I am grateful for your new shot in our Bosch bodies!
Some comments, in order of the texts.
*The beautiful pair in the bubble may relate to a saying about breakable glass. Cracks can again be seen in the big blue ball of the fountain. The pair’s bubble is more seen as organic, a product of the plant. In my opinion Bosch may have based it on an inflated bladder:
*Lust DOES play a certain role, it seems judged as rather unsatisfying over time. Moralist Bosch prefers the seriousness of recluses… See further along, on the little presence of joy.
*I don’t know about psycho-active workings of the Madroño, but as an alcoholic beverage it would do the same. Bosch must have learned about it from the Spaniards in the Netherlands. It can certainly explain many scenes on the center panel!
*The question of which period is represented on the main panel, is still open for debate. Knowing Bosch a little, it may be ambiguous. So there is a relationship with the days of Noah: Adam, Eve and Noah seem to recount about their history. At the same time I suspect it is an image of contemporary noble courts, that did organize Love Garden parties. Perhaps it was part of the deal with the donor. Falkenburg suggested it to be an educative Mirror for Princes.
*I agree with you that there is little real joy/pleasure in the Garden. This may exactly be Bosch’s intention, leading indirectly to Hell. As you can know, I think one of the themes is emptiness in life. Hedonism seen as idleness. The Netherlandish proverb “An idle man is the Devil’s ear pillow” comes in mind. This image is present in Garden’s Hell, and on the Last Judgement/Vienna. Breugel painted it later again.
* It’s true there is a gay theme. Whether it means that gayness is wrong, is not wholly clear. It functions at least to astonish, alienate or shock the viewers. And may add somehow to the emptiness theme.
* Yes, I’ve seen the humorous Bosch in his oeuvre.
* I only found out recently about an explanation of the dead poses (I call them the crucifixion poses). Bosch uses it more: in a Last Judgment the person IS just dead; on the Garden’s Hell also, and it is an Arma Christi at the same time (Passion element); on the Haywain a beggar is sleeping or indeed drunk; and on the Garden’s central panel here, the person may exhausted from ecstasy (another rare instance of pleasure). I found old expressions for the pose: “‘He’s in the Lord/He is half blessed/He is a corpse’ which mean to say: it is due to the consequences of his drunkenness that he lies there like a dead man. So it is used mockingly.” from anthologies 1606-1723.
* I always call the pink tower structure the “Flesh Palace”…
* NB, the “ghost” in the Venus’ pond may just be a minor error or restoration fault. On copies of the painting it’s not spooky at all.
So far, thanks again for all your work! Looking forward to other analyses.
Thank you case, always interesting to see your perspective.
The psycho-active properties of Madrono kick in at the high levels of proof which the country people distill it to. Perhaps to ease the pain of agricultural Labour. In the 1980s, you might see in Iberian villages a Madrono Man on the main road conducting non-existent traffic – such is its power.
I see an awful lot of hangover in the centre panel.
My friend the Mayor of Medelim attests to the sweet taste of Madrono berries when they are fully ripened. And to the effect the over-ripe flesh has on birds – the natural alcohol makes them tipsy.
The dead pose - do you mean the man in the centre panel of the Last Judgement – just above the cracked egg, there is a man in an identical pose.
Quite a number of same or similar visual tropes in the Last Judgement, actually.
The ghosts – I can see the argument for underpainting in the seven other "ghosts in the greensward" in the centre panel but in the Bath of Venus – the excluded pose is too deliberate to be an error, in my view. The questioning left hand, the attempt to join the group, the way the healthy, glowing girls turn their backs to her. It says to me, "Why are you doing this to me? I was once like you."
The Flesh Palace – yes! The two columns at the front have a phallic look about them (you may say, "Speak for yourself, mate!" They have upended the stone tablet on top in an unruly, disruptive way, don't you think?
The contention that the group of three in the grotto represent Adam, Eve and Noah – I haven't yet found a convincing connection that they should be identified as that. Margaret Sullivan (I think) has them as three Old Testament prophets – and I can't see what they should be, with. One thing 'Adam' has – he is rendered in a different register than all other facial portraits in the triptych – apart from the Treeman's face. they do share a common visual treatment.
I have to say, most critical theories are outside my circumference, but Falkenburg particularly - his (para-)typological theoretical framework allows him to assign symbolic meanings quite arbitrarily. Even Bax, more precisely tied to his sources, seems not to add much to (at least, my) understanding of what's going on. It's the subject of the next post, coming shortly.
Many thanks for your reactions, and your learning. Like your "in the Lord/half blessed/corpse" connection v much.
Is this video working? It's not downloading onto my computer - I'm getting a screen saying 0 of 0.
Yes, it’s o.k.
Oh yes, I’m very glad that you added all texts!
This makes life so much easier….
C.
I am grateful for your new shot in our Bosch bodies!
Some comments, in order of the texts.
*The beautiful pair in the bubble may relate to a saying about breakable glass. Cracks can again be seen in the big blue ball of the fountain. The pair’s bubble is more seen as organic, a product of the plant. In my opinion Bosch may have based it on an inflated bladder:
*Lust DOES play a certain role, it seems judged as rather unsatisfying over time. Moralist Bosch prefers the seriousness of recluses… See further along, on the little presence of joy.
*I don’t know about psycho-active workings of the Madroño, but as an alcoholic beverage it would do the same. Bosch must have learned about it from the Spaniards in the Netherlands. It can certainly explain many scenes on the center panel!
*The question of which period is represented on the main panel, is still open for debate. Knowing Bosch a little, it may be ambiguous. So there is a relationship with the days of Noah: Adam, Eve and Noah seem to recount about their history. At the same time I suspect it is an image of contemporary noble courts, that did organize Love Garden parties. Perhaps it was part of the deal with the donor. Falkenburg suggested it to be an educative Mirror for Princes.
*I agree with you that there is little real joy/pleasure in the Garden. This may exactly be Bosch’s intention, leading indirectly to Hell. As you can know, I think one of the themes is emptiness in life. Hedonism seen as idleness. The Netherlandish proverb “An idle man is the Devil’s ear pillow” comes in mind. This image is present in Garden’s Hell, and on the Last Judgement/Vienna. Breugel painted it later again.
* It’s true there is a gay theme. Whether it means that gayness is wrong, is not wholly clear. It functions at least to astonish, alienate or shock the viewers. And may add somehow to the emptiness theme.
* Yes, I’ve seen the humorous Bosch in his oeuvre.
* I only found out recently about an explanation of the dead poses (I call them the crucifixion poses). Bosch uses it more: in a Last Judgment the person IS just dead; on the Garden’s Hell also, and it is an Arma Christi at the same time (Passion element); on the Haywain a beggar is sleeping or indeed drunk; and on the Garden’s central panel here, the person may exhausted from ecstasy (another rare instance of pleasure). I found old expressions for the pose: “‘He’s in the Lord/He is half blessed/He is a corpse’ which mean to say: it is due to the consequences of his drunkenness that he lies there like a dead man. So it is used mockingly.” from anthologies 1606-1723.
* I always call the pink tower structure the “Flesh Palace”…
* NB, the “ghost” in the Venus’ pond may just be a minor error or restoration fault. On copies of the painting it’s not spooky at all.
So far, thanks again for all your work! Looking forward to other analyses.
Case.
Thank you case, always interesting to see your perspective.
The psycho-active properties of Madrono kick in at the high levels of proof which the country people distill it to. Perhaps to ease the pain of agricultural Labour. In the 1980s, you might see in Iberian villages a Madrono Man on the main road conducting non-existent traffic – such is its power.
I see an awful lot of hangover in the centre panel.
My friend the Mayor of Medelim attests to the sweet taste of Madrono berries when they are fully ripened. And to the effect the over-ripe flesh has on birds – the natural alcohol makes them tipsy.
The dead pose - do you mean the man in the centre panel of the Last Judgement – just above the cracked egg, there is a man in an identical pose.
Quite a number of same or similar visual tropes in the Last Judgement, actually.
The ghosts – I can see the argument for underpainting in the seven other "ghosts in the greensward" in the centre panel but in the Bath of Venus – the excluded pose is too deliberate to be an error, in my view. The questioning left hand, the attempt to join the group, the way the healthy, glowing girls turn their backs to her. It says to me, "Why are you doing this to me? I was once like you."
The Flesh Palace – yes! The two columns at the front have a phallic look about them (you may say, "Speak for yourself, mate!" They have upended the stone tablet on top in an unruly, disruptive way, don't you think?
The contention that the group of three in the grotto represent Adam, Eve and Noah – I haven't yet found a convincing connection that they should be identified as that. Margaret Sullivan (I think) has them as three Old Testament prophets – and I can't see what they should be, with. One thing 'Adam' has – he is rendered in a different register than all other facial portraits in the triptych – apart from the Treeman's face. they do share a common visual treatment.
I have to say, most critical theories are outside my circumference, but Falkenburg particularly - his (para-)typological theoretical framework allows him to assign symbolic meanings quite arbitrarily. Even Bax, more precisely tied to his sources, seems not to add much to (at least, my) understanding of what's going on. It's the subject of the next post, coming shortly.
Many thanks for your reactions, and your learning. Like your "in the Lord/half blessed/corpse" connection v much.