Art Fall of Man Fall of Man Three Part Mural

In this magnificent epitome, Adam and Eve recline like mythological lovers in the Garden of Eden, portrayed at the very moment they go aware of their mutual desire. [1] [1]
I would like to give thanks Lynn Russell and Lieneke Nijkamp for their assistance with this text. Having already taken a bite from the apple, Eve turns toward Adam with a knowing gaze as she tenderly touches his breast. Mesmerized, Adam gently draws Eve toward him with his left arm every bit he looks into her eyes with intense longing. Adam also holds fruit, a tender fig that he squeezes between the forefinger and pollex of his right mitt, a gesture as laden with sensual overtones equally is the partially eaten apple. [2] [2]
Portrayals of fig copse or figs in emblem books signified affluence besides as the Resurrection of Christ. In this painting, because Adam holds the fig merely has not nevertheless eaten from the apple, he is nonetheless—at to the lowest degree for at present—worthy of the abundance of the Garden of Eden. The fig in his manus could likewise correspond God's promise of flesh'southward redemption through the time to come cede and resurrection of his son. Run into Arthur Henkel and A. Schöne, eds., Emblemata: Handbuch zur Sinnbildkunst des Xvi. und XVII. Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart, 1967), lx–lxi and 241–242, citing Georgia Montanea, Monumenta Emblematum Christianorum Virtutum (1571; reprint, Frankfurt, 1619), 24. The compelling emotional force of this moment is enhanced by the surrounding plants and animals, which Goltzius has painted in a bewitchingly believable fashion.

Goltzius entices his viewer to become fully engaged in this intimate meet by placing the life-size figures of Adam and Eve close to the picture plane where i senses the fullness of their concrete presence and the power of their mutual attraction. [3] [iii]
For an excellent discussion of Goltzius' power to seduce the eye and afford sensual pleasure through the depiction of beauty, see Eric Jan Sluijter, "Venus, Visus and Pictura," in Seductress of Sight: Studies in Dutch Art of the Gilt Age, trans. Jennifer Kilian and Katy Kist (Zwolle, 2000), 86–159. Adam and Eve's bodies are perfectly proportioned, with pare that yields gently to the touch. As they prevarication there entirely naked except for the ground ivy that covers Adam's genitals, calorie-free plays across their bodies, modeling Adam's muscular body too every bit Eve'due south softer form with its paler, more than transparent flesh tones. Nevertheless, their idealized bodies have a physicality that fully explains their inability to restrain their key appetites. That failure will atomic number 82 to their expulsion from Eden and humanity'southward autumn from grace.

So beguiling is this portrayal that one tin almost understand how Adam and Eve remained oblivious to the dire consequences of their actions as they discovered these new and unexpected emotions. Nevertheless, as is narrated in the book of Genesis (Genesis 3:1–7), Adam and Eve had been told not to eat the fruit from the tree in the midst of the garden lest they die. The serpent, notwithstanding, persuaded Eve that eating this fruit would allow them to be similar God, knowing good from evil. She partook of the fruit so passed it on to Adam, who ate besides. Consequently, their eyes were opened, and, realizing they were naked, they sewed together fig leaves to embrace themselves. God drove the couple from his earthly paradise, the Garden of Eden, and neither they nor their offspring would ever be allowed to return.

