Day 166 - Iznik ceramics
July 11, 2019
I peeked into Gallery 460 on my last visit and smiled in anticipation of looking at its many Iznik ceramics, which I like so much. I am indeed happy to have visited the gallery, but also struck by how much more varied these ceramics are than I had imagined.
Three examples illustrate this. The first is a ewer dating from the 16th century. About 12 inches high and graceful in form, it has what I have thought of as the standard palette of Iznik wares: jewel tones of red, cobalt blue, and green on a white ground, all covered with a transparent glaze. Its design of tulips, roses, carnations, and swirling leaves is also what I think of as conventional.
The second example is a dish, perhaps 20 inches in diameter, made around 1580-85. The label describes it as having a "kaleidoscope design," a term that strikes me as odd but apt. Its highly symmetrical design seems to me abstract, although, with its central rosette, it also seems to assimilate floral forms. The palette is quite different - just a rich blue and white.
The final example is another dish, this one about 14 inches in diameter and made around 1540-50, during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent. While the brushwork in the previous two examples seems to me careful but vigorous, the painting on this dish is incredibly refined and delicate. I can't imagine how thin the brush used to paint the twining forms that cover the bottom of the bowl must have been, nor how long it took the artist to paint it in such a painstaking way, nor at what cost to his eyes. I don't know whether Suleiman actually owned this bowl, but if he didn't, he should have. It's breath-taking.
Three examples illustrate this. The first is a ewer dating from the 16th century. About 12 inches high and graceful in form, it has what I have thought of as the standard palette of Iznik wares: jewel tones of red, cobalt blue, and green on a white ground, all covered with a transparent glaze. Its design of tulips, roses, carnations, and swirling leaves is also what I think of as conventional.
The second example is a dish, perhaps 20 inches in diameter, made around 1580-85. The label describes it as having a "kaleidoscope design," a term that strikes me as odd but apt. Its highly symmetrical design seems to me abstract, although, with its central rosette, it also seems to assimilate floral forms. The palette is quite different - just a rich blue and white.
The final example is another dish, this one about 14 inches in diameter and made around 1540-50, during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent. While the brushwork in the previous two examples seems to me careful but vigorous, the painting on this dish is incredibly refined and delicate. I can't imagine how thin the brush used to paint the twining forms that cover the bottom of the bowl must have been, nor how long it took the artist to paint it in such a painstaking way, nor at what cost to his eyes. I don't know whether Suleiman actually owned this bowl, but if he didn't, he should have. It's breath-taking.
Comments
Post a Comment