The Long Disputed Meaning Of Van Eyck's Painting (Waldemar Januszczak Documentary) | Perspective 

The memorial painting theory makes much sense. The picture always seemed dark, sad, cramped and unhappy to me. Now it makes sense why this never seemed like the depiction of a joyous event. Well done, well done.

That's the first explanation of this painting that actually makes sense of the emotional context. I couldn't figure out why other explanations struck me as off, but at the end of the episode it finally clicked that the expression on Arnoldfini's face was grief and pain. Even the religious conviction that is holding him together cannot hide his sadness. His wife always seemed to somehow be portrayed in a stereotypical renaissance pose for women, but now that makes sense too: she looks like a holy Madonna, caring for her unborn child with divine grace. Considering this interpretation, I don't think the title is wrong, though. "The Arnoldfini's marriage" seems perfect. He's pledging his eternal devotion to her, to remain married to her past her death. This is an intensely personal painting intended for one person. Van Eyck was incredibly talented.

I can't find words to praise this brief but amazing documentary about such a famous masterpiece. I thought I knew everything about Arnolfini Marriage but I only skimmed over its profound symbolism. I'd have never imagined that Mrs Arnolfini died giving birth and this painting actually is a posthumous tribute of a husband to his late wife. Very poignant and Waldemar so brilliant as always.

Arnolfini’s raised right hand reminds me of the gesture of a priest making the sign of the cross as a blessing. ‘Go in peace’.

Waldemar becomes the Agatha Christie of art History, as he unravels the mystery behind this postmortem of a portrait. Personally, I'd always wondered at its joylessness as a painting and its somber tone. Brilliant Waldemar! You've proven once more, we shouldn't believe everything we read in Museum catalogues. Bravo!

Every video with Waldemar Januszczak is brilliant. The passion this guy has for art is so intoxicating!

This has to be among the best art channels on RU-vid. I find all your programmes very interesting, educational and entertaining to watch.

I never noticed the burnt out candles. Genius.

I am brought to tears and I do not apologize for the emotion it produces.

Agreed. The painting never looked like a "marriage" portrait. It's far too sombre. I also don't think they would've chosen to commemorate their marriage with her being so fully pregnant -- it would've been so scandalous. As a portrait of mourning, it makes much more sense. This new interpretation definitely answers many questions why the painting is so hauntingly moving.

Thank you for addressing stolen pieces in museums. I remember seeing this double portrait as a child and thinking it looked so weird but I couldn't stop trying to figure it out. I agree with the school of thought that it's a portrait in memorandum of Mrs. Arnolfini and that's it. What looked strange to me then about her I know now was her being idealized as an angelic figure after her death.

It's also worth noting that the color used for the wife's dress is verdigris. This particular color was often used at the time but it was infamous for how it would end up fading with time. More than a couple of paintings from the time that used this color, unfortunately, show this faded shade instead of the one intended by the artist. Van Eyck actually had to sandwich the layers of this color with varnish in hopes that the color would stand the test of time (so far, it has!). Though, it could be argued, that knowing the risk of using this color, Van Eyck still decided to use it as a message that this image of life, of fecundity was bound to fade away eventually.

Interestingly his colors are kind of taken away, dark, giving him a strong contrast, while the wife is full of life in white, green warm colours and being pregnant. The new theory makes a lot more sense than a wedding.

This makes total sense. To me, this answers why he looks so sad. You can see pain in his eyes, but what does his raised hand mean? It reminds me of the hand gesture of a priest making the sign of the cross and saying "Go in peace". Is that true?

He is still in his Mourning clothing. Very sad, but you see the love he had to make sure the painting was done by the best artist of his time. Excellent clip.

Waldemar Januszcek, we are so grateful you have given us these wonderful stories. We have been strictly quarantined since March 3. You make life far more pleasant and interesting. Thank you.

yup! your arguments are more than convincing. the pregnant part i always assumed but to put it into the context of her death --- now it all comes together. i often wondered why she was looking at her husband instead of greeting the guests coming thru the door. now i know! excellent! thanks for posting this and Marcus Carvalho is right - it is much too short!

That was a Wow. The marriage vow I had heard. but what a revalation. The dog would symbolize faithfulness, but it could also represent a short life.. Well done.

I found a terrible problem in this episode: it is too short.

What a gripping analysis. And in my view, quite possibly correct.

I'll buy into that explanation.

This is a brilliant bit of sleuthing, and I think you guys have hit the nail on the head.

For me things just fell into place like a puzzle. I have a copy of this painting at home and never noticed that the chandelier behind Mrs Arnolfini did not have a candle burning but I alway noticed his sad and thoughtful face. It always seemed to me that he looked as though only his body was worldly but his spirit had long gone. Now I can relate to this painting in a different way, it has even more depth to me than before.

