| |
 |
|
"Las Meninas" by Velแzquez is known as
the crown jewel of the Museo Nacional
del Prado museum's collection in Madrid,
Spain.
|
|
In 1963 when I was a U.S. soldier
stationed in Orleans, France, I visited the Prado Museum. I
brought back a print on canvas of Las
Meninas and had it framed as a gift for
my mom. When she died, I went home to
get the painting. The painting now hangs in my
office. ― Jon Garrido |
|
(Explore
a large image of 'Las Meninas') |
|
|
The
Velazquez Painting Las Meninas, an
Encyclopedia of Artistic Greatness
MADRID, SPAIN &
SANTA FE, NM
(By Blake Gopnik,
Washington Post) December 26, 2010
There's too much great art out
there. Giant exhibitions fill our
eyes with hundreds of works. Our
museums are constantly adding new
wings. Television, the Web,
magazines, coffee-table books - they
spout so many art stars, we're
drowning in them.
The remedy: Choose a single work, as
great as you can find. Stay with it
as long as you can stand, and let it
fill you with as many thoughts as it
can trigger. Seek out the very
greatest art work ever made, not for
its price or status, but to see what
it offers in a one-on-one encounter.
Have an affair with a masterpiece.
I tried to do just that earlier this
month, when I spent a whole week
visiting a single work in the great
Prado Museum. The encounter couldn't
have been better: It left me
convinced that "Las Meninas," the
grand canvas of Spanish court life
painted by Diego Velazquez in 1656,
is the absolutely greatest work of
art in the Western tradition.
It's not just me saying so. I have a
reliable source: Don Diego
Velazquez. He speaks for himself
through his art, and he never gets
anything wrong.
When Velazquez depicts an aging
soldier, he aces every detail, from
muscles starting to sag to a
mustache that refuses to droop. When
he paints a spinning wheel in
motion, he captures the whir of
spokes revolving at speed - using
blur to render motion for the first
time in history.
Velazquez, the great realist, also
gives us perfect dogs and fools and
beauties. Then, at the culminating
point in his career, banking on his
art to win him a knighthood, he
takes on a new challenge: to capture
what an unbeatable work of art looks
like.
"Las Meninas" isn't just a single
impeccable piece, such as all
ambitious artists set out to make
every time. It is like an
encyclopedia of artistic greatness:
It has a gorgeous surface, amazing
space and light, a tantalizing cast
and a complex plot; it is stunning
as a whole but also when you're
looking at a tiny detail in it; it
gives instant pleasure as well as
slow-burn philosophical rewards.
Above all, "Las Meninas" never stops
giving: Every time you think you're
done, the picture insists that
everything you've thought was wrong,
and that you'll have to start over
from scratch. And instead of putting
you off, it makes you enjoy that
relentless perplexity.
A grand first glance
Even on the surface, at very first
glance, "Las Meninas" presents
itself as a certifiably "great
painting." When you stand before it
at the Prado, where it has lived
since 1819, you have to be impressed
by the huge canvas. It fills the
better part of a wall at the far end
of the museum's most imposing
gallery. The room is often full, but
the power of this work keeps its
audience hushed. Even school groups
settle down.
The Infanta is suitably, regally
attended by her ladies-in-waiting -
the "meninas" of the title. And her
all-time-great portrait is
appropriately set in one of the
royal apartments of the Alcazar
palace, hung wall-to-wall,
floor-to-ceiling with selections
from the king's collection of
pictures. Those works are the
competition that Velazquez has to
beat with "Las Meninas." And
Velazquez depicts these works as so
dark that they're entirely outshone
- by "Las Meninas" itself.
The royal subject and setting and
maker of "Las Meninas" are matched
by its glorious, and glorifying,
execution. Its sense of air and
space, of light and surfaces, is
unrivaled. But instead of spelling
out every detail, as a lesser
realist might, Velazquez prefers
vagueness, from blurred fingers to
the mysterious flash of pink behind
the Infanta's right wrist. He
dutifully makes clear the world's
illegibilities - a paradoxical goal
that's worthy of the world's
greatest painter.
Reproductions can barely hint at the
experience of actually standing in
front of the picture. It's as though
Velazquez had deliberately set out
to make a picture so supremely
powerful that it could command a
pilgrimage from any art lover.
Engravings or descriptions - or in
our day, color photographs - are
rendered almost useless by the
painting's subtlety and might.
