Jean-Francois Millet: Shepherdess with Her Flock
I would be tempted to label this painting as romantic and pastoral if it weren’t for the girl’s facial expression. Her concerned and busy-like countenance infuses a down do earth (literally as well), occupied atmosphere, ruling out the dreamy and exalted element of romanticism. It seems that she would not indulge in admiring the nature around her; on the contrary, she turns her back to it, as if hiding something. It is difficult to discern what is it that she holds or does with her hands, but it may appear as if she were clutching a rosary and praying. If this is the case, then one could assume that even her prayers are directed towards asking for corporeal benefits, so sullen she looks. Perhaps she isn’t even praying, but merely counting the beads, as if trying to realize whether they can help her with her ragged situation. And perhaps, her mind is elsewhere, and the rosary is only the distraction. One thing is clear: as a result, she has frozen, inadvertently turning into a living monument.
|
Once again, the viewing angle allows to capture an incredulously wide territory. We see broad lands behind the flock — in an intentional distortion of space, or, in more formal terms, a “bold perspective.” The intent seems to be to position the girl against her working environment and mark her both as the master and the servant. I think that the idea of servitude prevails here, and the vast space becomes more of a trap than a place of freedom — the romantic shell crumbles and the realist core is uncovered. The sky, cloudy and gloomy, seems to accompany the ground. It appears very distant; there is no space left for hypothetic closer and friendlier parts, all because the artist insisted on filling the canvas with the soil; had the sky covered a wider area, there would be literally more air to breathe, which could have produced a counteracting effect of relief. Thus the “bold perspective” produces a psychological effect of entrapment.
|
What I dislike about this composition is the directness and lack of angles and visual points of rest. The sheep and the dog cannot hold the attention for a sufficient amount of time as to label them as effective compositional counterparts to the shepherdess. Though successfully manipulating perspective, the artist lacks conceptual sophistication (everything is relative, of course) and in my eyes, the whole scene is too much “in your face.” It possesses an undeniable aesthetic appeal and can impress powerfully — but not for long. Additionally, there is an disturbing imbalance between the tall figure of the girl and the rest of her surroundings. As a result, a considerable part of the canvas appears superfluous: I know that this is a sacrilege to even consider this, but only as in a thought experiment, the left portion (a half!) of the piece may be cut off, without any damage to the concept as a whole; try to cover that part on your screen, or move it to the right edge, and see what you get. Oh, and the painting hangs in Musee d’Orsay, Paris. Just in case you wanted to know…
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Bookmark, Share or Email this article.Read More Reviews:
This entry was posted on Saturday, October 27th, 2007 at 11:47 pm and is filed under Jean-Francois Millet, Realism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
on December 28, 2007 at 3:47 pm ilchar wrote:
I know that this is a sacrilege to even consider this, but only as in a thought experiment, the left portion (a half!) of the piece may be cut off, without any damage to the concept as a whole.
Please have you seen what kind of human action is going on this left side you want to cut ?
charly
on December 28, 2007 at 5:33 pm elijah wrote:
Unless I’m missing something, there are only sheep. But it is only a thought experiment :)