Horrible stuff here, but I get it, even if no one else will.Like a lengthy cloth that warms one at night, both holding the cold at bay and embracing the body’s warmth despite the impending darkness, yet does this and more despite the fact it is but a single thread woven with itself and intertwined upon itself time and time again, so also is there a thread in the paintings I am drawn to today. Amidst the onslaught of glory and expression and beauty, of the myriad of choices offered me, I find myself before Monet’s “Rouen Cathedral Façade an Tour d’Albane (Morning Affect)”, painted in 1894.
What brings me here?
Maybe it’s the front of the cathedral, lost in the purple-and-gray hue of dawn, both warm and cold in its shadowy, glowing glory. It stands solid, cold and still, immoveable amidst a world built of and upon change and progression and adaptation. It is solid, yes, but the images themselves appear shimmering, the outlines of solid granite and stone anything but precise. But are they not as we are? Are we, in the end, any more solid than a dream, a wish, or a candle’s final wisp of smoke that twists into the air and disappears for all eternity?
So, despite its solidity we know, its unsure and unsteady edges, the light that is dark moment and enlightening the next, reminds us that it too will change. When, we cannot know for sure, but change is that which we can rely upon.
Only in the cathedral’s forefront is there a hint of the future unseen, in the deep nooks and recesses Monet left uncharacteristically gray, does he pose the possibility of something sinister or unwelcome awaiting us as well as the dawn’s impending illuminating rays. Or maybe there is nothing there at all. And after all, what else is there in our own moments to come, recesses of darkness and the unknown? Surely nothing as solid as stone, but instead as ethereal as a fear or a dream or vacuum. Time is but the world we anticipate, but never the world in which we live.
The darkness of Monet is sunlight to other artists, and even from this faux attempt at a drab world, a sinister view, albeit cloudy and opaque, Monet strays.
Our attention is drawn from the front of the cathedral to a tower behind it, as nearly formless as the front, but instead of topping off on the canvas, this parapet stretches above the figure in the forefront but also even off the canvas, its angles and lines giving no hint of an end.
Then more contrast. This pillar is bathed in the breathtaking swath of pink and orange of the sun’s first emergence, sending out its dawning rays, the colors all the more striking when placed in direct contrast to – behind yet above – the darkness of night that lingers in certain corners and back ways in the first object. It is in the immediacy of both illumination and shadow that one is forced to consider the darkness and light that fill our lives; in fact, when one is not ceding to the other, light retreating at night or gray retreating at dawn, only then do we appreciate what it is to be alive, and in the quest to bring more light, to overcome what darkness we can, why we rise each morning. Only then, with this realization, does this art live more in my heart and mind than my eye.
Monet has today reminded me that all changes. That which is dark can be light, that which is glorious can kill. There is no single one, but instead all is, indeed, one. We are, after all, made up more of our pasts than ourselves.
I later find myself moving from the wall of Monets and Van Goghs to another room, this room filled not with impressions and abstractness but instead realism and solidity. But that which I find myself before is no more comforting: Francesco del Cairo’s “Heridias with the Head of Saint John the Baptist”, from 1625-30.
There is nothing subtle nor hinted at in this image before me. Heridias sits alone – or nearly so – in a darkened room, her pale-white face in a sea of black staring skyward in an ecstasy beyond a smile or even a grin. This is ecstasy that gives birth to a moan, a groan from the depths of a soul.
A fitting place for the origin of this ecstasy, as near her lap is the decapitated head of St. John the Baptist. Her left hand hovers inches above the forehead, her left hand grasping the holy man’s tongue in her hands, silencing one who needs no silencing.
We gasp at the darkness of the painting, and of Heridias’ act. We assume we are so different from her.
Are we? In degrees only. Not in totality.
Do we enjoy silencing a critic, achieving victory over a foe? Do we silently mourn the loss of a soldier while rejoicing the death of a Taliban leader? We shudder at the image of Daniel Pearl’s decapitation, but pass over without so much as a shrug the news of an errant bomb leveling a home, obliterating the mother and nursing child in the process.
Are we different, so very different, from Heridias?
Again, I am drawn to contrast, not that between me and the horror on the canvas, but instead a contrast much more stark. In the end, maybe Monet is right, we’re all subtle shades from the same palette, and none of us save the few – Hitler or Mother Theresa among them – have the right to blacks or whites. The rest of us, we’re nothing more than a palette of pinks and grays, a mixture depending in the time, the way the dawn’s first rays strike us or not, and that which we hold in our lap.