The Long Disputed Meaning Of Van Eyck's Painting (Waldemar Januszczak Documentary)

Subscribe and click the bell icon to get more arts content every week:
/ perspectivearts
New interpretations help answer the possible meanings and mysteries behind this painting. Experts explore whether van Eyck's painting symbolized a religious allegory, a disputed marriage or a simple wedding portrait.
Perspective is KZbin's home for the arts. Come here to get your fill of great music, theatre, art and much, much more!
From Every Picture Tells A Story
Content licensed from DRG to Little Dot Studios.
Any queries, please contact us at:
[e-mail]

[@13minutestomidnight]

That's the first explanation of this painting that actually makes sense of the emotional context. I couldn't figure out why other explanations struck me as off, but at the end of the episode it finally clicked that the expression on Arnoldfini's face was grief and pain. Even the religious conviction that is holding him together cannot hide his sadness. His wife always seemed to somehow be portrayed in a stereotypical renaissance pose for women, but now that makes sense too: she looks like a holy Madonna, caring for her unborn child with divine grace. Considering this interpretation, I don't think the title is wrong, though. "The Arnoldfini's marriage" seems perfect. He's pledging his eternal devotion to her, to remain married to her past her death. This is an intensely personal painting intended for one person. Van Eyck was incredibly talented.

[@themarquis336]

‘Arnoldfini’ 🤣😂😆

[@honeyvitagliano3227]

👏 yes👏

[@Jo_King...]

@@themarquis336 I'll be back, hopefully.

[@kiwitrainguy]

It was that religious conviction that probably stopped people from asking in public questions like "Why does God allow things like this (death in childbirth) to happen?" or "Why would a God that loves us bestow such misery and suffering upon us?" Advancements in medicine and living standards in general mean that those questions are not asked as often these days and as people realise that God did not bring about those advancements then religion has become less relevant to people.

[@joseffinat966]

Vraag mij af of het om haar eerste man gaat ,zij houd hem een beker voor ,een MAAT BEKER ? Als men hoofdstuk Amos erbij haalt kan men het ene met een ander verbinden 🤔

[@janemorrow6672]

Arnolfini’s raised right hand reminds me of the gesture of a priest making the sign of the cross as a blessing. ‘Go in peace’.

[@denisehill7769]

And to me, it looks like the palm is facing his wife's belly - that he is blessing the child she's carrying.

[@BalthasarCarduelis]

He looks like Reverend Runt from Barry Lyndon.

[@luciadilazzaro2285]

@@denisehill7769 but she isnt pregnant

[@denisehill7769]

@@luciadilazzaro2285 Maybe not, but the expectation (no pun intended!) was that this would be the normal course of events, alluded to in the statuette of St Margaret on the bedpost.

[@LambentOrt]

Agreed. The painting never looked like a "marriage" portrait. It's far too sombre. I also don't think they would've chosen to commemorate their marriage with her being so fully pregnant -- it would've been so scandalous. As a portrait of mourning, it makes much more sense. This new interpretation definitely answers many questions why the painting is so hauntingly moving.

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

@lambent "[C]ommemorate their marriage with her being so fully pregnant -- it would've been so scandalous." Yes, the pregnancy at the wedding had always baffled me.

[@cherias.4069]

@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 --A Commenter has posted that She was NOT "Pregnant" but rather, She was indeed holding up the very heavy cumbersome material of the long Gown Robes.✌

[@joseffinat966]

Op die ene schilderij heeft hij Roodhaar en een baard dus en bij deze heeft hij een hoed op zonder baard ,dus gelijk geschoren en geknipt bij die ene heeft hij geen hoed op maar wel rode baard 😂😂😂😂

[@larrygalbreath]

Excellent point!

[@let_uslunch8884]

Thank you for addressing stolen pieces in museums. I remember seeing this double portrait as a child and thinking it looked so weird but I couldn't stop trying to figure it out. I agree with the school of thought that it's a portrait in memorandum of Mrs. Arnolfini and that's it. What looked strange to me then about her I know now was her being idealized as an angelic figure after her death.