Whoa! This was a marvelous explanation. I even got a little teary-eyed at the end. Now that I get this background info, the tinge of sadness that always hung over this painting has been cleverly contextualized. It also explains why Mr. Arnolfini is clad in all black, and why his face is so weird and impassive, like he's just finished crying and is trying to repress his anguish. He's in mourning. Incredible. I'll never see this painting the same way again. It's like the "Chaconne" of painting now.

Brilliant. From the beginning, I could see the sadness in the man's face. This is no wedding, and yeah, it's obvious that she's pregnant. Another thing that might have been pointed out: While the man is quite realistic-looking, the woman is more stylized. Her features resemble that of a generic character in so much Christian art of that era. The implication? That the painting of her was not done from a living model.

Waldemar Januszczak is great. As an artist myself, I generally hate art critics talking about an artist's work. They spew a lot of B.S. Januszczak makes solid cases for his reviews.

This theory makes a lot of sense. I always found Mr. Arnolfini's features and stance to have been captured very realistically, whilst Mrs. Arnolfini looked comparatively rigid and static, her features very schematic and idealised. Now it makes sense. Mr Arnolfini was painted from life; his wife was not.

This particular video blew my mind, because I had an art history teacher determined to only believe that this was a marriage contract. Very good!

WOW, that is the best explanation yet-I wonder why so many experts don’t see that. Now I can’t unsee it.

I find this theory convincing - it explains the melancholy tone of the painting and makes it much more poignant and meaningful. This is a bereaved husband re-committing his marriage to his much loved departed wife. The practical point I want to make is that as someone who had done a fair bit of bodywork, the NG's theory that Mrs Arnolfini isn't pregnant is absurd. The sway of her spine and her whole carriage make it clear that she is counterbalancing the weight of her protruding "bump". This reinforces Januszczak's point about the protective gesture of her left hand. Sometimes academics get so caught up in their theories that they can't see what's right in front of their eyes...

That's as precise as history of art can get! This marvellous interpretation gives the painting the spiritual and intellectual depth it radiates as the ominious mood that has something surreal about it for many viewers. Colorwise the woman and the bed are the most lively elements and shapes of the painting. In comparison the man and his surroundings sink into shadowy half-life...or oblivion. So what is real on the level of meaning is his longing, grief and devotion to his deceased wife.

Well done, Waldy-another intiguing episode. My “fave” so far!🌹

I feel I need to congratulate myself, when Waldemar said something at the beginning - and I'll have to go back to find out what is was - my mind thought, this is a husband's painting of his wife who died in childbirth. A lesson in art history too and its relationship with mores of the times and theories contorted to fit present day culture. Wlademar is just the best. Thank you so much for these series.

I have to say it again: I'm impressed by how good this channel and the narrator are. Bloody good stuff! I love it!

Brilliant. The painting, the analysis, and the series. I’ll watch it over and over. And, in contrast to what I was taught - of course she’s pregnant.

Imagine my delight when I found this video was only posted last week! What a thrilling revisit to this amazing portrait and its true, heartbreaking story. After musing last night and this morning I think I see further clues to support the theory put forth... Many thanks to Mr. J for his narration and collaboration with the other critics and historians featured here, and to the Perspective team for producing this excellent video. First of all, it is preposterous that scholarship would take the position that Mrs. Arolfini is NOT pregnant. The hand on the belly with the palm down is enough for me to go on. Add the astute observation of the similitudes to scenes of The Annunciation, and I think the body of scholarship has terribly missed the mark by calling this a "wedding..." Read on. Further clues, of which there are too many to see and/or number, and in no type of sequence, that the posthumous theory is right... That Lady Arolfini is dead, and I would add that she lost twins. (1) mud on Mr. Arolfini's shoes, from a recent visit to a site with fresh dug dirt. (2) *** Lady Arolfini's shoes. This is the smoking gun that I think the video missed. The shoes, having been removed for prayer, point away from life, toward God, and are red in color. Red shoes symbolize human sacrifice. The Arolfinis might have known they were having twins, which would have increased the risk of the pregnancy and commanded prayer for the health, or salvation, of mother and children. (3) the Oranges. One remains on the windowsill, "in the light," yet it is moldering. The three ripe oranges have fallen, representing the mother and twins. (4) Mrs. Arolfini wears 2 gold rings (5) Mr. Arolfini is dressed in funeral garb whereas Mrs. Arolfini wears bright green clothing indicating new life. (6) the dog is the only one looking at whoever is in the mirror; to me this is showing animals' natural awareness and no fear of God. The dog also symbolizes loyalty, Mr. Arolfini's betrothal to his wife. Now, my speculations about the mirror and the expressions and postures of the subjects. (A) it is not the artist in the mirror. It would have been duplicitous for him to paint himself in and also sign the painting so ostentatiously. I believe it is God and the Devil reckoning the fate of the subjects, the Arolfinis. God stands forward, wearing cerulean blue, symbolizing heaven. He has come now to take Mrs. Arolfini. The devil stands behind, waiting to take Mr. Arolfini to hell, later. (B) Mrs. Arolfini gazes at her "husband" with a look of judgment. He is responsible for this. Her face is pure white and fully lit, marble like, indicating a clear conscious but also death. (C) Mr. Arolfini wears a look of doom. He cannot bear to look at whoever is standing in the door, nor at his "wife." His face is half cast in shadow, showing that he is half living in darkness. He is making the sign of the cross at his "wife," while also bearing her away with his left hand to whomever has come (and is shown in the mirror). The story depicted in this painting is a pregnancy out of wedlock, and Mr. Arolfini's grief at having to bear the consequences of his actions for the rest of life, until he is taken to hell. A true masterpiece by Van Eyck with untold symbols. I only hope that the painting (and humanity) survives another 500 years to continue to ponder it. Thank you for reading.

