Of Art Nouveau & Sublime Curves
John Coulthart of Feuilleton and I had been discussing my eroticizing specific non-erotic artworks. He suggests it's simply the sublime in the illustrations, the "sinuous Art Nouveau curves"; I believe it may have more to do with something else...I wrote:
Does anyone else find such illustrative style, and in fact most illustration in fairy tales etc., very erotic? I mean it’s not sexual, and the stories aren’t (necessarily) so either, but something in the epic nature, the good v. evil, combined with the fantastic puts me in such a frame of mind…I'm no closer, really, to being able to articulate what it is I am trying to get at, what I am feeling here... And in part, there's a reason why.
Also as noted in my comment, I'm not sure where I'm heading with this train of thought. Even after a discussion with my husband on this (an astute judge not only of art and graphic design, but of 'me' and my thinking), I'm still not much clearer.
I most definitely agree that Art Nouveau is sexy. But I still believe there's something more than just the style at work here.
In all honesty, I've put off posting this for quite some time as I'm beginning to think (fear) that all roads lead back to Girlie Town. That somehow, in my mind, there's nothing really to point to other than a romanticism of the classic female variety, for which I feel on the defensive -- as if admitting my gender, created in no small part by (and also in spite of) our pervasive & insidious culture, is some how a fault, a flaw which will haunt me... rendering any past and all future posts to simply the opinions of a girl.
While I cannot be other than what I am (even if in my entitled position of "being in process"), there's something about being stamped A Girl which undermines credibility.
If my eroticism of Art Nouveau is boiled down to the simple "because you're a girl", then it's not only condescending to my gender but to myself personally. My character, education, experience and opinions (which are a result of all the former things) are suddenly dismissed. I become predictably female and my opinions impotent in such simplicity (even if living as a female is anything but).
It's very much like artist whose work receives the stamp of Pop Culture Favorite. While the focus should be on the fact that the "pop" stands for "popularity", folks deride the value of the work. Ultimately, an artist communicates, and if the message is accepted, becomes popular, then ought not success, real not (only) monetarily, be the stamp given? Yet, the relationship seems to most often be a direct but inversely proportionate one. The more people like it, the less it is respected; as if mass adoration/adoption must equal "watered down" and worthless.
My (perhaps very) female reaction, however complex it might be, to Art Nouveau becomes watered down and worthless by virtue of its very direct relationship to a large number of persons, i.e. the female population. And I don't like it.
Especially when Art Nouveau has the very same sublime curves as I.
posted by Silent-Porn-Star at
12:26 AM
2 Comments:
I've been making a number of posts recently about Art Nouveau so this subject has been in my thoughts as well.
Regarding the sexual dimension, much of Alphonse Mucha's work (you have an example there) can be seen as fin de siècle pin-ups the way they focus on the female figure. All his women were based on photographs of models and when you see the original photos many of them look no different from porn shots of the period. The use of women is mostly about that 19th century thing of using "woman" as the signifier of some abstract essence or idea but I still feel there's a latent eroticism at work.
As far as the feminine is concerned, you just have to consider the kind of descriptive words applied to Art Nouveau: soft, sensuous, fluid, organic, curved, flexing, elegant, etc; all words usually considered feminine attributes. I've often wondered why Art Nouveau flourished for such a very brief time then was swept away by Modernism and was only allowed back as a decorative pastiche in the 1960s. Was Modernism with its hard lines more masculine and therefore something to be encouraged by the dominant culture?
Also why were some countries more open to Art Nouveau than others? Why did France enjoy it so much that the authorities in Paris actively encouraged its development while London has no Art Nouveau buildings of note at all? Is it that countries that were more accommodating sexually were more open to Art Nouveau's influence? I don't know the answers but they're interesting questions. Art Nouveau was a threat to some people as the case of the Atelier Elvira demonstrates.
All your points are valid; I just hate having my reactions reduced to such things. Being "a girl" has such a dumbing-down factor -- as in others dumb you down. :p
As for your questions regarding cultural reactions to Art Nouveau -- or any art from/style -- are good ones. I suspect there is some connection to women's liberties and status at play. And perhaps not the way you (might) imagine...
There are strong arguments supported by historical patterns which equate the exploitation of women's charms in fashions as a backlash so-to-speak; a response to keep women "feminine" when they've achieved power. There could be artistic parallels. It would require more time with noses in books.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home