Thursday's lecture will focus on the great eighteenth-century Spanish artist Francisco Goya, whose works might superficially seem to belong under the rubric of "Romanticism," but whose art is in actuality much more singular. One genre in which Goya excelled and found eager patronage was that of portraiture, of which this strange painting of Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga (1787-88) is a particularly unusual example. Manuel was the son of the Count and Countess of Altamira and is dressed as befitting his noble status in a splendid red costume. Yet Goya also surrounds the child with animals, including the magpie at Manuel's feet who is depicted holding Goya's own calling card in its beak. We have talked already in class about the role of signatures in works of art like Bruegel's Big Fish Eat Little Fish engraving, and about experiments with the genre of portraiture as exemplified by Rembrandt's contributions to the genre. In some past scholarship, Goya's portrait of Manuel has been interpreted according to traditions of animal symbolism, in which caged birds embody childhood innocence and magpies signify gossip, but as we will discuss in class, these interpretations do not prove wholly satisfying. What details or aspects of this portrait seem significant to you in terms of understanding both how Goya intends to represent Manuel, and how Goya situates himself (through his calling card) in relation to his artistic creation?
In Goya's Portrait of Manuel de Zuñiga, there are a few specific details in this portrait that seem significant to understanding how Goya intends to represent Manuel and how Goya presents himself in relation to the piece. Firstly, because of Manuel’s standing and that of his family, we might expect him to be painted in a way that displays the high position he will inherit or masculine qualities that represent him as one with time that will be ready to take over. In other words, we might expect imagery or symbols that show him being pruned and prepped, proclaiming to others of his inevitable rise to power. Instead, this piece is interesting because the young aristocrat is not stressed outright in any of these ways, but is surrounded by small animals that almost seem to cower behind his small little figure and rich costume. The string restraining the magpie and cowering animals seem to depict Manuel as in control of the animals, perhaps showing that actually Manuel will have a lot of power in the future, and already has great control and power in terms of who his family influences. Goya’s calling card in the beak of the magpie seems to show the artist is at the beck and call of even this child, symbolizing Goya’s relationship to the aristocracy as a loyal servant. If so, this painting is a way of prostrating Goya before his patrons in an act of humility. The onlooking cats could also represent Goya’s enemies who would greedily attack Goya the bird if not for the aristocracy to protect him.
ReplyDeleteSavannah is certainly right that the representation of Manuel restraining his pet magpie shows his mastery over nature and alludes to his future power and authority in adulthood. Really nice analysis!
DeleteI agree with Savannah in that I find the amount of control that Manuel has over the animals fascinating. He seems to be exploiting the magpie as bait in front of the cats, who are eyeing the bird as prey. But by holding the rope around its ankle, Manuel is able to either whisk the bird away to safety or let it be attacked.
ReplyDeleteIn playing off of the idea of childhood innocence, the halo of light behind his head in what appears to be a dark room, Manuel's rosy cheeks, and his gaze off into the distance make it seem as though he seems unaware of the power he holds. While he has the ability to save the magpie or not, he's not paying attention to what's unfolding by his feet. I think this notion of power is a product of Manuel's upbringing in an aristocratic family.
Nice addition to Savannah's comments, Molly, especially regarding the combination of control (over the bird and its predators) and the innocence reflected in Manuel's rosy cheeks and distant gaze.
DeleteAs mentioned in the prompt, (caged) birds may represent innocence. Another common thing they symbolize are people themselves. In the Bible, doves and ravens are commonly present. It is said that ravens are representative of humans, because they are not perfect, but God continues to give the power to fly onwards. Interestingly enough, both ravens and magpies are apart of the crow family of birds. In popular culture, crows tend to be a sign of bad omens. In this painting by Goya, Manuel is holding the magpie on a string, which may be representative of himself - on a string held up to high expectations of his powerful family. Both the bird and the child seem basically be objectified. Manuel seems very stiff and stoic, not at all how a child is usually acting - playful and full of life. Back to the magpie on the string, we can see that the cats are looming over it with wide eyes ready to prance. Goya seems to be making some sort of commentary on the life of the child. Since birds also represent innocence, we could see that Manuel's innocence may be lost soon, as the cats are ready to gobble it up.
ReplyDeleteJulia makes another interesting observation about the relation between the bird, the cats ready to pounce, and Manuel's imminent loss of childhood innocence. His controlling position in relation to the natural world signals his future adult status.
DeleteBy having the bird hold his own calling card in its beak, Goya is representing himself as the magpie. The bird's fate depends on the whim of little Manuel. Goya's success or failure was almost entirely dependent on the judgement of the aristocratic families he served. Even with his great skill, Goya still needed to eat, and to eat means to be paid. He is tied to the patrons he serves just as the magpie is tied to Manuel. The boy has power over all the animals, including the Magpie. It is Manuel's (the patron's) decision whether or not the bird (Goya) will be saved or fed to the cats. Goya was still part of a social hierarchy that found the wealthy at the top. So are we. Art is not free of society.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thought about how Goya may be commenting on his status as an artist within the hierarchy of aristocratic patronage!
