The Image of the Rural Pride as it Relates to the American Identity - Essay Example

?Running Head: ART HISTORY The Image The Image of the Rural Pride as it Relates to the American Identity The image of the rural pride as it relates to the American identity Introduction The most iconic imagery that has been repeated throughout the generations that concerns an image that reflects the American idealism that exists within the artistic work that has been done by American artists is that of the rural scene. The American farmer is the symbol of American ideals. In the 20th century, however, the conflicted emotions of a land that was no longer new had begun to show signs that this imagery was now being used to express some disappointments. Nearer to the beginning of the emergence of the United States, the farmer worked hard on land that holds a meaning that is deeper than that which is nothing more than simple ownership. Land ownership shifted from the elite who held the yokes of servants in the feudal system to that of the common man who either staked his claim or was given land on which his pride and his sweat coaxed out a living. In using the imagery of farms and rural life to express idealism, artists have made a commentary on what it means to work the land and the identity that this image creates in relation to that of American life. As a consequence, those same images have been used to relate the disappointments and changing ideals that have grown. The concept of the rural landscape or representation is not always defined by the image of a happy or successful representation of American rural life. In Grant Wood’s work American Gothic, one interpretation is to see a savagery in the faces of the farmer and his wife, their lives so cruel and harsh that they live with that impressed upon their faces. Charles Demuth resented his surroundings so much that his artwork was representative of that same hard lined concept which produced the idea that rural life was unacceptably harsh. The Rural Aesthetic One of the most iconic pieces of art in the American portfolio is that of American Gothic by Grant Wood. The image of the harsh and sober farmer, his wife looking at him with the barest disdain combined with a hint of respect, suggests both a satirical look at rural life, contrasted with a respect for the stoic and harsh nature of such a life. Corn (1998) argues that the work is not based on satire, but on the way in which Wood was raised, his background informing the aesthetic that he has adopted. As well, Wood, according to Corn (1998), had an aesthetic that was reflected in hard lines. Through the examination of the Midwestern lifestyle, he associated the difficulty of rural work to that of the hard line. Corn (1998) quotes Garland who defines the concept of the Midwest through the representation provided through hard lined works, which gave them the aspects of being “rural, raw and tough – as hard ‘edged’ (p. 397). The work, American Gothic, is one of the most recognizable paintings done in the 20th century. It is often referred to as the “American Mona Lisa” because of its wide use in pop culture iconic works of advertising and social referencing, and because it is associated with American Art in a very central and meaningful way. Critics of the work often assign it to being either regional or satire, both which the artist believes diminishes his intentions with the work. Wood resented the idea that the painting represented specifically Iowa, the work having a more universal representation of the American farmer and not representative of Iowa. The criticism of satire also did not seem to fit the painting. According to Seery (2002), “the farther the critic lived from the Midwest, the more predisposed he or she was to read the painting as satire or social criticism” (p. 121). In fact, the painting was depicted as vicious by art historian Mathew Baigell who framed his interpretation as “a ‘vicious satire’ that depicts the couple as savage, exuding ‘a generalized, barely repressed animosity that borders on venom” (Seery, 2002, p. 121). While this take on the painting is severe, to look at the work allows one to recognize the poisonous attitude that can be seen when looking at the work. While this does not mean that it was intended, there is some value in seeing this concept of savagery as one of the aspects of farming becomes defined by the struggle against the land as the farmer wishes to force her to do his bidding. This idea of savagery is not limited to the work of Wood. The work of Charles Demuth also depicted this idea of rural scenes reflecting a savage nature in the subjects. Demuth was portraying his frustrations as because of his health he had been forced to leave New York and be placed with his mother in the rural Lancaster Pennsylvania. This dislocation created resentments, his artistic work reflecting something of this belief in the harsh and hostile environment of the rural landscape. A part of this hostility was a reflection of the general attitudes about homosexuality, a part of Demuth’s life that he believed those in the community of Lancaster would not accept. In his landscapes of Landcaster, an ominous black water tower is seen in the background, the hard lines a part of the overall harsh representation of rural life (Scott, 1999). Kenneth Hayes Miller said that in order to be art, it had to be radical and he “considered art a political act in behalf of individual freedom”. As he had a specific belief system about art, so too did he apply this to his consideration of the rural space. For Miller, urban life was a life of freedom where rural life was about burden and oppression (Scott, 1999). Although these depictions of rural life may have left a sour taste on the American aesthetic, one can look at the paintings of William Sidney Mount in order to gain a contrasting opinion about the idea of the rural space as an appropriate subject matter. In contrast to Miller’s believes, Mount celebrated the concept of the American everyday life. He believed that the scenes of the rural space provided for a celebration of what is meant to be American. Using simple elemental terms from which to express his appreciation for the rural life in America, his work presented the everyday as something note worthy (Edwards & Anglin, 1989). The Everyday Mount’s work was a significant shift from the idea of the landscape to the pictorial representation of everyday life. Previous to this time, art had been created through the landscape in the American painting portfolio. Mount supported a sense of the patriotic through revealing the wealth of riches in the American common place aesthetic. His work was not