St. Martin Dividing His Cloak, by Sir Anthony Van Dyck

I hate this painting. Teriible I know. It is like a masterpiece apparently. But I loathe it. Plus it doesn't help that I have been working in a room with it for the past fews days with it looming over me.

Some of Van Dyck's stuff is amazing. But not this.

THE STORY OF ST. MARTIN:

Saint Martin was born in Hungary during the reign of Emperor Constantine, and spent his early childhood in northern Italy. He was drafted into the Roman Army at 15 and later became a member of the royal cavalry guard. While campaigning in Gaul, this famous legend of Saint Martin and the beggar took place.
One very cold day a beggar approached where Martin was stationed. Martin, wore a large cloak over his armour. None of his comrades took any notice of the beggar, so Martin cut his cloak in two with his sword and gave half of it to the beggar. That night Christ appeared to him in a vision, dressed in the divided cloak, and praised the young soldier for his charity.
Saint Martin was the most popular saint in France during antiquity and the early Middle Ages. It is said that French kings carried his cloak into battle as a spur to victory.

WHY DON'T I LIKE VAN DYCK'S REPRESENTATION?????

In terms of technique I ahve a few issues.... The foot of the beggar in white is mishapen, the toes unusually bulbous and indistinct. It looks overworked, as if it could not be quite captured properly. As it is at eye level it is very noticeable. Also the proportion of the horse to the people, particualrly if you compare it to the woman on the other side. It seems the whole scene is too big for the painting. I think in some ways this can work for the painting. It seems busy and a very active scene.

Now the characterisation of the figues in the painting are unsuitable I think. The agressive nature of the beggar in the forefront trying to grab his half of St. Martin's cloak is violent and I think unnecessary. The way they are dressed shows their desperation and poverty. I do not think that the violent possessive nature of the beggar creates sympathy. The beggar in white has what is supposed to be a supplicating plea of desperation on his face but he appears angry. Martin is no better characterised. His face is a mixture of piety and apathy, veering more towards apathy. He seems aloof and looks like he is doing his duty rather than wanting to commit a charitable act.

The sword precariously looks like it could be used to help divide the cloak or spear the beggar who is far too close to Martin for comfort. The sword looks like it is helping keep the distance between the two main characters. Not very charitable, is it now, Martin? It go either way if we didn't already know the story. Perhaps Van Dyck was counting on everyone to know the story.

Overall... not one of my favourites....