Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Primal perception: the artist as animal in Nineteenth-Century France
(USC Thesis Other)
Primal perception: the artist as animal in Nineteenth-Century France
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
PRIMAL PERCEPTION: THE ARTIST AS ANIMAL IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY FRANCE by Claire Correu Nettleton A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (FRENCH) December 2010 Copyright 2010 Claire Correu Nettleton ii Dedication To U.G., the true artiste-animal iii Acknowledgements I would like to especially thank my chair, Dr. Antonia Szabari, for her support and for sharing her extensive theoretical, literary and historical knowledge which greatly developed and improved my dissertation. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Panivong Norindr and Dr. Akira Lippit, for contributing their knowledge of animal theory, which enriched my project. I would like to extend a special thanks to Justin Slosky for his unparalleled support and kindness during this process. Justin‟s strength and affirmation was fundamental to my completing the project. I also am extremely grateful for Susan Nettleton and Larry Morris‟ incredible support, generosity and abundant help with this dissertation. I would like to thank Ayana McNair for her motivation and encouragement and Michelle Har Kim for her help and reinforcement. Finally, I greatly appreciate the encouragement from my other friends and colleagues: Boriana Grigorova, James Rowlins, Rachel Russell, Suzannah Hall and Jessica Graham. iv Table of Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgements iii Abstract vi Introduction 1 Background 2 Theoretical Framework 7 Darwinian Aesthetic Revolution 15 Orientalism as Artistic Inspiration 23 (De)natured Aesthetics: Animals in the Urban Sphere 28 Devenir Minoritaire: Becoming Revolutionary or Becoming Insignificant? 33 Chapter Division and Summation of Current Views 35 CHAPTER ONE The Caged Animal: The Avant-garde Artist in Edmond and Jules de Goncourt‟s Manette Salomon 42 Scientific Background 46 Aesthetic Philosophy and Literary Criticism 49 The Jardin des Plantes: The Artistic Gateway 54 The Monkey Artist 71 Barbizon: The Peasant Artist 82 The Queen Ant 93 CHAPTER TWO Aquatic Visionaries: The Impressionist Artist and the Primordial Animal in Jules Laforgue‟s Oeuvre 100 "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin" 103 Nineteenth-Century and Modern Reception 109 Laforgue‟s Artistic Mission 113 Indigenous Aesthetics 116 Urban Aesthetics 121 Evolutionary Optics 125 Aesthetic Philosophy of the Unconscious 131 The Deep-Sea of the Unconscious Mind 136 Aquarium 138 Orient 143 Further Questions and Paradoxes 152 v CHAPTER THREE The Animal and Aesthetic Nihilism in Octave Mirbeau‟s Dans le ciel 154 Criticism of the Novel 156 Destruction 162 Darwin and Decadence: An Aesthetic of Decay and Horror 162 The Fly-Poet and Spider-Artist: Writing and Painting as Animalistic Processes 166 Urban/Internal Aesthetics 174 Nirvana: The Freedom of Nothingness 178 Unformed Aesthetics 183 Creation 186 Animals as Creative Symbols 186 The Spontaneous Generation of Art 191 Regeneration in Darwinism and Buddhism 197 Conclusion 203 The Stakes of the Project 203 Oppression or Freedom? 204 Bibliography 209 vi Abstract This dissertation examines the narrative found in Edmond and Jules de Goncourt‟s Manette Salomon (1867), Jules Laforgue‟s "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin" (1895) and Octave Mirbeau‟s Dans le ciel (1892-1893) that the avant-garde artist has an affinity with animals. This mythology, fueled by Darwinian and Lamarckian evolution and popular science, is an attempt to explain the aesthetic of Impressionist and Post- Impressionist paintings. These authors portray avant-garde artists as naive animals whose work undermines the rigid and outmoded values of the artistic institutions of their day. These authors argue that the artist-animal feels a sense harmony with the „natural world.‟ This longing for a mythical „nature‟ coincides with the Haussmannization and rampant urbanization of Paris at this time. As wildlife became increasingly scarce in modern cities, zoological parks were some of the only places where animals were abundantly present. Similarly, art and literature also began to serve as a means of "preserving the memory of animals." Mirbeau argues that nature exists within the mind of the artist instead of as an external reality. The Goncourt brothers and Laforgue idealize and orientalize the urban menagerie and the aquarium as institutions in which the artist can experience a nirvana-like oneness with animals. In contrast, in the Jardin des plantes, animals were mistreated and kept in cages. This institution also reinforced the social disparity between French citizens and "strangers," including Jewish people, peasants, and "exotic" colonial subjects. The myth of the „artist as animal‟ may, at times, actually reinforce the negligent, cruel and colonialist structures of the nineteenth-century. Paradoxically, in these texts, the animal also represents creative freedom and a radical vii aesthetic. This dissertation poses the questions: to what extent is the myth of the „artist as animal‟ revolutionary and to what extent does it reinforce the existing structure of its day? My work will attempt to answer these questions through close readings of the fictional works and nineteenth-century scientific, popular and scholarly texts. In addition, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari‟s notion of „becoming animal‟ will be instrumental in understanding the animal as a „creative line of escape‟ from confining institutions (Kafka 65). In contrast, Walter Benjamin‟s conception of the nineteenth-century „myth of the primal‟ will help address the ways in which nineteenth-century society attempted to conceal oppressive ideological structures (Arcades Project 4). The ideas set forth by Donna Haraway, as well as other post-modern zoological and ecological critics, will be useful in deconstructing the dichotomies inherent in the narrative of the „artist as animal‟. The dialogue between these theorists and the nineteenth-century texts will help illuminate our current understanding of the relationship between art, literature and animals. 1 Introduction During the mid to late nineteenth-century, French literary impressionists Edmond and Jules de Goncourt, Jules Laforgue and Octave Mirbeau constructed the myth that the avant-garde artist has an affinity with animals. 1 These authors create a fictional fantasy of artistic naïveté that is based on evolutionary theory and popular science. Literary scholars have yet to recognize or critique this narrative. The Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau perceive the artistic institutions of their times, such as the Académie des Beaux-Arts and the Salon, to be antiquated. 2 The myth of the „artist as animal‟ is an attempt to break free from the mandates and conventions of these institutions. Even though the myth of the „artist as animal‟ is an attempt to build a radical aesthetic theory, it is still a part of the colonialist and orientalist structure of nineteenth-century France. That said, this dissertation will argue that while the texts do not attempt to completely overturn the institutions of their day, they do present the possibility of a subversive, revolutionary aesthetic within the framework of this society. Furthermore, these literary impressionists seek to create the illusion that the artist may become one with a mythical, 1 In all three of the literary texts that I will be analyzing, the authors describe the artist as, at times, behaving like animals or looking like animals. For example, the Goncourt brothers compare the bohemian artist to a monkey (Manette Salomon 229), Laforgue suggests that the avant-gardist sees in a similar manner to a crustacean (Impressionnisme 137), and Mirbeau compares the artist to a spider (Dans le ciel 62). 2 For example, in Manette Salomon, the Goncourts place the artistic academy on Rue d‟Enfer (120). Laforgue wrote that the Impressionist must forget "les tableaux amasses par les siècles dans les musées, oubliant l‟éducation optique de l‟école (dessin et perspective, coloris)" (O.C. III 330). Mirbeau was against the academic structure of art in the nineteenth-century (Combats esthétiques 14). He believed that the artistic institutions of his day magnified "la prééminence du passée, les formes rigides et surannées, les préjugés au détriment de l‟innovation" that stifle individual creative freedom (14). 2 untouched nature 3 that is separate from urban civilization. 4 In contrast, this dissertation will argue that the myth of the „artist as animal‟ creates a distinct nineteenth-century urban aesthetic that attempts to compensate for the disappearance of animals and plants in modern life. Literary impressionism reveals a new role for art and literature: to preserve the memory of nature in its decline. This dissertation thus has important implications for the field of ecological criticism of today in addition to the literary scholarship of the nineteenth-century. Background The Second Empire (1852-1870) to the Third Republic (1870-1940) was a period of turbulent transformation in government, economics, science and art. The power of traditional royal institutions such as the Académie des Beaux-Arts waned in this burgeoning capitalistic society. 5 During these shifts in government and in the institutional structure of art, France was struggling for a new cultural and artistic identity that stood apart from the aesthetic traditions of the Old Regime. Artists thus looked to the newly 3 One definition of nature is: "all natural phenomena and plant and animal life, as distinct from man and his creation" (Collins English Unabridged Dictionary 2003). However, the problem with this definition is that it assumes that human beings and that which humans produce are separate from nature. 4 For example, in Manette Salomon, an artist stands next to an artificially-made pond in the Jardin des plantes. The Goncourt brothers describe the pond as "une mare du paradis: rien que des frissonnements, des frémissements, des ondulations " (544). The authors create the narrative of simplicity, indicating that this "natural paradise" only contains the basic vibrations of the wind. In reality, the Jardin des plantes is a human construction that is designed to look like nature. This is only one of the many examples of creating the artistic illusion of untouched nature that I will provide in my dissertation. 5 In Titres, toiles et critique d‟art: déterminants institutionnels du discours sur l‟art au dix- neuvième siècle en France, Leo Hoek discusses the many determining factors that contributed to the decline of the Salon at this time, such as shifts in the art market and the growing value of artistic autonomy. 3 discovered worlds that were rich with novel aesthetic possibilities, such as the art of Japan found in the Exposition universelle (1867) and the beautiful and exotic sea life found in the recently explored depths of the ocean. Furthermore, at this time, there was an influx of scientific investigations particularly in the study of animals, led by Lamarck, Darwin, Helmholtz and many popular scientists. The simplest creatures on the evolutionary scale became something of value that merited scientific observation. 6 Impressionists and Post-Impressionists developed an aesthetic of the primal. 7 Scientific discoveries appealed to artists because they introduced new, beautiful and awe-inspiring universes. These universes, such as the colorful coral in the sea, the majestic tigers or playful monkeys found in the Jardin des plantes, or fossil formations and eroded cliffs that indicated a dynamic and shifting world, had never been seen by Western human eyes (Kendall 297). However, although artists derived inspiration from the exploration of these “new worlds,” there is still an underlining, hidden substructure of France‟s militant colonialism. 8 This colonial aesthetic comes partially from the domination of several nations particularly in Asia, Africa and the South Pacific. 6 For example, in Histoire des invertébrés, Lamarck dedicates several volumes to worms, and C. Wyville Thomson‟s accounts of his undersea voyage discuss very primitive creatures in the ocean‟s depths. 7 Primal means "first". This aesthetic focused on biologically primitive traits that existed before humans ever walked the earth. However, the words "primal" and "primitive" also have racist connotations that suggest that which is not part of the Occidental culture. 8 This dissertation offers a critique of the colonialist ideology present in the mid to late nineteenth-century aesthetic theories. 4 The illusion of these utopic spaces coincided with the idealist dream of Haussmann‟s Paris. 9 In addition, the disappearance of nature due to industrialization fostered a new aesthetic appreciation for plants and animals. As Walter Benjamin points out, Haussmann‟s Paris incorporates an aesthetic of the primal which naturalizes urbanization and industrialization. New building materials such as glass, iron and concrete enabled architects to produce the illusion of nature in decorative, Art Nouveau facades, thus creating a mythical “land of milk and honey” that was at once “primitive” and “machine-like” (Benjamin “Paris: Capital of the Nineteenth-Century” 79). This mythic utopia is created “by means of technical artifice, the locus of a perfect imitation of nature” (Benjamin 80). 10 Furthermore, according to Benjamin, this fascination with the primal is a means of creating a blank slate where a supposedly new and original culture may begin (Arcades Project 4). Correspondingly, the literary impressionists analyzed in this dissertation discuss the avant-garde art of their day in terms of the novel, the revolutionary, the “primitive” and the “natural.” 11 9 Haussmann modernized Paris and eradicated much of its medieval structure. 10 Benjamin cites the Art Nouveau movement as an example of the technical reproduction of nature, such as the fabrication of decorative flowers from iron that could be sold as commodities (83). This emerging aesthetic of artificial nature continues even today, as Timothy Morton suggests. 