Our lives are filled with horror, whether this is being accosted by
thugs down dark alley or looking at a particularly unpleasant bank
balance. It is near impossible to flick through the television channels
after 10pm without finding something horrific on the box and the
filmmakers always seem to try harder and harder to push the scare
buttons of their audiences.
I think horror has become so prolific that perhaps we as a society have
become desensitised to it, our tolerance for gore and horror becomes
lowered over time. Sixty years ago, we were sat in our cinema seats
petrified by Alligator People, Crab Monsters, Killer Shrews and the
Beast from Hollow Mountain (for a full list see
this,
the film posters are very funny) and now we have to deploy Jigsaw to
torture his victims in ways that the human imagination never thought
possible and American Horror Story is played on mainstream TV (seriously
not for the fainthearted, my nightmares have been numerous.)
So what is it about horror we like so much?
As always, I get totally wrapped up and carried away with my
posts which makes me feel that, very cornily, I have little control over
what I am writing and they just seem to write themselves! After
deciding to choose a very niche topic - Horror, which I thought would be
a challenge with the Pre-Raphaelite in fact turned out to spiral into a
epic book-like topic so in order to prevent people from becoming
comatose after reading, I've split this one in half.
I am going to be taking a look at what horror is, why aesthetically we
are drawn to it and focusing on the Queen of Monsters - Medusa.
The Horror of Art
It seems that there are three ways in which we can answer the above question "why do we gain pleasure from horror?":
1.) Curiosity
2.) Desire to see violent spectacles
3.) The Sublime
The first proposed answer comes from Noel Carroll in his book "The
Philosophy of Horror". He looks back to Aristotle's discussion of the
tragic and applies it to modern day horror. He coins the term
"art-horror" to explain the emotion that we feel when we experience
horror from the aesthetic be it art, film, literature or theatre.
Carroll first begins by distinguishing horror from other genres like
westerns for example where they are characterised by a setting. Horror
is characterised by the "intended capacity to raise a certain affect".
In horror fictions, we find that the emotions of the audience are
syncopated with those of the characters i.e. when the character
shudders, so do we, when the character panics so do we, when the
character feels relief because the monster has been shot by the
strapping hero, so do we, when they die...we cower.
Carroll continues to explain why we enjoy horrors, why we gain pleasure
from feeling the mix of disgust and fear they evoke. As I discussed in
my post about
Disgust,
this is an emotional response that is characterised by repulsion, by
the inclination to get away from the object. So why do we find ourselves
attracted to horrors when one of the main components of horror is
disgust.
"To a large extent, the horror story is driven explicitly by
curiosity. It engages its audience by being involved in processes of
disclosure, discovery, proof, explanation, hypothesis and
confirmation...Monsters are obviously a perfect vehicle for engendering
this kin of curiosity and for supporting the drama of proof because
monsters are impossible beings."
Carroll
The level of disgust we endure during horror films is combated by our
desire for knowledge of the unknown. The disgust is required by the plot
to engage the curiosity for feel for the monster and draws us in to
seeing how the plot is played out. The problem is that Carroll’s answer
for curiosity works only for fantastical horror, meaning only for those
horrors that we believe to be based around a villain that we do not
believe to exist. Carroll himself applies the definition of a monster as
"any being not believed to exist according to contemporary science". We have a strong desire to know something unknowable and the genre of horror allows us to bask in such curiosities.
 |
| Villalba - "The Way of the Dead" |
As Cynthia Freeland notes, this definition falls short when considering
realist horror as we can have little curiosity when we see a film like
Psycho where the villain is naturalised in the form of a psychotic
killer. These films showcase a monstrous violence committed by a human
opposed to violence committed by a monster. It is the act not the being
that is frightening. Plato ranked our human drive towards spectacles of
violence as the lowest desire and Aristotle said that this was the least
artistic of the six parts of tragedy. However, these realist horrors
pervade our modern culture, in fact the majority of horror films around
nowadays are based upon the slasher element of these horrors or indeed
the torture element for example in Saw or Hostel. These films force us
to "attend to the very problem of moral perverseness that Carroll
wants to avoid that we are somehow attracted to the monsters and to the
horrific spectacle itself". Freeland argues that Realist horror represents a 'postmodern phenomenon'
in creating horror that is intended to mimic reality. It intentionally
suppresses plot and fantasy to initiate the feeling in the spectator
that it could be you. "Paradoxically these films also send out the
comforting message that we are safe because the violence is, at that
moment' striking someone else." Fundementally though, we are interested
in the spectacle of violence that can be carried out by a human being.
In a very Family Fortunes type manner, I asked my friends and family to
name the first horror film they think of in a poor effort to see what
type of Horror is more forefront in our minds: Realist horror or
Supernatural horror? (Thanks to everyone who answered). And our survey
said...
71% Realist Horror
29% Supernatural Horror
The Sublime
 |
| John Martin "The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah" (1852) |
The sublime is an interesting concept when considering Horror, it is one
thing to try to relate why we enjoy horror to aesthetic experience as
Carroll or Freeland have attempted to do through the concept of
'art-horror' but this is a perhaps a more fitting task for the concept
of the sublime. Originally conceived by British philosophy as a distinct
aesthetic quality from Beauty which describes the pleasure in seeing
greatness beyond all measure of calculation, something which gives the
viewer a sense of infinity or insignificance or which inspires horror,
an overpowering or vast malignant object of great magnitude, one that
could destroy the observer.
Dennis in "Miscellanies" 1668 wrote in reference to his tour of the Alps:
"We walk’d upon the very brink, in a literal sense, of Destruction …
The sense of all this produc’d different emotions in me, viz., a
delightful Horrour, a terrible Joy, and at the same time, that I was
infinitely pleas’d, I trembled"
Dennis
The sublime is a fascinating phenomenon since it evokes horror and
aesthetic pleasure simultaneously, we can therefore derive from this
that it is possible to gain pleasure from horrific sights. The sublime
is able to account for our pleasure gained by natural horror.
Schopenhauer details the pathway from Beauty to the sublime:
"Schopenhauer saw beauty (pleasure through peaceful contemplation of a
benign thing) rising to sublimity (pleasure through seeing a vast,
threatening thing capable of undoing the observer) and reaching a
terrifying crescendo in the ‘fullest feeling of sublime’ – knowledge of
the vastness of the universe in all its dimensions and the consequent
insignificance of the observer."
The sublime is a difficult concept to convey in art since by its very
nature it requires both vastness of scale and dangerousness and is
therefore usually found in nature. It’s pretty tricky to pick up the
Gobi desert and put it in an exhibition although Al Weiwei got pretty
close with his sunflower seeds.
 |
| John Martin "The Great day of his wrath" (1853) |
John Martin deals with the sublime in his pieces by creating pictures
with overwhelmingly infinite details and space as well as giving a
demanding sense of insignificance to the subjects of his painting who
appear miniscule in comparison with the doomsday, apocalyptical
landscapes that are in fact so much more significant. The
John Martin exhibition
at the Tate Britain is fantastic (the have even created a trailer for
the exhibition which I thought was innovative - below). I would highly
recommend it especially since computer productions simply cannot do
these vast canvases justice; it closes on the 15th January so not much
time left. Even if you don't particularly like the Art, you get the
sense that Martin loved it himself and the endearing nature with which
the painstaking (and somewhat geeky) detail is done is impressive in its
own right - you certainly can't knock his technical ability.
The Beastly Femme Fatale
When considering the two different types of horror, the supernatural and
the real, the femme fatale is so divided from the former. This is
usually because the tales of the femme fatale are geared so decisively
towards shaping or reinforcing gender norms and condemning certain
female behaviours. To take this into the fantasy, the world of beasts
and ghouls further detaches us from the reality that the femme fatale
tales seek to create parallels with.
 |
| Reubens - "Head of Medusa" (1618) |
That said, we can find evidence of female beasts of horror in mythology
and literature, the problem being that so often these creatures are not
usually the prettiest things to look at for example, I can't see anyone
being seduced by, the clue being in the name with fantastical horror it
is so often the creature's appearance itself that invokes the mutual
feelings of fear, terror and revulsion. The femme fatale by nature is
seductive and therefore beautiful often overwhelmingly. To take as an
example, the Sirens, these vile creatures would lure and destroy men
sitting on islands of rotting flesh and yet, they lured these men by
their beauty. Though we may be horrified by the result of their actions,
it does not evoke the same feelings of revulsion as most beings of
fantastical horror like zombies or monsters.