The perspectives you have brought to this are so fascinating to ponder. One can never look at this painting the same way again. Really appreciate all that you bring to this channel.

Mr. Arnolfini is rocking that awesome hat.

Just found this channel and I have always loved Jan Van Eyck's work and this one in particular has always stayed with me for some reason. Seeing and hearing the new details of it as I too have loved how he did the mirror in the back of the room and the scenes around it and how it seems to show the viewer in the mirror, now adds even more to the scene portrayed here. I always thought it was both dark and light, and almost unsettling. Based upon the history at the time it makes perfect sense to me that she is indeed dead and this is her final scene as both a happy and sad time for her husband and their families. Van Eyck is indeed a genius for creating this and still keeping us guessing years later.

Very interesting presentation & analysis! I think the posthumous portrait after her death due to childbirth has a great deal of validity.

Waldemar excellent as usual 👍

One of my favorite RU-vid channels

You can tell by the treatment of the wife that the painting is all about her. Thank you so much for the beautiful and sad picture.

Excellent story and well done to Waldemar and the production team. Fantastic job! As an artist I'm for the first time inspired by the middle age art!

This guy is great. He makes it all fascinating and dramatic, which it is, of course.

Thank you Waldemar Januszak, finally Mr Arnolfinis gesture and facial expression make sense. They were weird for a wedding.. very touching explanation and makes us recognise (again) so sharply how desensitised and fast lived we have become.. to commemorate her so elaborately after her demise.

Wow! I was wondering the whole time why he looked so sad.

Wow! Well considered and well researched and respectful and sensitive presentation Mr. Januszczak! Fine work. Thank you!

I love the mysterious art and their artists - could we have an episode about Hieronymus Bosch?!

Such a wonderful program. And what a sad story. You made me cry a little bit.

The Memorial painting explanation makes sense to me as there is so much symbolism in this painting. Thank you.

One of the things that has always struck me about his painting is the paleness of the husband's unsmiling face, with his eyes partly closed and partly downcast, and the darkness of his clothing: gray, brown, black. He looks almost lifeless--depressed--a figure of mourning.

This is a very convincing argument for me because the moment I layed eyes on it I was struck that it was an incredibly ominous looking painting, full of grief. It upset me to look at it. It's just so obvious that something is very off. It screams it. The chap is in complete mourning. What a brilliant mini-documentary.

Amazingly accurate explanation of a painting. I do agree, and also, a noticeable gesture of Arnolfini hand : a salute to his wife.

A very, very good documentary! Waldemar's always are, but this one, wow!

Brilliant episode, logic explanation. I'm from Van Eyck's birth town and I could only wish more of his paintings had landed in the National Gallery. They would get so much more attention 🙂! Now you've made me curious. Another great Flemish painter, Pieter Brueghel, was born in this area.

Wow! How insightful is this?!

Wonderful explication of a wonderful painting. So glad I stayed.

This beautiful painting really stops you in your tracks and make you stare at it and wonder. It says something about a marriage, yet the grim and sad expression of the groom contradicts the supposedly joyous occasion and that makes me wonder why. Some reviews mention the reflection in the mirror, the slippers etc but your more detailed and interesting explanation poke the curiosity out of me and knowing now what you've so far theorize , I'll have to look at it from a different perspective and truly appreciate this work of art for what it is in that period. Your investigative explanation of this famous painting by Jan van Eyck is quite incredible.

Aaaargghhh! I can't believe I walked past the National Gallery last Summer I didn't know one of my favourite works of art was right there

wow best interpretation i've heard. i might start liking it now. i haven't liked it because 1 how can a man have that kind of expression at a wedding (even if it's not a romantic marriage), and 2 even worse the dog's head does not look anatomically correct - i can't bear to look at it, no matter how fantastic the 3d rendering of the candle chandelier.