[@maggiemakgill]

He addresses it VERY badly as the painting was probably taken from French hands and NOT from the Spanish royal family (during the time of the British involvement in the peninsula war Spain had been conquered by France), because of the whole France forces the king of Spain and his son to abdicate and then Napoleon has himself and then his brother declared King of Spain. After the war was over, the Spanish Royal family got its throne back and had other things to worry about then missing paintings, the was had done a lot of damage.

[@edwinaldana2867]

It's also worth noting that the color used for the wife's dress is verdigris. This particular color was often used at the time but it was infamous for how it would end up fading with time. More than a couple of paintings from the time that used this color, unfortunately, show this faded shade instead of the one intended by the artist. Van Eyck actually had to sandwich the layers of this color with varnish in hopes that the color would stand the test of time (so far, it has!). Though, it could be argued, that knowing the risk of using this color, Van Eyck still decided to use it as a message that this image of life, of fecundity was bound to fade away eventually.

[@rameyzamora1018]

The memorial painting theory makes much sense. The picture always seemed dark, sad, cramped and unhappy to me. Now it makes sense why this never seemed like the depiction of a joyous event. Well done, well done.

[@constancemiller3753]

I always thought Arnolfini himself looked ill and unhappy. If she and their child had died it makes more sense. The fidelity of the dog at their feet makes more sense as well.

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

@@constancemiller3753 Exactly. I had always considered his apparent unhappiness to be more so than was simply necessary for a rigid, unmoving face to make it easier for the painter to paint ... especially at a wedding (unless it was a forced one) ... had never thought much of illness, though, but that's there too ... had always been confused why the pregnancy was so featured if sex wasn't supposed to happen until _after_ the wedding ... but the death of his wife and child seems to be the clue that brings much of the painting together.

[@jeff__w]

@@constancemiller3753 He looks ill and unhappy to me, also. He’s also not gazing at his wife, possibly because she really isn’t there-he seems lost in a sad reverie.

[@rickmcqueen8027]

Yeah he looks unhappy, but....... I wouldn't want to have lived in 1400s

[@dj7ply]

@@constancemiller3753 the dog is supposed to mean loyalty within renaissance paintings. Arnolfini's shoes being off illustrating his commitment, also parallels the symbolism of the dog.

[@oldwoman2121]

Waldemar Januszcek, we are so grateful you have given us these wonderful stories. We have been strictly quarantined since March 3. You make life far more pleasant and interesting. Thank you.

[@alexluba1]

Waldemar is one of the best curators = knowledgeble, funny, and most important = always understandable, not like those brits who afraid to open their mouths. Thanks a bunch!

[@rachelwise148]

He is still in his Mourning clothing. Very sad, but you see the love he had to make sure the painting was done by the best artist of his time. Excellent clip.

[@sandy-sagerabbitvintage2681]

This makes total sense. To me, this answers why he looks so sad. You can see pain in his eyes, but what does his raised hand mean? It reminds me of the hand gesture of a priest making the sign of the cross and saying "Go in peace". Is that true?

[@ΠαλιάΨυχή]

Yes, i think like you. I think this "gesta" is an hieratic one as the posture of both figures in the painting. Christ makes this gesture many times...go in peace. The priest in church makes this gesture "go in peace"...it's sad and at same time not - if you believe in life after death.

[@emsnewssupkis6453]

@@ΠαλιάΨυχή It is him blessing her.

[@therealnotanerd_account2]

I found a terrible problem in this episode: it is too short.

