The painter who came closest Baldungova interpretation Milky virgin figure he was Jan Gossart. Although today we cannot confirm the directness of mutual influence, it is not difficult to conclude that there was an active connection between the two artists, at least in the domain of their poetics, which is much more than coincidental. Thus, Gossart's early works on the subject of Adam and Eve, which interpreted the consequences of the Fall in a fairly standardized way, will change substantially after Baldung's intervention, which emphasized a whole series of semantic and visual repercussions of the introduction of incriminated sexuality in the representation of the human condition, as, on the other hand, Baldung additionally profiled his own dialectic of depicting the Mother of God in an increasingly intense and 'disturbing' parallel with the first female parent, after - an assumption that is plausible - he met with Gossart's development of a special mise-en-scène intended for a new and different staging attraction Madonna, not only within the acceptable sociological plan.
At the first, introductory step, Gossart decides, setting the scene in the total, which will then be consequently fetishistically segmented in the approach of the gaze, which always, by the very nature of focusing in observation, must be regulated by the desire to know, to follow From der Weydenovu setting: Saint Luke draws the Virgin (circa 1515) regulates the author's proscenium within which, after the aesthetic foundation is made, essential analytical research will take place. As opposed to the later version Saint Luke draws the Virgin (c. 1520-2) in which the scene is safely moved to the region of vision, a transcendental transcendence that the inner eye is capable of only if it is, and literally, guided by the hand of an angel who controls Luke's hand (by which the authenticity of the painter's reproduction is to be confirmed), in the inaugural Gossart insists on the material concreteness and presence of the Virgin whose breast is exposed to the painter's 'pen' as proof that what is behind the veil can also be seen: in the foreground is the value of the visual records (Luka is the first portraitist, and in a very relaxed position), and in the very depth of the field, moreover, literally at the vanishing point of the newly discovered perspective, there is an episode in which the Madonna dictates the Holy Scriptures (the 'suppressed' content is that Luke is also the Evangelist ). As Luke's drawing, precisely from his strict, even slightly 'displaced' view, does not quite correspond to the scene that was obtained and that was offered to the viewer to see it 'directly', it is implied that, in the visual transcription of the history of salvation, there is a greater authorial influence ( or deviation), but in the transmission or translation of the sacred text.
Saint Luke draws the Virgin, also, in emphasizing the architectural setting, refers to Gossart's concept according to which, by adopting the ancient paradigm where the Virgin Mary is necessarily compared to other pantheon figures in order to be promoted as an unattainable paragon, the image itself becomes a kind of antique, an iconographic reminder that, like the text, deserves repeated readings. One such reading is related to a more precise determination of the nature of the relationship between the Madonna and the Baby-Jesus in a movement in which the mise-en-scène, having already assumed an autopoetic rigor, fixedly approaches the two figures of adoration, exchanging the external, general for the internal, intimate, almost close up proscenium. A series of images that were originally parts of a diptych (hence, the scene was constructed in relation to the view usually of the donor coming from the side), Gossart used to think about the emotional dynamics between the mother and the Son that could be presented outside of the Biblical roles, in a sudden situation or physical 'arrangement' in which, say, in tender immediacy, both Jesus and Madonna could forget about the announced plan, and surrender completely to the present moment. So on Virgin and Child with a Veil (c. 1520), the painter offers a detail of Jesus' innocent game of hide and seek with the Virgin's scarf: instead of another staging of the canonical and canonized meaning, a completely non-committal, 'contingent' detail emerges that must have been, however minor, an everyday element present in the mystery of the incarnation . U Virgin and Child (around 1520), on the other hand, the Baby-Jesus, seemingly by chance and without symbolic importance, grabs the Virgin by the chin: an incident that is nevertheless interesting, certainly a telling accident.
On three principled Gossarts Milky virgin image, the author's interest in the interaction between the mother and the Son is maintained, but indicatively spontaneity gives way to increased stylization due to which the Madonna gains a kind of autonomy, so her gaze, in all three cases, is not directed at the child. Moreover, for the author, the stylization itself - which as a marker of separation represents a kind of cold sentimentality, which is fascinatingly repeated in the idealizing rendering of the female body as sculptural, and the female skin as pale marble - is a way to two-shotin Christian painting, he points out, 'emancipates' or erotically singles out the Madonna, although Gossart persistently insists on certain iconographic signs of similarity, most of all, of course, in the painter's unrestrained repetition of the ultimate fetish, the 'fact' that both Mother and Son have almost the same curly blonde or brown hair. If we look at the three paintings in sequence, one can detect Gossart's growing need to subordinate the supposedly binding theological content clean to the phenomenological fascination that focuses mesmerized on the sexual object, the signifier of gender difference, on the exposed breast, more precisely on its perfection. Here we find ourselves at the epicenter of the controversy: if any figure deserves to be idealized in any kind of artistic reproduction, then it is, of course, both theologically orthodox and artistically necessary, precisely the Virgin, but does the general design change if the procedure used is intentionally centered - 'diversion' of attention from the face to the breast - to an object that, in problematic sublimation, rises to the level of a fetish that always has both a sexual etiology and an undoubted sexual connotation.

As well as on To the Holy Family (around 1510), chronologically to the author's first staging Milky virgin teme, tako i na Virgin and Child (circa 1522), the Baby-Jesus cupped the Madonna's breast with his left hand, which emphasizes her perfect roundness. The baby's reliance on the breast, therefore, redefines the visual center of the image, thus confirming Gossart's lifting interest within the composition, which in traditional sacral terminology produces a hidden erotic excess. In this new, glorious illumination, which is not only a consequence of religious illumination, the face of the Mother of God also becomes even more beautiful, because the narrative task of the used iconography changes. On Virgin and Child (ca. 1525-30), the Baby-Jesus is separated from the breast which, in turn, is duplicated in the grape that the Madonna holds in her left hand, which is the 'allowed' metaphor for showing the breast (in short, the other breast, which has no 'use' at breastfeeding, is an immutable taboo) which will be achieved by other means in the next Mannerist iteration, say in To the Holy Family (around 1528) Jana Cornelisz. Vermeyena i Saint Luke paints the Virgin (1545) From Heemskercka on which Madonna wears a transparent fabric, so - through the challenging veil - one can nevertheless glimpse her feeding breasts excitingly. Anyway, Virgin and Child point to Gossart's consistent internal development of Italian influence where mythological imagery is comparatively incorporated, so that the body of the Madonna takes on a carnality that cannot be dissolved in the transcendental vision, which is why the Virgin's breast takes on the same shape as the prominent breasts of the protagonists on, say, Neptune and Amphitrites (1516) Hercules and Dejaniri (1517) Venus (around 1521), as well as To Adam and Eve (around 1520-30). Moreover, in Gossart's last mythological picture at all, Danaji (1527), the imprisoned heroine has a seated pose, a blue robe and the exposed breast of the Madonna, so that the whole scene turns into a radically sexualized transposition Act of the immaculate conception.
However, Gossart's most spectacular and aesthetically the most satisfying realization Milky virgin imagination span, is located in Virgin and Child (circa 1527) where the aesthetic implications of the author's new 'centering', of finding the ideal center, of full focus, which - in fetishist logic - ultimately always stops at the object from which everything started or from which we all started, are seen most clearly and consistently. on object had a in which the separated part of the Real goes through imaginary transsubstantialization, which is a par excellence painting procedure in the region of Symbolic Prohibition, i.e. acting within a framework limited by the obligation of the Word. Gossart's mise-en-scène is extremely telling in its rupture familiarity as a revitalization of signifier abstraction: while they gently touch each other's cheeks, the Madonna caresses Jesus' naturally curly hair with her right hand, and leaves a book with her left, while the upright Baby steps on a text that seems to be doubly revoked or covered. In this one Milky virgin version, the author leaves the highlighted breast untouched, so that the gaze can be unrestrainedly focused on it, which, through a system of displacement and deregulation, has become the support of the entire composition. As Gossart presents the Madonna whose body turns to profile, the flawlessly geometric breast - as a point around which perspective is recalibrated - becomes, obliquely, a three-dimensional, 'projecting' object governed by its own ocular laws, which makes it the most significant part in the overall drawingu: a perfect breast also requires a perfect one disposition.
Given that it is deprived of its 'functionality', the adopted burden of the signified, the breast calls for an observation that is primarily structural and not incidental - voyeuristic: a primal object for a primal gaze. Gossart's setting suggests a sudden hierarchy that has been interpreted as erotic and eroticized: the Madonna's breast stands - a 'higher', superior power - right above the Biblical text: desire cannot be quantified or determined by Law. And so Gossart reached similar conclusions as jean fouquet in its magnificent, stately Melun diptihu (circa 1452), a work which, although it was done by a French painter - due to the clear influence of Flemish, generally Dutch painting - belongs to the Northern Renaissance. Fouquet's Madonna - Virgin and Child surrounded by angels - on the right panel of the Diptych, it is the result of the 'impertinent' use of the adopted paradigm which takes the interchangeability from the 'wrong' side (and which could only be allowed due to the specific situation at the court Charles VII): the figure of the Mother of God was invoked to concretely illustrate and embody Agnes Sorel, the King's unrepentant mistress who died carrying his child. In both painters, what violates the inclination of the Northern Renaissance is embodied in the unnatural perfection of the bare breast: artificialization is the next level of naturalization (decadence is the core of Mannerism), which is why Fouquet's Madonna has, instead of a breast made of flesh and blood, a superior sphere, an unmistakable 'sphere', so she looks more like an android than a living being, with her updo hairstyle and impeccably pale skin, while Gossart's Virgin grows into a sacralized sculpture (least religious) worship.
This author's dedication - selection, focusing, rejection of reality - to the perfection of the form of the marked object, of course, could not pass without a perverse dislocation, an iconographic 'outburst', an unexpected displacement, the consequent return of the repressed, which turns the idealization back into the grotesque. The over-stylized Madonna's breast results, in the last instance, in a phantasmagoric, irrational distortion of the point of view in a perspectival delusion. On Virgin and Child (1527?), Jesus assumed such a strange, unstable pose on his mother's lap, so folded forward on his right leg that now the Madonna's right hand grasps his pronounced, round, certainly not masculine breasts.
Bonus video:
