Where? Room E203 of the J. Paul Getty Museum
When? 1625
What do you see? A young Saint John the Evangelist sits in a room. He has red cheeks and wears a red/pink robe with a bold red cloak over his shoulders. He looks up into the light which represents the divine inspiration for the writing of a Biblical book.

Saint John holds a quill pen (a pen made of a bird feather) in his right hand, and he has just dipped the pen in the pot with ink on the bottom left. He presses his left hand pressed to his heart to indicate his personal faith that helped him to write the Biblical book.

On the right is an eagle which is one of the attributes of Saint John the Evangelist. Frans Hals used broad visible brush strokes to create this painting. His brush strokes are more refined in the face of John. He also makes brilliant use of the light to depict John the Evangelist. 
​
Backstory: This work is one of the few religious paintings by Frans Hals. About eighty percent of his works are individual portraits of upper-class people, wedding portraits, or group portraits. The remainder of his work consists mostly of genre paintings. The painting of Saint John the Evangelist is part of a series of four paintings of the apostles, with the other ones being St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke.

Who is Saint John the Evangelist? The author of the Gospel of John, the fourth book in the New Testament. Before becoming an Apostle of Jesus he was a fisherman. However, it is not certain if the Apostle John is also the author of the Gospel of John, as the author does not clearly identify himself in his writings. He is the only apostle that was not killed because of his faith in Jesus. Some people also attribute the Book of Revelation to him, though this is also a point of debate among scholars.

Who is Hals? Frans Hals the Elder was born by the end of 1582 (or early 1583) in Antwerp, Belgium, and died in 1666 in Haarlem, The Netherlands. His brother and five of his sons were also painters. Frans Hals is primarily known for his portraits. He had a loose painting style, which means that he used relatively few (but long) brush strokes to depict something. You can often see the brush strokes in his paintings. He painted based on his intuition and was uniquely able to capture the emotions and characteristics of the people he painted.

Together with Rembrandt and Johannes Vermeer, Frans Hals is generally considered the best Dutch painter of his time. While living around the same time, the three of them all had unique styles and never met each other in person.

​Another interesting painting of Hals is the Portrait of René Descartes, the father of modern Western philosophy. This painting is in the Statens Museum for Kunst in Copenhagen. There are several copies of this painting among which one is in the  Louvre in Paris.

Fun fact: This work is part of a series of four paintings in which Frans Hals depicted each of the four evangelists: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. All four paintings were lost since 1812 and were only rediscovered during the 20th century.

Cornelis Hofstede de Groot mentioned the four paintings in a catalogue raisonné in 1910, but not much attention was given to these mentions as they seemed to be atypical in Hals’ oeuvre. This changed in 1958, when Irina Linnik, an art historian for Odessa Museum of Western and Eastern Art, rediscovered the paintings of St. Matthew and St. Luke. These two paintings can still be seen in the Odessa Museum of Western and Eastern Art in Odessa.

​In the 1970s, Claus Grimm identified the painting of St. Mark, which is now in the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts in Moscow. The Getty Museum paid $2.9 million for St. John the Evangelist in 1997, when it was rediscovered by Brian Sewell when the painting was brought in for evaluation at the auction house Sotheby’s.
Interested in a copy for yourself? Poster or canvas.

Where? Room 29 on the fifth floor of the Musée d’Orsay
When? 1863
What do you see? Four figures picnicking on the grass. The two men are dressed in fashionable clothes of the 1860s. The man on the right gestures towards the man in the center who seems to be looking elsewhere. Sitting with them is a nude woman. She looks directly at the viewer with her hand on her chin. Her body is minimally shaded, making her appear flat to the canvas.

In the lower left corner are the woman’s clothes and a basket of fruit and bread. Behind them, a woman dressed in white is wading in a small body of water. She seems to be reaching for something in the water. A black and orange bird flies over her. On the right is a wooden rowboat. Given her position in the background, this woman is painted larger than you would expect based on the laws of perspective; she isn’t much smaller than the figures in the foreground, creating a confusing sense of depth in the painting.

Backstory: Also known as Le Déjeuner sur l’Herbe, the Luncheon on the Grass was inspired by two famous artworks: The Pastoral Concert by Giorgione and/or Titian in the Louvre and a drawing of the Judgement of Paris by Raphael (of which an engraving by Marcantonio Raimondi in the Metropolitan Museum of Art has survived). Despite his knowledge of the old masters, Manet’s work was completely avant-grade and shocking to the Parisian public.

Firstly, it was considered offensive to depict a nude woman, especially if the woman was not a goddess or other mythological character. Manet depicts an average woman, breaking the tradition of idealized female nudes like the Venus of Urbino by Titian or The Birth of Venus by Botticelli. Placing her in a contemporary setting with two trendy Parisian men made for a very shocking and offensive scene.

Secondly, Manet received a lot of criticism for his painting technique, which featured loose brushstrokes, a departure from the refined finish that can be seen in Renaissance paintings.

Thirdly, his rendering of space in this painting is distorted as the woman in the water is abnormally large for her position in the background.

​For all these reasons, Luncheon on the Grass was rejected from the Paris Salon. Instead, it was exhibited at the Salon des Refusés in 1863. There, it was still received with ridicule and outrage for its subject matter and technique. People laughed at the painting and some even hit the painting with sticks. Critic Louis Etienne called it a “young man’s practical joke” and a “shameful open sore” in Le Jury et les Exposants. 

Who is Édouard Manet? Édouard Manet was born in 1832 in Paris where he died 51 years later. Manet was a Parisian Realist painter who studied under Thomas Couture for six years. Afterward, however, he decided against attending the École des Beaux-Arts.

Early on in his career, he befriended Charles Baudelaire whose work featured urban outsiders such as prostitutes and street entertainers. Baudelaire’s writing inspired Manet to continue painting unusual characters alongside his other works that featured better-known figures such as musicians and writers.

​Manet’s avant-garde style that preceded Impressionism was often attacked by the press, but he was also defended by other creatives such as Emile Zola, Claude Monet, and Pierre-Auguste Renoir. Among his famous paintings are Olympia in the Musée d’Orsay (and painted in the same year as the Luncheon on the Grass) and The Battle of the Kearsarge and the Alabama in the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

Fun fact: The nude woman in Luncheon on the Grass is modeled after Victorine Meurent who also posed for Manet’s Olympia. She was a working class woman and aspiring painter whose work was actually exhibited in the Paris Salon of 1876. She and Manet had a close relationship, but her willingness to pose nude for his paintings tarnished her reputation. The men in the painting were modeled after Gustave Manet and Ferdinand Leenhoff, Manet’s brother and brother-in-law. respectively. 