There is perhaps one figure, which arguably links both the femme fatale
with fantastical horror: Medusa. At face value, Medusa is not a femme
fatale. She lacks the inherent seduction and beauty that femme fatales
possess but yet she does have one significant attribute in common with
the femme fatales - the danger of the aesthetic. In actual fact, Medusa
represents the most powerful aesthetic attributes because unlike Lilith
or the Sirens or indeed many other femme fatales, she does not need to
ensnare men with her visage to devour them, a mere glance at the beast
will turn your very being to stone.
 |
| Beardsley - "Perseus slays Medusa" |
Medusa has a complex relationship with horror and beauty. With the
former, she is an interesting figure of horror since she does not seek
out people to kill, there is very little written about her threatening
behaviour. In fact, she chooses to live with the blind gorgon sisters so
as to avoid the accidental death of innocents, not the usual behaviour
of creatures of horror, however, because of her attributes alone she is
still able to create fear for the spectator mainly because the revulsion
factor is so strong, the idea being that she is so ugly that one look
would turn you to stone. Aesthetically this is interesting since the
fear and disgust are determined not from the character of the beast but
the physical appearance alone which reminds me in fact of beauty and the
beast, the idea that you become attributed with the characteristics of
your aesthetics i.e. that the ugly beast somehow becomes evil and the
beautiful woman becomes the heroine.
The femme fatale defies the logic of horror in this way and becomes an
ever more dangerous archetype because whilst we can be aware of the
danger that beasts may incur because their aesthetic lends itself to a
fear response, we are drawn to the characters of beauty. This is often
why the creatures within these tales have such grizzly comeuppances to
show the consequences of vanity and no tale more than any other shows
this better than medusa.
The Medusa Myth
Trying to make heads (ha!) and tails of the Medusa story was (as usual)
actually a lot more complicated than I thought. The original telling
from Hesiod are insufficient to give us the full myth and were later
expanded by Apollodorus to tell the full tale however, as with many
Greek myths, this tale - although the classical version - has a couple
of tweaks in it that just don't seem in line with the modern view of
Medusa, for example Apollodorus describes the gorgons as dragon-scaled
creatures with swine tusks and golden wings. So I have mismashed the
tale as follows:
Medusa in some capacity offended Athena, the goddess of wisdom and war.
From reading the different versions of these tales, it seems that she
either:
(a) boasted that she was more beautiful than Athena,
(b) that she had carnal relations in Athena's temple with Poseidon or
(c) that she was raped by Poseidon.
Firstly, if she was indeed gloating about her beauty in front of a
goddess in her temple then that wasn't all too smart considering the
gods don’t have the most even of tempers at the best of times. This
works well with the morality factor and links well with the Narcissus
myth i.e. don't be vain or bad things will happen to you. If the second
myth version is correct then once again, this stigmatizes a certain kind
of behaviour about women being promiscuous or having relaxed or casual
attitudes towards sex which places chastity and virtue on a pedestal
which along with countless other stories helps to demonise the sexual
female and angelise the chase and pious one. The third version seems
fairly horrific quite honestly, the fact that Medusa would be raped by a
god, not a pleasant experience then solely blamed for the event by
another female who cursed her never to be loved again or even looked at
by a man only to then have her head chopped off by Perseus for a dare
seems like Medusa got a really raw deal. This seems to me to focus
perhaps on the horrible idea that Medusa was in some way culpable for
the rape considering her prior beauty lured Poseidon to her.
Anyhow, Medusa was turned into a Gorgon. Once again the story diverges,
some versions paint her as so terribly beautiful that she turned men to
stone with just a look, some stay it was because she was so grotesque.
Some accounts say that Medusa was bitter about the transformation and so
sought out the destruction of men whereas other say that she sought
solitude with her fellow gorgons. Either way, the 'hero' of the piece,
Perseus with all his macho bravado came along to behead Medusa, the only
mortal Gorgon all just to prove he had the courage to save his mother
Danaë from a bad marriage.
With any of these stories, Medusa gets a pretty rough deal.
The Beauty or the Beast?
 |
| Walter Crane - "Beauty and the Beast" (1874) |
In the classic fairytale of Beauty and the Beast (lovely illustration by
Walter Crane left) written originally by Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de
Villeneuve (What a name!) in 1740 and tells us a story of acceptance of
those who are aesthetically displeasing because what counts is what's on
the inside. This is therefore a juxtaposition between those who are by
character or morally beautiful but aesthetically horrific. The Horror we
experience from Monster is a face-value instinct, usually derived from
the fear of the threat they pose and the ugliness of the creature
itself. However, by the end of the film, I don't know about you but I
just don't find the beast so ugly...I kind of understand why Belle is
into him. This is because the first feeling of horror is dissipated when
we discover his gentle nature.
