My9s
Creative Commons License
This exhibit has not been peer reviewed.  [Return to Group]  [Printer-friendly Page] 

Michael Field's La Gioconda: Redefining Female Beauty In Art

Alix Caissie and Nicole Farrell

Ryerson University

Pater’s essay on the painting La Gioconda focuses mainly on how he interprets Da Vinci’s inspiration and perspective. He argues that Da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa as a representation of his “ideal lady, embodied and beheld at last.”@ Again, the concept of objectification is brought into the interpretation of art. The woman being “beheld at last” creates the notion that she is something hard to attain and thus worshipped, making her essence less realistic and more idealistic. The suggestion of Da Vinci having created the Mona Lisa as the ideal of femininity is congruent to the dominant male observation of sexualizing women in art. He goes so far as to say that when “set...beside those white Greek goddesses or beautiful women of antiquity..how they would be troubled by this beauty!”@ Not only is the Mona Lisa the idealized woman, but she is even more beautiful and more yearned for than goddesses, who are known for being untouchable and the ultimate in male adoration. It is also important to note that Pater chose to analyze La Gioconda in an essay format, and focused on Da Vinci’s inspiration behind the painting. Instead of personally expressing his feelings about the painting through poetry or more informal prose, he structured an essay which reflects the rigidity and objectivity of the male observer. His focus on Da Vinci’s interpretation shows his attention to how other males saw the image and what might have inspired Da Vinci to paint La Gioconda, which he deduces as an idealization of the perfect woman. By choosing to write a structured essay, his argument becomes a representation of the objectivity of the male observer and the focus on one fixed meaning of the image rather than in Field’s poetry which was a more personal reflection and subjective in its exploration of what the female image represented.
Picture
Walter Pater
Illustration by Simeon Solomon
         Although it may seem that the idealization of women’s beauty is a way of appreciating their influence and importance, it only succeeds in doing the opposite because the focus is not on the women themselves but rather on a fake, over exaggerated idea of what a woman is or should be. It could be interpreted that Pater appears to be taking the subjective approach by individualizing Da Vinci’s feelings about the female form, but he is in actuality looking at the painting with an objectivist approach because of the dominance he has over the image and the narrow meaning by which he defines it. The female form is sexualized, thus becoming defined as the object of males’ desire. With no emphasis on any other aspect of the female’s being, her meaning becomes fixed and objectively viewed. The male observers, in this case both Da Vinci and Pater, view the image with sexual connotations in mind, thus creating an imbalance of power. The sexual overtones of the image define the woman as being important for the desire of the male, thus making the woman an aide in abiding to what the male wants. This gives the power to the male, and the female becomes submissive and objectified.
Picture
Edith Emma Cooper and Katherine Harris Bradley
Michael Field
Field, however, denies this objectivity and instead presents La Gioconda as a figure who denies the male gaze and takes on a more dominant role outside male objectification. As Lyseck presents, the first half of “La Gioconda” plays into the exchange of the female form as an object of male consumption, listing off the desired attributes which demonstrate how easily the female image can be consumed.@ The breaking down of the female form into the eyes, lips, cheek, and smile mimics the approach that Pater takes, which defines the female “not as a real woman, but as a series of male fantasies.”@ Furthermore, the implementation of the word “historic” to describe these qualities is a direct critique towards Pater’s idealization of La Gioconda, and the eternalization of the female as a sexualized commodity. Accordingly, Field’s utilization of this word allows them to enter into a criticism not only of Pater’s essay, but of the encompassing role of female aesthetic within the Victorian context; whereby they can move away from simply translating the painting to arguing for its importance in redefining the female aesthetic experience.
Historic, side-long, implicating eyes;
A smile of velvet's lustre on the cheek;
Calm lips the smile leads upward; hand that lies
Glowing and soft, the patience in its rest
Of cruelty that waits and does not seek
For prey; a dusky forehead and a breast
Where twilight touches ripeness amorously:
Behind her, crystal rocks, a sea and skies
Of evanescent blue on cloud and creek;
Landscape that shines suppressive of its zest
For those vicissitudes by which men die.
@
    With the introduction of a semi-colon on the third line of the verse, “La Gioconda” suddenly takes on Field’s perspective.@ The poem switches, turning away from the description of the female form to a description of her motive. Yet, the introduction of the lines, “hand that lies/ Glowing and soft, the patients in its rest/Of cruelty that wait and doth not seek/For prey” presents a duality. On one hand, the act of passivity attributed to La Gioconda, “exposes the institutionalized silencing of women under the male gaze,”@ thus providing a strict critique of Pater assertion of male dominance. However, it also demonstrates a resistance within the figure, which provides La Gioconda with agency. Although the passivity provides that La Gioconda does not become outwardly dominant, it does create a sense of imagery where she appears almost spider-like, waiting patiently for those seeking only her beauty to become entrapped in her web. La Gioconda then becomes the one that preys on the subject, turning the objectification towards the reader, whereby they become consumed by her. Moreover, with the introduction of the colon on the seventh line, Field is denying the consumption of the image as a whole. By directing the reader towards the background, they refocus the reading to something which is “far less satisfying,”@ reinforcing La Gioconda’s dominance as woman outside of a sexualized object.
Mona Lisa (La Gioconda)
The Mona Lisa (La Gioconda)
Leonardo Da Vinci
    This re-direction of consumption and the inversion of the gaze is reflective of Field’s push to redefine the role of the female, both within authorship and as part of the aesthetic. The refocusing of the female form as a dominant figure denies the role of the viewer who, like Pater, may objectify and sexualize the image. Through inverting the gaze, so that the reader becomes objectified, La Gioconda can stand independently as both subject and object, which further re- asserts Field’s position of multiple interpretation. This is further reinforced by the lack of physical representation, which as previously stated forces the reader to recreate the images and therefore lets the image stand on its own.
Through analyzing Field’s “La Gioconda,” this essay has determined that Field was a pioneer in establishing a new perspective that redefined how women were perceived in both art and society. In contrast to Pater’s structured, objectified analysis of the female form, Field was able to infiltrate the male perspective and deconstruct this singular form of interpretation for a more complex plurality of female beauty and meaning. Due to their ability to begin the change of female representation, it opened up the opportunity for women to gain more respect and intellectual standing in the literary sphere. Although women were still idealized for their beauty, Field gave the female image in art power beyond the objectification of outward appearance and allowed the female form to embrace and take ownership of their beauty. This agency given to the female form created a a positive atmosphere of female empowerment.