“Archaeological Reminiscence of Millet’s Angelus” by Salvador Dali was painted in 1935. It is oil paint on canvas. The painting was based on the 1857-1859 painting “The Angelus” by Jean-Francois Millet. The Angelus was a painting that fascinated Dali. He revisited the motif many times over the years, in a variety of works.
Dali is the most famous of all the Surrealists. He began moving into surrealism around 1928. The term surrealist indicates a painting of seemingly disconnected and ambiguous subjects, but shown with great technical mastery and realism. In 1929, Dali made the film Un Chien Andalou (The Andalusian Cow) with Luis Bunuel. The film attempted to disturb and disorient viewers by mimicking a dream. Dali, and indeed much of the Surrealist movement was heavily influenced by the work of Sigmund Freud. Dreamlike subject matter, strange interrelationships between objects, and appearances of overt, psychosexual images, define much of the movement’s contribution. The Surrealists related theories of Freudian psychology to the idea of creativity and the production of art.
Dali was a prominent artist, and his contributions to surrealism became contributions to art in general. A major philosophical contribution made by Dali was an artistic technique he described called the “paranoiac-critical method”. The “paranoiac-critical method” is a way of seeing the world. The method involves a dissociation of object from language, of language from object, and the knowledge that we cannot really know anything. Therefore, objects become extensions of our subjective selves, and have nothing to do with our knowledge, or as Dali put it, “objects have a minimum of mechanical meaning.” Dali also said that the paranoiac-critical method is a, ”spontaneous method of irrational knowledge based on the critical and systematic objectivity of the associations and interpretations of delirious phenomena.”
In an interview with David Bryson in 1963, in response to Bryson’s question, “Could you define the word ‘paranoiac’? Could you define it in more detail?” Dali replied, “Aaaahhh….is one…..Uuuhh… The name is… ehhhh… ‘paranoiac-critical method’ because is one spontaneous method of knowledge, based in the instantaneous association of delirious material. Everything appear in my life- delirious, antagonist, impossible, put together. My method instantaneously creates miracle… Paranoiac-critical activity organizes and objectivizes in an exclusivist manner the limitless and unknown possibilities of the systematic association of subjective and objective ‘significance’ in the irrational…”
We are interested in the metaphor of standing in relationship to Dali’s “Archaeological Reminiscence of Millet’s Angelus”. What does Dali’s “paranoiac-critical method” have to do with our purposes? First we must examine the antecedent to Dali’s painting. Millet was a French painter. He’s most well known for scenes of peasants. His two most famous works are “The Gleaners”:
and “Angelus”:
Dali was fascinated by this painting. Dali used the “paranoiac-critical method”, employing “The Angelus” as his catalyst. Dali saw a reproduction of “The Angelus” in 1929, not having thought about it since childhood. He had been obsessed with that image as a child, finding parallels between that and two cypress trees that stood outside his classroom. Upon seeing this reproduction, he became very upset and distressed ; to discover why he employed psychoanalytical methods. He also began to see “The Angelus” in “visions” in objects around him: once in a lithograph of cherries, once in two stones on a beach. The “Archaeological Reminiscence of Millet’s Angelus” was based upon this latter vision.
The Angelus is a Christian devotion, or prayer. The devotion was traditionally recited in Roman Catholic churches, convents, and monasteries 3 times daily: 6:00 a.m., noon, and 6:00 p.m. (Many churches still practice the devotion, and some practice it at home.) The Angelus is a Christian devotion in memory of the Incarnation. The name “Angelus” is derived from the opening words: Angelus Domini Muntiavet Mariae (“…the angel of the Lord declared unto Mary…”) and is practiced by reciting 3 verses describing the mystery; alternating with the Salutation, “Hail Mary.”
The official origin of the devotional is not known. It was already well-established 700 years ago. The Angelus tradition was rooted in the 11th century monastic custom of reciting 3 Hail Mary’s during the evening bell. “It is common practice that during the recital of the Angelus prayer, for the lines “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us,” those reciting the prayer bow or genuflect. Either of these actions draw attention to the moment of Incarnation of Christ into human flesh.”
“The Angelus” is a painting which most people refer to as a religious work, showing working folk praying. Salvador Dali saw “The Angelus” as a “monstrous example of disguised sexual repression.”
Dali used the figures of the peasants from “The Angelus” several dozen times. He even wrote a book called Le Mythe tragique de L'Angelus de Millet.
They bow their heads and pray. What do they pray for? Do they pray for a bountiful harvest? Are they reciting the scriptures and Hail Mary’s which typically accompany The Angelus devotion? Have they, as Dali thought, lost a son?
This is significantly relevant to the standing metaphor because the figures are standing in a field, with only yellow earth beneath and blue sky above. The figures represent spiritual isolation as well as spiritual abundance. The figures symbolize life and death, male and female, heaven and hell, awake and dreaming, internal and external, perhaps every dualism we can imagine. There’s a juxtaposition of work and rest, of standing, or kneeling before the ankle-high crops.
And the disorientation of language recommended by Dali to employ the “paranoiac critical method” changes the painting even further. The images dissolve and disintegrate altogether, leaving only an archetype. That archetype, I believe, is the archetype of the dual nature of everything, and the implacability of ego and consciousness. One asks oneself, “Am I really all the things that are outside of me?” It is decidedly so, though we can never hope to understand how, or why.
No comments:
Post a Comment