-
Art...
-
ArtSleuth
-
A young man
-
An old one
-
Lookers-on
-
A picture by Rembrandt
-
A touching reunion?
-
Certainly, but something more too.
-
This is the New Testament story of the *prodigal son,*
-
who turns his back on his family,
-
squanders his inheritance on women and wine,
-
ends as a starving, penniless swineherd,
-
and returns to his father
-
… who, unbelievably, welcomes him with open arms
-
and kills the fatted calf to welcome him ...
-
.... to the jealous anger of his faithful, hardworking older son.
-
A strange idea of justice!
-
Does late repentance
-
wipe out betrayal and debauchery?
-
Does it outweigh a life of virtue?
-
The point here is that divine justice has its own criteria: **
-
“There shall be more joy in heaven over * one sinner who repents *than over ninety-nine just” .
-
But Rembrandt
-
seems to be deliberately obscuring the meaning of the story - and the picture.
-
no religious symbolism, no divine presence.
-
Why not?
-
Because the connection with God is clearly implied?
-
Or because Rembrandt himself wants *to add *another meaning?
-
Title: Rembrandt – *The Return of the Prodigal Son*
The hidden side of strength
-
Part 1. *The art of concealment*
-
How much of the story is actually left?
-
First of all, the son, with his
-
• bare feet and worn shoes
-
• legs showing through tattered clothing
-
• cord used as belt
-
• shaven head and reddened scalp
-
• emaciated face and swollen eyelids,
-
His kneeling posture reflects his shame and degradation.
-
His body is the body of a martyr.
-
And then the father:
-
• A man both powerful and versed in the ways of the world.
Vivid highlights
-
on his hair and beard
-
A man both wise and self-possessed: unspeaking,
-
one eye on his son, the other lost in thought.
-
A man both wealthy and loving: his mantle radiates warmth,
-
surrounds the son’s face with a red halo,
-
follows the line of his head.
-
His hands comfort and heal
-
- one delicate and pale,
-
the other stronger and darker.
-
The father literally enfolds his son.
-
The actors in this little scene carry the whole story!
-
The bystanders seem bit-players by comparison!
-
The older son, wearing the same red coat
-
The two servants in the sculpted doorway
-
The woman in the background, with her red pendant
-
Anything strange about the picture?
-
Let’s look at a more conventional treatment:
-
Father and son are looking at each other,
-
the servants are bringing out the clothes,
-
shoes and ring called for by the father
-
while the calf is led gaily to the slaughter
-
Religious symbols are everywhere:
-
the sacrifice recalls that of Christ,
-
the white dog stands for purity and faith.
-
Everything, *including the message, *is clear…**
-
Thirty years earlier, Rembrandt himself had followed the same line:
-
In the background, clothes are being produced, a shutter is being opened
-
His use of profile in the foreground clarifies the scene:**
-
a shoe has been shed, the stick dropped
-
the older brother is absent
-
the son’s body is so *ravaged, *
-
his face so *wretched, *
-
that he almost seems to *deserve *his father’s pardon.
-
Everything matches the *letter *of the bible story
-
- but what about the spirit?
-
The later version has no “after”:
-
the figures seem bemused,
-
no action is suggested.
-
As for “before”,
-
this sketchy bas-relief is all we get.
-
It conflates debauchery with downfall:
-
the prodigal son sports a sword and plays the flute,
-
while his fate is foreshadowed by
-
the pigs at his feet.
-
With his back to the viewer,
-
neither his misery nor his remorse are visible:
-
the father’s forgiveness exists *in a vacuum. *
-
Rembrandt pares the story down, and eliminates the kind of easy sentiment
-
which might otherwise make it seem banal...
-
...
-
and then goes even further by involving us, the viewers:
-
First, he makes us identify with the son,
-
whose feet are the first thing we see,
-
and whose position we share
-
Secondly, he prompts uncomfortable questions:
-
[to be translated]
-
would we have been generous, like the father
-
- or have stayed resentfully in the background,
-
like the older son?
-
But why is he so anxious to involve us in a picture
-
which was not intended for a church,
-
and was still in his studio when he died?
-
Part 2. *The painter as prodigal *
-
Rembrandt had painted his first version of the parable 28 years earlier -
-
the conventional orgy.
-
Expensively dressed,
-
brandishing a glass,
-
in a richly furnished brothel,
-
with a harlot on his knee,
-
the prodigal son invites us to savour the pleasures of the flesh ...
-
… including this peacock, symbol of opulence and vanity!
