Man in a Red Turban

Jan Van Eyck: Man in a Red Turban

By

Varo Borja

In this essay I will attempt to show the importance of Jan Van Eyck's Man in a Red Turban, and also give a small amount of background on Van Eyck. I will also, using art terminology, attempt to analyze Man in a Red Turban from three different schools in the study of art history: formalism, Marxism, and psychoanalysis.

Jan Van Eyck was born, according to artchive.com, somewhere around "1390 in the village of Maaseyck near Maastricht." Jan had an older brother named Hubert, of whom little is known other than Jan held him in the highest regard as a painter, and also as a sibling. Jan Van Eyck's ability began to recognized at a fairly young age, and he was noticed by members of the clergy and nobility who afforded him opportunities for employment:

"Between 1422 and 1424, he was employed as a painter by John of Bavaria, Bishop of Liège; the next year, 1425, his famous relationship with Philip the

Good, Duke of Burgundy, began. As court artist and equerry, he moved to Philip's court at Lille. Few such cases of mutual serendipity adorn the history of Renaissance patronage: instead of treating his artist as something between a jongleur and an artisan, as the Medici in their off moments were apt to do, Philip was moved to declare that he 'would never find a man so much to his taste, or such a paragon of science and art.' (artchive.com)"

Jan was considered by Phillip the Good to be of inestimable worth, and Jan's salary was paid often at the expense of other facets of the ducal economy. Jan prospered under the benefaction of Phillip the Good, and he was also afforded the luxury of travel. He made a trip to the Iberian peninsula in Phillip's entourage for his (Phillip's) betrothal to the princess Isabelle of Portugal, and he also mingled with the finest personages of the Burgundian court, including the wealthy Italian, Giovanni Arnolfini.

Jan Van Eyck was a master of realism. He is considered to fall between the end of the Gothic period and the beginning of the Renaissance. His style was an admixture of the elements of humanism and the genuine interest in the human figure as an ideal to be admired for itself, and the cold, calculating, baroque (in the words of Henri Focillon) elements of high Gothic. Jan Van Eyck's seeming self-portrait, Man in a Red Turban (figure 13.66 in Art Across Time), is closer to the former of these styles than the latter. From a formalist perspective, this painting symbolizes everything great about the Northern early renaissance style. Upon viewing this piece, the eye travels upward from Van Eyck's chin to the lush adornment of his scarlet chaperone (see page 533 in Art Across Time). The chaperone, or turban has a mixture of diagonal lines of lighter value than the rest of Van Eyck's clothing. The deep red color of the headdress gives us a feeling of warmth, in contrast to the cold, but serene expression found on Van Eyck's face. The sheer beauty of the folds of the headdress denotes the time expended on the work and Van Eyck's mastery of realism and space. Van Eyck's lips are thin and pursed in a sort of pedantic expression, but his eyes exude great wisdom and lend an aura of serenity to the pose. Van Eyck has a great sense of balance, especially in the line down the center of the headdress, and he also exhibits a brilliant sense of humor: the grave nature of his facial expression in contrast with the ridiculousness of his choice of hats. In a way, he has poked fun at his own erudition by making the very seat of his learning, his brain, the focal point of our amusement. This sense of humor is one of the finer qualities of Renaissance humanism, and is a marked departure from the elaborate scenes of damnation to be found in much of Gothic art and architecture.

However, from a Marxist perspective, more elements of the portrait come to life. Van Eyck was a functionary of the Burgundian court, but still relegated to the level of bourgeois. In a typical mode of class struggle, Jan Van Eyck could have been viewed as a type of upwardly mobile worker. In an attempt to be recognized, Van Eyck signed his paintings with elaborate faux-engravings and also added little puns and jokes in an attempt to please the upper echelons of society with his apparent humility. In Man with a Red Turban, Van Eyck faux-engraved "Als Ich Kan" (which are the first words of the proverb "As I can, but not as I would"). (Art Across Time pg. 533) The pun, and the self- promotion may be found in the word "Ich", which in a play on words resembles "Eyck". According to oneata.edu, "The inclusion of the signatures and mottoes suggests that they are part of van Eyck's design to articulate his privilege as court painter. He could be like a court official and witness events and produce documents that have ducal sanction. It is also possible that van Eyck is making a claim for a change in social status. One of the rewards sought after by bourgeois functionaries attached to the ducal court would be gaining noble status from the duke in recognition for their loyal service." The early renaissance was a time of great opportunity and progressive ideologies. In the middle ages, it was nearly impossible for a man born outside of the nobility to achieve noble status. With the coming of classical ideas of government, humanistic views of man as a whole and the possibility of fame and fortune tied to a profession other than war or the clergy, it was natural for Van Eyck to assert his claim to a better life for himself and his family. With enough learning, skill, and perseverance, a man might climb out of the common ranks and join that illustrious set of personages at the top of the social ladder. Another element found in Man with a Red Turban that might reflect Marxist undertones is the color choice of Van Eyck's head adornment. The color red had long been associated with the clergy, more specifically with the Cardinals of the Church of Rome. In a bold stroke, Van Eyck has equated his own profession with the priesthood. In other words, learning, skill, perseverance and new ideas might usurp the old hierarchy of religion and nobility, and create a new priesthood based on merit rather than birthright.

