and death, beginning and end. A lot has been assumed about this painting, including a range of interpretations ranging from pastoral Arcadian, mythological, to biblical. Among all this speculation however, two things are certain, the dominance and beauty of the natural setting – with the impending storm stirring away in the background. Then there are the deliberate motifs associated with the two figures. Even if they were portraits of actual persons, the poses and situations they have been placed in, give them a meaning more than their identity alone. The male is youthful, healthy and handsome. The woman is also youthful, but also has the sparkle of fertility and motherhood, as well as a deep underlying sensuality.

But if we were to allow an allegorical explanation as countless art historians tried, very interesting is the theory of Waldemar Januscak presented in his documentary “Every painting presents a story”. He makes a very strong point with his argument, that the painting handles the lesser known story from Homer’s Odyssey, the tale of Demeter and Iasion and the vengeful Zeus, who struck Iasion with a thunderbolt, cutting his life short.[1] Intriguing is also the explanation from Dr. Frank Stefano, who is not an art historian at all, only an amateur fascinated for many years with “The Tempest”. His conclusion is that it is an original take on the “Rest on the flight from Egypt” and he dedicated several blogs to exploring this theory. One of the interesting points from his research is his focus on the flower in foreground, to which nobody else seems to pay any attention. He talked to several botanists and he found out that the flower is Belladonna, so suggesting that it is Maria with baby Jesus. He is also explaining by length the discovery of another nude female originally in the place of the male figure and how this fits into his theory.[2]

Czech poet Ladislav Novák wrote a poem called “Giorgione’s Tempest” where Meister Eckhart explains its symbolism in a wealthy man’s study. According to him, the man is a shepherd who represents Giorgione and the lady is a woman the painter loves, without hoping his love will be requited. And if I were to choose this story would be the closest to my heart. But in my mind it is not unrequited love, but forbidden love between the artist and a gypsy, and their secret child. The storm on the horizon is symbolizing the oncoming trouble out of such union, and again on another level the oncoming trouble of war, that actually broke out in Venice two years later, in contrast to the miracle of birth. I also like how the woman looks straight at us and if we look at the male figure as he is watching her, we create this triangle and become part of the scene.

So we can see even after 500 years The Tempest does not cease to inspire. Giorgione initiated a new genre called Visual Poesia besides inspiring many artists and non-artists alike. Jan Morris, a Welsh historian, wrote that the picture changed the way she looked at painting. She was fascinated with the subject and “its sense of permanently suspended enigma”, and calls it a “haunted picture”, inhabited by the actual presence of the artist.[3]

 Now look at the man in the painting, the sometimes shepherd sometimes soldier, who I think is really the artist himself. He is looking at the woman, already during Giorgione’s lifetime described as a gypsy; and she in turn is looking at us. We are creating a triangle and are drawn into the story and then there is the storm above us “The Tempest” together with it we are forming a compositional tetrahedron. My interpretation story is about the artist dressed as a shepherd, watches his secret gypsy lover and their “love” child. And the oncoming storm represents the trouble brewing on the horizon, but it has a second underlying meaning of an oncoming war threatening the city of Venice (actual war broke out 2 years after finishing the painting) bringing death in its wake and this is put in contrast to the miracle of birth.

My friend said it is a 09/11 warning

and what is your interpretation story…?

Zemo

---

[1] Waldemar Januszczak. Every Painting Tells A Story (2003-4 Video documentary)

[2] “Giorgione Et Al…” : Tempesta “Pentimenti” N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2013

[3] Morris, Jan. Pleasures of a Tangled Life. New York: Random House, 1989. Print.p.170

 