This painting has long fascinated me. Thank you for your explanation of it.

Fantastic deduction - suddenly it all makes sense.

Most positive comments section I've ever read! Touché Januszczak!

By virtue of their creation paintings are always more than the image itself. So many stories to be discovered. This story is so deeply moving. And the story continues to unfold as so eloquently told. I've watched many of the Perspective documentaries, they've all been extremely informative and interesting. But this video is transformative, a story hidden by passing centuries and a lack of intellectual curiosity. Human frailty, human endurance, an unconsidered mystery. Great sleuthing.

WOW...this feels to be true. Thank you for sharing!

Brilliant explanation! This is one of the paintings I studied in my art history classes and it never made sense that she was not pregnant. Thank you so much for this!

Oh! Now I know why I've been quite fond of Arnolfini and his bride! I like it. MAKE IT LONGER! 😇

I believe it to be a commemoration painting as well. The wife is indeed pregnant, and he perhaps lost them both. Always enjoy Mr. Januszak's views and videos. Thank you.

Excellent short documentary. Excellent explanation. Yep, it does feel like it is mistery solved to me. I have this painting and its meaning as an open question since the first documentary I saw almost 30 years ago. This explanation is settled to me. Thank you. Did I say I am impressed by this channel? Well, I truly am.

I expect Velazquez saw this painting and thought a lot about and admired the idea of that mirror reflection. I never knew before that this painting was in the Spanish Royal collection, where he could have seen it.

Wow! Fascinating!!

Absolutely, fascinating painting!

Beautiful, passionate, investigative... Thank you.

Seen so many docs on this Painting, but this is just BRILLIANT

Thank you for debunking the ‘she’s not pregnant, it’s just the drape of the dress’ hypothesis. Surely any woman who has carried a child would agree that the woman is pregnant. Your evaluation of the scene seems spot on and provides a much better context for his vacant stare and dark surroundings.

What a fascinating story. The theory that this is a memorial makes so much sense that I am sure that it is the right one. I found the explanation of the symbolism in the paintings to be quite fascinating as well. Thank you so much for sharing this.

I've never known this version of this painting. I loved it. Thanks from São Paulo, Brazil.

Excellent and persuasive. Thank you.

Your theory explains everything! I always thought that the bride looked idealised. She looks like an angel. Not like a real woman. I think that Van Eyck never met the bride in real life. So he painted an angel. Compare it with angels on his other paintings. On the contrary Arnolfini himself looks like a real person. Thanks!!

Where Waldemar goes, I go. Thank you for all the wonderful art education videos. They mean so much to me.

Amazing clarity. Thank you.

This has been one of my favorite paintings since I studied Art History in school nearly 50 years ago, and I love now it even more. The face of Arnolfini has always haunted me and now I see why that might have been so. Thank you for a beautiful critique.

Very moving explanation indeed! Thank you...

This guy is an art expert and knows what he’s talking about more than the museum directors.

Wow thank you for explaining this art piece!

Thank you for your VIDEO lectures. I LOVE how you intelligently present THEORIES, IDEAS, nuanced details, pointed in-depth questions and more. You SUPPORT your conclusions and offer different points of view in a mature, adult, enthralling, engaging, intelligent style. You don't rant, whine, complain, accuse, insult and your delivery isn't bombastic or sensationalized as if you are gossiping. I find your communication skills yo be EXCELLENT. Thank you for posting!!!!! 😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗

I just discovered this wonderful channel! Thank you so much for all this beautiful work and perspective. You're never too old to learn about beauty.

This is so fascinating. As for wiping out the furry creatures, there was a mini ice age going on at the time, and you will see a lot of fur in many paintings during this time.

Waldemar is top curator and sleuth. And narrator! Love the mystique.

this was just sublime .

Merry Christmas and all it's blessings to you. Thank you for this brilliant interpretation - most like the accurate reading of the message of a grieving husband who lost his beloved wife in childbirth. Thank you for bringing art to life for us.

A wonderful painting, so much detail to be enjoyed up close. Also worth looking at the self portrait hanging next to it in the National Gallery.

When I was young I had seen photos of the painting long before I read that the lady in the painting wasn't pregnant. I was shocked and irritated by the denial and I remained that way until I viewed this video; finally, the voice of reason has sounded. Thank you, Waldemar.

Excellent analysis. I have listened in classroom lectures about this painting but none so probing and evocative.

Crisp stunning Brilliant composite analysis . And ..thankyou ...all makes absolute sense .

As an artist,I am amazed that he could paint like this with no conveniences like lights,water,heat,etc.

Amazing! Thank you so much!

Fascinating!

Totally subscribed 👍. Excellent. Loved your version💐