Vermeer

[RadCap]

Michael Smith, on HBL, posted a note about Vermeer's "Woman Holding A Balance". In it, he referenced a National Gallery of Art website which provided some insight into this work.

http://www.nga.gov/feature/vermeer/moment1.html

Because of it, I have since come away with a new appreciation of Vermeer's work. Previously I had been an admirer of his technique, but not of his subject matter. It definitely seemed to be more of the Naturalistic school than the Romantic school. However, given some details I had not previously noticed (ie the mirror) and the history of the painting behind her, etc., I find the work to be much more than I originally conceived. What I took to be a fairly mundane setting (something common to most all of his works) of a wonderfully composed and beautifully lit 'slice of life' scene, is actually a very profound - and a very secular - statement.

As the NGA text states, the woman holding the scale partially blocks a painting of "The Last Judgment". Specifically, the woman's head (the seat of her mind) blocks the part of the painting where St. Michael would usually be depicted weighing souls in the balance. Given that both characters are engaged in judgment (as evident through each character's use of scales), the substitution is certainly not accidental. And given that she blocks him, effectively replacing him in significance, the woman's judgment is seen to be taking precedence over the saint's judgment.

So - what is she judging? The visual clues are that of introspection. As the NGA notes: The woman is "serene and contemplative", "her gaze seems to be inward", and a light of "spiritual enlightenment" falls onto her from the window above. And facing her is a mirror, something which often symbolized "self-knowledge". Hence she appears to be judging herself.

Now, what is the standard she chooses for this self-judgment? Is it an upward appeal to a divine and 'otherworldly' authority? No. She is not surrounded by angels or devils. She has no cherubs crowning her, nor vultures plucking at her heart. She is not kneeling in prayer in an attempt to receive judgment from a mystical realm or from a being 'higher' than herself. She is totally enveloped in a man-made world. And the scale she utilizes is set to measure 'this worldly' wealth - specifically pearls (which symbolically have been associated with both "purity" and "worldly concerns"). So she is set to judge herself by referencing, not some other realm, but this realm - by this world.

It is interesting to note that both pearls and mirrors can also symbolize "vanity" - otherwise known as Pride - which just happens to be one of the seven deadly sins. In fact, Pride has been called the sin from which all other sins arise. Yet her quietly confident act of weighing her worth by this standard is not depicted as a sin. It is not shown to be shameful or at all 'out of balance' with reality. The harmony of the composition and the serenity of her appraisal show it to be a perfectly proper act. And it is contrasted with the agony, suffering, and guilt of "The Last Judgment" which is blotted out by her very presence as she judges her own self-worth instead.

"The Last Judgment" is how a non-secular artist would have depicted someone who dared commit such a 'sin' - her confidence would have been replaced by despair, her competence and self-assuredness would have been replaced by doubt and fear, her calm stance would have been replaced by cowering defeat, and her serenity would have been replaced by guilt. In other words, such an artist would have shown her suffering for her 'sin'. Vermeer does just the opposite. Her pride or 'vanity' is shown without blemish and without condemnation. The appreciation of her self-worth is calmly, beautifully, and peacefully depicted. It is not something to be shunned, but sought. It is not something to be feared, but appreciated. Her pride is not shown as empty, worthless, or evil. It is shown to be harmonious, enlightening, and good.

In its essence, the painting is a repudiation of pride as a sin.

With his painting, Vermeer transforms pride into a *virtue* - into something pure (as reflected by the pearls). By substituting the woman for St. Michael, Vermeer shows that her act is the proper one - that her goals, on earth, are the right ones, and the condemnation and suffering of "The Last Judgment" is not properly considered.

In short, Vermeer places man in the forefront (literally and figuratively), portraying him, not as a humble servant of god, but as a sovereign being with his own life as the proper end of his own judgment.

In short, it is something quite different than I first imagined.

--

(Let it be known, some of the above was cribbed from Mr. Smith's post. However, relating it to the concept of pride is entirely my own intellectual effort).

[AshRyan]

Yes, your observations on pride are an excellent contribution to my understanding (and appreciation) of the painting as well. Thank you.

