Portraiture as Iconic Imagery

Art is a field that can have innumerable interpretations. Its complexities lead to discourse between the artist and the viewer, as both may interpret the work differently. When McCloud says, "In emphasizing the concepts of objects over their physical appearance, much has to be omitted. If an artist wants to portray the beauty and complexity of the physical world, realism of some sort is going to play a part," (41) he is explaining how artists convey iconicity in their work.

Both paintings in the case study, van Eyck's Arnolfini Portrait and Velazquez's Las Meninas, are iconic pieces known extremely well throughout the world. The way they became iconic is what gives them their deeper meanings. McCloud describes that artists put themselves into the people they paint, whether these people are real or not. This reflection of the artist into their paintings gives a more personal feel to the people in the paintings. These paintings are texts in themselves, and the artists is the author of the text, with us, the viewer, being the reader as well. The voice of the author is portrayed in just the same manner and interacts with the audience similarly. Both portraits communicate with their audience, portraying important, wealthy people in European history. Both of these portraits are examples of realism, and Mitchell says, "The spectator of the realist representation is not supposed to be under the power of the representation, but to be using representation in order to take power over the world," (325). So, the representation presented in these portraits gives the viewer the power to decide what the images in it are being signified by.

Because the Arnolfini Portrait is such a complex, detailed painting, it was considered ahead of its time. It is also a very symbolic painting, with many images that allude the concepts such as marriage and loyalty. Las Meninas is also a very complex painting with many important elements to it. Both paintings have strong uses of illusions and techniques that amplify their symbolic meanings. The use of mirrors in both portraits is the most important key to representation her. In Velazquez's piece, the artist himself can be seen in the mirror in the painting, complicating his own representation and view of himself. The mirror could also be a symbol for the reflection of the viewer and their interpretation of the pieces. Portraits, unlike comics, have to send a message without using words. This is does through signification, as each element of the portrait is a sign that the viewer will associate with something, creating the whole meaning of the portrait together.

Mitchell's idea of metacritical pictures places these painting in a unique place to be analyzed. Describing the unique relationship between text and pictures, Mitchell questions, "the very identity of 'the verbal' and 'the visual,'" (90). With no verbal context to work with in a portrait, the reader themselves must create the dialogue between the piece and the words it is attempting to speak. These iconic paintings are able to speak to their audience because of the forces their painters used when creating them. As art is meant to be a reflection, both artists used both literal and figurative reflection in their portraits, as well including heavy use of illusion to contrast the realism of the painting style.

With such a heavy focus on communication through text, it can difficult to understand communication through a medium without any text. This taxes the author with the responsibility of creating art that will illicit the desired response from their audience using only pictures and the specific elements of art that can best portray communication without using it literally.