A Study of Picasso's Les Demoiselles D'Avignon

Overall, art is a difficult subject to write about. Art is an extension of human emotion, and emotions do not lend themselves to prose easily. This is because they are largely an abstraction. It is because of the shortcomings of language that humans feel the need to create art. Occasionally, however art becomes trapped by a specific definition or style, which degrades the medium to the point that it loses its artistic value and becomes mediocre. When this happens, certain artist will rebel against the status quo and try something that is very much outside the norms of what is currently popular. This happens in nearly every artistic field imaginable, from visual art to music the dramatic arts. It not an isolated incident; it happens consistently throughout history, time and time again. It is difficult for this generation to grasp this concept, not only because we have been raised in an environment where anything goes and any shock value has become big business, but also because thus far the only innovation in art in the past twenty years has been the minor explosion of grunge rock in the early nineties. It is reinvention that drives the art world. Some of the greatest artists imaginable were all considered controversial at one time. Mozart was writing German opera; Monet's impressionism revolutionized art; the Beatles brought intelligence to rock and roll; all of these artists brought freshness to their specific medium and changed their face forever.

Cubism, in layman's terms, is painting an object in such a way that multiple points of view are shown simultaneously. It can be assumed that one of the reasons behind this is approach is an attempt to help the audience see different perspectives. Cubism was very much a reaction to the mainstream art of this time period; according to A History or Western Art "cubism was essentially a revolution in the artist's approach to space" (466). It was largely misunderstood and often dismissed. Pablo Picasso, leader in the cubist movement had this to say to the cubist detractors:

Cubism is no different from any other school of painting. The same principles and the same elements are common to all. The fact that for a long time cubism has not been understood and that even today there are people who cannot see anything in it, means nothing. I do not read English, and an English book is a blank to me. This does not mean that the English language does not exist, and why should I blame anyone but myself if I cannot understand what I know nothing about? (Olga's Gallery)

This is an important message to anyone that has difficulty in finding meaning art. Given the vast amount of differing opinions and personalities humans possess, it is fatuous to believe that there is a standard all art should follow. This is the essence of cubism. It is deliberately harsh and jagged in order to shake the audience into thinking. If everything were merely a pretty picture art would lose the ability to change, which degrades the purpose of art. Art is not meant to be a mirror image or reflection of humanity. Mirrors deceive because the viewer sees what he wishes, rather than what is real. By stepping out side the norms of traditional society, cubism attempts to show all sides of the human condition.

An excellent example of this is one of Picasso's most famous paintings Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, which is a still life of five women, who are possibly prostitutes. Perhaps the most striking aspect of the painting is the disjointed appearance of the women in the in picture. The facial features are disproportionate with each other, while the body parts are angular and spastic. The faces of the women on the left and rights sides are alarmingly mask-like, while the seated woman shows us both her back and front simultaneously. Also interesting is the way the figures are not separated from the background; they are part of it, while concomitantly in the foreground as well. We see the subject lit from a variety of angles, as evidenced by the shadows on the faces of the figures on the right and left, as well as the random shadowing on the curtain and the fruit. It is quite evident that we are meant to see every facet of the room and every detail of the women. A popular theory is that the non-systemized characteristics of the faces indicate some sort of venereal disease among the women. While this is possible, it is more likely that the disfigurement is the result of look at the world through a kaleidoscope.

When looking at the poses the women hold in the painting, one can see obvious allusions to classical and historical works of art. A Western History of Art states that the figure on the left "nearly replicates the pose of ancient Egyptian kings" while the two figures in the center "are based on [the] traditional poses of Venus"(467). The two figures seated on the right are "obviously based on African prototypes"(467). This is important because Picasso was instigating a new style into the art world. He understood where his work came from, and with these poses, as well as the inclusion of the fruit in the foreground, Picasso gave a nod to his predecessors. It was his attempt to be revolutionary, without ignoring the importance of the giants upon whose shoulders he stood.

Art is not something that is easily understood, nor is it something that is easily dismissed. What is important is that it is seen, read or heard. This paper did not attempt to delve into the deeper meanings behind the painting. It is the opinion of this author that meaning is assigned based on a personal reaction to a work, and while Picasso certainly had a specific purpose behind this work, any attempt to discover this meaning is fruitless speculation. To quote Picasso's opinion of the understanding of art:

"Everyone wants to understand art. Why don't we try to understand the song of a bird? Why do we love the night, the flowers, everything around us, without trying to understand them? But in the case of a painting, people think they have to understand. If only they would realize above all that an artist works of necessity, that he himself is only an insignificant part of the world, and that no more importance should be attached to him than to plenty of other things which please us in the world, though we can't explain them. People who try to explain pictures are usually barking up the wrong tree"(Olga's Gallery).

Art is to be enjoyed not debated, and any attempt to discern the author's intention is probably misguided. It's easier to enjoy the music rather that try and figure out where it is coming from.

http://www.abcgallery.com/P/picasso/picassobio.html