The same is therefore true with Medusa, by her physical depictions, we
are given a sense of horror and yet we grow in sympathy towards her
after her tale is told in full. It is in this way that Art is so
important to the telling of the tale, artists throughout the years will
endeavour to depict Medusa aesthetically in accordance with their
sentiments towards her. So those choosing to portray Medusa as a vain
nymphomaniac will show her in an unappealing fashion. The Greek
ceramicists themselves after the initial stages of a beastly depiction
progressed towards the more subversive 'characters' of Medusa (this is
explored in detail in "Medusa: From Beast to Beauty in Archaic and
Classical Illustrations from Greece and South Italy" by Susan M.
Serfontein):
"Around the mid-fifth century B.C., a beautiful maiden with refined
features and seductive form initially appears in vase illustrations and
is particularly well- represented in decapitation scenes revived from
the archaic period. By the fourth century B.C., Medusa has become a
defenseless victim, whose vulnerability is enhanced by her lovely head
and figure, exposed breasts and desperate gestures that serve to instill
a new sense of tragedy into the grisly episode. By the late classical
period, she is actively engaged in a futile struggle against the
merciless attack of Perseus. Her vulnerable state, which is effectively
conveyed through her sensuous beauty and desperate gestures, serves to
instill a sense of pathos that is unique in these brutal scenes of her
beheading. The divergence between her pictorial image as a harmless
woman and her mythological description as a terrifying and dangerous
beast apparently undermines the heroic act of Perseus, as the once
fearsome monster is far too beautiful in her weakened state to elicit
fear."
Serfontein
Each phase of Art, then plays an important role in shaping the way that
Medusa was viewed and this is only well representative of the society
they take place in, but how do the Pre-Raphaelite interpretations of
Medusa reflect the Victorian attitude towards the myth.
The Gaze of Medusa
 |
| Kotarbinsky - "Medusa" |
The Pre-Raphaelites in their infinite wisdom chose often to
reappropriate characters, twisting the conceptions of these femme
fatales or monsters and enabling the spectator to view the other side of
the story. Medusa is no exception to this. Unsurprisingly, as with Lady
Lilith and indeed many other negatively portrayed female characters
from the canon, the Pre-Raphaelites have reappropriated Medusa for the
Victorian Era from a canonical interpretation of her aesthetic:
"Medusa's round, grotesque head with its grimacing, toothy mouth,
protruding tongue and glaring eyes, together with her extraordinary
size, characterizes her archaic canonical form. Since it is her glance
or look that could turn men to stone, the artist gave particular
emphasis to her eyes. They are usually inordinately large, glaring,
sometimes bulging, and always frontal to face the viewer, thereby
stressing their petrifying power....Medusa's remaining features serve to
enhance her beastliness. Her nose is generally broad and flat, more
animal than human in appearance, while ferocious tusks are sometimes
portrayed, adding to her grotesqueness."
Serfontein
The Pre-Raphaelite Medusa Gaze breaks down into three interpretations as
follows: the Terrifying Medusa, the Sleeping Medusa and the Melancholy
Medusa
The Terrifying Medusa
 |
| Alice Pike Barney - "Medusa" (1892) |
Representing the classic view of Medusa - the penetrating eyes, the
protruding tongue, the wild hair and monstrous features. This portrayal
is interesting perhaps evidence for one of the first zombies in
literature/mythology. Theoretically the idea of Medusa that no one was
able to look upon her could possibly explain she looked like, the
interpretations therefore obviously had to come from the imagination.
The depictions of Medusa were then derived from the scariest image that
the Greeks could imagine, that of their dead. Medusa's features in the
terrifying version are those of death itself, Medusa is therefore death
incarnate.
When you die, your body undergoes several unsavoury process which I
don't really have the stomach to guide you through fully so if you do
have a morbid curiosity for this then take a gander at the cheerily
named
Encyclopaedia of Death and Dying
(lovely). When you die, the first occurrence is that you undergo rigor
mortis which is when your muscles become tensed, the first thing to go
is your eyes so opened eyes will remain opened. Interestingly even up
until the early nineteenth century, in Britain and America it was
believed that a corpse with open eyes posed a threat to its kin.
