This is a discussion question that needs to be completed in your own words, so therefore, no references are needed. Also, please…No plagiarism!

Topic and format of Discussion:

“Van Eyck and Analyzing Art in the Northern Renaissance” Please WATCH this video BEFORE starting the Week 8 Discussion.

https://cdnapisec.kaltura.com/index.php/extwidget/…

Please respond to the discussion questions, using sources under the Explore heading as the basis of your response:

Explore

Jan Van Eyck’s Arnolfini Double Portrait

• Henry Sayre’s interpretation in Chapter 16 and also Figs. 16.7-16.8)
• Margaret Koster’s interpretation at http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Arnolfini+double… (if link has moved, please copy and paste link in your browser)

Discussion (please include greeting and questions in your post)

My interpretation of the Arnolfini painting agrees with (Choose one of the following). . .

• Agree with Henry Sayre (the author of our textbook) that the portrait represents a wedding ceremony

Jan van Eyck’s painting, Giovanni Arnolfini and his wife Giovanna Cenami, from 1434, is often used as a prototype example for iconographic analysis, and the conflicts that arise within it. As a painter, Van Eyck was revered for his incredible ability to mimic realism and the effects of light. The painting’s many symbols, some of Christian origin, have been a source of some debate. It was widely accepted as a painting representing a marriage, but recent controversy suggests it is more a record of engagement than a wedding portrait. In van Eyck’s time, a woman laying her hands in the palm of a male, as she so conspicuously does in the painting, was understood to be an agreement to wed (Sayre) Above the mirror in the center of the background are the words “Jan van Eyck has been here, 1434.” To contemporary ears this almost sounds like a bit of playful graffiti, but it also clearly establishes the painter as a witness to the event being painted (Jan Van Eyck’s Arnolfini Double Portrait

• Henry Sayre’s interpretation found in Chapter 16 & Figs. 16.7-16.8)

• Agree with Margret Koster that the portrait represents an engagement/betrothal ceremony -The theory that the portrait is a memorial to Arnolofini’s dead wife:
• Currently however, there is some speculation that it is, instead, a commemorative portrait. Margaret Koster puts forth arguments for this in an article in the Apollo. Click hereto read it.) No one knows for sure who the couple is but the best guess is that it is Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini a merchant from Bruges and his bride Costanza Trenta who he married in 1426. By the time this portrait was painted however, in 1434, Constanza had died. What’s more, the couple was childless which jives nicely with the idea of some scholars that Constanza may have died in childbirth. So the idea that this is a commemoration of Constanza seems to be valid. One thing’s for sure, there’s waaaaayyyy too much going on for it to be just a Double Portrait as a few other scholars have suggested. For more reading Margaret Koster’s interpretation at http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Arnolfini+double…