11 For example, Laforgue argues that the Impressionist should perceive "franchement et primitivement," "voir naturellement" and "peindre naïvement" (O.C. III 330). In addition, The Goncourt brothers describe "le grand mouvement du retour de l‟art et de l‟homme du XIXe siècle à la nature naturelle, dans cette étude sympathique des choses à laquelle vont pour se tremper et se rafraîchir les civilisations vieilles, dans cette poursuite passionnées des beautés simples"(360). Crescent, one of the characters in Manette Salomon who was characterized as part of this movement, was "un des premiers il avait bravement rompu avec le paysage historique […] il avait été au premier champ, à la première herbe, a la première eau; et là, toute la nature lui était apparue et lui avait parlé" (360). The Goncourt brothers construct the narrative that a return to "nature" in the nineteenth-century could refresh and renew an old civilization. This idea parallels 5 To explain this new aesthetic, these literary impressionists developed a narrative that the avant-garde artist is biologically closer to animals than other humans. This dissertation dissects the narrative of the “artist as animal” and the creative process that this narrative attempts to explain. Inherent in this myth is a set of binaries: primal/civilized, animal/human and even oriental/occidental, 12 in which the revolutionary artist is labeled primal, animalistic and oriental. In these dichotomies, the avant-gardist identifies with the minority. For example, in Manette Salomon, Coriolis is a Creole artist whose muse is a Jewish woman. Coriolis‟ friends include Anatole, a bohemian artist, and Vermillon, a monkey. Gilles Deleuze argues that identifying with the minority 13 instead of the majority can create a fissure in an oppressive, totalitarian ideology that limits creative freedom. According to Deleuze, “Le problème est celui d‟un devenir-minoritaire: non pas faire semblant, non pas faire ou imiter l‟enfant, le fou, la femme, l‟animal, le bègue ou l‟étranger, mais devenir tout cela, pour inventer de nouvelles forces ou de nouvelles armes” (Dialogues 11). The word “inventer” coupled with the militaristic language of “forces” and “armes” captures the true essence off the avant-garde: a révolutionnaire, marginal aesthetic. One could understand this idea in terms of a Hegelian Benjamin‟s notion that the myth of the "primal" is a means of breaking away from the recent past to forge new artistic ideas (see page 11). The character Crescent is described as "primal" in the literal sense of "first" because he was supposedly present at the "first field", the "first grass" and the "first water." 12 Animal and cultural theorist Donna Haraway has often described the tendency for people to orientalize animals. She writes that the opposition between human and animal is similar to the opposition between West and East because the former has often held more power than the latter, and the latter is often dismissed as inferior (Promises of Monsters 10). 13 The Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau all compare avant-garde art to Asian art because they both reject traditional European perspectives and techniques. Laforgue writes: "Notre polychrome moderne n‟a rien à voir avec celle de l‟Extrême Orient" (Textes de critique d’art 82). 6 dialectic in which the innovative marginal group opposes the dominant, established group. This dialectic eventually gives rise to a synthesis of both ideas. For Deleuze, the minority creates ruptures within the existing society to allow for multiple, new modes of thinking. Deleuze‟s understanding is different from a Benjaminian utopia. Benjamin argues that minor artworks can possibly become consumed and exploited by the majority and used as commodities or political tools. Even though the narrative of the primal artist is an attempt to undermine the traditional values of institutions that espoused cerebral, academic art, there are elements in the narrative that are aligned with those traditional values. The Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau portray Impressionists as crude, uneducated animals, who see and paint according to instinct rather than intellect or tradition. However, in fact, many of these artists were classically trained and did study past works of art. In addition, the myth of artistic naïveté can contain colonialist, sexist and racist undertones, thus perhaps reinforcing the binary oppositions that it seeks to undermine. Specifically, Manette Salomon describes the animals, plants and other forms of nature that can inspire the creative artist and incite “nouvelles façons de voir” (Manette Salomon 413). In contrast, this novel naturalizes many of the institutions, prejudices and racist beliefs of the time period. Manette Salomon idealizes the Jardin des plantes, a colonialist institution in which animals were kept in cages in deplorable conditions. This novel also suggests that marginal figures such as women, Jews and bohemians 14 are closer to animals than other 14 In the novel, both Manette, a Jewish woman, and Anatole, a bohemian artist, are described to both look and act like monkeys (229, 269). The Goncourt brothers also write in their journals that 7 people. Thus, the Goncourt brothers‟ artistic vision differs from that of Deleuze. While Manette Salomon offers the possibility of a revolutionary transformation through becoming a minority, the novel also stifles any attempt of the minority to deviate from the norm. Laforgue and Mirbeau, who wrote several decades after the Goncourt brothers, are much less conservative. However, both Laforgue and Mirbeau do indeed orientalize animals and compare them to Eastern sages. 15 In their quests for a transformative, avant- garde vision, both Laforgue and Mirbeau, at times, reinforce the prejudices of their own society. This dissertation asks: to what extent is this myth of the „artist as animal‟ revolutionary and to what extent does it reinforce the existing structure of its day? Theoretical Framework Because Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari discuss Impressionist and Post- Impressionist paintings in their works, their ideas on aesthetics may help answer this question. Edmond and Jules de Goncourt‟s Manette Salomon (1867), Jules Laforgue‟s Impressions (1883) and "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin" (1895) and Octave Mirbeau‟s Dans le ciel (1892-1893) describe a mythical process of the avant-garde artist transforming into an animal-like state. According to Deleuze, becoming animal, “C‟est une ligne de fuite créatrice” (Deleuze and Guattari. Kafka 65) because it is an escape from oppressive women are closer to animals than men because the authors believe that women base their lives on sentiment and maternal instinct (Journal. I, 23 Juillet, 1865 1161). 15 In "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin" Laforgue compares the aquarium animals to Buddhist sages. In addition to animals, Laforgue orientalizes other parts of nature. For example, he calls the Rhine river, the "Rhin oriental, le Gange" (Berlin cour de la ville, O.C. III 343). Mirbeau collapses the distinction between Darwinism and Buddhism (Lettres de l’Inde 44-45). See chapter 3. 8 societal institutions that hinder creative freedom. 16 Deleuze and Guattari‟s aesthetic is one of mutation and rupture from past ways of seeing. 17 It should be noted that Deleuze and Guattari‟s notion of „becoming animal‟ can be conceived as a rhetorical transformation, as Akira Lippit explains (Electric Animal 26). This aesthetic or rhetorical description of the „artist as animal‟ differs from eighteenth-century conceptions of artists (as those who improve upon nature) and animals (as those who serve man). This rhetorical fusion between artist and animal suggests a departure from previous discourse and ways of thinking and can create new ideas and new modes of perception that are no longer anthropocentric. In addition, the understanding of „becoming animal‟ as a rhetorical concept perhaps alludes to the new role that art and literature play in preserving our memory of animals in an increasingly urban and technological world. The myth of the „artist as animal‟ may be a rhetorical device that also bridges the gap between art and nature in modern society. Therefore, for Deleuze and Guattari, the animal does not symbolize a primitive or primal state. The animal represents transformation and novelty. Animals break free from the confines of human institutions, allowing the possibility of new thought and new action. Even if the animal has historically been associated with the “primitive,” one should also recognize that the animal is an important part of modernity. According to 16 However, becoming animal is not the final stage of this metamorphosis. Becoming animal is constantly in flux. For these theorists, the most effective means of escaping oppressive societal structures is to become "imperceptible" (Deleuze and Guattari. Kafka 67). 17 Art shocks the viewer, "brisant les cadres de sa perception habituelle, l‟entraînant dans ces nouvelles manières de sentir […] Quand la sensation atteint le corps à travers l‟organisme, elle prend une allure excessive et spasmodique. Elle rompt les bornes de l‟activité organique" (Introduction à Gilles Deleuze 208). 9 Lippit, the animal is “neither a regressive nor primitive figure” (Electric Animal 26). Instead, “Not only can the animal be seen as a crucial figure for the reading of that history, but the animal also serves as the very figure of modernity itself. The animal can be seen, in fact, as the figure of modern subjectivity” (Lippit 25-26). As previously mentioned, the French public became fascinated with animals during a time of industrialization and urbanization as animals and other signs of nature began to disappear. As Lippit writes, “If the animal cannot die but it is nonetheless vanishing, then it must be transferred to another locus, another continuum in which death plays no role” (Electric Animal 189). For the Goncourts, Laforgue and Mirbeau, this locus was Impressionistic art and literature. The animal thus could be viewed as an emblem of modern times and modern culture. In view of these modern theoretical frameworks, this dissertation deconstructs the nineteenth-century narrative of “primal perception.” Primal means both “first in time” and “first in importance” from the Latin “primus.” Of course, the terms “primal” and “primitive” are loaded concepts with many scientific, anthropological, sociological and artistic definitions that have racist connotations. The myth of longing for a more “primal” existence contains colonialist undertones, which were also a driving force in nineteenth- century culture. My dissertation will mainly focus on an evolutionary or biological understanding of the word: primal refers to the early creatures on earth that have simple or biologically primitive traits. The biological definition of “primitive” is : “ce qui appartient au premier stade de l‟apparition de la vie animale ou végétale” (TLF 1194). 10 Primitive traits that are seen in animals and plant life existing today are considered as scientific evidence of the evolutionary process. The term „animal‟ for Deleuze and Guattari, is synonymous with the term „metamorphosis,‟ for animals are continuously transforming and evolving: “Tout dans l‟animal est metamorphose” (Deleuze and Guattari. Kafka 64). The animal was not only a figure of the avant-garde movement but also of nineteenth-century society itself, which was mutating and evolving. This society might be labeled a “devenir-revolutionnaire,” what Arnaud Bouaniche defines as an “alliance de la philosophie avec les forces créatrices de son époque, forces qui font signe vers de nouvelles valeurs, de nouvelles manières de vivre et de sentir” (Gilles Deleuze : une introduction 34). On one hand, Manette Salomon, “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin,” Dans le ciel point to new and revolutionary ways of thinking and creating art. On the other hand, in contrast with Deleuze and Guattari‟s ideas, these works also reproduce the racist and sexist structures of mid to late nineteenth-century French society. The literary impressionists approach the revolutionary, biological “primal” from a crypto-racist and colonialist understanding of “primal.” However, the literary impressionists also recognize that the animal is a central part of modern life, and they exploit the animal‟s appeal to an urban public in their works. 18 Deleuze‟s theory is useful for understanding that of the literary impressionists because he argues that true art cannot be understood on an intellectual level; rather it occurs on a visceral level that shocks and stimulates change in the viewer or reader. Post- 18 See the section "(De)natured Aesthetics: Animals in the Urban Sphere" in this introduction. I will expand upon this concept throughout my dissertation. 11 Impressionist paintings, particularly those of Van Gogh and Cézanne (Bouaniche 210), impact the viewer on a physiological level and can alter one‟s perception of the world: Deleuze points to the Impressionists who utterly twisted perception. A concept, Deleuze says, creates a „crack in the skull [fend le crane], it‟s a habit of thought that is completely new, and people aren‟t used to thinking like that, not used to having their skulls cracked, since a concept twists our nerves‟ (Gilles Deleuze‟s ABC Primer Interview with Claire Parnet). Because Impressionist 19 works looked very different from past works of art and contemporary Salon paintings, they are often considered to evoke a perception that is “completely new.” 20 As Benjamin David Giorgio defines the word Impressionism,” I shall refer to the use of Impressionism to recreate an individual‟s perception of the physical or material world” (qtd. in Crane 5). Deleuze considers that this Impressionist shift occurs on a physiological level, essentially cracking one‟s skull, twisting one‟s nerves and that liberates the physical eye from previous ways of seeing: “C‟est notre propre œil qui, par la peinture, se libère de sa structure organique, perd en quelque sorte sa constance et sa fixité, et se met à circuler dans l‟ensemble du corps”. 21 This theory thus indicates that Impressionist works contain a certain organic power, impacting the physical body, to dismantle previous ways of seeing. This analysis of Impressionism fits within the framework of Deleuze‟s general philosophical project. Deleuze and Guattari 19 Some art historians consider the first Impressionist painting to be Claude Monet‟s Impression Sunrise in 1874. The works of Manet and other similar artists could be labeled "pre- Impressionist." Impressionism differs from Salon or traditional paintings by using small, quick dabs which reveal the changes in light. 20 These works are also often considered novel because they are created outdoors without preliminary sketches; they contain modern subject matter such as contemporary city dwellers; they are often cropped or truncated in diagonal or unorthodox angles, and the Impressionists often mixed paints on the canvas itself instead of on a palette. 21 Arnaud Bouaniche. Gilles Deleuze, une introduction. (Paris: Pocket, 2007) 209. 12 revolt against the systematic unification, rationalization and crystallization of ideas. He instead embraces the possibility of inventing the “nouvelles possibilités de vie” (Qu’est- ce que la philosophie 106). Revolutionary art, for Deleuze, disassembles stagnant societal structures to pave way for the new. The work of the Post-Impressionists in particular, such as Vincent Van Gogh and Paul Cézanne, “acts immediately upon the nervous system” and the rest of the body to create new physical sensations (Deleuze. Francis Bacon 25). “Sensation is the opposite of the facile and the ready-made, the cliché” (Francis Bacon 25). Art that impacts the physical body and produces “sensation” is revolutionary. Deleuze argues that the works of Francis Bacon, who paints the decomposition and reduction of the human body to physical parts, create a “zone of indiscernability” between human and animal (Deleuze. Francis Bacon 20). This aesthetic ambiguity is the “becoming-animal of man. In this becoming, the entire body tends to escape from itself” (Deleuze. Francis Bacon 20). This escape from the known and from the conventional human form allows a possibility of creative freedom. True artistic creation is linked to the animal realm because it subverts traditional human manners and modes of thought and affirms the new. Deleuze‟s ideas might bring to mind the aesthetic theory of Jules Laforgue: “L‟impressionniste est un peintre moderniste qui, doué d‟une sensibilité d‟oeil hors du commun…est parvenu à se refaire un œil naturel” (L’Impressionnisme 136). While Deleuze and Laforgue both discuss Impressionism in terms of physiological changes in the eye and liberated perception, there are two main points of divergence in their theories. First of all, Deleuze discusses the way in which a particular aesthetic or artifice impacts 13 the viewer’s perception. Laforgue, by contrast, creates the myth that the artist actually sees differently from other people. Secondly, while Deleuze is unconcerned with the “natural,” Laforgue creates the narrative that the Impressionist undergoes a process during which his eye becomes “natural” again. Thus, implicit in Laforgue‟s theory is the myth of an original, primal state to which the avant-gardist is able to revert. However, Deleuze is still useful for understanding Laforgue and the other literary authors because they all discuss creativity in terms of transformation and “becoming animal” during a time of major social, governmental and cultural transitions. One of the ways in which this changing nineteenth-century culture broke away from its recent past and forged a new identity was by developing a culture of the “primal.” In the essay, “Paris: Capital of the Nineteenth-Century,” Walter Benjamin writes that even when a new means of production takes place, people still retain images of the past in their minds. These images of the old become welded with those of the new. He writes that at the same time: There is the absolute effort to distance oneself with all that is antiquated— which includes, however, the recent past. These tendencies deflect the imagination […] back upon the primal past. In the dream which each epoch entertains the images of its successor, the latter appears wedded to elements of primal history (Benjamin. Arcades Project 4). In this passage, Benjamin is describing a burgeoning, modern city that is still partly rooted in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. In order to become the center of modernity and to develop innovations in industry, commerce, arts and crafts, Paris must free itself from the shackles of feudal society. This nascent society can latch onto 14 elements of primitive history in order to liberate itself from the recent past and thereby create a new culture with innovative ideas and a new aesthetic (Benjamin 4). As previously mentioned, to create this “primal aesthetic,” artists and architects had to create the illusion of nature within a modern urban environment. For example, Benjamin specifies, “people sought to copy the changing time of the day in the countryside, the rising of the moon or the rushing of the waterfall” (“Paris: Capital of the Nineteenth-Century” 80). These are images found in Impressionist paintings, which capture the shifts of light in the day and the transitory qualities of the natural world. Impressionist paintings offer a distinct style that creates an illusion of nature for the modern city dweller. This general phenomenon continues today, as discussed in the writings of ecological and cultural scholars who elucidate the relegation of nature to the aesthetic and discursive spheres. Timothy Morton writes: Ecology without Nature starts as a detailed examination of how art represents the environment. This helps us to see that „nature‟ is an arbitrary rhetorical structure, empty of an independent, genuine existence behind or beyond the texts we create about it (22). Morton argues that nineteenth-century texts that deal with nature are often culpable of “eco-mimesis.” This term indicates an imitation of nature which often acknowledges that it is a simulation. For example, while Laforgue lauds the naïve, natural gaze of pythons and crocodiles, the first words of his poem are “At the Berlin Aquarium,” which recognizes the poem‟s own artificial setting. This dissertation will discuss “eco-mimesis” at length in the chapter on the Goncourts because, as literary impressionists, the authors reveal the artificial, painterly qualities of their descriptions of pseudo-natural settings. 15 Darwinian Aesthetic Revolution The literary impressionists, as well as France as a whole, became particularly fascinated with animal and plant life after Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species. In the years that followed the French translation of The Origin of Species in 1862, the French press was inundated with discussions, debates and parodies of Darwin‟s ideas. In the popular sphere, articles in newspapers, magazines and the family press and a rash of satires and caricatures brought the story to the French nation at large. Among them were drawings of Darwin himself, his features suggesting that he had only recently evolved from monkeys or resembled man at his most primitive (Kendall 293). This mockery of Darwin and the implication that his ideas were primitive or ludicrous compared to other prominent scientists of the time has allowed some scholars, such as Lynn Gamwell, to believe that the naturalist did not make a major impact on French thought. 22 In contrast, the vast presence of Darwinian ideas in the scientific and popular spheres indicates a genuine engagement and fascination with his ideas. Furthermore, Darwin made a major impact on the French Impressionists, who for the most part, were familiar with his ideas, had personal connections with Darwinian scientists and who read his texts (Donald 25). For example, the letters of Berthe Morisot reveal that she had read The Descent of Man and the letters of Edgar Degas demonstrate that he had read The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals (Kendall 293). Claude Monet was the friend 22 See Gamwell‟s chapter "The French Art of Observation: A Cool Rejection of Darwin" in which she writes, "Reflecting attitudes that prevailed in the Académie des Sciences, realist artists in the second half of the nineteenth century portrayed their sitters using pre-Darwin views of the human psyche, and painters remained committed to an art based in the observation of nature" (57). 16 of Clemenceau, a Darwinist (Fitzwilliam Museum). “The impact of Darwin‟s ideas on the intellectual life of France coincided with the emergence of Impressionist painting and its own turbulent public history. Yet this parallel has never been acknowledged, despite a demonstrative awareness of evolutionary issues in artistic and literary Paris during these years” (Kendall 293). One of the reasons this connection between Darwinism and Impressionism is not widely acknowledged is that Darwin‟s theory of evolution is not easily recognizable in Impressionist paintings at first glance. Impressionist paintings often depict scenes of nature in varying degrees of light or in dynamic scenes of nineteenth-century city life through the use of rapid dabs of differing colors. However, the values of dynamism and mutation inherent in the paintings may reveal the influence of Darwin. Both Monet and Cézanne focused on “primal landscapes” such as cliffs emerging out of the sea that seemed to reveal the birth of the world and the potential for the evolutionary transformation of inorganic material into organic matter (Fitzwilliam Museum). Cézanne thus painted Provence as if in “prehistoric times.” He painted works such as the Pyramid of skulls which focused on human‟s Neolithic ancestors (Kendall 295). Degas incorporated Darwinian ideas by depicting the resemblance between monkeys and humans in his ballerina paintings and Chanson du chien (Rubin 9). These examples indicate the enormous influence of Darwin on some of the great Impressionist artists. This evolutionary aesthetic is also central to the literary impressionist works. Although this genre is obviously a written medium instead of a visual one, the works of the Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau provide rich descriptions of fictional 17 paintings that emphasize primal or animalistic elements. 23 The literary works analyzed in this dissertation could be seen as examples of ekphrasis, which occurs when the visual arts inspire the literary arts and vice versa. In addition, these texts, at times, describe the artistic process itself in terms of evolutionary science. Darwin‟s influence not only impacted the Impressionists and literary impressionists but also profoundly shifted the paradigm of the relationship between man and animal in French society as a whole. Certainly, Darwin‟s The Origin of Species (1859) and The Descent of Man (1872) collapse the rigid distinction between man and animal and enfold each into the other. In addition to illustrating the common origins between man and animals, the two books also suggest that humans and animals have certain common mental faculties and bodily functions that cause them to behave in similar ways. Darwin argues that animals and humans find the same sort of material to be aesthetically pleasing, such as bold colors or musical sounds. He writes, “the same colors and the same sounds are admired by us and by many lower animals” (The Origin of Species 267). 24 Darwin also affirms that both man and animals can function by instinct or habit, and instinct is responsible for many creative drives. 23 For instance, in Manette Salomon, one of the artists paints a dead monkey (313) and in Dans le ciel, an artist paints a pile of manure which contains thousands of small creatures (97). 24 "If beautiful objects had been created solely for man‟s gratification, it ought to be shown that before man appeared there was less beauty on the face of the earth. Were the beautiful volute and cone shells of the Eocene epoch, and the gracefully sculptured ammonites of the Secondary period, created so that man might ages afterward admire them in his cabinet?" (The Origin of Species 266). 18 In fact, Darwin even argues that certain animals such as bees and birds can create more marvelous architectural works than man can: 25 He must be a dull man who can examine the exquisite structure of a comb, so beautifully adapted to its end, without enthusiastic admiration. We hear from mathematicians that bees have practically solved a recondite problem, and have made their cells of the proper shape to hold the greatest possible amount of honey, with the least possible consumption of precious wax in their construction. It has been remarked that a skillful workman, with fitting tools and measures, would find it very difficult to make cells of wax of the true form, though this is perfectly effected by a crowd of bees working in a dark hive. Grant whatever instincts you please, and it seems at first quite inconceivable how they can make all the necessary angles and planes, or even perceive when they are correctly made. But the difficulty is not nearly so great as it at first appears: all this beautiful work can be shown, I think, to follow from a few very simple instincts. (The Origin of Species 354). In this passage, Darwin creates an aesthetic based on precision, exactitude and utility. This is an intuitive creation that does not rely on foresight, planning or intellectual understanding. The bees do not “even perceive when [the hives] are correctly made.” One could thus make the comparison between Darwin‟s aesthetic and the Impressionist movement for these painters often did not work from previous sketches or drafts. The Impressionists worked en plein air; they created improvised paintings that adapted themselves according to changing, natural elements such as the sun and the wind. 25 One could easily argue that Darwin is anthropomorphizing animals. As Lorraine Daston and Gregg Mitman write, "The reflective assumption that animals are like us, despite obvious difference in form, food and habitat, is not confined to popular culture. From Aristotle to Darwin down to the present, naturalists have credited bees with monarchies, ants with honesty and dogs with tender consciousness, all on the basis of first hand observation" (Thinking about Animals. New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism 1). In this quotation, Daston and Mitman call into question the notion of objectivity in science, arguing that humans have a tendency to conceive of animal behavior as similar to human behavior. 19 Darwin‟s description of beehives 26 certainly undermines the assumption that the work of man is superior to that of animals and that human reason is superior to animal instinct. 27 This is clearly a shift from the anthropocentric conception of Buffon in which man, as a superior being, reigns over the inferior animals. Although, like Darwin, Buffon praised nature as an outstanding “artist” (Histoire naturelle 214), he also argued that:”[L‟homme] commande à toutes les créatures, vassal du ciel, roi de la terre. Il l‟anoblit et l‟enrichit, il établit entre tous les êtres vivants l‟ordre, la subordination, l‟harmonie; il embellit la nature même” (Buffon. “De la nature première vue” O.C. XII 26 Darwin‟s observations of bees are certainly not unique for there is a long history of literature on bees. For example, in History of Animals, Aristotle (384 B.C. to 322 B.C) discusses the appearance of various types of bees, their reproductive patterns and their construction of honeycombs. One difference between Aristotle‟s and Darwin‟s various descriptions of honeycombs is that, unlike Darwin, Aristotle does not focus on honeycombs as architectural or aesthetic wonders, and he does not argue that bees have superior skills compared to humans. Comella (4 A.D. to 70 A.D.) observed bees in detail in De Re Rustica, his treatise on agriculture. Comella primarily focuses on efficient beekeeping techniques, such as outlining at what point in time a beekeeper should maintain or destroy a hive. This text is in some ways similar to treatises on beekeeping for centuries to come, including John Gedde‟s A New Discovery of an Excellent Method of Bee-Houses & Colonies (1675). These texts carry the assumption that humans need to dominate animals in order to improve their efficiency for human consumption. In contrast, Darwin suggests that humans can learn from animals. René Antoine Ferchault de Réaumur‟s (1683-1757) conclusions about bees are surprising similar to those of Darwin. Réaumur argues that bees have a soul and their honeycombs are amazingly mathematically efficient. He writes that the sides of the wax cells are "fitted together with an even more complicated geometry" (qtd. in Roger and Williams 4). In contrast, Buffon mocked Réaumur and other observers who "admire bees‟ intelligence and talents to the point of envy" (qtd. in Roger and Williams 5). Darwin rejects the Buffonian assumption that humans should not be envious of the crafts and talents of animals. 27 However, one can trace a historical fascination with instinct since long before Darwin‟s time. Aristotle proposed that birds possessed the impulse to train their young to sing (History of Animals 536). Cuvier discusses involuntary habits, which are part of "an organic disposition activated by some environmental situation and motivated by need" (Richards 68). Buffon argues that instinct is initially necessary to spark interest or action; however, he feels that instinct is inferior to human reason (Roger and Williams 83). As I will explain in the chapter on Laforgue, Darwin affirms instinct as a drive to create, and this drive, in some ways, surpasses calculation or planning. 20 113). Buffon constructed a hierarchy between man and animals in which man‟s duty is to “command,” “subordinate” and “embellish” nature. Buffon‟s aesthetic teeters between the artist‟s duty to appreciate the beauty of the natural world and his duty to improve and control nature. As Elizabeth Amy Liebman writes: Foremost among these was the contest between the entrenched academic representation as nature as it ought to be—‟la belle nature‟—and the possibility glimpsed by the artists of the Histoire naturelle, of objects represented as they are „la nature pure‟ (viii). As Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison argue, science in France before the mid nineteenth- century aimed to be “true to nature” (Objectivity 17). Scientific drawings of plants and animals aimed to be perfect replicas of the species that could even “replace natural specimens” (Daston and Galison 22). In contrast, during the mid nineteenth-century, science concentrated on the flaws and asymmetries of a specimen in order to give a more “objective” approach to science (Daston and Galison 17). During the following decade, Darwin constructed the narrative that nature by itself is better crafted and is more aesthetically pleasing than any human attempts to improve it. This idea corresponded to the avant-garde aesthetic of late nineteenth-century France, especially that of the decorative arts movement. Artists at this time focused on the intricate patterns of nature, including that of shells, leaves and even microscopic organisms. The progression of the novels in this dissertation from its first to the last chapter indicates a progression of the understanding and influence of evolutionary theory on aesthetics, from Buffon to Darwin. Although Darwin was incredibly influential in Europe from the mid to late nineteenth-century, the Goncourt brothers did not mention him in their journals until 1870. Darwin did have an influence on Edmond de Goncourt in the 21 1880‟s. However, at the time of the publication of Manette Salomon in 1867, even if the Goncourt brothers had heard of Darwin‟s ideas, they based the novel on their own understanding of Buffon, physiognomy, popular science and science fiction. Although Jules Laforgue was not a scientist and did not understand Darwin in a purely scientific sense, his understanding of Darwin‟s theory on the eye and optics and his sense of dynamism and transformation is not a misreading. As I will explain in my second chapter, Laforgue draws from both Darwin and Helmholtz to formulate his theory that the eye of the Impressionist has evolved differently from that of the Academic artist. Laforgue uses Darwin‟s theory to liken these two types of artists to two different types of crustaceans who see very differently. Laforgue also integrates Darwin‟s theory of evolution and natural selection 28 to artistic movements in general, arguing that the eye evolves and develops new ways of seeing. “Seul, et de par son principe d‟évolution, il est fondé à ne préconiser d‟autre objectif en général que: du nouveau, du nouveau et indéfiniment du nouveau” (Laforgue. O.C. III 342). 29 Similarly, Octave Mirbeau also integrates Darwinian and Lamarckian evolutionary theory in his aesthetic philosophy. For Mirbeau, evolution produces “de la spontanéité et du genie individue” (Combats esthétiques 14) which transcend the rigid structure of artistic institutions such as the Salon. According to the writer, art can harness 28 Laforgue writes "la simple loi de la selection naturelle universelle indique une tendance divine en soi." (338) and it promotes an "evolution vers la conscience pure" (340). 29 Laforgue‟s emphasis on novelty is similar to that of Deleuze. However, unlike Deleuze, Laforgue at times suggests a regression to a prehistorical or "primitive" (O.C. 133) way of seeing that shatters the perception of the recent past. In this sense Laforgue‟s aesthetic theory is closer to that of Benjamin because it is both "prehistorical" and "modern" (Dottion-Orsini 27). 22 the power of “le movement des choses inertes ou invisibles” (Mirbeau. Correspondance avec Claude Monet 244). His work goes even further than that of the Goncourts and Laforgue because Mirbeau suggests that, like microorganisms that develop and evolve into more complex creatures, drops of paint on the painter‟s canvas “s‟animent” and evolve into a painting (Dans le ciel 92). Just as Darwin effaces the importance of both God and Man in the scheme of biological evolution, Mirbeau effaces the importance of the author or the painter in a creative work. The work itself takes on its own life and transforms into something that the author may have never intended. A painting becomes an almost parallel “nature” that is alive and flowering (Mirbeau. Correspondance avec Claude Monet 244). 30 Mirbeau‟s incorporation of the theory of evolution into art suggests that a work of art is constantly transforming and evolving. Gamwell writes in Exploring the Invisible. Art, science and the spiritual: I propose that two catalysts contributed to the precipitation of abstract art: the scientific worldview that developed after the publication in 1859 of Charles Darwin‟s On the Origin of the species by means of natural selection and the secular concepts of the spiritual that developed thereafter. Darwin forever changed our sense of the universe; what had been static and eternal was now seen as constantly evolving (9). 31 30 See the third chapter of this dissertation for the full quotation and for a more in-depth discussion of this phenomenon. 31 Of course, Darwin was not the only scientist who suggested that creatures mutate and evolve. He was also not the only scientist to reveal the similarities between humans and animals. However, The Origin of Species reversed many of our metaphysical assumptions about humans, animals and nature. 23 Mirbeau‟s image of paint taking on a life of its own suggests a departure from the Buffonian concept of “la belle nature” because the artist no longer seeks to embellish nature. Rather, he or she is an intermediary for the artistic expression of nature. The transition in scientific understanding from Buffon to Darwin is important because it indicates a shift in consciousness from the belief that animals and nature were created for man‟s benefit to the belief that man himself is just a type of animal who is a part of nature. The Jardin des plantes also underwent a transition from a Buffonian understanding to a Darwinian one. 32 Buffon was the director of the Jardin and the Muséum national d‟histoire naturelle from 1739 to 1788. In 1898, the museum built La Galerie de Paléontologie et d‟Anatomie comparée using its collections from laboratories, some of which dated back over two hundred years (Muséum national website). The Gallery presents man among other primates and displays the ancestors of man, such as the famous “Lucy.” Even today, as in the nineteenth-century, the top floor contains mollusks, sponges, ammonites, insects and crustaceans which perhaps indicate the mid to late nineteenth-century emphasis on biologically simple creatures. The Jardin des plantes‟ transition from Buffon to Darwin parallels the progression of the literary authors discussed in this dissertation. While the Goncourt brothers emphasize categorization, Mirbeau affirms mutation and dynamism. Orientalism as Artistic Inspiration In one of Mirbeau‟s writings, the author imagines that people in India discuss both Darwinism and Buddhism at great length (Lettres de l’Inde 44-45). Mirbeau is one 32 The importance of the Jardin des plantes will be discussed later in the introduction as well as the first chapter of the dissertation. 24 of many authors to link Darwinian evolution to the Orient. In the visual arts, the title of Gauguin‟s Tahitian painting Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going? (1897) contains both Darwinist and orientalist undertones because it indicates that nineteenth-century France may have evolved from a culture similar to that of Tahiti. Tahiti, for Gauguin, indicates the traces of a primal past and an image of what France may have looked like before modern urbanization. Darwinism reinforced the notion of “type” into Occidental society, which is the “parameter of variation within which parameters of transmutation could theoretically take place” (Donald 169). In other words, instead of focusing on individual organisms, Darwin focused on types of organisms and the degree by which they varied from each other, thus aiding in: the production of exemplars of racial categories and, in a Darwinian reading, the parameters of divergent variation, which could nonetheless be contained with this taxonomic device. In the popular sphere, the notion of „type‟ functioned as a generalizing and distancing conceit, in „science‟, it provided a visibility of the specimen and of the units of comparative analysis (Donald 169). Similarly, works of art in the nineteenth-century made other “types” or races of human beings visibly divergent from white Westerners. The three fictional texts that I will be analyzing all focus on certain “types” of human beings as racialized “others.” While the Goncourt brothers, Laforgue, and Mirbeau admire many of the works of art and religious philosophies of Asia, they see cultures other than that of modern France as examples of a more primitive, naïve existence that is an alternative to Western society. In these authors‟ works, the boundary between Asian and animal is collapsed. For this reason, the ideas of Donna Haraway will be useful to this discussion of animals and orientalism. Haraway, a twentieth-century 25 critic, critiques the nineteenth-century myth of a “primal nature” that is detached from the realities of modern city life. “An origin story in the „Western‟ humanist sense depends on the myth of original unity, fullness, bliss and terror” (Simians, Cyborgs and Women--The Reinvention of Nature 131). As a reaction to the fractured and alienating nature of the urban city, nineteenth-century European writers and artists reinforced the “myth of original unity.” This myth became more prevalent as nature began to disappear. As urbanization destroyed many plants and animals, some writers and artists imagined an Eden-like utopia where “wild beast and human partake in a single life. That life can be regarded as the all-absorbing presence of Nature” (Shattuck 93). 33 Wishing for “harmony among all living creatures” in the face of mass environmental destruction, avant-gardists readily adopted narratives from the Eastern religions of Hinduism and Buddhism. These religions stress the oneness of life, and they also suggest the possibility of achieving a Nirvana-like state through the rejection of previous metaphysical constructs. These borrowed narratives were in tune with a post- Darwinian society that had rejected antiquated scientific notions and that now believed in the interconnection of all species. In the fictional fantasy of peace and oneness between 33 In this quotation, Roger Shattuck, a twentieth-century scholar who dissected the myths surrounding writers and artists of the Belle Époque, critiques the paintings of Henri Rousseau. Henri Rousseau‟s paintings often give the illusion of an "all absorbing presence of nature" even though they are mainly created inside the menagerie of the Jardin des plantes. Unlike Haraway, Shattuck does not focus on a feminist or Orientalist critique of these works. 26 humans and animals, the Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau all use Orientalist imagery. 34 Laforgue and Mirbeau in particular emphasize the concept of Nirvana in their works. Mirbeau writes that when “l‟homme entre dans le Nirvana,” he will become “deliveré de tous les soucis et de l‟inquiétude” and “il voit librement le cours de la vie” (Lettres de l’Inde 44). Similarly, Laforgue argues that both animals and Eastern sages are capable of entering into a Nirvana-like state during which one has “épuisé tous les sens, tous les tempéraments, toutes les métaphysiques” (“À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” 35). Both Laforgue and Mirbeau see the Buddhist and Hindu concept of Nirvana as a means of cultural forgetting. For these authors, Nirvana is a space in which one is no longer touched by societal mores or concerns. This void allows for the freedom of new creative possibilities. Laforgue and Mirbeau discuss this creative space within the framework of Eastern philosophy and the animal world. There is a tendency for people to associate animals with the Orient, as Haraway explains. 35 Using the logic of dualisms that Edward Saïd critiques in his book Orientalism, the animal is the human‟s “other,” just as the East is the West‟s other, and woman is the man‟s other (Primate Visions 10). The figure of the “Other” is useful in avant-garde discourse as a means of rejecting the dominant ideology of traditional institutions such as the Salon des Beaux-Arts. The reopening of trade routes in 1853 34 It should be noted that the Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau all favored the art and the philosophies of Japan. In contrast, the Goncourt brothers portray racist, orientalist stereotypes of Jewish people. See the first chapter of this dissertation. 35 Donna Haraway. Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science (New York: Routledge, 1989). 27 between Japan and the West led to a flood of Japanese imports in France (Mabuchi 3). The French avant-garde became fascinated by Japanese arts and crafts. 36 The Goncourt brothers wrote that “la victoire du japonisme” was one of the “grands mouvements littéraires et artistiques de la seconde moitié du xix e siècle” (“Préface.” Chérie xv-xvi). Laforgue sought to collect Japanese paintings (Dottin-Orsini 15) and Mirbeau argued that only Claude Monet and Japanese artists could render the ineffable quality of nature in their paintings (Mirbeau. Correspondance avec Claude Monet 237). These authors indicate that Japanese art offered new narratives and new imagery that countered the conventional paintings at the time. The Japoniste paintings, a fusion of French and Japanese techniques, offered “natural” landscapes that celebrated the beauty of the plants and animals. Japanese works therefore presented the myth of oneness between the painter and nature. The Impressionists and Post-Impressionists invented a modern aesthetic that integrated nature within modern-city life. The pitfalls of these writers‟ focus on the „natural‟ were the naturalization of racist stereotypes, as one can particularly see in the Goncourts‟ portrayal of women and Jewish people. In the texts of the Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau, one can find an attempt to create a revolutionary aesthetic that diverges from institutional art. At the same time, the authors replicate the racist and colonialist structure of their society. Although Japan was not a French colony, the mid to late nineteenth-century was a time of rampant colonization. Given this historical time frame, the narrative of the “artist as animal” is incredibly complicated and nuanced. The 36 See the section entitled "Orient" in the Laforgue chapter. 28 revolutionary, avant-garde aesthetic of this time also affirmed a history of colonial exploitation, racist stereotypes of Asians, the subjugation of women and the imprisonment and mistreatment of animals in the Jardin des plantes‟ menagerie. As I will explain in the following section, the menagerie attempted to create a “natural” space within an urban environment. (De)natured Aesthetics: Animals in the Urban Sphere Avant-gardists at this time attempted to naturalize the appearance of Paris in their paintings. Many avant-gardists such as Henri Rousseau “did not paint Paris as it was, as a city that was undergoing great changes, including the construction of the metro and the development of the department stores” (36). Instead, Rousseau, Bonheur, Renoir and Delacroix painted animals at the Jardin des plantes and depicted them in lush, natural landscapes. The Jardin des plantes perpetuated the myth of the primal, pre-cultural Eden as well as reinforcing the notion of animals as artistic subjects. The menagerie as it stands today was created in 1793 and opened to the public in 1794 when the French revolutionaries decided to move the animals within the King‟s royal menagerie to a public space (Gregory 72). Scientists who played a pivotal role in enriching theories of evolutionary biology such as Buffon, Cuvier and Lamarck developed many of their ideas from observing the plants and animals within the garden (Gregory 73). In addition, the garden contained a “museum complex for scientific research into plant and animal species. There, inside the galleries, were new and astonishing stuffed animal exhibits” (Ireson, 51). It contained amphibians, birds, reptiles, and of particular interest, mammals 29 from all over the world, such as tigers, panthers, monkeys and elephants, enabling artists to observe these animals first hand. The shifting of the garden 37 and menagerie from a privileged, royal space to a public one in the middle of Paris reflected the major transition in French society from a monarchy to the beginnings of a republic. One must of course recognize, however, that the menagerie was created during La Terreur, a violent and turbulent period during which thousands of so-called enemies of the Revolution were executed. “The French nation saw the museum with its menagerie and garden as a symbol of the new free nation and the new scientific consciousness” (Kisling 89). Ironically, this freedom is most often found within a space of captivity. The fact that the animals were caged in the name of freedom is perhaps symbolic of this contradictory time period during which the French people were suppressed and terrorized into submission in the name of liberty, equality and fraternity. As Haraway writes, “Animal societies have been extensively employed in the rationalization and the naturalization of the oppressive orders of domination in the human body politic” (The Promises of Monsters 268). Thus, the Jardin carries the myth that it is a Eden-like, peaceful and free space where according to a poem by Guy Dépasse, “vient inspirer le poète qui cherche le calme des bois” (5). However, in reality, the menagerie is essentially a cramped prison for animals, and the Jardin‟s Muséum national is a collection of horrors and monstrosities. The museum contains hundreds of animal skeletons and multiple floors of various organs preserved in jars. This dissertation will examine the ways in which the artifice of literature and art constructs the illusion of a natural, peaceful 37 The Jardin des plantes was originally the Jardin du Roi and was opened in 1640. 30 world in spite of the gruesome realities of the time. In addition, the connection between the animal and the “exotic” is certainly apparent in the history of the Jardin des plantes. The menagerie prided itself on its giraffe sent from the ruler of Egypt in 1825, and its Senegalese lion and two Algerian dromedaries acquired at the end of the eighteenth- century (Laissus and Petter 81-94). For visitors to the garden, the captivity of such “exotic” animals on French soil could symbolically demonstrate power of the French over orientalized nations. In witnessing these “exotic” creatures from Africa and Asia in cages, French spectators could feel confident about their status as a colonial superpower. The French public also enjoyed viewing indigenous people in human zoos, a grim practice that allowed the French to further exert their authority and superiority over colonized people (Bancel and Blanchard 5). The contradictory nature of the Jardin des plantes is apparent in Manette Salomon. In the novel, a group of artists often frequent the Jardin des plantes to paint the animals in its menagerie. At the end of the novel, one of the artists moves next to the garden to live in harmony with “nature.” The authors construct the narrative that the Jardin des plantes is a “divine land” and a “celestial Eden” (547). In contrast, according to most historical documentation, the animals in the garden‟s menagerie were actually kept in enclosed spaces in dirty, miserable conditions (Morris 25). Most of the animals were kept behind metal bars with nothing but dirt inside their small cages. “Wild cats and monkeys lived in cages devoid of vegetation; snakes deprived of any kind of greenery, huddled under old hospital blankets” (Ireson 52). Paradoxically, both the Goncourt brothers and artists such as Delacroix and Rousseau create the myth that the animals in the Jardin des plantes 31 thrive in a lush, natural environment that is separate from urban Paris. However, the fact that animals lived in cages and slept in hospital blankets reinforces the Jardin‟s status as a civil institution such as a jail or a hospital. Thus, the artistic obsession with animals was part of an urban aesthetic. Berger writes: The 19 th -century in Europe and North America saw the beginning of a process, today being completed by 20 th -century corporate capitalism, by which every tradition which previously mediated between man and nature was broken. Before this rupture, animals constituted the first circle of what surrounded man (1). Because of the sense of rupture between humans and nature, there was a need to construct the myth of an untouched nature. Although Serena Chou discusses twentieth-century American literature, her examination of the myth that nature is separate from culture may be relevant to this discussion. Chou writes that for most, nature writing tends to reinforce the myth of an untouched, virgin nature that exists outside the realm of man. The depiction of nature in modern and post-modern literature is indifferent to “the materiality and the social- constructedness of the nonhuman world” (5). The ironic notion that humans actually constructed the concept of the nonhuman world dictates a particular wish for nature as it diminishes in an urban world. Particularly in the nineteenth-century, it was necessary to aestheticize nature and animals as their presence declined. Zoos, then, become an intermediary between nature and civilization, allowing the modern city dweller to experience the animals and plants that he or she normally would not be able to access. Zoos give the illusion that they are places “of quiet repose in the heart of an industrial 32 city, where the urban smog was „magically lifted‟ once a visitor entered through its gates” (Rothfels 207). Berger explains this idealization of “nature” in the arts. He believes that for most people, nature is opposed to the many artificially constructed social institutions which “strip man of his natural essence and imprison him” because they separate him from his natural environment and impose rules and codes onto his natural impulses. He writes: Nature thereby acquires the meaning of what has grown organically in contrast to the artificial structures of human civilization. At the same time, it can be understood as that aspect of human inwardness which has remained natural, or at least tends or longs to become natural once again (15). The irony of this statement is that while man seeks to escape the social institutions which “imprison him,” Berger explains that he does so by looking at animals in zoos. Man becomes psychologically freed from his societal cage by viewing animals. Paradoxically, these animals are also in cages. Literary impressionists help us to understand this important aspect of modernity. This critical look at the representation of the natural is perhaps of even greater interest today as we become increasingly aware of ecological issues and the illusion of nature in art. In contrast, one could also argue that representations of the nature hinder us to see the decline of nature. As Stephen Spotte, a zoological theorist, writes: “Recognizing dimly the power of images to obliterate memory [zoos…] count on the spectator‟s amnesic gaze and the knowledge that zoos were once— and will always be--collections of curiosities” (Spotte 92). Zoos create the temporary illusion that humans no longer exist in society, but rather they live in nature. They are a means of forgetting centuries of societal progress in addition to the disappearance of 33 many species of animals. Furthermore, the Goncourt brothers and Laforgue in particular, paradoxically laud the menagerie and the aquarium as means of producing artistic transcendence from civil institutions. However, while the authors consider the animals‟ vision to be free, in the zoological park, the animals are still imprisoned. The Impressionist artist too could be seen as a caged animal because he is bound to the conventions of his own society even though he may have a vision that transcends them. Devenir minoritaire: Becoming Revolutionary or Becoming Insignificant? This dissertation presents the two sides of the myth of the artist as animal. On one hand, this myth reinforces a colonial and racist structure that both idealizes and yet dismisses marginal figures, including animals, women, Jews, Asians and bohemians, as “primitive.” On the other hand, the narrative offers the potential for freedom within a colonial and hegemonic space. It should be clear that while all of the authors offer subversive discourse against the social institutions of their day, none of them attempt to overturn these institutions. In fact, if we analyze the texts thematically, we would find little possibility for any transformation or revolution. Manette Salomon ends when Anatole, the bohemian artist, finds liberation from financial burdens by becoming a zookeeper at the Jardin des plantes. Laforgue‟s “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” takes place within the institution of an aquarium. 38 In Dans le ciel, Lucien, the revolutionary artist, burns his artwork and dies along with his pet peacock. Because of such anti-climactic endings, many critics have dismissed these works as minor, counter-revolutionary or 38 The author himself who despised the Salon, made part of his livelihood by reviewing the Salon. 34 even “impotent.” It is true that these authors are typically not found within the canon of great nineteenth-century fictional writers. However, if we take a Deleuzian perspective, which argues that there is great force in “devenir minoritaire,” one can see that these authors do make an impact. As Deleuze and Guattari write, minor or revolutionary literature “brise la structure symbolique” (Kafka 14) but does not necessary overthrow the symbolic structure. Instead it creates cracks and “ruptures” (Kafka 52). These theorists write that one must look for an escape from oppressive, societal institutions, but they specify: (une issue, et non pas la „liberté‟), cette issue ne consiste nullement à fuir, au contraire. Mais d‟une part, la fuite n‟est pas récusée que comme mouvement inutile dans l‟espace, mouvement trompeur de la liberté; elle est en revanche affirmée comme fuite sur place, fuite en intensité (Deleuze and Guattari Kafka 25). 39 For Deleuze and Guattari, it is an illusion that one may flee from social conventions and institutions. Because one cannot be free from society, one must find independence within the confines of society, even if in a “cage” (Deleuze and Guattari Kafka 64). This dissertation leaves open the possibility that although these texts may replicate the racist, orientalist structure of their society, they may also create fissures or cracks within that structure to create a radical and novel aesthetic. 39 It should be noted that Deleuze and Guattari are discussing Kafka specifically in this context. In addition, the theorists discuss five criteria for the possibility of "becoming animal" in literature. One of these criteria states: "quand un texte porte essentiellement sur un devenir- animal, il ne peut pas être développé en roman" (Kafka 70). It should be recognized that although "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin" is a prose poem and Dans le ciel is unfinished, Manette Salomon was a finished novel. That said, Deleuze and Guattari‟s notion of "becoming animal" still enhances the reading of Manette Salomon. 35 It is possible that these minor authors could quite easily go unnoticed because some of their revolutionary aesthetic theories seem too extreme. For example, one could easily dismiss Laforgue‟s myth that the eye of the avant-garde artist is physiologically and evolutionary different from that of the academic artist. In addition, the Goncourt brothers‟ racist and sexist points of view prevent some scholars from taking their ideas on art seriously. However, it is precisely because all three of these authors present ambiguous and controversial ideas that they are creators of a revolutionary aesthetic that paradoxically exists within the confines of nineteenth-century society. Chapter Division and Summation of Current Views 1. The Caged Animal: the Avant-garde Artist in Edmond and Jules de Goncourt ’s Manette Salomon This chapter examines the ambivalences and myths in the Goncourt brothers‟ narrative that the creative artist adopts an animal-like state to produce his work. The Goncourt brothers gather from popular science reviews and a modified understanding of Buffon and physiognomy to suggest that the avant-garde artist is biologically closer to an animal than more traditional artists. This relationship is an ambivalent one. On one hand, the avant-gardist may have more creative insight than the academic artist. On the other, this creative freedom impedes him from assimilating into society. Thus, the Goncourt brothers construct the myth that the creative artist in the mid nineteenth-century is like an animal in the menagerie of the Jardin des plantes—an exotic creature who functions differently from other human beings, but whose freedom is caged within a social 36 institution. This chapter negotiates Deleuze‟s notion that one may find freedom within a cage by “becoming animal.” This chapter is different from the way in which other critics have discussed Manette Salomon. Critics do not discuss the novel in terms of ambivalence. Critics tend to either argue that the Goncourts‟ conservative biases impede them from appreciating a new avant-garde aesthetic, or they tend to argue that the novel celebrates the notion of the artist as being one with nature. For example, in Bohemian Paris, Jerrold Seigel describes Manette Salomon as “anti-bohemian and anti-Semitic” (180). Seigel argues that the Goncourt brothers have expressed a particularly hostile attitude towards bohemians, believing that they contributed to the decay of the established bourgeois order. The character of Anatole is based on Alexandre Pouthier, a bohemian artist that the authors knew who “does not experience the need for a separate life, or his own private life, a man who by taste and by instinct attaches his existence to the instinct of others by a kind of natural parasitism” (Seigel 172). The words “parasitism” and “instinct” reinforce the concept of the artist as a parasitic animal whose existence drains the lifeblood of hardworking, middle class citizens who are trying to contribute to society. On the other hand, other critics such as Stephanie Champeau and Michael Crouzet read Manette Salomon as a celebration of a “naïve”, “anti-intellectual” art. While Champeau does not specifically focus on the issue, her work does suggest that for the Goncourts, the creative artist is physiologically closer to animals than other people (57). However, neither of these critics points out that the notion of the artist as one with the 37 natural world is a myth. In addition, these critics do not underscore the urbanization of Paris. 40 The other major issue in scholarship on Manette Salomon that concerns the narrative of „artist as animal‟ is the erroneous assumption that animals are only mimetic copies of humans. In contrast, Deleuze and Guattari write, “un devenir n‟est pas une correspondance de rapports mais ce n‟est pas non plus une ressemblance, une imitation, et à la limite, une identification” (Mille Plateaux 291). In one part of the novel, the artist Anatole has a pet monkey who also attempts to paint. Marie Lathers‟ work on Manette Salomon points out the eighteenth-century artistic depictions of monkeys with paintbrushes parodying artists. Cabanès and R.B. Grant also read the novel in terms of the monkey as a shallow imitation of the artist. This interpretation of the novel does not take into consideration the scientific climate of the time, for Darwin as well as popular scientists attempted to bridge the gap between humans and animals. 41 Thus, some of these critics do not situate the novel within its particular scientific, literary and historical context. They ignore the popularity of science vulgarisée, which includes the literary genre of science fiction and popular science reviews. For the Goncourt brothers, literary authors are not hard scientists; they create fantasy (Crosland 315). This novel needs to therefore be treated as a narrative about a particular cultural phenomenon, describing a particular creative process, which seeks to break free from the 40 Critics may not emphasize the role of urbanization in the novel because the writing primarily focuses on nature. However, this "nature" is usually found in urban parks within the city of Paris. 41 This may be because the novel does not explicitly state its scientific influences although they are implicit in the text. 38 confines of the society by “becoming animal.” However, because the novel is an ambivalent work, it also warns against the dangers of rebellion and deviance. Manette Salomon affirms the traditional and the modern, the conservative and the revolutionary, the natural and the artificial. The artist-animal is both a modern and primal figure that embodies all of these paradoxes. 2. Aquatic Visionaries: the Impressionist Artist and the Primordial Animal in Jules Laforgue ’s Oeuvre About two decades later, Jules Laforgue draws from Darwin, Helmholtz, Eastern philosophies and deep-sea voyages to formulate his aesthetic theory that the physical eye of the Impressionist has evolved differently from that of the academic artist. For Laforgue, the Impressionist sees in an unconditioned, unprejudiced manner. This parallels Daston‟s idea that the myth of objectivity became a central concern at this time. “Objectivity is blind sight, seeing without interference, interpretation or intelligence. Only in the mid nineteenth-century did scientists begin to yearn for this blind sight, the „objective view‟ that embraces accidents and asymmetries” (Objectivity 17). Laforgue creates the myth that the avant-gardist must undergo a physiological transformation in order to perceive in a more animalistic and thus „unbiased‟ manner. This chapter will focus on “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” and l’Impressionnisme, which critics have, for the most part, ignored. 42 On one hand, it would seem that the 42 Mireille Dottin-Orsini‟s 1988 edition of Laforgue‟s art criticism has been helpful in renewing interest in Laforgue‟s aesthetic theories. However, most scholars of Laforgue focus on Les Complaintes (1885) primarily because of the poems‟ resemblance to the works of Baudelaire and other decadent writers. While Les Complaintes is easily contextualized, "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin" defies categorization, combining zoological observations, aesthetic theory and an 39 Impressionist eye is biologically simple, similar to the eyes of crocodiles, starfish or even plasma. One the other hand, Laforgue‟s work also suggests that the Impressionist eye is actually more evolved than that of the academic because it rejects centuries of cultural conditioning. The author attempts to justify his theory using Darwin‟s observations that certain species of crustaceans may have much more developed eyes that others (Darwin The Origin of Species 241). However, it is unclear at times whether the Impressionist more closely resembles the more modern crustacean or the more primitive crustacean. Laforgue‟s aesthetic seems to embrace both modernity and a mythical, primal past. Similarly, while the author idealizes the „untainted‟ beauty and simplicity of sea animals, his works also unwittingly affirm the structure of urbanized, European cities. The drastic development of Paris and Berlin at this time propelled artists and writers to more greatly appreciate „nature‟ as a source of creativity. “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” affirms the institution of the urban aquarium as a means of viewing „exotic‟ and majestic creatures that are not typically seen in daily life. The urban zoo or aquarium is depicted as a space of repose and renewal within the framework of urban expansion. The poem presents the Berlin Aquarium as an Oriental utopia, a place of cultural forgetting in which one may achieve Nirvana. This chapter will thus analyze Laforgue‟s orientalist comparison of sea animals to Eastern sages. For Laforgue, in addition to many artists and writers of the late nineteenth-century, Japanese aesthetics and Buddhist philosophy were alternatives to common Western artistic perceptions. Haraway‟s critique of orientalism will be useful in this chapter to deconstruct the myth that the “Orient,” idealized understanding of Eastern philosophy. Similarly, Laforgue‟s aesthetic theory that likens the modern artist to a primordial animal has been too easily dismissed. 40 similar to the urban aquarium, is a source of replenishment from the chaos of modern, European life. 3. The Animal and Aesthetic Nihilism in Octave Mirbeau ’s Dans le ciel. This chapter analyzes the myth found in Dans le ciel that an artist is like a savage animal who kills and devours the old and gives birth to the new. Dans le ciel was published in installments in L’Echo de Paris between September 1892 and May 1893 and was published in book form in 1989. Pierre Michel and François Jean Nivet, two of the primary Mirbeau scholars who edited Dans le ciel, have argued that it is a work of artistic frustration and failure. Michel and Nivet write that the novel is plagued by an “impuissance créatrice” (9). This may be partially true. It is easy to read the novel in this way because, after all, the fictional writer in the story laments that he is unable to achieve his vision, and the fictional artist burns his works and kills himself. However, there are traces of revolutionary aesthetics and creative possibilities in the novel. These twentieth- century critics do not recognize that Dans le ciel proposes a radical aesthetic theory that utilizes the frightening and mysterious aspects of animal nature to destroy the conventional and formulaic art of the past. In addition, in labeling the novel as a work about impotence, the critics also do not recognize that in the novel, destruction is necessary for creation to begin. The novel seems to parallel the Japoniste paintings of Monet and Van Gogh who include large blank spaces on their canvases to indicate out of “nothingness” or the void, all life begins. Dans le ciel uses Darwinian and Lamarckian theories to suggest that the 41 work of art is like a primal animal that evolves into something new. Thus, the myth of the „avant-garde artist as animal‟ also evolves during the end of the nineteenth-century to become the „avant-garde work of art as animal.” This is significant because the intention of the author or artist thereby becomes unimportant. Dans le ciel considers a work of art to be subject to the processes of nature which are constantly shifting and evolving. In addition, critics of the novel indicate that the animal is a symbol of impotence, ignoring the new perception at the time that suggested that animals were symbolic of creation and were essential to modern life. Similar to the other fictional works discussed in this dissertation, the novel articulates the burgeoning ecological concern about the disappearance of animals in urban life. Dans le ciel incorporates an aesthetic of animalistic terror, rage and disgust to unmask the facade of civilized behavior. This aesthetic was primarily influenced by Darwin, who argued that both humans and animals express emotions in a similar manner. Darwin‟s theories are essential to the decadent literature. The decadent focus on both horror and decay also emphasizes the constant potential for beauty and renewal. Mirbeau presents death and birth as a simultaneous process. Similarly, as the novels and poems discussed in this dissertation suggest, while the animal disappears in modern society, it is reborn in literature and art. 42 Chapter 1 The Caged Animal: The Avant-garde Artist in Edmond and Jules de Goncourt’s Manette Salomon “Nous sommes l‟avant-garde [...] Nous sommes les marginaux.” —Deleuze. Dialogues 7. “I venerate the Beautiful, the Good, and all things great; Beautiful nature on which great art rests!” --Haussmann. qtd. in Benjamin 23. Manette Salomon (1867) by Edmond and Jules de Goncourt concludes with Anatole, a struggling bohemian artist who identifies with the animal world, finding tranquility and security as a zookeeper in the Jardin des plantes. At the end of his first day on the job, Anatole locks a tiger in its cage “enfermant le soleil et les féroces dans les cages de la ménagerie où le roux des lions marche dans la flamme de l‟heure”(545). This is conceivably a central image to the novel, for the setting sun and the “flamme de l‟heure” could indicate the decline of nature at a time of urbanization. The impossible task of “enfermant le soleil” in the bars of a cage could suggest the attempt to preserve nature through menageries, urban gardens and even through art and literature. This phenomenon parallels the birth of the zoo which occurred during the late nineteenth- century and the early twentieth-century (Rothfels 8). On one hand, Manette Salomon celebrates the myth of the naïve, untainted animal world. On the other hand, the novel also expresses the need for “the natural” to be controlled, mediated and even colonized 43 by modern, urban French society. The fictional artist is a mirror of this ambivalence. 43 Manette Salomon reveals the creative artist‟s imagined affinity with animals, including a physical hypersensitivity, 44 compassion towards animals 45 and similar physical and behavioral traits as animals. 46 This mythical rapport with animals is presented as a means for the artist to transcend human limitations and thereby experience creative breakthroughs. However, the artist must still be able to function within society. The artist may too be considered to be like a “caged animal” in the Jardin des plantes. The artist may experience a revolutionary vision, yet he may not be completely free to express it because societal conventions and institutions bind him. In addition, the novel suggests that because nature was in decline, literature and art became a pseudo-natural setting to replace that which was being destroyed. 43 The novel is ambivalent toward both animals and avant-garde art. It should be noted that the Goncourt brothers completed the novel only five years after the French translation of Darwin‟s The Origin of Species and at the very dawn of the Impressionist movement. 44 For an elaborate discussion on the sensitivity of the artist‟s eye, see Stephanie Champeau‟s La notion d’artiste chez les Goncourt (2000). The Goncourts argue that the eye of modern artist is extraordinarily sensitive to light and form. They describe painting as simply "a sensitive representation of the optic nerve and dismiss the idea that any kind of skill or formal training should be required for artists" (Champeau 205). They reduce the act of painting to basic physiological functions. 45 For example, Madame Crescent tells Anatole, an artist, "Eh bien! Je pensais à toi, animal…Je ne sais pas pourquoi…Vois-tu, au fond, il n‟y a que nous deux qui aimons vraiment les bêtes" (Manette Salomon 535). 46 For example, Anatole "se faisait comme le singe" when he kneels over, and he walks on his hands and knees like a toad (103). Anatole has the physical features and the behavioral characteristics of a monkey : "il trouvait en face de lui une tête qui ressemblait tellement à la sienne, une répétition parfaite de sa colère de singe" (229-230). The authors refer to Anatole and his pet monkey as "deux singes" (229). In addition, Manette, one of the artist‟s models, resembles a goat and a monkey (269). 44 “Natural” can be defined as that which is not man-made or artificially produced, including animals and plants. 47 This definition is, of course, problematic because it assumes that humans are separate from nature and humans‟ creations are unnatural. It would therefore be an oxymoron to label someone as a “natural-artist” or an “artist- animal.” In the novel, the artist functions as an intermediary between the natural and the urban worlds. He observes animals at the Jardin des plantes and other spaces and “reports” the animals‟ physical characteristics and behavior to an urbane public. The artist‟s role as a reporter or an observer parallels the Goncourt brothers‟ own role in the nineteenth-century society (Fitzmaurice-Kelly xxviii). The Goncourt brothers provide detailed descriptions of contemporary figures. However, they tend to naturalize these figures and depict them in terms of animals. In the novel, virtually every subset of society is classified in terms of animals regardless of whether bourgeois or bohemian. For example, Langibout, an art teacher, calls his bohemian student Anatole a “petit animal” (149). Additionally, Anatole describes a bourgeois man: “Cet animal vient de Province, son pelage est un habit noir” (172). As realist novelist Honoré de Balzac wrote, “Je vis que, sous ce rapport, la Société ressemblait à la Nature. La Société ne fait-elle pas de l‟homme, suivant les milieux où son action se déploie, autant d‟hommes différents qu‟il y a de variétés en zoologie?”(227). As this quote suggests, Realist literature attempts to naturalize nineteenth-century society, arguing that people can be placed in zoological categorizations. The Goncourt brothers‟ perceived affiliation between humans and animals arises out of the early, transitional ideas of evolution that include those advanced 47 Nature is "all natural phenomena and plant and animal life, as distinct from man and his creation."(Collins English Unabridged Dictionary 2003). 45 by Buffon, popular science and physiognomy. This focus on the connection between humans and animals is also a reaction to the urbanization of Paris and the decline of nature at this time. The role of the creative writer or artist in mid nineteenth-century Paris seems to be to bridge the gap between the urban and the natural. Thus, the novel‟s focus on “nature,” whether it be through green, urban spaces such as the Jardin des plantes, through the Fountainebleu forest outside of Paris, or through animal-like characters such as Anatole, Manette or the Crescent family, creates a sort of release valve. 48 Manette Salomon evokes the myth of an orientalized, primal nature as a space of escape or respite from the pressures of modern urban life and as a source of creative inspiration. For example, the novel describes the emerging aesthetic that fuses the urban with nature: “un café dans la forêt noire…école de la bière de Strasbourg!..la vérité sortant d‟un moss…le grand mouvement des brasseries! Le temple du Réalisme, au fond du jardin” (Fasquelle edition 283). These seemingly paradoxical images of civilization (“un café”, “école de bière de Strasbourg”, “brasseries”) are infused with nature (“la forêt noire”, “un moss”, ”du jardin”). In naturalizing the urbane, the novel justifies and reinforces the emerging urban and industrial society of mid nineteenth-century Paris and its colonial and hegemonic structure. Morton, an environmental and literary scholar, writes: “Ecological problems of all kinds force humans to reconsider the categories of the cognitive, the ethical and the aesthetic, categories that have come apart as modernity has emerged” (Morton. “On Alan 48 These spaces are „release valves‟ in the Marxist sense that they "open a phantasmagoria in which a person enters in order to be distracted" (Walter Benjamin. Arcades Project 7). Such distractions perpetuate the status quo of capitalism and urbanization. 46 Bewell‟s Romanticism and Colonial Disease” 4). Today, we humans have been forced to reconsider our relationship with the natural world because we had not previously considered it to be a finite resource. Ethical and cognitive dilemmas occur because humans must now take into consideration the impact their decisions make on the environment. Ecological problems have also affected our relationship to art in modern times because the visual arts have become a way to preserve our memory of nature. In a way, Manette Salomon expresses nostalgia for a mythical Eden-like space in which humans and animals lived in harmony. In another way, the novel is an expression of modernity and is perhaps a precursor to modern art. 49 Scientific Background Fictional works of this time drew heavily upon the biological sciences. This canon of literature includes the works of the Goncourt brothers, Balzac‟s La Comédie humaine (1830-1845) and Zola‟s Thérèse Raquin (1867) (Grant 64). “During these same years, Darwin‟s The Origin of Species was translated into French (1862)” (Grant 65). The recent publication of Darwin‟s theory of evolution strengthened the belief that humans shared common traits with other animal species and reinforced it with scientific evidence. Evolutionary science was popular in France during this period and it influenced the Impressionists. Evolutionary science impacted the art of Cézanne, who looked at fossil formations to paint Rocks (1867-70) (Fitzwilliam Museum). Edgar Degas, who 49 The novel presents the narrative that the blending of animal with human is a catalytic force that creates innovative art. This mythical catalytic force is an explanation of the artist‟s creative process and the transformative artistic movements at the time, such as Romanticism, Realism and Impressionism, the precursors of modern art. 47 read Darwin‟s Expression of the Emotions in Animals, painted animal-like features onto human subjects. French evolutionary scientist Georges Clemenceau was “a sympathetic friend and advocate for Monet‟s art and could relate it to evolutionary ideas” (Fitzwilliam Museum website). In the artistic sphere, Impressionist works highlight the evolutionary origins of man, emphasizing the affinity between man and animal. However, in the literary sphere of the 1860‟s, there is no evidence to suggest that Darwin directly influenced Manette Salomon. Edmond de Goncourt did read Darwin in the 1870‟s and 1880‟s. In Edmond de Goncourt‟s novel La Faustin (1882), one of the characters, Lillette, is a translator of Darwin (9). Clemenceau was also a friend of Edmond de Goncourt in the 1880‟s, with whom he discussed “roman, théâtre, peinture, art japonais,” (Le Gaulois 1). In the 1860‟s, the Goncourts incorporated their understanding of Buffon, popular science, science fiction and their own observations at the Jardin des plantes into their work. The Goncourts mention Buffon in their works, but scholars have noted their misreading of the scientist. In the novel, the authors use Buffon‟s Collection aux animaux quadrupèdes (1775-1777) to describe Vermillon‟s species of monkey. “Vermillon était un macque Rhésus, le macque appelé Memnon par Buffon” (231). In her book chapter on Manette Salomon, Marie Lathers points out that the Rhésus is not the same thing as the Memnon (156). The Goncourts also paraphrase Buffon‟s Discours sur le style (1753) in their journal: L‟art pour l‟art, en aucun temps, n‟a eu sa consécration comme dans le discours à l‟Académie d‟un classique, de Buffon: „La manière dont une vérité est énoncée, est plus utile à l‟humanité même que cette vérité.‟ J‟espère que c‟est de l‟art pour l‟art cela” (12 January 1860). 48 The editors of the 1959 edition of the Goncourt Journal point out that this is not what Buffon had actually written. Buffon wrote: “un beau style n‟est tel en effet que par le nombre infini des vérités qu‟il présente” (Discours 4). The Goncourts seem to be using the name of Buffon to legitimize their defense of l’art pour l’art. Thus, one could argue that the Goncourt brothers do not directly follow Buffon‟s ideas to the letter. Instead, the authors incorporate their own personal understanding of Buffon‟s ideas in a nineteenth- century context. At this time in France, the phenomena of popular science and science fiction exploded (Gamwell 57). Between the end of the 17 th and the 19 th -centuries, what would later be called science fiction begins to take shape as an autonomous fictional domain as concerns its materials, themes and narrative formats derived from the varying sort of merveilleux, utopias, imaginary voyages and texts of scientific popularization. 50 This unique brand of fiction provided a new and original dynamic for the merging of utopian speculation and geographic exploration (Bozzetto 3). During a time of industrial progress and scientific development, fiction became a vehicle for imagining utopic spaces and contemplating the mysteries of the world. Popular science had its parallel to “the independence of young artists from the Académie” (Crosland 315). Like the avant-garde artists, science fiction was a means of subverting established beliefs and ideas. Popular scientist fiction writers like Jules Verne as well as the Goncourt brothers often took a fictionalized, fantastical interpretation to scientific phenomenon that was being disseminated throughout the country. The Goncourt brothers 50 Examples of vulgarization scientifique include L’année scientifique, Cercle de presse scientifique, les mystères de la science by Louis Figuier and l’Exposition universelle. 49 “contrast their own lack of scientific recognition with those who had adopted a scientific career” (Bozzetto 3). Manette Salomon is an amalgamation of personal interpretations and often of misreadings of Buffon, budding evolutionary ideas, physiognomy and physiology. Aesthetic Philosophy and Literary Criticism Manette Salomon contains the fantasy of a naïve return to a mythical primitive existence. At the same time, this fantasy is presented as an integral part of modern life. Like Jules Laforgue, the Goncourt brothers believe that the artist has a sensibility that is “extrêmement developpé” (Champeau 57). Stephanie Champeau, a twentieth-century Goncourt scholar, writes, “En cela l‟artiste est même proche des animaux, dont la vie sensorielle est plus développée que les êtres humains (57). According to this critic, because animals do not rely on intellect or knowledge, they depend mainly on their senses to give them information. The myth of the creative artist as naïve or innocent is found in the art critic John Ruskin‟s influential book The Elements of Drawing (1856-1857) whose ideas circulated throughout Western Europe. As Arthur C. Danto comments in “Animals as Art Historians” in Beyond the Brillo Box: The concept of ocular innocence comes, so far as I have been able to discover, from Ruskin, who sought to purge the artist‟s mind of whatever stands in the way of registering visual truth, enabling pictures to be made which shows reality as we would see it were we not corrupted by artifice. Ruskin‟s complaint was that the art of painting since Raphael had deviated from this ideal, by the insinuation of all manner of conceptions. The Ruskinian attitude was carried over into the art of the 1950‟s and early 1960‟s in New York, not that the painting itself was to show nature bare, 50 since these were abstractions, but that we should approach these paintings without preconceptions. Danto points out the myth that modern art rejects previous conceptions, schools, models and artifice. In this sense, some modern art movements are characterized by the aesthetic of a “return to innocence.” In his reading of Manette Salomon, Crouzet similarly claims that “L‟art réclame un œil ou une conscience désintellectualisée, purifiées de tout ce qui est logique, construit, conceptuel” (Crouzet 53). This quotation certainly reinforces the myth of the “innocent eye.” This narrative should be understood within the context of a transitioning society in which logic, constructions and concepts were in flux. 51 The artist in Manette Salomon is both naive and urbane. For example in the novel, Chassignol, an artist, describes another artist: Coriolis qui a ça, un tempérament qui est doué, lui qui est quelqu‟un, un nerveux, un sensitif... une machine à sensations… lui qui a des yeux! Comment ! Il a son temps devant lui, et il ne le voit pas ! Non, il ne voit pas ! Cet animal-là ! (Manette Salomon Faquelle edition 322). While such sensitivity enables the artist to see artistically (“lui qui a des yeux,”) it also prevents him from achieving self-awareness (“il ne le voit pas!”). In this passage, the artist could be conceived as a purely sentient being that is both animal-like and machine- like. Haraway writes in “The Cyborg Manifesto,” a cyborg is “a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction” (149). Haraway‟s description of the animal-machine is, of course, different from 51 As mentioned in the introduction to this dissertation, in addition to undergoing several regime changes, Paris underwent major industrialization. Discoveries in science constantly undermined previous understandings of the way the world worked. In addition, avant-gardists questioned the value of traditional institutions such as the Salon. These forces helped shape the narrative of the artist as a naïve animal and the myth of a "return to innocence." 51 that of the Goncourts. The use of the word “machine” in Manette Salomon seems to refer to the fact that the artist is supposedly driven by sensory responses, similar to a machine or an animal. The notion of the “machine” in Haraway‟s work should be situated in a particular late twentieth-century context. At the time of Haraway‟s publication and even today, humans have become so dependent on machines and technology to function in society that they could be labeled as “cyborgs.” According to Haraway, the cyborg subverts the dichotomy of nature and culture because it infuses the animal with the machine. The cyborg is thus a quintessential post-modern subject. However, the Goncourt‟s description of the modern Parisian artist is similar to Haraway‟s notion because the artist is simultaneously urbane and naive as well as animalistic and mechanical. The paradoxical image of the artist who is at once an uncouth animal and a modern machine characterizes a particular aesthetic of mid nineteenth-century France. As Walter Benjamin points out in “Paris, Capital of the Nineteenth-Century,” during the construction of iron arcades in the city of Paris, “a primitive contrivance formed—on analogy with the machine—from the materials of psychology, this mechanism made of men, produces the land of land of milk and honey, the primeval wish-symbol” (5). This quotation indicates that Fourier‟s industrial utopia satisfies a type of human wish fulfillment or urge for a primal nature. Thus, the artist and the architect of mid nineteenth-century Paris is an embodiment of both the primal and the modern. 52 While Manette Salomon, a literary work, obviously differs from visual works of art, the novel was written in an Impressionistic style.52 In the novel, the authors emphasize the external qualities of objects such as color and shape and their placement in relation to other objects. The authors also describe the way in which changes in light alter the physical appearance of objects and people. 53 The 1996 edition of the novel by Gallimard is 629 pages including notes and commentary. Some nineteenth-century reviewers felt that Manette Salomon was too detailed, didactic and elitist. For example, one reviewer wrote in the Figaro on March 1 st , 1886 that the Goncourts‟ theatrical version of Manette Salomon was “caractérisée par un snobisme bruyant” (3). Other reviews applauded the novel for its artistic descriptions that resembled paintings. Alphonse Duchesne wrote in Le Figaro on November 30th, 1867 that the Goncourts “paint” the novel. Criticism of this time does not emphasize the fact that this novel is a piece of writing and is obviously not the same thing as painting.”Votre livre n‟est pas une séries de chapitres, mais bien une galerie de tableaux. Telle de vos pages est un Delacroix, telle autre est un Decamps” (558). Because the novel is an example of literary impressionism that attempts to graphically describe the visual arts, the text itself 52 Of course, the term Impressionism had not been invented at the time of the publication of the novel. The novel is set from 1840 to 1860, before the Impressionist movement. However, one could argue, as Goncourt scholar Michel Crouzet writes, "Ils prophétisent: ils annoncent „l‟impressionnisme‟ alors qu‟il n‟existe pas encore […] si l‟on résume avec Robert Ricatte l‟impressionnisme a deux traits, la peinture claire (ou le plein air) et les sujets modernes" (31). This novel depicts outdoor spaces that were written sur scène, such as the Jardin des plantes and modern subjects such as the bohemian, Anatole. 53 This is another example of ekphrasis because the authors use writing to vividly describe visual images. The authors also often reveal emotions or inner conflicts of characters through briefly outlining a visual description of their expressions or demeanor rather than through a penetrating psychological glimpse into the characters‟ psyches. 