When
was the last time you “slowly” looked at a work of art? Actually making intentional time to carefully
observe more than meets your eye at first glance? In our increasingly fast-paced world, where we
are bombarded with more visual clutter than we can possibly process, it is all too
common to rush through our looking rather than pausing to linger, reflect, and wonder.
Last week, Dr. Cleworth asked you to
spend focused time listening to Renaissance music. This week, I invite you to
engage in “slow looking” at Van Eyck’s masterful Ghent Altarpiece.
You
might be surprised to learn that recent research demonstrates that most
museum-goers, who claim to have had “incredible” and “outstanding” experiences
during their visit, spent an average of fewer than 30 seconds looking at any single
work of art. (Incredible but true; for a
summary, see this article)
Yet,
other scholarship asserts that prolonged observation is the foundation for
critical thinking and scientific inquiry, and develops a capacity to process
information and segregate complexities. Last year, Shari Tishman, a Senior Research
Associate at Harvard’s Project Zero, published Slow Looking: The Art and Practice of Learning Through Observation (New
York: 2018). Her book offers a detailed account of the
historical roots and strategies for slow looking
and presents arguments detailing how slow looking leads to the development of
deep, meaningful, and lasting understanding.
The premise of the book is that slow looking is a learned capacity and a
cognitive virtue, a skill and an inclination that can be developed over time. Tishman
claims that there is no magic formula for slow looking, but prolonged and
mindful observation are its essential ingredients. (Alas, one of the great disappointments for
me is how little time we are able to really look at each of the amazing works
we are studying in class.)
So,
this week as you participate in the blog, carve out at least 20 minutes for a
slow look at the Ghent Altarpiece. (Note: this linked website allows you to zoom in to very high magnification, so feel free to use this feature to explore closely -- as well as slowly -- if you wish.) I suggest you choose to contemplate either the
closed or open view (rather than both).
Spend the first 10 minutes looking at your chosen view of the altarpiece
in its entirety and note as many features as you can observe. Take a visual
inventory of what you see. Are there repetitions of color or gesture or shape?
What subjects can you identify? What
is unifying the work? etc., etc. Next,
select a single panel from your chosen view, and focus on just this one panel
for the next 10 minutes (be sure to blow it up on your screen). Again, inventory what you see, and write a list of questions or "wonders" that develop as you look at your subject.
What
did you learn from this experience? What
gem did you discover that you would not have otherwise seen? Did you find that the more you looked, the
more you became engaged with your looking and the more you were able to
discover? Was it hard to concentrate? Did your mind wander? Was it easy to generate questions about your panel? What might this suggest? You don’t need to answer all of these
questions, but please share about this experience and how you think slow
looking impacts how we view art.
I did have to do a lot of research on the subjects of this piece as I am quite uneducated in Catholicism. Please bare with me if I misunderstand/misinterpret the painting, I’m really trying my best.
ReplyDeleteSo before doing any research I chose to do my broader observations on the opened view of the Ghent Altarpiece. I immediately noticed the repetition of arches and half circles: arches on the top holding Adam and Eve, framing the Choir, above Jesus (or Christ Pantokrator as I learned he is also called in this case), Virgin Mary, and John the Baptist, finally all being closed by the sun in the bottom, middle panel. Mostly everyone in the top panels are shifted to face the center, to face Jesus. While everyone in the bottom panels are shifted to face the Mystic Lamb, the symbol of Jesus (I think?). Many are looking up/down depending on their orientation to the lamb. I also noticed there are no “traditional” halos, like in many of the past paintings we have viewed, but instead there are fine, yellow rays protruding from the head’s of Jesus, Virgin Mary, John the Baptist, and even the Mystic Lamb right below Jesus. My eyes kept taking me to the bottom right panel because the man in the red robes was so large I was curious as to who he is. I later discovered he is St. Christopher, often depicted as a literal giant! I noticed the backgrounds of the panels unified one-another. Adam and Eve are surrounded by dark shadows, the Choir with grey tile below and a light blue gradient above, the golden arches and grey background over the Last Judgement, and the entirety of the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb is surrounded by sunny, blue skies, green grass, and foliage.
Next, I did my “slow-look” on the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb, the bottom, middle panel. This panel sparked numerous questions, many of which I was not able to answer in my research. I first questioned the botany of the painting, specifically it was the single palm tree caught my eye. I noticed the crowd of people in the bottom left were in an array of bright colours, while the crowd in the bottom right were separated into groups by coloured robes. The groups of people at the top were mirrored to the bottom, as the top left men all wore a single coloured robe and the top right women wore an array of coloured robes. I noticed the many details of the octagonal fountain in the center, particularly the water spout flowing down a small dirt path toward the viewer. It’s such a fine detail it could perhaps be a symbol of baptism, or river of life, or some other important meaning I don’t have enough knowledge of to recognise. After my slow-look observations I was able to research the specific details I noticed to learn more about them.
Overall, slow-looking at this piece gave me time to really get my thoughts together. I love asking questions about the little, seemingly insignificant details of things, but it’s not often I ever seek out or get answers to them. I feel like with the importance of iconography in this painting, as well as others in the Northern Renaissance, I am able to actually get my questions answered. I’ve learned that those “seemingly insignificant details” I love so much actually have a meaning in these sorts of paintings. Each detail is added in reference to something, and I think that’s really powerful.
I am also very uneducated on Catholicism, so you are not alone here. You observed the Ghent Altarpiece in great detail. I did not notice the that everyone was facing Jesus which should have been a given but you pointed out a lot of significant symbols I did not notice at first glance. I think you did a really good job.
DeleteErica, I find it interesting how we both chose to observe the open view and Adoration of the Lamb scene for this blog! I appreciate how you did a little bit of extra research in order to understand the religious context behind the work; there is so much of it to explore. As I expressed in my original post, I'm a Catholic; yet, I did not understand every religious reference in this work either. That said, I noticed the lone palm tree as well. Now that I think about it, it could represent Palm Sunday, the day before Easter in which we receive palms to process into the church with (and make into little crosses). That is just speculation, though. Further, you took the symbol of the water flowing into the dirt path further than I did, and I feel like it could totally represent a 'river of life'. To touch upon your last point, I too enjoy noticing the littlest details of pretty much everything. However, as a caveat, I would imagine there are times when the iconography of a work does not yield direct answers to our questions. I am glad you were able to answer yours in this case, though.
