The films that we started off watching in class were obvious in their construction of gender and the place that each gender had in the artistic society. "Belly of an Architect", "Artemisia" and "Claudel" all play heavily on gender and how it is linked with art.
In "Belly of an Architect" Kracklite is the dominant artist in the film, and he focused his work on Boullee, an artist of the past. His strong passion for anything Boullee shows a strong link to art culture, and other famous artists of the world. Obviously this strong connection to Boullee is relying on culture, because Kracklite wouldn't be able to have an exhibition if it wasn't for Boullee. "Artemisia and Camille Claudel" are very different from "Belly of an Architect." In both of these films, the leading/dominant artist in the movie was the female. In both films, gender is linked to art the same way. Artemisia and Camille both have to rely on an artistically dominant male figure to help establish themselves as artists. Artemisia gets lessons from Tassi, and Camille is taken under Rodin's wing as a young sculptor. This plays on the idea that female artists can't become successful without that male figure that is present in their life. Felleman talks about how "art is shown as the progeny of sexual passion in these films." This quote draws on the fact that the works that the female artists produce aren't because they are great artists. The quote suggests that the sexual passion between the female "student" and the male "master" helps drive the painting/sculpting of the works of art.
I liked what Ortner was discussing. Ortner isn't saying that women are directly related to nature and men are directly related to culture. She is saying that historically women are seen as more "rooted in nature." In "Artemisia" we see that she is painting outside a lot (she sets up a "studio" outside for herself). In a scene with Tassi, Artemisia is seen looking through a perspectival grid out to a seascape. Windows looking out into nature are also a big part of the movie. In "Camille Claudel" the female relation to nature is pretty obvious in the opening credits. We learn that Claudel has been outside in the rain digging up mud/dirt so she can make clay to sculpt. Even though Rodin is a sculptor, we never hear/see him digging into the earth to get clay for his works. Instead we see Rodin portrayed in a high culture light: attending events and being transported around in a horse carriage.
I also think that Felleman makes a lot of great points in her essay. I completely agree that looking/touching and eroticism are identified with female art making. In "Artemisia" we see Artemisia watching Tassi's orgy through the window. She also asks to paint Tassi and he models nude, providing inspiration for her artwork. When Artemisia asks to paint her friend naked, we see her excitement to touch her male model's body that inspired her work. Finally, when looking through the perspectival grid, Tassi erotically describes the landscape to Artemisia, which we can assume paints a picture in her mind. "Camille Claudel" is no different. When Claduel visits Rodin to see how to "sculpt people correctly" Claudel gets on the modeling table that Rodin has and poses, prompting Rodin to approach her and kiss her, beginning a relationship. Claudel also works with clay, which is obviously a lot of touching and emphasis on hands, which can be considered an erotic part of the body.
In "Artemisia" and "Claduel" the female student is portrayed as inferior to her male "teacher" and learns how to become an artist through erotic lessons and relationships with their superior. The looking and touching the females engage in also helps them to develop as artists. We rarely see the men in these two movies looking or touching as much as the women.
Great observations re: Boullée reinforcing Kracklite's connection to culture (architectural history) and about how the men look and touch much less than the women.
ReplyDelete...that is, when they're not touching the women!
ReplyDelete