Velázquez' "Las Meninas"

Author(s): Leo Steinberg

Source: October, Vol. 19 (Winter, 1981), pp. 45-54
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/778659 .
Accessed: 09/02/2015 12:33

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to October.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Velizquez' Las Meninas

LEO STEINBERG

(Self-addressedmemo: Explain under what circumstancesthis piece was com-

posed, why it was shelved,and why retrievedaftersixteenyears.)

Vassar College, 5:27 P.M. on a Tuesday in the autumn of '65: a promising

lectureon Velizquez is thwartedwhen theslide projectorsuddenlyfaltersand the
screen behind the professorblacks out. The projectionistshrugs and shows
guiltless hands; then she and the rest of us subside in obscurity.But this
darkness, we soon discover, dims all of Vassar, engulfs all Poughkeepsie,
encompassesthestate of New York and more.It was Con Edison's darkesthour,
for we are speaking of November 9, 1965, and of the Great NortheasternPower
Failure which,frommy vantage, began with thefading out on thescreenof Las
Meninas. To make up for the lecturelost,I wrote it out and sent each student
enrolled in the course herown copyforChristmas.And that'show thesepresents
came to be written.
Then thequestion arosewhetherto publish or not.But beforeI could make a
move, Michel Foucault produced "Les Suivantes," a remarkablemeditation
whose opening lines confirmedLas Meninas as an epistemologicalriddle.' Other
essays, book chapters,even entiremonographs crowded after.To prolong the
procession at its tail end seemed tiresome,like joining a dismallylong line at the
supermarket;bettermove on.
But, of course, one keeps reading the literature.And the literatureon Las
Meninas is an epitome of recentthinkingabout illusionism and thestatusof art.
This picture of 1656, which an eighteenth-century admirerhad dubbed "The
Theology ofPainting"-and which thePrado formerlyblazoned in huge lettersof
brass as the OBRA CULMINANTE DE LA PINTURA UNIVERSAL-has

1. Foucault's "Les Suivantes" is the firstchapter of his Les Mots et les choses, Paris, 1966
(englishedas The Order of Things, New York, 1973). Along with a letterdated November 15, 1966,
AnnetteMichelsonsentme thebook-"not solelyforwhat it maypropose in itsnon-art-historical way
concerningVelazquez, but simply because it is the work of one of the most interestingpeople now
I
thinkingand writing."That neveracknowledgedher giftis one of myshabbiermisdemeanors-for
which I take thisoccasion to offerapology.

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
46 OCTOBER

become a cherishedcruxformoderninvestigators, forgeometricians,metaphysi-

semioticians,political and social historians,and even
cians, artist-photographers,
rare loversof painting.2
Last year broughttwo more essays in tandem on Las Meninas.3 The first,
writtenby a paradox-loving philosopher, erred(like Foucault's) in its initial
assumption about the viewer'simplied position. The second,correctingthefirst,
belabored the obvious-granting that "the obvious" is what one normally
overlooks.(The viewer'sposition in Las Meninas is self-evident and should never
have been a problem.) Thqugh thislatteressaywas unusually conscientious,and
despiteitsplea thatthepicture"be understoodas an inexhaustibleemblemof the
power ofpainting," in theend-to mymind,at least-the interpretation suffered
frommisplacementof emphasis.4What I miss in this-and in more historically
mindedrecentapproaches to Las Meninas-is thenecessaryengagementwith the
whole painting, the sense that everypart of it matters.Whetherthe picture's
essentialmeaning is discoveredin the crossofthe OrderofSantiago on theproud
painter'sdoublet,or in theeffectofthemirroron therearwall, a disproportionate
acreage of the canvas remainsunaccountedfor.
To say it anotherway: theontological or epistemologicalpuzzles now being
discernedin Las Meninas areposed in earlierpaintingswithvastlyless apparatus.
Parmigianino's tiny Self-Portraitin a Convex Mirror in Vienna is quite as
paradoxical as some believe Las Meninas to be. (Do you, when you look at it,
becomeParmigianino?) Or Pontormo'sPortraitof Duke Alessandrode'Medici in
Philadelphia: the subject looks straight out of the picture while drawing a
woman's face, evidentlyfrom life. What does this make of the viewer who is
patentlythe object of the depicteddraftsman'sattention?5Both these worksare
emblems(though perhaps not "inexhaustible") of thepower of painting. And I
would mention one other in this series of pictures whose subject, design, and
illusionismplace theactual world in a dependentposition.I have in minda large
foursquarepainting byFrans Floris, createdoriginally(1556) fortheclubhouse of
theAntwerpPainter'sGuild-that is tosay,as a professionalemblem.The picture
shows a painter,presumablya likenessofFloris himself,seatedbeforehis easel, at
work on a panel of which we see only the back. Nor would we know what or