Bad Boy of Baroque

The pride of The National Gallery in Dublin is no doubt the Taking of the Christ by Caravaggio. The painting itself is truly a masterpiece but fascinating is also the story behind the painting and its 400 year long journey from the workshop of Caravaggio in Rome to the wall in National Gallery in Dublin. Especially the last part is something out of an art historian dream. Long thought to be lost, it was discovered (very fittingly one might add) by a long-time admirer of Caravaggio, the Italian art historian Sergio Benedetti. Little did he know that only few yards from his workplace is the lost masterpiece the whole time, wrongly labelled “The Betrayal of Christ” by Gerard van Honthorst. The Jesuit order that had the painting in their possession for many years asked MrBenedetti to restore it, and Benedetti imeddiate suspicion lead to several tests and appraisals, until it was confirmed without a shadow of a doubt that it is the long lost masterpiece “The Taking of Christ” by Caravaggio But let us move to the actual painting and its place in the Baroque art movement.

The painting represents Jesus Christ being captured in the Garden of Gethsemane by soldiers who were led to him by one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot. Tempted by the promise of financial reward, Judas agreed to identify his master by kissing him: “The one I shall kiss is the man; seize him and lead him away safely” (Mark 14:44)[1] Caravaggio chooses the most dramatic moment of the story when Judas is delivering his kiss and everybody else is reacting.

There are seven figures depicting the moment that Jesus was betrayed by Judas and taken by the roman soldiers. The only solid figure is the Christ standing with his hands folded in a gesture of faith, his expression that of calm acceptance. He is aware of his fate and he accepts it with humility. The image would have encouraged viewers to follow Christ’s example, to place forgiveness before revenge, and to engage in spiritual rather than physical combat.[2] Caravaggio presents the scene as if it were a frozen moment, to which the over-crowded composition and violent gestures contribute dramatic impact.

Judas here is not the dignified apostle, he is portrayed as old wrinkled deeply troubled man, in his eyes a menacing expression almost madness. Caravaggio didn’t shy away from the ugliness in his characters; there was no idealized beauty but a raw naturalism. To this effect he often used lowly people as his models, people such as beggars, street urchins, prostitutes, for which he was a target of much controversy. And you can see the naturalism and the ugliness of his character in the face of Judas as he is delivering his kiss. Judas has a very ungrateful role in this biblical story. It was his faith to betray Jesus, so Jesus could be sacrificed for all our sins and then resurrected, without Judas there would be no Christianity, so one could say he was only a pawn in this God’s plan.

In contrast to the defenceless Christ is the soldier in the jet black armour, the light creating a sheen masterly done by the artist, grasping at Christ, his hand entering our space, which is another technique used in baroque painting to intensify the drama and include us in this nocturnal scene of panic and betrayal. This is one of the differences between baroque and renaissance, this sense of theatricality and drama, the scene seems to be coming out at us; as oppose the renaissance painting, which was trying to invite you in. This is one of the main characteristics of baroque art.

On the left of Christ is a man with outstretched hands fleeing the scene, his mouth gaping in horror. Many art historians argue that this is St. John but there is no evidence to support this, but it most probably is one of Christ disciples. A puzzling fact is that his head seem to merge together with the head of Christ, so maybe it isn’t a real person at all and in fact it is only the manifestation of the inner turmoil of Christ.

On the right behind the soldiers is a man holding a strange Chinese lantern, looking at the scene not in shock but with inquiring interest. This is almost certainly a self-portrait of Caravaggio, the artist including himself in the scene. This could symbolize the artists thought process; he is revealing for us the scene of Betrayal, bringing it to life. With the lantern he is illuminating the scene, showing us the biblical scene as it is, all the panic and naturalism, his interpretation of this particular passage from the bible.

The painting is typical of Caravaggio’s style; bright highlights, dark sharp shadows, and a black background. Like many of Caravaggio’s paintings, it shows his use of chiaroscuro, and taken to the extreme tenebrism, the sharp contrast between light and dark with little gradation.

---

[1]The New Testament in Four Versions: King James, Revised Standard, Phillips Modern English, New English Bible. Washington: Christianity Today, 1963. N. pag. Print.

[2] “NGA – Caravaggio’s The Taking of Christ.” NGA – Caravaggio’s The Taking of Christ. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2013.