[@modofatak]

Episode;* it is too short

[@husseinarshad935]

@@modofatakI found a terrible problem in this episode: IT IS TOO SHORT ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

[@husseinarshad935]

@@modofatakI found a very nice thing in this episode: It is too short

[@husseinarshad935]

@@modofataktoo bad its a great episode but: It is too short

[@husseinarshad935]

@@modofatak This is a really nice episode although: It is too short

[@charliebarrow7086]

For me things just fell into place like a puzzle. I have a copy of this painting at home and never noticed that the chandelier behind Mrs Arnolfini did not have a candle burning but I alway noticed his sad and thoughtful face. It always seemed to me that he looked as though only his body was worldly but his spirit had long gone. Now I can relate to this painting in a different way, it has even more depth to me than before.

[@Luboman411]

Whoa! This was a marvelous explanation. I even got a little teary-eyed at the end. Now that I get this background info, the tinge of sadness that always hung over this painting has been cleverly contextualized. It also explains why Mr. Arnolfini is clad in all black, and why his face is so weird and impassive, like he's just finished crying and is trying to repress his anguish. He's in mourning. Incredible. I'll never see this painting the same way again. It's like the "Chaconne" of painting now.

[@Liutgard]

Except he's not in black. That gown is a brownish plum velvet, lined in brown fur. His hat is black though.

[@HopskotchBunny]

The perspectives you have brought to this are so fascinating to ponder. One can never look at this painting the same way again. Really appreciate all that you bring to this channel.

[@JoseEduardoNZ]

I have to say it again: I'm impressed by how good this channel and the narrator are. Bloody good stuff! I love it!

[@melanieohara6941]

Well done, Waldy-another intiguing episode. My “fave” so far!🌹

[@1911olympic]

What a gripping analysis. And in my view, quite possibly correct.

[@BorutPeterlinPhotography]

Excellent story and well done to Waldemar and the production team. Fantastic job! As an artist I'm for the first time inspired by the middle age art!

[@tullochgorum6323]

I find this theory convincing - it explains the melancholy tone of the painting and makes it much more poignant and meaningful. This is a bereaved husband re-committing his marriage to his much loved departed wife. The practical point I want to make is that as someone who had done a fair bit of bodywork, the NG's theory that Mrs Arnolfini isn't pregnant is absurd. The sway of her spine and her whole carriage make it clear that she is counterbalancing the weight of her protruding "bump". This reinforces Januszczak's point about the protective gesture of her left hand. Sometimes academics get so caught up in their theories that they can't see what's right in front of their eyes...

[@kaiduponte4091]

WOW, that is the best explanation yet-I wonder why so many experts don’t see that. Now I can’t unsee it.

[@curiousnomad]

Brilliant. The painting, the analysis, and the series. I’ll watch it over and over. And, in contrast to what I was taught - of course she’s pregnant.

[@josephpetrino1741]

I'll buy into that explanation.

[@gregrice3867]

Wow! Well considered and well researched and respectful and sensitive presentation Mr. Januszczak! Fine work. Thank you!

[@w3rkh0f67]

Thank you Waldemar Januszak, finally Mr Arnolfinis gesture and facial expression make sense. They were weird for a wedding.. very touching explanation and makes us recognise (again) so sharply how desensitised and fast lived we have become.. to commemorate her so elaborately after her demise.

[@waynem7634]

The Memorial painting explanation makes sense to me as there is so much symbolism in this painting. Thank you.

[@rookhoatzin]

By virtue of their creation paintings are always more than the image itself. So many stories to be discovered. This story is so deeply moving. And the story continues to unfold as so eloquently told. I've watched many of the Perspective documentaries, they've all been extremely informative and interesting. But this video is transformative, a story hidden by passing centuries and a lack of intellectual curiosity. Human frailty, human endurance, an unconsidered mystery. Great sleuthing.

[@JoseEduardoNZ]

Excellent short documentary. Excellent explanation. Yep, it does feel like it is mistery solved to me. I have this painting and its meaning as an open question since the first documentary I saw almost 30 years ago. This explanation is settled to me. Thank you. Did I say I am impressed by this channel? Well, I truly am.

[@srothbardt]

This guy is great. He makes it all fascinating and dramatic, which it is, of course.

[@mkrowenp]

I love the mysterious art and their artists - could we have an episode about Hieronymus Bosch?!

[@timclemons8719]

They made an episode on Bosch!!!

[@mkrowenp]

@@timclemons8719 omg! did they?! I'll search through their history, thank you so much! Bosch's pieces have really fascinated me!

[@QueenBee-gx4rp]

@@mkrowenp Me, too.

[@jryecart8017]

the shirt on Waldemar ....

[@RichardASalisbury1]

One of the things that has always struck me about his painting is the paleness of the husband's unsmiling face, with his eyes partly closed and partly downcast, and the darkness of his clothing: gray, brown, black. He looks almost lifeless--depressed--a figure of mourning.

[@joseffinat966]

Hij heeft moeite met toegeven wat liefde Eigelijk voor hem kan betekenen,dat houdt in zich niet kwetsbaar opstellen geen volledige controle meer hebben over zijn leven, wat een logische conclusie is want je deelt jouw leven met iemand ( helft maar dat geldt net zo voor die ander ook de helft dat maakt als het goed is een heel mens ( eenheid ) ja en veel daarvan zul je moeten schipperen ,op zich is dat geen probleem als men beseft dat het om het schip gaat waar zij beiden op zitten en heel aan willen komen 🙏

[@MoiraOBrien]

What a fascinating story. The theory that this is a memorial makes so much sense that I am sure that it is the right one. I found the explanation of the symbolism in the paintings to be quite fascinating as well. Thank you so much for sharing this.

[@suewalksthebluffs]

Thank you for debunking the ‘she’s not pregnant, it’s just the drape of the dress’ hypothesis. Surely any woman who has carried a child would agree that the woman is pregnant. Your evaluation of the scene seems spot on and provides a much better context for his vacant stare and dark surroundings.

[@silvasilvasilva]

To be fair, the person who painted it was never pregnant, so that particular experience shouldn't count for much here. Also, I wouldn't dismiss the hard work of specialists at the NG as myths ready to be debunked (personally I find his gotcha atittude a tad annoying - his interpretation is no more than that, but he seems to believe otherwise). As with most things in the distant past, we probably will never know for sure. Acknowledging that truth makes for far more interesting conversations about art and history.

[@nelle6610]

I'm a fashion historian and have made a few dresses of this time period. Most of the dresses of the period make you look pregnant as they are tight over the bust and loose over the waist. This was for practical reasons, as women were pregnant more often and the cost of fabric was so expensive it was impractical to have a wardrobe specificly for when you were pregnant. Women of the sister's class have dresses that pooled onto the floor around their feet (some as much as 6 inches past the wears feet!) So to be able to get around a woman would have to hold up the front of her skirts, like the sitter was doing. The portrait also was painted during what Historians refer to as "The Little Ice Age" where it was rarely above freezing for much of the year. In order to stay warm people wore many layers of wool. This woman would not have been doing any labor, probably rarely walking, so she would require more layers to stay warm. From what I am able to see and know to be worn at the time she would be wearing a linen shift, a supportive kirtle made of linen buckram. A woolen kirtle (probably red, believed to promote the health of "delicate" ladies), woolen or silk hoes (socks) tied under the knee with a ribbon or garter, a blue wool kirtle either entirely lined or edged with white fur, and the green woolen overgown which appear to be fully lined in white fur. That is not getting into any of her Headwear. This would be VERY heavy. I can tell you from wearing something similar, your stance changes. The fact that she is holding up her skirt in her arms is going to make it look even more "pregnant". The skirt is very heavy and she would have to move her hips forward and upper body back to support the weight of the skirts in her arms unless she would want to rely on her arm strength entirely. This woman would have likely had very little strength due to her status and her family being able to pay staff to do most task for her. So holding up her skirts would be incredibly difficult and very heavy for what she would be accustomed to.