DeleteErica, I have to commemorate you for going above and beyond and really taking time to sit down and analyze what you saw. I appreciate that you researched who all of the people were in the paintings and pointed that out because I actually wondered who they were myself. I could pick out a few of like like Adam, Eve, Mary, and Jesus, but because I am not very familiar with Catholicism either (you're not alone don't worry) I was rather lost as to what the scenes were depicting. Now that I actually know who everyone is, it is a lot easier to understand what is being depicted in the painting.
DeleteI also enjoyed how every small detail of the altarpiece seemed to have a bigger meaning. I suppose I did not expect to find more than a couple of references but just about the entire painting was. It surprised me for sure!
Hi Erica, I too am impressed with your research -- although it wasn't required for this assignment. I'm curious, did your interest in decoding the iconography frustrate your ability to "merely" look? or did your curiosity about all the symbolism help pique and sustain your interest?
DeleteErica, I can completely relate, I do not know much about catholicism either. So looking at this piece at first was a little confusing, because I knew these details had meaning, but I was not able to understand them either. In addition to my own research your post brought more clarification for me in understanding the Adoration of the Lamb. Thank you!
DeleteI wish I could reply to each comment directly but I guess that's not an option.
DeleteThank you, Lizzy, for teaching me about Palm Sunday! I think that could definitely be the case! Once again, I looked it up and discovered that on Palm Sunday people carry palm fronds. This could be the answer to another question I had of why the women on the right and some men on the left in the Adoration of the Lamb were holding large leaves.
And thank you, Dr. Hall! I didn't really think of it as doing more work since I consider background research a major component in analysing anything. It wasn't frustrating at all, as often times I'm more intrigued by the decoding aspect than the actual work itself. It was fun to use this painting as a way to learn about Catholicism. Sometimes I'm interested in topics but they are so broad and intricate that I don't know where to begin. I learned with this altarpiece that I could easily use art as a starting point for discovering new things about history or religion!
Also it's reassuring to hear that I'm not the only one who doesn't know a lot about Catholicism. I was sitting here thinking I'm the only person in the class that's not an expert in music or art or religions haha.
For this week's prompt I chose to focus on the open view of the Ghent Altarpiece.
ReplyDeleteWith this being said, one of the first things that I noticed very early on in my slow looking was how detailed every individual panel was. As someone who draws in their free-time, I have always enjoyed drawing details more than anything else because I find that such gives personality to my artwork while also showing my audience how much effort I put into my drawings. So naturally, I noticed the fine detail that is found all over the Ghent Altarpiece first. One section in particular that caught my attention was the second panel which is titled "Singing Angels". Initially my eyes were drawn to the glistening gold leaves that were on the Angel's robe in the forefront of the painting; however, the more I began to look closer the more I became fixated on the sashes that were around each of the angels' necks. I wondered how Van Eyck was able to paint those sashes to look like they were made of real, shimmery jewels.
Another aspect of Van Eyck's work that drew my attention rather superficially was how bright and vibrant the colors he used were. It seemed as if every panel on the inside of the altarpiece was being hit by its own painted light source which helped in illuminating the colors that were used. I noticed this aspect of Van Eyck's work fairly early in my slow looking as well. One panel in particular that I focused on in terms of color was the first panel, titled "Adam". This panel showcases a rather skinny man, meant to be Adam from the Bible, shielding his body with a leaf. I found it interesting how his skin seems to glow in a way that makes him look as if he has a youthful gleam despite the fact that he is clearly an older man. Likewise, it almost seems as if Adam has a farmer's tan due to the fact that his arms and lower legs are more tan the his chest and thighs!
I agree that too often in today's society we are flooded with visual media which causes us to not look closely at what we are viewing. I am guilty of this myself. I cannot begin to explain how many times I have looked at images on my phone and swiped past them without even looking at them for five seconds. It is something that has become a habit for me even outside of social media. This assignment did more than force me to sit down and look at a work of art; it also helped me to understand how important it is to look beyond the surface level of a piece and value it's beauty.
Josh, I also looked at the skill of Van Eyck's fabric portrayals in his piece, and I agree that is is a sight to behold. It's quite a testament to the artist himself when he can render those clothing folds so detailed like he has in the open version of the altarpiece. It also is astounding the massive scale that this piece has that allows the artist to make such fine details in small models. Along with the fabric work in the Singing Angels panel, I think that the facial expressions are something to be noted as well. Some are a bit similar but the fact that he changes the angle of the face just a little, makes painting that face a whole other challenge.
DeleteSince you have experience with rendering fine details, you must have a unique perspective on (and appreciation for) Van Eyck's masterful work. It seems to me that he wants us to look at every single thing, since all the images are given equal treatment (in terms of detail). I also want to assuage your "guilt" of not looking slowly most of the time. Although am a believer of the value of slow looking, I also know it's simply not practical for the vast majority of our visual consumption. And tbh, most images probably don't warrant our focused attention.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFor my "slow look" of the Ghent Altarpiece by Van Eyck, I wanted to focus on the closed view of the panel because as discussed in class, people saw these panels closed for the majority of the time. At first glance, the colors seem to be more on the muted side. However, the more closer to life the people are in the panel, the more vibrant the colors are. For instance, the commissioners for the Altarpiece are the most vibrant panels on the closed view because they are alive at the time, while the biblical figures John the Baptist, and John the Evangelist are completely colorless. To one's eye, they look just like statues. This could be because they are no longer alive but still hold an important roll in the story of the bible. As our gaze moves upward to the annunciation scene, where the angel Gabriel is delivering the message to Marry, the color is still muted but not as muted as the Johns. I believe some pops of color are added in this scene because viewer is supposed to feel as though the scene is happening right in front of their eyes. Yet the over all dullness in color is still dominant due to the fact that this scene happened in the past. More color is added in the window with the view of the city to display the vibrant life being lived out there at that moment in time. People were often reminded of life and death in these types of paintings so that is what drew me to this conclusion in my color examination of the piece. More over, there are numerous hidden symbols in the Ghent Altarpiece. To emphasize, John the Baptist is holding the notorious lamb of god in his arms and pointing to it. At the same time, John the Evangelist is holding a chalice with what seems to have snakes inside of it, which symbolizes poison leaving his wine after he blesses it ( I had to google that). In the middle annunciation scene, Gabriel the angel is shown holding white lilies because they are considered a symbol of purity which is associated with Marry. Gabriel and marry are both wearing a lavish crowns that I believe to be replacements for their halos. The dove above Marry's head is the symbol for life. This is an important symbol because the dove has a vivid halo, so you can tell Van Eyck wanted the viewer to notice it. There is definitely more to pick apart in this altarpiece, but unfortunately I am clueless to who the figures are above the annunciation scene. I am glad I had a chance to take a closer look at this magnificent piece of art.
