Art Gallery Experience, Essay Example

In this essay I will compare and contrast Richard MacDonald’s sculptures: Joie de Femme and Sissone while also approaching the works of art through the scope of Clive Bell’s quote, “The battle is won. We all agree now that any form in which an artist can express himself is legitimate, and the more sensitive perceive that there are things worth expressing that could never have been expressed in traditional forms” (Clive Bell, in catalogue of the Second Post-Impressionist Exhibition, 1912).

Richard MacDonald has chosen to express himself through his sculptures. He uses mainly bronze as a medium. MacDonald focuses mainly on figurative sculpture: meaning he focuses on anatomy like the classical Greeks did. By focusing on anatomy as expression, MacDonald perhaps is suggesting a commentary on modernity. If this is the case (and I believe it is) then Bell’s quote has as much to do with art as it does with humanity.

The human figures that MacDonald chooses to sculpt are bodies caught in action as the show focuses on Cirque de Soleil performers. To choose this group of people in which to showcase his art says a lot about MacDonald. It suggests that he prefers human anatomy to be in a state of motion. Both Joie de Femme and Sissone depict women in different forms of play. In Joie de Femme MacDonald has two whimsical female creatures bent and playing a type of flute (something pan-like). This suggests that perhaps the figures are dancing. If the figures are dancing then Bell’s quote can be interpreted as being suggestive of the artist incorporating other pieces and forms of art in order to influence their own work. This is certainly the case for MacDonald, as he has chosen the Cirque performers as his subjects, and they all are dancers and performers. To use this group of people may further suggest that MacDonald is creating a type of story around his sculpture. This definitely takes on a type of “non” tradition form that Bell was referencing.

Dance, music, sculpture are all forms of art. In Joie de Femme the viewer sees two scantily clad dancers/performers bent over. The act of bending over suggests that the figures are caught mid-motion through a type of dance. This is certainly the case with Sissone where MacDonald has chosen to depict a dancer (as can be deciphered from her muscular body and form). In Sissone the viewer is allowed to see the figure (in bronze) gracefully gliding through air in a dance move. This too is caught in mid-motion. The difference between the motions of these two sculptures I believe the facial expression.

In SissoneMacDonald gives the viewer a graceful dancer with an almost pristine/expressionless face (not to say ugly) while in Joie de Femmethe subjects are so intent on the music they’re playing that they don’t seem to be stoic so much as completely involved in the music they’re playing that their lost to the outside world. IN Joie de Femme it is as if the figures aren’t aware that they have an audience and people gazing at them intently while in Sissone the viewer feels as the subject is aware of an audience and so her facial expression represents a need for poise and refinement.

That is the basic difference between these two sculptures: one is unaware of the moment while the other one is caught in the moment. Even MacDonald’s attention to body language in either sculpture refers back to this basic difference. In Sissone the figure’s entire body has intent coursing through it. Her hands point in different directions with a force behind them. Her legs stretch out revealing musculature of her well-formed legs (dancer’s legs) and her torso jolts forward and back giving herself fully to the moment to push forward. This is a sculpture that has intent written all over it. Even the way the fingers spread and pivot suggests a type of allowance for intensity. Such an intensity in fact that her lips purse. The only time I see anyone’s lip purse is when they are in extreme concentration. It’s like watching a basketball player shoot hoops. When they are completely concentrated on the game and trying not to allow for any distractions, they in turn let their faces contort in all kinds of strange and weird ways. The dancer in MacDonald’s piece is not different. She is not lost in the moment, she is completely aware of the moment. She has to be. As a dancer she has to know where every single one of her movements will land her. Her muscles have to be able to react in an instant to her partner or to the choreography. As such, she can’t allow for the unique or spontaneous otherwise it would damage the effect of the dance. A dance is intended to interpret human emotion through its art (as Bell states) but only in a confined way. The magic of the dance comes through the preparation. There can be no room for a misstep otherwise the intended effect of the whole routine is compromised. One misstep can lead to an entire company landing in the wrong cue marks and perhaps even be damaging not only to the audience but also to themselves (injuries for missteps for dancers can be quite serious). This dancer in MacDonald’s sculpture is very aware of all of that. She’s been practicing this very move for six months in preparation for her tour with the company. If she misses a step it not only could mean her job but also she risks the health of her entire company (a dancer missteps and legs can be broken, or ankles twisted). This awareness of the moment is what most marks this piece and what most differentiates it between Joie de Femme.

Joie de Femme in contrast to Sissone is about staying in the moment. The flutes for either figure are being played, the figures are bent in (perhaps) a type of dance, and their body language suggests nothing short of abandonment. This is certainly a different type of dance. The movement the figures are going through certainly matches the diagonal movement of Sissone. Diagonals in art suggest movement actually (in paintings such as Titian). In Sissone the diagonal was going in one direction (the torso thrust forward and the hands and leg bent back suggested a forward motion). In Joie de Femme the diagonal is all over the place. One figure has their elbows bent while holding the flute to her lips. He leg is not only bent but bent with the calf thrust to one side so that a diagonal is created with the knee and then with the angle the thrust leg gives to the foot. Her other leg is taunt and flexed to the rock but her torso leans forward away from the potential angle of that taunt leg. Even her head is bent cockeyed to her neck and chest, thrown to one side while the flute propels out of it. None of these angles however compare with the fingers. If there is an ounce of intent behind any of the muscle movements in the piece it is found with the fingers. They play above the notes, bent and ready for the next set of notes to play. They point in all directions. While the dancer’s fingers in Sissone are stiff and pointed with intention as well, this flute player’s fingers are ready to dive into the next set of notes with an urgency that has nothing to do with appeasing an audience the way the dancer’s fingers are intended to move precisely to a choreographed account of movements.

