In Empathy We Trust

[Show thumbnails]

As the Middle Ages came to a close, Jan van Eyck brought about an artistic revolution. As a young man, the prevailing artistic style was International Gothic, otherwise known as the Beautiful Style. While this style was very elegant, it lacked the depth and three-dimensionality for which Van Eyck is known. In the past making distinction between different objects was usual shown with color, yet Van Eyck’s style enabled the viewer to identify objects according to their physical properties. For example, fabrics looked soft, metal appeared hard and skin seemed almost tangible. Van Eyck’s ability to paint tiny objects as well as distant scenes was so unique because of his use of light and reflection. Although many credit Van Eyck as the founder of oil painting, this is not true. Oil painting had been around for some time, since painters were using it to emulate the effect of enameling as they built up layers of thin and translucent paint. The ability to layer allowed Van Eyck to create complex shadows, creating lighting patterns as they appear in nature. Indeed, Van Eyck’s work looked so real that one critic noted that it lacked, ‘only a voice.’ This work, often called Portrait of a Man in a Turban, is thought to be a self-portrait. While there is no direct evidence for this, the sitter’s dress is appropriate for a man of Van Eyck’s position. While the headdress is actually a chaperon, which has the ends hanging down, it would have been sensible to tie them up while he was painting. E Paul Julien of E2 portrays Van Eyck in this self-portrait. The original work, which hangs at the National Gallery, is framed in its original frame. At the top there’s a motto in Greek, which reads, “I do as I can.” This motto appears in other of Van Eyck’s paintings. At the bottom is inscribed, “Jan Van Eyck made me on October 21st, 1433.” E Paul Julien of E2 portrays Van Eyck in this self-portrait.

Ode to Van Eyck’s Arnolfini Marriage: The Northern Renaissance, ushered in by Jan van Eyck, replaced the Beautiful Style, which had dominated European art until 1425. Van Eyck popularized the use of oil painting. Tempera, which had been the traditional source for painters until that time, dried more quickly and did not allow for the brilliance of color or delicate nuances that layering with (wet) oil paint enables. While not the first to employ this new technique, van Eyck’s use of the medium took it to new heights, allowing for complex shadows and lighting to appear as it does in nature. His work looked so real that one critic noted that it lacked, ‘only a voice.’ Van Eyck is first recorded in 1422 as working for the Count of Holland, John of Bavaria in The Hague. Van Eyck moved to Bruges to work for the Duke of Burgundy, Phillip the Good, who was the Godfather to one of van Eyck’s children. Bruges was one of the principle artistic centers of Europe and it was here where van Eyck was commissioned to create the Arnolfini portrait. The work is often known as the Arnolfini Marriage and yet there is some controversy over this interpretation, as more recent scholars believe that his wife (Giovanna di Nicolao) had died in childbirth by the time this double portrait was finished in 1434. Regardless, this work is thought to be one of the first double full-length portraits in the North. Arnolfini, a silk merchant from Tuscany, was the Medici representative in Bruges. In this work, van Eyck portrays all of Arnolfini’s wealth and power—his huge black fur hat, the lavish Anatolian rug, and the lapdog that noblewomen of the day had. As much as Van Eyck’s work displays the social status of this couple, he also tells us about the social mores of his day. Giovanna di Nicolao is looking down, in a pose of deference to her husband, a pose, which exudes a humble and pious nature. Unlike the original, E2’s “wife” does not look diminutive or submissive in the least. Indeed, she has an even greater presence than Arnolfini, one that borders on the domineering.

Ode to Petrus Christus’ Portrait of a young lady: Born in 1410, Christus worked in Bruges, a wealthy city ruled by the dukes of Burgundy. Petrus Christus is the only known follower of Jan van Eyck and was responsible for spreading van Eyck’s style. Known for his precise form, his play with lines, and lighting, Christus’ work can be distinguished by its extreme clarity. Like van Eyck, Christus’ portraits show the eyes of the sitter looking at the viewer. Yet what is different is the attention that is given to the space that surrounds the sitter, as can be seen in Portrait of a Young Lady, where the lines in the walls come together, which adds depth to the work. But one of the things that makes this work so compelling are the shadows on the right, giving the viewer a feeling of being part of the scene. E2 takes this traditional Flemish Primitive, and remakes it with someone from another continent, namely Asia, however, the subtle tension between the serene pose and intense gaze of the model is still present.

Quentin Metsys (also spelled Massys) is said to be the most important painter who worked in Antwerp in the beginning of the 16th century. Born in Leuven in 1466, he went to Antwerp to become a painter in the guild of painters in 1491. Considered to be one of the foremost artists of his day by Erasmus and Sir Thomas More, he was visited by Albrecht Durer in 1520. Metsys’ most popular work today is the Moneylenders, which is also known as the Banker and his wife. Many of the artists of his day used satire and allegory in the works and with the influence of his humanist patrons this was also the case for Metsys. In fact it is thought that Metsys was inspired by a work that Van Eyck painted in 1440, representing a merchant with his accounts. What we see in this work is a couple is leaning on a table filled with coins, a circular mirror, a Book of Hours, and a ring holder. In the convex mirror we see a thief spying on the couple as the man counts their riches and his wife is transfixed by the gold, oblivious to the thief, a clear allusion to being blinded by greed. Though the original frame no longer exists, it is recorded to have cited a passage from Leviticus stating, “just balances, just weighs…shall ye have.” The original work is a warning about being overcome by greed. Throughout the ages, those who have lent money are seen as fostering sin. It is easy to point fingers at those who we feel have led us astray, making us loan too much money and charging too much interest. And while our systems failed us in the credit crisis, we must look not only at how to better regulate the industry, but we should also question the part that we played in wanting more and more. In so doing, we will be better able to manage our desires and not have them lead us astray.

6-e2_ode-to-rubens-self-portrait-with-isabella-brandt-mv

Ode to Rembrandt’s Jewish bride: Made towards the end of his life, the Jewish Bride is one of Rembrandt’s most loved paintings because it exudes an intimacy unknown in Dutch painting until this time. This is especially shown by the tender way in which the man puts his hand on the woman’s breast. In response, she lightly brushes his hand. What makes it all the more compelling is the feeling of gentle love and reverence the two have for one another. Whether or not the scene depicts two lovers or a father and daughter, the work exudes love. We are touched by the tenderness they express to one another through their gestures, the deep red of the woman’s clothes and by Rembrandt’s enchanting use of light. As work from the E2 series seeks to take existing masters and remake them in a way which asks the viewer to question what is different, odd or out of place in order to discuss stereotypes, so we wanted to remake one of the most iconic images in Dutch art. This image has been the subject of debate over the years. Are we seeing a groom and his bride or a father and his daughter? Regardless of the roles, the tender way in which the man touches the woman’s breast and her light touch in response depicts a deep sense of reverence and love between the two. Instead of having the “bride” be a typical Dutch woman, we chose for someone from a totally different culture, namely Asian. In addition, the couple is not a man and his bride or a father and daughter but actually two women, which may not be apparent at first glance.

Ode to Vermeer’s Girl with Pearl Earring: Made in the same year that Rembrandt painting the Jewish Bride, Vermeer’s Girl with a Pearl Earring (ca 1665) was created at a time in which Vermeer’s contemporaries concentrated on official commissioned portraits or scenes from stories. Because of this, we do not know who the sitters are, but since Vermeer had a large family (11 children), it is often thought that he used one of his children for this piece. Regardless, Vermeer is able to capture the sitter’s youth and seeming shyness or uncertainty in an unforgettable manner. With wide dark eyes and slightly parted lips, and light shining on her face, the girl mesmerizes us with her gaze and immediately we are drawn in. What adds mystery to the piece is that in the seventeenth century, the turban she is wearing would have been seen as a very exotic accessory. Indeed, it is said that this type of portrait (tronies) are more about the exotic strange quality, which allows the observer to use their imagination. E2’s remake of the most talked about of Vermeer’s portraits, shows someone from another culture than would have been the case during Vermeer’s time. Yet, like the original, we are intrigued by this woman’s penetrating inquisitive look, a look in which the viewer feels that they are the only one in the world she’s focused on. Again, the aim of this work as part of the E2 portrait series is to challenge our ideas on stereotypes to bring about a dialogue.

Sandro Botticelli was born in Florence in 1445. His father Mariano Filipepi found his son Alessandro so restless that he apprenticed him to a friend, a goldsmith named Botticelli. During that time, goldsmiths and painters maintained very close connections so it was not long before Sandro showed his interest in painting. Before moving on to study under Lippi in the 1460’s, Sandro had taken on Botticelli’s last name. Botticelli’s patron, Lorenzo the Magnificant, brought neo-Platonic culture to Florence at a time that is viewed as the high point of Italian Renaissance. Around the mid-fifteenth century, Numismatics, or the collecting and studying of medals and coins was a favorite interest of the nobility. Indeed, possessing a series of Roman coins showed one’s refinement and love of antiquity. Because of this, Italian nobles often commissioned medals of themselves, depicting them in a style based on the profiles of Roman emperors seen on Roman coins. These medals showed the political values of the nobles and were used as gifts for visiting dignitaries. The medal that Botticelli depicts is of Cosimo the Elder, who is considered the founder of the ruling family of Florence, the Medici. The young man who holds the medal exudes a vague sadness, which was characteristic of Florentine male portraits at that time. In this work E2 recreates the scene of Botticelli but uses the Italian Euro with Da Vinci on it instead. Botticelli might not have been to found of this move for Da Vinci was his rival and made no bones about the fact that he found Botticelli’s landscapes ‘dismal’. The focus on the Euro alludes to the current economic crisis, especially the upheaval in Euroland. Will the stronger currencies continue to support the weaker ones? Or will stereotypes about the different European nationalities run so rampant that they contribute to a destabilization of the currency?

