Rembrandt the thinker:
The structural conception of Rembrandt's
early pictures
|
|
|

The Good Samaritan
1633
|
Goethe gave his brief description of an etching, The Good Samaritan, the
title "Rembrandt the thinker", thereby characterizing with a word Rembrandt's
early period of creativity. After only a year's apprenticeship with van Swanen-burgh,
the painter, and half a year's study with Pieter Lastman in Amsterdam, the
19-year-old Rembrandt set up on his own in Leiden, his birthplace, in a studio
which he shared with Jan Lievens, his friend and colleague, who was a year
younger. The reputation of the unconventional young artists spread rapidly. They
were honoured with a visit from, among others, Constantijn Huygens, the
secretary of the governor, Prince Frederik Hendrik, who was later to become an
important patron for Rembrandt. Co-operation with Hendrik Uylenburgh, the
Amsterdam art dealer, developed. Commissions from this direction multiplied, and
by 1630 Rembrandt was working predominantly in the up-and-coming city. In 1633,
the year of the previously mentioned etching, he became engaged to Saskia van
Uylenburgh, the art dealer's niece.
Rembrandt almost casually added a few more figures to the scene illustrated in
The Good Samaritan, despite their being unmentioned in the Gospel account. The
crucial element in Goethe's observation consists in the fact that he sees not
only the principal characters but also these minor figures as all bound up in a
closely woven plot structure, one from which the depicted event can be
completely reconstructed as a contemporary situation. Goethe demonstrates in his
description how a dramatic plot structure is created in the static pictorial
scene through the constellation of the figures, their attitudes and expressions,
and acknowledges the structural conception of this artist's pictures in
"Rembrandt the thinker". Questions of structural conception within his pictures
were to accompany Rembrandt's work to the end; in his early creative period,
however, his attention was devoted exclusively to them.
|
|

The Martyrdom of St.Stephen
1625
|
| |
The Martyrdom of St.Stephen is Rembrandt's earliest extant painting. The
victim of the stoning is hemmed in by many figures making vigorous, extended
movements. As if the close-packed nature of the crowd were not enough, the
artist has squeezed the faces of background figures into every small space left
by the foreground figures. Various forms, likewise present at the spectacle, are
portrayed close to the central group. The whole picture is characterized by the
turbulence of a scene filled with many figures, along with the dramatic
expression of tumult, violence and pain. Although this is only his first
picture, the young painter is already presenting himself in a profession which
was considered at that time to be the hardest and was correspondingly highly
regarded. It was a question here of whether the artist was capable of mastering
not only every possibility of spatial depiction — landscape and architecture —
but also, equally, animal and human anatomy in every conceivable posture, wever,
the "history painter" was judged primarily according to the degree
of success with which he used facial expression and gesture to
characterize the particular emotional mien of the figures as
stipulated by the event in question -what was called at the time the
"passions".
It is in accordance with this that a further work from the early
period, Christ Driving the Money-changers from the Temple,
is restricted to the passions of the figures, to the expression of
anger, terror, pain and avarice. These qualities of expression are
emphasized in an extremely clear manner, as a result of which some
of the expressions have taken on a grimace-like appearance.
|
| |

Christ Driving the Money-changers from the Temple
1626
|
| |
The same extreme effect may be observed of the passions in the
scene entitled The Ass of Balaam Balking before the Angel.
The painting is concerned with the Old Testament account (Numbers
22) in which the prophet Balaam is instructed by Balak, King of the
Moabites, to curse the Israelites. While on his way to the King,
Balaam's path is blocked by the angel of the Lord, who is noticed by
the prophet's donkey, but not by the man. When Balaam attempts to
drive on his donkey with blows, the hesitating beast is given the
gift of speech. The Lord opens Balaam's eyes, and he perceives the
angel. Instead of cursing the chosen people, he blesses them and
announces future victories for them.
|

