Giovanni Arnolfini and his Bride

Giovanni Arnolfini and his Bride – Jan Van Eyck 1434

Painted by Jan van Eyck, 1434, oil on panel. This is one of the earliest examples of oil painting.

A few thoughts, first, to get you looking and thinking. As I go through this art history analysis it is helpful to be looking back and forth at the painting. The most important thing is to look–look closely. I will try to lead your eye to critical areas of the painting, and then will give you some information and analysis.

click to enlarge

I like to think of paintings as puzzles: you have to look at all of the pieces and put it together. You must pay special attention to the mirror and the writing above the mirror–this is the key to whole painting. If one can decipher this, then already you have a major piece to this puzzle. Notice the mirror itself first to the right here. If you look closely, you will see all of the major characters in the painting. First Giovanni Arnolfini himself and his betrothed (you’ll understand later why I say betrothed) dressed in green and purple respectively. Notice also the window, bed, and chandelier too. Now, most especially look beyond Giovanni, you see in the doorway the indication of the artist himself and of another figure, which I believe to be the priest officiating their formal engagement (betrothal) or wedding rite. Finally, notice the frame of the mirror, which shows little circular pictures of the stations of the cross. My interpretation of this is that marriage is a vocation, one which will ultimately unite you to the paschal mystery of Christ’s suffering and death, which lead to salvation. This might be a bit of a grim picture of the married life, but those of us who are married know that marriage is not always easy.

Notice the harmonious use of color in this painting.  The color scheme is thoughtful and symbolic.  Let us focus first on the red and green.  The red bed compliments the green dress (complimentary color scheme) setting up a harmonious relationship between these two objects.  There is some connection that Van Eyck is making between the woman and the bed. Furthermore, the red bed recedes in space.  The bed appears to recede for several reasons: the bed lacks of contrast within its own value structure, it lacks ornate detail (by comparison to the green dress), and overall its tints and shades are less intense (saturated) than the green dress. By juxtaposition the green dress is fully saturated, detailed, and full of contrasting values–this object thus tends to draw the eye. But this is most odd, as it is usually the warmer colors that tend to draw the eye in a painting, and particularly red tends to be a color which draws the eye.  We can only ascribe this to Van Eyck’s mastery of color and value.  It seems that the relationship between the woman and the bed emphasizes her role as a domestic ordering presence.  For Van Eyck, women order the interior of the soul and the home, while the man orders the exterior world.  Yet, Van Eyck does not put too much of an emphasis on the bed, rather the woman draws the eye, even though the passions are warmer and usually more intense, it is through the ordering and by art that Van Eyck emphasizes the woman over her domestic habitation.  It does not seem too great of a stretch to suggest that Van Eyck’s painting reveals a chivalric view of women in their traditional role as the ordering principle of the interior.

The Purple in Giovanni’s garb is complimentary to the yellows found in the chandelier and room surrounding Arnolfini.  Thus the artist is drawing a strong connection to the man and the room and chandelier.  The man is next to the window, the woman to the bed, reinforcing the traditional roles of husband and wife.  The husband goes out into the world and imposes order on it (as the chandelier is the light-giving principle to the room) and the wife orders the soul and the home.

Finally, the oranges on the window-sill compliment the blue parts of the bride’s dress. Colors on the opposite sides of the room compliment each other, thus unifying the colors, creating a harmony and balance between different parts of the room and figures in it.  So Van Eyck is showing that there must be some interplay between the various roles that each spouse plays.

Symbols abound in Flemish paintings.

Flemish painting carries with it a rich history of symbolism, and this painting is no different. I will explain a few of the symbols being used by Van Eyck. Notice the dog at the feet of the woman. The dog symbolizes loyalty, a tradition arising in the middle ages. “In allegory the dog is the attribute of fidelity personified. In portraiture, at the feet of a woman or in her lap, it alludes to her marital fidelity…It has a similar meaning in double portraits of husband and wife” (James Hall, Dictionary of Subjects and Symbols in Art). It seems that the dog serves as a testimonial to the wife’s fidelity and as an encouragement to the her to be faithful until death.  The shoes–a traditional gift given at marriages–being removed could signify that the event taking place is sacred (Moses was told to remove his sandals when in the presence of God on Mt. Sinai in the Old Testament, and it is here that Moses received the Law, which is a covenant between God and his people–the obvious parallel being the covenant between husband and wife in marriage). Giovanni Arnolfini raises his right hand as one would when one is sworn in to testify in a court of law. Most likely this symbolizes him pledging his troth, that is, his betrothal or his promise to be true. All of these symbols serve to highlight the same thing: fidelity in marriage. But there are so many more symbols in the painting.

To wrap up my short analysis, I should stress that the painting must be taken as a whole and interpreted by following the clues. Therefore, here are some questions that may help you in your pursuit to understand this complex and rich painting.

Questions:

Is the bride pregnant?

What manner of person is Giovanni? His wife?

What is in the mirror and why does “Johannes van Eyck fuit hic” appear above the mirror?

Does this painting say anything about the nature of the roll of an artist in the world?