Rogier van der Weyden is considered one of the most influential European artists of his time. Born in 1399 in Tournai, he apprenticed with Robert Campin before becoming the master of the painters’ guild in Tournai in 1432. Three years later he had moved to Brussels and by 1436 he had been appointed the city’s official painter. Van der Weyden is well known for both his portraits and religious paintings. Most of the portraits show a sitter in the three-quarter view in the bust-length size popularized by van Eyck. It has been said that Van Eyck observed things in a way that no painter had observed them before and that Rogier expressed the emotions of his subjects in such a convincing manner that no painter has replicated. Indeed, his subjects exude a bittersweet quality in an intimate manner. Rogier seems to have employed numerous assistants. His work was so popular that it was exported to Italy, France, Spain and Germany. Indeed, Van der Weyden’s work was sought after by the Este court in Ferrara, as well as the Medici’s in Florence. In Portrait of a Lady, we see a bit more of the face of the sitter than shown before in the three-quarter pose. The subject of this portrait has not yet been identified, but her aristocratic bearing is evident. Unlike the rich colors, which previously adorned aristocratic portraits, Van der Weyden chooses a dark background, which appeals to our modern taste. The somber dark colors are broken by a red accent, her red and gold waistband. Not only does the sitter’s dress show a change in fashion towards the more sober, but it also highlights her introspective mood. Her hands, which look as if they are resting on a ledge, are smaller than what would be expected for her large head. E2’s version has Chinese artist Ran Zhang posing as the lady. Even though she’s from a totally different culture than the original sitter, her ability to exude a feeling of serenity that the original work possesses is truly uncanny.

Ode to Raphael’s Bindo Altoviti: Born in Urbino in 1483 as Raffaello Santi, the man the world knows as Raphael, saw himself as a man of culture and not just an artisan. Raphael’s immense talent enabled him to create striking narratives in his compositions. And yet it is not only his artistic talent which helped him to achieve such great heights but also his social skills and prestige. These qualities helped him to endow aristocratic sitters with both a psychological complexity and a physical presence that would become highly influential in the work of future portraitists. Inspired by Venetian motifs, Raphael experimented with their sensual qualities, employing a style reminiscent of da Vinci and Giorgione, in which the sitter is partially turned away from the viewer while still looking at the viewer. The subject of this portrait is Bindo Altoviti, who came from a thriving family of Florentine bankers. Altoviti took over the Roman arm of the business at the age of 16 when his father died. Although the exact date of this work is not known, it was most likely commissioned a year after his marriage in 1511, when he would have been about 20 years old. There is a soft and inviting quality in Altoviti’s mysterious yet penetrating gaze. Indeed, depicting a beacon of society in such a sensual manner was unusual and it is precisely this psychological complexity, which has captivated admirers of Raphael’s work. E2 has taken out some of the subtle shading, which makes Raphael’s portrait so compelling. For while the idea of a Renaissance man was popular in Raphael’s time, today it would be harder to find an artist depicting a banker sitting in such a soft repose. Altoviti’s hardened gaze in the E2 portrait makes him a lot less approachable and complex than Raphael’s version. In so doing, E2 has served up the stereotype of a banker in the 21st century. With the backlash against the banking industry we are experiencing today, bankers are branded as arrogant, self-serving, manipulators of the public and establishment (regulators, law makers, politicians, etc.). And yet this narrow view of bankers does not help us to solve the current economic crisis, a crisis in which the Banks had a substantial role, but not the only one. By stereotyping and making scapegoats out of this group, we take away our own responsibility to understand how our behavior and lifestyle may have contributed to this crisis as well.

