I've long been aware that my knowledge of art history is quite parochial. I know most of what has gone on in England, and I know some of what happened in the major centres of art - but I only really know these from what is on display in London. So I understand quattrocento Florence, 20th century USA, 19th century France and so on to a fair extent. The problem with my knowledge of Florence, for example, is that most of the work was built-in and not portable. I have seen panels in the National Gallery and the Ashmolean but I understand how meagre what I have seen is: I have a deep love for Cimabue, Giotto and Uccello and the transition from Byzantine art to Renaissance art so I have dug down and found more. I did not realise until last night that my knowledge of art from the "low countries" (as the programme called them) suffered from exactly the same vignetting.
Living near London one cannot help but be aware of Rubens, Rembrandt and assorted Vans. With the exception of Rembrandt's portraits they always left me cold and uninterested. They were the sort of painting you were plonked in front of during school trips. And the Arnolfini portrait by Van Eyck was the one we would be plonked in front of the most.
It is an intriguing painting, and even as a youngster I could appreciate that it was display of phenomenal skill. I could see its exoticness to modern eyes. But, perhaps as a result of the nature of those first encounters, I never felt the need to follow up. So when Van Eyck's altarpiece at Ghent appeared during "High Art of the Low Countries" last night, my eyes nearly popped out of my head. I'm not going to comment on it; it will take a few hours of looking and then a few days of absorbing for me to come up with anything worth reading but for pity's sake, do yourself a favour and follow the link - your life will be the richer for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment