Module 2 Comparison post

https://collectionapi.metmuseum.org/api/collection/v1/iiif/437869/1763004/main-image

The painting here is done by the artist Diego Velázquez, of a slave, Juan de Pareja in the 1650’s.  During this time there was slavery and to have Pareja being painted in such a way is almost, haunting.  This image shows a type of “sadness,” that makes the viewer think he was forced into being painted.  The artist was able to give a proper aspect to slavery. 

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg60fD-ekvQkROPeWXF5Okp-6kwgj6Q7TNfgaa4VhhO5aXg0ZfwZtSo8e9-b9LitbfimkblXPRpPiWlw1koTtYXZyBkwLa_5sjsv_FddH7gvYPFMObml8nHWG8tm7WyhaiKqgB3H3MhKc53/w278-h320/12797074653_794bdfebf0_k.jpg



The next piece was made by Judith Leyster in 1633 depicting a self portrait.  During this time it is a change in typical art in where this is a female painting something non religious.  This piece is similar to the art done by Frans Hals.  It is thought that Frans was a mentor to Judith. Originally, Judith had started to paint another figure when displayed under infrared.   The thoughts were that she could have been doing another self portrait within the self portrait.  What makes this Baroque is that this is northern Baroque.  The change is that this artist seemed free to deliver what it was that she wanted, a sense of connecting to the viewer.  


The major differences between the two pieces from what I see is that Diego, and his painting of Juan de Pareja was done with the intent to give a noble display to a group of people that have been looked down at.  This piece had been done with such attention to detail that you really question whether the man in the painting felt comfortable.  I felt that this piece was made with the intention to show to people that they were not different.  That he wanted to subtly make the change from slavery.  Whereas the piece done by Judith was a different message.  I think that the message behind the piece was that female artists can create something as beautiful as those creating religious art during that time.  That there can be more of a connection to the ones who view it. Both artists had the intent I think to make a change.



Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker, "Judith Leyster, Self-Portrait," in Smarthistory, December 14, 2015, accessed January 31, 2021, https://smarthistory.org/judith-leyster-self-portrait/.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, "Diego Velázquez, Juan de Pareja," in Smarthistory, October 8, 2016, accessed January 31, 2021, https://smarthistory.org/velazquez-juan-de-pareja/.

Comments

  1. Caira LessickFebruary 3, 2021 at 6:11 PM

    Brenden, the painting of Juan de Pareja does give off a disturbing feeling. If the portrait of Juan de Pareja was intended to highlight a group of people being looked down upon, why was this man forced into being painted? If Juan de Pareja truly was uncomfortable and the Diego Velázquez wanted to shed light onto the discriminated, why not find someone comfortable with this project?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sofia February 3, 2021 at 9:07 PM

    I agree the painting of Juan de Pareja is haunting to look at. It is true that Valazquez did give a noble air to Pareja, and it is interesting that you thought his intent was to portray people equally. I believe the same thing, since it is a rare sight to see a black main painted with such dignity at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  3. EmeraldFebruary 4, 2021 at 6:16 PM

    Hi Brenden, your post is incredibly interesting. I do see the difference in the emotions in both painting. I think the Judith piece has more emotion behind her smirk, makes you wonder what was so funny or what was see looking at. The Diego piece seem emotionless, every focused. Hope you have a great semester.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Module 6 post

Image
  Kongo Peoples, Power Figure (Nkisi N’Kondi) c. 1850-1900, wood, paint, metal, resin, ceramic The figure above is also know under the name of Nkisi.  The name Nkisi refers to a spirit, but specifically medicine that a healer.  Nganga is a ritual spiritualist that used Nkisi figures to help clients.  At the center of this figure is what they call the mooyo or belly.  The spiritual center of the nkisi figure where medicines are places.  The Nganga used these figures in many ways, one being to heal and another is to record agreements and contracts.  The figure is used to foresee and uphold agreements.  For example each one of the knots around a Nkisi figure resembles those oaths made around the figure.  The Nganga people would hammer nails or sharp objects into the figure to get the attention of the spirit, which over time would explain the amount of nails inside the figure.  The material driven into the figure represents different severit...
Read more

week 9

Image
Feathered headdress, Aztec, reproduction (National Anthropology Museum, Mexico City). Original: early 16th century, quetzal, cotinga, roseate spoonbill, piaya feathers, wood, fibers, amate paper, cotton, gold, and gilded brass, Aztec, Mexico, (World Museum, Vienna) The headdress is also known as the Penacho of Moctezuma II.  We believe that is was an object sent from Mesoamerica to Europe by Hernan Cortes, but it is unknown if the headdress itself belonged to Moctezuma II.  In the late nineteenth century, Austria established its first museum of natural history.  The headdress a was found in Ambras Castle, and now it has been displayed in the ethnology museum in Vienna.   The headdress has become an important touchstone for Mexican national and indigenous people, and many Mexicans believe that it should be returned.  Representatives of Mexico have made continuous requests for the headdress the be returned, but denied due to it being risky to send a fragile o...
Read more