Goltzius' seductive rendering of The Autumn of Homo differs in fundamental means from the pictorial tradition of this biblical theme. Prior images, including Goltzius' drawing of The Fall, c. 1597 [fig. 1] [fig. 1] Hendrick Goltzius, The Fall, c. 1597, pen and brown ink, castor in various colors, British Museum, London. Photo © Trustees of the British Museum , and his big painting of 1608, now in the Hermitage, had depicted the couple standing or sitting at the moment when Eve was either receiving the apple tree from the serpent or passing information technology on to Adam. [4] [iv]
Much like his painting of 1616, Goltzius' drawing of 1597 includes a cat and a goat in the foreground. The virtually of import of these prior images of The Fall of Man was the engraving Adam and Eve, 1504, by Albrecht Dürer (German, 1471 - 1528), which served every bit the basis for the monumental painting of this subject past Goltzius' colleague in Haarlem, Cornelis Cornelisz van Haarlem (Dutch, 1562 - 1638). Cornelis painted his work for the Prinsenhof in Haarlem in 1592. Come across Ger Luijten, Dawn of the Golden Historic period: Northern Netherlandish Art, 1580–1620 (Amsterdam, 1993), 337–338, no. vii. For Goltzius' painting of 1608 in the Hermitage, run across Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 268–269, fig. 102. Here, as Adam languidly gazes at Eve, who is eating from the forbidden apple, his pose reflects that of his counterpart in Michelangelo's ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, where Adam awaits the spark of life from God the Father. [five] [five]
I would like to give thanks Rachel Pollack for this observation. Every bit infrequent as it was for Adam and Eve to be depicted equally lovers reclining in their paradisiacal setting, it was fifty-fifty more than unprecedented for a painting of them to focus on their rapt gazes and mutual yearnings rather than on the transfer of the apple.

Little in the demeanor of Adam and Eve indicates the grave consequences of their actions, although Goltzius alludes to the momentousness of the occasion. The animals surrounding the couple in the Garden of Eden provide a symbolic framework for how the viewer ought to respond to the scene. Almost of import to the biblical narrative, of grade, is the serpent that leads Eve astray. Far from the evil and menacing animate being that one oftentimes finds in such depictions, Goltzius' snake is sweet-faced and female-headed, a warning about the deceptiveness of appearances. [half dozen] [six]
See Louis Réau, Iconographie de l'art chrétien, vol. two, pt. 1 of 2 (Paris, 1956), 84. For an overview of Renaissance and baroque prints depicting Adam and Eve, see H. Diane Russell, Eva/Ave: Woman in Renaissance and Baroque Prints (Washington, DC, 1990), 113–130. The goat traditionally signified unrestrained animalism and the unchaste; as such, information technology was oftentimes included in images of The Fall (see fig. ane). [7] [vii]
This goat is in exactly the same pose as that of Goltizus' 1616 painting, indicating that he used the same preliminary drawing for both works. Karel van Mander I (Netherlandish, 1548 - 1606), whose writings Goltzius would take thoroughly known, gave a especially pointed symbolic interpretation for this fauna. For him the goat also signified "the whore, who destructs immature men, simply [as it] browses and violates the young greenish shoots," [eight] [8]
Karel van Mander, "Wtbeeldinge der figueren . . .," in Karel van Mander, Het schilder-boeck (Haarlem, 1604), fol. 129r. "De Geyte beteyckent de Hoere / die de jonghe knechten verderft / ghelijck de Geyt de jonghe groen spruyten afknaeght en scheyndet." The translation is taken from Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 332 n. 156. an estimation that Goltzius has followed: the goat nearest Eve chomps on young grasses.

The elephant and hare in the far distance accept different relationships to Adam and Eve. Both animals have turned their backs on the scene and are departing the area every bit quickly as possible. The hare probably leaps away in fearfulness of the consequences of Adam and Eve's actions, since fearfulness is one of the attributes Van Mander gave to this animate being. [9] [ix]
Karel van Mander, "Wtbeeldinge der figueren . . .," in Karel van Mander, Het schilder-boeck (Haarlem, 1604), fol. 130r. "Met hem wort de vreese beteyckent: want hy een seer vreesachtigh Dier is" (with him fear is meant, since he is a fearful animal). Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 302, no. 111, on the other mitt, interprets the rabbit as symbolizing carnality. On the other hand, the elephant was traditionally associated with piety, temperance, and guiltlessness, so little wonder that Goltzius depicted it in fast retreat. [ten] [ten]
The positive assessment of the elephant'due south virtues goes back to Pliny, who wrote that the animals "possess virtues rare even in homo, honesty, wisdom, justice." He besides noted that they hate serpents. See H. Rackham, Pliny Natural History (Cambridge, MA, 1940), iii, book 8. For Christian symbolism related to the elephant, run into Leonard J. Slatkes, "Rembrandt'south Elephant," Simiolus eleven, no.1 (1980): seven–thirteen. Van Mander goes so far as to accredit the aspect "Godliness" to information technology. Karel van Mander, "Wtbeeldingeder figueren . . .," in Karel van Mander, Het schilder-boeck (Haarlem, 1604), fol. 128r. "Den Oliphant beteyckent den Coningh / en d'Egyptsche hebben hem daer mede beteyckent. Den Oliphant / in een water siende nae een nieuw Maen / beteyckent de Godsdiensticheyt / oft Godsvruchticheyt: desire sy alle Maende hun suyveren met de nieuw Maen / dice sy schijnen te eeren."

