Jean-Francois Millet: The Gleaners
Once again, the sheer physicality and the rhythmic movements of the gleaning process build up to a stable emotional effect — subtler, to my mind, than a direct one would be, ensuing from more detailed facial expressions. The three figures blend well with the surroundings: they are just another group of workers; in the distance we see yet another one. Because of this commonness, the artist’s choice appears more random than purposeful. The women are a part of the whole, and not, as other interpreters suggest, a grand exposition of peasantry and farming. The background constantly seeps from in between and above the gleaners — in a way, it also encloses and traps, perhaps even stifles the workers in grave allusion on peasant life. It’s a familiar but not necessarily friendly environment. I find this scene mundane thematically but intricate artistically. The merit of this piece lies in the dance-like composition rather than in heroic symbolism, as other viewings suggest.
|
The two haystacks and a cart in the left upper corner mirror the bending figures, educating the viewers on the process of gleaning: it means picking up the remnants of the harvest — collecting the same growth, only in much smaller quantities. This replication reveals why the workers are here, what they are doing and what is on their mind: a somewhat crude, maybe even tactless disclosure of hunger and exhausting work. The division of labor between the sexes also comes to mind, as the people in the distance are most probably men, resting near the bounty, whereas the women are busy, collecting the scraps. Yet I don’t think Millet wanted to raise the issue of women rights and the injustice associated with it, as he had demonstrated the physical strain of the men in the “Wood Sawyers” — both partake in the dance of survival, only the moves are different.
|
The eye-level is typical Millet: directly in front and slightly above the protagonists. The background is cramped (the busy skyline) while the actors occupy most of the foreground; the perspective excludes unnecessary elements in the front, to focus on the workers, and quickly disperses in the distance to include as many objects as possible. I suppose that this distortion in the form of acceleration is an indispensable device when painting wide plain areas such as this one — a slight artistic adjustment is needed to compliment the theme. It would be interesting to determine whether the gleaners are treading forward or backward. I tried to glean my carpet (found only a pair of pear seeds), and the latter option seems somehow more expedient. To sum up this Millet session, I would say that the busiest his subjects look, the easier it is to sympathize with them. The artist’s strength is portraying movement and composition based on several figures — the moment they begin to ponder, they lose their immediate charm, which often degrades into sentimentalism.
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 Wednesday, November 7th, 2007 at 5:17 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 November 27, 2007 at 11:17 am BondBloke wrote:
I see where you are coming from, but reserve the right to disagree as I do not find any sentimentalism in this work at all…
on December 9, 2007 at 6:53 pm elijah wrote:
Well, as it was said in the article, neither do I. These workers look busy, so there’s nothing sentimental about them, it’s when Millet’s subject appear less busy that sentimental qualities intervene. But my problem is with interpretations that impose a nostalgic socialist agenda to these peasants. I resent that.