In the late nineteenth century, American Impressionists embraced an artistic and cultural tradition in which the floral intertwined with the feminine, in hopes of characterizing and molding the feminine through the floral. Femininity could be both defined by and imposed through the symbolism of flowers, which denoted fragility, purity, sensuality, and hiddenness; thus, the American Impressionists perpetuated a notion of ‘floral femininity,’ as some scholars have termed the genre. What might happen to our perspective, though, if we attempt to subvert the floral fence that has been imposed around the feminine? Could we, through a brief survey of the floral feminine in Western art, better understand the imposition of the floral on the cultural notions of femininity, while considering both the roots of that tradition and the modern rejection of that construction of the feminine?
The goal of this exhibition, then, lies not only in demonstrating an evolving understanding of the feminine through the floral, or as a particular cultural concept demonstrated in and through floral symbolism, but also in demonstrating the floral becoming the feminine, rather than the feminine becoming the floral. In this exhibition, we will consider both the experience of the feminine becoming the floral and the floral becoming the feminine, seeking to subvert American Impressionist artist Robert Reid’s gendered narrative that femininity is an entity that can be molded by a particular cultural understanding of flowers and floral symbolism. We will see, though, that Reid was only following in a well-rooted tradition, stemming at least from Marian iconography that associated the Virgin and her purity with flowers. Having jumped backwards to consider Marian floral imagery, we will then jump forward to examine some of the modern depictions of the floral feminine, in which the female determines the character of the flowers, rather than the flowers determining the character of the female.
Hans Memling, The Annunciation, 1480-89. Oil on panel, transferred to canvas. The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
In this Marian painting, the first of three in the exhibition, artist Hans Memling depicts the Annunciation of Mary. While the painting includes several noteworthy iconographical emblems, most notable for this exhibition’s purpose is the vase of flowers at the bottom right of the painting. The sparse flower arrangement includes lilies, which connote purity or chastity, and, thus, often appear as decorative emblems in paintings of the Virgin Mary. Furthermore, historians have noted that Mary’s purity became associated with Song of Solomon 2.2, which reads, “I am the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valleys.” As we will see, lilies and roses became common artistic purity symbolism. (See “Botanical Imagery in European Painting,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2007. https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/bota/hd_bota.htm; Stott, Annette. "Floral Femininity: A Pictorial Definition." American Art 6, no. 2 (1992): 61-77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109092.)
After Carlo Dolci, The Virgin and Child with Flowers, after 1642. Oil on canvas. The National Gallery, London.
This second Marian painting features the Virgin Mary and Christ. Christ stands, with his hand in the sign of blessing, while Mary, wearing her traditional blue and pensively gazing downwards, holds a bouquet that includes white lilies for purity. The flowers around Mary, and the rose held by Christ, similarly suggest Mary’s idealized feminine qualities--including purity, humility, and charity--and mesh fittingly with her soft face and docile gaze. More than in the first Marian painting, where the lilies lingered in the side of the painting and imposed little burden on Mary, this Mary seems shaped by the flowers around her--she has assumed the humility and the purity expected of her by the flowers framing her figure. (See “Botanical Imagery in European Painting,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2007. https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/bota/hd_bota.htm,” from which I learned the qualities attributed to the common Marian flowers.)
Robert Reid, Fleur de Lis, ca. 1895-1900. Oil on canvas. The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
In this American Impressionist painting, the central image in this exhibition, we see a woman being not only shaped but also subsumed by the flowers surrounding her. Reid presents an idealized “floral feminine,” in which the woman, though a distinct entity, seems to melt into the landscape around her. The woman, fenced in among the flowers, alludes to a Marian tradition that recounts Mary’s womb as an “enclosed garden.” Thus, while we see hints of the Marian tradition, here the flowers do not tell the woman how to be or what to do; rather, the flowers characterize the woman and her cultural and social role. The woman is slowly becoming a flower by taking on the antiquated Marian floral symbolism, Victorianized for a new time period--the woman is domestic, enclosed, pure, fragile, and lovely. (See Stott, Annette. "Floral Femininity: A Pictorial Definition." American Art 6, no. 2 (1992): 61-77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109092.)
Robert Reid, The Violet Kimono, ca. 1910. Oil on canvas. Smithsonian American Art Museum.
In The Violet Kimono, Reid’s idealized floral feminine has become domestic, drawing her flowers into her bedroom, where they spill over her skirts and adorn her dresser. Again, we see that the flowers are merging into her--there are flowers in her hair and on her kimono, which coordinates unnervingly well with her curtains and the flowers that she has brought from the garden. Once more, the flowers mirror the woman, as both dip and lounge and bleed into each other. The idealized flower-female is not only relegated to the outside; rather, she has become the idealized domestic Victorian housewife, well-coordinated, aware of the most popular trends (hence her loosely Japanese kimono), and engaging in fashionable yet “passive” exploits like flower arranging. In this painting, the floral-as-feminine still reigns culturally. (See Stott, Annette. "Floral Femininity: A Pictorial Definition." American Art 6, no. 2 (1992): 61-77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3109092.)
Georgia O'Keeffe, Series I White & Blue Flower Shapes, 1919. Oil on board. Georgia O'Keeffe Museum.
This painting by O’Keeffe is the first in the exhibition where the floral has, seemingly, taken on, or become the feminine, rather than the feminine having been imposed on by the floral; however, this painting also acts as a warning against too hastily assuming the links between the feminine and the floral. Though scores of critics have, over the years, proclaimed O’Keeffe’s work erotic, and argued that her paintings of magnified flowers also depict female gentalia, O’Keeffe maintained that her paintings were not sexual in nature. Rather than these flowers showcasing femininity through their depiction of female sexuality, then, O’Keeffe’s flowers might be understood as portraying female determinism. In the very controversy concerning the sexual status of the flowers, O’Keeffe offers an opportunity to understand her flowers as an artistic assertion by a female artist who wished to keep her flowers un-sexed. We might ask, then, if these flowers are feminine at all, and if so, why? Who determines the feminine, how do we measure the feminine, and how is it connected to female sexuality? (See https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/mar/01/georgia-okeeffe-show-at-tate-modern-to-challenge-outdated-views-of-artist.)
Joseph Stella, The Virgin, 1926. Oil on canvas. Brooklyn Museum.
Here we arrive at the last Virgin Mary of the exhibition, and the only one in which the floral has become feminine. In the other two Marian images in the exhibition, Mary was flanked by flowers, and the symbolism was apparent: Mary was to be characterized by these flowers, which indicate to the audience their shared qualities. In this painting, however, the flowers have conformed to Mary herself, no longer a dogmatic force but a descriptive force. These flowers, adorning the Virgin herself, can only be interpreted through her body and her robe, while the flowers behind her head are positionally dictated by Mary’s body placement. While Stella does include traditionally Marian flowers, like white lilies, the overall effect is one in which the feminine dominates the floral, rather than the reverse. (See https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/352.)
Kehinde Wiley, Shantavia Beale II, 2012. Oil on canvas. Collection of Ana and Lenny Gravier.
The last and most recent painting in the exhibition is a beautiful, strong, and subversive portrait of a Black woman surrounded by flowers. Artist Kehinde Wiley, in his description of his 2015 show “A New Republic,” explains that, “in my own work, the women are strident--they take the front. But there's also a sense of mystery. We don’t really know who these women are.” This woman takes the space that would generally be assumed by a (white) man, and, in doing so, subverts both racial and historical expectations for portraiture. This woman proves the culmination of the floral-as-feminine, because this woman, like Reid’s, is surrounded by flowers; however, rather than fading into the flowers, she dominates the canvas. Her flower background and foreground, while seamlessly integrated into the portrait, can only be decorative. She has harnessed the flowers, which adorn her rather than cover or dictate her being. (See https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/exhibitions/kehinde_wiley_new_republic/.)
- Henri Lowe
No comments:
Post a Comment