The about fascinating and riveting of all the animals in the scene is the cat in the firsthand foreground, which is then realistically painted that i can virtually hear it exhale. Although the cat was traditionally viewed every bit a symbol of lust and sensual pleasure, for Van Mander this animal served as a alert to the viewer about being an unjust judge. [xi] [11]
Karel van Mander, "Wtbeeldinge der figueren . . .," in Karel van Mander, Het schilder-boeck (Haarlem, 1604), fol. 130r. "De Katte beteyckent een onrechtveerdigh Richter: desire sy is dickwils in huys schadigher als de Muysen / dice sy als meesten dief / om hun dieverije straffende is." The cat'south penetrating gaze, from which in that location is no escape, reminds spectators not to condemn others for the very vices of which they are themselves guilty.

The Fall of Man is among a number of paintings Goltzius executed betwixt 1613 and 1616 that focus on lovers in a landscape, including Venus and Adonis, 1614 [fig. two] [fig. 2] Hendrick Goltzius, Venus and Adonis, 1614, oil on sheet, Bayerische Staatsgemaldesammlungen, Alte Pinakothek, Munich. Photo: bpk, Berlin / Alte Pinakothek, Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Munich / Art Resource, NY , which depicts the goddess gently embracing Adonis as she, in vain, urges him to stay with her and avoid the hunt. Much equally with Adam and Eve, the ii figures gaze into each other'southward optics, with their immature, arcadian bodies arrayed in the immediate foreground for the visual enjoyment of the spectator. The manner and graphic symbol of Venus and Adonis, and all of Goltzius' subsequent paintings, owe much to the influence of Sir Peter Paul Rubens (Flemish, 1577 - 1640), who visited Goltzius in Haarlem in June 1612 in search of an engraver to brand reproductive prints after his paintings. Goltzius, who had turned his attention to painting around 1600 later on his successful career equally an engraver, had previously sought to master the rendering of flesh, which Van Mander considered to exist i of the well-nigh difficult things to paint and thus a crucial test of a painter's skill. [12] [12]
For the painting of mankind, see Ann-Sophie Lehmann, "Fleshing Out the Body: The 'Colours of the Naked' in Workshop, Practice, and Theory, 1400–1600," in Body and Embodiment in Netherlandish Art / Lichaam en lichamelijkheid in de Nederlandse kunst, ed. A. Southward. Lehmann and H. Roodenburg, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 58 (Zwolle, 2008): 87–107; Paul Taylor, "The Glow in Late Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Dutch Paintings," in Looking through Paintings: The Study of Painting Techniques and Materials in Support of Art Historical Inquiry, ed. Erma Hermens, Leids Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek xi (Delft, 1998): 159–178; and Eric Jan Sluijter, "Goltzius' Painting and Mankind or Why Goltzius Began to Paint in 1600," in The Learned Centre: Regarding Art, Theory, and the Artist's Reputation—Essays for Ernst van de Wetering, ed. G. van den Doel (Amsterdam, 2005): 158–177. I would like to give thanks Perry Chapman for providing me with these references. It was merely after Rubens' visit, even so, that Goltzius learned how to create sensual painted images by blending his brushstrokes to create the luminosity of flesh and by focusing on the emotions of love and longing. [13] [13]
For further word of Rubens' influence on the pictorial grapheme of The Autumn of Man, see Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 302, no. 111. It is not known which of this Flemish main's paintings Goltzius really saw at that time, just one of them could have been a Venus and Adonis that was in the Delft drove of Boudewijn de Man (c. 1570/1575–after 1644), who probable was the first owner of Goltzius' The Fall of Homo. [14] [14]
For Boudewijn de Man, see Jaap van der Veen, "Delftse verzamelingen in de zeventiende en eerste helft van de achttiende eeuw," in Burgers verzamelen 1600–1750: Schatten in Delft (Delft, 2002), 72–74. The sale of Boudewijn de Man's collection occurred in Delft on March 15, 1644. De Man owned almost seventy paintings, including three by Rubens, among them a Venus and Adonis. This work sold for f. 500, and was the most expensive painting in his big collection. Venus and Adonis, c. 1612, was probably the painting of that subject in the Mauritshuis (inv. no. 254), which is at present considered a studio replica of Rubens' painting in Düsseldorf. De Man owned three Goltzius paintings, among them Adam and Eve, which sold for f. 110. One of De Man's other paintings by Goltzius was an "Abel in het verkort" (Abel in foreshortening), which has been identified as The Dead Adonis, 1609, in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (inv. no. SK-A-1284). Whether or non De Man commissioned these paintings (he did commission other works), information technology seems probable that Goltzius would take known his drove. I would similar to thank Jaap van de Veen for providing me with a list of the contents of De Man'southward sale.