Ode to Da Vinci's La Belle Ferronière: Known for his quote, “the painter is not worth praising if he is not a universal man,” Leonardo da Vinci is considered the most versatile genius of the Italian Renaissance. Having left over 3000 pages of notebook entries, showing his knowledge of a vast array of subjects including, math, geometry, engineering to anatomy, architecture, town planning and botany, da Vinci is responsible for establishing the idea of the artist as a creative thinker and not only a craftsman. Indeed, he did much to raise the status of Renaissance artists, focusing on their source of inspiration and universal genius more than their technical craftsmanship. That said it was in painting where he was able to really synthesize his knowledge. From 1482, da Vinci settled in Milan, until its capture by the French in 1499. Thereafter, he wandered for a few years before returning to Florence for a few years. He worked for many of Italy’s prominent families, including the Sforza’s, Borgia’s and de Medici’s. Annoyed by constant comparisons to Raphael and Michelangelo, who were younger than he, da Vinci accepted Francois I’s offer to move to France, where he achieved the emulation and honors that he’d been looking for. The range of gesture and expression in da Vinci’s is considered to be unprecedented. La belle Ferronière is thought to be the mistress of Francois I of France, who was married to a Le Ferron. The model for E2’s rendition is from China and is also the model for the portrait of Francois I.

7__ode_to_albrecht_durer_self_portrait-__1500

Ode to Uccello’s Portrait of a Young Man: Paolo di Dono is called Uccello because of his love of animals, namely birds. Trained in the style of Ghiberti’s workshop, Uccello spent the bulk of his career in Florence. His style is distinctive of the early Renaissance and shows a wonderful mix of traditions as Uccello combined Gothic art with more realistic work, using Roman block letters to emphasize the link with ancient Roman. What does this inscription say? The end does all, meaning that if you live a good life, your soul will be judged well at the final reckoning. This was an important reminder to future generations to live a life of virtue. In trying to integrate artistic form with scientific precision, Uccello studied animals and plants rigorously. However, it was the way in which he rendered space in accordance with the mathematical rules of perspective for which he is truly known. In his day he was often seen an eccentric mathematician rather than a painter. Uccello is now admired for the power of his form, his witty imagination and coloring. But it is for his love of perspective that he will be remembered the most, for it is said, “Uccello went off his head with his love of perspective.”

Jean-Honore Fragonard was the most well known pupil of Boucher. He won the Prix de Rome in 1752. Famous for his scenes of frivolity, which captured the ‘fragrant essence’ of aristocratic life in the 18th century, Fragonard’s work embodied the spirit of Rococo. He was a genius in portraying the type of semi-erotic scenes that were favored before the French Revolution. By 1767 he was making almost all of his work for private patrons, including Louis XV’s most loved mistress, Mme du Barry. But his light-hearted style was already becoming outdated and Mme du Barry replaced his work with that of Vien. While he escaped the terror with his life, the French Revolution marked the end of his career. By 1792, he seems to have given up painting. David, who had been helped by Fragonard earlier in his career, helped Fragonard find an administrative job at the newly opened Louvre, where he worked until 1800. Although Fragonard lived another six years in obscurity, he left his mark on other artists, from his sister-in-law, marguerite Gerard, who was one of the best female artists of her time to his great-granddaughter, Berthe Morisot, who painted with Manet in the decades that followed. The Stolen Kiss, which depicts a young man in the act of stealing a kiss, is a tale of innocent love. As the boy temps the young girl with a brief kiss, she is torn between wanting to surrender to his affection and pulling back. As she leans into the kiss, she turns back to look at the matrons in the room next to her. The girl is full of contradictions—while a part of her yearns for pleasure, she doesn’t dare to fully give in to her obvious desire. She is torn and the work simmers with that possibility—will she or won’t she? She is the perfect example of the coquette—her dress, body language and behavior is all focused on attracting men, yet will she follow through? Fragonard was a master at capturing this coquettish behavior, yet this mastery also proved to be his artistic downfall. E2 portrays this scene with two women, the one luring the other into a kiss full of promise and passion.

Ode to Hayez’ The Kiss: The Kiss is one of the most notorious paintings to show lovers’ caught in a deep embrace. It is a work that evokes a sense of intense romantic passion. Hayez, born in 1791, considered The Kiss to be one of his best compositions, for he brought together the main characteristics of Italian Romanticism, namely naturalness and sentiment. Indeed, the great sensuality that exudes from the lovers’ embrace can be linked to the fact that the model, Carolina Zucchi, was also Hayez’ lover. The Kiss was presented at the Exhibition of Brera in 1859, only three months after the triumphal entrance of Vittorio Emanuele II and Napoleon III in Milan. This event cannot be underestimated in the influence it had on the image, as the colors that Hayez used represented the alliance between France and Italy. This alliance, otherwise known as the Plombiéres Agreement, marked the ending of the Second War of Independence and the birth of the Italian nation.

Remaking Marat: Jacques-Louis David (1748-1825) was a Neoclassical painter and political activist during the French Revolution. David firmly believed the arts should educate the public and give expression to their ideals. The subject of David’s painting, Jean-Paul Marat, was a leader of the Revolution and a friend of David’s. Marat suffered from a painful and irritating skin disease, which required him to frequently immerse himself in a medicinal bath. During one of these baths in 1793 a rival revolutionary, Charlotte Corday, gained entry to his residence stabbed him to death. In Death of Marat, David depicts the poverty and simplicity in which Marat lived and worked. The figure has a ghostly, compelling quality, intended to keep alive the memory of a great revolutionary martyr. The letter by which his murderer gained admittance is still resting – in a grip of death – in Marat’s hand.