[@pistolannie6500]

@@nelle6610 I agree. Looking at the waist... there is a belt about her waist, &...the material, is Flat hanging down from under the belt... Not starting to curve out! I believe also, that "maybe", she could have been holding up the front of the skirt to show... that not only were they wealthy enough for such LONG sleeve trimmed in all that fur, BUT.... also the INSIDE of Her SKIRT lined in it! Left pooled down on the floor... we wouldn't see that. Also, I believe the painting was finished, AFTER she died. Divide the painting in Half..... HIS Side: signs of LIFE/Living things..... Light; fresh living fruit; 1 Lit Candle (in the chandelier above them); the little pictures around the mirror on his side... show the Life of Jesus. HER Side: Darker, NO Lit candle (as if saying... HER Life, no longer shown. The pictures around the mirror on Her side are of Jesus, Death. The Bed: most say it was also a "sign" of "wealth "....."that they put them even in their living rooms to show they could afford it". But... I think It TOO was another sign of her death; The DOG @ her Feet... another sign of death, as they were (thought) too "guide the deceased". There is something sad in the demeanor. And it was Not uncommon to do pictures of those that had died. (Your thoughts?)

[@louisacapell]

@@nelle6610 yes!! This guy is giving a less educated opinion. He doesn't understand fashion history. He's plain old wrong. Everything in this painting screams wealth wealth wealth. Extravagant dress showing off lining. All the things in the home. This whole show is silly. Ooohhh look, there's a bed ! Just like the other painting, ooohhh look,there's a candle by the bed! No dude, that's just how homes were set up then. Most would look like that. I have a stove in my kitchen , and I'd wager so do LOTS of women. This means nothing.

[@pistolannie6500]

@@louisacapell lol... I'm really NOT impressed w/this guy... He talks TOO FAST....his "presentations just seems a bit "disorderly"(?). I get nothing from watching him, except confused & tired. lol

[@tomasiturralde4705]

This beautiful painting really stops you in your tracks and make you stare at it and wonder. It says something about a marriage, yet the grim and sad expression of the groom contradicts the supposedly joyous occasion and that makes me wonder why. Some reviews mention the reflection in the mirror, the slippers etc but your more detailed and interesting explanation poke the curiosity out of me and knowing now what you've so far theorize , I'll have to look at it from a different perspective and truly appreciate this work of art for what it is in that period. Your investigative explanation of this famous painting by Jan van Eyck is quite incredible.

[@aiferapple1246]

Aaaargghhh! I can't believe I walked past the National Gallery last Summer I didn't know one of my favourite works of art was right there

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

@...apple Same. I walked past it many times and only went in the 5th or 6th time I was in London. I thought "portrait gallery" meant there would mostly be paintings of prime ministers I knew nothing about ... and was so happily surprised when I came across one of my own likewise favourite paintings.

[@aiferapple1246]

@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 I'm heading straight back there when things are more normal :)

[@robertfeeley9738]

You can tell by the treatment of the wife that the painting is all about her. Thank you so much for the beautiful and sad picture.

[@MelanCholy2001]

Oh! Now I know why I've been quite fond of Arnolfini and his bride! I like it. MAKE IT LONGER! 😇

[@HannaARTzink]

Beautiful, passionate, investigative... Thank you.

[@helpyourcattodrive]

Where Waldemar goes, I go. Thank you for all the wonderful art education videos. They mean so much to me.

[@goodboybuddy1]

Wonderful explication of a wonderful painting. So glad I stayed.

[@joseffinat966]

Stay ,had al een stok gevonden bij het Hemelrijk en meegenomen naar huis om het een fijne wandelstok van te maken Eigelijk zo een als Waldemar had ( ja er bestaat ook een hemelrijk op aarde ( Drenthe ook waar de hunebedden zijn 🥰 echt waar

[@noeraldinkabam]

It was not a perception, it was a fact: until well in to the 20th century pregnancyand giving birth was fatal for loads of women.

