Vergankelijkheid 1529 - 1610

Editor: We’re looking at "Vergankelijkheid," or "Transience," an intaglio print made sometime between 1529 and 1610. It’s unsigned and held at the Rijksmuseum. There's this allegorical female figure surrounded by death and worldly objects… it's very somber. What stands out to you formally? Curator: Observe the compositional structure. The artist has divided the pictorial space into distinct zones, hasn't he? We have the foreground littered with earthly remains and the implied movement to the sky in the background. What's interesting is how the human form intersects both these planes. How does that affect the visual reading? Editor: I see what you mean. She kind of bridges the gap between life and death, the earthly and the divine. She is holding an hourglass and appears to be pregnant. She seems frozen, like in-between the past and future? Curator: Precisely. Note the fine hatching and cross-hatching techniques used to create tonal variations. This attention to detail in rendering light and shadow imbues the image with depth and texture, and is that textural variance mirrored in the overall symbology? Consider also the allegorical weight of the female nude as "truth" contrasted by the earthly vanitas and skyward ascension; is it not striking? Editor: I never really thought about that connection. It's pretty intense to examine the structure like that. Curator: The artist employed intaglio, revealing that a plate had to be precisely incised to catch the ink for printing, making lines as part of a larger composition. To what degree would you suppose is this an element worth reading as opposed to painting or sculpture? Editor: Understanding the structure really unlocked a new way of looking at this piece. It all contributes to that feeling of inevitability. Curator: Indeed. We can observe through form how these thematic dichotomies such as temporal reality vs eternal existence are rendered. What we visually and intellectually absorb from the material is quite astonishing.