Where? Pellegrini Chapel of the Church of Sant’Anastasia in Verona
When? Probably 1435-1438, but some scholars say the completion date was between 1444 and 1446
Commissioned by? The Pellegrini family

General Information: This fresco, based on “The Golden Legend”, was painted above the arch, outside the Pellegrini’s funerary chapel in the crown and spandrils of the architecture, to the right of the sanctuary. It was executed, only partly, in true fresco on wet plaster, then elaborated a secco when the plaster dried. Because of these techniques, much of the fine detail and ornaments have scaled off. It has also been exposed to water from ceiling seepages and been severely damaged by this, especially on the left side which contained the dragon. Both sides of the fresco were removed for restoration, the left side in 1891, and the right in 1900. This caused the loss of the metallic and gilt decorations. Pisanello’s fresco was part of a cycle decorating the whole chapel.

The Golden Legend: It tells the tale of St. George and the Dragon. There are many versions. The St. George whom the Pellegrini family selected for its burial chapel, was a soldier who proclaimed the Christian faith, banned under Roman emperor Diocletian and was put to death as a consequence, around 303 AD. The list of his miraculous deeds and the persecutions he suffered has grown longer each century. He became a much-revered patron saint of cities and associations. The version pertinent to this fresco was part of a series compiled by Jacopo de Voragine in the 13th century.

The story finds George, a native of Cappadocia, on the road to the city of Silena in the province of Lybia. Silena had been terrorized by a plague-bearing dragon. It lived in a lake and would come to the city walls and poison all who came within reach of its breath. The citizens of Silena appeased the Dragon by feeding it two sheep a day. When these became scarce, they fed it a single sheep and a single human, chosen by lot. Eventually, the lot fell to the King’s daughter and with much sorrow, he resigned himself to her sacrifice. He sent her down to the lake dressed in regal garments and, there, she happened upon St. George. The princess told St. George to flee, but instead, the saint mounted his horse, armed himself with the sign of the cross, went across the lake, and pierced the dragon with his lance. The princess put her girdle around the dragon’s neck and led it to the city, where, after the citizens agreed to be baptized, St. George slew the dragon with his sword.
 
What do you see? The painting follows the legend faithfully. Most artists who painted this tale chose to show St. George vanquishing the dragon. Pisanello chose to depict the moments beforehand.
 
The right side of the fresco: To the right of the white horse in the center is Princess Silena dressed in luxurious garments made of fine fabrics and fur. Her large mass of hair is held in bands of braids and begins very highly on her brow, according to the early 15th century style. Lit candles were used to ensure the correct trim at her forehead and temples.

Resting on the ground to the right and behind her is the sacrificial “sheep”, in the form of a ram. Just behind her is St. George’s squire, carrying St. George’s helmet and the lance that will pierce the dragon. He is a dwarf and was probably a member of the Gonzaga household in Mantua, as he is seen in Pisanello’s Arthurian fresco that was painted there. His horses’ harnesses and the squire’s armor were, originally, decorated with silver and gold, as was popular in chivalric art. The eyes of the squire’s horse are set forward with the effect of engaging the immediate attention of the viewer. Two more horse heads are visible at the right edge with their feet in motion and ready for action. Note the foreshortening of the two horses, one seen from behind and one from the front. This was a new perspectival technique that Pisanello employed.

St. George is clearly defined by his fine clothing and his curly golden locks. He stands to the left of his horse, near the edge of the lake. He has his left foot in the stirrup, ready to mount and ride off in pursuit of the dragon which lurks on the other side of the water. He looks towards the dragon’s lair with eyes wide with fear and anticipation. Next to him are a hound and a companion dog. To the left and further back is a sailboat, ready to transport St. George across the lake to the dragon.

Background of the right side of the fresco: To the back and left of St. George is a group of seven men tucked behind three elaborately decorated horses. They stand near the point of embarkation for the sailboat. On the far left is a foreigner, his twirling moustache, muscular, broad face and narrow eyes indicate a Mongol. His features contain a suggestion of menace. Beside him, a man is turning his head in fear whether because of his frightening neighbor or the dragon is not clear. The elaborate headdress on the Asian man in the middle is seen in many of Pisanello’s drawings, suggesting that these visitors were fairly common to the area at the time. The knight with the ermine hat and collar, bowing his head so hopelessly, is probably the princess’s father.

​Directly behind that is a gibbet with two hanging men, who are depicted in great detail as if the viewer were standing beneath the gallows. Over the gallows is a rainbow painted right down to the ground. This is a reference to St. George and symbolizes the divine protection of God. To the left of the hanged men is a dark, foreboding rock that goes to the sea. There is a tower at the top of the rock painted grey and barely distinguishable. The whole scene is atmospheric with foreboding and creates a deep tension.

The towers of the city governed by the princess’s father rise on top of the hill in the background, some of them, adorned with Gothic open-stone ornament. On the far right stands a medieval fortress, the architecture still designed solely for defense.

Pisanello made use of hierarchical perspective in the fresco. We see distance by position and size. Techniques for spatial distancing and the use of linear perspective in painting became common later in the 15th century.

The left side of the fresco: Only few details have survived on this side. Sadly, the dragon in the sea has disappeared completely. The barely discernible scene of his lair, where the creature devoured his prey and offerings from the kingdom, reveals macabre human skulls and bones along with various animal remains. Small parts of an antelope, a deer and lion are visible. An excerpt from George Francis Hill’s book Pisanello fills in the blanks. “The main object apparent in the landscape----is the dragon, crouching toward the right with wings closed and tongue flickering out from between its two open jaws. Below it are apparently two of its brood, wingless; and clearly two human skulls and some bones.”

A comparison with Bono da Ferrara’s St. Jerome and other works, led Hill to the conclusion that this pilgrim, with some faults of “draughtsmanship”, was left by “the master” to be painted by Bono, who was probably in Pisanello’s workshop at the time. The imperfections include “short and feeble arms, hands that are nerveless and the foreshortening of the pilgrim’s right foot is not successful.”
 
Canting badge: A heraldic device that represents the bearer’s name in a visual pun or rebus. In this case, it shows the pilgrim as a representation of “Pellegrini” which means pilgrim in Italian.  The ermine border of this badge ties itself to the man in the ermine hat in the painting and hence to the Pellegrini. It becomes more than just a simple identifying device. The family is then associated with the act of pilgrimage through the represented pilgrim, a message as well as the pun.

The seashell on the pilgrim’s hat is a symbol or proof of pilgrimage or baptism. Baptism is the start of the Christian journey. His presence here becomes appropriate then with the commissioning family and the religious overtones. The Pellegrini were baptized, were Christians, and had made the journey. The prominence of the prayer beads in his hands reinforces his piety but also the fact that the Dominicans were promoting the use of these beads for Catholics in the 15th century.
 
Backstory: This fresco is also known as St. George and the Princess of Trebizond. There is nothing in the literature to explain why this fresco has two titles. Trebizond is on the Black Sea and is called Trabzon today. It is a provincial capital in northeastern Turkey. Silena lies in the vicinity of modern-day Beirut close to 900 miles away.  Commentators debate the city used.
​
Pisanello was in his late thirties to mid-forties when he painted it. His reputation as one of the most sought-after painters of the day was firmly established. He had spent most of his early artistic life in Northern Italy in the service of warring condottiere and the petty rulers of the various principalities and city states. His art must be seen against the background of Italian battles for territories, shifting alliances amidst the decline of the Byzantine empire, and the fear and uncertainty due to the loss of the empire’s protection of Italian trade routes. The rise of Islamic power was also a major threat. This explains the foreigners with the princesses’ father who do appear to menace, as they menaced Italian trade routes in the 14th and 15th centuries in Europe. Nor can this work be understood without an explanation of the remaining influence of the chivalric code. The crusades were in the distant past but chivalric code still defined the medieval knight system: the paramount importance of religion, the moral and social code of courtesy, the need for generosity, martial valor, and dexterity in arms, supposedly leading to gallant deeds, devotion and loyalty. This has been romanticized in literature, music, legend and art. This social code remained influential to the aristocracy in the first half of the 15th century. 