2. See KennethClark, Looking at Pictures,New York, 1960,pp. 31ff.

3. JohnR. Searle, "Las Meninas and theParadoxes ofPictorialRepresentation,"CriticalInquiry,
vol. 6, no. 3 (Spring 1980),477-88; Joel Snyderand Ted Cohen, "Critical Response. Reflexionson Las
Meninas: Paradox Lost," CriticalInquiry, vol. 7, no. 2 (Winter1980). 429-47.
4. Having establishedthe absolute geometriccertainty of theperspectivalviewpoint(whichmakes
it impossible forthe mirrorto reflectthe royal couple directly),Snyderand Cohen concede, in their
envoi, thatthe pictureallows, even encourages,preciselythis "mistakenopinion." They suggestthat
the vieweris meantto realizehis mistakein a "further realization."But thisis not how a pictureworks.
If two readingsare allowed, thenboth are effectively presentand ambiguouslymeant. I suspect that
Snyderand Cohen would not disagree.
5. See Leo Steinberg,"Pontormo's Alessandrode'Medici, or, I Only Have Eyes forYou," Art in
America,vol. 63, no. 1 (January-February 1975),62-65.

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Velazquez' Las Meninas 47

whom he is painting were it not for the incongruous presence of St. Luke's
symbolic ox at his feet. The placid beast identifieshim as St. Luke, patron of
painters,so thathis hitherwardgaze, avertedfromthepanel to studyhis model,
cannot but be directedat theMadonna and Child. The outrightglance,fromthe
pictureforthinto theactual world,definestheartistas one whose eyesarefixedon
reality.At thesame time,thisglance makes known thatthe Virginand Christare
withus-just as thekingand queen are "withus" whenwe confrontLas Meninas.
Thus it appears thatwhat recentinterpreters have thoughtmostextraordinary in
the Velaizquezis demonstrablypresentin thesesixteenth-century And
precedents.
still Las Meninas remainsincomparable.
But a surveyof interpretationsthat have seen the light(or obscuredit) in
recentyearsis not mypurpose.A111 I have in hand is a shortrevisionofthepaper I
wrotesixteen years ago afterthatfamous failure of power. The typescriptwas

FransFloris.St. Luke. 1556.(Antwerp:

MuseeRoyal
desBeaux-Arts)

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
48 OCTOBER

dusted offseveralmonthsago when the artist-filmmaker Juan Downey asked me

to read parts of it into the sound trackof a film he was shooting about mirror
images. His invitationgives thepresentretrievalitsproximatecause. The remote
cause lies in the cheerfulacknowledgmentthat everydescriptionof Velizquez'
pictureremains,in one way or another,inadequate, as I understandmine also to
be. Writingabout a worksuch as Las Meninas is not,afterall, like queuing up at
theA&P. Rather,it is somewhatcomparable to theperformingof a greatmusical
composition of which thereare no definitiverenderings.The guaranteedinade-
quacy of each successive performancechallenges the interpreternext in line,
helping therebyto keep theworkin therepertoire.Alternatively, when a workof
art ceases to be discussed,it suffersa gradual blackout.

What exactlydoes thisfamouskeymonumenthave to offera personunaware

of its fame and unread in the literatureluxuriating about it? What does Las
Meninas actually show?
At center,downstage,a littlegirl is being offereda drinkof waterin which
she's not interested.Near her, coming in at the margin, a boy dwarf teases a
drowsydog, who couldn't care less. A woman in middle distance talks to a man
who seems not to be listening;he's looking at us instead. Way in the back, a
courtierin solid black, seeing nothingmuch to detain him, preparesto leave; his
partinglegacybeing a backwardglance and an attempt(unsuccessful)to leta little
sunshine in by thedoor. What he leaves behind is a room fullof picturesthatare
nearlyinvisibleforlack of illumination,since thewindows are shutteredand the
lightson theceiling are out. Mostdisappointingofall: thegreatcanvas at left-on
which,forall we know,somethingremarkableis takingshape-turns its back on
us, adding a massive No to the list of negations. No wonder that the dramatis
personae (all but threeof them,to be exact)look straightout of thepicture-there
just isn't enough on theirside of thingsto hold anybody'sattention.
How is it, then,that this picturemaintains such a steadfastgrip on one's
consciousness? Being so negligible in subject, and in appearance so loosely
improvised,what makes it so confidentof regard?It must be a force,an energy
issuing fromthe picture thatarrestsand invitesand ends by draftingus into its
orbit.Looking at Las Meninas, one is not excluded; one hardlyfeelsoneselfto be
looking at it, as one would at a thingoverthere-a painted surface,a stage set,or
gatheringof otherpeople. Rather,we enterupon Las Meninas as ifwe were part
of the family,partyto the event.
But what is the event?What are we partyto? The paintergives it to us to
decide. He leaves it an open question whetherthesecourtlycharactershave just

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Diego Velizquez. Las Meninas. 1656. (Madrid: Prado)

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 50 OCTOBER

joined us or whetherwe've just walked in to interruptthem.6Eitherway, the

picture is a disturbance of what a moment before must have been perfect
stillness-witness the settledpose of the dog.7
A kind of reciprocity,then:as if we on this side of the canvas and thenine
charactersin it were too closelyengaged with each otherto be segregatedby the
divideof thepictureplane. Somethingwe bringto thepicture-the veryeffective-
ness of our presence-ricochetsfromthepicture,provokesan immediateresponse,
a reflexof mutual fixationevidentin theglancesexchanged,theglanceswe receive
and return.
And what else is he showing us, this royal painter?A dim spacious hall,
hung withpicturesand alive withintruders, theentourageofa littleprincess.The
eventrepresentedhardlydeservesthe term-for thereis nothingeventfulabout a
spoiled littlegirl of fivebeingoffered
a drinkofwater.But it appears thata picture
is being painted-the big canvas at leftis under attack.Standing some distance
behind,or ratherbefore,his canvas,thepainterseemsto be hesitating,considering
his next stroke,or perhaps waiting for things to settle.Meanwhile, his sight
convergeswith thegeneralconcentrationof glances upon his models,theparents
of thelittleInfanta,Philip IV of Spain and Queen Mariana. The locationof their

6. The formeralternativewas espoused in 1961bytheMadridcartoonistMingote.Some seriousart

historiansremain similarlyconvinced that the "narrative"of Las Meninas can be rationallyrecon-
structed;see thequotation adduced in Snyderand Cohen, pp. 432f.
7. The slumberingpet is a traditionalindex of tranquility:eg., thecat asleep in Barocci's etching
of the Annunciationconceivedas a silentmoment;or the dog, cat, or lion of St. Jeromeas tokenof
what Melanchthon,followingPlato, called the "sacredsilences"attendingmentallabor. Significantly,
an authorportraitpublished in 1503 labels the attendantdog in the lower right"APATHES."

"Hay dias en que no se le ocurrea uno nada" ("Some days Author portrait of Bernardino Corio. Woodcut from
nothing seems to be happening"). Cartoon by Mingote. his Chronicleof Milan, 1503.
Published in Mundo Hispanico, February1961, 75.

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Velizquez' Las Meninas 51

mirrorreflection on therearwall assuresus thattheroyalcouple standon our left.

Consequently,those many looks thatdarthitherwardout of the picturemustbe
theirdue ratherthan ours. But we also are implicatedsince we see ourselvesseen.
All of us-the implied presence of royalty,the persons depicted,and ourselves
returningtheirglances-together we round out thatspherewhich the partition-
ing pictureplane cuts in two.
It follows that the picture alone, the picture without its complementary
hemisphere,is but one half its own system,hence seeminglycenterless.Or, to put
it moreaccurately,thepicture'sfocalcenterkeepsshifting.Ask wherethecenteris,
and theanswerreturnedbythepictureis not anyone point,nor any two,but three
and four;it depends on what you are centering.
If you addressthe width of the canvas, takingits measurefromside to side,
you discoverthemedian in thelittleInfanta-at herlefteye,precisely.Like a jewel
in the dip of a necklace,she pinpoints the lower center.
Yet a glance at the perspectiveconstructionmakes the centricpoint shift.
The givenorthogonals-the horizontalsalong therightwall and theprocessionof
ceiling lights-converge upon theman on thestairinside thedoorway.Halting to
look, so thatlooking becomes his whole task and function,this man personifies
the vanishingpoint of thecentralperspective,thepoint opposite our vantage.No
question but thatthe perspectivelocates him at center.
On the otherhand, if you considerthe room we are in-a room whose full
width is revealed by the rear wall with its doors, pictures,and mirror-you
discover that the room's central axis falls to the left of the open door. No
mistakingit: the light fixturesoverhead clearlytrace the midline of the ceiling,
and the mirror,chargedwith the image of royalty,appropriatesthemidpointof
thewall. And thatgivesus threemiddles. Justas theInfantamarksthemidline of
the canvas; just as the man on the stair looms at the centric point of the
perspective;even so does thelooking glass definethecenterlineof theroom. Three
centers,nicely triangulated:the canvas as a physical object, the perspectival
geometry,and thedepictedchamber-each maintainsitsown middle.Three kinds
of center,which in a simplerpainting mighthave remainedcoincidentto avoid
unnecessaryconfusion,are here deliberatelydispersed.

The scattereffectis accentuatedby the dispersionof the threeadult men in

thepicture:theone standingwith foldedhands against therightwall, theman in
thedoor, and thepainter.All threegaze on theroyalpair thisside of thepicture-
theirconvergentglances homing like spokes on theirhub.
We begin to suspect thatVelazquez made his compositionseem improvised
and unstable, not only by deploying within the picture three middles instead of
one, but, more importantly,by conceiving his whole cast of charactersas

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
52 OCTOBER

subordinatedto yetanothercentrality.For he located the picture'sdramaticand

psychologicalfocusoutside itself,displaced fromwhat thepictureactuallyshows
to what it beholds. It is as thoughthedepictedscenewerea dependency,caught in
reactionto its deferredcenter.That center,ofcourse,is on our left.It residesin the
royal pair bestridingthe room's central axis in line with the looking glass in
which theirreflection appears.
But here a problem arises. We have found the perspectivalvanishingpoint
well to the right of the mirror,in the man on the stair. Now, in any coherent
perspective,such as Velaizquezemploys,this vanishingpoint definesitselfas the
point directlyopposite theviewer'seye.Thus thevanishingpoint in Las Meninas
assures us that the station fromwhich we perceive the scene lies oblique to the
mirror-not perpendicular.Therefore,whateverthemirrormay show to theking
and queen, what it revealsto us, standingoffto theright,can only be a reflection
of something offto the left. It follows that what we see in the mirrormust
necessarilybe a partof thepaintingin progresson thebig canvas.8The resultis an
elegant ambiguity:a mirrorthat transmitsdata fromtwo disparateplaces, from
the king-and-queen'spainted likenessand fromwheretheystand in theflesh.Yet
the two are thesame. The reflection which themirrorimpartsto us at an angle is
one with the image which we know the king and queen to be gettingin direct
confrontation.We discoverthatVelazquez' summarylooking glass conflatestwo
distinctthings into one: what the king and queen view fromtheirstation and
what we see fromours-the real thingand thepaintingof it-the mirrorrevealsas
identical,as ifto grantthatthemasterpieceon thecanvas mirrorsthetruthbeyond
any mirror'scapacity to surpass. In this sense, Las Meninas may be taken to
celebratethe truthfulness of thepainter'sart.
But praise of themimeticpowersofpainting-though broughtoffherewith
staggeringoriginality-is still conventional seventeenth-century ideology. And
Las Meninas is in no sense a conventionalpicture.It undertakesa lot more,being
concernedwith nothingless than the role vision plays in human self-definition.
The picture induces a kind of accentuationof consciousnessby summoning the
observer'seye to exertitselfin responsiveaction and in intensifiedmultipleactsof
perception. And here the whole picturecooperates.That is in
why, Las Meninas,
theradiantsignals are receivedfromall over.An uncannysensitivity to nuance of
illumination differentiates everyportion of matter.The backgroundalone con-
trastsdull surfaceswith thelusterof a scintillantmirror,thesundazzleofoutdoor
space withthesparsegleam of a concealed window; while theremembered glow of
extinguishedlamps irradiatesthe dark ceiling. Most of the space representedis

8. The question has been asked whether double portraits figure in the Spanish tradition of roy)al
portraiture. The answer is positive. Apart from Titian's half-length Charles V with the late Isabella of
Portugal, we have record that Alonso Cano's firstroyal commission, after his appointment at court in1
1638, was for a double portrait of Ferdinand and Isabella (see Harold E. Wethey, Alonso Canio,
Princeton, 1955, p. 18).

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Velazquez' Las Meninas 53

sheer transparency,literallya per-spective,a "seeing-through."All is diaphane,

and whateverresidueof opaque mattermightinterfere is givenovertopromoting
perception: an opened door, windows, lamps, mirror,and pictures. No other
appurtenances,no other functions-not so much as a chair to sit down on.
Nothing but what was createdforsight.And the lightitselfrisingeverywhere to
theoccasion: lurkingin thedepthofa mirror;breachinga door; beckoningfroma
distant unshutteredwindow; and finally,in full flood up front,dissolving the
pictureplane, and spreadingthroughtheretreating gloom a diffusedwatchfulness
thatmerelycrystallizesin eyesand faces.There is surelyno paintingin which the
emission of sight from human eyes becomes quite so structural,no painting
wherein sight lines sustain so much of the hidden armatureof the design, no
paintingwhose dramatispersonaeare groupedand rankedaccordingto what they
see.
This last observationis worthspelling out: "grouped and rankedaccording
to what theysee." Begin at the foreground,rightof center,wherewe-or rather
our royal neighbors-are eyed by threewatchers;a threesomecomposed in strict
symmetryby the Infanta, the curtseyinglady-in-waiting,and the femaledwarf
dressedin blue-three attentiveyoung persons in triangulardisposition. Notice
next thateach cornerof thisinnertriangleis preciselybackstoppedby attendants
whose positions stake out a larger,similar triangle:the boy with his footon the
mastiff,the kneelingmenina beforethe Infanta,and, thirdly,behind thecurtsey,
the talkativechaperone. Finally theremainingthreefigures,the shadowyguard,
the painter, and the valedictorian on the back stair, forma thirdoutfielder's
triangle-congruentwith thesecond,similar to thefirst. Think of theirplaces on
the projectedfloorplan,and our nine dispersedcharactersdescribethreeequila-
teral triangles,each group differentiatedaccordingto what it perceives.The girls
of the inner triad look straightout, open to what they confront.The three
backstoppingfiguressee less; caughtup in play,in service,or in conversation,they
only see what preoccupiesthem.Lastly again, the threeadult outfielders: theyare
so placed with respectto the painter's canvas that theyalone see a complex of
interrelations,or two worlds at a glance-their own and another;a stage to serve
in and a painted equivalent purelyvisionary.
To round out the system,it remains for the viewer to lend his attentive
presence-I mean theindividual consciousnessthatsalutesthepicturealongside a
king and queen. It remains for this self,ennobled by association, not only to
completethelast triadthatbringsthe companyup to twelve,but,above all, to see
the magic loop closed. As the royal presence is seen fromwithin the pictureto
inspire a painting, so the viewer sees the avertedpainting engenderits mirror
image, which in turnguaranteesthe royalpair's real presence.The paintergives
us the real, the reflected,
and the depicted as threeinterdependentstates,three
modalitiesof thevisible thatcause and succeedone anotherin a perpetualround.
Reality,illusion, and replicationby art conspire in ceaseless recirculation.
But none of thisworksunlessone agreesto participate.Acceptthesummons,

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
54 OCTOBER

and the picturereduces the real world and the symbolicto psychicequivalence,
like the two pans of a scale, each acted on by the other.Then, what one facesin
Las Meninas is not only a framedobject, a beautifulsurface,an illusoryspace, a
simulatedevent-though thepainting is all of these.Rather,thepictureconducts
itselftheway a vitalpresencebehaves.It createsan encounter.And as in any living
encounter,any vital exchange, the work of art becomes the alternatepole in a
situation of reciprocal self-recognition.9 If the picturewere speaking instead of
flashing, it would be saying:I see you seeingme-I in you see myselfseen-see you
seeing yourselfbeing seen-and so on beyondthereachesofgrammar.Confronted
mirrorswe are, polarized selves,reflecting one another'sconsciousnesswithout
end; partakingof an infinity thatis not spatial,but psychological-an infinity
not
cast in theouterworld,but in themind thatknows and knows itselfknown. The
mirrorwithinLas Meninas is merelyits centralemblem,a sign forthewhole. Las
Meninas in its entiretyis a metaphor,a mirrorof consciousness.

9. Several passages in Baltasar Graciin's El Criticbn(1651-57) indicate that self-recognition by

way of encounterwould have been in VelAzquez'world a familiarnotion. In the opening chapterof
this sagacious allegorical novel, Gracian's hero Andrenio,who has grownup on a desertisland and
has neverbeforeseen a fellowman, speaks thus to the shipwreckedCritilo: "You, Critilo,ask who I
am, yetthisis what I desireto learn of you; you are thefirstman I have seen till thisday,and in you I
findmyselfmore vividlyimaged than in the mute crystalspringswhich my curiosityoftenbesought
and my ignorance recommended."(Gracian knew Velazquez and regardedhim as the foremostof
modernpainters.)

This content downloaded from 136.145.182.24 on Mon, 9 Feb 2015 12:33:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions