Jan van Eyck (1434). Giovanni Arnolfini and Giovanna Cenami (according to tradition) [oil on wood]. The National Gallery of London.

Extreme sensitivity and luxury characterize this work (to me). This dual-portrait’s execution is so refined that the figures appear doll-like. Linear perspective, sumptuous and illusionary texturing, a consistent singular light source and beautifully-blended value arrangement are all present. The economic success of the couple is communicated in a contrived manner through the spatially-sensitive arrangement of small, refined items of ownership throughout the canvas. |

To properly place this work on the scale of abstraction a new category to the left of naturalism would have to be created, hyperrealism. The level of detail, in particular in the convex mirror, is likely not possible in reality. The sumptuous rendering of the subjects references the illusionary nature of this work.

The defining elemental characteristic of this work is texture. This is rarely the case because texture tends to be a supportive element, strengthening the native characteristics of primaries and formatting secondaries in proper measure to keep them from melting away. However, texture carries so much of this painting that I notice it first. Aside from the qualities it defaults to, texture establishes this works tone, does more than its share at communicating to the observer the station of this couple and provides simple aesthetic realism. Color is notable as well. To oversimplify, the direct, masculine, impure and dense left is set against the feminine, passive, complementary, pure and well-lit right.

The orientation of the figures, outer-edge framing of the portraits by planar shapes and placement of the chandelier and mirror create a work that is loosely symmetrically balanced. This is debatable, of course, because they do not reflect to the degree of Joudon’s Big Springs and there are major formatting differences.

The sumptuousness of this painting is masterfully developed by van Eyck’s painstaking, full and planned use of the value range, chroma and detail. He has reserved the lightest values to develop and frame exposed flesh. The densest tones and midtones blend together in the background to help push the portrait pair forward.

I would argue the general area around the youthful woman’s upper body is the primary center of interest in this work. Her form is highlighted by the stark contrasts in color and high key values, which are provided by the light source and used to develop her flesh. Both figures seem to be swimming in their garments, which makes the man seem slight and emphasizes the health and fertility of the woman. They are surrounded by lavishness and clearly have the means to properly provide for a large family.

It turns out that the woman is probably not pregnant, but wearing a garment in style in Flanders at the time that was designed to imitate pregnancy by layering excess clothing in the front of the body. I had an impression but far from a legitimate understanding of how complicated this painting is. Fourteenth century Flanders was more secular than most states of the time, and one of the common explanations of this painting is that it is a marriage contract. Religious themes are as numerous as symbols of wealth.