Finally, I will add a few thoughts from the school of psychoanalysis. Obviously, Van Eyck is an obsessive compulsive. His far-reaching obsession with attention to detail belies the torture inflicted upon a man by his own neurotic preoccupation with perfection. Van Eyck, though feigning humility, could also be seen as a sort of narcissist. His revolutionary method of signing his own works in such bold tones was a type of schism with the accepted conventions of the old world. Van Eyck's preoccupation with achieving that "new priesthood" could be interpreted as a vain bolstering of his own ego, with the reflection of self hatred found in his little puns and the obfuscation of self found in paintings such as The Arnolfini Portrait. Van Eyck, however, could see Man in a Red Turban, as an attempt at self-love, and a sort of redemptive ridiculousness for his own vanity can be found in the humorous aspect of that portrait.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I have admired Van Eyck for years. Being a type of perfectionist myself, especially concerning my own form of artistic expression, I can empathize with him on a very deep level. When I was a child, I would tear up drawing after drawing because I couldn't capture a scene as I thought it should be captured. Attention to detail can be a type of double-edged sword wielded against ourselves sometimes with unyielding fury. In Van Eyck's case, however, it was this same attention to detail that separated him from his contemporaries and relegated his work to the halls of greatness. More than this though, Van Eyck, through the details embodied in his work, captured the beauty of a period in history that might have been lost, in part, to posterity if it were not for his efforts. For that accomplishment alone, we should be truly grateful to him for his efforts.

Bibliography

Art Across Time, 3^rd edition: Laurie Schneider Adams. McGraw Hill, Boston. 1999.

Art of the West: Henri Focillon. Phaidon Press Ltd, London. 1963.

Oneata.edu: found at: http://employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/ARTH/arth214_folder/van_eyck/court_painter.html

Artchive.com: found at: http://artchive.com/artchive/V/van_eyck.html

The Gothic Period

An Essay on Gothic Art

by

Varo Borja

In this essay I will attempt to not only relate to the reader the plan used by Abbot Suger in

relation to St. Denis, but I will also tell how this plan relates to the rest of Gothic architecture

and give a small amount of background on Abbot Suger and the time period in which he lived.

Abbot Suger, the man most responsible for the Gothic style as we know it, was born in 1081 AD in either Flanders, St. Denis, or near Beauce. According to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, Abbot Suger entered the abbey at St. Denis in 1091 to become a member of the order that resided there. After spending time at St. Denis and some of the courts of the nobles of France, Suger went to Italy. To quote Wikipedia again “On his return from Italy, Suger became abbot of St Denis. Until 1127 he occupied himself at court mainly with the temporal affairs of the kingdom, while during the following decade he devoted himself to the reorganization and reform of St Denis. In 1137 he accompanied the future king, Louis VII, into Aquitaine on the occasion of that prince's marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine, and during the second crusade served as one of the regents of the kingdom (1147 - 1149). He bitterly opposed the king's divorce, having himself advised the marriage. Although he disapproved of the second crusade, he himself, at the time of his death, had started preaching a new crusade.” Abbot Suger was a very influtential man, even something of a phenomenon. In the Middle Ages it was almost unheard of for the son of impoverished parents to reach the heights of political power and prestige that Abbot Suger attained. Abbot Suger was also a very learned man. He was a product of the monastic education system established by the Irish monks, who were renowned in much of Europe for the their high standards of scholarship and progressive methods of intstruction. To quote Wikipedia again, “Suger became the foremost historian of his time. He wrote a panegyric on Louis VI (Vita Ludovici regis), and collaborated in writing the perhaps more impartial history of Louis VII (Historia gloriosi regis Ludovici). In his Liber de rebus in administratione sua gestis, and its supplement Libellus de consecratione ecclesiae S. Dionysii, he treats of the improvements he had made to St Denis, describes the treasure of the church, and gives an account of the rebuilding. Suger's works served to imbue the monks of St Denis with a taste for history, and called forth a long series of quasi-official chronicles.”

