|
The Face of Spain
|
| |
Enigmas and Reflections
- Riddles in Paint
|
| |
One of the most famous of the paintings by Velazquez, and an
example of his great mythological works, is The Fable of
Arachne (Las Hilanderas), now usually dated
to the 1640s. It was painted not for the king but for a private
patron. In its composition, the artist looks back to his
bodegones, where two different areas and two planes of reality
balance each other. The everyday scene in the foreground shows a
plainly furnished room where women are at work spinning. Sunlight
falling in from above conjures up a complex range of colours. On the
left, an elderly woman is at the spinning wheel, while the young
woman seated to the right is winding yarn. One of the figures of
naked youths by Michelangelo on the roof of the Sistine Chapel has
been identified as the model for her attitude. Three
other women are bringing more wool and sorting through the remnants.
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (Las Hilanderas)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas, 220 x 289 cm
Museo del Prado, Madrid
There were two editions of Ovid's Metamorphoses in the library owned by
Velazquez.
In this work, Ovid tells the story of the rivalry between Pallas Athene and Arachne.
Arachne, shown as the young woman on the right, made six
tapestries depicting gods abducting mortals,
beginning with Europa abducted by
Zeus in the shape of a bull.
The radiant apparition of the young woman by far
outshines the goddess Athene beside her.
|
| |
|
| |
Michelangelo
Ignudi
1508-1512
Sistine Chapel, Vatican
|
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid
|
| |
|
|
Peter Paul Rubens
The Rape of Europe (copy from Titian)
1628
The model admired all over Europe,
Titian's Rape of Europa,
was in the
royal palace in Madrid in the seventeenth century.
Rubens copied the painting,
and so did Juan Bautista Mazo,
Velazquez' son-in-law. |
There is a second room in the background, in an alcove reached by
steps. It is flooded with light and contains several elegantly
dressed women. The woman on the left wearing an
antique helmet and with her arm raised is a figure of Athene.
Opposite her - either really in the room, or part of the picture in
the tapestry on the back wall? - stands the young Arachne, who has
committed the sacrilegious act of comparing her skill in weaving
with the goddess's. She has begun their competition with a tapestry
showing one of the love affairs of Jupiter, the rape of Europa.
Velazquez borrowed the theme of this tapestry from a famous picture
by Titian, also extant in a copy by Rubens, to show
his artistic veneration for the Venetian master.
The legend of Arachne derives from the Metamorphoses of the
Roman poet Ovid, and around 1636 Rubens had painted a version of the
same story for the Torre de la Parada, showing the punishment of the
less able weaver, when she was turned into a spider. Velazquez omits
this detail, instead treating the rivals almost as equals. By
comparison with the weight of symbolism in the background scene, he
shows the simple work of the women in the foreground with monumental
dignity; it is the basis of the technique without which no goddess
could practise her arts. This interpretation is still relevant if
Velazquez has in fact represented the figures of Athene (now
disguised, but with her shapely bare leg indicating her timeless
beauty) and Arachne a second time in the figures of the old woman
and the young woman in the foreground. Here, at least, Velazquez has
transferred mythology to everyday reality. However, there is a whole
series of possible meanings beneath the surface of this painting,
and scholars are still puzzling over some of them to this day.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid
Athene, disguised as an old woman, visited Arachne to warn her of her
sacrilegious challenge.
When Arachne was unmoved, the goddess threw off her
disguise and revealed herself in helmet and armour.
It is not clear whether the
other women in the alcove with Arachne symbolize the four fine arts.
|
|
_______________
_______________
|
Diego Velazquez:
The
Tapestry-Weavers
(1644-1648)
Manufacturing riddle
|
| |
At first glance the
painting, executed by Velazquez between 1644 and 1648, looks like a
genre work. But The Tapestry-Weavers is not only one of the
earliest representations of manufacturing in the history of art; it
is first and foremost an allegory. In keeping with contemporary
taste, the artist has filled the canvas with countless scholarly
allusions. The painting, measuring 220 by 289 centimetres, is in the
Prado, Madrid.