Pisanello was a man of this time. He had one foot in late International Gothic Art – with intense attention to reality and detail – yet his interest in fanciful, imaginary tales and his representation of them remained in Medieval Art. He had kept his association with Verona all his life so it was natural that the Pellegrini family would commission Verona’s most celebrated painter, Pisanello, for their funerary chapel.

Pisanello is documented as living in Verona in 1433 with his widowed 70 year old mother, 4 year old daughter, Camilla and 2 servants. It is not known when he started or how long it took to paint the frescoes. His detailed hatching technique would have been extremely time consuming, as would the application of the silvering, gilding, and pastiglio in details like the horse’s harnesses. (pastiglio is the paste work or low relief decoration normally modelled in gesso on white lead, applied to build up a surface that may then be gilded or painted or left as it is.) 

There are very few of his paintings left. However, there are hundreds of drawings. These have been gathered together in The Vallardi Codex in the Louvre. Most are by Pisanello, but also many by his pupils and other artists, including drawing of horses, dogs, wild animals, costumes, heads of Mongols and Tartars, plants, men dangling on the gallows. In much the same way as he built his fresco on the wall, once he completed the composition, he could go to his store of drawings and fill in the necessary details from his patterns.

The architectural structure of the chapel would have been a consideration in his composition and perhaps even determined the precise scene he chose. Pisanello presents us with the novel setting. The viewer is presented not with the event itself, but with imminent action, filled with fear, anticipation, horror of what lies ahead. We see the stoic princess, the fearful father, the brave knight, his squire ready and waiting, and the macabre criminals hanging. On the other side the dragon rages, snorting out smoke and fire, the animal and human remains, the live animals awaiting their fate, unknowing. Who will win…Good or Evil? All viewers would have known the outcome. 
 
The Gibbet: The gibbet with two men hanging has been interpreted in several ways. This may be a touch of realism, since it was customary for hangings to take place outside the city walls. However, they have also been said to be a reminder of man’s mortality, appropriate in a scene which is concerned with Christian conversion. The presence of the rainbow may signal the possibility of redemption, also an appropriate message for the scene. There are also those who suggest political overtones for Verona are implicated in the tale.

However, on further reading of the translation of St. George, Martyr: (Jacobus Voragine: 1275: Beaten and Imprisoned): “he did do raise him on a gibbet; and so much beat him with great staves and broches of iron, that his body was all tobroken in pieces. And after he did do take brands of iron and join them to his sides, and his bowels which then appeared he did do frot with salt, and so sent him into prison. But our Lord appeared to him the of same night with great light and comforted him much sweetly. And by this great consolation he took to him so good heart that he doubted no torment that they might make him suffer.”

St. Georges end, according to the legend, was not pleasant but the clear message was that God will always protect those who believe in him. The rainbow behind the gibbet, descending to the ground, along with the other features in the painting suggest the more religious orientation of protection and redemption for Christians.
 
Pellegrini Family: The chapel in the Dominican Church of Sant’Anastasia belonged to the Pellegrini clan of merchants who had grown wealthy over several generations. They made their money from the cloth trade. They numbered amongst the most respected families in Verona and were among the highest tax-payers. One of the ways a family could both publicize its status and document a long line of succession was a burial chapel. Their chapel was in the most prominent location in the church, near the choir, which further enhanced their position in society. The Pellegrini had a collection of suits of armor, and they chose the traditional representation of the cult of chivalry for the entrance of this burial chamber. What better way to honor their religion, their family, and their social status than to have Pisanello paint a tale with the lady in distress, a knight in shining armor, the eventual triumph of good over evil, and the baptism and salvation of all concerned? Pisanello painted a world that was perhaps already in decline, but, today, it is a window for the viewer to examine a distant part of European culture.

Who was Pisanello? His exact date of birth is unknown but sometime near 1394 is the best estimate. His father, Puccino di Giovanni di Cereto, was a wealthy cloth merchant and his mother, Isabetta, was a native of Verona. Pisanello is mentioned in his father’s will in 1394. It is believed that following his father’s death, he and his mother moved to Verona and he grew up there. He bought a house in Verona in 1422 and always regarded himself as a Veronese citizen.

The first two decades of his life are obscure, although in 1416 he was referred to as “magister” (master) and by 1424, he was called “pictor egregious” (distinguished painter). A 1425 Gonzaga account book (Mantua) referred to him as “Magester Pisanellus Pictor”. These titles ensure us that his career as an artist was recognized. Between 1415 and 1419 he was in Venice working and studying as a pupil or colleague of Gentile Da Fabriano (1370-1427), a International Gothic painter. Pisanello learned much from him and his influence is visible in his paintings. The two of them worked together on the frescoes in the Doge’s Palace in Venice (which were overpainted in 1479). 

Pisanello was in Rome in 1431-1432 completing the fresco cycle of The Life of John the Baptist (destroyed in 1646 during a remodeling of the church) that Da Fabriano had left unfinished because of his death. Pisanello succeeded Da Fabriano as the major Italian exponent of the International Gothic style. While he was in Rome, he must have been accepted into the Papal household as Eugenius called him “beloved son”.

The earliest of all records are from Mantua where he lived and worked for Gianfrancesco Gonzaga and later his son, Lodovico Gonzaga. The family ruled Mantua, and Pisanello worked for them from 1422 to 1447. The patronage of these ruling families provided a livelihood for artists, and their recommendations to others provided further commissions. Pisanello managed to keep a balance and was employed by many of these petty rulers throughout his career. 

In the late 1420s, Pisanello was in Milan working for Filippo Maria Visconti, duke of Milan. In 1426, he made a painting for the Brenzoni Monument in the Church of San Fermo, Verona. This beautifully executed work with the delicacy, illumination, composition, and careful detail to expression, costume, and colors is a testament to his great talent. Close view shows even the eye lashes, painted to perfection by the artist in this delicate rendering of the Annunciation.

He became court artist to Alfonso V of Aragon, King of Naples in 1448-9 with a large stipend of 400 ducats a year. He died probably in Rome between July and October of 1455. 

He is most known for his delicate, precise, and beautiful drawings, and for the cast bronze medals he popularized. These were roundel sized and meant to be passed from hand to hand, each bearing personal portrait studies from life. Little is known about his personality, but from his arrest and trial, it appears he had some political passion as well as his prodigious talent.

