Similarities Between Pastoral Symphony And Le Dejeuner Sur L Herbe

Throughout Art History the human form has fascinated not only artists, but their audiences as well. The nude figure has been a widely accepted source of inspiration, from pre-Historic art to the post-Modern era, but the female nude in particular has not come without controversy. In Titian’s Pastoral Symphony, the two nude figures depicted were received entirely different than Manet’s nude figure in Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe. In the 16th century, the Venetians developed a style of soft-colored lighting on figures and landscapes that lead to a tempered depiction of the nude that was easier to appreciate, where as in 19th century European art the mode was focused on realism and depicted nudity in a less idealized manner that was harsher and more abrupt. Both Pastoral Symphony and Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe portray nude figures, but the distinctions in each allowed very different receptions in the time period in which the pieces were created. The Pastoral Symphony is elusive in its meaning and no art historian is entirely sure what it is meant to convey, but some believe it to be an allegorical painting—a popular mode of representation in 16th century
Venetian art. The painting depicts four figures in a pastoral setting. The two women figures are nude, where as the man on the right wears what appear to be clothes typically worn by nobles of the time and the man on the left wears brown garb that was more associated with the peasantry. The men are turned toward each other and seem uninterested in the other figures in the scene. The woman on the left however pours water from a glass pitcher into a well, and the woman on the right sits in front of the men and has just paused from playing the flute. The scene may depict an allegory for poetry with the women being muses, the instruments being different kinds of poetry, and the shepherd in the distance being the uneducated class that cannot appreciate the art in question. Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe, unlike Titian’s piece, bears no apparent mythological or allegorical undertones. It depicts two men clothes in fashionable Parisian attire for the 1860s, one nude women who sits with them, and another women who stands in the background of the landscape in a small pond. The surrounding landscape is loosely painted against the stark representation of the figures in the scene and historians have hypothesized that though the painting was largely criticized at the Salon de Refusés, Manet actually intended for this piece to reassess the entire nature of painting. Le Déjeuner is his way of critiquing the history of painting in its entirety. The nude figures themselves are represented differently in both pieces. In Pastoral Symphony, Titian places the two nude women on either side of the men sitting in the middle of the composition. Neither woman makes eye contact with the viewer, which gives the audience an invitation to view and admire without getting caught. Furthermore, the women are lightly cloaked in a white cloth and the curviness of their body is eased by a hazy shadow that settles over their form. The figures are idealized for Venetian art at the time and would have been what viewers of the nude expected. They do not demand confrontation through body language or eye contact and even are thought to be imaginary muses that are not present in the two men’s reality. In contrast, Manet’s nude in Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe, is stark against the loose landscape. She sits between the two men and demands the viewer’s attention through direct eye contact. The realistic representation of her body would have made audiences of the time, especially at The Salon, uncomfortable. Her clothes are discarded in the left of the foreground of the painting, which brings up the question of narrative. Why did she take her clothes off? Why is she nude in the presence of these men? Titian’s figures were understood to be idealized representations of supernatural figures, but Manet’s woman appeared as more of a loose prostitute figure that would have offended socialites of 19th century Paris. Other than the nude figures themselves, the landscapes they’re depicted in weigh into how each figure is received by the viewer. The idyllic setting provided by Titian in Pastoral Symphony, alludes to a countryside paradise where he uses dream-like color to cast a fantastical air over the entire piece. This air cast a mood that allows the viewer to avoid distress over the precise meaning of the piece—there is no urgency to find the underlying meaning because the reverie that accompanies the depiction is enough. The softness of the landscape translates to the women’s bodies, further softening their representation through shadow, which consequently effects the way viewers accept them. It is easier to view these figures than Manet’s because they’re portrayed as a fluid part of the landscape rather than a blunt figure in contrast of it. The nude figure in Déjeuner sur l’herbe, stands out among the landscape in complete contrast. Critics who viewed this piece in The Salon complained that the landscape seemed unfinished. With its looseness and it’s broad brush strokes it seems to allude to the impressionism that was to follow the creation of this piece. The issue with Manet’s nude figure in this landscape lies in its duality. The realistic figure composed against the lax landscape makes the possibility of ignoring the nude figure impossible. That paired with the confrontational gaze of the woman leaves the viewer with no choice but to meet her stare and recognize the risqué components of Parisian society of the time. Society plays a huge role in how a specific piece of art is received.
In the case of Titian’s piece, Venetians of the time would have expected and enjoyed idealized nude figures depicted in mythological and allegorical settings. They would have appreciated Titian’s nostalgic pastoral portrayal, and even though to a modern viewer the figures may look less than ideal, the women’s body would have been what was expected of idealized figure of the time. Dissimilarly, Parisian’s of the 19th century would have still expected a more idealized form than the one Manet portrayed in his piece. Along with the clothes dropped at the edge of the scene, audiences of the time would have been quick to assume that the naked woman in the painting was a prostitute and her stark representation would have surprised Salon goers of the
period. Both pieces by Titian and Manet represent the importance of the human form throughout Art History. It is the difference in depiction that illustrates how crucial stylistic decisions are when it comes to the nude figure. Titian painted what the audiences of the time expected, where as Manet painted a figure that he anticipated would cause public backlash for a greater critique on the nature of painting. Each piece however earns a prominent place in Art History for their creators stand among the most prominent artists of their time.