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

@Valerie Mac Fair @Noeraldin Kabam I'm chuckling because I kind of agree with both of you.

[@rockyroad7345]

This has been one of my favorite paintings since I studied Art History in school nearly 50 years ago, and I love now it even more. The face of Arnolfini has always haunted me and now I see why that might have been so. Thank you for a beautiful critique.

[@andrewfrost8866]

Wow! How insightful is this?!

[@keesgeldhof3872]

Your theory explains everything! I always thought that the bride looked idealised. She looks like an angel. Not like a real woman. I think that Van Eyck never met the bride in real life. So he painted an angel. Compare it with angels on his other paintings. On the contrary Arnolfini himself looks like a real person. Thanks!!

[@bridgetdavis9752]

This is so fascinating. As for wiping out the furry creatures, there was a mini ice age going on at the time, and you will see a lot of fur in many paintings during this time.

[@michelleroman4760]

Absolutely, fascinating painting!

[@jamesneilsongrahamloveinth1301]

Could it be that the painting was commissioned and worked on while Mrs Arnolfini was alive and completed after her death . . . ?

[@mariagunnarsQ17]

It's certainly a possibility. Such a sad story :(

[@k_eva1219]

Another documentary (forgot which) made a note of how angelic and ideal the woman's face is, almost like a porcelain doll. In other words, it does not look as unique as others in Van Eyck's portraits. This is another reason to believe that she had died and therefore her face is idealised as opposed to sketched while she was alive.

[@let_uslunch8884]

This is way I think it's a portrait in memory of Mrs. Arnolfini. Mr. Arnolfini is in front of the window and has the light from the candelabra above him but it's Mrs. Arnolfini without the candelabra, somewhat blocked by her husband in front of the window, and is standing further in the room yet she has the most light shone upon her. I think it's to signify ascension. It's a celebration of their marriage which Jan van Eyke witnesses and her death which he also may have witnessed. He was there...

[@splodge5714]

A wonderful painting, so much detail to be enjoyed up close. Also worth looking at the self portrait hanging next to it in the National Gallery.

[@furrystep]

Waldemar is top curator and sleuth. And narrator! Love the mystique.

[@timtaylor8406]

Brilliant exposition and exposé.... how interesting and plausible.

[@pertelote4526]

I am so happy I have come across your fascinating channel! I am going to do my long overdue "homework" during Christmas and learn about various works of art :-) Thank you!

[@chessdad182]

She is thinking I wish I had central heating, hot and cold running water, a refrigerator, and a washing machine. He is thinking we cannot afford it.

[@petermaxwell2965]

I first saw this when i was younger and loved it, 50years later i still do,

[@mendyboio3917]

fabulous, wonderful, your programs are very captivating. You make art so interesting and fun!

[@vaniberi8189]

Very moving explanation indeed! Thank you...

[@essejd]

Totally subscribed 👍. Excellent. Loved your version💐

[@koelschejung1964]

Thank you for a really brave look at this great painting. Having seen it many times and myself wondered about the meaning, it eventually makes sense, even if I am still on the search for a good interpretation of the people in the mirror.

[@saradecapua3264]

I never thought of this painting as a memorial. That may explain the emptiness I sense in his expression.

[@Trp44]

Your delivery is a delight.

[@antoinegiasson3185]

Great insight in Van Eyck's painting

[@wskroll]

This video is simply brilliant!

[@andyroo9381]

I loved this presentation.

[@nagolhayze9366]

That explaining dude is awesome .... wow what an inspirational and insightful narrative. Excellent and whatnot

[@mininovaband]

I love that the wife is in green. Beautiful gesture.

[@teresakoslosky3053]

Wow thank you for explaining this art piece!

