Under long term progressgoogeltranslated

-  DE SLEUTEL TOT DE NACHTWACHT  - 

- THE KEY TO THE NIGHTWATCH -

-  LA CLAVE DE LA RONDA DE NOCHE -

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

•

Velazquez, The Surrender of Breda, 1634                                                   Rembrandt, The Nightwatch, 1642

LETS UNDERSTAND THE MAIN CONNECTION WITHOUT ANY WRITING

 AND THEN TRUST IT HAD A ORIGIN AND LEFT A TRASE.

I NOTICED A BOOT AND READ THE INTERSPACE.

HOW COME AND WHY ?

Velazquez, The surrender of Breda, 1634 

Is Nassau kissing his crew ?

Has he gone to war with a ephebos ? 

Whats this? A giant dick ? 

Is the painting insinuating that Nassau is gay ?

IT LAYS IN THE LOGIC OF AN INSULT TO REACH THE SUBJECT.

Rembrandt, The abduction of Ganymede, 1635

THE REACTION
We will find an answer to the Spaniards implicit message in an odd painting by Rembrandt.
A depiction of Ganymede. The painting dosn´t follow any tradition fore the motive.
It stands in a art historical context as more than odd.
Usually we see Zeus in the shape of an eagle abducting the most beautiful of the boys,
so he could be cup bearer for the gods. But Rembrandt portrays this myth without male beauty.
The abducted boy is crying, grimacing bad and urinate in the eagles claws.
There is a clear position against all homosexual response in the subject.
Its clarified with clarity that the boy´s youth and virtue are completely beyond reproach.
We read this out of the cherries in his hand.
Any young men in Nassaus companion, their honor was untouchable.


WITH A IMPLICITE HETRO-MESSEGE BUT FIRST ...

Rembrandt, Belsazzar´s feast, 1635

  

 - I DON`T UNDERSTAND THE MESSAGE !

The words are Belshazzar in sight of text on the royal palace wall. 

The scriptures meaning is explained for the slothful and moderately humble Belhazzar;

 Mene - God has numbered the days of your kingdom and finished it! 

Tekel - You been weighed on the scales and found too light! 

Peres - your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and Persians.

We can look on Velazquez painting and the spanish empire in the light of this bible text. 

Rembrandt is adressing Velazquez and his capitulation scene. To make the connections stronger 

we can ask ourselves if Rembrandt also is working with a low and rough interpretation? 

I belive he does. 

There are a young boy in the shadows of the table, lets follow the emblematic of the figs and grapes.

The main woman in the scene seems to lift her skirts in front of the king. 

The right woman's left hand moves toward his sex while she is going down for an oral act with the wessel. 

The other woman's opens her mouth in front of a hand grip. And then the young boy, 

green in his face is blowing a little horn just behind the ass of the old man that bends over. 

But mainly its a pleasure full male body surounded by female action.

Rembrandt, Simsons weddingfeast, 1638

- I WILL GIVE YOU A RIDDLE !
Samson he is a man with a taste for women. The bible tells us about the riddle that he present at his wedding feast.
Its solved by cheating with the help of the bride. But Samson takes his revenge.
There is something hidden under the table, something we don´t see. The bride seems lonely and calm but 
the canopy pattern seems to stress her mind. But she is carrying an unborn idea !
In the paintings more quiet corner we meet a familiar figure, Ganymede, he has just served two of the guests.
But they grimace and are green in their face.
The painters guild in Leiden not only praised the painting they also gave the subject for master; 
The depiction of the spinning wheel.

Velazquez, Menippus - Mars - Aisopos 1639-41

- HEREIN REST MY PAINTING ...

First the view of the cynic satirist Menippus. Then Mars stripped to male attraction. 

Finally followed by Aesop as a smelly tanners. Are they complaining?

Significant for the paintings are how they conceal and expose.

What is being hidden? Whats is exposed? By a wicked satire?

