Why Artists Paint Animals - Essay Example

Why Artists Paint Animals This paper does not purport to explain why all artists paint animals, since the reasons would be at least as numerous as the artists, as illustrated by the contrast of the reasons for two paintings Lady with an Ermine by Leonardo Da Vinci (1490) and The Scapegoat by William Holman Hunt (1854). Artists who paint animals alone have a different reason than artists who put animals into scenes with humans. In scenes with humans there are four basic reasons to paint animals. One reason is to hint at the subject’s character by showing how they relate to animals and which ones, such as showing a warrior on a horse, which hints at power and courage. The second is to add to the mood of a painting: children with kittens are twice as cute as without. Third is to communicate a symbolic message, such as was done in the Lady with an Ermine. Last is generally because they are expected for various reasons of subject or environment etc., as one might expect some animals in a farm scene 1. It helps to understand the painting and the artist if we examine why they paint animals. The look of the animals depicted in these two paintings is so different that we immediately know that the intent of the artists was very different. The goat looks broken down and sickly, old and lost in a dismally stark landscape. The ermine, in DaVinci’s “Lady with an Ermine” is beautiful and sleek, almost human in its facial expression, which mimics that of the mistress of the Duke of Milan 2. Each of these paintings includes an animal for reasons other than how they look. The goat has religious significance for the artist, and is an attempt to fulfill his dream of being responsible for the conversion of the Jews to Christianity 3. The ermine for DaVinci symbolizes purity and innocence, but may also be a symbol of her pregnancy with the son that Ludovico Sforza did acknowledge4. In truth, these artists were both eccentric and their reasons for painting these animals are interesting stories. Hunt was somewhat obsessed by Christianity and he dreamed of converting the Jews with his painting, The Scapegoat 5. One might think that this is an indication that he loved God and possibly loved the Jews, wishing to save them. However, in looking at his writings, we can see that his religion was more obsession than love, and he felt quite superior to the Jews 6. He saw them, and other non-Christians, as poor creatures of God that simply could not understand His wisdom in sending Jesus Christ. The Scapegoat was Hunt’s depiction of the Jewish ritual at Yom Kippur of sending a goat marked with a red ribbon indicating that it carries the sins of the community, to symbolize atonement 7. In the arid wilderness of the Dead Sea the goat likely dies. Hunt thought that the parallel to the sacrifice of Jesus would inspire the Jews, and maybe even the Arabs to convert to Christianity 8. In somewhat of a contrast, Leonardo Da Vinci painted the Lady with an Ermine as a symbol of purity, because in the writings that he had read by Aesop, Pliny and many other interesting volumes, as evidenced by Da Vinci’s own writing which details his interpretations, that is what an ermine symbolized 9. There is evidence that Da Vinci did extensive research in literature concerning the symbolic meanings, and other attributes, of animals (Beck 1993, 185-198). Da Vinci only painted four women in his lifetime that we know about, and it seems that he was very much concerned about female virtue, and also his own. Da Vinci, apparently, tried periodic periods of abstinence in order to master his own, presumed sinful, sexuality. That he painted this Lady with an Ermine is significant in that she belonged to his benefactor, and one myth concerning the ermine was that it would rather be captured than get its coat soiled and that it did everything in moderation, because “moderation curbs all the vices” 10. Da Vinci even suggested in his notes that he painted Cecilia Gallerani as a symbol of moderation 11. Another painting of one of her contemporaries, “Lady with a Dog”, alleged to be Isabelle D’este, a close friend also shows a too human face on the dog that could be familially related to the woman. The dog is said to represent fidelity. One wonders if Da Vince had plans to do all of the virtues using women and animals, and simply did not finish. It is very helpful to know their background of these two artists and what they believed in order to fully enjoy their work 12. While art is certainly such that it can be enjoyed without any knowledge of the artist, or even the times, the subjects or the culture within which they worked, one can enjoy them so much more when these are understood. Perhaps in their own time and environments the artists, and their works, were better understood by some by just the appending of the artist’s name. After all, artists in their time did have a following, a fan club of sorts, of people who liked their work. This is a primary reason for sponsorship, so that the sponsor’s