Fun Fact: Members of the family were buried in the Pellegrini Chapel from 1387. From, Negotiating the Gift: Pre-modern Figuration and Exchange (p. 211): “Investment in church art and investment in mass-sayings were understood to be strongly equivalent to the extent that one could be exchanged for the other. In his last will of 1429, Andrea Pellegrini ordered that his body be buried in his family chapel in the Church of Sant’Anastasia in Verona and that for three years continuously, the mass of St. Gregory shall be said for his soul. He also stipulated that a terracotta statue of him kneeling and saying prayers be completed and placed in the chapel within three years of his death. Why stipulate the same number of years for the saying of masses and for making of the sculpture? When the saying of the masses ceased, the sculpture would be in place. The implication is that the praying effigy would take over the work of the prayers. In this case, Pellegrini was right to assume that the effigy would outlast the workings of the church ritual: the terracotta figure is still there, directly praying towards the altar in the chapel.”

Pisanello’s frescos are linked to the Pellegrini family through the same will. Andrea Pellegrini left the enormous sum of 900 florins for the project. The details from the will, along with the many Christian messages in the fresco make it clear that the Pellegrini were strong in their Christian beliefs and that they sought salvation in life and death. Pisanello was able to represent their desires through his art.

Where? Gallery 243 of The Art Institute of Chicago
When? 1892-1895

What do you see? Behind a balustrade in one of the most popular nightclubs in Paris, three men and two women sit at a table, leaning into conversation. There are drinks on the table and each member of the party wears a fancy hat. The woman with orange hair is Jane Avril, a famous entertainer. Behind their table, one tall and one short man are passing by. In the right background, two women stand by a green mirror. The one fixing her hair is dancer La Goulue.

Looking deeper into the room, there are many more guests sitting at tables with yellow lights hanging above them. Such a light may hang above the dancer May Milton in the left foreground. She stares at us with her bright teal skin, and her features have become grotesque and distorted under the harsh nightclub lights.

Backstory: In the risky neighborhood of Montmartre, Paris, nightlife flourished through the end of the 19th century. People of various classes came to the nightclubs and dance halls in Montmartre to experience a social life unlike any other. In its heyday, the area was actually quite dangerous, but it has since been romanticized and sensationalized so that images and music associated with it evoke great nostalgia.

Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec frequently visited the Moulin Rouge, a nightclub in the neighborhood. As such, he was very familiar with the other regulars. In At the Moulin Rouge, he was able to capture these characters on canvas and portray the true grunge of the Paris nightlife culture. Using bright colors and thick brush strokes, Toulouse-Lautrec paints in an Avant-Garde style, apt for his subject matter.

What is the Moulin Rouge? Established in 1889, the Moulin Rouge was a cabaret and nightclub located in the Montmartre district of Paris. Featuring live performances from the stars of Paris, drinks, and room for socialization, the Moulin Rouge was a truly modern space. The iconic can-can dance was first performed at the Moulin Rouge, and, at the time, it was considered a very improper dance. 

Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec created several advertising posters for the Moulin Rouge, as well as several paintings of the Moulin Rouge. Among those paintings are At the Moulin Rouge: The Dance in the Philadelphia Museum of Art and La Goulue at the Moulin Rouge in the Museum of Modern Art.

Who is Toulouse-Lautrec? Henri Marie Raymond de Toulouse-Lautrec was born in Albi, France in 1864 to a wealthy family. As his mother and father were first cousins, Toulouse-Lautrec suffered from congenital health issues that affected his bones and growth. Due to these health issues, he became slightly isolated from society and spent his time making art. Painting in the Post-Impressionist style and printmaking in the Art Nouveau style, Toulouse-Lautrec captured the Bohemian lifestyle of 19th-century Paris. This was the lifestyle Toulouse-Lautrec immersed himself in Montmartre’s Moulin Rouge. He created a series of posters advertising the cabaret and displayed his artworks there.

Fun fact: The two men walking behind the table in the center of the painting are actually Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec himself and his cousin, Dr. Gabriel Tapié de Céleyran. 

Where? Gallery 201 at The Art Institute of Chicago
When? 1877
 
What do you see? A busy, rainy street near the Saint-Lazare station in Paris. The canvas is divided in half by an axis, a tall green streetlamp. Walking on the right of it, in the foreground, are a couple dressed in the latest Parisian fashion. As they walk arm in arm beneath an umbrella, looking off to the left side of the canvas, a stranger passes them with his back to the viewer. Judging by the young woman’s brown dress and diamond earring, the pair are likely of the upper class. The men in the middle ground appear to be dressed in a similar fashion.

Further down the canvas are some traces of the working class. Behind the man’s umbrella, a painter dressed in white carries a ladder across the street. Behind the woman, a baker looks out her window. Two carriage drivers can be seen on the left side of the street lamp. 

Backstory: Exhibited at the Third Impressionist Exhibition in 1877, Paris Street; Rainy Day was celebrated by many. The natural scene of a real Parisian street painted in a realistic fashion calls back to Caillebotte’s interest in photography. However, the painting’s style cannot be characterized as entirely realist or academic.

Caillebotte features an unusual asymmetrical composition and cropped figures. On the right side of the canvas, the man and woman’s legs are out of frame and the stranger with his back to the viewer is split in half. This detail may be overlooked by modern viewers but was considered radical by Caillebotte’s contemporaries. The cropped composition may have been inspired by his interest in photography.

Featuring unsaturated colors and dim light, the painting has a gloomy and slow feeling. Subtly showing the division between the bourgeoisie and the working class, Caillebotte’s palette suits the daunting disparity that is most heavily felt by the workers.

Who is Caillebotte? Gustave Caillebotte was born in 1848 in Paris and died in Gennevillers in 1894. He grew up in a wealthy family and began painting in the studio of Leon Bonnat. In 1873, Caillebotte began his studies at the École des Beaux-Arts and shortly after became acquainted with Pierre-Auguste Renoir and Claude Monet.

With his money, he was able to support many artists like Edgar Degas, Camille Pissaro, and Alfred Sisley. Although he did not participate in the first one, Caillebotte exhibited eight paintings in the Second Impressionist Exhibition of 1876, one of which was The Floor Scrapers in the Musée d’Orsay. Caillebotte’s academic style combined with an Impressionist influence produced a unique and modern style of art. 

Never truly sticking to one style of painting, Caillebotte aimed to depict modern life for what it really was in the realist sense. Nonetheless, an Impressionist influence is evident in his loose brushstrokes and “cropped” paintings.

Fun fact: On the ground floor of the center building in the background, there is a green “pharmacie” sign with yellow letters. Nowadays, the same building, located in between Rue de Moscou and Rue Clapeyron, still has a pharmacy. 

British Museum, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Where: Room 15 of Level 0 of the British Museum
When: Probably between 490 BC and 460 BC
What do you see? A monumental vase with two mythological scenes painted on the upper part, the neck. The vase is a masterpiece of the red-figure technique and one of the iconic examples of Athenian pottery. The shape of this vase is called a volute krater (named after the spiral handles resembling the volutes of the Ionian columns).

• Side A – Achilles and Memnon: On one side is the fight between Achilles and the Ethiopian king, Memnon—the brother of Priam, the last king of Troy. Watching it are Thetis (Achilles’ mother, goddess of water) and Eos (Memnon’s mother, goddess of the dawn). Achilles is charging at Memnon from the left -- traditionally the victor’s side -- holding the spear made of Pelian ash (it came from the ash tree at Mount Pelion).
  
  Memnon defends himself with a sword in his right hand while another one is at his left side (which is a peculiar detail of the image). Eos, at distance behind him, has stretched out her arms as if pulling her hair out; her lips are open in a cry as she is about to lose her son. 

• Side B – Achilles and Hector: On the other side of the vase is another fight. This one is between Achilles (on the left) and Hector (on the right). On the far left, is Athena, the divine patroness of Achilles, the goddess of war and guardian of Athens. On the far right, behind Hector, is Apollo, who fought on the side of the Trojans. Notably, Apollo seems to be moving away from his protégée, and his raised hand holding the arrow seems to be the gesture of farewell. He knew Hector was doomed to die.
  
  ​Although Hector, the greatest fighter of Troy, will lose this fight to Achilles, soon after that Apollo will provide vengeance. He will guide the arrow shot by Paris to Achilles’ heel causing his death. Thus, the farewell was real, the arrow was symbolic. Apollo, indeed, was abandoning Hector, but the arrow in his hand foretold the way Hector’s defeater would soon lose his life.

• Rest of the vase: The entire narrative is contained in one circular frieze, which the painter placed on the lower portion of the neck of the vase. The remaining part of the vessel, besides the complex decorative band patterns, remains black. The decorative bands separating the scenes from the rest of the vessel are the meticulously reoccurring palmettes and the buds of lotus. They form a chain on the upper portion of the neck. The line with tongue pattern adorns the narrow area above the foot of the vase.
  
  The lip of the vase features the signature decorative band pattern of the Berlin Painter, the ULFA pattern (from “upper, lower, facing alternately”). It is a complex combination of a stopt key alternating with the saltire squares (sometimes also with crosses, or meanders). The krater’s handles, beautifully ornamented with the black ivy pattern, complete the details.
  
  The overall effect is the magnificence of the imagery and the technique with which it was achieved. It is the vessel of depth and mystery, the meeting place of the two worlds: the divine is intertwined with the mortal. 

​
Background: This vase is one of the early works of the Berlin Painter. Carol Moon Cardon situates it in the second group of vases from his early period, falling between 500-490 B.C.  The timeframes are often tentative, depending on the source or criteria by which scholars assign them. More generally, its place in art history falls into the Late Archaic period (circa 500 to 470 B.C.) There are four preserved volute kraters by the Berlin Painter, all in the red-figure technique.
 
The London krater is unique for a variety of reasons; its architectural design resembling the temple is among the most prominent of those. The fact that the painter decided to leave the entire belly of the vase black while placing the narrative and ornamentation on its extremes speaks of his highly sophisticated approach to design and the interpretative role he attached to imagery. 

​Red-figure technique: The red-figure painting technique appeared in Athens around 520 B.C. in what is known as the Pioneers’ Group—possibly the longest lasting and most influential red-figure workshop known. The Berlin Painter was possibly the student of one of the three most important of the Pioneers, Phintias. Prior to that, until about the second half of the sixth century B.C., the world of the vase painting was dominated by the black-figure technique.
 
The red-figure technique was actually simpler than the black-figure technique. The main principle in both was the skillful regulation of the flame and oxygen flow through the oven where the vases were fired to assure the proper oxidization of iron, which, in turn, allowed the painter to achieve the desired color. The black-figure technique rested, in principle, on adding varnish to the pre-contoured shapes on the surface of the vase to create fully developed objects and figures, which turned black upon firing; the red-figure technique was the reversal of the process.
 
Who is the Berlin Painter? Very little is known about the Berlin Painter in terms of the biographical information. It was not common for the vase painters to sign their names at that time. Interestingly, the Berlin Painter inscribed the names of his characters on the London krater. And yet, we do not even know his real name since none of the works attributed to him indicates it.
 
The nickname “The Berlin Painter” was given to him by the prolific scholar, Sir John Beazley, who attributed the makers of some 30 thousand items of Athenian ceramics. The nickname is based on the amphora located in Antikensammlung in Berlin, excavated in the Etruscan city, Vulci. This amphora served as the “mother-work” of the Berlin Painter--the vase to which other found works and fragments were compared in terms of stylistic details, resulting in matching them to the hands of one maker. 
 
Some of the stylistic details of the Berlin Painter, which revolutionized the red-figure technique, include:

• His design. He avoided the “crowded” scenes on vases and often placed just one figure per side,
• His style included a distinct use of the relief lines to depict certain features (like the nose, eye, fold of the drapery, but seldom to define contours). Sir Beazley described them almost poetically as “a wiry line that stands up from the surface of the vase, can be felt with finger, and looked at closely is seen to be composed of two ridges that stand up with a furrow between…”
• The diluted glaze the Berlin Painter frequently relied on to render musculature in general).
• There are also many features of detailed human anatomy, like ankles, chest, abdominals, which the Berlin Painter rendered in a distinct manner.
• He "grounded" the figures; the characters on the Berlin Painter's vases were no longer "floating," but felt connected to some foundation, even if invisible. Sometimes it was an actual line, and sometimes a boundary of different dimension. ​

 
What we know about him as a person, we can only guess from the themes he chose for his imagery; he was fond of animals and nature, probably liked poetry and city festivals and, of course, gave homage to the gods. He avoided the otherwise common themes of bloody combats and gory scenes, or those of debauchery and drunkenness. Even his depictions of satyrs seemed to emphasize their human nature over the animalistic. The Berlin Painter just seems like a mellow, content man.
 
Other works by The Berlin Painter: In 1911, Beazley assigned 38 vases to the Berlin Painter (“master of the Berlin amphora”) and outlined the characteristics of the Berlin Painter’s renderings. His drawing style was described in 1922 and by 1925 there were already 148 vases attributed to the artist. As of today, over 400 works of pottery and fragments are attributed to the Berlin Painter. Because of their masterful artistry, they are highly appreciated and sought by the world’s museums. In the Gregorian Etruscan Museum in the Vatican Museums, there is the beautiful hydria with Apollo sitting on the winged tripod, playing the lyre, as two dolphins below make their way back into waters.
 
The Metropolitan Museum of Art has 13 vessels. Among them is another hydria, featuring Achilles slaying Penthesilea, the queen of the Amazons. This museum has arguably one of the most exquisite of all vases by the Berlin Painter, the type C amphora with the beautiful walking-singing citharode—youth playing the kithara—on one side and the contest judge on the other side. The Louvre has the largest collection of his vases, for a total of 36. The only cup known to be painted by this artist (although debates over the attribution continue) is in the Agora Museum in Athens. It is called the Gorgos Cup, after the potter Gorgos, who provided the vessel to be decorated. The name "Gorgos" as the maker of the vessel is inscribed on the cup. While some painters were also potters of the vases they worked with (and it is possible the Berlin Painter was among them in some instances), the transition from potter to painter was not at all automatic.
 
There are also the Panathenaic amphorae painted by the Berlin Painter. Those were the vases that were filled with olive oil and given as prizes to winners of the Panathenaic Games. They were always traditionally done in the black-figure technique. Only highly esteemed painters were commissioned to provide those. Out of 21 vases painted by the Berlin Painter in the black-figure technique, possibly only two are not the Panathenaic amphorae (a fragmented amphora Type A in New York and a hydria in Frankfurt).

While vases, in general, were popular in antiquity and were given as burial offerings to go with the departed close ones, only the wealthy could afford to have a vase decorated by, say, the Berlin Painter or other artists of high esteem. The amphorae given to victors of the games were a sign of the prestige of the artist whom they were commissioned to.

​Legacy: There were three immediate students of the Berlin Painter, who were all very important and painted a large number of vessels: The Providence Painter, Hermonax and The Achilles Painter. The last of them, along with his own student, the Phiale Painter, closed the workshop of the Berlin Painter in 425. Although the workshop closed, many features of the Berlin Painter’s innovative style remained with generations of vase painters. 
 
The students of the Berlin Painter and other followers who came even later into the vase painting world (the Harrow Painter, the Tithonos Painter, the Painter of the Yale Lekythos, Alkimachos Painter, just to name a few) carried on the legacy of the master by either adopting his ornamentation style, features of the design (the “less is more” on the vase), or took up shapes which were not popular among the red-figure artists before the Berlin Painter.
 
The Berlin Painter was not only the master of the already existing technique but developed it as well as expanded the repertoire of shapes which began to be painted in the red-figure technique. He was not just the master of his technique but a thinker and inventor.

​Where? Gallery 2 of the Uffizi Museum 
When? Some time between 1280 and 1300, the precise date continues to be debated.
Commissioned by? Probably by the Vallombrosans, a monastic order of the Catholic Church.
What do you see? A majestic, Gothic altarpiece, in Byzantine tradition with the remarkable first signs of humanism that would dominate the Renaissance style. It measures 12’8” by 7’4” (385 by 223 cm) and is painted on large vertical wooden panels with golden background. The Virgin Mary is seated on an impressive marble throne, decorated with carvings, gems and mosaic designs, much like those seen in Tuscan churches of the time. She points to Jesus with her right hand, entreating viewers to seek salvation through Christ. The Madonna holds Jesus in the traditional Byzantine manner according to the icon, Hodegetria, meaning, “She who shows the way”. 
 
Jesus is dressed as a philosopher from ancient times and gestures a blessing while holding a rolled scroll in his left hand which is believed to be the scroll of law. The gilding on the clothing and drapery of the material they wear has been done using the Byzantine technique of “agemina”, indicating the application of 2 filaments (2 metals), of the precious golden decoration known as damascene.

• Eight angels: There are eight, elegant angels with colorful wings, gently supporting the throne. Six angels engage the viewers with their eyes, each pair of eyes appealing to a different section of viewers, while two of the angels look inward towards the Christ Child. The Madonna and Christ Child look directly out at us with slightly tilted heads. The message from the angels and the Madonna is for the pious to seek the Lord through Christ. The angels fill the same space as The Madonna and Child. This is unusual for the time.

 

• Four prophets at the bottom: The Old Testament Prophets at the bottom of the painting are from left to right: Jeremiah, Abraham, David, and Isaiah. This is a completely original visual element. They hold Biblical Texts from the Holy Scriptures, alluding to the mysteries of the Incarnation and the Virginity of Mary. They each foretold or made possible the coming of Christ. Jeremiah and Isaiah prophesized the coming of the Messiah by a virgin, and Abraham and David were believed to be direct ancestors of the Virgin and Christ. David sits beneath the Christ child, which may validate that kinship. 
  
  The outward-facing hands of the prophets symbolize their protection and support. Their position at the bottom of the painting suggests the very foundations of not only the painting but also the New Testament. This new feature, may be the antecedent of the predella, the lateral band of smaller images placed below the central painting, that is so familiar in Renaissance altarpieces.

• Golden background: The flat golden background, normally responsible for placing the scene in an “other-worldly” time and space, now also serves as part of the depth we see when the painting is viewed from a distance. Combined with the architectural surrounds that enclose the four prophets at the bottom of the painting, the curvature of the steps in the throne and the hierarchical positioning of the angels, the illusion of depth and space is created. This was very novel for the time. The golden background is engraved with geometric shapes and the golden halos are decorated using a punch. 
  ​

Backstory: This painting is also known as Virgin and Child Enthroned, and Prophets and it was originally painted for the Santa Trinita Church in Florence. This altarpiece was a unique work with Medieval/Byzantine features but also one of the first works in the movement towards naturalism that would be a hallmark of the Renaissance. 
 
If it was commissioned by the Vallombrosan Order, they may well have requested the presence of the four prophets as they placed great emphasis on the Old Testament prophets in their literary and artistic traditions. Many other religious orders were being formed at the time and competition for the loyalty of Florence’s wealthy citizens and their financial support was important to any order. This spectacular and innovative Maestà that Cimabue created would certainly have brought new attention and prestige to the Vallombrosan at Santa Trinita. This large work would have been venerated with the intense devotion that the icons of the Byzantine style demanded, but it would also have been seen as a departure from the purely religious objective. 
 
What is a Meastà? Maestà is the Italian word for “majesty” and refers to the iconic formula of the enthroned Madonna as the Queen of Heaven with the Christ Child in her arms. She may or may not be surrounded by a court of angels and saints. It was a most common subject in the 13th and 14th centuries and was the object of intense devotion. 
 
Innovations: After some of the ancient Greek and Roman painters, Cimabue is one of the first to show linear perspective and to play with spatial features in his art. His figures take on volume and presence as they engage viewers not only in a pictorial story but also an important dialogue.
 
His elegant angels have carefully designed hairstyles, each wearing decorative head bands. We can see two, wearing fashionable sandals, their bodies fill the volume of their diaphanous, draped clothing to the point that the knees are visible. They fully occupy the same space as the Madonna, helping to emphasize her importance but with more natural appearance. We can still see the elongated bodies and fingers, and the almond-shaped eyes of the Byzantine figures. The Madonna, by her size alone, continues to be the most important figure. Of note is the chiaroscuro effects of light and dark in the shading of the faces, suggestive of a light source, unseen in most Medieval work.
 
Cimabue’s figures lose the rigidity of Greek and Byzantine art and for the first time since the Roman period, human emotions are seen in Florentine art. This can also be seen, for example, in his Crucifix (1268-1271) in the Basilica di Santa Croce in Florence. In this painting, Christ is showing the emotions on his face around the moment of his death.

Who was Cimabue? Cimabue was born c. 1240-45 in Florence and died in Pisa in 1302. He was a very innovative painter and used linear perspective, reintroduced volume and space, and, most significantly, human emotion in his paintings. While not much is known about his life, Cimabue first appeared in recorded history when it was noted that he witnessed the assumption of patronage by Pope Gregory X (Monastery of Saint Damiano) on June 18, 1272 in Rome. That he was in attendance suggests he was an experienced, well known and respected Florentine artist by that time, particularly as he had traveled from Tuscany to Rome for the event.
 
In art history, he has generally been overshadowed by his younger contemporaries, Giotto (1267-1337) and Duccio (c.1255/60-1319). He was known as a master of mosaics, frescoes and paintings. It has been said of him, “Without Cimabue, there would have been no Giotto.” He is remembered as the man whose style inspired the movement that formed the Florentine School but the School is attributed to Giotto, as he carried it forward into the Renaissance.
 
Cimabue is also known as Cenni di Pepo or Cenni de Pepi which translates to “bull-head” or “one who crushes the views of others”. A contemporary of his said in 1333 or 1334, “a nobler man than anyone knew, but he was, as a result—so haughty and proud that if someone pointed out any mistake or defect in his work, or if he noted any himself, he would immediately destroy the work no matter how precious it might be.” This information suggests he was a perfectionist and perhaps arrogant along with it. 
​
An example of his fresco work is the Madonna with Child Enthroned, Four Angels and St Francis which he painted in 1278-1280 and can be found in the transept of the Lower Basilica of San Francesco in Assisi. 

​Fun Fact: Dante, in the Divine Comedy, Canto XI, lines 94-96, in writing about pride, wrote of Cimabue: “In painting, Cimabue thought he held the field, and now it’s Giotto they acclaim—the former only keeps to shadowed fame.” This was written between 1308 and 1321, just a few short years after Cimabue had died. However, some 8 centuries later, Cimabue may well find himself in the limelight once again.
 
In 2019, a small painting was found in France, in the farmhouse of a woman who had retired. It had hung on the wall for years, thought to be a Greek icon. A sharp-eyed auctioneer noticed it and saved it from the rubbish. It was quickly identified as, Christ Mocked by Cimabue. Christ Mocked sold for $26.6 million in October, 2019, making it the most expensive painting sold from before 1500.

Evidence was not only based on the painting style but also by the worm tunnels that matched up with the panels of wood of two other works by Cimabue: The Virgin and Child with two Angels in the National Gallery  in London and The Flagellation of Christ in the Frick Collection in New York. The three paintings below are part of the Diptych of Devotion, which consisted of two doors with four paintings each. This means that the remaining five paintings are still missing today.

Where: Room 208 on the second floor of the Museum of Modern Art
When: 1991
What do you see? Two identical clocks hanging on the wall, set in synchronized manner at the same start time, operating with identical batteries. The clocks touch while showing the time which is running out. Inevitably, at some point they will stop; one of them will stop ahead of the other.

​Part of the meaning of this work is in the title, the other part is in the action—it can represent two heartbeats. Some may interpret this that one of the heartbeats will stop before the other, leaving one of the lovers on his/her own. But the clocks can also be reset at any point and then the artwork can be interpreted as two perfect lovers who will stay together infinitely.

Background: After finishing “Untitled” (Perfect Lovers), Gonzalez-Torres said: “The piece I made with two clocks was the scariest thing I have ever done.” He created this artwork during a time that his partner Ross Laylock was suffering from AIDS. The political and personal reality fueled the art of Felix Gonzalez-Torres, as he watched his partner fall victim to the unchartered territory of AIDS. Ross died in 1991.

Gonzalez-Torres was born in Cuba, but after immigrating to the United States at age 11, he became an American citizen. His art can be interpreted as a reflection of both the appreciation and limitations of his rights as a U.S. citizen. It became the expression of both his personal drama and political convictions. But Gonzalez-Torres was careful to not impose a certain meaning to this artwork, allowing viewers to interpret it in their own way.

AIDS epidemic: The peak of Gonzalez-Torres’ creativity coincided with the peak of the AIDS epidemic, the disease which at that time (the 80’s) was not only covered by fear and mystery, but also largely neglected by politics. The word “AIDS” was not mentioned by President Ronald Reagan until the Third International Conference on AIDS in Washington, D.C., in 1987. At that time 21 thousand people already had died from the disease which, by then, had spread to 113 countries.

Other works by Gonzalez-Torres: The experience of Gonzalez-Torres’ partner suffering from AIDS, inspired Felix Gonzalez-Torres. “Untitled” (Passport) 1991, is a stack of countless sheets of plain, white paper, which the audience can take some sheets from. The stack typically gets replenished, though the exhibitor may also decide to not replenish it anymore at some point. It can be interpreted as a passport with nothing written in it, reflecting a world without borders. While Gonzalez-Torres did not specify how he wanted people to interpret his art, it makes many viewers feel a bit uncomfortable. Instead of feeling his art, the viewer is informed and moved to action.

Who is Gonzalez-Torres: Felix Gonzalez-Torres (1957-1996) was an American artist. He was born in Cuba but fled his native country at the age of 11, in the turbulent year of 1968. Some of his artistic ideas can be foregrounded by his biographical experience (like being a refugee and gay), though he never intended for his works to be solely read through a biographical reading. He considered it to be extremely personal, even saying: “I can’t separate my art from my life.” Not having a studio of his own, he worked often with simple, ordinary objects turning them into sculptures or installations, breaking many conventional norms while doing that. The breakaway was mainly in the meaning given to those objects, as they acquired their new, artistic forms. It was not an easy message for viewers to digest.

Legacy: Since his passing in 1996, progress has been made in the United States and other parts of the world regarding the treatment of minorities. The art of Gonzalez-Torres is a contributing factor to this progress. Together with artists like David Wojnarowicz, Essex Hemphil, and Ray Navarro, they spent their artistic lives to make a societal impact. Their art has helped museum visitors understand minorities and contemplate important societal issues.

Where? The French Gallery of the Timken Museum of Art
When? 1758
What do you see? Two lovers rest by a trail in a blooming garden. Their clothes are disheveled and unbuttoned. With one hand, the young man puts flowers into his lover’s hair. In the other hand, he holds her hat, filled with pastel-colored blooms. Resting her arm on his knee, the young lady holds a wreath of blue flowers on her arm. As she looks off to her right, she doesn’t seem to notice the shepherdess entering on the left side of the painting. This woman wears less lavish clothes than the couple, and she carries two baskets of flowers. She tilts her head as the young man flirts with her in an act of playful infidelity. And the young man’s lover doesn’t seem to mind. On the bottom right is a spaniel, which either is the dog of the couple or an ironic symbol of loyalty. Above the scene is a statue of two babies playing and watching the scene unfold.

Backstory: Boucher probably created this painting to decorate the salon of an aristocrat’s country house. Focusing on the theme of love, Boucher sets the intimate and dreamy scene in a beautiful garden. Like most Rococo paintings, the colors and textures of the painting are delicate, soft, and feminine.

Besides romance and coquetry, this painting also shows a romanticization of the peasantry in France during this time. Many aristocrats of this time fantasized about life in the country, working as a farmer or milkmaid. The inclusion of the young shepherdess in this painting may be a nod to this trend. While very beautiful, rococo paintings like Lovers in a Park, were often criticized for their artificiality and unrealistic subject matter.