Although Rubens had a bully impact on Goltzius' painting style in the mid-1610s, no one would ever confuse the works of the two artists. Goltzius never assimilated the lessons of his experiences in Italy in 1590–1591 to the same extent that Rubens had during his prolonged stay there in the first decade of the seventeenth century. The idealization of classically inspired figures in Rubens' paintings was of a dissimilar society than the idealization of comparable figures in Goltzius' paintings. For case, fifty-fifty though Adam's pose relates in many ways to that of the antique sculpture of the river god Tiber that Goltzius drew in Rome in 1591 [fig. three] [fig. 3] Hendrick Goltzius, The River God Tiber, 1591, black chalk on blue paper, heightened with white, Teylers Museum, Haarlem , Goltzius has given Adam's body a sinuous, rhythmic catamenia reminiscent of the artist's late sixteenth-century mannerist style.

Goltzius must have based this composition on a number of drawings that he made from life. The goat nearest Eve, for instance, is practically a mirror image of a metalpoint drawing he fabricated in 1591–1594. [15] [15]
This drawing is illustrated in Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 176, no. 60. Documents indicate that Goltzius also fabricated a drawing of a true cat, which was probably similar in character to the goat drawing. [16] [xvi]
Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 176. Drawings likely served every bit models for both Adam and Eve since the poses of both figures are establish in other paintings. For instance, Goltzius used Eve's pose for one of the daughters in Lot and His Daughters, 1616, in the Rijksmuseum. [17] [17]
Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 304–305, no. 112. Interestingly, past 1616 Goltzius had already used Adam's pose twice when depicting a female figure. In his Vertumnus and Pomona of 1613, the goddess of fruit reclines in a mural only as Adam does, but facing the opposite management [fig. 4] [fig. 4] Hendrick Goltzius, Vertumnus and Pomona, 1613, oil on canvas, Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam. Photograph © Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam . In 1615 she appears in mirror image, in the pose that Goltzius would utilize for Adam one year later. [eighteen] [xviii]
This painting is in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge. See Huigen Leeflang et al., Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617): Drawings, Prints, and Paintings (Amsterdam, 2003), 300–301, no. 110. Information technology is testimony to the artist's genius that each of the permutations of this figure seems so compellingly natural and integrated into its narrative.

Arthur Thousand. Wheelock Jr.

April 24, 2014

davisvenly1968.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.nga.gov/collection/art-object-page.95659.html

Share this post