Remembering the Revolution: Corday kills Marat: On July 17th, 1793 Charlotte Corday was executed for the assassination of Jean-Paul Marat on July 13th. Marat was a radical Jacobin leader and publisher and was responsible for the death of many Girondins, with whom Corday sympathized. As the Jacobins became more radical, Corday began to sympathize with the Girondin whom she thought would save France. The violence which had been ignited during the September massacres, only continued to grow. She held Marat responsible for this and decided that the only way to stop the reign of terror was to kill the most radical of radicals, Marat. She believed that he was threatening the Republic and hoped that in killing Marat, the violence would end. Indeed, at her trial she stated, “I have killed one man to save a hundred thousand.” On July 9th she left Caen and went to Paris, with a copy of Plutarch’s Parallel Lives in hand. She bought a kitchen knife with a blade of six inches and wrote an address to the French people explaining her motives for assassinating Marat. After going to the National Assembly to find Marat, she discovered that he no longer attended meetings. She arrived at his home before noon on July 13th, claiming to know of a Girondist uprising in Caen. She was turned away, but came back again in the evening. Marat let her in, but due to a debilitating skin condition, he went back to his tub, where he had been conducting most of his affairs. After Marat wrote down the names of the Girondists, she pulled out the knife, plunging it into his chest. Killing Marat did not stop either the Jacobins or the Terror. In fact, Marat became a martyr, and his bust ended up replacing the religious statues and crucifixes which had been banished during the new regime.

Ode to Ingres’ Valpincon Bather: Ingres, who moved to Paris in 1797 to study in David’s studio, was David’s most renowned pupil. He won the Prix de Rome at the young age of 21 in 1801, but only left for Italy in 1806 because of the political situation in France. While Ingres was in Rome, he became inspired by scenes of bathing women and in 1808 he painted Valpincon Bather. This theme was to resonate with him throughout his career, for in 1863, more than fifty years after he’d painted the Valpincon Bather, he painted Turkish Bath. Ingres came back to Paris in 1824, where he remained for 10 years, receiving the success he’d craved. Celebrated for his bold use of color, mastery of technique and understanding of the female character, Ingres, who led a very bourgeiois life, was still seen to have, “personal obsessions and mannerisms” that made him such a great artist. Baudelaire remarked that his works “are the product of a deeply sensuous nature.” However, in 1834, when his work, Martyrdom of St. Symphorium, was poorly received at the Salon, Ingres accepted the position of Director to the French Academy in Rome, a position he held through 1840. While he had scores of admiring pupils, Chasseriau was the only one to attain distinction.

Georges de la Tour was born in 1593 in a small French town just twenty miles from Nancy. A painter in the Baroque tradition, he’s considered to be a Dutch Caravaggisti and is often compared to the Dutch painter Hendrick Terbrugghen. De la Tour is best known for his use of lighting in nocturnal scenes, which he took further than his predecessors. The work developed later in his career shows a greater stillness and simplicity. Although he was appointed the position of court painter, after his death in 1652, his work was largely forgotten. He was rediscovered in 1915 when German scholar, Hermann Voss, discovered some of his work, which had been confused with Vermeer. In the Penitent Magdalene, we see Mary just before her conversion. She has just cast aside her jewels to the ground, giving up the materialism of her worldly life in search for a more spiritual existence. The skull may suggest the death of her old life as she ponders her conversion. Looking contemplatively into the flame, which gives the work a mysterious quality, she ponders her new illumination. In E2’s work, the model is an American from African and American Indian descent.

Paolo Cagliari, known as Veronese was born in Verona circa1528. His nickname is derived from his hometown. Veronese trained with Badile and later married his daughter. From 1553 Veronese was based in Venice and hence is considered a member of the Venetian School. A contemporary of Tintoretto, both artists became dominant figures Venetian painting in the period after Titian. Like Tintoretto, Veronese was also employed by the Venetian republic to decorate some of the rooms in the Doge’s Palace. While Tintoretto concentrated more on religious subjects, Veronese received a number of secular commissions. Veronese had a love for ornamentation, which got him in trouble in 1573 when he was interrogated about adding a buffoon with a parrot on his wrist, dwarfs, a servant with a bleeding nose, etc. to the painting entitled Last Supper. Instead of making the changes required to the work, he changed the name to the Feast in the House of Levi, one of the most famous works in Venice’s museum, the Accademia. According to the Metropolitian Museum of Art, “His art is inextricably linked to the idea of opulence and splendor in Renaissance Venice.” This work created in the decade before his death, exudes darker, more somber tones and that is certainly the case with this work of Lucretia right before she takes her life. Unlike Titian portrayal of Lucretia at the moment of her rape by Tarquin, the seventh and final King of Rome, who reigned from 535 BC until the uprising of 509 BC in which he and his family were expelled and the Roman Republic was established. Veronese chooses to show Lucretia in the moment right before her suicide. Her face is full of grief as she looks down to the left right as she begins to insert the sword between her breasts. In E2’s version the sitter exudes the same type of despair as the original Lucretia. The twist comes when viewing this work together with Veronese’s Penitent Magdalen, in other words as a diptych.

