Dorothea Tanning – Surrealist or
Realist?
By Karen
S. Lynch
Even at 97,
Galesburg native Dorothea Tanning and her surrealist artwork are still sparking
controversy. Tanning lived in Galesburg for 20 years before moving to Chicago
in 1930 to study painting at the Art Institute of Chicago.
A recent
article in The Zephyr, written by
diana Mackin, contends some paintings by Tanning suggest the artist may have
been a victim of sexual abuse. The artistic conclusions by Mackin are debatable
but there is a valid argument to explore TanningÕs work.
According to WebMuseum of Paris, ÒAmerican
painter Dorothea Tanning, b. Galesburg, Ill., Aug. 25, 1910, learned to paint,
she claimed, by visiting art museums. She attended Knox College in Galesburg,
studied art in Chicago, and in 1935 moved to New York City, where she supported
herself with advertising art and painted in her spare time. A commercial artist
in New York, she began painting as a professional after meeting a group of
French surrealists that included Max Ernst, whom she married in 1946. Tanning's
paintings have evolved from her early surrealist evocations of perverse
children's games and fantasies to experiments with different painting and,
later, sculptural approaches – although her involvement with symbolic and
dream material has remained constant.Ó (Contribution by Michael Shephard.)
While it is
impossible to know how Tanning drew her inspiration, she did paint many
provocative images of children in various stages of dress, often with oddly
proportioned people and dark mythical creatures. Tanning loved reading Gothic
novels, which could be the source of some of her imaginative inklings.
The quality
of TanningÕs art is un-debatably stunning – a testament to her worldwide
fame in the art world. The artistic details are intricate and symbolically
deliberate, although sometimes hidden in layers that beckon exploration. Colors
vary from near monotones, to muted primary colors. There is a quality of soft
light, even in the darkest subjects of TanningÕs surrealistic paintings.
I believe
art intends to elicit some emotions in the viewer or an outlet for the artist.
Most representational art is simply visual –
depicting scenery, people, animals, or a still life, as seen through the eye of
the artist. What the viewer sees may elicit a sense of pleasure or beauty but
rarely provokes deep or dark emotions.
Surrealistic images often depict a wider range of emotions, thoughts,
visions, or experiences – either real or imagined. Surrealist artists
often depict dark or mythical creatures, subject to intrigue into the thoughts
and mind of the artist. Symbolic images between people, animals, and nature
often intertwine into dream-like states in the artwork of Tanning.
TanningÕs
best-known work, ÒEin Klein NachtmusikÓ (A Little Night Music) painted in 1946,
is a very dark piece. The painting seems to ironically mock MozartÕs
light-hearted chamber works of the same name. The painting is one subject
surrounding the current controversy that diana Mackin contends represents the
ÒdefloweringÓ of a child, with its large sunflower lying on the red hallway
carpet.
The main
subject is a young girl with an unraveling rag skirt – hair blowing in
the wind, as if being drawn towards the golden light of the slightly open fourth
hotel door. A life-sized ÒdollÓ with open shirt and tattered skirt leans
against one closed door. The painting could symbolize the transition from
childhood in the journey towards womanhood. Tanning also lived in Paris for 28
years and could be depicting childhood prostitution. The combination of the
images and the title of ÒA Little Night MusicÓ could suggest sexual
connotations.
I find the
symbolism in TanningÕs body of dark surrealistic artwork startling and
revealing. I have always believed artists in any genre have some personal truth that seeps into
their work, either deliberately or unknowingly.
One of
Tanning's particularly disturbing
paintings, ÒThe Guest Room,Ó shows a young, pubescent girl standing fully naked next to two open bedroom doors. A ghostly image of the girl stands blindfolded behind her on
the other side of the door.
The subject
in bed suggests a dreaming child clutching another life-sized ÒdollÓ with its
oddly severed arm. I find this painting full of symbolism. I interpret the young girl "blind" either a real event or simply fearful of
a nightmarish vision.
What
appears to be dark ruffled "sheets" above them also suggest something dark or sinister happening under the
sheets. Tanning could also be using the dark cloth as symbolic storm clouds or the
"cover" of darkness – suggesting nightmares, rather based on real events or simply things the mind fears. There is also an "evil-looking" figure in the
background, also with a hidden face. The symbolism suggests a demonic figure or dark secret.
I am very
curious why she depicts the heavy male figure with spurs on his boots,
proportionally much smaller than the vulnerability of the nude child. Does Tanning
want him to have a smaller presence and power, or is she merely demeaning his
significance? Once again, she has his head covered with a
cloth.
Many of TanningÕs unseen or
non-human faces are either covered or transformed into the heads of fish or
dogs. A painting she named ÒDorotheaÓ has her own face depicted as a dog image
she uses repeatedly (perhaps a favorite pet) while she lounges on a chaise
holding another dog.
The painting named ÒFamily PortraitÓ shows a young woman seated at
a table without any food or "substance" on her empty plate. Her eyes seem haunted, posed straight at the artist. Behind the woman is a ghostly shadow of a disproportionately large man in a brown
suit and tie. Once again, his eyes are not visible behind his glasses. Below
the table is what appears to be a heavy "mother"
figure, shown proportionally very
small with an average-sized dog begging for food.
The argument Tanning may have
experienced some type of sexual abuse holds some validity. It is also as likely
she was merely attempting to depict the existence of sexuality in all its
forms. Overall, the paintings I studied seem to depict some kind of torment
– terror and darkness, hunger, feelings of isolation or vulnerability. The nudes, shown more
sexual than human art forms, as Tanning often shows her female subjects in
tattered cloth, skirts hiked up or as totally nude and vulnerable.
Tanning painted a self-portrait
she named ÒBirthdayÓ at age 32 in 1942, the year she met her future painter
husband, Max Ernst. They married four years later. Seeing the artwork lacked a
title, he gave the painting its name. Dorothea, his fourth wife, lived and
worked for 28 years in Paris after the war. Ernst introduced Tanning to the
surrealist art world, for which she became a synonymous master.
Her self-portrait shows her bare
breast, partially clothed in an open Victorian blouse and skirt of tangled
roots standing on a tilted wood floor. The artist is barefoot with a mythical
winged-lemur at her feet. A recurrent theme in many of Tanning paintings are
doors, of which this painting has an endless circle, both open and closed.
There is a sense of mixed metaphors
with an invitation to exploration of the mind of the artist. Many questions
arise in her self-portrait. Do the doors suggest there is both the seen and
unseen or simply represents where she lived – where her ÒrootsÓ were
literally at the time she painted her own image?
If there is one truth of
ÒrealismÓ in the body of TanningÕs work, it is in the embodiment of a true
surrealistic master with visual inquiry of interpretation. There are no right
or wrong answers. Only the artist knows her own truth. Tanning is the least
likely person to tell others what they must see.
4/24/08