[Kitty Hawk]

Those were interesting comments on Vermeer's painting. I'm looking through a book of Vermeer's paintings, which includes A Lady Weighing Gold (Pearls). One important detail I don't think you mentioned is that the woman is pregnant. The author of the book I have (The World of Vermeer, Hans Koningsberger) interprets this to mean the painting is a celebration of "life everlasting." Not saying I agree with that, but the woman's pregnancy must have some importance for the painting's theme.

[danielshrugged]

I've heard it suggested that the woman is not actually pregnant. Just looks like it from the style of dress or something. Not sure what to think about this possibility, though.

[RadCap]

Daniel is correct. There is some contention whether the woman is pregnant or if her garments are of the period and thus 'bulky'. I did consider mentioning this, but since the dispute exists, I simply did not mention it one way or the other.

[Andrew Joseph Sandberg]

I think it is important to discern the fact that although Vermeer may have intended "The Last Judgement" to be of conceptual importance, it does not act that way on a universal level. To understand such symbolism one needs a specialized knowledge of christianity and art. Art is for man- not man the scientist, or man the theologian, or even man the artist, but man as such. The theme of a painting must be available to the viewer by a process of induction from the content provided. Their is no specific content in this painting that connotes an allegorical theme. Like all of Vermeer's paintings, the theme of "Woman Holding a Balance" is epistemological- the objectivity of human consciousness in regard to perception, or as Ayn Rand stated "the contextual nature of our perception of light"(RM).

I would like to say, personally that I love this painting- the deep shadows, the lustrous textures, the brilliant exchange of light and dark, the directed rythms of orange and blue, and the wonderful twinkling display of fine jewels. It is among what I would name Vermeer's greatest works, and it gives me a pleasure in contemplation rivaled by few other works of art.

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

Here is a better picture of the painting "Woman Weighing Gold" by Vermeer, where the background image of the Last Judgment can more clearly be seen.

I have often thought that some of Vermeer's paintings have a deeper meaning than just being a beautiful painting of ordinary life, but I'm not sure about this one. It is interesting that the woman holding the balance has her head directly beneath the image of God making the Last Judgment; and it is interesting that God is in very dim light whereas the woman's face and headdress are glaringly bright.

Unfortunately, when one is talking about Christian allegory in paintings, the sun usually represents the Light of God, which would mean in this case that God is shining on the woman from above. Also, since God is depicted in low light levels in the background painting, it could mean that man in his art cannot fully capture the Light of God -- i.e. he cannot fully capture the essence of God in a painting.

The way the woman is painted reminds me of Mary, the Mother of God (according to Christian mythology), so maybe Mary is weighing the necessity of giving birth to Jesus, so that the final judgment of man will not be dim as it is shown in the background painting -- i.e. man will be saved by the birth and death of Jesus.

The balance not being tipped one way or the other could symbolize that the outcome hasn't been determined yet, but the fact that she is holding the balance means that man's future will be determined by her choice of giving birth to Jesus.

But, as I have said, I am not at all certain about this allegorical meaning. However, if there is Christian symbolism involved, then the things I have pointed out do go along with Christianity.

In other words, without the artist himself saying what he had in mind symbolically, if anything, I think one is making a hard jump in going from the painting to secularism. I don't think anyone from that time period (1632-1675) would ever come out, in words or in a painting, to say that secularism is greater than God. I just don't see that happening.

Edited December 16, 2006 by Thomas M. Miovas Jr.

[Capitalism Forever]

The way the woman is painted reminds me of Mary, the Mother of God

She is dressed like a wealthy and fashionable woman from Vermeer's day and age, so I doubt it could be Mary. Also, Mary could hardly have had a painting of the Last Judgment behind her in her lifetime!

so maybe Mary is weighing the necessity of giving birth to Jesus

I don't think Christian doctrine holds that was something for Mary to decide!

Unfortunately, when one is talking about Christian allegory in paintings, the sun usually represents the Light of God, which would mean in this case that God is shining on the woman from above.

But the same sunlight also falls on the pearls and ribbons on the table--the symbols of wealth. And even on the wall behind her, except that gloomy painting of the Final Judgment. The fact that the painting remains dark even while the area of the wall around it is bright seems to say that it is dark by nature--while the glittering of the pearls, against their less bright surroundings, appears to highlight their positive nature. Also note that the dark painting is in the background while the woman and her wealth are in the foreground ; this relegates the painting and what it symbolizes to a status of irrelevance and says that it is the secular values that are important.

I don't think anyone from that time period (1632-1675) would ever come out, in words or in a painting, to say that secularism is greater than God.

If any period, the Renaissance was the one when people dared to value secular wealth and pleasures in spite of their "knowledge" of God's disapproval of it.

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

We could probably argue back and forth over Vermeer and not get anywhere, because I don't know much about his explicit philosophy. I think I read somewhere that he was a Protestant who converted to Catholicism so he could marry the woman he loved. If this is true, then he is not going to triumph secularism over Christianity.

The most that could be said about his paintings overall is that they most definitely celebrate our ability to see, and that he loved to show the nature of how light interacts with things. I've asked various people who know about art over the years about Vermeer and whether or not his paintings had a deeper meaning, and they generally tell me no, not that they know of.

I tend to disagree with them on certain specific paintings, but for most of them, I can't figure out if he is saying anything profound or not; other than isn't it great that we can see. And this was basically why Miss Rand loved his paintings and thought he was the greatest painter artist.

Sometimes artists use references that are not explicit in the paintings, like some of the symbolism in Thomas Kinkade's paintings. But unless he came out and told me what he was symbolizing, I wouldn't have read that in the painting itself (i.e flying birds are meant to represent freedom, the lighted windows are representing the peaceful soul of a Christian, and the lighthouses represent Jesus, etc.)

So, I will say that it was possible that Vermeer had some sort of symbolism in some of his painting, but you may not know what they were unless he told you. Given my Catholic youth, I see Mary weighing the decision to save mankind by giving birth to Jesus in "Girl Weighing Gold".

Sorry, but it all fits together for me with that interpretation, and I don't see your interpretation as being plausible.

[Capitalism Forever]

I think I read somewhere that he was a Protestant who converted to Catholicism so he could marry the woman he loved. If this is true, then he is not going to triumph secularism over Christianity.

I'm not sure what you mean by the second sentence. The fact that he converted in order to marry would seem to indicate to me that he took neither Protestantism nor Catholicism very seriously.

So, I will say that it was possible that Vermeer had some sort of symbolism in some of his painting, but you may not know what they were unless he told you.

But we can at least make some educated guesses, can't we?

Given my Catholic youth, I see Mary weighing the decision to save mankind by giving birth to Jesus in "Girl Weighing Gold".

I dunno, perhaps there are different interpretations of some things even within Catholicism, but as far as I can tell from my experience with Catholics--and even Christians in general--the story is that God told Mary she was expecting a baby from him, and he wanted her to bear and raise the child, end of story. I am not aware of God giving Mary an option to abort the baby, nor of Mary ever contemplating to go directly against God's will, which after all would inevitably result in damnation for her.

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

But we can at least make some educated guesses, can't we?

We can do better than that. Since the objects in the painting and the background and everything else in the painting is objective (in the sense of being paintings of objects), we can observe what the artist had in mind and whether or not the objects are placed in a thematic manner. With some paintings, the meaning is obvious, like a roses flower bed; but with others, more thought is required to understand the message of the artist. Certainly, the more the artist has a rational psycho-epistemology, the more objectively clear his paintings will be and the message will be obvious. At certain times of history, artists have had to hide their true intent -- in plain sight so to speak -- because they would get in trouble with the authorities if they were too explicit. There were some paintings of dinner parties at the beginning of the Renaissance that did depict the bounty of earth, but it had to be toned down and made more religious. I think there is at least one painting of the Last Supper (of Jesus) that was done this way.

Regarding Mary having a choice. Of course she had a choice according to Catholicism. God did not rape her. According to Christian lore, she freely accepted God's will to have his child; which is why she is considered to be blessed.

Most of Vermeer's painting are definitely secular; or at least I can't see the religious meaning in them. But I would like to see a comment by him stating that the secular was more important than the religious in "Woman Weighing Gold." That he didn't seem to do many religious paintings (that I know of)might mean that he did this one for some special occasion. Or there may have been allegories that I am not familiar with that would have been fairly well known at his time period.