[@ericashmusic8889]

I was a draughtsman for 55yrs. I have also studied this painting many times + sectional enlargements in various books. The chandelier is an absolute masterpiece of perspective drawing, I finally concluded, it must have been created with or by, some type of mirror or reflective device- that is to say it would have been next to impossible to eyeball copy , as artistes normally do...it is simply too good to be true. I also discovered over the time I studied it, that Jan v' Eyck's having a little fun in the image, cute but it's there. It is suggested it was as a posthumous gesture ( silly idea ) It was painted before she died. ( Everything is posthumous after the event. ) Women in that time period often died in childbirth, so in my view, Alnofini- just simply took the precaution of an " us together" painting ; the fact it demonstrates his wealth was incidental. Everyone dresses up for a photo-shoot.

[@janemorrow6672]

It made me think about the reflections in the mirror. If I was van Eyke I would have wanted them to reveal something of the story. Who would be coming to the room? A doctor? A midwife? An undertaker?

[@nineteenfortyeight6762]

God and Jesus.

[@kidnap2010]

In the mirror, the third party is Van Eyck himself, when you paint people, in a room, you are yourself in the room, so it make sense to represent a far and tiny yourself painting, but so discretely, in the far away mirror.

[@jowoodfield5929]

Thank you, for such an insightful exploration of this masterpiece….

[@o.h.d.4516]

Brilliant explanation. Very compelling story and facts too. Superb

[@AG-cg7lk]

What a fantastic review. Quick question to the experts: I know that a lot has been proposed about the prayer beads hanging on the wall, the number of beads etc, but is it possible that the beads represent a (secret) crisis of faith following the loss of his wife in childbirth? she has hung up her brush, symbolising her end to keeping their family home, and he has hung up his prayer beads.

[@nirupmaanand2315]

Thanks so very much !

[@Ivy_1057]

Thank you!

[@davidmellon55]

I like it! The thing that backs up the dead wife theory the most for me, is -- comparing the husband's face to the wife's face. Not simply the inexplicable expression of grief he has. It is that his face is much more beautifully rendered than hers is. I believe it is because Mr. Arnolfini posed for the painter. The wife's face lacks those fine particulars. Not bad, just a little more generic looking. As if to say the wife was unavailable. Who knows. Such a great painting. And mystery only adds to the bliss.

[@joseffinat966]

Soms teveel mysterie vaak wordt het opgelost wanneer toeval het wil of bestaat er geen toeval ik denk het laatste maar zoeken of toeval geen toeval is kost veel tijd VAN LEVEN WILDEMAR ,waarom komt men pas op het laatst erachter hoe kostbaar het leven is in liefde ECHTE LIEFDE ,waar ieder mens naar verlangt om zich een volledig mens te voelen ,wij verknoeien zoveel tijd aan onzinnige zaken ,denk wat er nu zoal passeert oorlog ,ander geweld ,pas als het er niet meer is komt berouw ,daarom streef ik naar geweldloosheid, vrede, accepteren van elkaar dat wij in wezen allemaal gelijk zijn ,er is geen mislukte schepping geweest ,alléén overheersers zoals beschreven in Ephezier Wereldbeheersers en met liefde kan men hun verslaan blijf altijd in het licht van liefde staan verwar het niet met seksuele uitspattingen maar liefde is het enigste die kan en mag OVERHEERSEN ( STAY)

[@janekennaway8008]

So good. Thanks.

[@spanglestein66]

Love WJ’s explaining art and the symbolism there in. Lovely stuff

[@debbralehrman5957]

A very interesting perspective on this picture.

[@craigadams4143]

Fascinating 🕵️🕵️🕵️🕵️🕵️....also liked seeing you in some colorful clothing. Loved that hint of color peaking out from your black coat-shirt....🙌

[@psalmsreader7997]

I like your interpretation, was hoping that you would talk about that carved wooden figure that appears just above their hands placed on the back wall.