ReplyDeleteNohely, I chose to focus my attention on in inside of the altarpiece; however, your observations made me wish that I would have spent my time on the outside! I initially thought that the muted colors had nothing to do with anything, besides the fact that the altarpiece was very old and probably damaged. I figured that the blurriness and lack of color was due to the fact that the outside needed to be restored. I did not think that they could actually hold some sort of symbol, let alone something so powerful as what you mentioned!
DeleteNohely, seeing as how the rest of us chose to observe the open view, I am pleased that you 'branched out' into the closed view. In addition, I especially appreciate how you focused much of your observation on color. I guess you sort of had to, because this view does not seem to have quite as much variance in shape or gesture as the open view, but regardless, you made some great points. For instance, I had not considered that the presence or absence of color meant life or death. Perhaps the lack of color in both John the Baptist and John the Evangelist could thus implicitly serve as a memento mori (reminder of death). Moreover, thank you for looking up the significance of the 'snake' in John the Evangelist's chalice. Lastly, I totally see the 'vivid halo' of the dove now that you mentioned it. Maybe Van Eyck intended to do a similar thing with the sun in the Adoration of the Lamb scene of the open view! I am now kind of curious as to that. Thank you for this analysis!
DeleteNohely, I think if I were completing this slow looking assignment I would have looked at the closed version, too -- in part because of what you indicated (this was the "typical" view) and also because it is so less complex than the interior! I'm glad your slow looking led you to some discoveries about color variations and allowed you to hypothesize what that may symbolize. By the way, the top figures represent prophets (on the sides) from the Old Testament, who foretold the birth of Christ, and sibyls (in the middle) who are oracles from classical antiquity.
DeleteTo begin with, if we are going by the standard expressed in the Artsy article, then I cannot say I have ever truly looked at a piece of art slowly. This is regardless of the amount of Phoenix Art Museum visits I have taken. I am much like the majority of people who take seconds to look at art, *sometimes* a minute. That aside, however, I did not let that stop me from being up to this “challenge” of slow looking.
ReplyDeleteI chose to observe the complete open view of the Ghent Altarpiece first. Immediately, I was able to pick out the somewhat-alternating arch and rectangle shapes of the frames. The repetition of these shaped frames, I feel, establishes unity throughout the work at large. Also, the two frames where Adam and Eve are, that have kind of an ‘arched-rectangular’ look, seem like they help to close the Altarpiece. In addition, I noticed each of the golden arches above the heads of Mary, Christ, and John the Baptist, which also serve to create unity. Moving on to gesture, I recognized that the Singing Angels and the Angel Musicians have very similar postures; both groups seem to be leaning toward the organ/other musical instrument while they sing/play. In a similar way, Adam and Eve have similar stances. The only real difference is that Eve does not have her arm across her chest like Adam does. Now, I will discuss color. Throughout the work as a whole, I observed quite a few parallels in color between subjects. First, the regal red ‘cloak’ that Christ is wearing is very similar to the cloak that the angel with a cross on her head is wearing, and to the ‘shawl’ that the angel with curly hair who is looking up is wearing. Second, the royal blue cloak that Mary is wearing is similar to that of which a man in the Adoration of the Lamb scene is wearing. And third, the ‘peach’-colored shawl that one of the Pilgrims is wearing is very similar to the color of one of the flags in the Knights of Christ scene.
For my single panel of the open view, I chose to observe the Adoration of the Lamb scene. Since it is the widest painting of the work, I felt there would be many areas to explore. And because of its vastness, I actually ended up taking a little more than ten minutes (like thirteen or so) to observe it. The very first thing I chose to zoom in on was the sun. Doing so led me to this bird, somewhat resemblant of a dove, ‘coming from’ it. Doves, when used in the Christian context, typically represent peace, and as this is a religious painting, I would not be surprised if this bird was a dove. In addition, I was able to see that the beams coming from the sun represent actual lines, which piqued my curiosity as to why they were depicted as such. Furthermore, to the right of the sun, I noticed these buildings, and from a closer look, it seemed as if their pointed tops resembled almost Oriental-style architecture. (Given the context of this work, that may seem a little far-fetched, but that is what it reminded me of.) Zooming in on the water fountain in the center of the painting, I found that it has little ‘serpent’-shaped spouts for the water to come out, and there is a hole toward the bottom where water comes down into the soil. In regards to color, I noticed that the group of people in the bottom right corner are ‘divided’ in their clothing; some are wearing lilac while others are wearing a sort of ‘mahogany’. (I know, very specific colors -- I love exploring different shades.) The group of ‘princes’ in the upper left corner are all wearing deep blue shawls. Six of the angels surrounding the Lamb are cloaked in white, and most have blue wings. Finally, I found that the tree by the group of princes bears pink rose-looking flowers that, at first glance, ‘blended in’ with the skin of the men in the back. For gesture, I noticed that the Lamb is bleeding from a ‘point of impact’ into the chalice, of which to drink from as wine (I’m Catholic, so I recognized this.) Some of the people in the lower left corner group are holding up books and looking to the Lamb, while others are not looking at the Lamb at all. Lastly, two of the angels in white, that are close to the water fountain, appear to be waving these cup-like objects on a chain up and down. This reminded me of how sometimes, in church, the deacon will wave (holy) water at us, and ‘smoke’ up by the altar.
DeleteTwo questions I had while engaging in observation were, “why is one of the ladies in the top right corner holding what appears to be a baby llama in her dress?’ (as I noticed while zooming in) and, “why is there a lone palm tree in the upper left corner?”
Overall, I learned that slow looking very much helps with not only understanding the artwork in question, but also further engaging with it (i.e. putting ourselves almost in the ‘position’ of the subjects). I will admit: I’ve never been particularly apt at ‘hidden object’ games as a child, but taking part in this exercise helped me pick out a multitude of little ‘objects’ that I otherwise would not have seen. Next time I go to the Phoenix Art Museum, maybe I will take more time to observe and truly ‘digest’ what I am seeing.
