Joan of Arc: Heroine or Hallucinée?

Introduction

When first presented to the Salon of 1880, Joan of Arc was largely well-received. Viewers noted that it followed in the tradition of peasant painting that had been begun by Jules Breton and others. In addition, the Franco-Prussian War made Joan of Arc an especially popular theme in late 19th century art as a symbol of hope and patriotism[1]. However, Joan of Arc is notably different from other peasant paintings of the time, as well as other renderings of Joan. Many felt that the phantom figures in the background were at odds with the naturalism of the work. Some questioned why the figures are in back of Joan instead of in front of her. In more modern commentary, these questions have continued, along with questions about Joan’s facial expression. Bastien-Lepage is known to have been a great admirer of Pre-Raphaelite art[2], which is characterized not only by intense, almost photographic realism but also by a fascination with hypnotism, mysticism, and the occult. Richard Muther claims that Bastien-Lepage’s ideal was “to paint historical themes…just as if the old drama had taken place yesterday evening.”[3]

But what was Bastien-Lepage’s idea of what really happened in this ‘historical’ scene? I believe that Bastien-Lepage viewed Joan as a deranged victim of hallucinations, and that his combination of realism with supernatural subject matter references the Victorian fascination with the occult and emphasizes the contrast between “reality” and Joan’s hallucinations.




[1] Caroline Igra, “Measuring the Temper of Her Time: Joan of Arc in the 1870s and 1880s,” Konsthistorisk Tidskrift LXVIII (1999): 1-4


[2] Kenyon Cox, “Some Phases of 19th Century Painting: Part 1: Naturalism in the 19th Century.” The Art World I, No.5 (February 1917): 318-319


[3] Richard Muther, The History of Modern Painting, Vol. 3 of 4. London: J.M. Dent & Co, 1896. 265

Images

Jean Bastien-Lepage, Joan of Arc, 1879

oil on canvas, 100 x 110 inches, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Accession Number 89.21.1.

 

Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, Joan of Arc at the coronation of Charles VII, 1854

2.4 x 1.78 meters, Louvre Museum, Accession Number MI 667.

Historically, Joan of Arc has almost always been portrayed as a heroine. Ingres paints Joan as a military hero as well as a saint. Her armor and triumphant pose mark her as a victorious conqueror, while her halo marks her as a hero of the faith. She even wears a skirt with her armor, displaying her feminine decorum. This contrasts sharply with Bastien-Lepage’s rendition of an ordinary, peasant Joan with an intense, trance-like expression. Bastien-Lepage’s Joan looks almost dazed, and he gives no visual indicators of her piety or heroism.

Jules Breton, The Song of the Lark, 1884

oil on canvas, 110.6 x 85.8 cm, Art Institute Chicago, Accession Number 1894.1033

Like Joan of Arc, Song of the Lark portrays an ordinary peasant girl staring off into space. Both paintings use a naturalistic color palate and are painted en plein air, like other peasant paintings of the time. However, this is where the similarities end. Song of the Lark, like most peasant paintings, contains no supernatural elements, unlike Joan of Arc, which contains three mysteriously transparent background figures. In addition, the facial expressions of the two girls are radically different. In contrast with Song of the Lark’s peaceful gaze over the horizon, Joan’s wide-eyed stare into nothingness is quite eye-catching and a bit disconcerting.

Sir John Everett Millais, Ophelia, 1851-2

Oil on canvas, 1105 x 1458 x 145 mm, Tate Gallery Britain, Accession Number N01506    

 

The influence of Pre-Raphaelite art on Jules Bastien-Lepage is clearly seen when we compare Ophelia and Joan of Arc. Like Joan, Ophelia’s facial expression is a dazed, hypnotic stare, typical of Pre-Raphaelite art due to the group’s fascination with mysticism, the occult, and especially hypnotism. In addition, the natural color palate of greens and blues, as well as the intense, almost photographic detail of the shrubbery and grass, is strikingly similar to that of Joan’s garden.

John Adams Whipple, Hypnotism, 1845

daguerreotype, 13.3 x 18.4 cm, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Accession Number 2005.100.76 

I find this piece fascinating for two reasons. First, it shows the growing fascination with hypnotism in late 19th century culture. Hypnotism was quickly becoming a reputable and commonplace practice, as doctors believed it cured many psychological ills. The second thing I find fascinating is that the hypnotized people have adopted an almost prayer-like pose. I think it is possible that Bastien-Lepage believed that experiences of religious ecstasy were similar to effects produced by easily explainable and scientific phenomena such as hypnotism, and hence that they were not genuine spiritual experiences. Joan’s intense stare into nothingness could be a reference to the practice of hypnotism and its effects.

   

William Mumler, Mrs. Tinkman, c. 1861

albumen silver print, Getty Museum, Accession Number 84.XD.760.1.

William Mumler is considered to be the first true practitioner of spirit photography, a new but growing industry in the late 19th century. Since early photography required such long exposure times, early spirit photographers were able to superimpose old photos of the deceased onto their plates during part of the exposure, leaving ghostly imprints. Most all such photographers were denounced as frauds, but continued to gain popularity across Europe and North America. The spirits in Joan of Arc seem to reference these spirits in that they are almost transparent in the background. In Mrs. Tinkman as well as Joan of Arc, the spirits are almost not noticeable at first glance. Also, the living subject of both works is not looking towards the spirits and does not appear to be able to see them. I find this the clearest evidence for Bastien-Lepage’s disbelief in Joan’s “Voices.”