grounded in European elements and themes as Mount refused to study in Europe (Oedel & Gernes, 1998). Mount’s work paved the way for the rural art of the early 20th century that provided a discourse on the darker ideas of rural life. Celebration or Dark Oppression As shown in the development of rural depictions from the 19th century to the 20th century, there was a decided shift in the way in which rural life was represented. There are two ways in which to approach this shift. The first way is in looking at the theoretical shifts that took place in the late 19th and early 20th century in relationship to art. Art shifted from the idea of being a reflection of life to being a reflection of emotion. The modern art period took art from the place where it was about pleasure until it went “beyond the pleasurable principle” (Zizek, 2006, p. 147). Art was no longer about creating a reflection of what was beautiful. As Mount explored the way in which the common everyday life of the rural space was beautiful, artists such as Demuth and Wood found a way in which to portray the hard edges of that world. The work was taken back to a fundamental perspective principle and defined by hard hedges that captured none of the naturalized lines that occur in a world where decay and climate change the lines of a building. The hard lines form in such a way as to suggest that the elements of design in a painting are reflecting the emotional undercurrent that is intended in the work. When American landscapes first were being produced, the concept of the importance of the field and its connection to the ideologies of freedom that it represented was a common theme. The artist Edward Hicks developed a style that celebrated then New World. His work Peaceable Kingdom with Quakers Carrying Banners is an example of the more elaborated themes of ideological freedoms that were expressed in the 18th century. Hicks created a series of 62 works with ‘Peaceable Kingdom’ titled pieces that all had similar elements. The first is that of symbolic animals as they are related to Isaiah 11:6 in the Bible. The idea of the lamb laying down with the wolf, and so on, relates to the idea of peace, a subject of great interest to the Quakers as they had been through a dramatic split with the church and had suffered persecution for their beliefs. The typical piece of work for Hicks had the image of a child with a hand on the lion, surrounded by a variety of animals in a rural setting (Reitzes, Street, & Scott, 2003). At the beginning of the rise of the United States, the feelings of patriotism and faith in the new found freedoms that were so very different from those in Europe provided for a more positive production of artistic work. The national expressions that are part of the unity between politics and art were experienced in a more positive light, acting on that pleasure principle in order to promote the idea of the freedoms that had brought them out of the darkness of oppressions that the Americas represented. The work of Hicks, as an example, showed the American landscape as a part of a bigger experience in which the land was a part of peace and hope. Through examining the works in reverse order, the way in which the concept of the farm and of the land has been revealed for having been a core component to the American identity. As that identity has evolved, so too has the images of the farm and the farmer, the nature of oppression being shifted from the freedoms that working the land represented in the beginning to the point where the farm began to represent the oppressed, the Midwest being ridiculed to an extent for pedestrian and unsophisticated aesthetics. Conclusion One of the strongest themes that have traveled through time in the portfolio of American artists is that of the rural environment. As has been stated, this environment means a great deal to the people of this nation, the concept of working one’s own land at the foundation of the freedom to earn one’s place for themselves being a potent part of the development of the national identity. The development of the concept of freedom, that an individual had the right to work for their own benefit and to own land was a strong attraction that the New World had in contrast to the lingering remnants of feudalism in European traditions. As the New World became a nation, however, and the system of land ownership changed, the nature of rural life becoming less attractive, the imagery of the farmer became a bit more bleak and oppressive. As American Gothic was painted at the onset of the Great Depression of the thirties, it is clear that the hardships and turmoil of the time, at the very least, is reflected in the hard lines and stoic expressions. As Demuth had a personal agenda in the creation of his works, his feelings of Midwestern oppression is clearly established, reflecting the commentary by Hicks on the nature of rural life and the contempt with which farm labor suddenly was not considered a valid form of life. Just as all cultures take on different preferences for a way of life, the historical time line of paintings provide insight into the nature of how rural life is perceived. It is clear that the topic is still important, but distinct shifts have allowed the subject to be changed in relationship to how it is received by the public. Owning a farm, while still a magnificent thing, has fallen out of fashion with intellectuals. It not represents those who are often believed to be less education and less enlightened. As with most social concepts, rural life has changed from its original meaning in art. References Corn, W. M. (1998) The birth of a national icon: Grant Wood’s American Gothic. In Doezema, M. (Eds). Reading American art. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Edwards, L. M. & Anglin, T. (1989). Domestic bliss: Family life in American Painting 1840- 1911. New York: The Hudson River Museum. Oedel, W. T. & Gernes, T. S. (1998). The painter’s triumph: William Sydney Mount and the formation of a Middle Class art. In Doezema, M. (Eds). Reading American art. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Reitzes, Lisa, Stephanie Street, and Gerry D. Scott. (2003). A national image: the American painting and sculpture collection in the San Antonio Museum of Art. San Antonio, Tex: San Antonio Museum of Art. Scott, W. B., & Rutkoff, P. M. (1999). New York modern: The arts and the city. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Seery, J. E. (2002). America goes to college: Political theory for the liberal arts. Albany: State University of New York Press. Z?iz?ek, S. (2006). The parallax view. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Read More