To define the very spirit of Gothic achitecture, as exhibited by Abbot Suger’s work on St. Denis, is quite an imposing task. In my humble opinion, Gothic architecture embodies the very spirit of the mid to late middle ages, which is one of complete devotion to an unseen God and a persistent longing to bring that God’s kingdom to a world filled with war, disease, and ever lingering famine. Abbot Suger sought, through the texts of the ancients (particularly Dionysus the Areopagite) to bring man as close to God as is possible on earth, and to glorify that God’s earthly kingdom (as embodied in the kingdom of France, and then the rest of Christendom respectfully) with the elements that were at his (Suger’s) disposal. These elements were taken primarily from Romanesque architecture (the ribbed groin vault, the pointed arch, and the buttressed vault), but with a new luminosity that wasn’t possible before. This last element was provided through the use of stained glass. There was also a return to near-Classicism in this period in the field of sculpture. Huge strides were made towards achieving classical contrapposto and the truly organic aesthetic that had disappeared since the time of Imperial Rome.

Abbot Suger’s ideas were not new. He only expanded and for lack of a better word, “illuminated” the tried and true elements of the art and architecture of the past. His revolutionary style soon spread through all of Christendom, but it took different forms in each region of the Western world. In France, where the Gothic style originated, a couple of good examples of Suger’s influence can be seen at Chartres cathedral and the cathedral at Notre Dame. To quote the most excellent scholar, Henri Focillon from his Art of the West, Vol 2., “Lying on the fringes of Beauce, on the sharp descent down from the plateau, Chartres is both a town of the plains, ringed round with a wide horizon of cornfields, and a town of the uplands, where the roofs climb up steep slopes and along alleyways flanked by gables. To the east, the land on which the church stands is intersected by a fault, so that the apse dominates the void; westwards, the plateau falls gently away. The cathedral, like a fortress, overlooks and controls the town.” Chartres cathedral was built almost exclusively on the new pattern set by Suger at St. Denis. Chartres has the light, elegant feel of the Gothic style cathedral while retaining, like St. Denis, many of the elements found in Norman Romanesque and cathedrals such as Durham, in England. Chartres has a pair of assymetrical spires (also a new innovation of the Gothic period) at the west façade, and a richly decorated tympanum at the north portal. Again we see elements of the Romanesque period, but with a new freshness and a focus more on uplifting the worshipper instead of scaring the bejesus out of him. Another element found at Chartres that was begun during the Gothic period is the very ornate rose window found on the north façade. The interior of Chartres is lit by an amazing array of stained glass windows (180 in all) that are still intact to this day. Once again we see Abbot Suger’s hand at work in the luminescent effect of the jewelike window scheme.

At Notre Dame we see many of the same elements as at Chartres, again with much reliance on the old Norman Romanesque style and a hint of the German (in its squareness) flavor found at Speyer Cathdedral.. The double ambulatory of the choir continues directly into the aisles, and the shortened transept barely surpasses the width of the façade. The six-part nave vaults over squarish bays, although not identical with the “siamese twin” groin vaulting in Durham cathedral, continue the kind of structural experimentation that was begun by the Norman Romanesque. Much like St. Denis, the buttresses of Notre Dame cannot be seen from the inside, and the famous west façade contains a lovely rose window to, as according to Suger’s plan, illuminate the interior and enlighten the minds of the believers To quote M. Focillon once more, “The blind courses of inert stone are replaced by a skeletal armature which, within a net made up of radii, circles, and the arcades festooned around the circumference, entraps mulitcolored light. The wall has fallen, and revealed a wheel of fire.” (Art of the West, vol. 2 pgs. 42-43)

In England, at Salisbury cathedral we see a marked departure from Suger’s St. Denis in the exterior, which is low and sprawling much like an English bulldog. The layout of Salisbury is more Romanesque and Cistercian (a monastic order that was very austere and favored a more Spartan approach to the building of their churches) with a double transept and a square apse. Salisbury has a very large crossing tower (much larger than originally intended) found above the larger transept, that resembles the one found at Notre Dame. Upon entering the west portal the resemblance to Chartres is starkly evident in the large quantities of brightly lit stained glass to be found throughout the cathedral. Although differing largely from what Suger originally intended, Salisbury cathedral retains much of his original formula, just on a different framework.

