The Rokeby Venus

The Rokeby Venus, 1651, Diego Velazquez 
By REID GUEMMER 

In 1905 The National Gallery in London purchased Velazquez's The Rokeby Venus for 45,000 pounds. The painting was publicly displayed until March 11th, 1942 when the gallery
held a typical public viewing day. One of the many attendants, Mary Richardson, stowed a meat chopper in her fur hand muff that she would later use in her attempt to destroy the painting. After using the chopper to break the glass, guards ran into the room after hearing the shatter although Richardson had already slashed the painting seven times. Thankfully, the painting has since been restored to where it almost appears as if the accident had never happened.

Velazquez generally excels at any genre of painting he takes his hand at, although especially in portraiture. In the Case of The Rokeby Venus, Velazquez most likely painted the piece in Rome since it provided a more liberal audience in the art scene. As one of Velazquez's three remaining nudes, it is an admirably unique piece. There is some stipulation on whether the painting was commissioned by notorious womanizer,  Gaspar Medez de Haro Bio, or whether it was Velazquez's own mistress. Either way, the painting shines a light on the road leading to artistic advancement and developing a more liberal, modern style.

The especially captivating part of this painting is Velazquez's work with reflection. Venus lays admiring the view of herself in the mirror while Cupid holds it and admires as well. Although while Venus reflects on her own beauty, she makes simultaneous eye contact with the viewer.
  • 7:00 AM

This Girl is on Fire: Venus at Her Toilet

This Girl is on Fire
Woman as Goddess
Curated by Emma Krasnopoler


Diego Velasquez, The Toilet of Venus, 1650


When Velasquez painted The Toilet of Venus in 1647, nudity in Spain was heavily denounced. Except for the old masters’ paintings of gods and goddesses, contemporary artists were forbidden from painting nude figures, especially female nudes, which were considered disgraceful. The price for painting a nude painting was condemnation, banishment, and even excommunication. Everyone thought Velasquez would be subject to these consequences, yet somehow, due to favoritism or just fame, Velasquez managed to display his Venus without punishment. Philip IV proudly displayed the painting along with other paintings of nudes by Titian and Rubens.

But this post isn’t really about Velasquez. It’s about the woman in the painting. I feel as though I am interrupting a private moment between this woman and her reflection. She is enthralled with the face in the mirror, and I doubt she even realizes I am watching her. Who is she? Although the chubby Cupid beside her designates her as a goddess, she does not look like the typical Venus figure that appeared in many mythological paintings before this. Her buxom figure, pink flesh, and plain face differentiate her from other Venuses, yet Velasquez still calls her a goddess. What does she lack that other Venuses have? She has the youthful glow, perfect complexion, and enviable figure. While she may be a daughter of some court member, or even a prostitute, she also could very well be Venus.

I chose this painting to commence this series not because this woman is doing anything extraordinary, or because she is the most beautiful or progressive woman, but because she defies the standards of her time that condemned female nudity and demonstrates that any woman can be a goddess.

  • 7:00 AM

Las Meninas and Interview with the Vampire

Velazquez, Las Meninas, 1656





The Infanta Margaret Theresa monopolizes the piece, without a doubt. Taking up barely any space in the huge, busy room, she still strikes the viewer and stands proud in the center, gazing directly forward. Other characters look forward as well, like the tall painter and the small girl near the dog, but they are in darker colors and do not command the attention the little girl demands. Almost completely in white, the sunlight illuminates her entire form, from her angelically light hair to the hem of her ridiculous dress. She holds such power in such a tiny container, doted on by every single person in that room from her maids of honor, chaperone, and bodyguard to the two dwarfs and the dog. Reflected in the mirror are her parents, completely separate from the space but watching over her nonetheless.

She immediately reminds me of Claudia from Interview with the Vampire, both adored by those around them and so very proud. Claudia, of course, has darker elements. Forever cursed to be stuck as child, she must live a child-like existence even though she's hundreds of years old. The forced immaturity infuriates her, specifically in this scene. She cuts and cuts her hair, trying to change herself so that she can evolve or just not be the exact same girl she's been for hundreds of years. But it grows back, turning her back again into the one person she does not want to be.

Louis and Lestat, the two vampires who watch over her, do what they can to keep her safe even she is truly powerful and old enough to take care of herself. Her duality comes across painfully, the viewer taking part in her inner conflict as well. I think the thing that truly connects the two with me is how they seem so very small and restrained in their respective worlds, but they are so very important to those around them. There are aspects of the two girls that are far different, of course. One is a little princess, the other is a vampire cursed to eternal childhood. But the restraints on both of them are very similar, both made to look like dolls, porcelain and perfect, and never able to - or allowed to - be independent of their caretakers or their own image. It seems a caged existence, one expertly depicted through both film and paint and crystal clear to viewers of either.

  • 7:00 AM

Toilet of Venus

Diego Velazquez, Toilet of Venus, 1647-51
While this Toilet of Venus lacks the grandeur of Boucher's Rococo-styled Venus (painted in 1703), it stands as an important representation of Velasquez work. It's subject matter was rare and quite bold as it went against what the Catholic Church found tasteful. For this reason, very few female nudes were done at the time of the Inquisition. This painting is Velasquez's only piece depicting a female nude that has survived to this date, but only barely. In 1914, The Toilet of Venus had suffered a malicious attack at its home in the National Gallery in London.

In the early twentieth century, England was undergoing a violent suffragette movement. One afternoon, one Mary Richardson entered the National Gallery, which was open to the public. She carried in with her a meat grinder. Mary Richardson approached the Velazquez and dealt several slashes. This attack was one of several on the National Gallery, which lead them to denying entry to women for a brief time. The message this group of militant Suffragists were attempting to get across reverberated through to the frames of these canvases. Mary hated the way men would ogle Venus' naked body before her viewers.

As a self-proclaimed art student, Mary Richardson made a statement over the power the gallery held; although, the act of slashing the painting was a dramatic form of revenge. Emmaline Pankhurst was an activist and major voice in the movement for women's voting rights. When the Conciliation Bill did not pass, which would have granted women's suffrage, Pankhurst lead a violent revolt where "women were thrown from one policeman to another who punched them with fists, striking the women in their faces,breasts and shoulders." She was then jailed for the chaos. Mary Richardson had destroyed the painting in protest of her imprisonment. "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history."While all the damage was successfully restored, these attacks were horrific actions that jeopardized Velazquez's triumphant nude.


  • 7:00 AM

Vulcan's Forge

Diego Velazquez Vulcan's Forge, 1630
Interrupting a steamy moment, Apollo pops in where Vulcan and his buddies are making "weapons of war." He drops by to let Vulcan know that his Mrs. is having an affair with Mars. Disturbed and embarrassed by the news, Vulcan stands to Apollo's left with his shoulders and face expressing his clear discomfort. Whether because a God just appeared in the room, or the personal nature of his visit, Velazquez also does a fantastic job of showing the shock of the others in the room. During a time where painting movement was the acclaimed talent, Velazquez paints a scene of shock and stillness that still embodies the Counter-Reformation trends.

Supposedly making armor for none other than Mars himself, Vulcan and his men are set up in a forge where Velazquez beautifully details the background with objects that would have been found in the smitheries and forges. Along with their steamy smelting, Velazquez adds, or rather doesn't add, a drapery with little covering over Vulcan and his barefoot works.  In contrast to this, Apollo appears in a longer, flowing covering and sandals. The God of Sun radiates with knowledge and power in the room, looking pretty full of himself with his hand position and facial expression. Where the minimally-covered men look in shock and wonder.

Vulcan, smoking hot metal in hand, looks terribly dangerous with his Caravaggio-like face, and strong body. The bodies of all of the smelters in the forge look healthy and muscular, but Vulcan's face looks troubled and quite angry, like he could strike out at Apollo with his burning weapon at any moment. Velazquez painted this scene with tension and curiosity and fully embraced the new characteristics of the Counter-Reformation with his style and composition.

  • 7:00 AM