Sir John Everett Millais, Christ in the House of His Parents
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 04. 2012
- Sir John Everett Millais, Christ in the House of His Parents, 1849-50, oil on canvas, 864 x 1397 mm (Tate Britain, London). Created by Beth Harris and Steven Zucker.
The PRB were golden. Also important in this painting is the sheep in the background And the red flower in the doorway, as well as what looks like a small candle in the window.
“Turned the lights on in a Caravaggio...” good one!
These talks are something I discovered during Covid lockdown. They bring delight. I am looking at paintings I have seen ... In a deeper, richer way. Thank you!
This painting is so powerful to me for the exact reasons it probably insulted an upper class public- it speaks of humility, family, and the working class. Idealized Christ imagery that you mentioned is very much about aligning these figures with that of royalty or nobility. Millais is subversive because the working class, labor, etc. is central here in a way that made people very uncomfortable. Perhaps that’s why some critics resorted to racialized commentary on the appearance of Jesus here- even though to a 2022 sensibility here, Jesus looks “white,” the fact that he is being represented in such a way that does not perpetuate the ideals of what white supremacy looked like in the Victorian Era.
Charles Dickens was off the wall with that description 😅😁
An absolute masterpiece! Brilliant in every way.
Im doing an essay on this painting,The Pre-Raphaelites were fantastic painters, especially Millais. I think the differences in interpretation from the May 1850 newspaper reviews, such as the much sited Dickens review, to modern textual sources such as G.H.Fleming 1967 “Rossetti and the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood” Western Printing Services Ltd, Bristol. Looking at these comparisons is extremely fascinating.. Thanks for the video!
All, I come from Southampton UK, home of the artist, and enjoyed the commentary very much. Many thanks, kip
I love this painting!
Great video. Thx.
I think that's supposed to be joachim, not Joseph
Religious or not~ this is an interesting observation, isn't it?
Mary is always represented wearing blue. How did a Jewish carpenter's wife afford blue cloth?
I am amused by the commentators, who are reticent in other videos of discussing possible symbolism of ancient artifacts because, they claim, they simply cannot know what is meant by the art. Yet, here, they dig for symbolism that Millais might never have intended, simply because they feel they "know" the Victorians better. That's what people who discuss art do--they speculate based on their own backgrounds, and these two cannot seem to escape their own cultural biases.