In this renaissance piece, we see a young arian woman in red, blue and cream, with two adolescent males at her feet. The child to the left of the woman is completely nude, leaning into her lap as she gazes at him. The child to the right is fully clothed in a brown cloth, and carries what looks like a long, slender cross. The scene of the three figures is outdoors, backgrounded by countryside. To the left of the woman, we see a field, the beginnings of a village, followed by mountains. To her right we see a building with a large tower or steeple, which may be a church or some other place of worship.
Based on how the woman is dressed, and the tiny halo crowning the nude child's head, I think its safe to assume that this is the Madonna and the Baby Jesus. This makes it all the more likely that the building to the right is, in fact, a church. This is very similar to other dogmatic based paintings from the time period, and displays a classic theme with images of Mary from the time, the blue of her dress which portrays purity and virginity. The red suggests wealth and power, a contrast to the outdoor, less regal setting. This could also be because the outdoors is the environment created by god, whereas the regality of man's creations (buildings, houses, etc) portrays a different meaning. The tone is therefor very solemn, portraying the love between mother and child, with both hands touching what I assume to be the bible. The figure to the right seems to act as a submissive protector of the two, most likely a representation of a figure from the bible.
Raphael's work is similar to that of Leonardo DaVinci and therefor has a soft and beautiful Italian style. Although I don't believe in dogmatic religion, this piece still touches me in that the love between mother and child is so apparent. The values of color and light vs. dark are well portrayed, and the piece seems to have perfect proportions. The intent was clearly portrayed: to show the mother, child and protector.
1 comment:
This analysis is a little lean on interpretation (aside from your own knowledge of art history), but I am quite blown away that although you dislike images representing what is to you dogmatic religion, you can overcome that to see another valuable aspect of the work. Good going!
Post a Comment