The Ass of Balaam Balking before the Angel
1626
Oil on panel, 63 x 46,5 cm
Musee Cognacq-Jay, Paris
|
| |
Rembrandt took over the scenery to a considerable extent from a
picture by Pieter Lastman. However, the gestures in his own painting
are much more forceful: the hand holding the stick is raised to a
more threatening position, the donkey has pulled her head further
back, and her jaws are open wider. The angel with the uplifted sword
has been moved right up to the raging prophet, as are Balaam's
companions, who are observing the scene. The movements of the
figures cover the entire picture. The violent gesture of the raised
arm and the features of the prophet, contorted with the strain,
remove all doubt with regard to whether a blow will in fact be
struck and where it will land. In the same way, the angel's gesture
communicates the fact that his sword, once set in motion, is capable
of parrying Balaam's stick and thereby protecting the donkey from
the unjust blow. Lastman's picture portrays the point in the scene
where the animal speaks, thus depicting the actual occurrence of the
miracle. Rembrandt intensifies the situation further by
characterizing this point in time as the moment in which the highest
possible unfolding of movement takes place.
A general survey of the scenic creations from the Leiden years
and the initial Amsterdam period produces the realization that
almost all of Rembrandt's portrayals of events are conceived at the
climax of their external action. This can be seen in the "histories"
both from mythology, such as The Abduction of Proserpine,
and from the Bible, such as Christ in the Storm on the Lake of
Galilee. This principle is pushed to the extreme in the
scenes The Angel Stopping Abraham from Sacrificing Isaac to
God and The Blinding of Samson. The intention
of the artist in depicting the climax of external action can only be
to achieve the utmost vividness in the presentation of the event;
the observer is to become an eye-witness, and thereby directly
experience the event for himself. In doing this, Rembrandt does not
shy away from drastic motifs. In The Sacrifice of Isaac,
the angel has seized Abraham's arm, which was already raised to kill
his son. The old man is turning round in the utmost grief and
terror; his hand has opened and the knife, intended for the exposed
neck of his son, is falling to the ground. In The Blinding of
Samson, we are shown with agonizing meticulousness the
manner in which a Philistine driving a dagger into the hero's eye
causes the blood to spurt forth.
|

The Abduction of Proserpine
1631
|

Christ in the Storm on the Lake of Galilee
1633
|

The Angel Stopping Abraham from Sacrificing Isaac to God
1635 Oil on canvas, 193 x 133 cm The Hermitage, St. Petersburg
|
|

Abraham and Isaac
1645
|
We are concerned in both of these cases with a violation of the
static nature of the picture. An examination of the way in which
knife and blood are depicted reveals that they can only be in free
fall: the position of the knife makes no sense unless we understand
it as in motion. The form taken by this motif of free fall compels
the observer to imagine movement taking place. Yet a more protracted
examination of the picture renders the actual motionlessness of the
knife and of the drops of blood grotesque. They contradict the real
course of events. And it is clear that this contradiction will
become all the more striking, the longer the picture is studied. The
drastic means through which Rembrandt wishes to render what is
portrayed in the picture so emphatically comprehensible as motion,
happening, action, simultaneously reveals the fact that the picture
can merely help the observer to imagine the intended course of
events in his mind's eye; it cannot enable him to actually see them
in the reality of the picture.
A limitation of the picture is indicated here, one which can be
regarded as self-evident. Since the painted picture is naturally
without movement, it would seem that the course of events depicted
therein would necessarily belong to a different reality than that of
the picture itself. This is one of the arguments put forward for
regarding the pictorial world as merely appearance and distancing it
from the reality of an event involving movement. By intensifying his
scenes as far as the climax of the external action, the young
Rembrandt is pushing at the limits of pictorial art. However, those
scenes of his which are full of wild movement argue that he refuses
to recognize these limits, that he will break through them - by
force, if need be. It is instructive to see the painter beginning in
his early work at precisely the point where the possibilities
offered by painting end. He was nonetheless to hold for all of his
creative life to the principle of depicting events and processes,
always presenting them at their climax. This indicates one of the
fundamental artistic problems with which he was to struggle
unceasingly. It is important to stress the fundamental nature of
this problem, since we will observe in the following how Rembrandt
was ultimately to resolve the apparently inevitable contradiction
between the motionlessness of a picture and the temporal nature of a
dramatic event - with every consequence both for the prior
understanding characterized here of pictorial reality and for
observation itself.
The works cited above already demonstrate the first important signs
in this direction. The structural conception of these scenes does
not limit the observer solely to the here-and-now of a rapidly
passing event. Other measures are added to that previously mentioned
of extreme climax: allusions are made to what has gone before and
what will follow.
|
|
|
_________________________
_________________________
|
| |
Rembrandt:
The Blinding of Samson, 1636
God's champion defeated in the
war of the sexes
|

The Blinding of Samson
1636
Oil on canvas, 236 x 302 cm
Städelsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt
|
| |
Samson was famous for his inordinate strength; only the help of a
woman enabled his enemies to take him prisoner. His story is told in
the Old Testament Book of Judges. Samson, too, was a judge, a leader
among the people of Israel.
At that time, the enemies and oppressors of the Jews were the
Philistines. Before his birth, an angel of the Lord had appeared to
Samson's parents to tell them what God intended with their son: "For
the child shall be a Nazerite unto God from the womb: and he shall
begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines." They
were also instructed never to cut his hair.
As ill-luck had it, Samson grew up and fell in love with a
Philistine girl, asking her to become his wife. The Old Testament
explains that his unruly behaviour was directed by God: seeking an
opportunity to incite animosity between the people of Israel and
their Philistine oppressors, God had influenced Samson's feelings.
Samson provoked a quarrel by telling a riddle, promising 30 changes
of garment to the bride's 30 companions if they could solve it. Her
companions then forced the young woman to entice the solution from
Samson. Samson kept his secret until she used her strongest weapon:
"thou ... lovest me not."
On discovering that he had been de-cieved, the "Spirit of the Lord
came upon him, and he went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of
them, and took their spoil, and gave change of garments unto them
which expounded the riddle."
The Bible mentions three women in Samson's life. The first was his
wife, or fiancee, whom his father-in-law refused him after the
slaughter in Ashkelon, giving her to his companion instead. The
second was a "harlot" in Gaza. Getting wind of Samson's visit to
her, the Philistines decided to lie in wait for him at the gate of
the city and kill him in the morning. But Samson arose at midnight
and, tearing out the doors and the two posts of the city gate, he
set them down - to the disgrace of his enemies - on top of a hill.
Only the third woman is given a name: Delilah. Samson loved her, but
the lords of the Philistines bribed her. Her task was to find out
the secret of Samson's great strength. In return "we will give thee
every one of us eleven hundred pieces of silver." Three times her
lover gave her the wrong information, until she too began to express
her doubts over Samson's love. The big man's resistance was finally
broken: "If I be shaven", he confided in her, "then my strength will
go from me." So "she made him sleep upon her knees; and she called
for a man, and she caused him to shave off the seven locks of his
head ... and the Philistines took him, and put out his eyes."
The Book of Judges does not explain why God allowed the defeat of
his "Nazerite". Commentators have pointed out that Samson had ceased
to obey the Ten Commandments. Nonetheless, the tables were
eventually turned when Samson, blind and bound, was brought forth
and subjected to ridicule at a Philistine festival. In the meantime,
his hair had grown, and, praying to the Lord to give him back his
old strength, he braced himself against two pillars, toppling them
and bringing the whole house down on top of himself and thousands of
Israel's enemies.
|
| |
Samson conforms to the Calvinist outlook
|
|

The Blinding of Samson (detail)
|
| |
Rembrandt painted five scenes from Samson's life, all of which,
for different reasons, have ended up in German museums. The pious
couple receiving God's message from his angel and Samson telling his
riddle at the wedding feast can be admired at the Dresdner
Gemaldegalerie. In a painting executed in 1635, now at
Ber-lin-Dahlem, Samson shakes his fist at his father-in-law, who
refuses to let him marry his daughter. Also in Dahlem, Samson
Betrayed by Delilah (1628) shows the hero asleep with his head on
Delilah's lap. Finally, The Blinding of Samson (1636), measuring 205
x 272cm, belongs to the Sta-del Museum in Frankfurt.
All Rembrandt's pictures of Samson were painted between 1628 and
1641. For more than a decade, the artist was preoccupied with the
strange figure of a muscle-man, one of God's "chosen" who stood out
from the rest of his people mainly because of his great strength and
boorish insolence. The Bible makes no mention of intelligence, or
spiritual qualities.
The decade in question was in the first half of Rembrandt's life
(1606-1669), so that the young artist may simply have been
fascinated by Samson's superhuman feats of strength and defiance of
convention. Hercules, on the other hand, no less popular a superman,
would not have been a suitable hero: Rembrandt's upbringing had been
Calvinist, and Calvin's doctrine was a powerful influence on
religious sentiment in the new state of the Netherlands, so that not
only were dancing, music and luxury proscribed and the Catholic
Church fought at every turn, but also reference to heathen antiquity
was considered improper. Dr Tulp, a figure painted by Rembrandt, had
publicly raised his voice against the exhibition of antique gods at
festive processions. Hercules was popular, but unacceptable.
However, the artist's relative youth can hardly be deemed sufficient
explanation for his choice of subject matter. It was the fact that
the story of Samson complied with the Calvinist view of the world
that tipped the balance in his favour. Yahweh, the God of the Jews,
was the real leader and ruler of Samson's people. It was Yahweh who
took away Samson's strength, and who also gave it back to him.
Calvin's view of the world was very similar to that expressed in the
Old Testament: God, the ruler, made his will known through the
Bible, determining all morality and politics. Whoever did not obey
was, like Samson, cruelly punished. Unlike Luther, the French
Reformer did not conceive of God as a God of love and mercy, but as
a hard-hearted overlord. Calvin propagated intolerance towards those
who broke his strict moral code, or disobeyed church rules.
Offenders were condemned to death or forced into exile. Over 50
death sentences can be traced back to Calvin's instigation.
There is another sense in which the figure of Samson complies with
the Calvinist outlook: predestination was a tenet of the Reformer's
doctrine, and Samson was "a Nazente unto God from the womb". For
even before his birth, an angel had told Samson's parents what his
task and status were to be. The "Book of Judges" tells the full
story. If the notion of predestination is applied generally, rather
than to God's chosen few, then even Delilah was not only a
money-grabbing traitress, but an instrument of the Lord.
|
| |
The pleasures of terror and cruelty
|
| |

The Blinding of Samson (detail)
|
| |
The helmets which Rembrandt sets on his Philistines' heads were
rarely used in armed conflict by 1636. In fact, they resemble
so-called Burgundian "pot-helmets", worn a century earlier. The same
type of helmet turns up in several other "works by Rembrandt, from
which we may tentatively infer that it either belonged to the
artist's collection of costume props, or was perhaps worn
decoratively by members of militia companies on representative
occasions. Realistic representation was not necessarily the aim of
"history painting" in Rembrandt's time. Old Testament figures, for
example, were often portrayed clothed in contemporary Turkish dress.
Like Samson's people, the Netherlander were fighting a national
liberation struggle against a powerful enemy. The country had fallen
to Spain by inheritance, and Philip II had sent the Duke of Alba
from Madrid to bind the Netherlandish provinces more closely to his
empire. Alba's rule was dra-conian and vicious, provoking open
resistance to his authority. It was not until 1648, however, that
the Dutch northern provinces were granted independence, so that
Rembrandt's Blinding, executed in 1636, was painted against a
background of war. The fighting itself made little impact on
Amsterdam, where the artist lived, for the warring parties had
filled their ranks with mercenaries, and the battles were fought
elsewhere. Nonetheless, the mercenaries were forced to feed
themselves from what they could find in the countryside. The
devastation by marauding armies experienced by the neighbouring
German lands during the Thiry Years' War had demonstrated what lay
in store for the Netherlandish civilian population. As if all this
were not enough, reports of torture carried out by the Spanish
authorities struck fear into the hearts and minds of the people.
At the time, atrocities of the kind shown in Rembrandt's painting
were a good deal more widespread than is the case in central Europe
today. They were more frequently painted, too, especially in Rome,
Naples and Spain. Many of these works showed martyrs stretched on
the rack or the wheel, or being stoned, beaten or stabbed to death.
The illustration of martyrdom was part of Counter-Reformation
propaganda: its function was to glorify the saints, and prepare
priests for possible death. This, at least, was the official line.
However, besides church propaganda and the very real atrocities of
the age, there seems also to have been a genuine need during the
Baroque for depictions of Man's cruelty to Man; it is a need that is
difficult to explain. Perhaps it was a reaction against even more
frequently painted scenes showing ecstatic hermits, or abbesses
triumphing over earthly temptation: a repudiation, in other words,
of images of the human that were all too ethereal.
In none of Rembrandt's other paintings is physical pain depicted
quite as realistically. He has chosen to show the precise moment at
which the dagger enters Samson's eye. Pain not only distorts the
face, it contorts the entire body from top to toe. Rembrandt has
painted Samson's head in the foreground, placing the act of
mutilation directly in front of the spectator's eyes. An
18th-century owner of the painting evidently found its directness
too hard to bear: he had the painting enlarged, creating distance
between the spectator and the act by giving the scene more space. In
the Stadel, a frame covers the added parts, allowing one to view the
work in the original format.
Delilah's betrayal of Samson, or triumph over him, was a common
enough subject in 16th and 17th century painting, but these works
usually showed Samson taken captive, rather than his blinding anci
bloodv torture. Rubens, for example, thirty years Rembrandt's
senior, used the theme of Samson and Delilah as an excuse for two
wonderful figures leaning dramatically into the foreground; though a
soldier in the background is seen raising a knife, there is no sign
of impending horror on Delilah's face. Rubens evidently preferred to
give her an amused, slightly thrilled smile, as if she were merely
anticipating the outcome of some foolish prank.
|
| |
Cunning triumphs over physical strength
|
|

The Blinding of Samson (detail)
|
| |
Rubens' figure could be construed as an illustration of the
"wiles of woman", and it is certainly true that the phrase - which
might sound feeble by today's standards - has been used often enough
in connection with Delilah's deed. If the story of Samson and
Delilah has retained any relevance, however, then not as an
illustration of cunning, but as a narrative of the struggle between
the sexes, of revenge taken by the physically weaker sex on a symbol
of male potency; conversely, its narrative force may lie in the
portrayal of the primordial male fear of vulnerability and loss of
potency during coitus.
Holofernes' decapitation at the hands of Judith is a treatment of
the same theme; he too had taken her to his bed. The Jewess Jael,
too, kills the sleeping Canaanite general Sisera by driving a nail
through his head. All three stories of women's victory over their
sexual partners were from the Old Testament, and all three were
painted again and again during the 16th and 17th centuries.
There are several indications of the significance attached by
Rembrandt to the conflict between the sexes. Delilah is shown
towering over Samson's supine body. The dark blade of the soldier in
the foreground obscures the intersection of the diagonals which
structure the composition, the precise location of Samson's
invisible genitalia. More importantly, however, the Book of Judges
says that Delilah "called for a man", causing him to "shave off the
seven locks" that were the source of the sleeping man's strength.
Rembrandt, however, has her do the deed herself, showing her with
the scissors and hair still in her hand. Rubens, too, placed the
scissors in Delilah's hand. It was common for artists to depart from
the letter of a Biblical story to emphasize their own concerns.
Oddly enough, books about Rembrandt tend to ignore this great
painting, or to speak disparagingly of it. Yet even in terms of
scale, it was the largest of Rembranch's works to date. Apparently,
however, this in itself is enough to denounce the artist: Rembrandt
is accused of conforming to the platitudes of comtempor-ary taste,
paying lip-service to Baroque notions of grandeur, instead of
following his own route into the depths of the human soul, beyond
all crude realism or superficial drama. It is no accident that the
work on which discussion of Rembrandt's treatment of the Samson
theme tends to concentrate is the picture of the angel announcing
his message to Samson's parents, who are shown kneeling beside each
other, absorbed in prayer.
But the Blinding also reveals the inward state of the
participant figures. This applies not only to Samson, but to the
soldiers in the foreground and Delilah as well. The faces and
gestures of the latter betray contradictory emotions: fear and
aggression in the soldier, triumph, horror and inward reserve in the
turned face of Delilah. To Rembrandt, however, Delilah's gaping eyes
had a separate meaning.
|
| |
The eyes - fount of fascination and taboo
|
| |