Bacteria within the body begins to decompose the organs and tissues
releasing an unpleasant gas which builds within and the increase
pressure causes the eyes to bulge out their sockets and the tongue to
swell.
 |
| Paton - "Dowie Dens o' Yarrow" (1860) |
If you look at Paton's representation of the Scottish ballad The Dowie
Dens o Yarrow, you can see the very Medusa-esque face upon the dead face
of the Lady's Lover. Paton was actually a friend of Millais and was at
its origins asked to join the Brotherhood, which he declines mainly due
to the fact that long distance relationships just don't work - who did
Millais think he was kidding...
Few Pre-Raphaelites chose to portray Medusa in this way but key works
from the Victorian era, which show the terrifying Medusa, are from
Sandys, Alice Barney and Kotarbinsky.
Sandys - "Medusa"
Sandys is a genius. 'Nuff sed. Correct me if I'm wrong (please don't,
you'll break my heart), but Sandys is the greatest capturer of
expression, to my recollection, there isn't an artist which displays the
ambiguity of expression like Sandys, the feeling of terror, torment,
sadness, revenge, anguish and horror is so transmittable through his
painting and his drawing of Medusa is no exception. For me, this goes
beyond a Terrifying Medusa, beyond the previous interpretations and
portrayal to convey a new message. Sandys not only grants the viewer a
sense of the myth through the expression alone, but also recreates the
myth for the Victorian audience.
 |
| Sandys - "Medusa" (1875) |
The painting's concept in essence reminds me of the film "The Ring",
though obviously predating this by a long shot. The Ring is a horror
film about (*Spoiler Alert*: if you care?) a video which after viewing
it, you receive a phone call warning you that you only have seven days
to live, over the week a series of event happen to you eventually
culminating in a creepy girl in serious need of a good wash and a
haircut coming through your TV to kill you. The mother of the son who
has seen the video figures out that you need only copy the tape and
replay it to another victim to set yourself free of the curse. It is at
this moment that you, the viewer, realise that she has just shown you
the tape. You are the next victim. In a similar fashion, Sandys kills
his spectators, by displaying Medusa and forcing her death-stare upon
the viewer which with her haunting eyes, leaves you in no doubt of the
doom Sandys was intending to convey.
True aesthetic experience is such that it creates willnessness, a
certain arresting of your cognitive function, you engage aesthetically
with the piece, which transmits a certain emotion to you. This arresting
(deriving from the Vulgar Latin
arrestare - to stop) in some
ways acts as a physical metaphor for the 'stonifying' of the victims of
the Medusa stare. Being presented with an arresting work of art that
commands a sense of willlessness also in turn mimics the freezing Medusa
stare.
Sandys progresses art from the aesthetically engaging to the realms of
viewer participation, for a moment, you become part of the myth and
narrative that the artist displays.
The Sleeping Medusa
 |
| Solomon - "The Head of Medusa" (1884) |
Though a fleeting second stage in terms of the Greek ceramic depictions
of Medusa, this litters the Pre-Raphaelite canvases, most obviously by
Burne-Jones who displays several views of Medusa in his Perseus Cycle.
The sleeping medusa with the serene face and closed eyes is powerless,
we know well from the Tale of Perseus and the Serpent (Also depicted by
Burne-Jones in The Finding of Medusa or The Death of Medusa) that
Medusa's head still had the power to turn those who looked upon it into
stone even after it was decapitated. In this portrayal, the artist has
enfeebled the Medusa by rendering her power useless. The appearance of
the closed eyes suggests to the viewer a more sympathetic version of the
fatal blow by Perseus. It seems that rather than being poised for
attack, the sleeping Medusa was asleep at the time of Perseus's attack
and was in fact defenseless. This certainly paints a different view of
the previously courageous Perseus who slew a predatory Medusa, their are
literary references which in fact support this telling:
"While a sound sleep held her and her serpents entranced, he took the head from off the neck" Ovid
"The Death of Medusa" - Edward Burne-Jones
 |
| Burne-Jones - "The Death of Medusa" (1888-1892) |
Burne-Jones perhaps sympathising with this creates the passive and
solemn head of Medusa which harks back to those first pieces in 4th
Century BC which in trying to combat the vileness of Medusa does not
seek to confront you with her beauty and its terror but seeks to
immortalize the Medusa head as a demure and serene icon, with the eyes
closed and the body in a state of plea, Burne-Jones perhaps demonizes
Perseus in his macho endeavours for destroying such a beauty.
