"The Countenance of Aristotle In Rembrandt’s Fall of Man" or "Why I could give a damn about REMBRANDT"
In every one of us there are two ruling and directing principles, whose guidance we follow wherever they may lead; the one being an innate desire of pleasure; the other, an acquired judgment which aspires after excellence.
Socrates
If I had to work with a Rembrandt.....here goes it.
Rembrandt, The Fall of Man 1638
I began with, what I felt was, an enigmatic image of Adam and Eve, and in searching for a visual precedent I stumbled, instead, upon a thematic parallel with another work that Rembrandt completed nearly two decades later. Original Sin poses the issue, most obviously, of pleasure, along with notions shame and beauty. There is also, though, the issue of human consciousness and self-awareness, manifested in the narrative itself and represented by the tree of knowledge. It wasn’t until I ended up falling upon the image of Aristotle by Rembrandt that this distinction between pleasure and knowledge was made clear to me.
Rembrandt, Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer, 1653
A discussion of Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer is rarely left without, at least, touching on the concept of melancholy. Likewise, Rembrandt’s etching of prelapsarian man exihibits a similar preoccupation with discontent. It is my contention that Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man can be seen as an antithetical conception of the same theme exhibited in his painting of Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer. Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man characterizes his conception of a state of pure pleasure, while Aristotle contemplating the bust of Homer can be seen as a characterization of the height of knowledge. My argument is that both works play on the potentially precarious aspects of human nature in their most extreme dispositions. Before anything else, viewers are quick to acknowledge the distinctly grotesque depictions of Rembrandt’s Adam and Eve.
At first glance, the influence of Albrecht Dürer is evident as an inspiration for Rembrandt’s conception of Adam and Eve. Dürer ‘s direct influence, however, has been pinned down to the creature that twines the Tree of Knowledge in Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man.
Dürer, The Harrowing of Hell, 1512
A similarly composed beast can be seen in The Harrowing of Hell, wherein the archetypical figure scales Dürer’s entryway. The dragon, for Rembrandt, cleverly reiterates a moving narrative within the work. In the biblical account of The Fall of Man, the serpent was only relegated to the ground after the commitment of sin. Thus, Rembrandt resolves to depict the moment of transformation from that of a creature with legs to one that moves upon its belly. In “Rembrandt and the Spoken Word,” Julius Held examines the artist’s ability to depict multiple moments within a single frame. (1991) Held contends that Rembrandt’s body of work contains conversational motifs Instead of looking at a silent picture of a single moment of time, the viewer listens to an exchange of words, which entails a temporal component. The dragon’s metamorphosis in The Fall of Man, however, helps to illuminate a different kind of shifting narrative that Rembrandt sought, consciously or not, to illustrate. And I say or because Held is not even sure that Rembrandt was aware that he was employing such a method.
The next element is the elephant. The scholar, Leonard Slatke, traces this creature back to netherlandish fairs, where it would perform. But he also discusses the allegorical reference of the elephant within Rembrandt's print. Slatkes argues that the elephant served an ulterior motive for Rembrandt in The Fall of Man. He explains that the elephant was readily connected with the story of Adam and Eve through myth and folklore.
Anon, Dutch engraving Hansken the Elephant. Amsterdam, Rijksprentaenkabinet
For Rembrandt, he says, the elephant worked as a symbol of chastity and temperance and could easily embody the corrective qualities of humankind.
In great distinction Rembrandt’s scenario of Adam and Eve is an erotic interpretation of The Fall of Man.
Hans Baldung Grien, The Fall of Man
E.M. Vetter suggests that Hans Baldung interpretations hinge on a notion of hyperbolic pleasure. Baldung, on the other hand, seems to equally implicate Adam in his lascivious conceptions of The Fall. Succumbing to earthly and bodily desires. Although Eve is the traditionally obvious scapegoat for The Fall of humanity, in Bandung’s scenarios, the first man seems to be mortally subject to the same earthly desires as womankind. Rembrandt’s conviction of Eve in his interpretation of The Fall of Man, combined with his unsightly rendering of the human form, make for a inherently anxious reading of the work; one that invokes guilt-ridden uneasiness before voyeuristic desire.
The Fall of Man, as conceived by Rembrandt, presents an eerily complex proposition of pleasure. Similarly, the painting of Aristotle presents an interestingly convoluted conception of knowledge.
Julius Held contends that the act of speaking and listening has the potential to liberate us from an existential loneliness. Thus, the inability to use such a method with an individual figure results in a tenor of estrangement and psychological isolation.
Several interpretations of Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer have been posed, beyond its initial and notably charged aura. It is widely accepted that the chain around Aristotle’s neck is a gift from one of his most famous pupils, Alexander the Great. This, for Julius Held, is significant because it represents a dilemma between secular and spiritual favor.Others have suggested that the cameo of Alexander The Great is a commentary by Rembrandt on the practice of portraiture.
There are, to me, only two logical explanations for the despondency of Aristotle in this image. On the one hand, Aristotle has reached the limits human thought, on the other he has not. The viewer is left to ponder the difference between hopelessness caused by fulfillment and discontentment caused by a lack thereof. Which question that is asked, however, is beside the point. Both questions have the same effect, as Rembrandt, consciously or not, readily transmits. This painting is not about answers, nor is it about fulfillment. We are to see, in this portrait, a man who devoted his life to the pursuit of knowledge. It is also quite clear what we are not meant to see in this painting and that is contentment, more simply - pleasure.
Just as the notion of pleasure is conveyed in Rembrandt’s Fall, the artist depicts not an allegorical understanding of knowledge, but a much more convoluted portrayal of its disposition. Aristotle, befit with melancholy, characterizes the other end of the spectrum of knowledge that Adam and Eve have yet to embark on in Rembrandt’s Fall of Man. these two works of art, together, reiterate the dilemma posed in the Philebus, which is based on the schism between said knowledge and pleasure.
Although Aristotle modifies the argument made in The Philebus, he draws from its final conclusion. Which is to say that both a life of pleasure without knowledge and a life of knowledge lacking any pleasure are neither worth choosing. Thus, either option in its most pure form is not a platonic Good. (Heinaman) In Rembrandt’s painting, Aristotle represents the full potential of man’s knowledge, and yet, he is portrayed in an incredibly solemn regard. By contemplating, though, he counteracts the akrasia exhibited in Rembrandt’s Adam and Eve. Thus, judgment, also, separates and connects these scenarios; one acts on impulse rather than logic. The other is driven by the pursuit of knowledge and rationale rather than corporeal urges.
Finally, I'd like to revisit Dürer and his print of Adam and Eve in an effort to illustrate Rembrandt’s exceptional interpretation man before The Fall.
Dürer, Adam and Eve
In Dürer’s engraving, the idealized human form is emphasized. The consummate man in Dürer’s conception is replaced with an imperfect figure in Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man. Prelapsarian man was blemished before any sin had been committed in Rembrandt’s representation. As representative of the apogee of guilt-free pleasure, Eden, accordingly to Rembrandt, is achingly similar to his conception of the pinnacle of human knowledge. Both environments, as perceived by Rembrandt, are ironically faulty. Rembrandt’s conception of this state of being is wrought with critique, as is his conception of an icon of knowledge in Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer. The exemplary notion of humanity that prefigures The Fall is, for Rembrandt, substandard. So too, though, is the periphery of understanding.
The solution arrived at in The Philebus was one of compromise. The benefits of abstractions such as pleasure and knowledge can only be reaped when they are accompanied by and mixed with other abstractions. The lack fulfillment as manifested by Eve’s hunger and Aristotle’s countenance can only be satiated, then, through something I would akin to the temperance of Hansken. Contentment, before happiness, characterizes a state wherein nothing is desired. Adam and Eve as the apotheosis of bodily desire and Aristotle as a paragon of curiosity exemplify legitimate states of discontent in this regard. In the fables described by Slatkes, the elephant remains chaste whilst his mate is pregnant and never eats more than he needs to survive. So too, must the medium be met, it seems, for humanity. It is only through the balance of pleasure and knowledge that the good life could ever be achieved. A good life is still complex and tumultuous, but it is not a consistent disposition characteristic of melancholia; nor is it a crude fumbling of naked flesh.
(Located somewhere in between this dichotomy of knowledge of pleasure is a series by Dirck Volkertsz after Maarten van Heernskerck completed entitled The Road to Eternal Bliss. One etching within the series, is an illustration of God’s Mercy Trimphing over Satan and Engendering Self-Knowledge....but that's a completely different rant)
Socrates
If I had to work with a Rembrandt.....here goes it.
