Saturday, January 26, 2019
Paintings! —> that you’ve def seen before
I saw Ritchie’s post and thought that I might give y’all a little sneak peak on my groups presentation on Monday. Our artist was Edvard Munch. The paining we analyzed in class was called “The Dance of Life.” While you’ll have to wait to see this painting and hear our opinions of it until class, here are some of his other painting to give you a taste of what you’ll be seeing in our presentation. I am sure almost all of you have seen “the Scream.” The one I find most interesting and disturbing is the one with the vampire woman biting the mans neck. Creeepy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hey, Ben! Oooh thanks for sharing. I’ve been finding myself in a painting kind of mood these last couple weeks. For starters, I totally dig the vampire one. (I’ll admit, I’m partially biased because as of late, I’ve been watching The Vampire Diaries. I think most of us would agree that MS. KING SHOULD WATCH IT TOO! Please!)
Ok, back to the vampire painting. There are two ways I interpreted it.
In the case that the woman isn’t a vampire: The man seems like he’s in some sort of pain, and the woman is comforting him. I think it’s cool how, despite the fact that Munch doesn’t focus on their faces, he’s able to use their body language to paint a convincing picture. The sort of relationship that Munch depicts here is not exactly clear; maybe the woman is a lover, or maybe she’s a close friend, or maybe she’s a maternal figure (although the two people seem close in age). Regardless, the way the man buries himself in the woman and the way he clutches her in anguish indicates to me that their relationship is a loving one. I love the way Munch painted the woman’s cascading hair enveloping the man; Munch uses a physical feature of the woman to connect the two people. The last thing I wanted to point out was the dark (rather haunting) shadow surrounding the people; it could represent a variety of things from suffering to pain to evil to death.
In the far more interesting case that the woman is, in fact, a vampire: Because vampires tend to be a very sensual (often sexy—@Lainey@Farah@Anabella) species (or at least they’re typically depicted in this manner), this painting definitely hints more at lust and sexuality than at pure love. The powerful woman vampiress sinks her teeth into the helpless male human who, in turn, clutches her in agony (and perhaps pleasure—who knows what Munch was thinking?). In this case, the dark shadow likely represents evil and death and might also hint at the fact that the woman is taking advantage of the man. He is either powerless to her vampiress predator attributes or to her charm…or maybe to both? There is a dark existence present in this painting, regardless of your interpretation.
Ok, I had to look it up: The title is actually “Love and Pain,” and Munch apparently “maintained it was nothing more than a woman kissing a man on the neck.” (The Nazis hated it, by the way, “[declaring] it morally ‘degenerate.’”) Indeed, the man is in pain, and the woman is comforting him (with her love). Others have varying interpretations (click on the source—they’re pretty neat) because Munch didn’t spill too much about it. (Source: https://www.edvardmunch.org/vampire.jsp)
As for me, I’m sticking with the vampire theory. Who doesn’t dream about vampires every once and a while? It’s a natural part of the human existence.
I know I went a little overboard on this post, but I’ll admit, I’m a sucker for all things vampire. Haha! Get it?
The vampire painting is also my favorite--for reasons that Jessie has already mentioned. I like Jessie's analysis of Munch's portrayal of the body language of the female. She is obviously "in charge," and the embrace definitely seems more sensual, rather than loving.
Munch's use of color is what draws my eye the most. No colors are too bright (most of it is painted in dull hues), except for the hair and the woman's arm. I find it interesting that although the woman is the vampire (and therefore, dead), she is the one portrayed in a more vibrant manner. The woman's bright white arm stands out, and her brown hair is streaked with orange and red, colors normally associated with life and passion. The man is hunched over and painted entirely in shadow, and you can barely see his face. Possibly, Munch used these contrasting shades to reveal that the woman is literally sucking the life out of her victim. Again, it's just a guess (since Munch didn't actually call the painting "Vampire"). However, I like to believe that it depict a vampire because of the time period in which it was painted (1893-95); Dracula by Bram Stoker would be published in 1899.
One last note: I find it interesting that our society has switched the roles of the man and the woman in regard to vampires. In this painting, it is the vampire woman who is seducing (?) and drinking the blood of the man. Also, women were seen as the temptresses of "pure, innocent" men during the time period. In modern culture, popular novels, movies, and TV shows (such as The Vampire Diaries and Twilight) have switched the roles: the pure or "good" young girl falls in love with the sexy, much older vampire. I wonder when or why this gender role swap occurred...anyone have any thoughts?
Post a Comment