Who is François Boucher?  François Boucher was born in Paris in 1703 where he would die in 1770. His father was a decorator who specialized in embroidery. Boucher studied under François Lemoyne and later under François Cars, an esteemed engraver. During this time, Boucher engraved many of Watteau’s drawings and became familiar with his style very quickly.

In 1723, Boucher was awarded first place in the Academy competition. Afterwards, he traveled to Italy where he studied with Carle Vanloo. Though his style was not heavily influenced by this trip, when he returned to Paris, he became fascinated with fashion and sought to depict it in his works. After being admitted to the French Academy in 1734 for his work, Rinaldo and Armida, Boucher caught the attention of Madame Pompadour who essentially made him her personal painter. It was around this time that Boucher took a young Jean-Honoré Fragonard on as a student.

​In 1755, Boucher began working on tapestries for the Gobelins tapestry works, producing pieces for operas and festivals. In 1765, he became the director of the French Academy and Madame Pompadour appointed him First Painter to the King. 

Fun fact: A leisure activity for many aristocrats of this time was to dress up in simpler clothes made out of cheaper materials and role play the idealized life of a peasant. The clothes they wore, though plainer than their usual outfits, would be higher quality than what peasants actually wore. The young shepherdess in Lovers in a Park wears clothing in this style. 

Where? Santa Maria delle Grazie Dominican Church and Convent in Milan
When? 1495-1498
Commissioned by? Ludovico Maria Sforza, Duke of Milan between 1494 and 1499, for the renovations he had planned for the church and convent. 
​
What do you see? The Last Supper where Jesus and the 12 apostles are sharing their final meal before the crucifixion. The fresco is designed so that the space in which the last supper takes place looks like an extension of the architecture of the room itself.

​In the center is Christ. His outstretched arms touch the table. The 12 apostles are divided, first into two groups of six on each side, and second, into subgroups of three. Each subgroup is a tightly-knit group in composition. Scan the row of heads and see the wave-like arrangement, surging and ebbing. 

The ceiling of the room is painted as if coffered, and the coffers provide a clear sense of depth to the mural. In the background are three windows with a view to the landscape. The center window behind Christ, has a semicircular pediment, suggestive of a halo. The right wall is illuminated and the left is in shadow.
​
Backstory: Leonardo da Vinci always carried a sketch book with him. He looked for facial expressions, bodily movement, and believed the artist had “two principal things to paint, man and the intention of his mind.” He has frozen these 13 men in a moment of time and by doing so, he captured all the drama and excitement of the Gospel verses in The Last Supper. Few sketches remain but below is an early version.

Da Vinci had indicated great concern about painting Christ’s face. Christ is larger than the others (hierarchical perspective) and this is also of theological importance. The spatial isolation of Jesus gives added importance to his image. Da Vinci also used the most expensive paint for Christ—ultramarine.

​It is hard to imagine the reactions of the friars and nuns as they entered the refectory to see the mural for the first time (before the mural started to deteriorate). The light, bright, stunning colors of a well-known story told in a brand-new fashion must have been almost shocking. Gone were the traditional halos, the flat facial expressions, the formalism, and instead, a band of 13 young men are seen reacting to an announcement that none of them could believe would happen. The humanism of Da Vinci was a great surprise. In the silence of their shared meals it must have given them much to contemplate.

Restoration: Leonardo da Vinci had no experience painting frescos before he started on this mural and used an experimental technique similar to painting on a wooden panel. As a result, the painting is in very poor state as Da Vinci painted on an outside wall with no space to prevent water damage, and he painted with a mixture of oil paint and tempura. The paint did not adhere to the wall and it was decaying even during Da Vinci’s lifetime.

Numerous restoration attempts have been made over the centuries, but they usually caused further problems. In 1979, a small group of Italian art restorers began a huge project to properly do the job. It took them 20 years to complete.

Symbolism: Christ’s simple pose is complex in detail and meaning—he is silent, sad, and submissive. His right hand extends toward Judas, whose hand is near his. Christ’s hand is palm down, accusing Judas. “The hand that betrayeth me is with me on the table.” At the same time, Christ’s right hand refers to the glass of wine, the symbol of his blood used in the Mass, while his left hand extending to the bread refers to the symbol of his body.

The triangular pose of Christ is a reference to the Holy Trinity, an emblematic abstraction of his words, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” The hand with the forefinger pointing straight upward to the right of Christ, belongs to Thomas. His probing finger refers to the physical resurrection of Christ and points to heaven as a harbinger of the physical ascension. 

Refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie: The Last Supper measures 460 cm x 880 cm (15 ft x 29 ft) and covers the end wall of the refectory (dining hall) of the monastery. Painting the mural was not easy and a hazardous task as it was placed 15 feet above the floor. The theme of the Last Supper was a traditional one for refectories. 

​The opposite wall of the refectory is covered by the Crucifixion fresco by Giovanni Donato da Montorfano, to which Leonardo da Vinci added figures of the Sforza family in tempura; these figures have deteriorated in much the same way as those in The Last Supper. Da Vinci worked very thoroughly but slowly and Montorfano was finished before him, to the consternation of Duke Sforza who exhorted Da Vinci to finish his project. 

Who is Da Vinci? Leonardo da Vinci was born April 15, 1452 near Vinci in Tuscany. He was the illegitimate son of a 25 year old aspiring lawyer/notary, who had come home for the summer and met the young peasant girl Caterina. He was already engaged to be married but these occurrences were not particularly remarkable at that time. 

His paternal grandfather took custody of Leonardo after the birth. The fact that Leonardo was not a legitimate son may have been quite fortunate, as the first legitimate son would have had to follow in his father’s footsteps and become a lawyer. His grandfather allowed him free reign to pursue other interests.

When Leonardo was 15 years old, he was sent to Florence to work as an apprentice to Andrea del Verrocchio. He excelled and by the time he was 25, he had his own studio with students. He applied to the Duke of Milan and moved there when he was 30. 

​In 1499, following the Duke’s fall from power, he left Milan and spent a short time in Venice. He returned to Florence in 1500 and in 1516 he moved to France at the invitation of King Francis I. He died there in 1519 at age 67. Among his most famous works are the Mona Lisa in the Louvre and the Madonna Litta in the Hermitage Museum.

Fun fact: The rules of perspective that were used, bring about an unusual effect. This is especially true when looking at the table. The top of the table is always visible, no matter the angle at which you look at the painting. The nuns and friars in the refectory would be sitting well below the mural and it was important that they could see the bread and wine in this fresco.

Another interesting aspect of the fresco is the bottom center of the mural, where a doorway has been cut into the painting. In 1652, the kitchens were relocated to the room behind the refectory and they wanted easier access to the room. They cut out a good portion of the painting, included the feet of Jesus. 

​Fortunately, in 1520, Giampietrino had made a copy of the original in oil on canvas. We can see Jesus’ feet and also the salt cellar spilled by Judas that is no longer visible in the original fresco by Da Vinci. This copy by Giampietrino was very important for the restoration of The Last Supper between 1979 and 1999.