Rembrandt, The Fall of Man 1638
I began with, what I felt was, an enigmatic image of Adam and Eve, and in searching for a visual precedent I stumbled, instead, upon a thematic parallel with another work that Rembrandt completed nearly two decades later. Original Sin poses the issue, most obviously, of pleasure, along with notions shame and beauty. There is also, though, the issue of human consciousness and self-awareness, manifested in the narrative itself and represented by the tree of knowledge. It wasn’t until I ended up falling upon the image of Aristotle by Rembrandt that this distinction between pleasure and knowledge was made clear to me.
Rembrandt, Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer, 1653
A discussion of Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer is rarely left without, at least, touching on the concept of melancholy. Likewise, Rembrandt’s etching of prelapsarian man exihibits a similar preoccupation with discontent. It is my contention that Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man can be seen as an antithetical conception of the same theme exhibited in his painting of Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer. Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man characterizes his conception of a state of pure pleasure, while Aristotle contemplating the bust of Homer can be seen as a characterization of the height of knowledge. My argument is that both works play on the potentially precarious aspects of human nature in their most extreme dispositions. Before anything else, viewers are quick to acknowledge the distinctly grotesque depictions of Rembrandt’s Adam and Eve.
At first glance, the influence of Albrecht Dürer is evident as an inspiration for Rembrandt’s conception of Adam and Eve. Dürer ‘s direct influence, however, has been pinned down to the creature that twines the Tree of Knowledge in Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man.
Dürer, The Harrowing of Hell, 1512
A similarly composed beast can be seen in The Harrowing of Hell, wherein the archetypical figure scales Dürer’s entryway. The dragon, for Rembrandt, cleverly reiterates a moving narrative within the work. In the biblical account of The Fall of Man, the serpent was only relegated to the ground after the commitment of sin. Thus, Rembrandt resolves to depict the moment of transformation from that of a creature with legs to one that moves upon its belly. In “Rembrandt and the Spoken Word,” Julius Held examines the artist’s ability to depict multiple moments within a single frame. (1991) Held contends that Rembrandt’s body of work contains conversational motifs Instead of looking at a silent picture of a single moment of time, the viewer listens to an exchange of words, which entails a temporal component. The dragon’s metamorphosis in The Fall of Man, however, helps to illuminate a different kind of shifting narrative that Rembrandt sought, consciously or not, to illustrate. And I say or because Held is not even sure that Rembrandt was aware that he was employing such a method.
The next element is the elephant. The scholar, Leonard Slatke, traces this creature back to netherlandish fairs, where it would perform. But he also discusses the allegorical reference of the elephant within Rembrandt's print. Slatkes argues that the elephant served an ulterior motive for Rembrandt in The Fall of Man. He explains that the elephant was readily connected with the story of Adam and Eve through myth and folklore.
Anon, Dutch engraving Hansken the Elephant. Amsterdam, Rijksprentaenkabinet
For Rembrandt, he says, the elephant worked as a symbol of chastity and temperance and could easily embody the corrective qualities of humankind.
In great distinction Rembrandt’s scenario of Adam and Eve is an erotic interpretation of The Fall of Man.
Hans Baldung Grien, The Fall of Man
E.M. Vetter suggests that Hans Baldung interpretations hinge on a notion of hyperbolic pleasure. Baldung, on the other hand, seems to equally implicate Adam in his lascivious conceptions of The Fall. Succumbing to earthly and bodily desires. Although Eve is the traditionally obvious scapegoat for The Fall of humanity, in Bandung’s scenarios, the first man seems to be mortally subject to the same earthly desires as womankind. Rembrandt’s conviction of Eve in his interpretation of The Fall of Man, combined with his unsightly rendering of the human form, make for a inherently anxious reading of the work; one that invokes guilt-ridden uneasiness before voyeuristic desire.
The Fall of Man, as conceived by Rembrandt, presents an eerily complex proposition of pleasure. Similarly, the painting of Aristotle presents an interestingly convoluted conception of knowledge.
Julius Held contends that the act of speaking and listening has the potential to liberate us from an existential loneliness. Thus, the inability to use such a method with an individual figure results in a tenor of estrangement and psychological isolation.