Perhaps the biggest departure from Suger’s plan is to be found in Italy at Florence Cathedral. Here not much is left of the soaring majesty and ethereal grace of such cathedrals as Chartres and Notre Dame. Florence cathedral is based largely on the old Roman basilica plan, and like almost all Italian cathedrals, it features a campanile (bell tower) instead of a richly decorated and spire-laden westwork. The similarities are to be found in the details, though, such as the pointed arches and the stained glass of the campanile and the ribbed groin vault of the nave. Florence cathedral also contains a rounded apse at the eastern end, much like St. Denis and Notre Dame. Florence cathedral is definitely more sombre and archaic than St. Denis (Florence cathedral’s main feature is a huge octagonal dome, much like the Roman Pantheon), and it resembles an early Christian basilica more closely than the cathedrals of the Ile-de-France, but in the details of this relic of the past much of the Gothic spirit is to be found. One interesting aspect of Florence cathedral is that, in a way, it hearkened the end of the Gothic period and was the product of a new set of ideas and ideals fostered from much earlier time, but which would shine a new light on the world in the embodiment of the Italian Renaissance.

In conclusion, I would like to say that I much prefer the Gothic period over any that I have encountered, in regards to architecture. In cathedrals such as Chartres and Salisbury and even Florence, I find an absolutely exquisite beauty not to be found in our ultra-modern and plastic coated present world. Abbot Suger, through his study of the Dionysian mysteries, planted the seed for some of the most elegant buildings of all time, and we in the present age owe him an extreme debt of gratitude. Truly, these buildings were more than a mixture of glass, stone, and metal. They were imbued with the spirit of an age, and were certainly worthy resting places for the veneration of the unseen and inspiring hand of God.

Bibliography

Wikipedia: Found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbot_Suger

Focillon, Henri. The Art of the West (vol. 2). Phaidon Press Ltd.: London and New York, 1963.

Touch

Touch
By
Varo Borja


I touch you
Broken you
Your essence
Marred magnificent
A child’s embrace
Soft downy cheeks
Baby
Touch me
Broken me
Shameful me
Falling, twisting
Turning pale oblique
The glass darkens
We see each other
In liquid
The womb
The grave
The ontology of you
The absolute
Suffer me to dream
And in the process
I will rise
I will cry
War
Touch them
The kiss of steel
Hard razor ripping revolution
Bloodshed bombastic fury
Fire, sword, famine
Death knows innumerable names
I will submit
I will supplicate
For the end
This time
Touch you
Feel you
Hold you closer than my own skin
Make a new life
Replenish the earth
Start again
Leave this town
Touch the limit
Touch the sun
Touch the hand of God
Tell Him that we hurt
Tell Him that we still need
A savior
Touch me and tell me
Everything
That I ever wanted to know
And all that is
Is that we’re going to be okay.

The Pharisees (An Essay)

The Pharisees

by

Varo Borja

In this essay I will attempt, in as brief a manner as possible, to define what a Pharisee was, how they came about, and the impact, or legacy they left from the time of Christ until today.

The word “Pharisee” comes from the Hebrew word, Chasidim or “pious ones”. The Pharisees, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, came into being somewhere in the middle of the 3^rd century B.C., or right around the time of the Maccabean revolt against Antiochus Epihphanes. Being born in revolt, the Pharisees were no strangers to a type of militaristic doctrine. The Pharisees, as apart from the chief priests, were stringent upholders of the law, written or oral. Many of their “laws” were codified in the Book of Jubilees; an apocryphal book of the Hebrew Bible. During the Seleucid implementation of the pagan rites in the sacred Temple in Jerusalem, the Pharisees were some of the most outspoken opponents to this policy. Antiochus Epiphanes, the Seleucid monarch, had tried to implement a violent process of Hellenization in the region of Judaea. He was supported by the Sadducees (the temple cult that welcomed everything Hellenistic, including philosophy and the building of gymnasia), but resisted bitterly by the Pharisees. Some Pharisees even suffered martyrdom for their convictions. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, some Pharisees were so devout that they let themselves be slaughtered on the Sabbath rather than lift a finger to defend themselves (any type of physical activity was expressly forbidden on the Sabbath).