[@kathleenbrady9916]

My favourite art historian

[@bluefish4064]

To me it is a reflection as in the mirror reflecting the viewers too of a marriage, not a wedding . A life spent together with all the domestic trappings and spiritual devices of a wholesome couple of the time . Fidelity represented by the dog , fertility in the ripening fruit etc . Yet with all this stuff and stability and piety, children were denied them and the death of his young wife could not be prevented.

[@newkan]

I find it interesting that the light from the window casts a shadow with an angle of eleven on a summer morning on an overcast day since there is no harshness to the light. The room is thus facing west, just my guess.

[@lichtloper]

exquisite work

[@feralbluee]

Thank you - finally an explanation which makes sense. I knew she was pregnant - how could she not be?! what always puzzled me was the expression on his face - certainly not a happy one. it is sad and empty. I do wonder about the couple in the mirror - they are entering the room. also why is his hand raised in that position - a benediction? now you really have me wondering. excellent - thank you so much 🍒🍎

[@bigjohnknew]

Waldy never shies away from the true provenance of an artwork even if it may not be in the best interests of the national gallery. You have to respect him

[@zelica333]

Another clue is the way the melancholic man holds the ladies unresponsive hand, the way you might hold a dead lovers hand. A great series.

[@teruroberto]

Amazing! Thank you so much!

[@carolking6355]

Thank you .

[@ErikBongers]

Belgian here. Yes, that makes much more sense. (not that I'm an expert because I happen to be Belgian)

[@tehnoobgamer]

At 22:15 , Waldemar pointed out the pattens signifying Mr. Arnolfini's eternal devotion to his wife. Oh, God. What a man.

[@sallys4474]

Brilliant analysis. Victorians took photographs of dead loved ones.

[@constancemiller3753]

Not only 'death portrait' but actually putting dead loved ones in photos with the living. See a movie called Photographing Fairies. It depicts how this was done for the parents of a young soldier killed in WW1.

[@mzjamm2]

If you had seen the series "A Stich in Time". They made a copy of the Arnolfini green dress. It was decided what specifically the painting was expressing besides great wealth. If you had seen how the dressed flowed you would understand how heavy the dress was to carry. If it wasn't picked up you couldn't walk. The end.

[@jilldavies7094]

But she's not walking anywhere, so there's no need for her to hold the dress up.

[@cerenaseawell5753]

Amazing. Glorious. Thank you.

[@LaPinturaBella]

I think this interpretation is correct. The symbolism is all there. As a "wedding" painting, it has always struck me as depressing and unhappy.

[@terenzo50]

I've often wondered: Why the long face on the fellow? Ms. Koster wraps it up nicely for me.

[@bazbarrett8103]

Here on the WINdow sill....great

[@georgepetroff867]

An excellent informative presentation, thanks.

[@kmaggie924]

Still not convinced of a pregnancy but this was an interesting look into the presenter’s thoughts about this painting.

[@jordikore1974]

Teoría interesantísima y que nunca había escuchado. Me parece , si más no, muy curiosa y , como tantas otras, con argumentos creibles.

[@andyskelton7223]

Waldemar you are a Genius.

[@donovanmedieval]

It's obviously a wedding picture. Look at those happy faces.

[@ian1609]

I've not seen this painting before but this was hugely informative and made me think about meanings as part of my own Christian faith. It's true that without a basic knowledge of the bible our European history is incomplete but let me add a few things that I noticed. If it is indeed a painting in memory of his wife I also think it is a picture of hope. That one day we will be reunited. The way they hold hands is not the holding of hands of those in love but rather odd - the wife's hand turned out rather like depictions of Christs crucified hands. A connection to Christ as well as his wife's perhaps. It's also odd that the mirror isn't a true reflection as their hands are not shown as together. Could this be a mirror to happier times when they were married and the witnesses also attended. So in effect the picture depicts both the marriage and the memorial. This might explain the painters - I was here motif. Also the use of colour - with the wife's white headdress (the symbol of purity) contrasted with the red (the blood of Christ who redeems us) as opposed to the dark colours of the husband (black being the colour of death).