Jupiter en de donder 1773

Curator: Right, so we are looking at "Jupiter en de donder" or "Jupiter and the thunder," an engraving dating back to 1773, created by Reinier Vinkeles, and it is held here at the Rijksmuseum. Quite a dramatic little thing, isn’t it? Editor: Dramatic, definitely! My first impression is all about the raw power it captures, especially in that stormy sky. But also a bit... illustrative, almost staged? Is it me? Curator: I get what you mean. Vinkeles was, after all, an engraver often illustrating scenes and stories. I see the work in dialogue with baroque sensibilities in its grandiosity. Notice how Jupiter's dominance is reinforced by the chaotic scene below, full of fleeing figures near classical-style buildings. This all feeds into a wider discourse around power. Editor: Yes, definitely! And you know what also strikes me? Jupiter here isn’t just a powerful figure; he embodies authority and perhaps, inevitably, patriarchal power. What does it mean when supreme power is rendered as a virile, white male figure hurling lightning bolts? Who is left cowering? Where is Juno in all this?! Curator: Well, allegorically speaking, perhaps Vinkeles wasn’t aiming for nuanced social commentary! Maybe he simply sought to convey the sublime terror—and yes, masculine potency—of the god. Editor: Sublimity and power, gendered. Okay. What’s the tale being referenced here? I can’t quite make it out. Is there a specific mythological event Vinkeles is illustrating, or is it a generic depiction of Jupiter asserting his dominion? Curator: Ah, I suspect the engraving accompanies a fable. That frame just above the inscription references the fable number CLXII. Perhaps that might illuminate a more specific context. Editor: Regardless of the particular story, I think situating this piece within broader discussions of visual representation, specifically relating to gender, power and the politics of seeing, remains critical. Otherwise, are we simply perpetuating unquestioned norms? Curator: Well, whatever Vinkeles might have been thinking at the time, the print definitely holds different meanings and raises pertinent questions today, wouldn’t you agree? Editor: Absolutely! That tension between its historical context and our contemporary lens is what makes discussing artworks like this so stimulating.