When you're in front of the picture,
standing "alongside" its courtly
crowd, you also get a palpable sense
of light entering the Infanta's
space, pouring through a window
that's just beyond sight. It takes
genius to use light to make us feel
a window we can't even see. And then
we watch that light bounce from dog
fur to velvet, from silver
embroidery to silver tray, from the
polished red of a Mexican pot to the
gold in a hair clip - across all the
necessary markers of luxury and
taste. And as the light bounces
across the room, we imagine
Velazquez's brush flying across the
canvas to portray that sparkle:
Light, and Velazquez, both reveal
the world to us in all its glorious
particularity.
Space itself is among the subjects
of this painting. Its perspective
lets us understand where all the
walls stand, as well as the layout
of every object and figure among
them. In "Las Meninas," the accuracy
of that scheme was testable by all
its courtly viewers, who'd hung out
in the room it depicted. The
painting still passes the same test:
Surviving plans and inventories of
the Alcazar, which burned down in
1734, show a perfect match between
what was really there and what
Velazquez showed.
All this virtuosic realism certainly
makes "Las Meninas" a truly great
painting. It doesn't come close to
making it the greatest ever. Its
realism fulfills cliches of
excellence; Velazquez needs to
reinvent what excellence could be.
He takes a base of realism, and
piles subtleties and convolutions on
it.
'The Theology of Painting'
The oldest comment about "Las
Meninas" comes a few decades after
its making, from the mouth of Luca
Giordano, a splashy Italian painter.
Seeing the picture for the first
time, he was said to have proclaimed
it "The Theology of Painting" - as
much ahead of other art as theology
is ahead of every other kind of
knowledge. And like a fine
theologian, Velazquez leads us into
depths that are bafflingly deep.
our side of the canvas. The only
people who could command that kind
of rapt attention, even from the
Infanta and the king's own painter,
would be the king and queen of Spain
themselves. And there they are,
glimpsed in a mirror on the back
wall behind their favorite artist.
We need to imagine them standing
pretty much where we are as we take
in "Las Meninas."
So now we have to test a new story
line to explain what we see: The
picture must revolve around a moment
when the royals are passing through
to get a peek at Velazquez painting
a portrait of their daughter.
With this story line, we realize
that Velazquez has not merely
captured a portion of space. He's
frozen a moment in time, and the
passing flow of life. Showing off
yet again, he's also made a painting
that's all about the visit of a king
and queen but that barely lets us
see them - much as he gives us
window light without a window.
Or might the story line be more
decorous and formal than that, and
more regal? Maybe Velazquez isn't
working on a portrait of the Infanta,
even though she's front and center
in the picture that's hanging on the
wall at the Prado. Maybe she's the
one who has stopped by, with her
little retinue, to watch her royal
parents sitting for the court
painter. The mirror doesn't show the
royals passing through, but arrayed
for the grandest of court portraits,
being recorded on the huge canvas on
the painter's easel. And what's
still more fun is that Velazquez
makes that couple us. As you look at
this painting, you take the royals'
place on this far side of the
painter's easel, just where they
would have stood as Velazquez
painted them. We observers look into
the mirror on the picture's rear
wall to check out what we look like,
but instead of seeing our own lowly
mugs, we see ourselves as royalty.
Except that can't be right, either.
In this painting, every time we
think we're smart enough to know
what's going on, Velazquez tells us
he's smarter still. Looking deep
into "Las Meninas" reveals that the
whole scene is being observed from
far over to its right. We're not
looking at the room from its center,
facing the mirror; we're facing its
brightly lit rear door. Which means
that, if we're not looking at the
mirror from in front but from our
skew position, then it can only be
reflecting something farther over
yet to the left. The faces we
glimpse in the mirror can't be of a
royal couple looking at it; they can
only be those painted royal faces
Velazquez has already set down on
his canvas, off to the mirror's
left.
Last year, when Stork and Furuichi
prepared their computer re-creation
of the painting's space (first
publicized in these pages), they
mapped out the layout of all the
objects and people in the room in
"Las Meninas." That led them to
discover that the easel and its
canvas block the view of the mirror
to anyone standing directly before
it: The royals could never have used
it to see their own faces.
Through the looking glass
So now we've figured it out: "Las
Meninas" shows Velazquez painting a
picture of the royal couple. It's a
plausible reading - and it gets
things wrong, once again, as all the
others have. As we watch Velazquez
at work at his easel in "Las Meninas,"
his greatest painting and his claim
to ultimate artistic repute, the
only thing he could be painting is a
picture of himself.
If we're looking at a painting by
Velazquez and we see Velazquez in it
(there he is in "Las Meninas,"
holding his brushes), then what else
can it be but a self-portrait? It's
the latest in a line of paintings of
artists peeking past their easels as
they paint themselves.
And what are those artists always
peeking at? Their own view in a
mirror, obviously, or they couldn't
see to paint their own portraits. So
it turns out that, as we look at
"Las Meninas," we're not in the
position of its royal observers, as
we thought. We can only be in the
position of some big mirror that we
imagine Velazquez using to study
himself, with the Infanta and her
retinue looking on from the side.
(We know the Velazquez estate
included 10 mirrors, and Velazquez
had used lots more in his
redecoration of the Alcazar.)
Standing before the picture at the
Prado, you can easily imagine that
the figures in the painting aren't
staring out at you; they're staring
at themselves.
Or maybe we shouldn't think of
ourselves as standing in front of
this scene at all, whether as its
royals or as Velazquez's mirror.
What is in a mirror is always seen
from the viewpoint of the person
looking into it. That means
Velazquez has put anyone standing in
front of his painting into his own
shoes, while he portrays himself.
When we stand looking at "Las
Meninas" at the Prado, we see what
Velazquez saw in that mirror, as he
stood at his easel laying down an
image of himself and everything
around him. In other words, the
mirror view that's sitting on his
easel has to be identical to that
glorious mirror view we know as "Las
Meninas."
You could say that Velazquez, art's
magician, allows his picture to be
in two places, and two eras, at
once: It is the real finished canvas
whose front we're examining, as we
gaze in wonder at the illusions
produced by "Las Meninas" in 2010;
it is also the fictional picture,
still in progress, whose back we see
sitting on its easel in a room at
the Alcazar in 1656.
If only it were that simple. (As
your courtship of this painting
starts clocking up the hours, you
start wishing you were dealing with
some easygoing genius such as
Michelangelo, van Gogh or Duchamp.)
Didn't we say that the view in the
mirror that hangs on the back wall
could only be of a fancy royal
portrait sitting on the painter's
easel? And if it's those royals that
Velazquez is brushing onto his
canvas, how can he also be depicting
himself?
And there's still another reason why
"Las Meninas" can't present
Velazquez portraying himself and his
surroundings, much as we might
prefer that simple solution. We
decided, early on, that we're
staring at this palace hall from
somewhere in front of its brightly
lit rear door. And that, of course,
is nowhere near where Velazquez is
standing as he paints, over at far
left. If he were truly rendering
this scene from a mirror set in
front of him (as we presume he must
be, to paint his own portrait), the
picture he is working at - "Las
Meninas" itself - would show its
scene to us from that spot where he
is standing.
This is one more of this picture's
irresolvable contradictions, and
like all the others, it must be
deliberate. It may also carry
meaning.
Maybe we need to think of Velazquez
as deliberately sidelined in the
world that he creates. And maybe he
wants his entire painting to read as
a celebration of his neutral view
from that sideline, taking in the
passing world with an impartial eye.
You could say that Velazquez has
built a looking-glass universe where
he's at the center of that instant,
sidelong looking: He's off to the
side, but he's also bigger than
anyone else in the painting, and in
some sense is its central subject.
(He's the only person in it really
doing much of anything.)
Velazquez is letting us in on the
exemplary realist moment, where a
great painter gives his all to
capture the single view that sits
before his eyes - basically, it's
the moment of the live portrait
sketch, which was a Velazquez
specialty. By using the format and
manner of a grand history painting -
the kind of painting normally
reserved for great moments in war or
religion - he turns his humble scene
of a painter at work into a kind of
apotheosis of portraiture. The
artist's glance can change the world
and redraw boundaries as much as a
miracle or battle would.
The true subject of "Las Meninas" is
the heroic moment of its own making,
recorded "live," in a real place, as
no history painting had ever been
before. We might want to change the
title to "The Immaculate Reflection"
- it is the "mirror of nature" that
theorists had long asked painting to
be.
One other thing: "Las Meninas," the
greatest realist painting by the
greatest realist painter, can't have
ever had much to do with the
realistic, portraitlike moment it
touts. For all its hard-won snapshot
feel, the picture must have taken
months to make, with trips up and
down a ladder to get to its top.
Paradox piled on contradiction piled
on impossibility. The confusion has
to be on purpose: Velazquez, the
great realist painter setting out to
show what the greatest painting ever
might really look like, has decided
that to be truly great, it needs to
surpass any single reading we might
use to pin it down.
"Las Meninas" is a painting that
keeps 10 balls in the air at once -
more than enough to keep an art
critic scratching notes onto his pad
for days in a row, and wishing at
the end that there were more days of
scratching ahead. Part of its point
is to show how much more unendingly
fertile it is than any mind that
takes it in.
Velazquez labored to make "Las
Meninas" the ultimate
puzzle-picture. (It didn't get that
way by accident.) And that
head-scratching is balanced by the
beauty of untroubled realism - by
the comforting perfections this
story started out describing.
Paradox starts feeling like the
normal state of things.