Silent Reinterpretation, Research Paper Example

Suzanne Valadon’s “Adam and Eve”

Introduction

In 1909, French artist Suzanne Valadon unveiled her “Adam and Eve”, an oil done on canvas representing the time-honored moment in the Bible when the apple, cause of all sin, is taken.  The painting, however, offers a decidedly non-traditional interpretation of the event, as has been remarked upon for over a century.  Valadon’s Eve, simply, is not necessarily the instigator of the disastrous action, for Adam, right by her side, appears to be guiding her hand to take the fruit.  In this profoundly basic scene, Valadon challenges thousands of years of Christian dogma through nothing more than a purely visual concept on a stretch of canvas.  The work endures as an important piece of art, however, because there are shades of  further meaning to be uncovered within it.  By virtue of a nearly primitive style, and inherent ambiguity to be perceived through the basic form, Valadon allows for a more unusual interpretation of the Biblical story than that of simply shifting the blame.

Style, Form, and Meaning

As with any art, the actual composition cannot be be wholly extracted, or seen as removed, from what the painting expresses creatively.  The writer carefully selects words and rhythms of sentence structure to convey more than what the words actually mean; the artist, then, uses line, color, shape, texture, and light as similar tools to relate ideas and feelings.  Also as with writing, styles are genres unto themselves, and artists range from classical, academic realism to cubist and primitive approaches to better capture mood.  With Valadon’s “Adam and Eve”, all these elements work to provide a striking number of artistic possibilities, and ironically due to the simplicity of them in the painting.

The most startling quality apparent in the painting is an odd kind of modernity.  In terms of composition, the presentation is elementary, and as basic as a photograph of a couple.  Eve and Adam occupy, and largely fill, the scope of the canvas, and in a symmetrical way.  The “paradise” in which they stand is equally straightforward; that is to say, Valadon is not concerned with displaying a lush conception of a magnificent garden.  There is green grass underfoot, there is the apple tree, there is blue sky behind them, and that is enough to accomplish her objectives, for this is no devout tribute or glorifying of a Christian episode.  All she requires are the basics, and that is all she takes the trouble to paint.  Then, these few components are rendered in a style both symbolic and highly literal.  In regard to the latter, Valadon’s Adam and Eve are hardly ideal specimens of the sexes, or a typically romanticized couple.  She has a pleasant, full face, a nondescript body, and pubic hair. He is more “human” seeming, clean-shaven, and with bony shoulders and knees.  The symbolic quality arises from the general lack of further detail in both, as well as from that ordinariness of them.  Even the lines of the figures, curved and otherwise, have a “straightforward”, non-lyrical aspect to them.  The colors, if appropriate, are nowhere especially striking, and the apples themselves, merely yellow and a muted red, are hardly mythic.  Texture is minimal as well, in that the painting only reveals the barest of dimensions and spatial relationships.  Most importantly, it seems that Valadon’s Adam and Eve are, and intentionally, painted to represent any man and woman at all.  Everything about Valadon’s composition is deliberately undramatic and somewhat plain.

This, then, goes to what the artist has to say, or suggest, in the painting.  As noted, it is commonly felt that her Adam is breaking from historical representations and playing an active role in what will lead to man’s expulsion from Eden:  “Valadon subverted the traditional assignment of blame and guilt in a new version of the story” (Fichner-Rathus  11).  There is an interesting and additional support to this view as well, for Adam, unlike Eve, has his genitalia hidden by leaves, and that indicates something of an awareness of the shame in their nakedness the couple will be experiencing upon eating the forbidden fruit.  This component, then, suggests an Adam who is actually and slyly fully aware of exactly what is about to occur, as he guides Eve’s hand.  More pertinently, in regard to reversing the traditional idea of the event, there is no serpent anywhere coaxing either one of them.

However, as with any work of art worth examining, it seems there may be far more at play here than so obvious a scenario.  It is interesting that the described interpretation of the painting is so widely held, because it ultimately rests on nothing more than Adam’s hand on Eve’s wrist.  The question arises: why is it not conjectured that he is actually seeking to prevent her from bringing the apple to her mouth, or perhaps even guiding her hand to set the fruit back on a bough of the tree?  This possibility certainly exists, because the face of Valadon’s Adam reveals absolutely nothing.  It is not merely impassive and lacking in expression; it seems almost as though he is absorbed in watching something else, and only absentmindedly touching Eve’s wrist.  For her part, Eve is also not helpful in defining the real agenda of the couple, for she appears to be only mildly intrigued by the apple.  Simply, Valadon resists any clear interpretation because she leaves her Adam and Eve open to any number of them.

This being the case, then, it may be argued that Valadon’s object is, in fact, no specific interpretation at all.  A great deal has been written, analyzing Valadon’s perceived feminist perspectives and breaks with classical traditions:  “Valadon’s path was based in a materiality and realism that addressed a particularly concrete experience of the world” (Mathews  179).  If these views are valid at all, then, it nonetheless cannot be determined that a specific statement was her goal, and this opens the door to what is a more interesting interpretation of her Adam and Eve.  More exactly, it could be argued that Valadon is not out to assign blame to Adam, but to reveal, through the passivity of the faces, a kind of unthinking conspiracy.  Her Adam and Eve, no matter how his hand moves, do not at all appear to be doing anything of consequence, as defying the will of God would certainly indicate.  That is the overwhelming impression the painting gives, in fact, prominent interpretations notwithstanding.  They are simply a couple thoughtlessly doing a simple thing, and taking together an apple from a tree.  Consequently, it may be said that Valadon has an even more unique perception of the “fall”.   Seen in this light, her Adam and Eve are guilty of nothing more than a blind carelessness.  That is a radical and valid interpretation in itself, and more so than a simple shifting of blame from one gender to the other.

Conclusion

Personally, I find the striking simplicity, and almost primitive style, of Suzanne Valadon’s “Adam and Eve” both highly appealing and a little disturbing, because it so powerfully enhances the message the painting conveys to me.  This is the most famous couple in the history of humanity, and the cause, in Christian ideologies, of all man’s suffering.  As Valadon presents them, they are nothing more than a man and a woman engaged in a random, small action, and completely oblivious to anything important attaching to the fact of the apple in Eve’s hand.  That, in my view, is the true interpretation, and it is one more chilling than any attributing blame.  It is as though Valadon is saying through her art that universal catastrophes and evil may arise, not from widely accepted ideas of defiance and willful recklessness, but from bland carelessness, as men and women simply do what appeals to them at the moment.

Works Cited

Fuchner-Rathus, L.  Understanding Art, 9th Ed.  Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2009.  Print.

Mathews, P. T.   Passionate Discontent: Creativity, Gender, and French Symbolist Art.  Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999.  Print.