what was he trying to say through the arnolfini marriage?? and why do you think he chose that subject?
2007-12-30 06:15:33 · 6 answers · asked by anth 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Painting
Remember that during that period artists didn't choose their subjects - that's a modern thing. Jan and his brother were jobbing artists and would have been considered as skilled craftsmen by their clients. The painting has been discussed many times and people try to read an awful lot into it that may not actually be there. Follow the links that the previous person has given you, but make up your own mind.
2007-12-30 06:34:29 · answer #1 · answered by derfini 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The artist was probably comissioned to complete the work so his choice of subject would have been limited by what his patrons required (which was the case with most artists during this period).
The purpose of the work is probably to show off the sitters' social status and related wealth.
Signed, inscribed and dated: Johannes de eyck fuit hic./.
This work is a portrait of Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini and his wife, but is not intended as a record of their wedding. His wife is not pregnant, as is often thought, but holding up her full-skirted dress in the contemporary fashion. Arnolfini was a member of a merchant family from Lucca living in Bruges. The couple are shown in a well-appointed interior.
The ornate Latin signature translates as 'Jan van Eyck was here 1434'. The similarity to modern graffiti is not accidental. Van Eyck often inscribed his pictures in a witty way. The mirror reflects two figures in the doorway. One may be the painter himself. Arnolfini raises his right hand as he faces them, perhaps as a greeting.
Van Eyck was intensely interested in the effects of light: oil paint allowed him to depict it with great subtlety in this picture, notably on the gleaming brass chandelier.
Oil on oak
2007-12-30 18:36:07 · answer #2 · answered by samanthajanecaroline 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's already all been said..but don't you just think that painting is simply amazing? Van Eyck is one of my favorites. When I first saw that print in an art history text I thought it was a more modern painting and was shocked to learn when it was done!
2007-12-30 17:16:21 · answer #3 · answered by micropreemiemommy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It was a payed job. In those days marriage wasn't officially registered and many people (provided they had the money and the inclination to do so) had a painting made as a kind of 'proof'.
He even painted himself into the picture (center reflection) to state he was witness to the marriage.
2007-12-30 16:59:27 · answer #4 · answered by Puppy Zwolle 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
read all about it here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Arnolfini_Portrait
2007-12-30 14:20:25 · answer #5 · answered by Ja Funmi dba Big Baby 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
idk
2007-12-30 14:18:11 · answer #6 · answered by Patrick H 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