Pour un regard moderne, ce qui distingue Vermeer de ses contemporains, Metsu, Ter Borch ou De Hooch, est l'aura de mystere qui se degage de ses tableaux. Ce sentiment trop bien partage a fait fleurir une vaste litterature, qui n'est pas toujours exempte de lieux communs. Cette qualite poetique, singuliere et incontestable, fait precisement l'objet de ce livre. Mais elle n'est pas envisagee ici comme une dimension ainsi que le suggere Daniel arasse, Vermeer a au contraire tres deliberement construit le mystere de sa peinture. A travers une analyse rapprochee des uvres, de leur structure et de leur contenu, l'auteur montre comment la " scene d'interieur " devient chez Vermeer une peinture de l'intimite, un " dedans du dedans ", une sphere reservee et inaccessible au cur meme du monde prive. C'est cette intimite, dans son impenetrable visibilite, que peint le " sphinx de Delft ". Notre conception de Vermeer se trouve ainsi completement on percoit que la poetique propre de ses uvres est inseparable de son ambition de peintre. Pour l'historien, cette ambition n'est pas sans relation avec le catholicisme de Vermeer, avec sa foi dans la puissance de l'image peinte a incorporer une mysterieuse presence.
Daniel Arasse is probably one of the greatest historian of arts of the 20th century. His vision of art is so accurate and articulate that I just dream of becoming like him. His approach of Vermeer is as brilliant as the rest of his publications. It allows us to see how to study a painting properly, beynd the consideration of iconography that is sometimes making us blind to the rest of the aspects of a painting. A small encounter with Vermeer and his painting.... a book about a genius, written by a genius.
The only reason this isn’t a 5/5 was because it heavily deals with “Art of Painting” and “Allegory of Faith.” One could argue that “Girl with Pearl Earring” and “Woman Holding Balance” have been explored enough, but I still wanted Arasse’s point of view. He describes Vermeer’s style as allusive and evocative, continuously in the paradox between proximity and isolation of genre paintings. I found his hesitation in doing an iconographic approach in the name of anachronism quite interesting, since Vermeer’s paintings have weighted references (which he suggests should not be studied alone) I enjoyed the writing, like “economizing allusions to the exterior world” as well as his beautiful exploration on light as coherence and accurate, not as theatrical.