Christ’s dealings with the Pharisees in the early 1^st century A.D. angered this sect to no end and was one of the direct causes of His death. In a quote from the Gospel of Matthew, Christ said "The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten in the chair of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say and do not. For they bind heavy and insupportable burdens, and lay them on men's shoulders; but with a finger of their own they will not move them. And all their works they do for to be seen of men. For they make their phylacteries broad, and enlarge their fringes. And they love the first places at feasts, and the first chairs in the synagogues. And salutations in the market place, and to be called by men, Rabbi" (Matt., xxiii, 1-8). Christ made several more scathing rebukes of the Pharisees (as well as the scribes and the Sadducees), calling them a nest of vipers and warning the multitude to “Beware of the leaven of the scribes and the Pharisees”. Extremely conservative as a rule, and haughty in their knowledge of the scriptures and their own “righteousness”, the Pharisees were confounded and deeply embarrassed by the Son of Jesse who called himself the Messiah, and the “Son of David”. Claims like these were reserved for what the Pharisees considered to be the savior of Israel from the Romans. The Pharisees, in their evolutionary process, had become deeply nationalistic and involved intrinsically in the politics of Palestine (Judaea), and sought a temporal solution to the woes of the Jewish nation. They firmly expected the wrath of God to deliver them from the Roman legions and restore the rule of their land to those most worthy to rule it: themselves. However, as opposed to the Zealots (a sect bent on armed rebellion against Rome; Simon Zealotas the disciple of Christ was one of these), the Pharisees had no taste for armed revolt. They much preferred for the hand of God to do it for them. Perhaps this is one reason why Jesus made statements like the quote above, and didn’t add, “beware of the leaven of the Zealots also”.

After the death of Jesus a new trend in the religio-political situation in Palestine came into being, with the Pharisees at the forefront. To quote the Catholic Encyclopedia, “After the conflicts with Rome (A.D. 66-135) Pharisaism became practically synonymous with Judaism. The great Machabean wars had defined Pharisaism: another even more terrible conflict gave it a final ascendancy. The result of both wars was to create from the second century onward, in the bosom of a tenacious race, the type of Judaism known to the western world.” Where the Sadducees had failed, the Pharisees succeeded. The Sadducees had been a totally exclusive class (or caste) of priests, with limited numbers and high (material) standards of entry. The Pharisees had always held the respect of the people for their seeming purity and unquestionable devotion to the law and the prophets, and welcomed any adherents to their doctrine. Also, the Pharisees had been inherently nationalistic in their ideals, and this appealed to the majority of the non-Christian, non-pagan population of Palestine. The Pharisees had always placed the spiritual before the material (in theory), and their belief in a resurrection and the eternal nature of the soul (as contrasted with the Sadducees who believed in neither) appealed strongly to a people who saw themselves in present bondage and gave them something to look forward to in the afterlife.

In conclusion, it would be important to note that some of the most prominent men in the New Testament were Pharisees. Nicodemus (John 3:1), Gamaliel (Acts 5:34), and Paul (Acts 26:5, Phil. 3:5) all were Pharisees, and not in least ashamed of it. Paul stated, according to the Zondervan Bible Pictorial Dictionary, “I am, in the matter of the Law, ‘a Pharisee’ (Phil. 3:5), he did not think of himself as a hypocrite but claims the highest degree of faithfulness to the Law. In similar manner, church leaders might say, ‘We are Pharisees’”. To quote this source again, “Much of modern scholarship, however, has cast the Pharisees in too favorable a light; when one reads our Lord’s heated denunciation of Pharisaism in Matthew, chapter 23, where He specifically lists their sins, one has not only a true but a dark picture of Pharisaism as it was at the time of Christ” (Zondervan Bible Pictorial Dictionary pg. 648). This statement, when compared with the present state of affairs in the modern nation of Israel, is all too true. Almost daily Palestinian men, women, and children are blown to bits or machine gunned down in the name of Jewish nationalism. The seeds for this type of conflict are very old, and the ancient sect of the Pharisees is very near the taproot.

Bibliography

The Zondervan Bible Pictorial Dictionary. Merril C. Tenney, Editor in Chief. Grand Rapids Michigan, 1963.

The Catholic Encyclopedia. Found at: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11789b.htm.

The New Oxford Annotated Bible (Revised Version. Edited by Herbert G. May and Bruce M. Metzger. New York, Oxford University Press, 1971.

Brainyquotes.com. Found at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/ariel_sharon.html