Venus and Olympia

While I was at college, I was set this essay question: "In his early work, Manet was heavily influenced by the old masters. What do you make of this?"

Kind of a strange question. What I made of it was this: In his early work, Manet was heavily influenced by the old masters. What I also made of it was the image below.

The image compares Titian's 'Venus of Urbino' to Manet's 'Olympia'. There is obviously a strong similarity. Both depict naked women in a reclining position, and both women are 'courtesans' which is a nice way of saying prostitute. Titian's Venus has long been held by the art establishment as one of the ultimate examples of figure painting and female beauty. In stark contrast, Manet's 'Olympia' created a scandal when it was exhibited at the Paris Salon of 1865. In fact, it ignited a scandal over art and decency that has rarely been paralleled.

If the two paintings are so similar, why did Olympia cause such a scandal? It's always been considered ok to paint nudes if the context was one of mythology, ancient history, or some exotic, far off place, such as in 'The Turkish Bath' by Ingres.

Manet's 'Olympia' depicts a contemporary scene, not an exotic or mythological context. Manet's 'Olympia' depicts a prostitute. Rather than allowing the viewer to assume the role of an unseen voyeur, her gaze engages the viewer as she would a customer. As many of the male visitors to the Paris Salon were likely to have visited prostitutes in a similar setting, 'Olympia' was much too close to the bone. While Titian's Venus has a passive, alluring gaze, Olympia's gaze is confronting, even challenging.
This contrast is further emphasized by the position of the hands in the two pictures. I've always found 'Venus of Urbino' to be rather outrageous in this respect. I mean, what is she doing?! Masturbating is the obvious answer. You can really come to no other conclusion than that she is touching herself; the fingers curl and incline into her genital area. (Just in case you didn't work that out for yourself). It's odd that few, if any art history texts make any reference to this glaring act at all. Perhaps not; it's easier to ignore this detail than to confront it. In any case; how is it possible that Titian's painting was and is regarded as a great academic masterpiece while verging on pornography? It's not so different to a playboy or penthouse image, apart from the fact that is was created by an old master in oils.

On the other hand (excuse the pun), Olympia's hand has a more defensive posture. It blocks any view of her genital area and seems in some way challenging. It again positions the viewer in the role of customer rather than voyuer, as if to say: 'you don't get this unless you pay for it.' Olympia's whole demeanour is much more reserved. She appears relaxed, yet self possessed. She is much more an individual that Titian's Venus; in no way a passive plaything for a wealthy nobleman but a confident woman offering a service which is as much a part of everyday life now as it was then.

Another interesting element of Manet's Olympia is the position of the black cat. It's back arched; it's tail upright, it can be seen as a sexual symbol. The position of the tail and hair standing up could be said to be phallic. Who is the cat responding to but the viewer/customer? The cat's pose is defensive and threatening. Furthermore, cats have long been a symbol of femininity, of bad or good luck and were commonly the familiars of witches. This element adds futher tension to the picture; underlining Olympia's inaccessibility. While she will engage in the transaction on her terms alone, a firm barrier protects her. Her inner self cannot be known and is not for sale.

Did Manet intend all of this? It would be very interesting to ask him but that's not possible now. The strong similaritiies and contrasts with Titian's Venus would suggest that he definitely did. It could be said that Manet managed to make a feminist years ahead of its time. He was of course pilloried for it at the time.

The Body Shape Revolution

Cosmo published a section in this month's issue entitled 'The Body Shape Revolution and Where You Fit In'. It featured images of women similar to those in the image below.
How nice of Cosmo to define a catalogue of standard body types to help us understand who we are. I personally would be lost without this kind of help. Not having to think for myself makes life a whole lot easier. The body type featured in the image below is not included.

The picture of Isabelle Caro, 27, an anorexic who weighs just 31 kilos (4 stone, 12lb), has been displayed on Milan billboards to jolt the fashion industry into action over the problem of anorexia. Despite insisting that Cosmo has been "... the only mgazine to ban diets and feature women sized six to sixteen in every issue." such magazines must take at least some responsibilty for this problem due to their continual obsession with appearance and the need to be attractive.

So just what is a true Cosmo girl? The image below seeks to answer the question.

The Rock of Doom

'The Rock of Doom', by Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones was painted between 1885 and 1887. This painting is the sixth in Burne-Jones' Perseus Cycle. This picture, like others in the series, draws upon the version of the Perseus legend that appears in William Morris's "The Doom of King Acrisius" from The Earthly Paradise. The picture is in some ways relevant to the issues previously discussed. The theme of a helpless woman in peril being rescued by a heroic male is recurrent in the history of Western art (St. George and the Dragon for example). A Fruedian analysis of this work seems appropriate. The rock Andromeda is chained to is unquestionably phallic. The sea monster she is to be sacrificed to can be seen as another phallic symbol; a metaphor for the evil of unrestrained male sexuality. The viewer is invited to be a voyeur; Andromeda is naked and completely helpless. Perseus is clad in a complete suit of armour, also phallic in that it's rigidity holds his body in a state of permanent erection. This might seem a long bow to draw but the fact remains that the female is depicted as passive and helpless and the male active and heroic. Perseus face remains mysteriously androgenous. This is typical of males in Burne Jones' work.

The idea of rescue was quite prevalent in 19th century society. Countless philanthropists established shelters for 'fallen women' to help set them on the path to 'virtue'. The underlying idea is that female sexuality is something that must be controlled. Despite the advances of more recent times women are still characterised as the 'weaker sex'.

This painting also characterises the stereo types of women that appear in Greek mythology. Women seldom if ever have any real personality. They are helpless victims like Andromeda, or are part beast predators like the mermaids, the sirens and the harpies. One only has to look at the classical design of law courts, places of government and other official buildings to realise that the Greek ideal is still alive today. This is not to say that the culture and art of the ancient Greeks (and Burne Jones) is anything but beautiful, but that their gender bias in many ways continues to permeate our lives.

Real Women

"Real women, sizes 6-16 NAKED. No retouching, just brave readers, nude and honest..." So reads the cover of this month's Cosmopolitan Magazine. This is in keeping with the publication's 'Body Love Policy'. Editor Sarah Wilson explains the philosophy:

"It can do a girl's head in seeing image after image of size 8 women with their clothing slipping off bony hips and shoulders, right? You begin to think it's standard — and desirable — and you compare your own body to this "normalised" image..."

"But skinny women sell magazines, don't they? There's certainly that argument out there. The thing is though, they sell mags because they create angst. Many women's mags are sold using angst — telling readers that they are too fat or too single or too lonely or too unfashionable. But I prefer not to treat readers like victims. It's unempowering..."

This is in keeping with present moves to ban annorexic models from catwalks and encourage a more natural and realistic self image for (in particular young) women. All very politically correct. But Sarah Wilson is not being particularly honest. Skinny women don't necessarily sell magazines, but naked women certainly do.

This presentation of women further focusses on the idea that a woman's appearance is of prime importance. In pretending to promote more healthy attitudes to body image, the magazine does nothing more than continue to objectify women.

Judging by the messages on this forum: Proanorexia, World's Largest Pro Anorexia Site, the trend among young women towards a negative and obsessive body image is of great cause for concern. To really make a difference publications like Cosmo need to do more than simply present a range of different body shapes in the buff. The idea that the degree to which a woman is attractive to men is of tantamount importance needs to be substantially changed. Of course, this wouldn't be as profitable, would it?

Cosmo's new policy certainly seems to be working. This month's issue was sold out at my local newsagent's. Obviously I managed to pick up a copy elsewhere.

Unbridled Freedom?

To escape the safety of human bondage and venture into the uncharted waters of unbridled freedom, that is the terrifying question...