Les Demoiselles d’Avignon (1907)

Pablo Picasso (October 25, 1881-April8, 1973), born in Malaga, Spain was a painter, sculptor, printmaker, ceramicist, stage designer, poet, and playwright. He became one of the world’s best known modern artists of the 20^th century. One of his works that really caught my attention immediately was his Les Demoiselles d’Avignon (1907). This painting was made using oil on canvas and depicts five naked prostitutes posing with different body positions as well as faces. Their bodies seem to absorb the presence of whoever is admiring them. Their limbs are oddly shaped in pointy angles which also gives emphasis to the women’s promiscuous nature in comparison to their surroundings.

This work reflects the aesthetic preferences associated with modernism by taking a huge leap from the expected types of paintings such as covered up subjects and high social status people. Through this aspect, Picasso managed to really connect with his subjects as he aimed primarily to paint the social outcasts on the streets. This included poor people, prostitutes, and homeless people and many other social rejects at the time. His aim was to shine a light on the real people he often encountered in the streets but he never hindered to portray them as they truly were in all forms, in the physical and emotional state.

As I was walking through the MoMA I came across so many different paintings that I loved. To keep a long experience short, Les Demoiselles d’Avignon caught my immediate attention due to the authenticity and vividness of the real human body at its prime. This painting was placed strategically on its own on a big wall, drawing everyone’s attention to the brushwork and colors used to paint. Most importantly, these women are working in a field that is shunned by many conservatives and hidden in the shadows of the night. In this instance, though they seem to embody their decisions and look entirely comfortable in their bodies. It is a real depiction of what every woman should feel like in their own skin. I am all for women feeling empowered with the skin they are in no matter the shape, size or skin tone and I believe this painting greatly speaks for itself to that aspect. Some questions I have about the work is to why the two women on the right have faces that were inspired by African masks. The fact that only these two women have these masks on must symbolize something that I am not understanding.

In my 8^th grade French class, I had to give a speech (en francais) about the painter Edgar Degas. I’m not sure I can really describe it as a speech; it was a string of simple, present-tense sentence that were interrupted by idiotic questions for the teacher like, “Madame Boucher, comment dites ‘ballarina’?” As part of a unit on Impressionism, each student was assigned one of the great early-twentieth-century artists to speak about. One by one, we stumbled through our presentations – Claude Monet, Marie Cassatt, Paul Gauguin, George Seurat; the artist I had the strongest response to was Henri Matisse.

Matisse was born in northern France in 1869. As a young man, he studied law and then worked in a law office. He took up drawing in his free time, and moved to Paris when he was in his early twenties to pursue an education in painting. He was traditionally trained but soon became influenced by the progressive painters of the day, especially George Seurat.

As it turns out, Madame Boucher’s interpretation of Impressionism was very loose. Matisse was actually a part of a post-Impressionist movement called Fauvism. In French, “les fauves” means “the beasts”.

The Fauvists used big, bold swaths of color and were concerned with conveying mood and emotion. Matisse was actually a pioneer in the movement. Fauvists were building on the abstractions and deconstructions of earlier impressionist movements such as pointillism (painting tiny dots rather than using brush strokes). This was a period of painting that rejected the realism of the 19^th century, and embraced innovation and experimentation. Like the Impressionists before them, the post-Impressionists were concerned with how to evoke the sensual experiences of the physical world, but they went even further by embracing less literal representations of people and objects. The Fauvists exemplify Modernism.

The picture I selected is titled “The Red Studio”. Painted in 1911, it’s a rendering of Matisse’s own atelier (or art studio). I selected it because I think it’s a great example of Fauvism. It’s painted almost entirely in a passionate red. The paintings on the atelier walls are miniature versions of Matisse’s recently completed works and they exuberantly jump off the canvas. Except for the window, the only fully formed items are the artists’ works. The other items in the room are only suggested; the table, chairs, pedestals, and floor are only sketchy outlines. Taken all together, I get the sense that Matisse was extraordinarily ardent about his craft.

There are two features of this work are particularly striking. First is the chair in the foreground. Not only does it play with perspective in a way that rejects traditional perceptions, it’s also the only “unreal” item to obscure one of the artist’s works. This visual obstacle gives the atelier depth and proportion using a very few lines. Second is the far left corner of the room. There is no line to suggest it at all. The viewer “feels” the corner because of the way that the other artwork is situated against the invisible walls of the room.

This work is situated in the fifth floor gallery of the Museum of Modern Art. It hangs alongside many other iconic Matisse paintings such as “La Dance”. As I moved through the room, I was impressed by the artist’s range. While there are definitely unifying features of the works, there is an impressive diversity in form and materials.

I’ve encountered Matisse many times in the past – first in that 8^th grade French class, but then in museums like MoMA here at home, the Musee D’Orsay in Paris, and the Barnes Foundation in Philadelphia. For me, Matisse’s unique ability to convey emotion through the audacious use of color and geometry make him a 20^th century master.

#  #  #

Here are some other works by Matisse that show his range.

–Do you think that Gregor is more powerful BEFORE or AFTER his metamorphosis? Explain your response.

–How is Gregor’s family transformed in the wake of his metamorphosis?

–At the end of the second section of the story, Gregor’s father pelts him with apples. What do you think this episode is about?

–Gregor emerges from his room one last time when he hears his sister playing her violin for the lodgers. What is the significance of this? What meaning does music hold for Gregor here?

–Ultimately, what do you think Gregor’s metamorphosis means? What does it mean to be transformed into a giant bug?

–Explain your understanding of Gregor’s death. How/why does he ultimately die?

–The story’s narrator is revisiting a place he once lived.  Explain the significance that this “revisiting” has in relation to the themes of the story.

–What is the connection between our narrator and Weifu?  Why do you think so much of the story is spent on Weifu’s life, while the narrator shares very little about his own life experiences?

–Explain the significance of the story about reburying Weifu’s little brother?

–Weifu recalls when he and the narrator used to pull the beards off religious statues in the Temple when they were younger.  What is the significance of this memory?

–Describe an instance of filial piety in the story.  What is its significance?

–What aspects of this short story seem to you to be particularly modernist?

–The poem opens, “Let us go then, you and I….” Whom do you think the speaker is addressing here?
–What is Prufrock’s relationship to time?
–Look at the description of the yellow smoke in the second and third stanzas of the poem. What do you make of this description?
–“I have measured out my life with coffee spoons,” laments Prufrock. What do you think this line means?
–Describe the overall mood of the poem. What feelings does it leave you with?
–In the final lines of the poem, the speaker shifts from “I” to “We.” How do we explain this shift?

–How does justice work in the world of “Punishment”?  What happens when one tells the truth? What happens when one lies?

–What do we make of Chandara’s choice to take responsibility for the death of her sister-in-law? Do you see her as a hero or as a victim?

–Explain the significance of the details Tagore offers about the marriage between Chandara and Chidam.  How do they help us understand the events of the story?

–How do you understand the title of the story?

–As she approaches death, Chandara both says, “to hell with him,” and maintains that she loves her husband.  How do you reconcile these two apparently contradictory statements?