I had to post my response in separate comments because I maxed out the character limit Blogger allows for a single comment. xD
DeleteLizzy, I did not look at the open view of the altar piece as you did, but what you mentioned about the colors in the painting peaked my interest. You noticed the way Van Eyck used color to separate certain groups. The princes in blue, two groups in lilac and mahogany, and the angels in white. I haven’t looked at the inside very long, but I probably wouldn’t have picked up on that detail. Who knew colors in and of themselves could bring such insight? I was so focused on looking for iconography in the work, I wasn’t thinking that deep about what the colors meant. Your pointing out how the colors play into the work as a whole reminds me that every part of the painting helps to tell a story and means something.
DeleteLizzy, I appreciate your thoroughness in looking and listing so many of the details you discovered. I noticed you offered an explanation for the question you posed about the palm tree when you replied to Erica. It is quite possible the palm tree is a reference to Palm Sunday (the beginning of the "Passion of Christ", which culminates with the sacrifice of the "lamb"), but traditional "readings" of the panel have interpreted the palm as part of van Eyck's attempt to represent plants from all over the world and thus reference God's greatness through his vast creation. However, now that I look at (see what looking does!!) the palm's relative prominence, rising so high on the horizon, leads me to think you are correct in reading more into what it represents.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI felt the same way as well, it's like missing a piece to the puzzle. I didn't notice until you pointed out that Mary and Gabriel's robes could be the same color as the statues. Another thing that you opened my ears too is that the angel does look like it's towering Mary. I didn't even put their height into account and I can see where you're coming from. Angels just could be gentle giants, the world might never know. I really enjoyed being able to make out what you were seeing! You have a better eye than me!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI had a typo, so I deleted my first post because I couldn't edit it.
ReplyDeleteI chose to take a deeper look into the altarpiece while it’s closed, and I immediately turn my attention to the angel and Mary whenever I look at this. The feeling that I get when looking at this is hope. The only repetitions I can make out is the body form of the women that are in the art piece; being that we looked and talked about this in class briefly, I can already identify Mary as well as the commissioners near the bottom. There’s also a dove above Mary, with I know that stands for the Holy Spirit. I believe that the second row is the heart of the cover, it holds the famous annunciation scene, it’s something that catches the eye most.
The panel I choose to look at is the interior view with the city being seen in the window. I think the reason why I’m drawn to this panel is because you can see the outside world from within the painting. The thing that’s unifying this panel is the person above the window, I feel like they’re important though I don’t remember or know who that person is.
Something that I took away from this experience is that feeling that I use to get when I would frequently visit museums, there’s something about this painting that inspires me. Although I will admit that my mind did start to wonder off a bit while looking. This happens to me a lot. I think it was challenging to come up with questions other than who the other people that I didn’t know where. Slow looking does have it’s perks, it can really open your eye to seeing something you didn’t notice before. I get similar vibes with slow looking as to when I try to find Waldo.
Yasmine, I was drawn to the open window panel as well. I think it is such an immersive experience when an artist opens a window to us. It almost beckons us to lean more into the painting, involve ourselves more into it, getting lost in the experience. I also think it can be seen as a salute to what he does in the open panels, where buildings are in the background of that as well.
DeleteYasmine, the annunciation scene is truly an eye-catching piece. The repetitions in the pieces from what I can tell are really subtle. From what I was able to gather from my time examining the different panels are the similarities in the faces of the women. I noticed many of the women's faces are round and do not have very many details in comparison to the men's faces.
DeleteI'm intrigued that you chose to slow look at a panel that is uninhabited and, like Bryson, also find this panel to be "invitational" -- it seems that van Eyck is entreating us to peer out beyond the painted surface to engage with the "real" world. I'm also sensing that if you forced yourself to spend more concentrated time looking at this panel, you would begin to see some really amazing details: Gabriel's words, the light on the window sill, the leaf motif on the column's base and capital, the shadows cast (from what?) across the floor ...
DeleteYasmine, I too am immediately drawn to the annunciation piece. It draws my attention quicker than anything else. It's breathtakingly beautiful and I think what draws you there is the size of Gabriel in comparison to everything else. Then after looking to Gabriel, you follow his gaze to Mary and the Holy Spirit. The lining of sight really connects the whole piece. Also nice observation of the facial details, I myself didn't notice that at all.
DeleteAlthough the open panels of the altarpiece intrigued me, I couldn't handle the fact that there was a piece missing, so I decided to observe the closed piece. I think it is interesting how it's almost as if the colors in Mary's and Gabriel's robes are the same as the statues at the bottom, as if to connect them despite two being "alive" and two made of stone. I enjoy the setup that Van Eyck chose in terms of upper, middle and lower framing. It reminds me often of pieces from early Renaissance in Italy. In the center, the main scene of a biblical story, while the bottom is reserved for the patrons of the piece, and any other significant members that they wanted portrayed in the finished produce. The fact that Van Eyck incorporated the shading and lighting from the frame itself onto the floors of the Annunciation Scene, allows the viewer to believe that they are watching the scene through a window. It gives the piece depth in a perspective way along with a psychological way; inviting the viewer into the scene with Mary and the Archangel. This aspect of the pieces also reminds me of an Italian Renaissance piece; Leonardo Da Vinci's The Last Supper. With the same way that Van Eyck used the frame of the pieces as a shading mechanic, Da Vinci used the window to the left of the wall as a way to inspire the lighting and shading in his piece. With both these artists using the natural, "outside world" if you will, to further enhance the experience of looking at the piece, to me shows how they are deeply observing the world around them.
ReplyDeleteFor the single frame I chose the one with the Archangel Gabriel. I think it is quite beautiful how Van Eyck filled the whole space to display Gabriel. Although this could be seen a failure to fully understand the proportions of person to building, I think it can be seen as a convenient advantage. Because no one has ever seen an angel before, who is to say that they take up the same amount of space as a human being. For the angel to be almost towering in the room, taking up almost every inch of the panel, seems to me just as overwhelming and validating that an angel would state, at every encounter, "do not be afraid". I also really enjoy how any divine beings at this time were to be seen with their hands in the position of blessing. Not only is it a symbol of the fact that they can give those blessings, but also that every encounter with a human they are offered those blessings.
(Note: I deleted my first post because it had errors from yesterday that I posted this when I wasn't feeling well. I'm sorry Yasmine that your reply is just floating in the void now.)
