Topic 43 of 74: The Brontes and the Visual Arts
Fri, Nov 21, 1997 (00:13) |
Elena Sheehan (Rochelle)
The importance of the visual arts to the Brontes is very evident. Their
paintings evolved alongside their literary skills, though never to the same
heights. References to art are scattered through their novels (all save WH).
The general interpretation runs like this: Branwell was talented and had the
potential to make a career as a portrait artist - needless to say, he blew it.
Charlotte would have liked a career as an artist - and I've wondered if perhaps
this might be yet another clue to her dislike of her brother at the end of
his life, when he had blown opportunities for training in the field that he had
never had. Nevertheless, her appreciation for art and her enjoyment in it lasted
all her life and is reflected in her writing. Emily used her own artistic
capabilities as yet another way of appreciating the natural world (hence the
number of drawings she did from life of scenes and animals). For Anne it was
a usefull skill as a governess as well as an enjoyable activity.
Were they great artists? No. They were competant, and might have been more so
had it not been for the rigidly structured way art was taught. Witness here
Charlotte's very pretty but utterly unoriginal copies of flowers. She was a
girl, so it was mete for her to do floral art. Emily showed the most originality
of the girls - though the pet portraits to that wonderful fir tree she gave
to one of the students in Brussels. Compare Charlotte and Emily's drawings of
the same subject.
Some of Charlotte's criticisms of contemporary art in Villette reminded me of]
simmiler criticisms the pre-Raphaelites were raising at the same time. Overly
mannered, unnaturally lit scenes, with nothing of the natural world to them, if
I remember correctly, were some of the issues she raised. The pre-Raphaelites
first exhibited in 1848. While Charlotte had other things on her mind that
year, does anyone know if she ever expressed an opinion on the school?
5 responses total.
Topic 43 of 74 [bronte]: The Brontes and the Visual Arts
Response 1 of 5: Amy Wolf (amy2) * Fri, Nov 21, 1997 (19:07) * 3 lines
I can't remember reading a direct reference of Charlotte's to the pre-Raphaelites in MARGARET SMITH'S LETTERS, but of course, this book only goes through 1847.
I was really impressed with Emily's pet portraits on my trip to Haworth - they were just wonderful. Seeing Branwell & Charlotte's Angrian illustrations was a kick as well!
Topic 43 of 74 [bronte]: The Brontes and the Visual Arts
Response 2 of 5: Elena Sheehan (Rochelle) * Sun, Nov 23, 1997 (16:55) * 11 lines
They adapted a lot of the plates they had access to in publications such
as the "Keepsake" annual to Angrian and Gondal illustrations.
BTW, was that Merlin hawke of Emily's called Nero or Hero? The biographies
can't seem to agree!
It's interesting to chart Charlotte's appreciation of her own art indication
through the novels. She seemed to think the predominate method fine enough in
Jane Eyre, but had totally changed her mind by Vilette. In the latter novel,
not only is she critical of teaching art by the painstaking copying of engravings,
but she also had a swipe at art in general - starting with the Rubenesque
Cleopatra.
Topic 43 of 74 [bronte]: The Brontes and the Visual Arts
Response 3 of 5: Amy Wolf (amy2) * Mon, Nov 24, 1997 (11:35) * 2 lines
I think that Charlotte's swipe at that Cleopatra might have had more to do with its depiction of women than its art, though she objected to that too.
As far as that hawk -- Margaret Smith has a footnote in her letters claiming its name was NERO, not Hero, as has often been mistranscribed.
Topic 43 of 74 [bronte]: The Brontes and the Visual Arts
Response 4 of 5: Elena Sheehan (Rochelle) * Mon, Nov 24, 1997 (22:24) * 14 lines
I think you're correct in her the depiction of women being one of
her objections, though it was in the context of a wider criticism of artworks
in general.
Charlotte at least had no illusions in her later life as to whether her works
demonstrated a vast talent. I respect her ability to apply realistic assesments
to her earlier works. There also just seems to be - and maybe I'm reading too
much into it - a dissapointment at how her art education had let her down.
I suppose I'm not the only one familier with that feeling - what could be worse
than recognising genius, and not possessing it yourself? She had good instincts
and a love for art, just not commensurate capabilities. Gee, ultimately she
just had to settle for being a literary genius...
Topic 43 of 74 [bronte]: The Brontes and the Visual Arts
Response 5 of 5: Amy Wolf (amy2) * Tue, Nov 25, 1997 (11:50) * 1 lines
I too respect Charlotte's later assessment of her artwork & even her poetry, for that matter. She had a great instinct for judging others & her judgment was never clouded about her own merits either. At heart, she was a realist. And she was the first (and nearly the only) one to immediately see the genius of Emily's poetry during E.'s lifetime. That alone would guarantee her immortality even if she -hadn't- written JE & Villette!!
bronte conference 
Main Menu