DeleteBecause Manuel has a hold of the string attached to the magpie's ankle, he has full control whether or not the magpie survives when the cats pounce. I think this symbolizes Manuel's control over Goya in a way. Goya's life is in the hands of the aristocracy in a sense and that's who ultimately decides his fate. Manuel is still unaware of his status and his ability to have that much control as depicted in his rosy cheeks, child-like appearance (as opposed to the adult-like portrayals of Christ), and seemingly unaware gaze (he isn't watching the cats to make sure he saves the magpie in time).
ReplyDeleteKatie dovetails nicely on Alex's preceding point -- Manuel is represented both as an aristocratic descendent who will have a controlling position, and as a child who has not yet quite realized his stature and power.
DeleteOne of the aspects of this piece that sticks out to me when I first look at the piece is the scale of Manuel compared to the size of the piece. Manuel is depicted as very small when compared to all of the empty wall space that surrounds him. While this blank wall space may be to emphasize the animals on the bottom of the composition, compared to other portraits we have seen earlier throughout the semester, this one definitely sticks out in this way. Even the portrait of Van Eyck, which we discussed as being less self elevating (when compared to that of Durer), Van Eyck still depicted himself as taking up the entire composition. Goya seems to suggest the humbleness of Manuel and his lack of desire to be portrayed as above the others around him. The animals can also play into this idea. One could argue that by including the birds and cats, Goya is taking the attention off of Manuel and focusing it on other aspects of the composition. The other aspects that Goya is focusing on, like the birds, which represent innocence, may also play into how one should think of Manuel's character, as something that is impressive about him. On the other hand, the cats, symbolizing gossip are included which may show the two sidedness to Manuel's character.
ReplyDeleteBy including his signature on the calling card that is in the birds mouth, Goya is choosing to include himself in the piece in a very subtle yet creative way. While his name is not written largely, it is still in a place that the viewer will see as one will naturally be curious what the bird is holding in his mouth. Even if one did not look to see what was written on the card, the string that Manuel is depicted holding will draw the viewers eye down to the bird and subsequently to the calling card where Goya's name will be seen. This seems to suggest Goya's attempt as modesty, yet still making it clear that he wanted to be known for completing this piece.
Harry is quite right that the empty space surrounding Manuel seems to suggest his position in relation to a larger world, and it also gives the work an eerie cast that contributed to the interpretations of this as a death portrait in past scholarship (as I mentioned in lecture). Harry's interpretation of the calling card as modest yet assertive on Goya's part is also very compelling -- one might even compare it to the way that Michelangelo signed his name across the breast of the Virgin Mary in his early Pieta.
DeleteThe placement of the card at the feet of Manuel seems to show a subordination of the artist to the subject. There is a juxtaposition between the childlike, innocent nature of Manuel and his implied, future power. The magpie is vulnerable to the tendencies of the cats just as Goya may feel like he is is at the mercy of higher powers. The magpie is also, literally, at the mercy of Manuel and the string around its leg. The centrality of Manuel is also emphasized by the his red color of clothing, which makes him stand out the most prominently in the photo. His gaze into the distance is also of interest, because he seems to show a certain nonchalance and effortlessness in maintaining control over the magpie. Perhaps this reflects the seemingly random nature of who ascends and remains in power and who does not.
ReplyDeleteGreat analysis, Amrita! One could interpret Manuel's distant gaze both as nonchalant and effortless, or as purely innocent of his future power. It may be that Goya meant to suggest both interpretations simultaneously.
DeleteThis artwork may also suggest an easily breakable boundary between childhood innocence and evilness. This is embodied through the contrast of the innocence of Manuel's eyes and the evilness of the cats' eyes. By depicting the magpie holding his own calling card, he may be suggesting that between the forces of evilness and innocence, he prefers to stay innocent like a child. Compared to being converted to a evil person, he would rather be manipulated by an unsophisticated but innocent child.
ReplyDeleteInteresting idea about how the threat of evil (perhaps represented by the lurking cats) as threatening Manuel's child state of innocence?
DeleteThe first thing I noticed in this painting is not Manuel, but the cats hiding in the background. The cats are staring at the magpie and the calling card in its beak. The position of the calling card near Manuel's feet and in front of the cats (predator of magpie) suggests that Goya feels inferior to the aristocrats. He is serving the powerful family, and does not have much power himself. I also noticed that Manuel is controlling the magpie with the string he is holding. This detail shows that Goya is fully aware of his role. He is fully controlled by the aristocrats, and is expected to do what they ask for. In addition, in the painting, Goya portrays Manuel in prominent red, emphasizing his dominance and the great power he has even as a innocent child.
ReplyDeleteNice summary of previous comments here!
Delete