4 ms·
This has never been fully explained to me. so I'm confused. Ok, Vermeer originally painted the cupid. Does anyone argue that he covered it up? Does anyone a
by compsciphd 5y ago
This has never been fully explained to me. so I'm confused.
Ok, Vermeer originally painted the cupid. Does anyone argue that he covered it up? Does anyone argue that his final intent was for the painting not to have the cupid? Or do people argue that someone else covered up the Cupid and in effect mangled Vermeers work?
If Vermeer was the one who did it, isn't this "restoration" effectively mangling the artwork to not be his final intent?
- rurban 5y agoThe cupid changed the story completely. She was having an affair or waiting for the sailor to return, and completely lost her innocence. She's also looking pregnant. If it was an order, and it surely was, the father and family must have been furious and either ordered Vermeer or someone else to overpaint the cupid. And the girl got her innocence back. Could also happened a couple of years later when the lover didn't come back or married someone else. Note that dutch girls at those times, and esp. those painted by Vermeer had their loved ones on sea in the east-indies for business. They all were reading letters, and had a map on the wall.
- beecafe 5y ago> Following further investigations, including tests in an archaeometry laboratory, it was discovered that layers of binding agent and a layer of dirt existed between the image of Cupid and the overpainting. The conservators concluded that several decades would have passed between the completion of one layer and the addition of the next and therefore concluded that Vermeer could not have painted over the Cupid himself.
- drewzero1 5y agoWhen I started reading I was concerned about that as well, but the article references recent analysis showing the wall was painted decades after the rest of the painting, and couldn't have been done by the original artist.