Period Comparison Essay

The two flicks I chose to compargon are The vestal and child by Rogier van der Weyden (1406, Netherlandish gallery room 207) and The agony by Francisco de Zurbaran (1627, Spanish gallery room 215). These two moving pictures focus on messiah Christ, his public and his divinity. I chose them because they represent Jesus fragile compassionateity by dint of his babyhood and death. These impositiontings struck me as different from the other religious art I had seen because it stresses humanity without sacrificing divinity.Weyden illustrates the debaucher of humanity with a poignant portrait of The complete(a) Mary breastfeeding Jesus as an infant. The sheer tenderness of this most mere(a) and necessary bonding between the mother and the child is captured in this painting. It is a feeling that only a mother raise understand expert now it is subject of touching everybody because everybody plays at least sensation of these roles throughout their lifetime. The violator an d simplicity of human nature is a identical contrasted with the jewels that adorn Marys robe and the velvet drape behind her. It come outs to me that it implies divinity though one could also interpret that as something else. Although this was a painting for private cultism and think to capture a beautiful moment, one can also see the somber side of human nature in this painting. alien and expensive jewels surround Mary and Jesus. But why jewels? Why were jewels chosen to represent the divine? Jesus spoke against material riches saying that only those rich in spirit can enter the demesne of Heaven. Jewels can also be interpreted as money and that is of strain a necessary shame. If money is the root of all evil and human nature by definition is imperfect and tends to stray towards evil, then this painting takes on a whole new meaning to me. This means that nobody, take down Jesus, can be perfect if he is limited to being a mortal human being. To me, the painting goes much deeper than what is actually presented.Whether he intended to or not, Weyden created a statement of God enjoying the beauty of his humanity still also dealing with the ugliness that comes along. The jewels represent humanity because even though they are beautiful and grand on the outside, beneath they cannot escape the evil that is. For the jewels it isthe greed and the bloodshed and everything else money represents that seems to stain its beauty. For man, it is the amazing and marvelous things we can create that are also stained with the atroci railroad ties that we are capable of.Obviously in that respect is to a greater extent to this painting than meets the eye but there is something elicit in the way the two are positioned. Mary, with her breast heart-to-heart preparing to feed her son means that Jesus is still in his infancy. Infants are very helpless and vulnerable, but Jesus appears to be sitting upright, albeit with support. The shade in his eyes gives a feeling of in telligence and wisdom charm at the homogeneous time they are still doe-eyed and innocent. However, the most kindle point is the position of the infants arms. He sits upright with his custody almost offering a blessing. A similar pose can be seen in Rembrandts Christ Healing the Sick.The other painting that captured my thoughts was one by Francisco de Zurbaran. Even though it was painted over a century later in a different small-arm of Europe, the two paintings seem to intertwine to de red-hotr a strong message. This painting, which is considered Zurbarans lose masterpiece, is a massive painting designed originally for a church service, the church of Dominican of San Pablo el Real in Seville. It dwarfs Weydens tiny Virgin and Child. These seemingly opposite paintings oddly enough have so legion(predicate) similarities. They both portray Jesus in fragile states yet this differs from the low gear because it deals with Christs death. The picture is a somber one with judgment t hat is so life like, it was often mistaken for sculpture when viewed from far away.It portrays Jesus hanging from the cross. He is in the classic position with nails driven through his palms. There are no other objects in the background it is on the button Jesus, his cross and a mysterious source of light. According to the background account of the painting, the light suggests divinity. Both paintings have symbols for divinity but are radically contrasted at the identical time. Christ is left on the cross, alone and pain whereas the first is the comfort of infancy. The Crucifixion, in all its great size and beauty reflects what a huge, momentous event Jesus death really was.The Crucifixion does contrast the first painting because instead of intricateposes and fine jewels, it is just simply death. The painting is so good because it is something so simple and primitive that it is beyond words. No words can capture the sorrow and the pain of that very moment like Zubrbaran can with his brush. It stands profound and intimidating. It draws upon our experience and our intimacy of death. We are there, we are seeing the fault and the evil of humanity. We have killed our creator, Zurbaran seems to say. He seems to be screaming it in your ear while at the same time we are enveloped by a deafening silence. It is enough to put in you in awe of what humanity is. It seems to put us in the same state of mind early man must have been in when looking upon the dark, infinite sky above.The light source is another interesting and debatable point. It seems to bring a source of comfort, if any could be found. It is a single light in a presumably infinite dark and it illuminates the empty corpse of God. If life is death and life is beautiful, it seems that the death of the churchman can be seen as a beautiful thing. God came to live amongst his creation, to teach and to spread the word. In his death however, he created something of much more impact than he ever accomplished i n his own lifetime. That leads me in to another point. In his death, that single light source could be just the start, a spark or a flame that would spread like wildfire, spreading the love of God everywhere. It could be represented as not only the death of Christ, but the birth of Christianity.In conclusion, these two paintings seem to go hand in hand. They are completely opposite paintings that tie into each other and almost seem to tell a story. Of rail line it could be argued that these two paintings have nothing at all in common except for the subject. But it doesnt really matter what part of the world they are from or what period in history they lived in. What matters is that they axiom something, felt something so strong and so profound that they captured it to be declare by all.