Self-Portrait
1628
Oil on wood, 23,5 x 17 cm
Staatliche Museen, Kassel
|
| |
One of the rules of "history painting" demanded the artist's
empathy with the figures he painted. Samson, a colossus in revolt,
could thus be seen as Rembrandt himself, turning blind and
forfeiting his creative powers.
There can be little doubt that Rembrandt feared the loss of his
eyesight. Though there is no documentary evidence to prove this, a
sketch Rembrandt made of his father suggests the latter went blind
towards the end of his life. The artist must therefore have
witnessed his gradual loss of sight. Even if he had not seen members
of his own family blind, he would have seen blind people wherever he
went, for eye disease was common and medical treatment ineffective.
The blind appear in many of Rembrandt's paintings: an aged Homer,
Jacob blessing his grandsons, blind violinists, blind beggars, the
blind hoping to be healed by Jesus. His most frequent use of the
motif centres on the theme of Tobias and his blind father. There are
some 50 sketches, etchings and paintings of Tobias, most of which,
though not all, include Tobias' father. According to the Bible story
Tobias healed his father's blindness by smearing the bile of a fish
on his eyes. In so doing, he followed the advice of the archangel
Raphael: in other words, divine inspiration. However, Rembrandt
shows Tobias standing behind his father with an instrument in his
hand: medical scientists have suggested this may be an operation to
remove grey cataract. The painting, showing Tobias giving his father
back his eyesight, was executed in 1636, the same year as The
Blinding of Samson.
But Rembrandt's preoccupation with eyes and eyesight was not limited
to that year alone. He was altogether fascinated by this bodily
organ and its function. At the same time, he treated it with the
caution normally reserved for subjects that are taboo. His portrait
of his mother as the prophetess Hannah shows her with eyes closed,
and with the folds and tiny wrinkles of her eyelids and aged facial
skin rendered in minute detail; and it is as if skin had grown over
her eyes. In another work Abraham, about to sacrifice his son Isaac,
lays his left hand across his son's face, covering his victims's
gaze. Or in Rembrandt's astonishing Self-portrait of
1628, the artist's eyes, drowned in deep shadow, are practically
invisible.
Considering Rembrandt's preoccupation with his ability to see, it is
understandable that, unlike Rubens, he decided to paint Samson
blinded rather than Samson taken captive. To Rembrandt, a painting
of Samson not only meant the Old Testament, Calvinism, or the
struggle between the sexes, for the theme gave him the opportunity
to paint a picture about sight: Deli-la's gaping eyes see Samson's
dead eyes, while the blinding brightness of the sky outside - and
where else has Rembrandt painted a blue so bright! - is swallowed by
the almost impenetrable darkness of the interior.
The first to paint such stark contrasts of light and darkness had
been Michelangelo da Caravaggio (1571-1610), a manner imported to
more northerly latitudes by Netherlandish artists. The technique
heightened dramatic tension, and accentuated important details. In
Rembrandt's work it appears also to have symbolized the act of
looking itself, the power and impotence of the human eye.
Rembrandt's self-portrait shows that the most important elements of
a painting are not necessarily to be found in its brighter sections.
The artist's forehead, eyes and mouth, features which generally help
us recognize a person, are engulfed in darkness. However intent the
spectator's gaze, its object will thus remain obscure. By contrast,
relatively uncharacteristic features, such as the neck, ear and
cheek, are well lit. The subject of the painting was not Rembrandt's
face, but the act of looking. Its theme - like that of The Blinding
- is the eye itself.
Rose-Marie and Rainer Hagen
|
|
_________________________
_________________________
|
| |
The Blinding of Samson reveals other warriors in
addition to the one who is boring his dagger into Samson's eye. One
of them lies under Samson, holding him fast; another is fettering
Samson's raised fist with a chain; a third, with sword raised, is
approaching from the rear to the right, mouth and eyes opened wide;
a fourth is holding his lance pointed at Samson, poised to stab
should the latter still possess the strength to resist despite the
loss of his hair. Looking back at Samson, Delilah is fleeing behind
the man with the lance, holding in her hands the scissors and the
shock of hair which she has previously cut off.
Each figure contributes in its own way to the overall action at the
moment of the blinding. While it is true that Delilah is represented
running away from the scene, the fact that the treacherous mistress
has cropped the hair of the sleeping Samson beforehand is no longer
left merely to the reconstruction rendered by the observer's
imagination: scissors and shock of hair are displayed in the
picture. This is made still more intelligible by the collective
actions of the warriors. We see one of them entering in a timorous
manner; a second, who has wrestled Samson to the ground; a third,
shackling him; a fourth, striking home. In order to be able to blind
Samson, it was necessary for the warriors to force an entry
following the robbery of his hair, wrestle the weakened man to the
floor, fetter him and gouge out his eyes. Every one of the stages in
this process is distributed among the individual figures. The
figures reveal various stages in the course of events. They do not
indicate individually what is happening at the precise moment when
the blood spurts forth; rather, this form of temporal
role-distribution is used to illustrate the phases of the chain of
events in the picture itself. Rembrandt had already structured the
motif of a step-by-step approach in 1629 in an initial version of
the Samson topic (Samson Betrayed by Delilah).
|
| |
 Samson Betrayed by Delilah
1630
|