Artsy: Although it enjoyed unprecedented popularity in Degas’s era, the ballet—and the figure of the ballerina—had suffered a demoralizing fate by the late 1800s. Performances had been reduced to tawdry interludes in operas, the spectacle serving as an enticing respite for concertgoers, who could ogle the dancers’ uncovered legs.
6 comments:
TIs Impossible to ever watch Phantom of the Opera in the same way again. Madame Giry who I always viewed as the one good person in Phantom, has a whole new emphasis placed on the "Madame" in Madame Giry. It also makes me dislike Raoul even more because he is very sleezy. The Lord Webber did a very good job though with historical representation of the corpes de ballet in the show though, because they only perform in the interval after the Phantom kills the stage hand, not as an integral part of the show. In all actuality it seems to make very much sense, even by todays standards ballet costumes are still in all ways revealing and skin tight, imagine what that would be like in an era where you never even saw a woman's ankles in the everyday world. As awful of a situation it was it was a way to climb out of poverty, it is not right, but it was a way. I did a project on impressionism last year and it always puzzled me as to why Degas never painted the ballerinas actually performing, now I know why. He was certainly one of the most "eccentric" impressionists. What I think is so crazy is that ballet today is considered a very physical, strong, beautiful art form that requires amazing amount of class and precision, little more than a hundred years ago it was a dirty cover for prostitution, and they say things never get better.
I’ve always liked looking at Degas’ Ballerinas, but I didn’t really know the history behind them and what the industry was like back then, which in many places isn’t very different than it is today.
Though I don’t like Degas as a person, this analysis has given me a greater appreciation for the thought and commitment put into the paintings, both by Degas and by his mistreated models - who never would have know that they were being immortalized.
What struck me most was that ballet was a way for young girls to support their families, not so much by dancing but by doing sexual favors. And in modern times, so many girls, including myself, are put into ballet by their mothers at a very young age. Growing up I ever understood why ballet? I still don’t entirely, but now knowing the history, it has a nefarious quality to it. Though I know those aren’t the intentions of modern mothers, and that they probably aren’t even aware of the history of the industry, it makes you wonder how ballet has remained a nearly universal hobby to sign our daughters up for.
I had no idea that Degas models were sexually exploited. This context especially important in the light of the #MeToo movement. Acknowledging these girls not just as beautiful artists, but as women who suffered is extremely important. This information should be printed on the plaques next to the pieces, just like the authors name and when it was painted. Admitting that art can be beautiful, yet represent or depict something horrible is something that we need to acknowledge. This ties into a larger conversation which is what do we do with the art of despicable people who did horrible things. I don’t know what the answer is, but I think we need to start by stating openly what they did, for both past and present people. As a culture, we need to come to a consensus. Also, we should acknowledge that this is a bigger conversation than art, it applies to the sciences and every field.
This article is eye opening in a way. As one of the contemporary viewers who enjoy the evocative hand and brilliant, textural applications of color, I am quite disappointed at the painter after reading the article. I knew that Degas always chose to include the darker side of the ballet world, and quite honestly thought that added to the aesthetic value of his paintings. But I did not know about the painter’s misogyny. I always marveled at Degas’ paintings, because I thought he beautifully captured the movement of ballet dancers, in no time, like Monet captured the swift changing of lights in the nature. But now I know that Degas demanded his models to be in that unnatural position “cracking their joints” for the sake of art. “I have perhaps too often considered woman as an animal”? Hmm. I just cannot let myself support this artist anymore knowing that he said the sentence.
This article makes me very sad, as Degas is one of my favorite artists. This builds off of a conversation we had in Colloquium last year, where we asked ourselves whether or not it is possible to honor a person's work without honoring the person themselves. This was in the very midst of Bill Cosby, and as he was a major influence in my childhood, it was very difficult for me to reconcile the hilarious, caring father on TV with the sexual abuser the world was knowing him to have been. In this article, I think it is interesting that Degas was committed to showing behind the scenes of the sordid world behind the beautiful art form of ballet, and yet he was also part of the system that oppressed the dancers in the first place. Similarly, Hitchcock was a masterful, revolutionary filmmaker...who was also misogynistic and took advantage of his actresses. Degas' work still has so much merit, in the world it exposes and the unapologetic nature in which it does so. However, the most depressing thing is that this culture is still very present in the modern ballet world. An article from a week or two ago talked about the ballerina who sued her former boyfriend, also a dancer at The NYC Ballet for being part of a larger, abusive culture towards female dancers that is still very present within the ballet world. I know that this argument is losing steam, as the headlines in the news show us otherwise every single day, but this is 2018 and we should be better at treating all people with respect and professionalism.
While I had never heard of this side of Degas’s infamous ballerina paintings, I am genuinely unsurprised by the history that this article uncovered. Having seen many of Degas’s paintings of these young dancers countless times, I always got the impression that there was something unspoken and secretive about these portraits. It has also always been apparent to me that Degas was painting these dancers from the unavoidable male gaze and that the delicacy of their forms were at least in part a result of this. Especially with an art style as emotional as Impressionism, this reveal was unavoidable. As a visual artist, this makes me consider more deliberately how the aesthetics of a medium or technique can convey or conceal a more significant meaning. Storytelling in theatre and in scenic design are filled with little pockets of opportunity, and I take a lot of my personal inspiration from art and art history.
Post a Comment