Elizabeth McCormack Professor Berg Seeley WRD 103-206 28 February 2013 Uncovering the Ccircus: Henri de Toulouse-Lautrecs Equestrienne

Upon my arrival at the Art Institute of Chicagos gallery 242, I seated myself crisscross applesauce style in front of Henri de Toulouse-Lautrecs first important painting, Equestrienne. Lautrecs representation of a circus mnage captures all the fundamental characters: sneering ringmaster, bashful, peculiar clowns, dashing horse, graceful rider and an inquisitive audience. This range of action causes the viewers eye to jump epileptically round the canvas. John Bergers essay, Ways of Seeing, challenges that possessing pre-conceived knowledge on a painting like Equestrienne (for example: that this piece was crucial in Lautrecs development as an artist) transforms our raw perception of beautiful art into a mystified, confused observation (Berger 157). However, after looking at the postcard and digital reproductions, original painting and research, I found myself with an enlightened and thorough understanding of Henri de Toulouse-Lautrecs approach to art and the central role that movement plays in the fanciful Equestrienne (which can be seen below).

Comment [SB1]: Liz, what about the headings: Last name and page number on upper right hand corner of each page?

The viewers eye is first drawn to the left side of the painting where the dominant protagonist, the ringmaster, stands. The viewer feels closest to the circus leader because of his positioning in the foreground. His head appears both pointed and flattened in the context of the rounded stadium style circus tent, featuring red and white bleachers. The painting of this character gives off a strong sense of movement, his tuxedo coat tails move as if he is striding forward and the painting appears to capture the mans left fist as soon as it clenched. There are also many colors in his tuxedo that I could not see at all in the postcard reproduction- a purple shade of burgundy and a greenish mustard color hide in the fabrics folds that emerged only in the original. The brush strokes used for darker colors are heavier and thicker, making them stand out. Lautrec also adds small dabs of red to the ringmasters lips and by his collar. In person, I also noticed that his coat sleeves appear almost translucent and thin, like I can see through the layers of paint and colors that clothe him. A whip extends from his right hand, hitting either the ground or the horses hooves and ankles. As stated on the Art Institutes website, The curve of the whip visually links the two protagonists;, this visual trick moves the viewers eye from the ringmaster to the horse and female rider (Analysis 124). The horse itself is the essence of movement: its grey head is bent forward and down and the hooves come together so the viewer feels the released energy kicking into a gallop. Following the whips crack, the horse springs into action. The horses downcast head makes me think he would prefer to be anywhere but there. Again, so many more colors are visible in Lautrecs original painting than the postcard reproduction. The horses rump appears only white and grey in the reproduction but at the museum, the spots look dark navy and the shadowing, pink and mustardy colored. The blanket covering the horses back is green and yellow. To me the most beautiful part of this painting is the horses face:; his eyes are half

closed;, hair covers his forelock, emanating vulnerability and a defeated attitude. The horses mane looks fluttering, appearing in the lower half of the picture frame with the moving coat tails. The actual second protagonist in this painting is not an animal, but the rider, the equestrienne. She leans forward on the horses neck but her body is turned left, facing the ringmaster. The dominant visible portion of her body is the lower half, both legs extended over the left side of the horse, the riders feet are dressed in what look like pink ballet slippers and are the most delicate, gentle part of the painting. They seem almost lifeless, simply hanging. The tutu is being blown by the horses stride, again signifying that Lautrec was able to successfully capture the circus movement. The equestriennes face is one of the most puzzling parts of the painting. Rouge adorns both her lips and cheeks, creating a clownish vision. Yet her eyes, raised chin and expression shine through the make-up;, she seems to be challenging the ringmaster. Her expression is extremely difficult to read; in my raw analysis of the postcard reproduction I described it as feeling both distaste and admiration for the ringmaster. Its clear she is about to attempt a circus feat. While I observed the clown standing on the stool, I did not realize from any of the reproductions or the painting that she is about to jump through the hoop. Sometimes the artists intentions cant even be seen in the original, it takes a careful eye to put the stunt together and for me, some research to see it. Both clowns in the drawing, the red-headed one on the left and the one on the stool, are painted to look very bizarre. The clown on the left stumbles drunkenly and his hair sticks straight up, his left arm is also not visible. The other clown has a white puffy bottom half that looks almost like a chicken suit! His upper half is not present at all, where I would expect his arm to be hanging down, there appears to be a hook. The audience is all also partially obscured;,
Comment [SB2]: ?