The desire for a naked man ?

Not without you came to wonder over rumor of Nassau. 

 Rembrandt, The Nightwatch, 1642

A victorius company member adorns the old conquistador helmet with oak leaves. 

A ribbon tied to the Ganymede painting.

A SHADDOW OF A MAN

It would be a shadow of a man that reach for his weapon brother´s .. arm.. Would it still look like it, 

remember that it take place in the interest of Amsterdam.

- Surrender or you suffer from both French uniforms and the Swedish kings weapon.

The old gift, the partisan is still in the Royal Palace. 

The troops were coordinated. In time we are in the Swedish-French stage of the Thirty Years War. 

The boy that runs errands for the men? He maintains his smile over the rose that been thrown in his steps. 

We can´t give hime the name of Ganymede!

Rembrandt sign next to the boot.

•

As barber to King Midas you keep quiet with what you seen.
The idea that Holland´s epicenter The Nightwatch contains a rhetorical answer whether a member of the Nassau-family was gay or not. 
The painting finds it form in a simple insult. 
Then biblical motifs with rough and low undertones. 
No, that won´t work!
When my story then reaches Las Meninas, well, then all the possibilities falls.
The eternity of this art won´t be dissolved by the trampling of a little boy.
I would be a dwarf. I dosn´t help that Rembrandt could take all the donkey stories to his heart.
Amsterdams opinion was carved in stone. It appears hopeless. 

But Bartholomeus van der Helst, his company portraits from 1639,
is it possible to read it in this perspective?
A bright dressed company member in focus raises an association to the efeb in the capitulation scene.

Between the two expressive flanks this painting is unfold.
It seems to be about shooting a beautiful curly and well-dressed man.
Raise your eyebrows and maybe you will feel sick. We have too use homophobic rhetoric. 

So from left to right:

Surely he keeps his distance? A skeptical eye,

pulling lightly his upper lip and the eyebrows held high.

Two boys, one is ashamed and looks down. - Has he misunderstood all?

He has clearly no track what weapon he hold in his hand.

You came to wonder what comments the own portraits raised.

- I blushes and you´re standing and pointing at my dick.

- It would be little boys curiosity.

But our sticks stops undressed games.

Cuver your self !

A shiny bareheaded man and one dressed for the pleasure of our glance.

Here lies an accusation.

-We would shoot you if you exposed yourself to a man!

- He is faithful to his woman. Like a dog !!

Its empty talk, fill my glass!

That man knows how to hold and hide his dick !

Nobody would put a plug in that barrel hole!

Would their run a rat its dead!

- I swear to God !                                                                                  -The thought makes me sick!

•

Rembrandt, Mordokais triumph, 1641

- LOOK WHATS BEEN DONE FOR WHOM THE KING WANTS TO HONOR !

These words could easily been Velazquez when he completed Philip IV´s tribute to his old commander and his victory in Breda.

But the words are from the bible and the story of Haman, King Ahasuerus his  Esther and the old jew Mordochai.

It ends up very badly for Haman. He will be hanged in his own built gallow.

The Nightwatch is the gallow for the capitulation scene. 

But now comes the big problem.

The words could also be applied to Rembrandt !

But first lets say goodbye the Spanish military commander and his horse.

Velazquez, Philip IV of Spain, 1641

Magnifcently equipped !

Velazquez, The fable of Arachne, 1644-48

- YOU FALL ON YOUR OWN GRIP ! YOU WILL HUNG IN YOUR OWN THREAD!

Being challenged Velázquez now responds both to Rembrandt and the Dutch painter Angel. 

This with a masterpiece of the spinning wheel. This was just what Angel asked for in a treatise in 1642.

There he gave the task of a master. He wanted to see the painted movement of a wheel. 

Hearsay or substantial information, I think we have strong reason to believe that Velázquez searched for information. 

What have Rembrandt and his colleagues really done? I suppose the information came through the southern part of the Netherlands, 

where the Spaniards were still present. Velázquez wanted all information he could get. 

