 |
| |
 |
Paul
Gauguin's Genesis of a Picture: A Painter's Manifesto and
Self-Analysis
by Dario Gamboni |
 |
| |
|
|
| |
|
Introduction
There is an element of contradiction in the art historian's approach
to interpreting the creative process. While artistic creativity is
seen as stemming from the psychology of the creator, there is a tendency
to deny the artist possession of direct or rational access to its
understanding. Both attitudes have their roots in romantic art theory.
These attitudes imply, on the one hand, that the artist's psyche is
the locus of creation, and, on the other, that intuition and the unconscious
play the major roles. Such ideas remained prevalent in the twentieth
century, as attested, for example, by the famous talk given in April
1957 by Marcel Duchamp under the title "The Creative Act,"
which defined the artist as a "mediumistic being."1 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
This element
of contradiction explains the frequently ambivalent treatment of artists'
accounts of their own creation: although we recognize that they possess
a privileged and even unique position, we tend to dismiss their explanations
as "rationalizations" and to prefer independent material
evidence of the genesis of their works, such as studies or traces
of earlier stages. This preference can often be justified with solid
arguments, but it also happens to satisfy the general tendency of
modern critical thought to "discover" and to "unveil,"
to oppose the hidden, the latent, and the repressed to the explicit
and the manifest. Thus, our suspicion itself must be suspect, and
it is necessary to examine in what regard, and under what conditions,
use can be made of the artists' accounts of the origins of their works. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Genesis of a Picture
A good case study of the problematics of using an artist's own writings
to interpret his or her work is Paul Gauguin's written account of
his Mana'o tupapa'u of 1892 (Albright-Knox Art Gallery, Buffalo;
fig. 1). The painting is one of Gauguin's most famous works and it
had a special importance for him, as demonstrated by the high price
he asked for it, its numerous variations, and its inclusion in the
Self-Portrait with a Hat painted in the winter of 189394
in Paris (Musée d'Orsay, Paris).2 One can argue that the painting's
fame rests in part on Gauguin's remarks about it. The title he chose
for these remarks, Genèse d'un tableau (genesis of a
picture), indicates that he intended them to possess a paradigmatic
value. By extension, the painting itself can be seen as programmatic,
and close examination of it supports this claim. Taken together, Mana'o
tupapa'u and his commentary Genesis of a Picture
represent Gauguin's main contribution to the collective reflection
on the creative process. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Gauguin's explanation of the painting
exists in five versions. He first discussed it in two letters written
from Tahiti in December 1892 to his wife Mette and to his friend Daniel
de Monfreid; then, in a more developed form and under the title Genèse
d'un tableauwhich I will use here for the whole series of
commentariesin his manuscript Cahier pour Aline in 1893;
and, back in France in 189394, in the manuscript Noa Noa,
written alone and finally revised with the help of the poet and critic
Charles Morice.3 These versions display many differences but are also
in general agreement. One can summarize their argument as follows.
The painting began as "a study of a Polynesian nude" shown
in a "rather daring position, quite naked on a bed." The
painter, however, wanted to avoid any charge of indecency and to render
the "Kanaka spirit, its character, its tradition." For this
purpose, he chose certain accessories (such as the pareu on
the bed) and certain colors (yellow and violet), as well as a theme
that could justify the motif. Since allusions to sex had to be avoided,
the reason for the woman's position must be fear, experienced in the
night, and therefore fear of the Tupapa'u, the spirit of the
dead. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Gauguin concluded his reconstruction
with a descriptive and interpretive summary: "To recapitulate:
Musical partundulating horizontal linesharmonies in orange
and blue linked by yellows and violets, from which they derive. The
light and greenish sparks. Literary partthe spirit of a living
girl linked with the spirit of Death. Night and day."4 His analysis
distinguishes between several levels or components of the work, especially
the "musical" and the "literary" parts. It also
takes the form of a plot in which the making of the painting unfolds
like a story ("so then I do this…"), emphasizing the
rational logic of the process and the extent of the painter's control.
The latest version, in Noa noa, adds to this account an anecdotal
origin: Gauguin told how returning once at night from Papeete to this
house, he found his "vahine" Teha'amana lying on their bed
in the darkness, terrified by the night and the spirits. I shall come
back later to this story. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
The reception of Gauguin's explanations
of the painting has varied greatly. While many authors, including
Robert Goldwater, have seen them as truthful and convincing, others
like Robert Rey have been more critical.5 In his dissertation on Gauguin's
paintings of the first voyage to Tahiti, published in 1977, Richard
S. Field argued that Gauguin had manipulated his reconstruction of
the creative process in order to "reveal something about art
rather than supply a key to a single painting," and that by "wanting
us to believe that the entire meaning evolved through the stimulus
of the evolving forms," he was "actually trying to remove
the artist entirely from the mortal sphereto raise the artistic
process to the level of divine intuition and guidance."6 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Audience and Function
In examining Gauguin's intentions in explaining the origin of his
painting, Field rightly raised the question of his audience, which
may help us understand the functions and meanings at stake. For whom
was Gauguin writing? The letter to Monfreid is supposedly meant "for
[him] only," but the letter to his wife reveals that the artist
intended her to share it with others. Both letters refer to the Tahitian
paintings that Gauguin had sent home and that would be exhibited in
Copenhagen and Brussels in 189394; the letters also contain
a French translation of the works' titles, which the general public
would only encounter in the original (and approximate) Tahitian.7
Gauguin wrote to Mette about the group of paintings: "Many of
the pictures, of course, will be incomprehensible and you will have
something to amuse you. To enable you to understand, I proceed to
explain the most questionable and the ones I would keep or sell dear.
[There follows the explanation about Mana'o tupapa'u.] Here
endeth the little sermon, which will arm you against the critics when
they bombard you with their malicious questions."8 By way of
his wife (and to a lesser extent of his friend), Gauguin thus addressed
the critics at large. His Genesis of a Picture must
therefore be understood as an intervention in the collective process
of interpretation and within the context of the interaction between
artists and critics. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
The last third of the nineteenth century
saw the rise and the establishment of what Harrison and Cynthia White
have called "the dealer-critic system," in which the consecration
and diffusion of artists and artworks depended on the free market
and the press rather than on the formerly dominant state-controlled
institutions, such as, in France, the Académie des Beaux-Arts,
the École des Beaux-Arts, and the jury of the Salon.9 Dealers,
critics, and other mediators thereby gained an increasing power over
artists who sometimes protested verbally or visually. In 1896, two
years after the presentation of Mana'o tupapa'u in the annual
exhibition of the private association La Libre Esthétique in
Brussels, James Ensor thus depicted in the painting The Dangerous
Cooks (private collection) two key members of the Belgian art
worldthe lawyer, collector, and critic Edmond Picard and the
secretary of the association Octave Mauspreparing artists like
fish or meat before serving them to the critics. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Gauguin himself preferred the raw
to the cooked, but he was also keenly aware of the new situation and
tried to make the best of it, as demonstrated by his calculated and
at times manipulative relationships with writers and critics such
as Albert Aurier, Octave Mirbeau or August Strindberg.10 However,
he came to experience and express a deep frustration at finding that
the artists' new dependence upon the professional commentators could
be even greater than had been the one upon the official institutions.
In a piece of "counter-criticism" entitled Racontars
de rapin, written at the end of his life in 1903, he would describe
the evolution he had witnessed in his lifetime as a passage from the
"regime of the sword" to the "regime of the man of
letters."11 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Conception of the Creative Process
Seen in this context, Genesis of a Picture represents
an intervention in the market of interpretations and in the power
competition between artists and mediators. By giving as an "explanation"
of his picture an account of its "genesis," which he alone
had witnessed, Gauguin clearly claimed the artist's privileged access
to the content and meaning of his work. However, there is no reason
to reduce the formulation and communication of this account to a strategic
move only. It also permitted Gauguin to defend a certain conception
of the creative process and to require from the spectator an approach
to art that corresponds and does justice to it. In the various versions
of Genèse d'un tableau, the subject matter of the painting,
its "literary part," does not exist prior to the work but
emerges progressively from a sort of dialectical pas de deux
with the formal choices, and they lead together to a symbolical level
that can be neither dissociated from the painting as such nor simply
turned into words. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
There are many antecedents to this
conception, especially in the writings of Eugène Delacroix
and Charles Baudelaire. Closer chronologically to Gauguin, James Abbott
McNeill Whistler had argued in his lecture Ten O'Clock, published
in 1885 and three years later in Stéphane Mallarmé's
French translation, that "the unattached writer [who had] become
the middleman in this matter of art [had] brought the most complete
misunderstanding as to the aim of the picture" because "for
him a picture is more or less a hieroglyph or symbol of story."12
However, Whistler's anti-"literary" stance tended to reduce
the "aim of the picture" to formal harmony whereas Gauguin's
position is much more complex. Odilon Redon would come closer to it
when, in 1898, in an exchange of letters with the critic André
Mellerio, he would criticize the notion of concept préalable
(preliminary conception) and define it as only a point of departure.
Redon described the creative process only in generic terms, as a sort
of serendipitous flânerie guided by fantasy, and he refused
to give specific explanations on the ground that "nothing is
done in art by will alone" and "all is done by a docile
submission to the coming of the 'unconscious'."13 But Gauguin
resorted to explanations in order to dismiss similarly the notion
that a work of art is the re-translatable visualization of a preconceived
idea. In 1899, he thus felt compelled to refute the opinion of the
critic André Fontainas, who had written that without the title
inscribed on the canvas, it would have been impossible to discover
the "meaning of the allegory" in Where do we come from?
What are we? Where are we going? (189798; Museum of Fine
Arts, Boston). Gauguin responded that the painting was not an allegory
but a "musical poem" and that the inscription did not reveal
a preliminary program but was a reflection added after the end of
the creative process, a "signature" rather than a title.14
As Whistler had done before him, Gauguin attributed Fontainas's mistake
to the literary bias of writers, and wrote that he had attempted to
"translate his dream in a suggestive decoration without resorting
to literary means."15 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Conception of Aesthetic Communication
"Translation" means here expression, and the "literary
means" are rejected in favor of artistic or (more specifically)
painterly means proper. The term "suggestive" is also revealing:
in a letter of August 1901 to Monfreid, Gauguin would write that "in
painting one should look for suggestion rather than description, just
as in music."16 The description of the creative process
in Genesis of a Picture is related to a conception of aesthetic
communication in which the expressive capacities of the formal means
are exploited in conjunction with the subject matter and semantic
associations of the objects depicted or "suggested."17
To his wife, Gauguin wrote, for example, that he had wanted to "explain"
the woman's fear in Mana'o tupapa'u with "as little as
possible of the antiquated literary means" and used instead the
colors violet, blue, orange-yellow, and greenish yellow.18
In his article of 1892 on the "symbolist" painters, in which
he hailed Gauguin for the second time as the "initiator"
of the movement, Albert Aurier had written that since the aim of art
was no more "the direct and immediate reproduction of an object,
all the elements of the pictorial language, lines, planes, shadows,
lights, colours [became] abstract elements that can be combined, attenuated,
exaggerated, distorted, according to their own expressive mode, in
order to achieve the overall goal of the work, that is the expression
of an idea, a dream, a thought."19 Among the explorers
of this "language," Aurier cited Leonardo da Vinci, Charles
Henry, and the Dutch neoclassical artist Humbert de Superville. It
may be significant that the latter's Allegory (fig. 2) has
been creditedwithout evidence of a direct linkas a compositional
and iconographical source for Mana'o tupapa'u, since his Unconditional
Signs in Art (182732), a book known in France through its
transmission by Charles Blanc's Grammaire des arts du dessin
(1867), was a major inspiration for artists seeking to base communication
on visual properties.20 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Communication implies reception. Gauguin's
Genesis of a Picture constantlyalbeit implicitlypoints
to the impact that a work was intended to have upon the spectator.
It thus belongs to the tradition of what is called in German Wirkungsästhetik
(aesthetics of the effect) and can be compared with "The Philosophy
of Composition," an essay of 1846 in which Edgar Allan Poe claimed
to explain the genesis of his famous poem The Raven (1845).21
Poe's account proposes an even more rigorous causality than Gauguin's
and is quite explicit about its intention: "It is my design to
render it manifest that no one point in [the poem's] composition is
referable either to accident or intuitionthat the work proceeded,
step by step, to its completion with the precision and rigid consequence
of a mathematical problem." Poe claims to let the public "take
a peep behind the scenes" and compares the creative process to
a mechanical one by speaking of its "wheels and pinions";
his explanation is directed against the notion that poets compose
"by a species of fine frenzyand ecstatic intuition."
But he also lets sound (the equivalent of Gauguin's "musical
part") play a leading role in the process and defines the poem's
plotits subject matteras "a pretext for the continuous
use of the one word 'nevermore'," the refrain determined by the
search for a "key-note" expressing the sadness meant to
produce poetical beauty. Poe already used the notion of "suggestion,"
explaining that the motif of the bust of Pallas (on which the raven
perches) had been "suggested by the bird" and emphasizing
the general need for "some amount of suggestivenesssome
under-current, however indefinite, of meaning." |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
The theoretical and programmatic ambition
of Poe's explanation is also more explicit than in Gauguin's case
and is already made clear by its title. Venerated by Baudelaire and
Mallarmé, Poe had a deep impact upon the French symbolists
and his "Philosophy of Composition" served as an antidote
to the unlimited faith in inspiration. By transposing it in the field
of painting with Genesis of a Picture, Gauguin was again pleading
for the equal standing and independence of his art. That he did so
in writing and with arguments partly borrowed from literature is only
an apparent paradox since he could rely on genuine parallels in literary
and art (as well as musical) theory. The relationship between "The
Philosophy of Composition" and Genesis of a Picture also
attests to the existence of an intertext of reflections upon the creative
process, formulated by those directly involved in it and crossing
the borders of the different arts or media. (The link between the
two was already noted by Robert Rey in 1923.22 ) The Raven
had been translated into French by Mallarmé in 1875 and published
with drawings by Édouard Manet; Gauguin had paid them a triple
homage in 1891 with his etched portrait of the French leader of symbolism,
whose head is echoed on the right by the ghostly bird, alluding to
both the poet and the earlier illustrations by the painter.23 Gauguin's
interest in Poe is further evidenced by a quotation included in the
Cahier pour Aline.24 As for Poe's relevance for Mana'o tupapa'u,
it is made manifest in the painting Nevermore of 1897 (Courtauld
Institute Galleries, London; fig. 3), which is to some extent a variation
on the earlier painting and where the tupapa'u is replaced
by the bird. This replacement is consistent with the comments on the
raven made by Poe in "The Philosophy of Composition." When
the bird flaps its wings against the shutter, the lover adopts "the
half-fancy that it was the spirit of his mistress that knocked,"
and the raven's repetition of the word "nevermore" in answer
to his questions makes him believe "in the prophetic or demoniac
character of the bird": the raven functions, in effect, as the
"spirit of the dead." It is thus logical to suppose that
The Raven and "The Philosophy of Composition" played,
in the genesis of Mana'o tupapa'u, a role acknowledged indirectly
in Genesis of a Picture and in Nevermore. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Heuristic Value
In my account, Genesis of a Picture appears to be an intervention
in the market of interpretations and a contribution to the rivalry
between artists and writers. It also expresses a certain conception
of the creative process and of aesthetic communication, and points
indirectly to sources of the painting that it fails to mention explicitly.
In other words, its origin, its composition, and the intentions
associated with it are at least as complex as those of the picture
itself. Does it nevertheless possess a heuristic value in relation
with Mana'o tupapa'u? Any answer to this question must remain
conjectural, to the extent that there exist no other traces of the
composition (in the dynamic sense of process) of the painting except
possible steps toward the tupapa'u figure and an undated
drawing of the reclining nude that could support the idea that this
was its starting point.25 But I think the answer is yes, provided
one accepts that this value is mediated by the logic of the writing
itself and resides in specific elements and in the movement of the
text rather than in what it purports to reveal. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
One detail that Genesis of a Picture
can illuminate is the flowers depicted in the background of the painting.
In his letter to Mette, Gauguin wrote that since they were "not
real, only imaginary," he made them look like sparks or phosphorescences,
which frighten Kanakas who believe them to partake of the spirit of
the dead.26 The connection is made clearer in the Cahier
pour Aline: "These flowers are tupapa'u flowers, phosphorescences,
a sign that the ghost is thinking of you. Tahitian beliefs."27
Despite this specific reference and the fact that they resemble the
hotu flowers that do gleam in the night in Tahiti, similar forms appear
in the background of a depiction of his sleeping son, painted by Gauguin
eight years earlier (private collection; fig. 4). The plant and bird
forms are here justified as wallpaper motifs but implicitly evoke
the oneiric world of the sleeperthey are equally "not real,
only imaginary." In the Cahier pour Aline, the reference
to "Tahitian beliefs" mediates from the detail of the flowers
to the picture as a whole: "The title Mana'o tupapa'u
has two meanings, either she thinks of the ghost, or the ghost thinks
of her."28 The letter to Mette introduces the list
of titles with their translations by observing that "this language
is bizarre and gives several meanings"; regarding Mana'o tupapa'u,
it notes that mana'o means "to think" and "to
believe," and translates the title both as "thinks of, or
believes in, the ghost" and as "ghost or spirit of the dead
watches over her."29 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Here again, the subject appears inspired
by Gauguin's exploration of the life and thought of the Maori,30
while reflecting his longstanding interest in thought processes and
visualization. In a letter of 1888 to Vincent van Gogh, Gauguin had
explained that in The Vision of the Sermon (National Gallery
of Scotland, Edinburgh) "the landscape and the wrestling [of
Jacob with the angel] exist only in the imagination of the praying
people as a result of the sermon."31 One can argue
that in spite of its religious iconography, The Vision of the Sermon
is less about "belief" than about imagination, a distinction
made unnecessary in the Tahitian pictures by the double sense of mana'o,
"penser croire." What is new in Mana'o tupapa'u,
on the other hand, is the fact that the thought/belief relationship
is reciprocal and reversible: either the woman imagines the spirit
of the dead or the spirit of the dead imagines the womanor "watches
over her," as its position in profile beside the bed also suggests.
The various ontological levels of the painting, expressed by distinct
stylistic treatments and levels of abstraction, are thus brought into
a dynamic relationship. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
These "levels of unreality"to
use the phrase introduced by Sven Sandströmalso distinguish
Mana'o tupapa'u from another source that is not mentioned in
Genesis of a Picture, Manet's Olympia (Musée
d'Orsay, Paris; fig. 5), which Gauguin had copied in February 1891.32
Paul Cézanne had already revisited the famous painting in his
Modern Olympia (1873; Musée d'Orsay, Paris), which introduced
the (male) spectator into the picture and made the reclining prostitute
appear to him like a vision rather than a reality. This spectator
is not directly represented in Mana'o tupapa'u, but the anecdote
told in Noa Noa suggests his indirect presence. Striking matches
in the unlit room, the narrator discovers the terror-stricken Teha'amana
looking at him without recognizing him. He himself is paralyzed by
a "strange uncertainty" that he describes as double: "Did
I know what she thought I was, in that instant? Perhaps she took me…for
one of those legendary demons and specters, the Tupapaus that
filled the sleepless nights of her people? Did I even know who she
really was? The intense feeling that possessed her, under the physical
and moral domination of her superstitions, made her so foreign to
me, so different from all that I had been able to glimpse until then."33
In this story, at the same moment when Gauguin experiences the irreducible
otherness of his Tahitian lover, he also becomes part of her imaginary
world as a tupapa'u, a spirit of the dead. The transformation
is supported in the original language by the fact that the narrator,
coming back from town, is indeed a revenant, a French expression for
"ghost." Insofar as the revised version of Noa Noa
can be considered relevant for the painting, one can therefore suppose
that the painter/lover/spectator is partly present within the picture
by way of the tupapa'u. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
Creative Process and "Traumarbeit"
This indirect presence or re-presentation can be interpreted as the
result of a transfer or displacement. The latter term would be used
a few years later by Sigmund Freud for one of the operations making
up what he called the "dream-work," the elaboration of the
dream.34 In fact, Gauguin's account of the genesis of Mana'o tupapa'u
can be closely compared to Freud's analysis. The first impulse is
clearly erotic, even if the expression, for reasons of propriety,
is slightly euphemized. In the letter to his wife, Gauguin begins
his account as follows: "I made a nude after a young woman. In
this position, a trifle would make her indecent. But this is how I
want her, the lines and the movement interest me."35 Je la
veux ainsi can easily be understood in sexual terms, as can the
parallel explanation, given in Cahier pour Aline, that he had
been "seduced by a form, a movement." In Noa Noa,
the narrator confesses that he had "never seen [his lover] so
beautiful, and above all, never found her beauty so moving";
the episode concludes with a "sweet and ardent night, a tropical
night." But this erotic impulse is checked and diverted by an
internalized censorship: since the picture must not be indecent, the
reference to lovemaking is replaced by the fear of the spirits, the
figure of the lover by that of the tupapa'u. |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
One can also find in Mana'o tupapa'u
equivalents of the other operations of Freud's "dream-work."
The result of "condensation" can be observed in details
like the "flowers" or the ornamental motifs of the pareu,
which suggest a grotesque head smiling beneath the woman's thighs.
These ambiguous or potential images, included by Gauguin in many of
his Tahitian paintings, introduce another ontological level in the
painting. They relate to his notion of "suggestion" and
to his interest in mental imagery and in the Maoris' "beliefs"
or "superstitions." In his letter to Monfreid, Gauguin makes
clear that the night of Mana'o tupapa'u also represents the
woman's "thought" and, in Noa Noa, the narrator describes
the semi-obscurity of the room as "peopled with dangerous apparitions
and equivocal suggestions."36 Finally, the choice of objects
and the pseudo-logical development of a theme meant to justify the
initial motif can be compared to the operations that Freud calls "taking
account of figurability" and "secondary elaboration." |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
We have seen that Gauguin had attempted
to visualize the oneiric activity as early as 1884. He could not have
been aware of Freud's work at this date or, in all probability, when
he painted Mana'o tupapa'u and wrote Genesis of a Picture,
but he could know many earlier works on the dream, especially by French
researchers like Marie-Jean-Léon d'Hervey de Saint-Denys and
Alfred Maury.37 On the frontispiece to his 1867 book (fig. 6), d'Hervey
de Saint-Denys depicted, beneath a typically "indecent"
oneiric episode, six representations of "hypnagogic hallucinations,"
that is, images seen in a half-sleep state. They bear a generic resemblance
to the quasi-abstract motifs employed by Gauguin in his evocations
of dreams, "visions" and apparitions, which may be explained
by the artist's knowledge of this plate or, more probably, by a common
basis in direct observation. |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Comparison between Freud's analysis
of the oneiric process and Gauguin's account of the creative process
is not limited to the issue of the dream.38 Both intend to reconstitute
a dynamic process in reversean aim shared by Poe but made almost
tautological in his case by the fact that he claimed to have composed
The Raven "backwards." It is well known that Freud
would progressively extend his analysis of the dream-work to all psychical
productions rooted in the unconscious, including literary and artistic
works. As for Gauguin, he used the term "dream" when referring
to the elaboration of his works in ways that go beyond traditional
clichés. Explaining his making of Where do we come from?
What are we? Where are we going? to Fontainas, for instance, he
wrote that he had been "painting and dreaming at the same time"
and that the title came to him "when I awoke, my work completed."39
One can even compare Freud's interest in an 1884 article by the linguist
Karl Abelaccording to whom the most ancient languages ignored
the principle of contradiction and contained words possessing two
opposite meaningswith Gauguin's fascination with the "bizarre"
ambiguity of the Tahitian language, remarkably exploited in Mana'o
tupapa'u.40 The parallel between Gauguin's self-interrogation
about his creative activity and Freud's auto-analysis and preparation
of Die Traumdeutung is thus not merely chronological but can
be related to common preoccupations, including with "archaic"
or "primitive" processes.41 In a sense, Gauguin's attempt
to uncover the "genesis" of his picture, like Poe's more
aggressive exposure of the "wheels and pinions" of poetical
composition, partakes of the "unveiling" tendency that I
mentioned at the beginning, for which Freud's "psycho-analysis"
would serve as a major model. It takes a risk shunned by Mallarmé,
who in 1894 called it "impious" to "disassemble fiction
and the literary mechanism in public," and by Redon, who told
Mellerio in 1898 that the "birth" of works of art should
be kept hidden.42 Yet the "mystery" that Mallarmé
and Redon wanted to preserve was also important to Gauguin, which
may explain why he was finally ambivalent about Genesis of a Picture.
He finished his letter to his wife by saying that what he had just
written was "very boring" but "necessary for you over
there"that is, to deal with criticsand he concluded,
in Cahier pour Aline: "This genesis is written for those
who always want to know the whys, the because. For the
others, [the painting] is quite simply a study of a nude from the
Pacific."43 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
1. The Essential Writings of Marcel Duchamp, eds. Michel
Sanouillet and Elmer Peterson (London: Thames & Hudson, 1975),
p. 138. A first version of the present paper was presented at the
26th International Conference of Art History organized by the Instituto
de Investigaciones Estéticas of the Universidad Autonoma
de Mexico in Saltillo, Coahuila (1014 November 2002).
2. See Richard Brettell et al., The Art of Paul Gauguin,
exh. cat., National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. (Washington,
D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1988), pp. 27982, no. 154.
3. Paul Gauguin, Lettres à sa femme et à ses amis,
ed. Maurice Malingue (Paris: Grasset, 1946), letter CXXXIV of 8
December 1892, pp. 23942; Lettres de Gauguin à Daniel
de Monfreid (Paris: Falaize, 1950), letter VII, pp. 97101;
Cahier pour Aline, pp. 7v, 8, 8v, 8bis (MS in the Bibliothèque
d'art et d'archéologie, Paris; facsimile ed. Victor Merlhès
[Bordeaux and Paris: William Blake and Co., Société
des amis de la Bibliothèque d'art et d'archéologie,
1984]), pp. 1821; Noa Noa (MS in the Musée du
Louvre, Paris), pp. 10810 (Noa Noa, Paris: Crès,
1929, pp. 92-94). The first version (MS in the Getty Center for
the History of Art and the Humanities, Santa Monica, California)
is translated in Noa Noa: Gauguin's Tahiti, ed. Nicholas
Wadley, trans. Jonathan Griffin (Oxford: Phaidon, 1985), pp. 3738.
4. "RécapitulonsPartie musicaleLignes
horizontales ondulantesaccords d'orangé et de bleu
reliés par des jaunes et des violets leurs dérivés.
Eclairés par étincelles verdâtresPartie
littéraireL'esprit d'une vivante lié à
l'esprit des Morts. / La nuit et le jour." Translation from
Brettell 1988, p. 281.
5. Robert Goldwater, "The Genesis of a Picture: Theme
and Form in Modern Painting," Critique 1 (October 1946),
pp. 512; Robert Rey, Gauguin (Paris: Rieder, 1923),
pp. 3840.
6. Richard S. Field, Paul Gauguin: The Paintings of the First
Voyage to Tahiti (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1963; New
York and London: Garland, 1977), p. 115.
7. "Cette traduction est seulement pour toi afin que tu puisse
[sic] la donner à ceux qui te la demanderont. Mais sur le
catalogue je veux qu'on mette les titres comme ils sont sur le tableau.
Cette langue est bizarre et donne plusieurs sens." Gauguin,
Lettres à sa femme et à ses amis, p. 240.
8. Translation by Henry J. Stenning in Paul Gauguin, Letters
to his Wife and Friends, ed. Maurice Malingue (Cleveland and
New York: World Publishing Co., 1949), pp. 17678.
9. See Harrison and Cynthia White, Canvases and Careers: Institutional
Change in the French Painting World (Chicago and London: University
of Chicago Press, 1993; 1st ed., 1965).
10. See Elise Eckermann, "En lutte contre une puissance
formidable": Paul Gauguin im Spannungsfeld von Kunstkritik
und Kunstmarkt (Ph.D. diss., Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität
zu Bonn, 2001; Weimar: Verlag und Datenbank für Geisteswissenschaften,
2003).
11. Paul Gauguin, Racontars de Rapin, ed. Victor Merlhès
(Taravao: Éditions Avant et Après, 1994). On the interdependence
and rivalry between artists and writers at the end of the nineteenth
century, see Dario Gamboni, La plume et le pinceau: Odilon Redon
et la littérature (Paris: Minuit, 1989).
12. James Abbott McNeill Whistler, The Gentle Art of Making
Enemies, 2d enl. ed. (London: Heinemann, 1892; reprint, New
York: Dover Publications, 1967), p. 146.
13. "Rien ne se fait en art par la volonté seule. /
Tout se fait par la soumission docile à la venue de l' 'inconscient.'
" Lettres d'Odilon Redon 18781916 (Paris and Brussels:
Librairie nationale d'art et d'histoire and G. van Oest, 1923, p.
34, 16 August 1898).
14. Paul Gauguin, Lettres à André Fontainas
(Caen: L'Echoppe, 1994), pp. 47, 1416; see also Gauguin, Lettres
à sa femme et à ses amis, letters CLXXX and CLXXII,
pp. 28690, 29295.
15. "J'ai essayé dans un décor suggestif de
traduire mon rêve sans aucun recours a des moyens littéraires…."
Gauguin, Lettres à André Fontainas, p. 16;
Gauguin, Lettres à sa femme et à ses amis,
p. 289. Décor could also be translated as "scene"
or "scenery," but given the positive meaning of décoration
for Gauguin, it is more probable that he wanted to characterize
the whole painting.
16. "… il y a en somme en peinture plus à chercher
la suggestion que la description, comme le fait d'ailleurs la musique."
Lettres de Gauguin à Daniel de Monfreid, letter LXXVII,
p. 182; in his letter to Monfreid about Mana'o tupapa'u,
Gauguin wrote that he chose to use a chrome yellow for the sheet
because "this colour suggests the night without explaining
it" (ibid., p. 101).
17. This conception was already sketched out by Gauguin in his
letter of 14 January 1885 to Emile Schuffenecker. Gauguin, Lettres
à sa femme et à ses amis, letter XI, pp. 4447.
18. Freely translated from "il me faut expliquer cet effroi
avec le moins possible de moyens littéraires comme autrefois
on le faisait." Ibid., p. 241.
19. "Dans l'art ainsi compris, la fin n'étant plus
la reproduction directe et immédiate de l'objet, tous les
éléments de la langue picturale, lignes, plans, ombres,
lumières, couleurs, deviennent, on le comprendra, les éléments
abstraits qui peuvent être combinés, atténués,
exagérés, déformés, selon leur mode
expressif propre, pour arriver au but général de l'œuvre:
l'expression de telle idée, de tel rêve, de telle pensée."
Albert Aurier, Textes critiques 18891892: Des impressionistes
au symbolistes (Paris: École nationale supérieure
des Beaux-Arts, 1995), p. 103; originally published in "Les
Symbolistes," Revue encyclopédique, no. 32, 1
April 1892, pp. 47587).
20. Marcel Giry, "Une source inédite d'un tableau de
Gauguin," Bulletin de la Société d'Histoire
de l'Art Français (1970; published 1972), pp. 18187.
Charles Blanc's treatise was republished in 1885 and the impact
of his transmission of Humbert de Superville's ideas has been especially
noted in the case of Seurat. See, for example, Seurat, exh.
cat., Galeries nationales du Grand Palais, Paris; Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York (Paris: Éditions de la Réunion des
musées nationaux), 1991, pp. 43536.
21. Edgar Allan Poe, "The Philosophy of Composition,"
in Tales, Poems, Essays (London and Glasgow: Collins, 1952),
pp. 50313. On Wirkungsästhetik, see Wolfgang Drost,
"Zwei Etappen auf dem Wege von der normativen Ästhetik
zur Wirksästhetik und zur Theorie von der 'Poesie des Kunstwerks':
Simon-Théodore Jouffroy und Charles Baudelaire," in
Albrecht Leuteritz et al., eds., Festschrift für Georg Scheja
zum 70. Geburtstag (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1975), pp. 20312.
22. Rey 1923, p. 39.
23. See Brettell 1988, no. 116. The poem was recited (in Mallarmé's
translation) during the banquet organized on 23 March 1891 to honor
Gauguin's departure for Tahiti.
24. "Notes d'Edgar Poe" (Cahier pour Aline, p.
1v).
25. For the tupapa'u, Field pointed to two drawings of a
woman in the Carnet de Tahiti (pp. 55v and 56r). See facsimiles
in Carnet de Tahiti (Taravao: Éditions Avant et Après,
2001), unpaginated. The charcoal drawing of the reclining nude (c.
1892, location unknown) is reproduced in John Rewald, Post-Impressionism:
From Van Gogh to Gauguin (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1956),
p. 527, and in Noa Noa: Gauguin's Tahiti, 1985, p. 78. Gauguin
wrote to Monfreid that the nude in Mana'o tupapa'u had not
been painted from life.
26. "Il y a quelques fleurs dans le fond mais elles ne doivent
pas être réelles étant imaginatives, je les
fais ressembler à des étincelles. Pour le Canaque
les phosphorescences de la nuit sont de l'esprit des morts ils y
croient et en ont peur." Gauguin, Lettres à sa femme
et à ses amis, pp. 24142. The Cahier pour Aline
also speaks of "electrical sparks."
27. "Ces fleurs sont des fleurs de Tupapau, des phosphorescences,
signe que le revenant s'occupe de vous. Croyances tahitiennes."
28. "Le titre Manaò Tupapaú a deux sens,
ou: elle pense au revenant, ou: le revenant pense à elle."
29. "Manao Penser croire / pense ou croit au revenant / tupapau
/ (Esprit des ou Revenant / veille sur Morts / elle." Gauguin,
Lettres à sa femme et à ses amis, p. 240.
30. See Jehanne Teilhet-Fisk, Paradise Revised: An Interpretation
of Gauguin's Polynesian Symbolism (Ph.D. diss., University of
California at Los Angeles, 1975; Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Research Press, 1983), passim; and Stephen F. Eisenman, Gauguin's
Skirt (London: Thames and Hudson, 1997), pp. 11930. Teilhet-Fisk
(1975, p. 73) considered Mana'o tupapa'u to be "the
first work by Gauguin, or any other artist, to reveal a remarkable
knowledge and understanding of the Tahitian belief in the supernatural
world."
31. "Pour moi dans ce tableau le paysage et la lutte n'existent
que dans l'imagination des gens en prière par suite du sermon."
Victor Merlhès, ed., Correspondance de Paul Gauguin,
Paris, 1984, p. 232, no. 165.
32. Sven Sandström, Levels of Unreality: Studies in Structure
and Construction in Italian Mural Painting during the Renaissance
(Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1963); see Brettell 1988, no.
117.
33. "Savais-je ce qu'à ce moment j'étais pour
elle? Si elle ne me prenait pas, avec son visage inquiet, pour quelqu'un
des démons ou des spectres, des tupapau dont les légendes
de sa race emplissent les nuits sans sommeil? Savais-je même
qui elle était en vérité? L'intensité
du sentiment qui la possédait, sous l'empire physique et
moral de ses superstitions, faisait d'elle un être si étranger
à moi, si différent de tout ce que j'avais pu entrevoir
jusque-là." Gauguin, Noa Noa (Louvre MS), p.
93.
34. Sigmund Freud, Die Traumdeutung (Leipzig and Vienna:
Franz Deuticke, 1900 [published 1899]).
35. "Je fis un nu de jeune fille. Dans cette position, un
rien, et elle est indécente. Cependant je la veux ainsi,
les lignes et le mouvement m'intéressent." Gauguin,
Lettres à sa femme et à ses amis, p. 241. However,
Gauguin still qualified Mana'o tupapa'u in the same letter
as "raide," in the sense of risqué.
36. "Ces fleurs sont en même temps comme des phosphorescences
dans la nuit (dans sa pensée)." Lettres de Gauguin
à Daniel de Monfreid, p. 101: "dans ces demi-ténèbres
à coup sûr peuplées d'apparitions dangereuses,
de suggestions equivoques…." Noa Noa (Louvre MS),
p. 93. On the notion of "potential images" and its relevance
for Gauguin, see Dario Gamboni, Potential Images: Ambiguity and
Indeterminacy in Modern Art (London: Reaktion), 2002, esp. pp.
1820, 8696. Field (1977, pp. 11415, 118) suggested
the possibility that the anecdote told in Noa Noa, compounded
with Gauguin's "growing awareness that the Tahitian equated
darkness with the past, was the actual formative basis of the painting."
37. Anonymous [Marie-Jean-Léon d'Hervey de Saint-Denys],
Les rêves et les moyens de les diriger. Observations pratiques
(Paris: Amyot, 1867); L.-F.-Alfred Maury, Le sommeil et les rêves.
Études psychologiques sur ces phénomènes et
les divers états qui s'y rattachent suivies de recherches
sur le dévelopement de l'instinct et de l'intelligence dans
leurs rapports avec le phénomène du sommeil (Paris:
Didier, 1862; 1st ed. 1861). See Henry F. Ellenberger, The Discovery
of the Unconscious: The History and Evolution of Dynamic Psychiatry
(New York: Basic Books, 1970); Stefanie Heraeus, Traumvorstellung
und Bildidee. Surreale Strategien in der französischen Graphik
des 19. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Reimer, 1998); Stefanie Heraeus,
"Artists and the Dream in Nineteenth-Century Paris: Towards
a Prehistory of Surrealism," History Workshop Journal
48 (autumn 1999), pp. 15368.
38. Field (1977, p. 268, n. 27) compared Gauguin's preoccupations
with Freud's in general terms and referred to Niels Sandblad's suggestion
that "this would make a very fertile field for investigation."
39. "… en peignant et rêvant tout à la
fois … / Au réveil, mon œuvre terminée,
je me dis, je dis: D'où venons-nous? que sommes-nous? Où
allons-nous?" Gauguin, Lettres à André Fontainas,
pp. 1516.
40. Sigmund Freud, "Über den Gegensinn der Urworte"
(1910), in Studienausgabe, vol. IV: Psychologische Schriften
(Frankfurt am Main: Fischer, 1970), pp. 22734.
41. Kirk Varnedoe suggested that "Gauguin's description of
his elaboration of the Spirit (or Mana'o tupapa'u), from
initial sensory impression to symbolic art, follows a similar pattern
and implicitly aligns his creative process with the primitive's
construction from initial utterance to developed language"
and pointed to evidence of Gauguin's acquaintance with linguistic
theory. See Kirk Varnedoe, "Gauguin," in William Rubin,
ed., "Primitivism" in 20th Century Art: Affinity of
the Tribal and the Modern, exh. cat., Museum of Modern Art,
New York; Detroit Institute of Arts; Dallas Museum of Art (New York:
Museum of Modern Art, 1984), p. 200 and p. 208, n. 62.
42. Stéphane Mallarmé, "La musique et les lettres,"
(1894), Oeuvres complètes, ed. Henri Mondor and G.
Jean-Aubry (Paris: Gallimard, 1945), p. 647 ("le démontage
impie de la fiction et conséquemment du mécanisme
littéraire"); Lettres d'Odilon Redon, p. 30,
letter of 21 July 1898 ("Le point initial de mes ouvrages vous
importe-t-il tant que ça? Ne vaudrait-il pas mieux le cacher
un peu; est-il bien de regarder ainsi la naissance!").
43. "Ce que je t'écris là est très ennuyeux
mais je crois que cela t'est nécessaire pour là-bas."
Gauguin, Lettres à sa femme et à ses amis,
p. 242; "Cette genèse est écrite pour ceux qui
veulent toujours savoir les pourquoi, les parce que.
/ Si non, c'est tout simplement une étude de nu océanien."
|
|
|
 |
|