Bryson, I too looked at the closed view of the altar piece and it is interesting to see your perspective from your slow look. You seem to know more about artistic techniques than I do and noticed a very interesting aspect of the annunciation scene. You brought up how Van Eyck used shading to make the frame look like a window into that scene. I did not notice that until now. It does in fact enhance the experience of the viewer and makes it more lifelike. Not having much artistic knowledge, I did not notice a detail like that. It is interesting to think about how two pairs of eyes looking at the same piece can have different interactions with what they see and notice.
DeleteFirst, I hope you are feeling better, Bryson. Also, I now have a better idea of what Yasmine's disconnected reply relates to! As you may have guessed, I'm pretty familiar with this altarpiece. Nevertheless, I'm always eager to discover something "new" (to me, at least). Your reflections on Gabriel's size in relation to the room he enters are very interesting. Having been taught the "Italians do it best" version of the Renaissance, I realize how biased my impressions (and interpretations) can be. Thank you for offering a compelling explanation of what may have been artistic intent rather than artistic naiveté.
DeleteI really like your insight to Gabriel's size as artist's intent rather than as naiveté. It leads me to believe that perhaps not all artists before one point perspective couldn't get the proportions right, but that they had intent and purpose for doing so. Perhaps as a way to draw attention to that part of their art. Anyways, I also viewed the closed view of the altarpiece and noticed the indication of windows lighting the rooms. It is an interesting stylistic choice that I think works very well for this piece. Even being an artist, I didn't notice as many details as you did but I did enjoy your insights and have to agree with all of them upon a further look.
DeleteI chose to take a slow look at the outside of the altar piece. The colors of the outside are not very bright in contrast to the inside. The colors used are mostly dark, or neutral colors. There are many different subjects in the overall piece. There’s the annunciation scene containing the angel Gabriel and Mary. Above that are four different characters that I am not sure of their identities. Below the annunciation scene are two statues, one of John the Baptist and the other of John the Evangelist. The outer bottom panels contain the patrons. The unifying aspect of the panels to me is the way they are carefully arranged. Each panel works together with the other to unify. I noticed that each person or being portrayed was giving a hand gesture. This speaks of the North’s love of iconography and how an already magnificent alter piece can be further deciphered. Iconography is evident in the altar piece as a whole from the towel, pot, and books around Mary to the lilies the angel was holding and the pearls adorning his head. The love of detail from this period is also evident in the heavy draping of clothing that many of the characters wear and the lifelike way the clothing is depicted.
ReplyDeleteThe individual panel I chose to look at was of John the evangelist. The painting looks like a statue as opposed to a living person. It is painted in grisaille (neutrals) to better resemble a statue. John is giving a gesture with his right hand and his left hand holds a chalice with snakes and another creature in it. The painting of the statue has the illusion that it is inside of a niche with what looks like gothic architecture around it. Van Eyck embraced painting John as a statue. The eyes are not too detailed, similar to what would be on a statue. His hair looks almost solid, like it was molded, in contrast to the way Mary’s hair is painted to look lifelike. A few questions did come to my mind as I continued to look at this panel. Why is John holding the chalice with the snakes and why does the creature in the middle seem to be staring at me? I know it’s probably iconographic, but what does it represent? Perhaps a momento mori? In painting with so few colors, how did Van Eyck achieve such depth to John? Why did he choose to paint John as a statue and not as a person? What is the emotion that is trying to be conveyed on John’s face?
I did not realize all the little elements of iconography within the whole altar piece and even each individual panel. It wasn’t too hard to concentrate, but I did feel I was sometimes trying to get myself to see something that wasn’t there, rather than letting the painting speak for itself. It was really cool to be able to look so close at the details of the paintings. The more I zoomed in, the more details I noticed that I hadn’t before. It drew me in, and I wanted to zoom in everywhere!
Reading through the entirety of everyone's comments I noticed that very few chose the closed view of the altarpiece. Like you, I also noticed the large amount of iconography and it was hard to know what all of it meant. I definitely understand what you mean about trying to look for something that may or may not actually be there. This entire blog prompt was me trying to find meaning behind perhaps a lantern that didn't mean anything at all. I also didn't even think about Van Eyck would consider drawing both Johns in grisaille. What was his motivation? That really perplexes me now and I am going to try and look up if he ever left a reason for doing so.
DeleteYour looking revealed several interesting connections and details, Ashlynne! I am not sure why van Eyck chose to paint in grisaille, but do know that by the end of the 15th century the practice of painting exterior panels in grisaille had become prevalent (almost customary) for altarpieces in the North. Giotto did it too, in the Arena Chapel (and other artists before him), so van Eyck is not the first. I would venture to guess artists like to demonstrate their mastery of illusion -- showing how they can paint "sculpture" (and architecture) as well as "life." As for the snakes in the goblet (admittedly weird) -- this is a reference to the Golden Legend, in which, to prove his sanctity, John drinks a cup of poison without being harmed (in Latin, poison is venenum -- as in snake venom). Finally, I know what you mean about wondering about over-interpreting ... but can assure you that when we are looking at 15c Flemish panels, almost every last thing means something.
DeleteWhile slowly examining Jan Van Eyck's Ghent Alterpiece, I decided to focus first on the Adoration Of The Lamb. In this panel there is much to look at. Van Eyck is able to draw the viewers attention with his ability to use bright colors such as green, red, and white. Despite their impressive attempt at one-point linear perspective in this scene, Van Eyck is still able to convey his strong meaning with his emphasis in detail. Van Eyck beautifully paints in such thin and straight gold lines to mimic the rays of light in Adoration Of The Lamb. The altarpiece as a whole contains beautifully painted angels in the top right and left panels. I noticed ,as we discussed in class as well, his angels do not wear halos like the angels in Italy did. They wear thin jeweled crowns instead. I wonder why he chose to represent the angels with a jeweled crown instead of the halos? I really enjoy the colors Van Eyck used. The somewhat muted tones of green and red, pairs beautifully with the royal blue. Each proportion plays extremely well in the panel space used.
ReplyDeleteI also chose the scene and noticed the rays of gold around the lamb's head, but I didn't even think to have interpret the crowns as halos. In away I sort of like it because it's a very different take on the unearthly divine. Thank you for mentioning this, I want to keep an eye out for any more angels wearing crowns in other art works.
