So, here's a short version of what I've been up to in my English 480S class: art! Yes, not an essay, not a literary review--an artistic interpretation of the texts we've been reading! I'm going to add an in-depth analysis of this painting later (since I have to turn one in for credit), but I couldn't wait to put it up.
Being a double major in English and Political Science has really killed my time for creative projects (apart from essays of course), and the LSAT is slowly sucking out my soul. So, if I want to do an art piece, I have to work it into "creative projects" in class. Thus, we have "The Death of Romanticism". It's been a long time since I've immersed myself in art, so I hope you'll excuse the errors from lack of practice. It was fun either way.
Oh, and the photo's crap. I don't have a decent digital camera. I wish I could share how vivid it is in real life. Also, I'll probably upload some detail photos later.
This is a mixed media piece. I used watercolors, a gold pen, a black pen, oil pastels, and chalk. I might do some digital editing later, although I'm pretty old school.
So here is my creative project for ENG 480S, symbolizing the shift from Romanticism to Modernism with the following influences:
Klimt
Manet
Other Impressionist artists
Mucha
T.S. Eliot (that's "The Wasteland" in his chest)
Modris Ekstein's commentary on Cubism
World War I
The symbol of the dying woman in Victorian art
The return of "normality" following WWI--Mrs. Dalloway
I won't point out all the elements, but I will say that the medal is intentionally on the wrong side (Victoria Cross), the flowers in her hair are Azaleas (symbolism), and the gun is a German Mauser. Honestly, I'd like to hear what YOU see.
EDIT:
So here's what I'm turning in:
The process of expressing the transition between Romanticism and the Victorian age to Modernism in a visual format has been an evolving understanding of what these movements have meant in my mind and the overall impact of this shift on the human soul—both individually and collectively. Throughout my self-examination of this subject, I was continually drawn to a feeling of loss with the development of modernity following the Great War, a sense that some innocence and the metanarratives of previous centuries had been destroyed. Some might define this change as progress rather than loss, but our readings led me to believe that any transition is painful, whether for good or ill. Although several of the novels, plays, and poems we read prior to WWI exhibited a quest for identity devoid of established roles and a certain disdain for some social conditions, there was still a sense of beauty—appreciation of nature and purpose despite the horror or confusion of the situation. There was progress to an end. With this shift to Modernism, I feel that this disdain has been amplified, and much of the meaning of life has been brought under harsh scrutiny. Novels like Mrs. Dalloway assure us that a sense of normality can be restored despite destruction, but we know that society will never be the same again.
It was with all these thoughts about our reading swirling in my mind that I began my painting, doing some research in regards to development of visual art following the transition that was so evident in the literature we read, paying particular attention to Impressionism, Expressionism, Art Nouveau, Klimt, Mucha, Manet, Victorian paintings, and Cubism. These artists and concepts represent a wide swath of time in art history, but my own background and interest drew me to choose these influences in my work. In truth, it is often difficult to personally explain influences just as it is difficult to link a specific incident in a writer’s life with the resulting literature. Much of my interest has been internalized, expressing itself unconsciously. In any case, I specifically decided to mimic these styles, choosing to portray the death of “Romanticism” as expressed through the female figure and the triumph (perhaps tragedy) of “Modernism,” the male figure.
After doing a bit of reading, I decided upon these gendered assignments and tragic pose based on the tradition of the “woman destroyed by love” used by the Pre-Raphaelites (D’Amico 98), a theme that bled into other Victorian style. Most pre-modernist paintings also chose to depict epic events (Hilton 209), a tradition I hoped to mimic in this arrangement. This would be a means of emphasizing the connection between the two figures and the loss expressed by the male—this was my intention anyway. As our class discussion made evidently clear, my choice of design might have made the man seem more “hollow” to some. I allow that art is extremely subjective, and I encourage this differential perspective. I was very glad to see that some of my classmates read the affection in his hand on her shoulder, an effect that contrasts with the severe look of the gas mask.
In speaking of the male’s stark design, I wanted to express his attachment to the Great War through the inspiration of Modris Eksteins’s statements about the aforementioned gas masks as a precursor to Cubism and all the surreal experiences that were connected to this horrible event: “When men donned their masks they lost all sign of humanity, and with their long snouts, large glass eyes, and slow movements, they became figures of fantasy” (163). The male is done in only black and white chalk pastels, emphasizing the loss of vitality and the bleak outlook associated with the modern age. The gas mask ensures that his identity is questionable, a theme we noted in several works. I hope that his lack of expression makes an even more emotional impact than any attempt I might have made to place sorrow or satisfaction on his face. I hope this lack of features also helps to open interpretation of the figure.
In the center of his chest is a watercolor painting of my interpretation of Eliot’s “The Wasteland”—a vast expanse of desert with a scorching sun and no hint of life. It is done in an impressionist style, and now that I consider it more carefully, I wonder if my decision to paint it with the same media as the woman shows something more of the tie between the two figures. Just as we discussed how “The Wasteland” forever impacts our interpretation of those texts that have preceded it and vice versa, this painting could show the dual relationship between the two. Also on his chest is a single medal: the Victoria Cross, an honor that was first bestowed in 1856 following the Crimean War (Simner). It is “Great Britain’s highest award that can be bestowed on an individual and thus takes precedent over all other awards” (Simner). The inscription reads “For Valor” and it is properly worn on the left side of the chest. I intentionally placed it on the right in the hope of expressing the meaninglessness of such awards with the destruction of the hero, contrasting this high achievement with the destruction the viewer sees in the figure of the woman.
The woman is done in a mixture of styles and media with particularly emphasis on Mucha and a touch of Klimt in the style of gold pattern on her dress. She was painted using watercolor to emphasize her delicacy and vibrant color. She was outlined with gold and black pen. She appears to be glowing in contrast to the man, emphasizing the disconnection between the two figures. Her form is meant to evoke nature and great beauty, two themes emphasized in the Art Nouveau style (Howard 18), a style that served as a kind of transition in the late 19th century to modernism (Lavallée). The flowers in her hair are actually intended to be azaleas, signifying “Fragile Passion” in the language of flowers that was made popular in the Victorian period (Greenaway 8). Although she has elements of the bridge between Romanticism and Modernism, she is nevertheless destroyed by the overwhelming criticism of modernism. The tie-in with Klimt implies, however, that the female form is not completely destroyed but capable of the reinterpretation the artist later proves in his ties to Expressionism (Urton).
In addition to the two dominant forms of the painting, there are a couple of other elements that were included to emphasize some points about World War I and its aftermath. The gun is supposed to be a German Mauser, the elite rifle of the German soldiers during this time period, and although it did not have the rapid-fire capabilities of the machine gun, it was often used in sniping missions (Duffy). I mostly chose this specific gun for aesthetics, but I also wanted to include a non-British element in an attempt to make the soldier more universal or European to emphasize the shift felt by all involved in the Great War, a decision that detracts even further from the meaning of the Victoria Cross. The gun is also aimed away from the woman, making it unclear what has happened in this situation and reducing the viewer’s ability to draw a clean solution to the question of the event. I wanted to use the modernist tinge to express the uncertainty of the action, leading the viewer to wonder why this event took place, questioning whether there was any reasoning behind the destruction of the woman—or if it was inevitable since she does not fit with the rest of the painting.
The other element left to be discussed is the background, a depiction of a metro station inspired by Marcus Krackowizer and done more closely to the impressionist style than any other part of the painting. Following the traditional technique, I used oil pastels in chunky motion to make clear strokes without mixing colors, attempting to emphasize the importance of light and contrast rather than detail. This was a common shift in painting in light of the development of photography, leading artists to seek new ways of expressing reality (“Impressionism”). If you look carefully, you can see a crowd of blue shadows on the left side that are supposed to represent a milling crowd going about their regular activities. Although it is twilight, there appears to be a kind of normality to the background in contrast to the surreal figures in the foreground. This was inspired by Mrs. Dalloway and the novel’s interpretation of life after the war. The experiences have been internalized (as depicted by “The Wasteland” in the male’s chest), and the view of life has changed (the impressionist dominance as opposed to Art Nouveau/Victorian), but it still continues. At one point I had considered painting a simple blue sky like in Monet’s Woman with a Parasol, but I thought it might be best to incorporate a more industrial look in the painting to emphasize the technological advances of the era.
There are doubtless many other elements that I have inadvertently inserted in this painting and numerous other explanations for their placement if the class’s response is any indication. This could be related to the relationship between the two figures, the cause of the woman’s death, or the emphasis of light in the metro. There are several meanings possible in the painting, and I think this ultimately works to my advantage when emphasizing Modernism. We cannot all agree on a single, direct “meaning” for the painting. We are all caught up in our own subjectivity as influenced by our own interpretations of the texts we have read this semester.
Works Cited
D’Amico, Diane, and Christina Rossetti: Faith, Gender, and Time. Baton Rouge, LA:
Louisiana State University Press, 1999.
Duffy, Michael. "Weapons of War: Rifles." First World War.com. 28 Aug. 2002. 25 Nov.
2008 .
Eksteins, Modris. Rites of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Books, 2000.
Greenaway, Kate, and Edmund Evans. Language of Flowers. London: G. Routledge and sons, 1884.
Hilton, Timothy. The Pre-Raphaelites. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1970.
Howard, Jeremy. Art Nouveau: International and National Styles in Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1996.
“Impressionism.” Wikipedia. Wikipedia. 10 Nov. 2008.
Lavallée, Michèle. “Art Nouveau.” Grove Art Online. Oxford University Press. 15 Nov. 2008.
Simner, Mark. “Victoria Cross.” Britishmedals.info. Sep. 2006. 27 Nov. 2008 .
Urton, Robin. “Expressionism.” Art History. 25 Nov. 2008. .