-
Here, Rembrandt follows a familiar Dutch convention:
-
using the biblical scene as pretext, he ostensibly condemns the sins of the flesh
-
- while evoking them in lip-smacking detail.
-
But the picture acquires a new dimension…
-
… once we realise that it is a self-portrait.
-
Even if this is nothing new …
-
other painters portray themselves in taverns…
-
And Dürer draws himself surrounded by pigs…
-
… Rembrandt gives the harlot the features of Saskia van Uylenburgh,
-
his own wife!
-
In fact, the picture can be seen as an ironic image of his new status:
-
Saskia, whom he shows off proudly,
-
is immensely rich, and marrying her has earned him the right to work in Amsterdam
-
… where commissions pour in,
-
… he acquires a fine house in a fashionable neighbourhood…
-
… and picture follows picture. [à réviser : il réalise une collection d'art personnelle]
-
Rembrandt’s self-portrait as prodigal son
-
acknowledges his own extravagance,
-
while making Saskia - slightly behind him, looking calmly at the viewer - the moderating force in the partnership.
-
But tragedy lies ahead…
-
Saskia dies in 1642.
-
Sixteen years later, Rembrandt is ruined,
-
his house and possessions have been sold,
-
and the birth of an illegitimate child to his new partner
-
has tarnished his private reputation.
-
The commissions dry up and,
-
when Hendrickje dies in 1663,…
-
… the parallel with the prodigal son is obvious:
-
alone, ruined, shunned by the church,
-
Rembrandt longs to rejoin the Christian community
-
and make his peace with God.
-
His Protestant faith
-
dictates that he open his heart to God, but ask for nothing:
-
God alone, in his infinite freedom, will grant him grace
or withhold it.
-
Part 3. *The power of the unseen*
-
But the picture’s fame today
-
is not simply due to Rembrandt’s identifying with the prodigal son.
-
In the prosperous Dutch Republic,
-
the wealthy burghers determine what sells.
-
Their walls are covered with pictures, and they want religious scenes to fit in …
-
… and have “real life” resonance,
-
which speaks directly to them.
-
Earlier artists have approached bible stories in two ways,
-
but Rembrandt does something new.
-
*First strategy: *using perspective
-
to link the story with the present.
-
Lucas van Leyden puts his * “Christ Presented to the People” *in a modern urban setting,
-
with a crowd in the foreground.
-
Pieter Aertsen and Joachim Beuckelaer both hide
-
biblical scenes - *the flight into Egypt, and the prodigal son *
-
- behind well-stocked market stalls.
-
And Brueghel presents his main subjects - *Christ carrying the cross, St. Paul *
-
- as *details *in crowd scenes.
-
The benefits are obvious: viewers are drawn into the picture,
-
They have to make sense of it,
-
think about it,
-
and then reinterpret the things they first noticed
-
in the light of a bible story.
-
Better still, a “worldly” setting
-
makes that story seem “truer”.
-
...
-
Rembrandt has studied these perspective effects and absorbed them,
-
but moves closer to his subject than van Leyden, and adopts a more head-on viewpoint,
-
and eventually substitutes strange empty spaces
-
for the crowd in the centre.
-
Each of the two versions is theatrical in its own way:
-
one has *the epic vitality *of the medieval stage,
-
the other suggests a moment *mysteriously suspended in time.*
-
The Prodigal Son is in the second category, with:**
-
perspective lines converging on both father and son,
-
the dark and gaping doorway,
-
the off-centre positioning of the main figures,
-
faces which cannot be identified with certainty.
-
*Second strategy: *using extreme theatrical effects to achieve immediate impact.
-
This is Caravaggio’s method,
-
and Rembrandt learns from it:
-
few figures
-
harsh, spot-type lighting
-
main figures in the front foreground, where the viewer picks them out at once.
-
His areas of darkness are theatrically effective in two ways:
-
They focus our attention by simplifying the composition**
-
They *draw us into the picture by suggesting a world*
-
which our imagination can enter and fill.
-
Next episode: Holbein's Ambassadors
Self-love or more?
-
Find more information: www.canal-educatif.fr
-
Directed by
-
Procuced by
-
Scientific advisor
-
This film exists thanks to sponsors and the efforts of a community
-
Voiceover
-
Editing & visual effects
-
Postproduction (extra) anbd sound recording
-
Musical selection
-
Musics
-
Photographic credits
-
Special thanks
English subtitles: Vincent Nash
-
A CED production
