The Satyr and the Peasant
- Johann Liss -
Description of the Painting
The Satyr and the Peasant was painted by German painter Johann Liss. The painting was done on a fabric canvas and done with oil paint (Hand, 1993, pg. xiii). The most striking part of the painting is the Satyr that dominates the left half of the canvas. Despite this, however, his face is obscured with shadow, keeping his expression a mystery. After the Satyr, the painting guides the viewer to the right. First we see the faces of the peasant mother and child, their expressions sharply contrasting the (possible) expression of the satyr and the surprised/angry expression of the peasant man. The differences of the peasant's expressions is the “center” of the painting where most of its emotion and implications are held. This is supported with how light is used in the work. The painting clearly marks what you are supposed to look at with its use of light.
Once the faces are inspected, detail is what is left: the posture of the mother and how she holds the child, the clothing, the vines that circle the Satyr, and especially the spoon and bowl that the man is using. Then, after the majority of the canvas is considered, the viewer then notices the face of the child on the far bottom left. Almost as if he is an afterthought, the child is dwarfed and dominated by the Satyr, barely remembered. His gaze burns through the canvas, staring at the viewer with an accusatory glance.
The color and use of light is clearly baroque. The sharp contrasts of light and dark guides the viewer’s gaze. With this is mind, it is interesting that the Satyr’s body is half in shadow, despite being the “main” actor of the painting. This suggests that the Satyr is not the focus of the painting, but rather the peasant family and their expressions.
The composition of the characters is also worth noting. Again, the Satyr spreads and stands tall over the other characters. The woman is also standing, though she is clearly in the background. Due to her placement behind the man, her facial expression is understood only within the context of the scene and especially within the context of the expression of the man. Like the woman, the man is also a reactor in the scene given his sitting position, though he is the “main” reactor as the actions of the Satyr are clearly directed towards him. The mother and child’s smile (or possible laughter) suggests agreement and support towards the Satyr.
History of the Painting’s Construction
Inspiration
The painting itself is based on Aesop’s fable “The Satyr and the Traveller”. In the fable, a Satyr wanders in a forest in the middle of winter. He then encounters a Traveller who provides food and shelter in a nearby cave and the Satyr graciously accepts. In the cave, the traveller blows on his hands. The Satyr asks the traveller why he does this and the traveller says it’s to warm his hands. This impresses the Satyr, and they eat together. As they eat, the Traveller blows on his soup. Confused again, the Satyr asks why he does this. The traveller tells him that this is to cool the soup down. This contradiction “...provoked the Satyr’s indignation as much as the first had kindled his surprise: so, taking the man by the shoulder, he thrust him out of doors, saying, he would have nothing to do with a wretch who had so vile a quality as to blow hot and cold with the same mouth” (Aesop, 2012), the moral being that one should never trust hypocrites.
Construction
Despite being German, Liss’ paintings were mainly done in Italy and though the date is contested the painting’s composition suggests that is was done between 1623 and 1626. The realism, texture, and lighting also suggest inspiration from Caravaggio (Hand, 1993, pg. 122). What’s more is that this fable was adapted very often as a painting at the time, though usually not done in Italy. The most popular example of the fable is done by Marcus Gheeraerts the Elder which was done in Bruges in 1567 (Hand, 1993, pg. 121). According to Richard E. Spear, the painting is actually quite a departure of Liss’ other paintings, though the piece impressed many people as it inspired many copies (Spear, 1976, pg. 591). Lastly, one preparatory drawing exists and it is of the woman’s face thus further supporting the credibility that the painting’s center is their faces (Hand, 1993, pg. 122).
Connection to Money
Interpretation 1: Status Quo and Change
The painting can be seen as a metaphor to the reaction many are having to the economic and monetary systems that dominate life in the 21st century. The peasant man can be seen as upholding the status quo of increasing inequality, globalization, individualism, increasing alienation, etc. His plump size and that he is caught while he is eating food furthers this interpretation of him benefitting from the current system. Due to this, he has no interest in trying to stop or change the way that life is being lived. The Satyr represents a type of activist that brings awareness to the future that is coming or maybe even a rebel who is trying to enact change. The Satyr's indignation can therefore be seen as an act of defiance towards the power of the man.
It is doubtful that anything the Satyr can say will change the mind of the man, but what is most important is the reaction of the child and the woman. They are the ones that can feel that something is wrong, but have not seen it expressed clearly. With the appearance of the Satyr, their hardships are validated and they are now given a direction--a view of the future where money is not held so high.
This is the same reaction that many are having in the United States. The difficulty of living under capitalism was something that Democrats, as well as ethnic minorities, have understood for a long time, however, America's white working class is also realizing this. Many feel “left behind” and this feeling is what accounted for Donald Trump’s popularity leading up to the 2016 Presidential Race. The focus of welfare programs and even guaranteed incomes in the coming 2020 Presidential Race shows that this issue is still alive in the minds of Americans. The Satyr has revealed the problem, and people want change.
Interpretation 2: The Satyr as Money
While I have a proclivity to see the woman and child as the innocent that suffer from the system, the opposite is also possible. It may be that the painting is a metaphor for the introduction of money to human society. The Satyr represents money itself and the peasants are the rest of human society. Many were like the father: leading simple, calm lives and connected with their community, receiving support from cradle-to-grave from the various social systems they were born into (friends, family, religious groups, etc.). The lives of these common people was never the same after money. Their lives were brutally interrupted and replaced with a life led by money. Others were like the mother and child: happy and excited for the future dominated by the profit motive and individual wealth maximization. In this light, the woman’s expression can be seen as ominous, or even haunting as she supports the establishment of a world of precarity and anxiety.
Bibliography
Aesop. (n.d.). The Satyr and the Traveller. In C. Whittingham (Trans.), Aesop’s Fables. Retrieved fromhttps://www.gutenberg.org/files/39187/39187-h/39187-h.htm#Page_179
Hand, J. O., & Mansfield, S. E. (1993). German Paintings of the Fifteenth Through Seventeenth Centuries. Retrieved fromhttps://www.nga.gov/content/dam/ngaweb/research/publications/pdfs/german-painting-fifteenth-through-seventeenth-centuries.pdf
Liss, J. (1623). The Satyr and the Peasant [Oil on Canvas]. Retrieved from https://www.nga.gov/collection/art-object-page.1178.html
Spear, R. E. (1976). Johann Liss Reconsidered. The Art Bulletin, 58(4), 582–593. https://doi.org/10.2307/3049572
Comments
Post a Comment