Whitechapel: 
At the Whitechapel I was able to see the Guernica by Picasso. When you stand there long enough you can start to understand what is going on in the painting. The painting begins to make more since and flows together. It’s a caption of the Spanish Civil war, it brought many people’s attention to the matter. As for the rest of the Galleries I was not overly impressed it was nothing like the Tate Modern or Saatchi.
At the Whitechapel I was able to see the Guernica by Picasso. When you stand there long enough you can start to understand what is going on in the painting. The painting begins to make more since and flows together. It’s a caption of the Spanish Civil war, it brought many people’s attention to the matter. As for the rest of the Galleries I was not overly impressed it was nothing like the Tate Modern or Saatchi.
The National Gallery
Jan Van Eyck painting Arnolfini Portrait is my favorite in the National Gallery. What I love about this painting is how Van Eyck puts his own special touch into the painting. Not only does he sign the painting “Jan Van Eyck was here 1434” which is unheard of artist putting any sort of mark on their paintings. Jan Van Eyck also is so bold as to put a self portrait of himself as a reflection in the mirror. Jan Van Eyck has particular attention to the lighting in the painting. The golden chandelier above the couple is a good example of this. Outside the window it is apparent that it is light outside. Where the light is coming through the window the chandeliers has a shine and lightness to it on the other side. To the right in the shadows it is darker and daunt. Another play with light is that Giovanni Arnolfini’s wife has a shadow behind her. Even the mirror you can tell that there is a shadow to the right of it. Textures are so incredible in depth in detail, the folds and lace on her head scarf on the wife. Arnolfini coat and the dog at his feet are
detailed work of fur textures. The incredible detail put into the rug is amassing, colors and small in detail. From approaching the painting from afar it is interpreted that the wife is pregnant by how she is holding up her dress but it is stated that it is a contemporary fashion of the times. What I find interesting is why did Jan Van Eyck choose to paint the pair without shoes on but to only put the shoes besides them? Is this to show that the two are at their house and are comfortable with their surroundings. This is also a contrast to the formal outfits that they are wearing. Over all this piece of art is fascinating to me, in that it shows great texture and lighting. Also the symbolic meaning along with artist rebelling that is intertwined in the painting.
Jan Van Eyck painting Arnolfini Portrait is my favorite in the National Gallery. What I love about this painting is how Van Eyck puts his own special touch into the painting. Not only does he sign the painting “Jan Van Eyck was here 1434” which is unheard of artist putting any sort of mark on their paintings. Jan Van Eyck also is so bold as to put a self portrait of himself as a reflection in the mirror. Jan Van Eyck has particular attention to the lighting in the painting. The golden chandelier above the couple is a good example of this. Outside the window it is apparent that it is light outside. Where the light is coming through the window the chandeliers has a shine and lightness to it on the other side. To the right in the shadows it is darker and daunt. Another play with light is that Giovanni Arnolfini’s wife has a shadow behind her. Even the mirror you can tell that there is a shadow to the right of it. Textures are so incredible in depth in detail, the folds and lace on her head scarf on the wife. Arnolfini coat and the dog at his feet are
detailed work of fur textures. The incredible detail put into the rug is amassing, colors and small in detail. From approaching the painting from afar it is interpreted that the wife is pregnant by how she is holding up her dress but it is stated that it is a contemporary fashion of the times. What I find interesting is why did Jan Van Eyck choose to paint the pair without shoes on but to only put the shoes besides them? Is this to show that the two are at their house and are comfortable with their surroundings. This is also a contrast to the formal outfits that they are wearing. Over all this piece of art is fascinating to me, in that it shows great texture and lighting. Also the symbolic meaning along with artist rebelling that is intertwined in the painting.Visit http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/cgi-bin/WebObjects.dll/CollectionPublisher.woa/wa/work?workNumber=ng186 to be able to zoom in onto this piece of work.
No comments:
Post a Comment