DeleteHi Aryanna. I also decided to focus in and talk about the Adoration of the Lamb panel in my post as well. Although, after reading your comment, I had to go back and look again at the painting because I did not notice the angels with crowns the fist time. That is interesting and I also wonder why they are portrayed this way instead of with the traditional halo. I also do agree that the painting is absolutely beautiful with its wide range of colors and symmetrical proportions that make it pleasing to look at. Also, as you mentioned, despite the lack of correct one point linear perspective in this panel, Van Eyck still memorizes his audience with many other techniques.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have to admit that I am the last in slow observation. When I went to the Phoenix Art museum a few months ago, I did not spend very long on each artwork. It was hard for me to stay in on place for so long because I got distracted easily. Perhaps next time I go I will try to restrain myself and delve deeper in my observation.
ReplyDeleteIn my slow examination of Jan Van Eyck's Ghent Altarpiece, I decided to look at the closed view. The first thing I notice is that all of the subjects have similar if not identical values. Nohely mentioned how the colors are muted and had deviations from who's alive and note alive but based on her observation, I decided to first look at the annunciation scene. With that, my observations began with Gabriel and Mary. Gabriel and Mary both have an overall high key value. They are mostly lighter in color but still have that muted degradation that Nohely mentioned. I also noticed that Gabriel and Mary both have the same color hair. It also struck me as odd that as soon as I saw that hue I noticed it extended across the whole of the closed side. I immediately noticed that it carried over to Gabriel's wing and that his wings were a reddish color with green on the outer side which was weird. I couldn't find any symbolism indicating why it was so. Continuing I noticed that lots of red permeates throughout the close view as the rafters in the annunciation scene are also a reddish brown. The patrons also are dressed in red in the bottom panels next to the grisaille of both Johns. The iconography is also overflowing in this piece as I can see the lamb of Christ in the Baptist's hands as well as the cup of serpents in the Evangalist's hands. There was one head that seemed more humanistic which leads me to believe it is the central head of the serpent, or Satan.
For the one panel to focus on, I chose the Virgin Annunciate scene. In my first observation I didn't notice the open book on the right side. I looked online but I couldn't find out what the book might be a reference to. If I had to guess it would be a bible seeing as there are two books like it in both annunciation panels. Mary also has this quality that she is looking towards the holy spirit above her head thus indicating she is looking to God after Gabriel relays the news of Jesus to her.
From this experience I saw way more than I normally do. I often find it hard to focus on the minute details that I find hard to see if the artwork is several feet away. I don't know if I would have also discovered the unity in colors across the panels if I had looked at the piece with which I normally allocate to art pieces. Overall it was a more rewarding experience to look at the artwork thoroughly and completely. I look forward to doing this approach from this point on.
I was also wondering why John the Evangelist was holding a cup full of snakes; I too alluded it to be in reference to Satan. I found it is in reference to him being pure in a sense that even poison could not be harmful to him. Perhaps poison and Satan go hand in hand, and that John cannot be touched by sin himself. I didn't notice the humanlike head until you pointed it out, which further makes me believe this could be connected to sin in some way. The last bible study I went to was when I was ten years old, so all these references are lost on me.
DeleteSadly, Blogger dislikes how long my comment post is, so I shall publish this in two installments.
ReplyDeleteThis week I am but a student and am allowing myself to enjoy Dr. Hall's invitation to seek out the rewards of slow and considered looking. However, before I dive into the Ghent Altarpiece, I offer all of you one small encouragement. Having read the article Dr. Hall posted by Kaplan, it made me think about what a "museum experience" really is. Having been to many museums, I must confess that I occasionally get into the "taking scalps" mentality. By that, I mean that I feel a certain pressure to see everything, or, at least, ensure that I see all the big ticket items. To an extent, this is understandable as many of us are not likely to count on repeat visits to the Hermitage in St. Petersburg or Musée de l'Orangerie in Paris. So, we rush around trying to fill our eyes with as much as possible so that we can claim victory. Or, worse yet, we give into the temptation presented by our hand robots and insist on a selfie-protocol so that we can brag to our Instagram followers that we are saucy sophisticates.
My encouragement to you: store your cell phone in a locker and head immediately to the museum coffee shop first. Sit down. Look at the museum guide. Select 10-15 objects you want to see -- no more! Or maybe even just two or three galleries. Then, following both the article's and Dr. Hall's advice, embark on a slow looking campaign. Trust me, you will leave the museum feeling as if you have developed an intimate relationship with some of its works, and you will actually remember that you saw them in an intellectually engaged way that doesn't require thumb scrolling through your Instagram. It is better to cultivate intimate experiences with a handful of pieces than to leave a museum with only the most fragmented of memories of what you saw (and what you felt!). Yes, of course, after you have slowly looked at the pieces on your itinerary, wander and be delighted if you have time. Absorb the atmosphere of the institution, be open to small treasures, people watch (I love this part -- watching a museum goer have a relationship with a work always fascinates me). Then have another cup of coffee, and, ideally, talk about what you have seen with friends.
Dr. Cleworth's words, part 2:
ReplyDeleteOnward to Ghent. I am having a slow look at the "Hermits" panel on the lower register of the open view. What delights me about this panel is that it is perhaps among the least narratively significantly of the panels; the eye can easily hop past it and wander incessantly back to Adam and Eve, our enthroned figures in majesty on the top register, and, of course, back to the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb. But no, I refuse. Van Eyck performs numerous miracles in this panel.
Let's start on the ground. The ground slopes away but reveals dozens of a treasure. The craggy ground flakes and cracks with dozens of fault lines rendered with impressive realism. The texture is realistic and one can almost feel it underfoot. Stones abound, as do bits of jettisoned debris. Little bits of oddly geometricized red shapes are scattered about, looking as if they are tassels of the hermits' clothing that have been strewn about.
Scrolling up a bit, I love the knots on the central hermit's walking staff, displaying where the craftsman whittled away unwanted branches. His belt buckle cinches his robe realistically, and light glints off it. Van Eyck leaves no detail to chance. The faces of the world-weary hermits (he shows warts and all!) are varied and interesting, each seemingly engaged in his own emotional landscape moving toward whatever religious/pilgrimage goal awaits (one senses movement toward the fountain. The central hermit stares back at the audience. His wildness exceeds the others. There's no iconography to suggest he is John the Baptist (no animal pelts, etc), but he nonetheless comes to mind, as his gaze is drawing us into the narrative. Mary Magdalene appears as if leaning against or coming around the rock outcropping (which, again, evidences a geologist's eye for detail). She has the same hairdresser as Dürer, though she prefers a less obviously permed do. Who knew? Her cape clasp and ointment vessel both glint with gold and reflect an unknown light source.