The second and lower flute player’s body is also bent in as many contortions as the first. Her feet are angled in different direction (one seems to lovingly touch the other flute player’s foot on the rock with a type of caress). Both of the flute player’s knees are bent and the torso bends forward almost allowing the upper half of her body to touch the lower half (perhaps suggesting how close the mind is to the body and there ought not to be a separation between the two – a suggestion echoing Bell’s example of the war being over). Her elbows are cocked in similar fashion as her counterpart. This is something that Sissone does not communicate: she is bent by limbs away from her body, not her limbs away from her limbs as the knees and elbows of Joie de Femme. Her fingers are also bent in the same fashion as her counterpart. Her face is not stoic like Sissone’s face is stoic, but rather imbibes something that looks like raised eyebrows at the tonality of her notes suggesting that she is fully engrossed in what she is doing and is not aware of any potential viewer.

If Bell is suggesting a battle being over and the spoils of war being that expression of self can be had through any number of forms, then MacDonald is doing Bell justice with both of his works. There is a link between the two sculptures: their garments. Sissone wears a gossamer (one can only guess) type garment that clings to her body like the Hellenistic statues from ancient Greece. The garment outlines the dancer’s body perfectly almost as if it isn’t there. So perfectly in fact that I had to take second and third looks just to make sure that it was indeed an article of clothing I was seeing and not a trick of the light. The garment clings and allows the viewer to see the entire dancer’s body as if she were wearing nothing at all. It is in effect a wisp of a thing. So wispy in fact that the only trace of its lines occur around the breasts. It disappears somewhere right below the upper thigh (as can be seen with the genitals not have any detail when the entire rest of the dancer’s body is burdened with detail). The garment in effect becomes part of the dancer, melding into her as she flies into her motion and allows a freedom for this motion.

Both sculptures allow for this freedom of motion in their garments. It is one of the things that both pieces have in common. In Joie de Femme the garments are also reminiscent of the Hellenistic period as the garments suggest movement. Prior to this time period in art sculptures were completely stoic, although the bodies were of impeccable detail, there was no movement. MacDonald’s pieces break from this canon and the spoils of the war with the artistic canon allow an artist freedom in creating their art according to their own standards and desires for expression.

It is interesting to note the difference in placement of the garments for each sculpture. Joie de Femme has MacDonald using garments to cover the lower half of the performers while in Sissone he uses the garment to cover the upper half of the dancer. Although the dancer’s body barely registers having any garment on it, the full thickness and angry waving of the Joie de Femme’s garments cannot go unnoticed, so much a part of the sculpture they are. Although they cover the lower half of the flute players’ bodies, they do so sparingly as they whip past their forms and play around in drastic ways past their bodies. This may be MacDonald consciously associated the garments with what the respected performers are trying to accomplish. That is, in Joie de Femme the garments wave around the players with complete abandon, and don’t adhere to form, thereby suggesting that they are free from the very bodies they were suppose to cover (in effect, not achieving their intended purpose of keeping a person clothed). While in Sissone the garment is nearly imperceptible suggesting that the only thing that matters to the dancer (and thereby to the audience) is form. Both sculptures use fabric to enhance their intended message: form.

While I’ve talked about body angles and fabric I have yet to mention what the figures are actually doing: performing. The dichotomy of performance between each piece suggests some commentary from MacDonald about these particular forms of art. Sissone is dancing; it’s rigid, but beautiful in its stoicism. MacDonald may be suggesting that dancing is a practiced art that inspires from performers adherence to choreographed steps that create a beauty in how well the dancer performs the steps. In Joie de Femme the performers are playing flutes (perhaps pan flutes) and their bodies suggest that this is fun for them, they’re lost to it, enjoying it because it’s kind of like a jam session. There are rules to follow, just the emotion of the piece. The forms of the performers adhere to each individual message from MacDonald.

I might also mention something about MacDonald’s use of the pan flute in Joie de Femme. Pan was a fertility deity. He was half man, and half goat and a sex god. He roamed the countryside having sex and often impregnating women and all the while he played a flute while he did it. This flute is associated with Pan to such a degree that it is formally known as the pan flute. The performers in Joie de Femme are using this flute in order to play their music. This connotes a very different idea for the sculpture if the viewer had no idea what a pan flute signified. It signifies sex and fertility. Keeping these themes in mind while viewing the art the piece takes on added meaning. The women are dancing around half naked, but the parts of them that are covered by a garment, the garment seems to want to detach itself from their waists, leaving their entire personages exposed. This playfulness only seems to add to the idea of frolicking and sex suggested by the performers. In fact, the angles of the performers’ bodies further expound on this theme as all of the diagonals suggest movement, more movement in fact than can be exemplified by bronze. It is almost as if the performers were calling forth Pan with their flutes, inviting him to join them in their revelry.

Although MacDonald made both sculptures, they stand for very different things but use the same proponents: garments, performance art, and angles. Using all of these devices in his sculptures, MacDonald was able to create a way in which performers symbolized different aspects of their art. Sissone represents strict adherence to rules and regulations, as dancers are required to keep their cues in order for the true beauty and appreciation of a performance piece to be anticipated. Joie de Femme suggests a leave taking of rules (as suggested by the garments active role in the piece) as can be deciphered with the performers using pan flutes and their extreme body angles and diagonals. Each piece gives the viewer something new to think about and something new to appreciate about art and sculpture. Bell said that we are living in a time of art where expression can now be free from previous rules/laws/canons. MacDonald has certainly done that with his pieces (his entire show in fact). He has presented the audience with the basic human form, and put that form into different artistic expressions with very different connotations for each expression. This is a commentary on the human range of emotions when looking at art, and MacDonald does it succinctly.