Several interpretations of Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer have been posed, beyond its initial and notably charged aura. It is widely accepted that the chain around Aristotle’s neck is a gift from one of his most famous pupils, Alexander the Great. This, for Julius Held, is significant because it represents a dilemma between secular and spiritual favor.Others have suggested that the cameo of Alexander The Great is a commentary by Rembrandt on the practice of portraiture.
There are, to me, only two logical explanations for the despondency of Aristotle in this image. On the one hand, Aristotle has reached the limits human thought, on the other he has not. The viewer is left to ponder the difference between hopelessness caused by fulfillment and discontentment caused by a lack thereof. Which question that is asked, however, is beside the point. Both questions have the same effect, as Rembrandt, consciously or not, readily transmits. This painting is not about answers, nor is it about fulfillment. We are to see, in this portrait, a man who devoted his life to the pursuit of knowledge. It is also quite clear what we are not meant to see in this painting and that is contentment, more simply - pleasure.
Just as the notion of pleasure is conveyed in Rembrandt’s Fall, the artist depicts not an allegorical understanding of knowledge, but a much more convoluted portrayal of its disposition. Aristotle, befit with melancholy, characterizes the other end of the spectrum of knowledge that Adam and Eve have yet to embark on in Rembrandt’s Fall of Man. these two works of art, together, reiterate the dilemma posed in the Philebus, which is based on the schism between said knowledge and pleasure.
Although Aristotle modifies the argument made in The Philebus, he draws from its final conclusion. Which is to say that both a life of pleasure without knowledge and a life of knowledge lacking any pleasure are neither worth choosing. Thus, either option in its most pure form is not a platonic Good. (Heinaman) In Rembrandt’s painting, Aristotle represents the full potential of man’s knowledge, and yet, he is portrayed in an incredibly solemn regard. By contemplating, though, he counteracts the akrasia exhibited in Rembrandt’s Adam and Eve. Thus, judgment, also, separates and connects these scenarios; one acts on impulse rather than logic. The other is driven by the pursuit of knowledge and rationale rather than corporeal urges.
Finally, I'd like to revisit Dürer and his print of Adam and Eve in an effort to illustrate Rembrandt’s exceptional interpretation man before The Fall.
Dürer, Adam and Eve
In Dürer’s engraving, the idealized human form is emphasized. The consummate man in Dürer’s conception is replaced with an imperfect figure in Rembrandt’s etching of The Fall of Man. Prelapsarian man was blemished before any sin had been committed in Rembrandt’s representation. As representative of the apogee of guilt-free pleasure, Eden, accordingly to Rembrandt, is achingly similar to his conception of the pinnacle of human knowledge. Both environments, as perceived by Rembrandt, are ironically faulty. Rembrandt’s conception of this state of being is wrought with critique, as is his conception of an icon of knowledge in Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer. The exemplary notion of humanity that prefigures The Fall is, for Rembrandt, substandard. So too, though, is the periphery of understanding.
The solution arrived at in The Philebus was one of compromise. The benefits of abstractions such as pleasure and knowledge can only be reaped when they are accompanied by and mixed with other abstractions. The lack fulfillment as manifested by Eve’s hunger and Aristotle’s countenance can only be satiated, then, through something I would akin to the temperance of Hansken. Contentment, before happiness, characterizes a state wherein nothing is desired. Adam and Eve as the apotheosis of bodily desire and Aristotle as a paragon of curiosity exemplify legitimate states of discontent in this regard. In the fables described by Slatkes, the elephant remains chaste whilst his mate is pregnant and never eats more than he needs to survive. So too, must the medium be met, it seems, for humanity. It is only through the balance of pleasure and knowledge that the good life could ever be achieved. A good life is still complex and tumultuous, but it is not a consistent disposition characteristic of melancholia; nor is it a crude fumbling of naked flesh.
(Located somewhere in between this dichotomy of knowledge of pleasure is a series by Dirck Volkertsz after Maarten van Heernskerck completed entitled The Road to Eternal Bliss. One etching within the series, is an illustration of God’s Mercy Trimphing over Satan and Engendering Self-Knowledge....but that's a completely different rant)
Comments
Post a Comment