Paolo Cagliari, known as Veronese was born in Verona circa1528. His nickname is derived from his hometown. Considered one of the masters of the late Renaissance, Veronese trained with Badile and later married his daughter. From 1553 Veronese was based in Venice and hence is considered a member of the Venetian School. A contemporary of Tintoretto, both artists became dominant figures Venetian painting in the period after Titian. Like Tintoretto, Veronese was also employed by the Venetian republic to decorate some of the rooms in the Doge’s Palace. While Tintoretto concentrated more on religious subjects, Veronese received a number of secular commissions. Veronese had a love for ornamentation, which got him in trouble in 1573 when he was interrogated about adding a buffoon with a parrot on his wrist, dwarfs, a servant with a bleeding nose, etc. to the painting entitled Last Supper. Instead of making the changes required to the work, he changed the name to the Feast in the House of Levi, one of the most famous works in Venice’s museum, the Accademia. According to the Metropolitian Museum of Art, “His art is inextricably linked to the idea of opulence and splendor in Renaissance Venice.” It is said that Veronese’s use of brilliant, luminous hues is reminiscent of Verona’s artistic style, which focused on harmonies of contrast rather than the Venetian style, where the focus was harmonies of tone. Veronese’s use of color and perspective went on to influence the Flemish Baroque master, Peter Paul Rubens. In this work, Magdalene covers herself with her golden locks, as she looks awe-struck towards the sky almost as if she’s seeing a vision. She is full of contradictions, embodying sin and salvation, the fallen and the redeemed simultaneously. Yet with the skull posed in the bottom left corner, under the crucifixion, the work ultimately reminds us of the transient nature of earthly pursuits. Veronese’s latter works used a darker palette and less complex compositions, resulting in more emotionally charged works. E2’s version uses an African American model to be Christ’s consort, the Magdalene. In both the Magdalene and Lucretia the raw emotion is almost palpable.

Jacques Guillaume Lucien Amans was a French Neoclassical portraitist who worked in New Orleans in the 1840s and 1850s. Born in Maastricht, when it was still part of the French empire, Amans showed his worked at the Paris Salon between1831 and 1837. The influence of both David and Ingres’ Neoclassical style are clear in his work. Together with Vaudechamp, Amans sailed to Louisiana to paint portraits of gentry in 1837. When Vaudechamp left Louisiana in 1839, Amans took over as the state’s most celebrated portrait painter. Indeed, he was so famous that in 1840 he painted president Andrew Jackson. In 1856 Amans moved back to France and never came back to Louisiana. This portrait, Creole in a Red Headdress, was created around the same time as that of Andrew Jackson. In 2011 the Historic New Orleans Collection purchased it and wrote that the portrait not only defies ethnicity and race but also gender distinctions. Indeed it was that aspect of this piece, which compelled E2 to remake the work. Earlier that year, E2 had remade Ingres’ Valpincon Bather with a sitter who defied gender distinctions and it when they read the history of Creole in a Red Headdress, they decided to invite the same sitter to pose.

Ode to Titian’s Venus d’Urbino: Tiziano Vecelli, commonly known as Titian, who lived in Venice from 1487-1576, was trained in the studio of Giovanni Bellini. When Bellini died in 1516, Titian became the official painter to the Venetian Republic. Indeed, Titian’s renown was vast and his work was commissioned by the most pre-eminent kings and nobles of his day, including Francois I of France, Philip II of Spain, Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor and Pope Paul III. His studio was prolific, producing several thousand works. Of all the female nudes in the history of painting, the Venus of Urbino is probably one of those whom has commanded the most attention from writers. Why? Because she unabashedly parades her nudity. What provokes the viewer is her unflinching gaze as her left hand lightly rests on her sex. Indeed the roses in her right hand are thought to symbolize the pleasure she is affording herself (source: Dangerous Women, the Perils of Muses and Femmes Fatales by Laure Adler and Elisa Lecosse). It is also possible that her erotic pose may be linked to a widely accepted belief by physicians and theologians in the sixteenth century, that female masturbation aided in procreation. The color of her hair, a golden red, appeared in so much of his work that it was coined, ‘Titian hair.’ Titian was also known for the way he depicted ‘life through colored light’, and was also instrumental in establishing oil paint as a widely accepted medium, which he applied in expansive brush strokes, sometimes using his fingers to give the work a final touch.

