Poetry and Painting: Connections
Before we get into everything, I would like to
say that surrealism is, in my humble opinion, the greatest art movement of modern
times (post-1900), and Rene Magritte is one of my favorite artists of all time.
I think his surrealist works are some of the greatest pieces of art to come
from the movement, if not the 20th century. So after reading this,
everyone should go check him out.
I also think it’s best to spend a few minutes
reading the poem and viewing the painting before reading this post because I reference
them heavily. (Both are below for your convenience as well.)
Now, the analysis.
Rene Margritte’s The beautiful relations (1967) is a painting I’ve been fond of for
some time. I think I discovered it sometime in freshman year. Then, I thought
it was sad and lonely. Now, I think it's still lonely but more melancholy. Perhaps it's the single air-balloon or the single eye;
these things which usually come in pairs coming alone. Or rather, I guess they’re
coming together—but they don’t fit. Eyes are not balloons and a balloon, though
it can give a birds-eye view, can
never be one’s only perspective on the world. Thus, that they’re being portrayed as
one, the two eyes of the face, just seems off—like it should work but it doesn’t.
Similarly, the speaker of Cristin O’Keefe
Aptowicz’s “Not Doing Something Wrong Isn’t the Same as Doing Something Right” tells
of a night which should have worked but didn’t. They recount what can be assumed
to be a one-night stand which was supposed to “save” them in some way. It didn’t
if the way they’re constantly defending their actions says anything. I think that the trouble
was between the speaker’s lack of a body, or conscious acknowledgement of one,
and their partner’s solid understanding of their own. This difference created
an image which mimics the one in The
beautiful relations: two unlike things trying to be one.
In the poem it’s a body-less female and a
full-bodied male trying to save the speaker from numbness. While in the
painting it’s an eye and balloon trying to be eyes. In theory, both situations
should work but in practice you just can’t put them together.
The other way I read both the poem and painting
as one is in the image conveyed. This is perhaps their biggest link and I’d be remiss
to not mention it. Both portray a body-less woman. You could probably read more
into this idea. Perhaps looking at the air-balloon being an image of the
speaker’s desire to take flight from their current state. I can also see a
valid argument about the red lipstick of the painting representing the desire
in Aptowicz’s poem. Regardless, I do believe that the speaker of the poem is
portrayed by the face of the painting.
Beyond these links I think that The beautiful relations and “Not Doing
Something Wrong Isn’t the Same as Doing Something Right” and their connections
are a great example of how art of two completely different mediums, paint and
poetry, can come together to create something even greater for the viewer. I think
that might be the true beauty of art.
Rene Margritte, The Beautiful relations (1967)
Not Doing Something Wrong Isn't the Same as Doing Something Right
Cristin O'Keefe Aptowicz
In my defense, my forgotten breasts. In my defense, the hair
no one brushed from my face. In my defense, my hips.
Months earlier, I remember thinking that sex was a ship retreating
on the horizon. I could do nothing but shove my feet in the sand.
I missed all the things loneliness taught me: eyes that follow you
crossing a room, hands that find their home on you. To be noticed, even.
In my defense, his hands. In my defense, his arms. In my defense,
how when we just sat listening to each other breathe, he said, This is enough.
My body was a house I had closed for the winter. It shouldn’t have been
that difficult, empty as it was. Still, I stared hard as I snapped off the lights.
My body was a specter that haunted me, appearing when I stripped
in the bathroom, when I crawled into empty beds, when it rained.
My body was abandoned construction, restoration scaffolding
that became permanent. My body’s unfinished became its finished.
So in my defense, when he touched me, the lights of my body came on.
In my defense, the windows were thrown open. In my defense, spring.
- Tina
It was very interesting to see how you analyzed the painting and poem. When I look at the painting, I see a confusing image that looks like a hot-air balloon scene went wrong and was salvaged by the artist. After reading your interpretation though, I agree that the hot-air balloon and eye combination has a similar effect to the partners in the poem (although I probably wouldn't have made the observation if you hadn't pointed it out). Your final point about poetry and art was a great way to end it. Good job!
ReplyDeleteThe poem you chose to describe this painting really fits well. The last few stanzas repeat "my body...//my body..." - is a specter, a construction etc. Which fits well with the visualization proffered here by Rene: a floating face, like a specter, and a balloon like a construction. Another line is "...I stared hard..." which reflects the hard stare of the singular eye and the unfeeling expressions of the lips. Well described and discovered, I enjoy your description!
ReplyDeleteI loved your analysis of the meaning behind he painting before tying it to the poem! I think your insight was interesting and insightful. I also agree that these two pieces compliment each other very well. They both hold a similar kind of emotion/ feeling- lonely, broken, melancholy.
ReplyDeleteThese are very interesting works to examine together. Reading this poem in light of the Magritte painting, I find myself thinking about whether there might be two figures in the painting (as there are in the poem), the viewed (the face) and the viewer (either us or some fictional figure the face is facing).
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your analysis before reading the poem because while reading the poem, I got a better understanding of what it meant and how it tied to the painting. I really like how you point out that the painting has mismatching eyes and how it goes with the poem's main message that something that should work doesn't quite work. And I agree with you that the speaker is portrayed by the face of the painting . Great analysis!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, thank you for sharing two pieces of art, neither of which I had known about! I agree that the poem and the painting really compliment each other. The body (or lack of one) is clearly a central theme in both, and the painting includes the other parts that can be further tied into the emotions of the poem. Nice analysis!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed looking at both the painting and the poem and being exposed to new art that way. When I did first see and read them, I did not see how they related, but after reading your argument, I definitely see the similarities. I loved your argument about how the things should fit together, but don't. That was a very clever observation.
ReplyDeleteEmma Hummel