friends and associates could be properly entertained and impressed with the artist’s work on their behalf. Even the more independent artists, such as Hunt, who worked through Gallery owners and such, still had followings who were eager to see any new work, perhaps to purchase it. However, the reaction Hunt got with the Scapegoat was not very positive, as his patrons were used to more conventional religious art from him 13. The gallery owner that Hunt showed this painting to first refused to display it. Da Vinci’s painting got a good reception as it was actually a very good portrait of Cecilia Gallerani, which even inspired a sonnet by Bernardo Bellincioni, also in the patronage of Ludovico il Moro, whose mistress it was in the painting 14. So either Da Vinci really admired the lady or he really lusted for her and wanted to remind himself that she was off limits. What seems more interesting than even the stories behind these two paintings is the look of the animals they painted. The goat in Hunt’s painting is anything but pretty. In fact, even if the subject were understood, it is not something most people would use to decorate a wall. Even in our more enlightened time with the huge history and variety of art available today, consumers expect art to have some essence of beauty. In this author’s opinion, other adjectives come to mind, such as sad, broken down or pitiful. Oddly the other version made from this original sketch is darker with more colour and sports a rainbow, but is not any prettier. In Da Vinci’s painting, it is the facial expression of the ermine that is interesting. The animal seems to be looking at the person that has drawn the lady’s attention, and the facial expression of the animal looks exactly like hers, but there is a haughty quality there, perhaps challenging the distraction for the lady’s attention. Beck 15 takes note of this and mentions that Leonardo would have known how the pupils are in the eyes of different animals. Therefore, the smaller than usual pupils of the woman’s eyes and the somewhat larger than usual for the ermine would have been deliberate. “According to Leonardo, ‘the size of visible things seems to vary as much as do the various sizes of pupils to which those things will have been present.’" 16 One could speculate any number of reasons why he made these faces so similar. Many other artists are mentioned in these articles that refer to these two paintings. All of them included animals in their paintings. The reasons for doing so run the gamut from companion to political satire. Few artists seem to have painted animals with people just for their beauty or aesthetic. Artists that painted the animals alone often painted them for their reality or beauty, though Hunt’s Scapegoat is an exception. However, when depicted with people it seems that many artists have used them as an expression of the meaning of the work. Some are very easy to interpret as they are almost grotesque in appearance and often somehow combined with the portrait of a person or persons (Beck 1993, 185-198). Others, like this “Lady with an Ermine” are more subtle in their expression. Leonardo Da Vinci made a study of animal forms and of their other characteristics, as he was curious about all of God’s creatures. Many drawings are included in his notebooks, and it is evident that some of his invention drawings stemmed from his knowledge of anatomy. Hunt, on the other hand, only used animals as spiritual symbols to illustrate his views on Christianity. Da Vinci’s animals were beautiful, but Hunt’s bordered upon the grotesque. He has somewhat ugly sheep stampeding down rough hills in one, and another, John Ruskin’s Dead Chick 17, must have been a reaction to the critic’s harshness concerning The Scapegoat and some of Hunt’s other works 18. It seems that the differences in the reasons for depicting animals between these two artists made a huge difference in how they were depicted. Da Vinci investigated the beauty of nature and the design of animals, while Hunt seems to have seen them only as spiritual symbols. So DaVinci’s paintings and drawings of animals are beautiful, even though sometimes fierce when wild, and if somewhat symbolic changes do show in portraits with people, while those painted by Hunt seem dark, unattractive and pitiful or even evil. References Dictionary of art historians. http://www.dictionaryofarthistorians.org/ (accessed 4/28/2014, 2014). John ruskin's dead chick by william holman hunt_classical painting oil painting shijieminghua. http://367art.net/gallery/H/Hunt__William_Holman/John_Ruskin__39_s_Dead_Chick_by_William_Holman_Hunt_30919/30919.html (accessed 4/28/2014, 2014). Beck, James. 1993. The dream of Leonardo Da Vinci. Artibus Et Historiae Vol. 14, no. , No. 27: 185-198. Boine, Albert. 2002. Hunt's the scapegoat. The Art Bulletin 84, no. 1: April 16, 2014-94-114. http://www.english.uwosh.edu/roth/huntarticle.htm (accessed 4/16/2014). Dalya Alberge, Arts Correspondent. Spotlight falls on master's true passion. Times, the (United Kingdom).   Read More