Steefel explores the almost exclusively
ignored bowl of fruit in one of Picasso's most famous paintings Les
Desmoiselles d'Avignon and how this explicitly sexualized inclusion in
the piece underlies and adds to the "primitive" influences of the
piece. Steefel presents the argument that this is not in fact a harmless bowl
of fruit, but is rather a phallic symbol that is as aggressive as the
entire piece itself. This painting is described as embodying the over
sexualized, traumatic, and aggressive nature of the view of the primitive
Amazonian women as a whole. Noting that something as simple and harmless as a
bowl of fruit is transformed into an assertive, male, phallic symbol when
contextualized with the "primitive" Amazonian women.
Though this may
seem to be a jump forward in the process of analyzing the influences of the
"primitive" in Picasso's works, it is a piece that takes his work
within the influence of the primitive to an entirely new level, this is no
mundane depiction of "primitive" life, but rather a highly sexualized
scene of women in a brothel. This challenges what is high art, what is the view
of other cultures within the time period, and challenges the context of art as
a whole. Picasso's influences of primitivism at the time are taken a step
further in this painting. The often ignored bowl of fruit serves as a testament
to the pushing of limits in terms of primitive depictions. I aim to make clear
that this is not a harmless or meaningless inclusion, but rather a meaningful
commentary of the permeation of the conception of the "primitive" in
art.
Steefel does well in
regards to analyzing the work in reference to major themes and relating it to
other articles which interpret the ugliness and super sexualization in relation
to the perceived primitive nature of the women, however I believe that he could
have gone further even to argue that this view, and this influence of the
"primitive" in Picasso's work has the ability to manipulate and
transform even the most harmless, and traditional subject, a still life of a
bowl of fruit, into something both sexual and intrusive due to the overarching
themes of primitivism. This is a true testament to the perception of the
primitive, both during that time and Picasso's statement on the subject matter
itself in that he is able to include something so mundane and present it in
such a way, with such settings that it appears as daunting and primitivized as
the Amazonian women themselves.
Full
Citation:
The
Neglected Fruit Cluster in Picasso's "Les Demoiselles d'Avignon"
Lawrence D. Steefel, Jr.
Artibus et Historiae , Vol. 13, No. 26 (1992), pp. 115-120
Published by: IRSA s.c.
Article Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1483434
I have read Steefel’s opinions on the fruit bowl in Les Desmoiselles d'Avignon and after reading this blog I feel more comfortable with the idea’s presented. Its funny how art critics, especially those male and in the first half of the 20th century, only saw the fruit bowl as a nice little additive to offset the primitive or savage women. In fact, I think that although your recognizing the more significant aspect of the fruit bowl, that is its male phallic resemblance, these critics still help your argument that the fruit bowl adds to the primitive element of Picasso’s work. They focus mostly on how the women are depicted and then throw the fruit bowl in like its a candle in the dark, providing contrast to the horrible women. However, I believe theres another story that can be told. I argue and what Steefel turned me towards, is that as the fruit bowl plays on women’s social issues off the time. I believe the “primitive women” surrounding castrated male reproductive parts(the fruit bowl) is empowering to women. As women rights and equality were issues just being brought to the table around the time of this paintings creation, I would argue that Picasso may have been representing women’s uprising and strive for equality.
ReplyDelete- Joshua Hancock
I really like your take on the piece, and I think that looking at the fruit bowl in light of women's rights and the feminist movement. I would not have connected the fruit bowl to the painting in that way had you not mentioned it. I think that your argument adds even further to the argument that I found Steefel was lacking in his article. Thanks for the input!
DeleteI very much agree with Steefel's argument that the fruit bowl is anything but meaningless. However, it is still interesting to me that Picasso would include a fruit bowl in painting that is meant to portray a level of sex appeal, despite it's primitiveness. It is very clear by this point that Braque and Picasso have a great deal of paintings that have fruit as the main subject matter. The fruit bowl in Demoiselles is even more recognizable and distinguishable than that of several other works we have looked at. He has made the women more abstract, yet clearly made the fruit a bit more life like than some of his other paintings that include incredible abstract fruit. Picasso and Braque clearly like to paint fruit, and it does not seem unusual that he would add this in like he does in some of his other works. In that sense, the fruit does not seem random at all and was definitely added for a reason, as Steefel argues.
ReplyDelete-Dana Rich