Burne-Jones has again and again chosen to create sympathies with the
androgynous or genderless creatures of his paintings, the over
masculinisation of Perseus almost parodies him as a farcical archetypes
who blazes in to cause irreparable destruction something we see from the
lack of horror with which he depicts the Medusa.
This is a moment of immanence told by the writhing figure of Medusa
below. The odd jammed figures give a sense of commotion and you feel the
peak of the moment as the aftermath of the tragic beheading. The barren
landscape only seems to emphasise the confinement and solitude that
Medusa has endured as a result of Athena's curse. The passage below also
evokes a sympathetic tone for Medusa "She fell upon the ground and felt no more of all her bitter pain" which almost suggest an act of mercy by Perseus.
"Over the waterless ocean, the valley that led to the Gorgon.
Her too I slew in my craft, Medusa, the beautiful horror;
Taught by Athené I slew her, and saw not herself, but her image,
Watching the mirror of brass, in the shield which a goddess had lent me.
Cleaving her brass-scaled throat, as she lay with her adders around her,
Fearless I bore off her head, in the folds of the mystical goatskin
Hide of Amaltheié, fair nurse of the Ægis-wielder.
Hither I bear it, a gift to the gods, and a death to my foe-men,
Freezing the seer to stone; to hide thine eyes from the horror."
Kingsley
The Melancholy Medusa
 |
| Bernini - "Head of Medusa" (1630) |
This really is the true reappropriation of Medusa, going to the farthest
stage in changing the perception of this character. Whilst the Sleeping
Medusa is useful in creating a passive narrative for the Medusa and
perhaps demonising the 'all-guns-blazing' Perseus, it tells us little of
how we should view Medusa. The Melancholy Medusa focuses not on her
final demise but on the sad tale which precursors Perseus's entry. These
pieces remind us of the toils that Medusa went through and perhaps
choose to display her as the victim as many women were in those times.
 |
| Evelyn de Morgan "Bust of Medusa" (1876) |
Although, whilst dealing with these characters of Greek times, it is
quite easy to separate ourselves from what these tales are about. They
represent attitudes towards women of the time, the idea that of that
time, it was acceptable or expected to punish the victim of rape, which
itself says a lot about the prevailing attitudes towards women at the
time. We can often distance ourselves with the morals of these times
given that they existed over 2,000 years ago. Yet, it seems that these
morals remain prevalent today, as noted from the multiples prolific case
studies from Saudi Arabia where women who are rape victims in today's
society are lashed and punished for being abused. Notably, the famous
Qatif rape case (for more info about this generally see this.)
Evelyn De Morgan explores this melancholy Medusa in her bust of 1876.
You can tell from the oblique angle of her head, the open eyes that
display not sleep but distinct melancholy and introspection. The oblique
angle gives a sense of shame, as if Medusa feels ashamed of her
appearance and the curse that befell her. As an outcast and unable to
look upon another man again, Medusa is left with the memory of the rape
by Poseidon and the punishment of solitude. Alice Fleming, the sister of
Rudyard Kipling and close friend of De Morgan encapsulates the
sculpture with a verse:
"Medusa -
Is there no period set?
Is pain eternal?
Still through the eons must her vipers sting?
For all eternity the anguish burn?
An endless circle, endless suffering!
Beauty that had lit heaven, shut deep in Hell."
Alice Fleming
The Dilemma of "Aspecta Medusa" - Rossetti
 |
| Rossetti - "Aspecta Medusa" (1867) |
Despite the fact that Rossetti himself described this piece as a "very straightforward work",
I am genuinely baffled by this painting. Rossetti has left clues in two
different directions on this one and it appears that I'm not the only
one to be so confused by it. A number of sites discussing this piece
have directly conflicting views about the subject matter yet neither
acknowledge that the contrary opinion exists.
There are two possible interpretations for this piece:
1.) The subject of the painting is Medusa
2.) The subject of the painting is Andromeda
To explain further, Rossetti wrote a couple of stanzas to accompany the
painting to clarify things or to be honest, make things more obscure:
"Andromeda, by Perseus saved and wed,
Hanker'd each day to see the Gorgon's head:
Till o'er a fount he held it, bade her lean,
And mirror'd in the wave was safely seen
That death she liv'd by.
