COMMENDED ESSAY: Did Edward Burne-Jones replicate or appropriate the Classical world and its ideals? Explore the transmission of mythology through Pre-Raphaelite art.

This essay was entered into the St Hughes Mary Renault essay competition. It was commended for its “well structured and well researched essay” that the “judges enjoyed reading”.

The Pre-Raphaelite painter Edward Burne-Jones was besotted with the classical world, as a result of his Oxford schooling, his trips to Florence, Rome and Venice, Britain’s prominent role in the nineteenth century revival of antiquity and his Grecian mistress[1]. This infatuation is best shown through the majority of his paintings having classical subjects which either draw from ancient sources, such as Ovid, or his contemporary William Morris’ retellings. In this essay I argue that Edward Burne-Jones’ treatment of classical mythology is multi-faceted, as he portrays the events of the myths accurately, replicating classical artistic ideals as he does so, but also uses them as vehicles to justify and make sense of his illicit extramarital affair. In order to do this, I shall explore three paintings by the artist, namely: ‘The Doom fulfilled’ 1888, ‘Pygmalion and the image: The Godhead fires’ 1878 and ‘Phyllis and Demophoön’ 1870.

Figure 1: Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones, ‘The Doom Fulfilled’ (1888), mixed media on paper, 1538mm x 1384mm, Southampton City Art gallery

In ‘The Doom fulfilled’ 1888, Burne-Jones both glorifies classical art, by drawing inspiration from and replicating its techniques and appropriates it by corrupting its purpose as an exemplum virtutis by linking the artwork to his prior affair. Andromeda is presented with pale translucent skin, reminiscent of the preferred medium for classical sculpture, marble. Her white skin glows in comparison to Perseus’ olive complexion, drawing on the idea of gendered colours that was evident in antiquity. Whereas pale skin was considered the epitome of female beauty, warriors were often described as having a darker skin tone, as shown by Homer’s description of Odysseus becoming melagkhroiēs (black-skinned) again. Furthermore, Andromeda stands in contrapposto, harking back to classical nude statues such as the Praxitelean type, Venus of Cnidus 350 BCE, which the artist was known to have studied carefully[2]. Moreover, the figure of Perseus is directly based off the Laocoön. Both stand contrapposto in their attempts to feign off the attacks of vicious sea serpents which have coiled between their legs, with the snake’s frozen mid bite. Both men visibly strain to fend off their mystical attackers with Perseus’ arms heroically outstretched to resemble Sansovino’s, now deemed incorrect restoration of the statue. By drawing so greatly on the Laocoön for inspiration, Burne-Jones is echoing Pliny the Elder’s musing that the sculpture “is a work of art to be preferred to any other painting or statuary[3]”. In this way, the artist shows great respect for art from the classical period, by using similar techniques and repurposing subjects to replicate both the aesthetics and the esteem of classical art. However, this painting subtly alludes to his long-term affair with the sculptress Maria Zambaco Cassavetti, described as the “emotional climax of his life”[4], and he therefore appropriates the classical world’s use of art as an exemplum virtutis. The violent imagery of the Perseus saga acts as a manifestation of the extremely passionate affair between Burne-Jones and Cassavetti, which was epitomised by their 1869 suicide pact to overdose on Laudanum together[5]. Burne-Jones used Maria to make his last studies for the female figure, as he saw her as an ideal Grecian beauty and therefore more beautiful than the Nereids, just like Andromeda was claimed to be by her mother. However more implicitly, Burne-Jones takes on the mythical role of Perseus as he reflects on societies negative perception of his affair and his inner turmoil between loving his wife and craving his mistress, which are both embodied by the snake he is fighting. The all-encompassing effect of his affair and its negative ramifications are further reflected on by the choppy, inky waves and the desolate rocky background that encircle and trap the two subjects. Interestingly, Burne-Jones’ choice to portray the Perseus saga was most likely in part to the myth’s love triangle between Perseus, Andromeda and her previously betrothed Phineus and its similarities to the love triangle between Maria, himself, and his wife Georgiana. Although Burne-Jones was not a hero like Perseus as the sensibilities of Victorian society condemned affairs especially when overt. He therefore appropriates and corrupts the morally sound myth of a hero protecting a maiden, using it to exonerate himself by portraying himself and Maria, the perpetrators, as beautiful and idealised classical sculptures.

Figure 2: Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones, ‘Pygmalion and the Image – The Godhead Fires’ (1878), oil on canvas, 1437mm x 1168mm, Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery

In his ‘Pygmallion and the image’ series of 1878, Burne-Jones appropriates the Greek ideal of beauty, which he tried so hard to replicate, by using his ex-mistress as his model for the female figures. In the myth of Pygmalion and Galatea, which the image is based on, Pygmalion sculpts his ideal of female beauty and then begs Aphrodite for a wife as perfect as his marble woman. This tale is mirrored in Burne-Jones’ personal life, as although he thought he was already married to the perfect woman, he could not help but long for his muse Maria. This is exemplified by Maria being used as the model for both Aphrodite and Galatea as she was the living embodiment of Grecian beauty by the Pre-Raphaelites. Her “glorious red hair” is shared by the goddess Aphrodite in the painting, and her “almost phosphorescent white skin[6]” that likened her to the “white-armed Helen”[7] of the Iliad and Odyssey, is shared by both figures. Crucially however, as with all other epochs that aimed to recreate authentic classical beauty, the Pre-Raphaelites failed as they projected their modern bias onto the past. Burne-Jones once mused that, “I must confess that my interest in a woman is because she is a woman and is such a nice shape and so different to mine.”[8] This contrasts greatly to the androgynous concept of Apollonian beauty where harmony consisted in opposition, namely, between that of male and female[9]. Furthermore, the ancient Greek view of beauty was multi-faceted as it was as much to do with the qualities of the soul and personality, as well as physical appearance. Kalokagathia, literally καλός kai ἀγαθός meaning beautiful and good, encompasses the beauty of forms, the goodness of the soul and the morality of character into one expression[10]. In this way, Burne-Jones fails in his quest to replicate classical beauty in his paintings; as his model Maria cannot be deemed as kalokagathia. She was an adulterer on two counts, against her own estranged husband Demetrius Zambaco and Georgiana Burne-Jones and is therefore not virtuous. Consequently, by using Maria as his model he is appropriating the classical ideals he is trying to replicate. The artist therefore overcompensates by flooding the image with the symbolism of Aphrodite, and therefore beauty and love. The goddess stands in a pool of crystal aquamarine, which harks back to her creation of being fully formed from the sea. She is also portrayed surrounded by doves, her avian symbol, following in the classical artistic tradition which can be seen on Greek pottery and on reliefs of her temples such as that of Aphrodite Pandemos at Athens[11]. Furthermore, she is adorned with both roses and a myrtle branch, of which were sacred to the deity. However, as myrtle was classically used in wedding rituals, even Burne-Jones’ compensation subtly alludes to his 1869 plan to leave his wife in order to marry his mistress. Indeed, this image was inextricably linked to his affair as Burne-Jones even sent the first set of his ‘Pygmallion and the image’ series to Maria Zambaco’s mother[12], despite no longer being romantically involved with her. Therefore, Burne-Jones greatly appropriates the Greek world and its ideals in this image as he fails to replicate the Greek concept of Kalokagathia and recontextualises the myth of Pygmalion and Galatea in order to beautify the sordid reality of his affair.

Figure 3:Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones, ‘Phyllis and Demophoön’ (1870), mixed media on paper, 938mm x 475mm, Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery

This first edition of Burne-Jones’ painting ‘Phyllis and Demophoön’ from 1870 is wrought with references to his affair and is thus an appropriation of the eponymous myth rooted in espousal loyalty. In 1870 his affair with Maria was coming to a physical end as the guilt he felt towards his wife Georgiana and his two children triumphed over his infatuation. This regret is encapsulated by the caption he gave to this image in the Summer Exhibition catalogue of the Old Watercolour Society, “Dic mihi quid feci? Nisi non sapienter amavi”, a quote from Ovid that translates to “Tell me what I have done? I loved unwisely”[13]. This painting’s subject matter can be interpreted in multiple ways, it could be a physical embodiment of Burne-Jones’ difficult escape from his long-term affair, as Demophoön seems eager to flee from Phyllis, modelled off Maria, who has ensnared him with both her arms and her drapery. However, as mythically Phyllis is a loyal wife whose tale is recounted second only to Penelope’s (the most loyal woman in Classical culture) in Ovid’s ‘Heroides’, the female figure more likely represents Georgiana, wife of Burne-Jones. If we interpret the image accordingly, Demophoön looks back mournfully to the woman he has hurt, and his kinetic stance is due to the shock he feels in being welcomed back so readily and warmly. In the myth Phyllis kills herself from heartbreak and loneliness as a result of her husband never returning home, similarly Georgiana describes the years of her husband’s affair, 1868-71, simply as “Heart, thou and I here, sad and alone”[14]. As there were multiple similarities between the classical world, especially its myths, and Burne-Jones’ personal life, it was near impossible for him to not replicate elements of the classical world in his paintings. The female figure’s face takes on the likeness of the blooms around her as it is illuminated with a pink glow, juxtaposing the two faces in terms of light, establishing the female as the virtuous and the male as the sinful. His use of the colour pink has classical connotations of “rosy-fingered Dawn”[15] . The hope that the female deity inspired in her creation of a new day, is akin to the hope Georgiana inspires for a reunification. Moreover, the drapery is not diminishing in its connection with Demophoön but growing, as it represents the connection between man and wife. This was previously only felt by Georgiana, being gradually shared by Burne-Jones. This reinvigoration of marital unity is further emphasised by their shared mossy and shadowed skin tones, achieved by Burne-Jones through chiaroscuro, as they become one both emotionally and physically. Despite the end of his affair with Maria, Burne-Jones continued to use her likeness in his later paintings, including the two I have previously explored, as regardless of their relationship status she remained his epitome of Grecian beauty. Therefore, whilst Burne-Jones does appropriate the classical world and its ideals in this image, as he corrupts the figure of the loyal Phyllis with the head of his mistress, all images after this are mere reflections on his affair and therefore more passive in their appropriation.

In reviewing these three works by Edward Burne-Jones, I can ascertain that the artist both replicates the classical world and its ideals as he portrays the events of the myths accurately whilst using the techniques of classical art, but also appropriates the classical world and its ideals. Specifically, the moral purpose of art, mythology and the concept of beauty. Nevertheless, whilst the morality of appropriating art, and its subjects, is fiercely debated, Jean Pierrot alludes in his ‘The Decadent Imagination: 1800-1900, that the classical world provides a framework for artists to express their personal ideas and or problems, safely behind the veil of antiquity. Indeed, the beauty of Classics is in its ability to be received and utilised by a plethora of people in a multitude of ways, including Edward Burne-Jones’ use of mythology in his artwork to make sense of his illicit personal affairs.

 

[1] Liana De Girolami Cheney. “Edward Burne-Jones’ ‘Andromeda’: Transformation of Historical and Mythological Sources.” Artibus Et Historiae, vol. 25, no. 49, 2004, pp. 197–227. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1483754.

[2] Liana De Girolami Cheney. “Edward Burne-Jones’ ‘Andromeda’: Transformation of Historical and Mythological Sources.” Artibus Et Historiae, vol. 25, no. 49, 2004, pp. 197–227. JSTOR, accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1483754.

[3] Pliny the Elder, Natural History, 36.37

[4] Stephen Wildman, Edward Burne-Jones: Victorian Artist-Dreamer, MET Publications, 1998, p114

⁵ Jan Marsh, Pre-Raphaelite Sisterhood, Interlink Pub Group Inc, 1985, p273

[6] Alexander Constantine Ionides Jr, Ion: A Grandfather’s Tal, vol.2, notes and index, p28

[7] Homer, Iliad, 3.121

Homer, Odyssey, 7.357

[8] Penelope Fitzgerald, Edward Burne-Jones, Sutton Publishing Ltd,1975, p115

[9] Umberto Eco, History of Beauty, Rizzoli, 2004, p58 & 72

[10] Ibid p45

[11] Monica S. Cyrino, Aphrodite, Gods and Heroes of the Ancient World, Routledge, 2010, p122

[12] Ann S. Dean, Edward Burne Jones, Pitkin Guides, p19

[13] http://www.bmagic.org.uk/objects/1916P37 accessed: 15/06/2019

[14] Georgiana Burne-Jones, The Memorials of Edward Burne-Jones, Volume 2, 1904, Ch XVI

[15] Homer, Odyssey, 2.476

Medieval Cherry Pottage

As cherries are currently in season, I decided to make cherry pottage  from the British Museum’s The Medieval Cookbook by Maggie Black.

“Any young hostess, married or not, would enjoy showing off this pretty dish.”

Ingredients (serves 6) – note I made a half batch

900g cherries

350ml red wine

175g white sugar

50g unsalted butter

225g soft white bread crumbs

Pinch of salt

Method

Remove the stems and stones from all the cherries.

Add in the roughly torn up white bread into a blender to create breadcrumbs. Set the breadcrumbs aside for later use.

Into the blender add all the cherries, half the wine and half the sugar.

Blend the ingredients together until a smooth puree is formed.

Melt the butter in a large pan or saucepan.

Add all the puree, the restr of the wine, the rest of the sugar and the salt into the pan. Gradually add in the breadcrumbs. Simmer on a low heat for 10 minutes, stirring often until the mixture thickens to a poridge-like consistency.

Pour the mixture into serving bowls, cover, and leave to cool down completely. Serve with a cherry (as shown), edible flowers or gilded cloves!

This was a very easy recipe to make and disregarding the pitting of the cherries, was quite quick to make. The taste of this dish really relies on the quality of the cherries, and as my Dad said “You can’t go wrong with cherries and wine!”. Whilst this pottage is a bit abnormal for the modern taste, it was still pleasant and flavourful – resembling a very fruity porridge.

Rating: 6/10

 

RUNNER UP ESSAY: Girton College Cambridge 2019 Humanities Essay Competition

** This essay is the intellectual property of Isabel Lewis**

This essay was awarded runner up in the 2019 Girton College’s (Cambridge University) humanities essay competition. On the 25th April, I attended a prize giving ceremony at Girton College, it was a lovely day and a pleasure to tour the college and it’s classical objects library, aswell as meeting and talking to the Mistress of Girton and the Professors that judged the competition. The judges praised my originality of thought and noted that although they were first complexed as to where I had got my idea from and whether it was correct or not, after reading the essay in its entirety, they were won round due to the strength of my argument and the range of evidence I used. Below you will find the original essay I submitted without the appendix of figures, however, I will include a picture of the object the essay centred around for clarity.

Girl or Goddess? Determining the Subject of a Terracotta Figurine

LR.772: Terracotta figurine of a woman with a ball

Upon seeing the Greek terracotta figurine of a woman with a ball (fig. 1), I was intrigued as to who it depicted as the artefacts that have survived from the Classical World predominantly depict men. Therefore, in this essay I will discuss the two most probable possibilities and ultimately decide which I deem correct. These two characters are Homer’s Nausicaa and the goddess Aphrodite, thought to have been first suggested by Alison Roberts. The determination of the subject is greatly affected, yet not dictated, by whether the figurine is holding a ball or an apple. Another important factor of ascertainment is to establish whether the function of the figurine was a cult idol or simply a decorative ornament. In this essay I will explore both these uncertainties, compare the figurine to other visual materials, as well as including relevant context.

Aphrodite

In order to establish Aphrodite (the Lawrence Room Catalogue credits Alison Roberts for this attribution) as the subject of this piece, we typically make the assumption that the item being held by the figurine is an apple and that it was originally painted gold. The importance of the golden apple derives from the myth the Judgement of Paris in which the Trojan prince was asked to judge who was the fairest out of Hera, Athene and Aphrodite. They each offered him prizes as a reward for choosing them, but Aphrodite’s offer of Helen, the most beautiful woman in the world, in marriage was Paris’ favourite and she therefore won the competition. As a result of this myth, one of Aphrodite’s emblems became an apple and she was often depicted holding one. Examples of this are a statuette of Aphrodite leaning on a column from circa 100 B.C. to 100 A.D. (Fig. 2) and Aphrodite in bronze in Hellenistic fashions circa 200 to 150 B.C. (Fig. 3). However, if we decide to determine the object is a ball, our argument that Aphrodite is the subject is still relevant. Indeed, there is a depiction that associate the goddess with sport, such as in the four adjoining fragments of a red-figure hydria by the Kleophon painter circa 430-420 B.C. (Fig unavailable) that portrays a seated Aphrodite flanked by two girls playing with a ball[1]. Therefore, either option of what the item is could be linked to the goddess, however this argument is weaker as there is only one known depiction and Aphrodite is not even the one playing with the ball.

However, there are arguably some visual discrepancies with this figurine and traditional depictions of Aphrodite. Normally, the goddess is most commonly portrayed as either semi-clothed or nude, often posed in the midst of a futile attempt to protect her modesty. Contrastingly, this figurine shows a woman fully clothed which is atypical of this supposed subject. However, there are some representations of the goddess fully clothed, such as the Corinthian terracotta statue of Aphrodite from the 4^th century B.C. (Fig. 4), that is similar to our figurine in its Hellenistic dating, dimensions as they are both statuettes and material. This suggests that similar fully clothed depictions of Aphrodite were at least made in mainland Greece, around the time of our figurine, perhaps strengthening our argument. Despite this, the major point of contention in our attribution of this figurine to Aphrodite is the traces of brown paint used to colour our figurines’ hair. Aphrodite is traditionally depicted as blonde in classical literature; in Homer’s ‘Illiad’ the goddess is described as Χρυσεη which translates from Greek as ‘golden’. Aphrodite was likely to have been depicted as blonde as the Homeric characterization of the gods remains their archetypal depiction through the Classical and Hellenistic, making the likelihood of the goddess being the subject of the figurine less likely.

However, we do know that the cults of Aphrodite used idols in their worship of the goddess. Moreover, we know stautuettes existed of Aphrodite in Attica, where our figurine was found, because Pausanius states:

[There is a] sanctuary of Ares [in Athens], where are placed

two images of Aphrodite, one of Ares made by Alkamenes, and one of Athena.[2]

By establishing the function of this figurine as a votive offering, if it is in fact Aphrodite, in its place of acquisition in Attica, greatly strengthens our argument as we can hypothesize that there was a significant demand for such offerings. Indeed, it is more plausible to assume that the likelihood of this figurine being Aphrodite is greater than that of Nausicaa. A key element of traditional Greek religion was the worship of the Olympians and statuettes such as this figurine, were often used as votive offerings. One can hypothesize that the more well known the subject, the more likely they are to be depicted and/or commonly used as votive offerings. As a result of this, our argument for Aphrodite being the subject of the figurine is more logical, but only if we disregard the hair colour discrepancy.

Nausicaa

Contrastingly, as a result of my study of ‘The Odyssey’ by Homer at A-level, the terracotta figurine of a woman with a ball immediately conjured up thoughts of comparison with Homer’s character of Nausicaa. We first meet her in the eponymous book six on the island of Scherie, and she develops into, arguably, one of the most pivotal and engaging female figures of the epic. ‘The Odyssey’ is believed to have been written circa 750 B.C. and was performed orally by bards for centuries. Due to its popularity it became a common subject of vases, especially kylikes, amphoras and kraters making it plausible that scenes and characters from ‘The Odyssey’ could be depicted on other decorative objects such as ornamental figurines. However, this might make us ponder the probability of Nausicaa being the character depicted in these media as not only is she a female, she is only paramount to the plot of book 6 and is only mentioned in a further 3 out of the 24 books.

However, we know female characters of ‘The Odyssey’ were depicted aesthetically because of a Melian relief from the first century A.D. that depicts both Penelope and Eurycleia (Fig. 5). Similarly, we know that Nausicaa was seen as a distinguished enough character to be depicted aesthetically as there is an Athenian red-figure water jar from 406 B.C. (Fig. 6) that depicts the princess alongside Odysseus and Athene. This is because the first scene between Nausicaa and Odysseus is very charming as well as being a key turning point of the epic. The probability of the figurine being Nausicaa also increases as a result of these two visual materials, as the Lawerence Room Catalogue dates the object between 300 and 201 B.C. a time that lies between the dates of the other depictions. This informs us that ‘The Odyssey’ was used as a source of inspiration around the time of the creation of this figurine. In fact, it makes sense to depict Nausicaa as she was instrumental in aiding the hero Odysseus’ journey home, thus fulfilling his nostos. This is achieved by Odysseus being woken up by Nausicaa’s maids’ reaction to them dropping their ball.

Nausicaa goes on to accept Odysseus’ supplication and advises him how to gain the help of her father King Alcinous of the Phaeacians – who eventually orchestrates the hero’s journey back to his homeland of Ithaca. The wealthy educated elite would have recognised this character’s importance to the plot of ‘The Odyssey’ and the possession of such a figurine may have shown the sophistication of their thought to their peers.

However, in our argument for Nausicaa as the subject of the figurine, we must make the assumption that the item the women is holding is a ball. This is an image often associated with Nausicaa, as we learn in E.V. Rieu’s translation of book 6:

Presently, when mistress and maids had all enjoyed their food, they

threw off their headgear and began playing with a ball (99-100).[3]

Furthermore, the second century female grammarian and critic of Homer, Agallis, attributed Nausicaa with the invention of ball games further linking the princess to this object. Therefore, we can assume that there is a greater probability of this terracotta figurine of a woman with a ball being Nausicaa. By removing their modesty veils, Nausicaa and her maids were promoting the idea of feminine freedoms in a time where the majority of Greek woman were confined by societal gender roles. As a result, this figurine could possibly have been owned by a wife as a form of escapism.

Appearance wise, the figurine is described as having traces of watercolour on its surfaces, noted as being pink on the dress and brown on the hair. Likewise, Nausicaa is traditionally depicted with brown hair, such as in Frederic Leighton’s painting titled ‘Nausicaa’ (Fig. 7) and Michele Desubleo’s ‘Odysseus and Nausicaa’ (Fig. 8). The pink of the chiton would have been an expensive dye to use as it was made from either gypsum or haematite[4] and therefore only attainable for a goddess or a princess – which Nausicaa qualifies as. These two factors, when taken together, help to present a very strong case for Nausicaa being the subject of the figurine when taken in conjunction with Nausicaa’s traditional and literary link to ball games.

In conclusion, I believe the subject of this Greek terracotta figurine of a woman with a ball is Nausicaa. This is because despite Aphrodite being depicted visually much more frequently than Nausicaa, I cannot accept the visual anomaly between the figurine’s brunette hair and the goddess’ typical blonde. The cults of Aphrodite were also centered outside of Attica, arguably reducing the market for idols of this goddess in the figurines’ place of acquisition. Unlike the other two examples of Aphrodite holding an apple, the figurine does not seem to display the item proudly. In my opinion, her pose is more reminiscent of playing ball as she draws the item to her chest in anticipation of throwing it. Therefore, as Nausicaa is more definitely linked to ball games than the goddess, as the princess is attributed with their creation, I can attribute her as the subject confidently.

[1] Worshipping Aphrodite: Art and Cult in Classical Athens by Rachel Rosenzweig p49-50, published by the University of Michigan Press

[2] Description of Greece by Pausanius, translated by W. H. S. Jones, 1. 8. 4

[3] ibid

[4] ‘The panel paintings from Pitsa (Greece, 6th c. BC) : A first analytical assessment of their materials and technique’, presented at the 5th Symposium of the Hellenic Society of Archaeometry, Athens 2008 by H. Brecoulaki, D.C. Smith, G. Economou, M. Perraki, I. Kougemitrou and E.Stasinopolou.

Obtained 1/03/2019 from: https://www.cairn.info/revue-archeologique-2014-1-page-3.htm#no72 

The Colour of White Lecture by Professor Milena Melfi

On Friday the 15th of March 2019, I attended the Oxford and Cambridge Classics Open Day. I was very fortunate in hearing three enthralling and interesting lectures from three excellent female professors – this second of which was from Professor Milena Melfi.

–

In order to introduce us to polychromy, Professor Melfi showed us a picture of the Statue of Phrasikleia from Attica c.520BC. This was in order to establish how much more we can learn from ancient materials when colour is considered.

Restored replica of the Statue of Phrasikleia from Meranda, Attica

 

When analysing this replica statue, we can establish that this korē (girl) died both wealthy and young. Her family’s wealth is shown by the lifelike height (2m) of the statue, the abundance of colour made from expensive pigments and the inclusion of gold and leaf leaf to decorate her dress. Furthermore, her untimely death is expressed in the monuments inscription,

Korē I must be called evermore; instead of marriage, by Gods this name became my fate.

We can learn from this statue that the skin was painted in a flesh colour made up of white lead, red ochre and light brown umber pigments and this paint was polished with a stone to give it a lifelike quality. This fact, when coupled with the abundance of colour directly contrasts the tomb it decorates as it conjures an image of life – memorialising the young girl. Through pigment analysis we can also identify the item she is holding in her left hand to be a lotus bid, unbloomed just like the maiden. Similarly, the crown of lotuses with its round shape could signify the gates of the underworld making this statue bitter-sweet. Such insightful analysis would have been impossible without pigment analysis.

This statue is considered one of the most important examples of archaic art, partly because polychromy on women ,including statues, signified beauty. As stated by Euripides’ eponymous Helen,

If only I could shed my beauty and assume an uglier aspect, the way you would wipe colour from a statue.

As this statue is completely covered in vivid colour, for example Phrasikleia’s delicately painted toenails and her dress covered with rosettes and Miranda’s, it makes its message even more tragic. Not only did Phrasikleia die unmarried, she died unmarried despite being both beautiful and wealthy.

Professor Melfi stated that without considering colour we cannot understand statues, as colour adds dimension and meaning. Colour can signify race, allegiance, wealth, gender, status and beauty, to name a few.

Pigment was completely gendered in the ancient world, with pale skin representing femininity and dark skin representing warlike masculinity. This is shown by the Riace Warrior statue c460BC with its surface sulphur residue which indicates a dark patina was placed on top of the bronze material. The patina therefore shows the realism of the sculpture. Just like Homer’s description of Odysseus becoming melagkhroiēs (black-skinned) again with the help of Athene, warriors were often described as having darker skin tone. So such colour analysis can help us establish the career of the subject of the statue.

Riace Warrior from Marina

The status of the subject can also be determined from pigment analysis. As shown by the statue of Peplos Kore from Athens c530BC as this statue possibly could not depict a mere korē (maiden/girl) but a mighty Ancient Greek goddess. This is because we know little figures of animals were painted on the dress, and gods such as Athena and Aphrodite (of Asia-minor) are described as wearing embroidered dresses. To further this argument, the statue has holes signifying it originally included metal attributes, the holes in the hand are likely for a bow and arrows. Finally, the holes in the head are for a metal crown of feathers/leaves. This decoration has a dual purpose of practicality and decoration as decoratively, a crown signifies deitism and the spikes of the crown would help prevent bird droppings tainting the art piece. Therefore we can confidently argue that this statue depicts the goddess Artemis.

Restored replica of the statue of Peplos Kore from Athens

Colour can also signify value, as shown by the Colossal Funerary Lion from Loutraki, near Corinth c550BC. In this instance, colour is both natural and unnatural. Naturally, colour is used to show detail as it was used to show the lines, creases and whiskers of the lion and unnaturally, it’s mane was painted blue. This blue mane was painted with azuralite dye which was very expensive and used for Sphinxes and Pharaohs in Ancient Egypt. Through similar chemical analysis, it was determined that Polykleitos’ Diadoumenos (fillet-binding athlete) from Delos of c420BC was originally fully gilded and was thus more precious. Without said analysis we would be missing an integral part of the statues’ visual heritage.

Lastly, race, allegiance and myth is depicted through colour on the Sarcophagus of Alexander the Great c320BC. On its short side we see a battle between the Persians and Greeks, as portrayed by the colour showing the traditional Persian style of dress that contrasts the Greek heroic nude. Similar the two sides’ differing complexions were signified by the artists use of differing colours. The shields of the fighters also further this separation of identity. Through UV light colour study we learn that the interior of a Persian shield shows an audience with a great King, signifying the strength of the owners allegiance. Contrastingly, the Greeks have a very different round shield shape and one has a depiction of the head of the Gorgon Medusa, showing the importance of Ancient Greek religion and it’s myths in all aspects of life, even battle. In the discussion of colours importance for identity, on the long side of the Sarcophagus we see Alexander in his traditional state with a lion headdress- which would have been made even more obvious to the viewer through colour to show the animal’s skin. Lastly, this ancient source also shows how colour can emphasise emotion as we see a dead Persian surrounded by a pool of vivid crimson blood, such imagery their traditional and long standing enemy would have inspired great patriotism in the Greek viewers.

Restored replica of a frieze from the Sarcophagus of Alexander the Great

However, after all this discussion of the importance of colour in ancient art, Professor Melfi posed the question: why are the statues we see in museums still white? Practically, this is because of the fragility of pigments especially when the art piece was buried or exposed to weathering. However, more importantly is the fact that we inherited the perception of a pure white antiquity from J.J. Winklemann who likened ancient art ,biasedly, to,

A heavenly spirit spreading like a gentle stream.

Indeed, this neoclassical art historian and archaeologist considered a Roman Apollo Statue as the exemplar of ancient art, which we ironically know today to be a copy of the Greek original. Professor Melfi’s view on Winklemann’s idea was this it was time to abandon this way of thinking and start appreciating the actuality of ancient art in all its vivid polychromy. Finally, she reminded us that in the ancient world,

No marble was left uncoloured.

–

I found Professor Melfi’s lecture to be exceedingly interesting as I had never before considered the possibility of colours being so vividly coloured. As a result of her lecture my view on all ancient art has changed and it has made my experiences in museums and looking at sources for Classical Civilisation A-level, completely change. I am now extremely passionate about the restoration of all ancient art to their original colourful form, and following on from that I believe we should have full scale replicas of ancient temples or buildings available. I think this is the only we can appreciate the culture and expand our knowledge of/on the ancient world. Arguably, this would also inspire a greater general appreciation of classics, as making the subject more accessible promotes the subject to a greater audience.

3/3 Vandalism in Art: Guernica and the Mỹ Lai Massacre

My final case study is ‘Guernica’ which was painted by the Cubist Spanish painter,Pablo Picasso in 1937. The title refers to the Spanish city that was bombed by Nazi planes during the Spanish Civil War. As the painting depicts the horrors of war it has come to be an anti-war symbol and a reminder of the tragedies of war (specifically on civilian life and communities). The predominant “colour” of Guernica is mostly black, reminiscent of death itself.

‘Guernica’ by Pablo Picasso

Picasso had this to say “My whole life as an artist has been nothing more than a continuous struggle against reaction and the death of art. In the picture I am painting — which I shall call Guernica — I am expressing my horror of the military caste which is now plundering Spain into an ocean of misery and death.”

In Guernica, we see several civilian victims of the bombing—some alive but some already dead. There is a corpse sprawled in the foreground which is framed on either side by living victims with their heads thrown back, wailing in agony. The figure to the left is a mother clutching a baby who appears to have died during the bombing. Her eyes are shaped like tears as she is meant to mirror the classical image of the Virgin and child.

The lightbulb at the top of the mural is said to represent the technological advancement of war, as Germany were testing their Luftwaffes on Guernica. The Spanish word for lightbulb Bombilla is similar to Bomba, the word for bomb.

The bull is arguably (and in my opinion) the most poignant symbol of the painting. Alongside the horse, Picasso presents the core, animalistic response that all living things share in the face of death and tragedy. The bull is the unofficial national symbol of Spain, and bullfighting is a traditional spectacle sport. However, this mural does not show a traditional ‘nationalistic’ Spanish bullfight. In Guernica the bull remains standing impassively while the matador (interpreted as Germany) , the aforementioned corpse, lays dead in the foreground, the sword he would have used to kill the bull is broken off in his hand. Only the bull remains peaceful in Guernica, as a representation of the unwavering Spanish endurance – even after a brutal attack.

Although interestingly, Pablo Picasso says this “If you give a meaning to certain things in my paintings it may be very true, but it is not my idea to give this meaning. What ideas and conclusions you have got I obtained too, but instinctively, unconsciously. I make the painting for the painting. I paint the objects for what they are.”

On February 28, 1974, Tony Shafrazi spray-painted Picasso’s painting Guernica with the words “KILL LIES ALL” in foot-high red letters.

It is believed that Shafrazi was protesting the announcement, the day before, of the release on bail of William Calley Jr the Lieutenant responsible for the My lai Massacre. The Mỹ Lai Massacre was the Vietnam War mass murder of up to 504 unarmed South Vietnamese civilians by U.S. troops in Sơn Tịnh District. The majority of the victims were women and children and the massacre, was later called “the most shocking episode of the Vietnam War”.

 

I have included the most infamous image of the My Lai massacre in hopes to show the similarities between the image and the mural of Guernica and highlight the tragedies of war. We are left to wonder whether life imitates art, or art imitates life.

Twenty-six soldiers were charged with criminal offences in regards to the massacre, but only Lieutenant William Calley Jr., a platoon leader, was convicted. Found guilty of killing 22 villagers, he was originally given a life sentence, but he served less than four under house arrest. He was then released from U.S. Army custody ,having received a limited pardon from Richard Nixon.

In regard to his 1974 vandalism of the painting, Shafazi gave the following statement to Art in America in December 1980: “I wanted to bring the art absolutely up to date, to retrieve it from art history and give it life. Maybe that’s why the Guernica action remains so difficult to deal with. I tried to trespass beyond that invisible barrier that no one is allowed to cross; I wanted to dwell within the act of the painting’s creation, get involved with the making of the work, put my hand within it and by that act encourage the individual viewer to challenge it, deal with it and thus see it in its dynamic raw state as it was being made, not as a piece of history.”

I hope my “presentation” has made you question the true meaning of Vandalism. Is the altering of these 3 images a heinous crime against culture or a way of re purposing artifacts? Is it an innovative way to gain exposure for the worthy protests of society, making the piece politically relevant and influential? The responses to these questions are personal and changeable.

I would like to leave you with another quote from Shafazi said while being dragged away from the scene of his crime:

“Call the Curator, I’m an Artist”.

2/3 Vandalism in Art: Elizabeth I – the Importance of Portraiture to Monarchs

Our next focus will be on a portrait of Elizabeth 1 created by an unknown artist in the 1580s or early 1590s. This portrait’s symbolism is like most portraits of Queen Elizabeth.

She is painted with dark eyes, a narrow nose and red hair, tieing her to her father Henry VIII rebuking the scandal of her mother’s infidelity and the claims of her illegitimacy.

The white colour of her clothing symbolises chastity and constancy. This was reflected in the lead based paint used to make her look paler and thus more virginal. The masculinity of the queen’s Polish-style doublet in this portrait creates an image of a Queen equal to her male counterparts in other European countries. Elizabeth is also shown wearing the Lesser George, the medal signifying membership of the Order of the Garter, on a ribbon around her neck.  It is dedicated to the image of Saint George, England’s patron saint. The crown worn on her head is an obvious reference to her Queen-ship and the veil is reminiscent of that of the Virgin Mary’s.

Pearls also symbolise Elizabeth’s chastity and connect her to Cynthia, the Greek goddess of the Moon, who was a virgin and therefore seen as ‘pure’. In Elizabethan England pearls were greatly expensive and therefore reserved for the nobility, this explicit reference to wealth is echoed in the thread of gold which her doublet is embroidered with.

Elizabeth is seen to be loosely holding white roses, roses are known as the queen of flowers, and their white colour symbolizes purity, chastity, and innocence as white lilies represent the purity of the Virgin Mary.

However, we did not know until recently that the portrait was originally painted with a snake instead of the flowers, it was only discovered due to the deterioration of paint. The serpent would have appeared mainly black with green and yellow scales and Elizabeth’s fingers would have originally clasped around the serpent, rather than be extended as they are now. A decision was made to replace the serpent with a small bunch of roses as the emblem of a serpent was an unusual choice. It sometimes represents wisdom, prudence and reasoned judgement, all character traits Elizabeth possessed. However, in the Christian tradition, serpents or snakes have been used to signify Satan and original sin. Eve’s rebellion over God’s wishes doomed humanity to live in state of sin, this idea of a woman leading a man astray would have been detrimental to Elizabeth’s image as a competent female ruler.

Therefore, the discovery of the serpent has lead to a conspiracy that the artwork was either painted by a Catholic or altered by a Catholic, hoping to portray Elizabeth as evil and unfit to rule England. If this is the case, the repainting of the snake is vandalism of the artist’s original intention for the piece to be a catalyst for social and political upheaval.

 

1/3 Vandalism in Art: The Rokeby Venus’ Tumultuous History

My ‘Thinking Outside the Box’ Presentation

(Written in the form of a presentation)

I have decided to do my thinking outside the box presentation on this topic as I have great interest in how an act of Vandalism can change how a piece of artwork is perceived. The term vandalisme was coined in 1794 to describe the destruction of artwork following the French Revolution , however the term originated from the invasion of Rome in 455 AD by the East Germanic tribe of Vandals, which resulted in destruction of numerous artworks.

I will first be focusing on a famous case of art vandalism, The Rokeby Venus ,otherwise known as the Toilet of Venus by Diego Velazquez.

‘The Rokeby Venus’ – a piece of art I have on my wall.

From its creation in roughly 1647-1651 up until it’s vandalism in 1914, the Rokeby Venus reflected the commonly used subject of a reclining Venus and it’s connotations of love, beauty and sexuality.

Venus is portrayed from a back view which was a common literary and visual erotic motif with the folds of the bed shaped to emphasise the curvature of her female form. Unlike most common portrayals of Venus with blonde hair, Velazquez paints her with brown – maybe hoping to appeal and reflect his Spanish audience or maybe he was accurately painting his mistress who is said to be the model of the painting.

There is much debate over Cupid’s role in the painting, especially in reference to the pink ribbons he is holding. Some suggest they were used previously to anchor the mirror to the wall however others theorise that they allude to the fetters (or physical restraints) Cupid uses to bind lovers. The critic Julián Gallego found Cupid’s facial expression to be so melancholy that he interprets the ribbons as fetters binding the god to the image of Beauty, and gave the painting the title “Amor conquered by Beauty”.

The Venus effect is a phenomenon in the psychology of perception. Viewers of paintings with the Venus effect assume that Venus is admiring her own reflection in the mirror; however, since the viewer sees her eyes in the mirror, Venus is actually looking at the reflection of the painter and indeed the viewer.

The critic Natasha Wallace has speculated that Venus’s indistinct face may be the key to the underlying meaning of the painting, in that “it is not intended as a specific female nude, nor even as a portrayal of Venus, but as an image of self-absorbed beauty.” According to Wallace, “There is nothing spiritual about face or picture. The classical setting is an excuse for a very material aesthetic sexuality—not sex, as such, but an appreciation of the beauty that accompanies attraction.”

‘The Rokeby Venus’ after its vandalism.

However on 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez’s canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was provoked by the arrest of Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been warnings of a suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, causing particular damage to the area between the figure’s shoulders.

Richardson was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, the maximum sentence for destruction of an artwork. In a statement shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, “I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history.” She later commented that she didn’t like “the way men visitors gaped at it all day long”.

Contemporary reports of the incident suggest that the picture was not mere artwork. Journalists of the time tended to describe the attack in terms of a murder (as Richardson was nicknamed “Slasher Mary”), they used words that referenced wounds inflicted to an actual female body, rather than an inanimate painting of one, such as The Times a “cruel wound in the neck”.

Now the painting is not merely seen as a pretty object to hang on a wall or as a scandalous portrayal of a female nude in seventeenth century Spain. It conjures up memories of the female fight for equality and the lengths they went to achieve such a feat, it also makes us ponder the question of female objectification in art as frequently female nudes have been painted solely by men for the pleasure of solely men.

The feminist writer Lynda Nead stated, “The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally.”