Scroll up. The foliage is lush, and some of the trees bear copious fruit (maybe citrus...the leaves aren't right for figs or pomegranates). We can see cypruses and palm trees. Where are we? Surely not the Low Countries in this panel. The sky. Birds. Yes, many birds are loving rendered, the direction of their flight clearly indicated, as is their distance from the viewer.
What I admire about Van Eyck is that he offers a total viewing experience. This is not just narrative or portraiture. It is a type of visual totality. The effect is rich, though one can argue that the exercise in looking can exhaust a viewer. This is not work that readily avails itself to comprehension with a single slow look. The Ghent Altarpiece requires a lifetime of contemplation.
When I first looked at The Ghent Altarpiece by Van Eyke in class I was instantly reminded of mosaics. In a way, my instant recognition and connection to this flander was noticing that each panel had a meaningful attribute to its overall purpose.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that kept me thinking the most was noticing that in this time period, specifically in Northern Europe, artists have begun to develop and have tried to incorporate the one-point linear perspective as well as the contrapposto pose that we have seen in Donatello's St.Mark sculpture back in Italy. The development of art and its encounter with new techniques could be greatly reflected in Van Eyke's flander. The people, the vanishing points, the colors, textures, and the form of human bodies have become more realistic an proportional than ever but not quite as perfected.
I chose to focus my attention on the inside of the Ghent Alterpiece where we see the two marginal registers. As I was slow-looking at these two parts of the piece I noticed that on Adam's side we also find what I think could be Cain and Abel. On Eve's side we can see the scenario of Cain killing Abel. It could be that Van Eyke decided to place Cain and Abel right about Adam and Eve because they were their children but I wonder if Cain and Abel's story are a part of this flander to possibly teach the importance of obedience and maybe even to remind people about the consequences of jealousy. After all, Adam and Eve's story does teach the world about the importance of obedience.
Another feature that overall was so astounding to me was the attention to detail. From a broad view of this piece there is no way that I would have been able to noticed the details in each panel, specifically Adam and Eve's. From a closer perspective Adam's body includes each dent and vein in full detail; every hair could be seen from his eyebrows to his legs and in Eve's body too. Eve's facial features are detailed when we see her lips, her chin, and even the little marks that we see where the armpit meets our side. I also noticed than Van Eyke placed Adam and Even at the margins and I think that, that says something about their sin and perhaps how that influenced everything below that flander.
Overall, I thought this piece was truly remarkable considering all the details and iconography it depicts. Even though I only took the time to write about two parts of the piece I can see why this piece was important to the Northern Renaissance and how it represents life and art in the 15th century.
I enjoyed reading your observations and you mentioned some things I didn't even notice! I looked at the open view of the Altarpiece for 10+ minutes and didn't pay any attention to the small details above Adam's and Eve's heads. I wasn't initially aware of the story of Cain and Abel so I did some research. I think your comments on teaching the importance of obedience and consequences of jealousy are interesting and I can definitely understand where you're coming from. I also think it's interesting how Cain and Abel's sacrifice is over Adam, who is seen simply covering his body, compared to Cain murdering Abel which is over Eve holding the forbidden fruit. It's like Van Eyke specifically put the sin above sin in the far right panel.
DeleteOh my goodness I was trying to figure out what that scene above Eve was! That makes so much sense though now that you mentioned it. How clever to put the two together as well, thank you for mentioning that or else it probably would've taken me longer to figure it out!
DeleteI decided on observing the closed Ghent Altarpiece. What intrigued me about the closed piece was how mostly everything from the background to the people was done in a neutral color, however, there are still some pops of color on some areas. I noticed that the angel Gabriel and Mary both look large for the room. This could be because Van Eyck wanted to show how important the two figures are or he didn't know how to do proportions well yet. The buildings outside the window look slightly curved and the people by them are larger than they should be. I'm not an expert in Catholicism but I noticed Gabriel holding white lilies, a symbol of the Virgin Mary. In the Interior With Lavabo, I noticed a pot that looked extremely well kept which I assume is also a symbol of the Virgin and her purity.
ReplyDeleteAs I was looking at the entirety of the closed portion of the altarpiece, I noticed the paintings of the statues of John the Baptist and John the Evangelist had expressionless faces, just like a statue would. I focused my attention on John the Baptist's panel. Although it may seem quite simple, I am astounded by Van Eyck's ability to create something that was normally three dimensional, at the time, into a painting of it being three dimensional. The painting of John the Evangelist also doesn't show as much emotion as the 'living' people.
I will be honest, I found it extremely difficult to focus on examining this altarpiece. I'm easily distracted by what's around me and even the I still find it difficult to examine art pieces in general. After I tried focusing, I still saw interesting details and enjoyed thinking about Van Eyck's methods.
Yes, I agree with you. I have a hard time focusing on anything really except when its related to music. Also I never really notices the pot as a symbol of anything but then again they did love their iconography. I also never realized the proportions, which in fact, is a good very cool that you saw that. I just assumed everything was like that for a reason.
DeleteI started off by looking at the altarpiece when it was closed. What caught my attention was that all the people who were painted had there hands touching near there chest area and the colors always had a brown tint to them. Another that caught my eye was the details in everything. The painted statues had those folds in their clothes and it seemed real. There's also a dove or some type of bird on the head of Mary which can symbolize the pureness she has and I saw Gabriel holding lilies, a symbol of the Virgin Mary. Mary and Gabriel seem to be very large in size compared to the rest of the piece, this was probably meant to symbolize their power.
ReplyDeleteOnce I opened the altarpiece the bottom panels caught my eye, the colors were vibrant and very noticeable. While their land still looked slanted a bit, they did use many colors to show how worshipping felt or made it seem wonderful. I also noticed that right above the bottom panels there was the 3 main figures sitting on thrones. Maybe this was to show their power over the people or their authority.
For me it was hard focusing on the painting because I can't interest in something when I don't understand it. I could look at something for hours but never understand anything. I like art but staring at it and analyzing it to find all the symbolic things and all the clues of religion and society in a painting is difficult and takes a lot of time to master. I could listen to music all day but I could never stare at something that long.