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid
|
| |
The painting is in dreadful condition. In the course of centuries
it has been cleaned and "repaired" with unsuitable materials, and
strips of canvas have been added to all four sides. In recent times,
dry air and pollution have made the paints crack and peel, and it is
now almost impossible to make out the former colours under the
darkened varnish. International experts, examining the painting in
1983, concluded that it should be left in its present condition,
since further restoration attempts might destroy it altogether.
In spite of its deficiencies, The Tapestry-Weavers
remains one of Velazquez' most important works, contrasting sharply
with the rest of his artistic production. For most of his life,
Velazquez, as painter to the Spanish court, was expected to deliver
majestic renderings of the rulers of the day, while the present work
shows wage-labourers at work. On the left is a whirring spinning
wheel, on the right a turning reel of yarn. A bale of raw wool, the
material processed here, hangs on the wall. The girl in the red
skirt separates it with a comb; the woman with the white headscarf
spins it to yarn on her wheel, while the worker wearing the white
blouse winds the spun thread into a ball, which will later to be
passed on to a weaver. In the background, at a higher level, is a
different, brighter world. A figure in armour makes grand gestures,
while opulently dressed ladies consider a tapestry. They are
inspecting the luxurious product of the -wool workers' labour.
The foreground and background of the painting evidently contain
depictions of the two social strata between which Velazquez felt
drawn. As an artist, he pursued the "menial" trade of a craftsman;
but he also felt part of an aristocracy to "whom all work was
foreign, forbidden, indeed contemptible. It was a dichotomy, replete
with tensions.
|
| |
A person who needs to work deserves contempt
|
| |
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid
|
| |
For centuries, the wool industry, with the support of the
monarchy, had been an important pillar of the Spanish economy. Until
the beginning of the 17th century, the rough highlands of Castile,
where no cereal crops would grow, had provided pasture for some two
million sheep. The wealth of towns such as Burgos, Salamanca and
Toledo was based on the production and export of wool. However, the
industry was eventually plunged into a serious crisis: between 1594
and 1746, several hundred textiles mills were forced to close in
Toledo alone, leaving a mere 15 operative. As a result, the town
lost half its inhabitants. During the same period, the number of
households in Burgos, where most of the raw wool changed hands, sank
from 2600 to 600.
The reason for the crisis was gold, shipped to Seville twice a year
by Spanish ships, whose captains had discovered the Americas. Large
quantities of money suddenly flowed into the country, only to flow
out again equally quickly. For commodities that had once been
produced in Spain were now bought abroad instead: Velazquez and his
fellow citizens no longer dressed in Spanish cloth, but in textiles
woven in Flanders or England. The "richest nation on earth" believed
it could afford to import everything it needed, from cereals to
sword blades, leaving all trade, together with the profits, in the
hands of foreigners. Merchants arrived from France, Italy and the
Netherlands; builders, smiths and tailors also came to Spain, taking
over so-called "menial" tasks - mostly involving manual labour or
money-making - which were looked down on by the indigenous
population.
Most of Velazquez contemporaries preferred to work for a grandee, or
do odd jobs, or even beg at church doors, rather than earn their
livelihood with their hands. For, as a French traveller to Spain put
it, the heads of the inhabitants of that country were "fuming with
delusions of nobility ...". After all, their ancestors had defeated
the Moors, conquered the Americas and fought for the Catholic Church
against most of Europe. With such a heroic heritage, any Spaniard
worth his salt saw himself as a conquistador or a knight, or, at the
very least, a hidalgo. To be a hidalgo, a nobleman of the lowest
class, was a matter of honour. A hidalgo did not work, nor did he
pay direct taxes.
The clergy and nobility were exempted from countless taxes by which
the king attempted to squeeze from his countrymen funds to finance
wars in the interests of Spanish hegemony. However, since
practically every inhabitant was a nobleman, very few taxpayers were
left. Among the 3319 heads of household in Burgos in the year 1591,
for example, there were 1722 hidalgos and 1023 clergymen, so that a
mere 574 taxpayers made any sort of fiscal contribution at all. It
was hardly surprising that the economy was stagnating and the
Spanish Empire in decline.
|
| |
The importance of a career at court
|
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid |
Artists, too, were required to pay a tax: the Castilian "alcabala",
a ten percent levy on all purchased goods. They fought
against it bitterly, not because it deprived them of income,
but because they felt it was demeaning to have the same
fiscal status as potters and joiners. "Painting is a liberal
art; there is nothing slavish or craftlike about it",
maintained the painter Francisco Pacheco, Velazquez's
teacher and father-in-law. "It is more noble than sculpture,
since it involves less physical labour. It is worthy of a
hidalgo, and even kings do not spurn it."
Spanish artists were naturally prone to the prejudices and
values of the class society in which they lived. Velazquez,
born in Seville in 1599, was proud of his noble Portuguese
extraction. However, nominated in 1658, at the height of his
career, for the aristocratic title of Knight of the Order of
Santiago by Philip IV, he was unable to prove his
aristocratic ancestry beyond a few generations. He required
(and was granted by Pope Alexander VII) official exemption
from the obligation to prove his noblility.
Over a hundred witnesses were heard to establish whether the
artist was worthy of the Order. For example, confirmation
was required that he had never worked for a wage. One
witness declared that painting came "as a talent to
Velazquez, a gift, not as a trade or craft". He had never
sold one of his works, painting solely for the enjoyment of
His Majesty.
It is doubtful whether this can apply to the artist's youth
in Seville. At that time Velazquez had chosen to paint quite
ordinary folk, like the (later) weavers: a waterseller, or
an old woman frying eggs in a kitchen. But at the age of 24
he entered a different, grander world: the Duke Olivares,
one of the young king's ministers and favourites, introduced
Velazquez to the court at Madrid. Here, over 1000 persons,
their behaviour governed by the stiff court etiquette,
orbited the godlike "Planet King". Velazquez did a portrait
of the king which pleased him so much that he permitted only
Velazquez to paint his portrait from then on.
Velazquez served the monarch for over 40 years. Two
documents indicate the low status granted to the painter
within the court hierarchy, whatever his value as an artist:
"Like the king's barbor", the painter was to receive
annually, besides his apartment and salary, "a suit of
clothes to the value of 90 ducats". Together with the court
fools and noblemen's lackeys he was given a seat in the
fourth row whenever the court attended a bullfight.
Velazquez could attain greater prestige in such a rigidly
structured society only by applying, like other courtiers,
for various official posts, though the work, which had
little bearing on his work as an artist, prevented him from
painting. He thus worked his way up through a series of
appointments, such as Usher of the Chamber,
Under-Chamberlain, and Assistant Curator of Royal Furniture.
It is therefore all the more astonishing that an artist so
intent upon being seen as a nobleman should have painted
The Tapestry-Weavers, one "of the oldest
paintings of workers or factories" in art history, according
to the art historian Carl Justi. In order to do so, he would
almost certainly have had to obtain the permisson of Philip
IV, himself an expert in artistic matters, who visited
Velazquez nearly every day in his palace studio to watch him
at work. For only the King could afford to abandon social
prejudice to such an extent.
|
|
|
|
The revenge of the offended goddess
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid
|
It was probably in the course of his work as Curator of Royal
Furniture that the court painter Velazquez came into contact with
spinners and weavers. Stored in the royal depots, besides furniture
and paintings, were some 800 Flemish tapestries. From these the
artist, aided by the Curator of Royal Tapestries, would choose the
appropriate decoration for receptions held in the royal apartments.
He would select tapestries with suitable themes, then pass them on
to the Curator of Tapestries. The artist probably took charge of any
necessary repairs, too, which were carried out in Madrid's carpet
workshops. No carpets had been woven there for many years, and only
mending work now took place. It was here, too, that Velazquez may
have found his inspiration for The Tapestry-Weavers.
However, it is unlikely that the artist's sole intention was the
realistic rendering of a working scene. His life was spent at a
court where literary and scholarly allusions, as well as obscure
codes, symbols and allegories, were highly fashionable. The riddle
of the work known, since the 18th century, as The
Tapestry-Weavers appears to have been solved in 1948, with
the discovery by Spanish scholars that the painting, before entering
the royal collection, probably belonged to Philip IV's Chief
Equerry. It appears in his inventory of 1664 as The Fable of
Arachne.
The young woman whose white arm is turning a reel of yarn is thus a
mythical figure; her story is told by Ovid in the Sixth Book of his
Metamorphoses. According to this account, the audacious Arachne
challenged the goddess Pallas Athene, the inventor of the distaff,
to a weaving competition. The goddess naturally won, and, to punish
Arachne for her impudence, turned the young woman into a spider.
In the foreground of the painting Velazquez shows the young woman
and the goddess at work. Pallas still wears her white veil: in order
to enter the workshop she had disguised herself as an old woman, but
her bare, youthful leg betrays her real identity. On the stage in
the background she reappears victorious, now wearing her traditional
armour, her hand raised to cast a spell over Arachne.
The double portrait of the goddess may have added, in the eyes of
the artist's contemporaries who enjoyed discussing the relative
significance of ranks and hierarchies, a further, allegorical
dimension beyond that of the fable itself. In the lower half of the
painting Pallas appears as the patron of embroiderers and weavers.
At the higher level, in the background, four richly dressed ladies,
possibly representing sculpture, architecture, painting and music
(the latter with the attribute of the double bass) gather around the
resplendent goddess. This is Pallas the tutelary goddess, whose
sublime arts - which, with "nothing slavish" about them, are "worthy
of the hidalgo" — triumph over a "menial" craft.
|
| |
Homage to the Venetian master
|
|
Velazquez
The Fable of Arachne (detail)
c. 1657
Oil on canvas
Museo del Prado, Madrid |
Two putti can be distinguished in the tapestry at the
back of the studio. They are shown against a cloud
background above the sea, while on the right a pink veil
floats skyward. The rest is hidden from view, but the
subject would have been immediately familiar to a
17th-century connoisseur. For the tapestry is the
reproduction of a famous and much-copied painting by Titian,
in the Spanish royal family's possession since 1562: The
Rape of Europa. Its theme was mythological, using an
episode which also occurs in Ovid's version of the Arachne
legend. Competing with Pallas, the young woman weaves a
series of tapestries, the first of which shows the Rape
of Europa by Zeus, disguised as a bull.
While cryptic allusions to hidden paintings complied with
contemporary tastes in art, the reference in the present
painting must also be seen as an act of homage by Velazquez
to an admired Venetian master. Titian was the favourite
painter of Charles V, Philip IV's great-grandfather, and
several of his works hung in the latter's palace in Madrid.
Velazquez made two extended journeys to Italy to study
Titian's art and buy several of his paintings for the royal
collection. He stayed there between 1629 and 1631, and from
1649 to 1651. This allowed him to escape the excruciating
narrowness of the Spanish court, and to live unhampered by
etiquette and hierarchy. In Italy he needed only to paint in
order to gain recognition. He did not have to undergo the
torments of a troublesome, time-consuming, appointment at
court.
The Tapestry-Weavers was probably executed
shortly before the artist's second journey to Italy. He was
47 years old at the time and still, after many years'
service at court, the King's favourite. The monarch
continued to forbid any other artist to paint his portrait,
even when Velazquez was absent. His reputation as Spain's
greatest painter was unchallenged, and his social standing
improved, too. Since his appointment to the post of "Under-Cham-berlain
in Effective Service", which gave him the right to carry at
his belt the black key to the royal apartment, he was no
longer obliged to sit with the lackeys at bullfights, but
was given a more dignified position beside the Marshall of
Ceremonies.
But there were other reasons to feel distressed. Like all
court officials, Velazquez was a victim of the court's
desperate financial plight. In 1648, shortly before his
departure, he complained that he was still owed his salary
for the years 1630 to 1634, as well as fees for paintings he
had delivered between 1628 and 1640. But Philip IV and his
country were bankrupt. The Spanish bid for European hegemony
had failed; the enemy was ready to pounce, and the Spanish
provinces were in a state of uproar. The situation was
further exacerbated by the deaths of the Queen and the heir
to the throne, making life in the monarch's immediate
proximity doubly oppressive. It required the repeated and
emphatic chiding of the King himself to induce Velazquez to
return to Madrid from Italy. He returned to a palace where
life was so dull that the poet Lope de Vega felt the figures
on the palace tapestries, unable to escape, deserved the
spectator's pity.
(Rose-Marie and Rainer Hagen)
|
|