I believe it ́s now that Velázquez presented ”The fable of Arachne ”  with its message of ”don ́t challenge the master”.  

Doing so, Rembrandt will now share the same destiny as Arachne. 
She challenged Pallas Athene in the art of tapestry making but finally hanged her self in her own thread. 

It is a suitable theme in consideration of Rembrandts use of Hamans expression and destiny. 
Velazquez could just as well argue that it´s Rembrandt that acts and shout like Haman ! 

Spain ́s struggle in the war. Pallas Atene, the goddess of war and protector of art, 
will bring victorious messages. 

At the time it was not just the hearsay over ”The Nightwatch” that told Velázquez and the court 
that the banner and the luck of war now changed sides.

It was a message of reality.

The meeting of two opposite sides is established in ”The Surrender of Breda”. 

Velázquez now presents a ladder on the former Dutch side. 

The ladder in the painting could be interpreted as a symbol for trying to reach God. 

But it is so well placed next to the pile of cloth that I came to wonder if it is not also a question of equipment

 for taking down all the Dutch victorious banners and stack them on a pile. 

The banner was conquered from Velázquez ́ scene of capitulation and taken to triumph in ”The Nightwatch”. 

But now in lack of a Spanish victory a blood-coloured cloth is just torn down in ”The fable of Arachne”. 

The upper part of ”The fable of Arachne” with its triumphal arch is later added to the painting. 

Maybe there was an historical event that finally gave the reason? 

Or is the addition just a question of responding to ”The Nightwatch” ?

Rembrandt, The Holy Family with a Curtain, 1646

- WHAT A POOR COMFORT.

At the time of the work with Rembrandt ́s peaceful painting of the Holy Family, 

information about Velázquez ́ new painting probably reached Holland. 

I suppose this did not worry Rembrandt. There was nothing ingenious about it. 

Velázquez was just showing off his skill with the spinning wheel, and that gave him some comfort. 

In the case of Calderon he had rewritten his play ”El sitio de Breda” and a second version was printed in 1640.

Maybe Rembrandt responds, using a little panel and presenting a new and strange version of the Holy Family. 

A trompe l ́oeil with a curtain in front of a painted framework. 

As I see it, the uniqueness of this theme is the crying child of Jesus. I thought he was the calmest child in history. 

But his mother is giving him comfort. In other words this is a tableau over a painting and it gives consolation. 

This happens to be just the case with Calderon ́s ”El sitio de Breda” . 

A tableau over a painting and it gives consolation. 

I believe Rembrandt is showing off with a riddle giving us a new scene where Josef in anger uses his axe on the former Spanish side. 

Is this what is being told in this uniqe and strange picture?
A scholar would forget the crying child and say something about Apelles.

Rembrandt, Virgin with child, cat and a snake, 1644

A SNAKE IS HIDDEN IN THE MOTIVE ! 

Which aim not only on the scene with the baby Jesus.

Rembrandt, The judgment over Haman, 1654-55

WHAT COMES NEXT ?

Rembrandt gives us; The judgment of Haman, who pleads for his life.

But whats distracts the king? A profane and legitimate wonder, a new spanish painting?

Rembrandt, Quintus Fabius Maximus, 1655

A INTERESTING AND DESTROYED PAINTING

Velazquez, Las Meninas, 1656

TO RESTORE THE HONOR OF THE COMMANDERS HORSE

The ingenious idea in ”The Nightwatch” is still unsurpassed and that makes Rembrandt a winner. 

He could look at himself as the king among painters. The situation calls for Velázquez analysis. 

Maybe in due time he realised that ”The Nightwatch” was just mirroring itself in ”The Surrender of Breda”. 

A conclusion could be that Velázquez presence made his portrait.

Rembrandt had ingeniously placed himself under Velázquez crown and in front of his work. 