Ode to Goya’s Maya: While Titian’s work may have influenced Goya, what he projects is without both pretext or screens and becomes the source of inspiration for artists in the century to come, especially for French artists. The uproar caused by the Venus of Urbino was also caused by the Nude Maya, which has been referred to as “one of the most disconcerting images in all art, in which the exaltation of life in the feminine being is triumphant” (source Prado Madrid, Great Museums of the World publication). The clothed Maya reclines in a similar pose to the naked Maya, but the light and shadows are more extreme and intense. Her pose appears more pronounced. The idea of two paintings in identical format was innovative in and of itself, even more so when one realizes that female nudes in early Spanish painting are very unusual, though Velazquez, too, was an exception. The Naked Maya is Goya’s most controversial painting and though there were ways to make it less provocative and profane for the audience, for example by giving her a more romantic or stylized quality, Goya clearly refrained from portraying her in an idealized fashion. Adding fuel to the fire, her unblinking eye, which stared at the viewer in a statement of defiance, was precisely what unleashed the critics. The work was seen as obscene and was confiscated, together with the Clothed Maya, by the Spanish Inquisition in 1813. Both works were owned by Manuel de Godoy, the Prime Minister of Spain, who fell from grace in 1808 when all of his property was seized by Ferdinand VII. It is disputed whether Maya was Pepita Tudó, the Prime Minister’s mistress, or the Duchess of Alba, with whom Goya was rumored to have had an affair.

Ode to Velázquez’ Venus at her Mirror: Diego Rodriquez de Silva y Velázquez was born in Seville in 1599 and was quickly recognized as a child prodigy. His career took off after he was appointed the court painter to Philip IV in 1623, in whose palace he enjoyed having his studio and gallery. Although the portrayal of nudes was officially discouraged due to the Spanish Inquisition, Velázquez was protected and able to carry out the commission of Venus at her Mirror due to his relationship with the King. It remains the only surviving female nude by Velázquez due to the rarity of nudes in 17th century Spanish art. Velázquez was inspired to paint Venus at her Mirror after his visits to Italy. Painted in the Venetian Renaissance style, its all-pervasive theme is reflection. Venus reflects on her beauty, reflected in the mirror; since we can dimly see her face, we know that our face can be seen by her, and she may be thought to reflect on the effect her beauty has on us. Venus is pictured reclining with her back to the viewer – in antiquity, portrayal of Venus from a back view was a common visual and literary erotic motif. Velázquez’ Venus, however, is not portrayed as in traditional depictions: she has no jewelry, roses, myrtle, or blond hair. The only way to identify the woman as Venus is because of the presence of her son, Cupid.

Ode to The Pinching D'Estrees Sisters: This favorite painting at the Louvre is of Gabrielle d’Estrées in a tub with one of her sisters, pinching her nipple. In the background a woman is knitting clothes for the baby. The artist who created this work is unknown, however it is clearly from the Fontainebleau School as the women are depicted in their bathtub, an obvious allusion to an antique theme of Venus, the Goddess of love. This type of portrait was fashionable in aristocratic circles and most found the subject matter pleasing as it usually shared an intimate view of the daily life of the sitters. However this intimate view is anything but ordinary and that is precisely what drew us to remake this piece as the pinching gesture, is actually an allusion to the impending birth of Gabrielle’s illegitimate baby by King Henry IV (who was King of France from 1589-1610). The ring Gabrielle holds in her hand is thought to be Henry’s coronation ring, which he gave to her shortly before she died. Indeed, Gabrielle was the subject of much controversy as Henry obtained an annulment from his first wife and was set on marrying Gabrielle, whom had already provided him with three children. One of the ways to challenge stereotypes is to take iconic images and change them. While we have made only a few changes, without the knowledge of the original work, the viewer wonders what is happening. Are these two women lovers? The most obvious change that we’ve made is having the woman who is sewing in the background actually look directly at the viewer. The way in which the woman who is knitting is staring, would not have been permitted by a household servant at the time and if the servant had been so bold as to stare, the artist would surely not have drawn attention to it. And so the questioning begins, which at the end of the day we hope will lead to a discussion of the effects of assumptions and stereotypes.

