Is the woman a nun? She has a wedding ring and is holding rosary beads I think. But the bodice of the dress is really rather flattering sexually - considering the headdress. It seems a contradiction. I love this painting though. Her gentle beauty shines through it.
The man holding the falcon - I don't know if he's nasty or just plain sad. Or is that arrogance?
I am certain I have seen this style of headdress before, but I am not sure where.
But if I had to guess I would say it was the probably the social/cultural prerunner to the style of headpiece worn by Ann Boleyn and the other women of King Henrys court.
The more I look at it the more certain I am she is a noblewoman. And the headpiece would be something worn by courtisians.
But, of course, who else would be able to afford such a fine portrait. And what other women could have gotten away with such a sexually becoming style.
I've seen the headdress before in pictures/paintings and in movies - it's the style of dress in this painting that seems out of its era - the small pleats being spread by the breasts and the v of the bodic, not low enough for cleavage but enough to hint. The headdress suggests one thing - the bodice of that dress quite another. Fascinating and very clever. You can actually *feel* the softness of that dress fabric and the starched crispness of the headdress regardless of its light transparency at the forehead.
You know, just sitting and looking at her, I see mischief or humor in her mouth. As though she's going to laugh at any minute.
And I agree. It looks like it could be after a wedding. She has her wedding ring on. Perhaps she's sitting for the portrait immediately after the ceremony - hence the sense of amusement I get from her.
7 comments:
Is the woman a nun? She has a wedding ring and is holding rosary beads I think. But the bodice of the dress is really rather flattering sexually - considering the headdress. It seems a contradiction. I love this painting though. Her gentle beauty shines through it.
The man holding the falcon - I don't know if he's nasty or just plain sad. Or is that arrogance?
I don't believe she is a nun, I think this may have been a bridal portrait.
I am thinking that headdress is probably something with Puritan origins.
The man does look very stern, but I like him. Great artists on both of them.
Me too, in spite of that weird headpiece she is quite pretty.
You are right about the dress, it does seem rather sexually flattering, not like a Puritan at all.
Maybe one of the first Protestants then. They were alot more sexually open than either Catholics or Puritans.
I am certain I have seen this style of headdress before, but I am not sure where.
But if I had to guess I would say it was the probably the social/cultural prerunner to the style of headpiece worn by Ann Boleyn and the other women of King Henrys court.
The timing would be correct.
The more I look at it the more certain I am she is a noblewoman. And the headpiece would be something worn by courtisians.
But, of course, who else would be able to afford such a fine portrait. And what other women could have gotten away with such a sexually becoming style.
I've seen the headdress before in pictures/paintings and in movies - it's the style of dress in this painting that seems out of its era - the small pleats being spread by the breasts and the v of the bodic, not low enough for cleavage but enough to hint. The headdress suggests one thing - the bodice of that dress quite another. Fascinating and very clever. You can actually *feel* the softness of that dress fabric and the starched crispness of the headdress regardless of its light transparency at the forehead.
You know, just sitting and looking at her, I see mischief or humor in her mouth. As though she's going to laugh at any minute.
And I agree. It looks like it could be after a wedding. She has her wedding ring on. Perhaps she's sitting for the portrait immediately after the ceremony - hence the sense of amusement I get from her.
Fascinating.
Post a Comment