These questions must have been a puzzle to the royal painter and I believe they were brought up for discussion 

in the rooms of the royal palace in Madrid. 

It had emerged to an artistic duel just like the one between Pan and Apollo. 

I have found a room where these problems could be solved and where Velázquez analysis is reflected. 

In fact we know that alluding paintings still hang there in the background 

as we see them in ”Las Meninas”, Mazos ́ two paintings ”Pallas and Arachne ”and ”Apollo and Pan”. 

Here Philip IV would give the honour and rank in return to Velázquez.
The mirror gives us a reflection of a king. 

”Las Meninas” is famous for the illusion that you could feel like a king when Velázquez makes your portrait. 

Above all it raises the question who is the king? And who has made the painting? The king? 

But the primary viewer in these pieces of eternity is Velázquez himself. 

His describing words could easily have been:

 - Standing here in front of my painting I am the king - of painters. 

Maybe somebody in the audience raised the question:

 - What about Rembrandt? We have all heard and remember how Spinola ́s horse was driven away like a pitiable dog. How Rembrandt felt like a king in front of your painting. 

Velázquez has painted a possible answer: 

- I am tired of him. Rembrandt will not feel like a king! 

Can´t you see that I in front of a dwarf, have painted a calm dog that does not care if a little boy is treading on its back. 

Velázquez is once again the king of painters, Rembrandt a dwarf and little boy. 

What an ingenious idea and the beauty of the painting and Infanta Margarita caught everybody ́s eye.

This is my conclusion of Velázquez ́ tired eyes and the mirror: 

We cannot exist at the same time. I have reason to believe that he was addressing Rembrandt and not his own patronage. 

 It was an analysis of the situation with ”The Nightwatch” that made this painting.

Rembrandt, Ahasuerus and Haman at the Feast of Esther, 1660

THE YEAR VELAZUEZ DIED

-How can we honor this man? Don´t misunderstand. In the bible, its Haman who is asked, 

he believes its referring to himself. 

Rembrandt had since The Nightwatch a profane association in the subject. 

The man won't be honored.

Rembrandt, The Conspiracy of the Batavians under Claudius Civilis, 1661-62

Amsterdam 1662

(Newly  reedated)

Amsterdam 10th October 2000

A postum triumph for Velazquez.

IMMENSELY SWEET.

Rembrandt, Lucretias suicide, 1664

Surely the were some bragging over Velazquez portrayed girls.

But among the legends of the Roman Empire are a parallel and it tells us about

the establishment of the republic.

The story of Lucretia begins in how men are bragging over their beautiful and faithful women

but ends in Lucretia´s suicide and revolt against the old Roman Kingdom.

It is the altar where the Republic rests.

Velazquez, Hamans Recognizes his Fate, 1665 

A sad mood, regrets and repentance.

Both Mordocai and King Ahasuerus gives expression of these feelings.

The decision is made Rembrandts painting won't hung in Amsterdam's new courthouse.

No one understands how the man thought. 

Rembrandt, Lucretias suicide, 1666

A knife cuts the canvas. Its just paintings on the story thread. 

A charm - In other words the allurement and charm of Rembrandts work will remain.

Rembrandt, The Painter Gerard de Lairesse, 1665

Where the head to small for the hat? And those big fumbling hands!

Could they really manage to perpetuate the Dutch victory at Breda?

Gerard de Lairesse got the assignment.

•

Now lets search for a new self-portrait by Rembraandt!

One of the  eighteen company members of The Nightwatch never got to see the painting,

he died before Rembrandt completed it.

But from an all-seeing triangle we meet his gaze,

his rifle is resting on the shoulder but his brother is firing a salute.

Now we can count the men, quite suddenly a navel 

in the original center of the painting is vacant! 

Whose?

It´s not every day you find a self-portrait by Rembrandt. 

Carl Fredrik Hill, Stenbrott vid Oise II, 1877

Okänd konstnär "MFC"