heads are cut off by the frame or only one half of the body is visible. The gazes of everyone in the painting besides the equestrienne look judgmental, blank and doubtful of her skills. The only actual shadow cast in this painting is by the horse;, the original shadow has a very vivid outline. Both the postcard and online reproductions show Equestrienne to more or less have the same amount of detail. While light fluctuates depending on the online image, all reproductions Ive seen clearly lack the details and perfection inside of the original painting. From only looking at the reproduction and original painting, I felt I approached Equestrienne with the nave, raw eyes that Berger would have approved of. Knowing absolutely nothing about the artist or the paintings context allowed me to peek into Lautrecs true intentions. The arrogant, domineering ringmaster and critical audience tear at the female equestrienne. She is being subjected to something far from fair., Sshe and the horse both want out of this game, the horrible circus world that has become their way of survival, but they are trapped. Doing some research shed a lot more light on this, describing the painting as a spectacle of implicit sadistic cruelty observed by an audience whose sparsity and impassivity suggest dream imagery (Introduction 114). The painting makes you feel both detached from reality but also stuck in the precise moment of action. Lautrecs contrast between male and female cant be ignored. The ringmasters brutish gaze and whip-cracking hands itch for power;, the equestriennes made up face and forced smile reflect something she is supposed to be and do, even though it does not fit her. Lautrec is experimenting with the stereotyped figures he encountered daily, the lives lived and gazes held that he painted. Because gallery 242 features only works by Lautrec, I could see that he has a distinct yet also experimental style. As I read online about Lautrecs life, he had a fascinating obsession with brothels, circuses and bars that fit into the dark Paris underworld. The research I did

furthered my understanding of the painting (Artist Biography). Information about this painting elucidates my knowledge rather than mystifies. Berger wrote, "We never look at just one thing; we are always looking at the relation between things and ourselves. Our vision is continually active, continually moving, continually holding things in a circle around itself constituting what is present to us as we are (Berger 156). I dont wholly agree with this statement, while always keeping in mind our active surroundings and knowledge, I think there is a moment where we can forget all that and we can lose ourselves in the painting. As humans we have the capacity to truly focus on art, to be sucked into it so that everything around us disappears. There is so much going on in Equestrienne that I thought I was only taking wild guesses behind the artists motives. I was finally able pinpoint the main attraction: the very tangible, seething gaze between ringmaster and rider. Knowing the context of Lautrecs reality and preferred subject material helped me see beyond the two-dimensional images. Berger says, Original paintings are silent and still in a way that information never is (Berger 173). Going into the Art Institute with only my pieces title and artists name, I could take in Equestriennes silence and allow the painting to swallow me whole. Even though the information I found from research comes from an educated, biased mind, I still remember what I first witnessed in ?the painting. Influence from research can remain separate in my categorical mind yet also add to my understanding if I choose to integrate it with my interpretation of the painting. Berger wrote in Ways of Seeing that most professionally trained art historians believe in the painters skill as a seducer- which convinces us that we can know the people portrayed (Berger 160). Yet no degree compares to the raw eye of a mind that has experienced the world. I stand with Berger that I will never be convinced that I know the figures portrayed, mystery is inevitable in the past and present and every facet of art. Mystery is inescapable, it pervades our daily lives and
experiences with art, mystery fosters all that is beautiful.
Comment [SB3]: but above you just discussed how viewing Equestrienne amongst other Lautrec paintings enhanced and informed your perception of the piece, no?

Works Cited Analysis: Lautrec's Unique Composition and Artistic Expression. Museum Studies. The Art Institute of Chicago, 1994. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. Artist Biography: Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. Micro Gallery National Gallery of Art. Online Content. National Gallery of Art. Washington, D.C., 2004. Web. 16 Feb. 2013. Introduction: Lautrec's Equestrienne (At the Circus Fernando). Impressionism and PostImpressionism in the Art Institute of Chicago. Art Institute of Chicago, 2000. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.

Liz, the essay is intelligently and beautifully written. You clearly understand Berger s essay and with due diligence and sensitivity have undertaken the assignment with curiosity and considerable acumen. Please note my few comments, corrections, and suggestions. You do have a bit of a run-on addiction. A