I've decided to look at the closed portion of the altarpiece, because I believe the annunciation scene is one of the most important scenes to paint. It marks the beginnings of Christ, the forgiveness of sins. I'm not an expert in Catholicism, I was raised Jehovah's Witness actually, so I hope you don't mind I asked my Catholic friend some questions I was confused by. I wasn't quite sure who the statues were at the bottom of the panel, and she informed me it was John the Baptist and John the Evangelist.
ReplyDeleteOn to the painting, I first noticed how dull and muted the colors were compared to the opened portion of the piece. Perhaps there is symbolism in this lost to me; could this somehow allude to the seasons? Winter being dull while spring vibrant and colorful, a mark of new beginnings? But surely Mary being told of her pregnancy is the new beginning. Perhaps there is no meaning at all, and the color just faded. The next thing I noticed was how level Gabriel and Mary are. Using the tiles on the ground I found that the folds of their clothes stop right at the third row, and that Gabriel's wings line up with the dove above Mary's head. One point linear perspective is still being found out at this point I think, I had to zoom in to make sure there was another room behind Mary and I'm pretty sure there is. There looks to be a few more archways and a window that looks farther away than the one behind Gabriel. Speaking of the windows, the detail put into this altarpiece is amazing. The buildings outside the windows seem like their own painting when you zoom into them.
I'm not quite sure who the people are above Mary and Gabriel; I did however notice that almost all watching the annunciation scene, except for the woman in the middle left. She seems to be looking up; perhaps to God like Mary is? The statues of John the Baptist and John the Evangelist are not looking at the scene either, despite the patrons to their sides looking up. They are expressionless, like a blank slate almost. It makes me uneasy seeing them so expressionless, I'm not sure why. John the Baptist claimed to see the spirit of Christ go into Mary, referring to him as the lamb of God, which is why he holds the lamb. I'm not sure about John the Evangelist and the cup of snakes, however.
For the single panel I'm observing the Virgin Annunciate. Immediately I'm drawn to the man looking at Mary from above. I had to Google who he was, but learned he is Micah, the man who prophesied where the Messiah would be born. It might be there, witnessing the annuciation scene, where Micah has his prophecy of where Jesus would be born. Moving down, I can tell there is a room behind Mary due to the zoom, but I talked about that previously above. The green curtain hanging off the table by Mary made me thing of what we discussed on Thursdays class, how green symbolizes fertility. Again, Mary is looking up at the sky. But is it toward God, or toward Micah who is right above her?
I admit I had a hard time dissecting this altarpiece because I wasn't face to face with it. If I go to the Phoenix Art Museum I could stare and observe at art for what feels like hours, but because I was on my laptop I just had too many distractions. Hopefully one day I can see this altarpiece with my own eyes.
First off wow what an amazing work of art. Being able to really look at the piece and get real close up was such an eye opener and made me very appreciative of the attention to detail. I don't think ever I've been able to look at art so close but with that in mind I was able to notice so many things, and the amount of time suggested for us to look at it may have helped with that as well! The panel I chose was the very bottom middle one, opened. I think the biggest thing I noticed was a sight halo/rays around the lamb's head, and the reason for that is because I think in class we were discussing how there weren't any in the painting. There were repetitions of colors between the clothing of certain individuals as well as atmospheric perception and an improvement in linear perspective. I found that when looking at something for 20 minutes you notices very particular things, one being for me that it seemed that certain people were bare foot and others weren't (those who weren't seemed to be noble and people of wealth). I did try the first time to do this assignment right before I was about to go to sleep so it was kind challenging to stay-awake, as it would be for anyone who is laying in bed, but the second time was easier because I wasn't out of it.
ReplyDeleteBefore I begin, I would like to note that I have very little knowledge on Catholicism and I also had to do some research to figure out some things about this painting, so sorry if some of my knowledge is a little off. I started by choosing the open view of the work to examine because I thought that one seemed to have more contrast in colors to catch the eye than the closed view. Don't get me wrong, the closed view still looks beautiful and interesting, the open view just seems to peek my interest more and I find myself lost looking in it more than the closed view. Just its pure symmetry with every panel lined up is satisfying to gaze at and look at each panel as it holds a specific person or scene. Each one seems to tell a specific detail that all weaves into one collective, beautiful story. I also found myself looking up characters and meanings as I said before, I do not know much about Catholicism. As a result, I learned a great deal that I did not before and found out some meanings behind this work of art. Christ is positioned center of the top with the Virgin Mary and John the Baptist at his side, with everyone seeming to be positioned or looking in the direction of Christ to add to the symmetry. Adam and Eve stand at the very ends facing in almost bracketing or enclosing the painting in a way helping to draw the attention back to center. The bottom center panel shows the adoration of the Lamb of God. Again, there is a crowd that seems to be all looking in to the center from every panel to draw attention to this event. Just the immense and beautiful details put into every single panel give the viewer endless options to look upon and examine and keep a person interested for hours.
ReplyDeleteI also decided to take a closer look at the panel that pictures the Lamb of God because I did not know much about this scene. Through what I have read through researching, the lamb is supposed to represent Jesus and his sacrifice to take away all sin in the world. A dove is also pictured at the very top, illuminating down to everyone which is supposed to represent the Holy Spirit. There also lays a fountain which may be representing the Fountain of Life that sets right in the middle. There is so much detail to look at just in this panel alone. The theme of symmetry seems to also be followed here even in a single panel as everything and everyone points towards the middle. Even the Christ, The Holy Spirit, and the Lamb form a symmetrical vertical line that seems to draw all the attention to the most important part of the painting, the very middle.
As I gazed upon this work of art, I found myself lost in it. It was easy to concentrate on, I think, because of the fact that I had little knowledge on the subject. As I looked at it more and more, I kept finding more things to look up. While we briefly talked of the history of the piece in class, I also go to read and learn a little more about that. But I was more interested in what everything was and what it meant. Once I figure out what a certain panel was, it was possible that it had its own background story; like Adam and Eve for example. I got to explore the whole narrative of Adam and Eve, from the birth to their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. These two characters had a completely different story but are found here in this painting encapsulating the scene looking upon everyone. I think that it was really interesting to explore these stories and how they all come together and connect in this painting, it is just truly breathtaking to think about all the iconography and how it plays as one to create such a masterpiece.