Around a decade ago, I stood in front of this painting to present my final project to my renaissance art history class and lecturer. It was a surreal experience to talk about such an important piece in one of the greatest art museums in the world, having guests of the museum stop to listen to me, surrounded by the intense energy of the old masters.
Bravo, Ms. Allen! First time in my 82 years that I've appreciated an oversized painting like this, It's never too late to be awakened to something that was always there - as opposed to "something new." Thanks so much
I loved from the beginning to the end of this video all the knowledge that this teacher Karly Allen passed on this painting, she has a very affectionate way and at the same time muto instructive in her words in which she totally caught my attention. I'm super delighted, I hope to see more videos with this teacher, a big hug to all involved of the National Gallery, from Recife, Brazil
Kudos to the National Gallery to give us these educative insights into major artwork such as this. Pearls in an age of mediocrity. I am underwhelmed however by the camera position, and the lack of proper editing of both colors and sound. The camera should have been set a higher level to help us appreciate the painting from a 90° angle. The keystoning effect seems to have been corrected in post-production, but it does not offset the low viewing angle. The colors ought to have been properly white-balanced to remove the blue haze given off by the ceiling light hitting a vast expense of green wallpaper. The sound lacks in clarity and crispness, with muddy mid-ranges and watered-down trebles. Also, Mrs. Allen's natural mouth noises could have been edited out to allow sensitive ears to focus on the content than on the form. Granted, these steps require a budget that the Gallery may or may not have. But the purpose of these interesting lectures certainly deserves a bit of extra attention to their production value.
I love this series of talks from the National Gallery and was thrilled to see this video on one of my all-time favourite paintings at the gallery. Karly Allen clearly knows her stuff about Veronese and I enjoyed most of the talk but was surprised and disappointed that Ms Allen so misrepresents the significance of Alexander's response to Sisygambis's error which is the nugget of this telling episode in Alexander's life (and thus the focus of this painting.) Ms Allen's description of his response as "Hephaestion is also an Alexander, we're all Alexander" may communicate the magnanimity of Alexander's response but suggests that Alexander is some self-effacing man-of-the-people who thought it was a lark when strangers mistook others for him. This however is a poor rendering of his lapidary response (which is the reason why this episode is remembered, and depicted, in Veronese's time and our own). Alexander is reported to have replied "He too [i.e. Hephaestion] is Alexander" which conveys and emphasises the uniquely close nature of the friendship between Alexander and Hephaestion (to whom Ms Allen refers, somewhat coyly, as merely his "good friend" (not even "closest friend"?); considering that the two men compared themselves to the fantastically loyal Achilles and Patroclus, "good friends" seems an understatement.) Anyway, this episode is important when viewing Alexander's life not only because it shows his mercy toward Darius's family and magnanimity in the face of Sisygambis's (very minor and unintentional) slight but also because it confirms the high esteem in which Alexander holds Hephaestion. By downplaying Alexander's response, Ms Allen makes the episode depicted in the painting less forceful and somewhat wishy-washy, as though he was painfully modest ("Aw, shucks, Miss Sisygambis, 'tis my men who deserve all the credit, not I") rather than loyal and noble in victory. I still enjoyed most of this talk very much though.
Fascinating lecture. We often hear that the colour has deteriorated - is less blue, less red ... I would love to see these pictures restored digitally so we could get a better idea of how the original colour was.
As to the question of who is Alexander and who is Hephaestion, I've been puzzling on this for years and am still not prepared to say with 100% certainty which figure is who. I really love the deliberate ambiguity that Veronese introduces by making either possibility likely. Having said this, if I had to choose I'd probably say that Alexander is the man in red since he is clearly the one speaking his famous lapidary response and the hand gestures make sense if he is shushing Sisygambis's apologies (upon realising her error) and indicating his "alter ego" Hephaestion (rather than H. shushing S.'s misdirected thanks and indicating their correct recipient, A.) Also, it is often remarked in the accounts of Alexander's life that he was small for his size and that Hephaestion was the taller of the two. Although the two figures seem to be of comparable height, the man in orange is slightly taller, indicating to me at least that this is Hephaestion.
Excellent presentation. I know very little but I am guessing the bearded male in the center would be an interpreter, no? Likely they did not speak the same language... Just a thought
Is there no zoom? The view is so long that, to a short-sighted person like me, it's purely impressionistic. No monkeys. No turbans. I have to use it as pure audio book.
The picture is affected by a greenish tint which is probably the result of the green walls reflecting on the canvas. National Gallery, please do the obvious, have only white, or neutral green backgrounds for all works. Even tough the human eye can "accommodate" for this kind of deviations, accommodation is limited and it doesn't work any more when the paintings are photographed.
Sigh. There is no doubt which one is Hephaestion and which one is Alexander. Hephaestion was known as a dandy who always dressed in sumptuous, richely coloured clothing, while Alexander dressed as a soldier.
