About ‘Art Mirrors Art’

The idea behind this blog seemed to be simple. I thought to collect a few examples of art works that depict mirrors (or use them in some way) and present them here in a somewhat orderly manner. May be adding a word or two of my personal impressions as a bonus. I thought I would find, say, a hundred of such art-mirrors or so, and the work be done in a dozen of posts. 


Let’s say that my assumptions about the simplicity of this enterprise were sightly off.  Just slightly.

I have been busy with this theme for more than six years by now. I gathered 12,500+ artworks. I wrote about 250 postings (and I already have enough materials to write three times more, if I would have more time). And I don’t see any end of this, increasingly feeling that I just scratch a surface.

The very beginning of the project is a bit difficult to locate in time, even for me. Like many of us, I bumped into interesting examples of the famous ‘mirrors in art’, such as Velázquez’s Meninas or Jan van Eyck’s Arnolfini Portrait, and was intrigued by their enigmas.  I read both serious, academic studies and more mainstreas interpretations (often fairly esoteric).

I even wrote a couple of posts about some of these works myself. Back then I was more interested in various re-interpretations or re-appropriations of these masterpieces.  I then started to collect these ‘mirror artworks’ more systematically. I found both well-known artworks and fairly obscure pieces. Most of them were paintings (or photographs  – but in any case, 2D works.) I have also found a wide variety of other things too, like sculptures or art installations. Somethings these were the mirrors themselves, decorated so lavishly that they would easily go as the art pieces.  Of course, when I say ‘collected’ I mean collecting (mostly digital) reproductions of these artworks, not real paintings.

You mat have seen many similar collections already. Whether gathered by amateurs or professional art historians, they most often focus on the artistic side of these art works, and sometimes on the biographies of the artists themselves. Some of these collections aim to highlight certain themes (for examples, the art works that illustrate the Bible).  I am obviously interested in these things too, but my own take is somewhat different.

To start with, I am not an art critic or an art historian; I am not even a ‘just historian’.  My background lies in a corner of humanities that is referred as ‘future studies’. It is often perceived as the exact opposite to anything ‘historical’.  More specifically, I help people to think about, and to work with the ‘possible futures’ (a profession otherwise known as ‘innovation consultant’.)

Then, and with some amusement to myself, I have discovered that these ‘mirrors in art of the past’ can in fact help me in my own work with the futures.  It didn’t happen at once and took me a while to see the things clear, but with time this project started to work as a training platform or a springboard of some sort for my thinking about the future.

I also found that these reflective exercises – reflections about history of technology, history of cultures and societies, and general history of ideas – may also help other people to better deal with the concept of possible futures. 

At some point I summarised all these ideas in a separate post, a kind of methodological introduction to this blog. I called it Future of Mirrors, Mirror of Future. This framework is still largely valid, I feel it only gets better after studying certain topics (for example, the history of the Prudence’s mirrors was an important addition to my thinking).


Perhaps worth saying that I initially started to write about these things in Russian, in my Russian-language blog called Specularum. At some point I realized that I need a separate blog in English, and here it is.

Now, speaking about ‘blogs’, I have recently found a very appropriate ‘warning sign’:

It is exactly the way this blog is run, too. The only things I can add is that English is not my native language, so in addition to the above problems I also keep making all kind of stupid mistakes – grammatical, stylistic and what not. Very often I don’t write in English at all, but rather express my Russian thoughts with English words.  You are warned twice, people!

The postings here are often ‘drafts & stuff’. They are not aimed at competing with any serious academic or even journalistic publications, and indeed always remain to be very bloggish (and I want to keep them this way).

When I write these postings, I don’t follow any particularly structure, or strategy. One day this may be a story about an exhibition I visited at this very day, and another time I can write about a paintings that I’ve seen years ago. Knowing this turbulent flow, I also maintain a more or less structured overview, a list of all the postings in a chronological, regional and topical order. You can find this overview in the Inventory of Mirrors in Art.

Finally, the copyright stuff. My own texts and the visuals I create myself are under the Creative Commons license (Attribution + Noncommercial, to be precise). In other words, feel free to use and share them, but please provides credits to the creator). If you plan to make lots of money with them, we need to talk.  

As for the other visual materials I use, I don’t hold copyrights to any of the art works that I post here.  I am using all these reproductions with research and educational purposes only, adhering a fair use policy. If you look for the copyrights for these work, you need to search elsewhere.

7 thoughts on “About ‘Art Mirrors Art’

  1. I work at a very large state agency in a very large state. The agency is in the process of managing change from an archaic culture of barely controlled chaos where success is largely accidental to a culture of planning and (gasp for us) managing work. We have a lot of “voice of the customer” outreach, and during this, we hear too often, “This is how we do it in our area” with little or no projection into a future that could be different. The dead hand of dysfunctional tradition is a major obstacle. Apparently, there are few mirrors in which we can see ourselves and recognize like the 1960s or 70s TV commercials that it’s Shake and Bake, and I helped.

    • Hehe, perhaps we can talk ‘professionally’ 🙂 My agency is small, and I live in a small state, but these are exactly the issues we are helping to explore and resolve.

  2. Congratulations for this website, blog, or whatever these things are called nowadays! I just found it by accident and I am so glad that I did. Your posts are a thoroughly enjoyable read, very in-depth and interesting indeed. I will follow it closely form now on, I can assure you. Allow me you thank you for your culturally illuminating services, by presenting you with a painting that will certainly appease to your reverence for mirrors and reflections, from the magical Golden Age of Dutch Painting that you so often make mention of: http://artifexinopere.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Ludolf-de-Jongh-Le-verre-refuse-1650-55-National-Gallery.jpg

    Best regards,
    Pedro Fonseca e Silva

    • Dear Pedro,

      Thank you very much for your feedback and your kind words! I am glad that you found this blog of some interest for you. Unfortunately, the project has been abandoned lately, due to my professional duties (as you could guess, this project has no direct relationshiops with my main work). Let’s hope that one day soon I will be able to resume writing here on a more regular base.

      I very much appreciate your ‘gift’, this self-portrait by Ludolf Leendertsz de Jongh! It is indeed one of the most intersting examples of self-portraits by the Dutch masters of this age, and I would love to delve a bit more into the story of its making.

      Meanwhile, please do read the previous materials written here, and I hope to read more of your comments in the future!

      Yours truly,

  3. I’ve just stumbled upon your blog and read the Beckmann part I&II piece. Its excellent, thank you, and Im looking forward to reading more. Good to see a couple of pictures illustrated that were new to me, despite major survey at Tate Modern London 2003 and the books I have. Especially interesting, because there is virtually nothing recorded about MB’s technique, was your inclusion of the unfinished final triptych. This triptych gives insight into his working methods (at least at the end period). It looks as if the general areas of colour are applied in pastel, with drawing, probably first in charcoal, then in a turps thinned black or maybe black ink as is suggested in the book “Beckmann and America” where they illustrate a small final picture “Opticians Window” 1950, left unfinished. It mentions that this is one of only two examples of an unfinished work found in the studio, where this starting process can be seen, but obviously this tryptich is another, and very good one too. I like to imagine this would have been a sensational good piece if realised. Interesting to imagine what Beckmann might have been making had he had more active years in NYC and exposure to the AB X scene makers…Im certain all that glass, transparent and reflective material all about him would have fascinated him. I realise its a bit off your subject, but do you have any information regards his working methods, his use of pastel and ink as the starting point for the pictures? Thanks, Greg.

  4. Hi Greg,

    Thank you for your kind words! I am glad to hear that you found my writings interesting and somewhat informative. You are right in noticing that the issue of painting techniques is a bit far from my core focus in this blog, although I do pay attention to these things, too, as they influence the ways that mirrors are depicted. But I can’t cover everything in this truly hobby project.

    Re Beckmann, I remember reading that he was fascinated with stained glass. Indeed, some of his paintings (especially some of the large triptychs) bear resemblance to the stained glass windows. I had a chance to see some of his triptychs, and this is a very moving experience.

    I also recall reading that he used quite a complex, multilayered technique, putting dark pigments underneath many of his otherwise bright paints (but I don’t remember the source by know, sorry). I know little about his late turn to pastel.

    Sometimes I write follow-up postings, in case I find more examples. By now I have a few more interesting mirror-works by Beckmann and, time allowing, plan to write about them. IfI will find something about technical aspects, I will try to include these things as well.

    Have a nice day!

  5. Just fyi: Ive read that regards pastels, he would put the colour down in pastel first, arrive at a general scheme/key to his satisfaction, and then remove one area of pastel at a time with turps, and paint in the corresponding colour…and so on, until completion. some of the last works still have passages of pastel remaining here and there. Why he’d use ink to draw his elements in, on his oil primed canvas canvases…I don’t know…a thinned down black oil paint would have made more sense, but apparently it was ink. I was aware of his attachment to gothic tradition and its stained glass, in this regard like frenchman Roualt (although with different results). Thanks for your reply and enjoyable work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s