Let not thine eyes know
Any forbidden thing itself, although
It once should save as well as kill:
but be
Its shadow upon life enough for thee"
Rossetti
This describes the story of Perseus, Andromeda and the head of Medusa.
As mentioned previously Medusa's head still retained its powers even
after being severed. Perseus, after turning his almost stepfather into
stone chose to save Andromeda from being tied to a rock where she was
being sacrificed to a sea monster Cetus. All thanks to her mother's
boast of her beauty (Mothers eh?). Perseus with his wily ways used
Medusa's head to turn the serpent to stone. With Andromeda rescued and
then married to Perseus, the curious damsel wanted to see the head that
saved her life so Perseus shows her the head in the basin.
The title of the painting is "Aspecta Medusa" which does give us a
hint on translation as to which female is portrayed in the painting.
Sadly, my knowledge of Latin stops at Amo, Amas, Amat but Google
Translate (usually reliable) and other translation sites come up with
the same thing either "The appearance of Medusa" or "Countenance of
Medusa". This weighs quite heavily in the favour of option one since the
idea that this is the appearance of Medusa means that's who we're
probably looking at. On the flip side in the book "The Medusa Effect" by
Thomas Albrecht translates "Aspecta Medusa" as "Medusa Beheld", the
simple difference between the passive or the active verb is the problem
here. The book goes on to explain the context of the painting, which
gives significance to option number 2.
Frauenhofer writes in contradiction of this:
"In this picture, however, Medusa retains her original beauty. She is
the typical Rossettian ideal: she has a strong facial structure, her
lips are full, and her long, reddish hair has been left loose and
flowing. Yet she has an air of doom about her. Medusa merges with the
murky background, gazing downwards into the darkness as her head tilts
ominously to the side."
 |
| Study for "Aspecta Medusa" - Rossetti |
This highlights the importance of looking at the picture itself; two
clues lead me to believe that visually there is a strong argument that
the subject is indeed Medusa. Rossetti although did not complete the
painting also chose not to show any clues that this was Andromeda by
painting a basin of water or Perseus. He did however tilt the subject's
neck over in such an elongated manner that it symbolically reminds me of
the placement of a head to be slaughtered on the chopping block; the
neck is clearly exposed and has a foreshadowing feeling of Medusa
beheading. The hair in the picture dangles and is voluptuous, it is
certainly a focal point in the composition which parallels with the fact
that Medusa was renowned for her hair prior to the change and once
again foreshadows the hair of snakes in the Medusa myth. Finally, the
ominous surroundings and darkness do not belie the surroundings we see
in Burne-Jones's display of Andromeda and the water basin; it has a
macabre, dark atmosphere which envelopes the subject building upon the
other elements that foreshadow Medusa's fate.
If we look behind the more famous chalk piece and discover the story
behind it then we ad another facet to the story. It was originally
commissioned for 1500 pounds by Charles Mathews who sought a depiction
of Perseus showing Andromeda the head of Medusa however, he cancelled
the agreement when he saw the first draft simply because he did not like
the gruesomeness of the severed head. I think this is our most
convincing clue since it is clear that you can transpose Andromeda's
position in the draft pencil drawing to the chalk piece. Although it
appears fairly well balanced on both sides, it seems to me that as much
as I would prefer for it to be Medusa perhaps this evidence cannot be
overlooked and I must find in favour of option number 2...but a number
of other sites do disagree, so what do you think?
Even if it is indeed Medusa Beheld then we can still obtain a
sympathetic view of Medusa since Andromeda does not look on her face
with disgust but rather passivity and perhaps gratitude or even empathy.
Ruskin, Medusa and the Weather?
 |
| Burne-Jones - "The birth of Pegasus and Chrysaor" (1876) |
Ruskin displayed a complex relationship with Medusa. He heralded her as a
concept of the masculine and feminine combined a powerhouse of
destruction and dominance mainly by referring to the weather.
Ruskin calls Medusa, the personification of "towering cumulus cloud
seen in approaching thunderstorms...Medusa (the dominant), the most
terrible. She is essentially the highest storm-cloud, therefore the hail
cloud of cold, her countenance turning all who behold it into
stone...The serpents about her head are the fringes of the hail, the
idea of coldness being connected with the Greeks with the bite of the
serpent."
Poor Ruskin. He had a tough old time but managed to even put his feeling
into words eloquently when in despair and whom did he think of in his
hour of comfort. Yes, that's right - Medusa:
"I try to feel that life is worth having - unsuccessfully enough...I sometimes wish I could see Medusa"
In fact, Richard Dellamora in "Masculine desire: the sexual politics of Victorian Aestheticism" states that even though Ruskin "celebrates Medusa associating her with the immanent presence of a divine masculine principle" that "Medusa haunts Ruskin's imagination during the decade."
The Sublime Medusa
Medusa, as a character, can herself be seen as a creature of sublimity
since in many conceptions of her she is depicted as so beautiful to
behold that it is the overwhelming nature of her beauty which catalyses
the 'stonification'. Shelley in his poem (in full
here) remarks:
"Yet it is less the horror than the grace which turns the gazer's spirit into stone
"
"Tis the tempestuous loveliness of terror"
"Of all the beauty and the terror there-
A woman's countenance, with serpent locks,
Gazing in death on heaven from those wet rocks."
Shelley
Shelley seems to be conveying that it is Medusa's beauty that is driving
the destruction. Medusa can be represented aesthetically as something,
which is so ultimately destructive to humanity that she evokes the
concept of the sublime and it is in this way that Medusa, is a femme
fatale.
The reinterpretation of Medusa by the Pre-Raphaelites means we can view
her as a commandingly beautiful being capable of instilling aesthetic
pleasure, yet her character is so dominantly and innately destructive
that she becomes a figure of horror creating terror within the
spectator. We must therefore find that Medusa is actually a femme fatale
that ensnares and destroys men not by the conventional beauteous
qualities of the other femme fatales but by her sublimity making her one
of a kind.
Medusa and THE END OF THE WORLD
To leave you on a happy note, in addition to living at the end of the
world there has been theoretical talk that Medusa is a symbol for the
end of the world or at least the end of the world having meaning. Ruskin
as mentioned above seeks Medusa to deprive him of life and to end his
world.
Looking at another film "The Medusa Touch" is a psychological
horror/thriller centred on a novelist with telekinetic powers, who
causes disasters simply by thinking about them. In this way, he is an
extension of Medusa's powers holding the ability to cause apocalyptical
catastrophes with only his imagination. The reference to Medusa derives
from the idea that his power is uncontrolled and unintentional, just
like Medusa has no choice over whether her gaze turns you to stone, the
thoughts that are imagined by the protagonist occur whether he intends
them to or not.
Both the film and the Medusa have been linked with the idea of Nihilism
which in simple terms is a philosophical approach which negates the
meaning of existence or other ideas like truth, knowledge etc.
Refraining from looking into the eyes of Medusa is then interpreted as
humankind's reluctance to face the depressing reality that the universe
is meaningless. Jack London in his book "The Mutiny of Elsinore" writes a confusing passage explaining this:
"The profoundest instinct in man is to war against the truth; that
is, against the Real. He shuns facts from his infancy. His life is a
perpetual evasion. Miracle, chimera and to-morrow keep him alive. He
lives on fiction and myth. It is the Lie that makes him free. Animals
alone are given the privilege of lifting the veil of Isis; men dare not.
The animal, awake, has no fictional escape from the Real because he has
no imagination. Man, awake, is compelled to seek a perpetual escape
into Hope, Belief, Fable, Art, God, Socialism, Immortality, Alcohol,
Love. From Medusa-Truth he makes an appeal to Maya-Lie."
London
So in simple terms:
Humans are instinctively and innately against truth i.e. reality,
choosing to believe lies/fiction in order to evade the depressing
reality of the world. We do this by escaping reality through our
imagination including "Hope, Belief, Fable, Art, God, Socialism,
Immortality, Alcohol, Love". We have no control over this ignorance of
reality, we cannot help believe the lies. Animals, however, have no
imagination and so see reality for what it is. Rather than look at the
eyes of Medusa, which would reveal the fact that reality is meaningless,
we choose to believe the Hindu concept of Maya based on the illusion
that we do not experience the world itself but rather our own created
projection of it. Phew.
Perhaps Medusa is beyond a femme fatale, beyond destruction of a single
being but in fact a representative character for a self-destructive
interpretation of reality. Deep.