Courbet was born in 1819 at Omans, close to the Swiss border, the son of a prosperous farmer. Although most of his career was spent in Paris, Cezanne (accent to right on e) noted that ‘his palette smells of hay.’ In 1839 he moved to Paris where he spent hours copying the work of famous naturalists such as Caravaggio and Velázquez. It is from these artists that he obtained a heavy style with strong contrast between light and shade. The Sleep was commissioned by Ottoman diplomat Khalil-Bey. In the original work a blond and brunette are shown holding each other in a close embrace. The dark-haired beauty with a more muscular body and chiseled features protectively embraces the more fragile blond beauty. She is stretched out with her right arm falling back as her lover nestles against her shoulder, as a woman would with a man. The work exudes an intimacy between the women with their intertwined bodies that was forbidden, all the more because the perspective draws the viewer in as if they are not watching a scene but taking part in it. And yet, the lovers are absorbed in their own voluptuousness, totally unaware of the viewer, in contrast to Manet’s Olympia in which she insolently rebukes the viewer with her gaze, not promising abandon but rather ultimate control. Interestingly, the Sleep was bought from Khalil-Bey by one of Manet’s friends, Jean-Baptiste Faure, who also was the first owner of Dejeuner sur l’herbe. E2’s rendition shows two burlesque performers of different races snuggled together. The dark-haired beauty again has a more muscular body and is stretched out as her more fragile lover leans against her.

Ode to Manet's Dejeuner sur l'herbe: Édouard Manet, who came from a comfortable middle class Parisian background, longed for recognition but he was labeled a rebel him due to his unconventional ideas. While Manet trained under Couture from 1850-6, his style was more influenced by the old masters, which he studied at the Louvre. Manet’s Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe was rejected by the famous Academy, and so it was shown at Le Salon des Refuses in 1863. At that time it caused one of the greatest upheavals in the art world, causing the viewers to riot and even threaten to destroy the building. Why was this painting so controversial? Not because the woman was naked but rather because she was shown with two men who were fully clothed in contemporary dress. She too, stares at the viewer in a challenging manner. To make matters worse, she was a known person and not an idealized version of Venus. Indeed, Victorine Meurand, was one of Manet’s favorite models. Her soul-piercing stare was exactly the same type of look, which had gotten Titian and Goya into trouble. And who were the men? It is widely thought that they were his brother, Eugene and his future brother-in-law, Ferdinand Leenhoff.

20-ode-to-marit-silsands-never-forget-i-a-final

e2-ode-to-holbeins-jane-seymour_crop_final

john_everett_millais_-_ophelia_proces14_a4

kees-tabaks-allegory-of-sight-a0002158_a3

Het E2-concept van Kleinveld en Julien

Tijdens de samenwerking aan het Before During After-project besloten de fotografen Elizabeth
Kleinveld en Epaul Julien een nieuw concept te creëren, een reactie op de door orkaan Katrina
blootgelegde ongelijkheid. Onder de kunstenaarsnaam E2 willen Kleinveld en Julien, allebei
afkomstig uit New Orleans, een discussie op gang brengen over stereotypes en hoe deze kunnen
leiden tot vooroordelen en discriminatie.

In het kader daarvan herschept E2 iconische beelden, zowel schilderijen, fotografie, film en zelfs
literatuur, met een stevige draai. Deze serie, die begint met de Vlaamse primitieven en bijna 600 jaar
kunstgeschiedenis omvat, wordt in samenwerking met het Nederlands Nationaal Theater
uitgevoerd. Zij stellen veel kostuums, pruiken en voorwerpen ter beschikking voor de
herinterpretaties van de historische afbeeldingen. Hoogtepunten van deze serie zijn werken
gebaseerd op onder meer: Venus of Urbino (Titiaan, 1538), Venus at her mirror (Velásquez, 1647-51),
Het Joodse bruidje (Rembrandt, 1662/66), Het meisje met de parel (Vermeer, 1665), La mort de
Marat (David, 1793), Il bacio (Hayez, 1859) en Dejeuner sur l’herbe (Manet, 1863).

E2 heeft een wapenschild: al spelend met het traditionele symbool van de aristocratie ook daar een
nieuwe betekenis aan gegeven. Het E2-logo staat in het midden, aan de zijkant pelikanen en aan de
bovenkant een zogenaamde fleur de lis (een lelie, het symbool van de staat Louisiana). Verder is het
schild versierd met een lint met daarop de woorden In Empathy We Trust. Het idee hiervoor
ontstond nadat Kleinveld en Julien geïnspireerd raakten door de novelle Ourika die Claire du Duras
in 1824 schreef. Het was één van de eerste keren dat een auteur zich probeerde te verplaatsen in de
schoenen van iemand van een ander ras of cultuur. E2 hoopt dat hun werk de beschouwer zal
aansporen om hetzelfde te doen.

Elizabeth Kleinveld

Just another WordPress site

Recent Posts