Rogier van der Weyden: The Crucifixion, with the Virgin and Saint John the Evangelist Mourning (1464); Philadelphia Museum of Art.

MODERN ART IN 1464
It is generally considered that since painters found out how to create the illusion of reality, for many centuries they all tried to imitate nature or represent an ideal of nature, true to life. Only in the second half of the 19th century with the rise of impressionism, and later, expressionism and symbolism this ideal was abandoned. There are very few exceptions to this general rule: the overbearing and deliberately unbalanced works of the Mannerists, and the liberties El Greco permitted himself – both in the 16th century – are usually regarded as singular, isolated phenomena. Mostly, paintings that were not true to life, or showed abstract tendencies, have been classed as the work of incompetent artists.
Therefore it is all the more interesting to behold that in the very early stages of realistic painting one of its most accomplished practitioners, Rogier van der Weyden, created a piece of art that is so stylised and so artificial in it's composition, that it almost seems to herald Mondrian.
The Diptych of the Crucifixion, finished in 1464, depicts the moment of Christ's death, witnessed by Mary, who faints with grief, and St John, who supports her. There are only three figures and they fill most of the space. The background is relentlessly sparse: a black sky, a stone wall, partially covered by two deep red pieces of cloth, and a ground consisting of nothing but barren rock. The only other objects in the painting are a skull and a bone; the remains of Adam, the first man, who perpetrated the original Sin, making the salvation of mankind by Jesus' sacrifice necessary. The entire composition is divided in clear straight and diagonal lines. There is no perspective and hardly any depth. It's an almost two-dimensional composition of lines and colours. Rings a bell?
During the later part of his life Van der Weyden was regarded the greatest painter of the north. But this work must have been too original to be fully appreciated at the time. Strangely enough these days Van der Weyden enjoys less fame than several of his contemporaries.
(Text: Edgar Foley)