
Hidden Cupid resurfaces in one of Vermeer’s best-known works - pseudolus
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/news/hidden-cupid-resurfaces-in-one-of-vermeer-s-best-known-works
======
acqq
> The Cupid is so far about half-exposed—it is estimated that the work will
> require at least another year

But luckily:

> The same Cupid painting also features in A Lady Standing at a Virginal in
> the National Gallery in London.

So we could "mostly" know how the Cupid should look like in one year:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Standing_at_a_Virginal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Standing_at_a_Virginal)

"Mostly" because I don't know if this other painting was also later modified
since it was painted.

~~~
wazoox
The same elements appear repeatedly in Vermeer's paintings, so it's almost
certainly the exact same cupid, hanging on the same wall next to the same
window :)

~~~
acqq
Take a look at the stain on the picture in Wikipedia in the area of Cupid's
crotch, I don't think it's accidental being where it is.

It seems that it happened more than once, that once painted, the pictures were
later censored to make them more "decent", which is probably what happened to
the "completely hidden Cupid" as well. Even the later "uncovering"
intervention could have involved modification of the original form.

There are only 35 known originals from Vermeer and as far as I know the Cupid
was up to now reasonably visible only on the painting I've linked to. In "Girl
Interrupted in her Music" it's there but dark.

~~~
mikorym
Is this the allusion made in the article—that the modification was done as
censorship?

~~~
mxfh
Doesn't need to be censorship, maybe just personal preference of the owner who
didn't like the comparibly explicit allegoric theme of Vermeers earlier work,
compared to the "open" interpretation of the letter without the cupid. Full
statements are here by the museum

[https://www.skd.museum/en/besucherservice/press/2019/a-new-v...](https://www.skd.museum/en/besucherservice/press/2019/a-new-
vermeer-in-dresden/)

There are even some overpaintings done by Vermeer himself, like the tilt of
the head and a wine goblet, which wont be restored.

[https://youtu.be/sFH8vhOI1Ck?t=536](https://youtu.be/sFH8vhOI1Ck?t=536)

~~~
Hoasi
Now I suppose we'll all need to get used to this "new" original version; not
sure which one is best.

~~~
mxfh
Since most see the picture as well documented reproduction I don't think
anything is inherently lost, only gains into the "final" intent of the work as
by the artist. So we have a very well documentent historic state and restored
state. Also the colors will be closer to the original intent, since the non-
original muting varnish will be removed too. Still there is an ongoing aging
process on the organic original pigments used, so it's always not the exact
state in appearance as when the painting was completed.

~~~
Hoasi
I agree that nothing is inherently loss. This is more like a rediscovery.
Still, the covering of that painting, which had artistic merit on its own, is
now a thing of the past. I am curious what Vermeer would have thought of it.

~~~
acqq
> I am curious what Vermeer would have thought of it.

I can tell you I'd hate that somebody overpaints with nothing a part of the
picture that I've spent so much energy to paint exactly with what I wanted.

I see no excuse for that.

~~~
Hoasi
Thank you for your opinion, it might be different from the painter's though.
But ultimately, we don't know.

------
jtms
Slightly unrelated but I feel worth mentioning Is the documentary “Tim’s
Vermeer”. The subject attempts to reverse engineer Vermeer’s painting
techniques and it’s a fascinating and entertaining ride!