53 demonstrates its own artifice. The novel is at once a Naturalist work and an Impressionist work, meaning that it uses painterly techniques to construct the myth of a primal nature. Most modern day criticism of Manette Salomon dismisses the role of both nature and animals in the novel. Twentieth-century critics who do acknowledge the importance of animals in the novel do not recognize the novel‟s inherent artifice and mythical constructions. For example, Stephanie Champeau mentions in her book, “La notion de l‟artiste chez les Goncourt,” “il y a quelque chose de presque animal chez l‟artiste dans sa façon de percevoir, de goûter le monde” (47). Champeau and Michel Crouzet are two critics who mention the positive connection between the animal and the artist‟s process in the Goncourts‟ oeuvre. Unfortunately, they do not discuss this link as a narrative. They also do not recognize that the urbanization of Paris at this time may have been a motivating factor for artists and writers to preserve nature in their works and thus create the myth of the artist as being close to animals. Marie Lathers‟ book chapter “Models, Monkey‟s and Naturalism” stresses the importance of animals in mid nineteenth-century paintings and in Manette Salomon. In her post-colonial critique of the novel, Lathers‟ main focus is on the ways in which the characters in the book have been “naturalized” and “domesticated.” Other critics such as R.B. Grant and Jean Louis Cabanès discuss the animal in terms of the decline and impotence of the artist. The majority of critics of Manette Salomon do not mention the role of the animal at all. Other modern critics of Manette Salomon such as Jerrold Seigel have dismissed the novel for its racist and sexist prejudices against women, Jewish people and other marginalized figures (173). Seigel labels the novel “anti-bohemian and anti-Semitic” (174). The novel‟s insistence upon a 54 mythical untainted nature renders such stereotypes so as to seem natural and unquestioned. As Chou writes, “When we label a problem natural, we imply that there is not much we can do about it” (9). This chapter hopes to take into consideration such criticism with specific regard to the artist and his imagined parallel with animals and the “natural world.” The Jardin des Plantes: the Artistic Gateway The novel describes the Jardin des plantes in terms of an idyllic escape from the chaos of modern, city life. “Entre les pointes des arbres verts, là où s‟ouvrait un peu le rideau des pins, des morceaux de la grande ville s‟étendait à perte de vue” (Manette Salamon Fasquelle Edition 3). This quotation highlights both the artificial and natural landscape of the Jardin des plantes. The green pine trees mask the modern city of Paris like a curtain (rideau). The imagery of a curtain suggests that the Jardin des plantes is almost like a theatrical set that hides the backstage of the venue. The pine curtain allows the visitor to lose his or her view of the city in favor of a more “natural” perspective. This garden constructs the myth that an artist painting in the Jardin des plantes would lose his or her cultural conditioning and view the world from a more naïve understanding. 54 At the same time, the text itself undermines this myth, indicating that the Jardin des plantes is an artificial construction. As ecological scholar Timothy Morton writes: Suburban nature (and its “wilderness” remix, National Park campsites), can‟t decide whether it‟s artificial or natural. We flip like a lenticular photo from artificial nature to natural artifice. We crave those landscaped 54 Similarly, the novel opens with a guide giving a tour of the Jardin des plantes. The tour guide tells the group, "Confiez-moi votre œil… Je n‟en abuserai pas! Approchez, Mesdames et messieurs! Je vais vous faire voir ce que vous allez voir!" (83). This quotation reinforces the narrative that the Jardin may produce a change in the modern city dweller‟s perspective. 55 dry creek beds in front of our houses, and the Parks need trash cans and toilets. Suburban nature in a sense is more natural than natural— hyperbolically lush and carefully managed, nowadays without too many pesticides and herbicides (if you‟re being ethical). That initial bluebird is just right—it‟s just a little bit more than natural, so it slips into being super-natural (“All the Corners of the Buildings” 1). Although Morton is discussing suburban nature in the twenty-first century, Manette Salomon certainly contains these notions of “artificial nature” and “natural artifice”. According to Morton, parks contain so many visual clues to suggest that they are “natural” that they become “super-natural” or “hyper-real”. As previously mentioned, the Goncourt brothers can be seen as the fathers of Impressionist writing, and they write as if they were painting. For example, Alphonse Duchesne wrote of Manette Salomon in 1867, “Vous n‟écrivez pas. Écrire! A quoi bon? Vous faites mieux. Vous peinez” (557). This quotation suggests that painting is perhaps even “more real” than writing. Nineteenth-century criticism of Manette Salomon has either criticized or lauded its hyper- realism and likeness to painting. 55 For example, Albert Wolff dismissed the novel in his article in Le Figaro on November 26th, 1867, for being too “realistic” and thus lacking imagination or intrigue. Wolff argued that the characters were “copiés sur la réalité” (in Manette Salomon 556). However, Duchenese applauded the novel because he argued that the novel had painterly qualities. Because the novel is self-conscious that it is a work of art, the authors‟ descriptions of “nature” (or the Jardin des plantes) use clear indications that they are artificial constructions. Although the book presents the myth of artistic naïveté, the use of Impressionistic writing makes the reader aware of its own artifice. 55 It is, of course, necessary to recognize the difference between Impressionism and literary impressionism because painting and writing are two very different media. 56 For example, the authors describe the Jardin des plantes : Plus loin, à la dernière ligne de l‟horizon, une colline où l‟œil devinait une sorte d‟enfouissement de maisons, figurait vaguement les étages d‟une falaise dans un brouillard de mer. Là-dessus pesait un grand nuage amassé sur tout le bout de Paris qu‟il couvrait, une nuée lourde, d‟un violet sombre (81). The first clue that the Goncourt brothers allude to paintings in their written description is the word “ligne”, as if to indicate that the horizon is an artificial, painted line. “Vaguement” could indicate the vague, nebulous imagery of Impressionism. The mention of the color “violet” also points out the aesthetic quality of the scene. Finally, the cloud that covers Paris masks the view of the city, just as the work itself attempts to mask (“enfouissement” and “couvrait”) signs of urbanity although it is continuously present in the text. Manette Salomon does depict the kind of urbane public who frequented the Jardin des plantes. “Du monde allait dans le Jardin des plantes, montait au labyrinthe, un monde particulier, mêlé, cosmopolite, composé de toutes les sortes de gens de Paris, de la province et de l‟étranger que rassemble ce rendez-vous populaire” (79). In this passage, the authors depict the Jardin des plantes as the gathering point of French people from every walk of life. Visits to the Jardin des plantes were part of a mass, cultural phenomenon (Hoage 106). The novel presents the fantasy that this institution is a Garden of Eden, 56 allowing people to gather together regardless of class or origin. All kinds of people, whether “populaire” or “cosmopolite,” are welcome. 56 The authors describe the Jardin as "Eden" on page 547. 57 As previously mentioned, in the novel, virtually every person from every layer of society is described in some way as an animal. For example, Anatole describes a man in the French artistic Academy as “C‟est l‟animal du monde! Le plus facile à nourir” and his wife as “une bête” with “des ongles de chat” (172), Anatole and Manette are described as monkeys (230, 269), and women in the street have “robes de plumes, de soie, de fleurs et d‟oiseaux” (262). Despite these different class distinctions, genders or professions, they are all described in terms of animals. The Goncourts‟ Paris is almost a human menagerie in which different subspecies of humans are placed in zoological categories. Thus, for the authors, the Jardin is a microcosm of the human species, which is animal-like in nature. It is fitting that Manette Salomon begins and ends near the menagerie inside the Jardin des plantes. The Jardin, like other similar institutions in Europe, has a predisposition for people “to associate with other living creatures no matter what the circumstances were, recalling notions of a primitive yearning stamped onto the human psyche early in our evolution” (Spotte 13). Similarly, in Manette Salomon, the artist Coriolis feels the need to spend time “dans l‟air sain et calmant de la vie végétative. La bête, chez lui, avait besoin de se mettre au vert. Aussi eut-il plaisir à se sentir dans cet endroit si bien mort à tous les bruits d‟une capitale” (Manette Salamon Fasquelle edition 237). “La bête, chez lui” reinforces the narrative that within the artist, as well as perhaps within all humans, is an animalistic, “primitive yearning” for green spaces 57 57 The word death ("mort") is certainly appropriate to the Jardin. Although the Jardin des plantes is an urban institution, it is constructed as the momentary "death" of bustling, urban life. In addition, although there is the myth surrounding the Jardin des plantes that it is healthy and calm ("sain et calmant"), thousands of animals were ill and died "en masse" due to atrocious 58 The incorporation of animals into urban society is an important characteristic of Realist and Naturalist literature. Naturalist literature often depicted the struggle of working class individuals for scarce resources in the same way that animals did at this time (Mayard 1061-1073, Brian and Hurt 971-976). As Lathers writes in her analysis of Manette Salomon, In the 1840‟s, a growing group of realist authors such as Balzac were intent on recording the private and public lives of various social types of the July Monarchy, animals were also busy representing themselves in narrative or so their human ghost writers would have readers believe. Although relegated to parks and zoos—to nature—the animal-authors suggest that the animals‟ participation in rituals of daily life, both public and private, merit recording, not as mere fantasies of nature or satire but as realist representatives of culture (144). Lathers argues, according to realist authors, animals were an important part of daily city life and were representative of mid nineteenth-century French culture. Just as Realist artists naturalized modern Parisian life, they also anthropomorphized animals. One of the roles of literature was to speak for animals and to imagine their experience in zoological parks. Thus Realist literature attempted to bridge the gap between fiction and everyday life, the city and nature, and humans and animals. One example of a work with an animal “author” is Dame Giraffe (1827) by Charles Francois Bertu. This fictional work imagines the experience of the giraffe living in the Jardin des plantes who was sent from the ruler of Egypt in 1825.This short story reveals the colonialist discourse of the Jardin des plantes, which is also apparent in Manette Salomon. In “Dame Giraffe,” the bear Martin remarks, “les citoyens d‟Afrique conditions. See "La nouvelle rotonde des fauves au Jardin des plantes." Le Petit Journal supplément illustré (31 mars 1895). 59 brulent du désir de contempler la sublimité de votre taille” (29). This sentence suggests that one of the roles of the Jardin des plantes was to demonstrate France‟s grandeur to other countries. In addition to its Egyptian giraffe, the menagerie prided itself on its Senegalese lion and two Algerian dromedaries acquired at the end of the eighteenth- century (Laissus and Peter 81-94). The captivity of such “exotic” animals on French soil could symbolically demonstrate to the garden visitors the power of France over orientalized nations. In witnessing these “exotic” creatures from Africa and Asia in cages, the French spectators could feel confident about their status as a colonial superpower. As Lathers writes, “The Jardin des plantes becomes in literary naturalism (as it already was in scientific naturalism) a privileged site of colonialist discourse” (160). In Dame Giraffe, the giraffe learns to assimilate into French society by learning about French art and literature and by denying her native religion of Islam. 58 She starts her induction into French society by reading the Génie du christianisme. The giraffe quickly learns that “les arts font vivre, font fleurir la France” (41). This statement illustrates Morton‟s concepts of “artificial nature” and “natural artifice.” Although human constructions, art and literature are assigned the roles of breathing life into French society and making it “flower.” The artifice of French art and literature is presented as “natural.” This story of the giraffe thus naturalizes Western imperialism over non-Christian, non- Western nations. Dame Giraffe reveals the connection between animals and the orientalized other because neither are given their own voice. The author speaks for the Egyptian giraffe as a willing participant in its assimilation into French society. As both 58 According to the story, in her war-torn country, "Par Mahomet, ils périront tous" (33). 60 Haraway and Saïd quote from Marx: “They cannot represent themselves. They must be represented” (Haraway Primate Visions 10). 59 As Luc Vezin writes on the depiction of The Jardin des plantes, in Manette Salomon and other artistic and literary works: Lieu de promenade en famille, royaume de petite délinquance des pickpockets et des rendez-vous galants, le Jardin des plantes exhale un parfum mêlé d‟innocence et de débauche […] les spécimens humains qu‟on y rencontre sont tout aussi exotiques que les animaux de la ménagerie (94). This quotation presents the taxonomical fiction that people from different social classes (“gallant” people and pickpockets) belong to two different species of animals. The description of the garden as being exotic may refer to the many races and nationalities that could be found there. As Jacques Perret writes,”En ce jardin comme ailleurs les races ni les nationalités ne se mélangent pas volontiers […] J‟ai noté ce trait parce qu‟il en va de même chez les animaux qu‟ils viennent voir à la ménagerie” (Perret 15). 60 Perret suggests that just as the Jardin des plantes forces animals of different species and origins to live together in the same space when they normally would not mix, the institution also forces people of different nationalities and races to co-mingle when they ordinarily might 59 Colonialism can also be defined as "the use of the weaker country‟s resources to strengthen and enrich the stronger country" (Princeton University Wordnet). Manette Salomon and La Dame Giraffe both reveal the exploitation of animals from foreign countries for scientific, artistic and entertainment purposes. Morton argues that today this practice extends to the field of medicine, in which rich countries colonize genomes from other countries. "„Foreignness‟ might also be reduced to indigenous genomes, in which case Bewell is making a case for a new kind of colonialism, the kind pointed out by the ecofeminist Vandana Shiva: a colonizing of life-forms themselves (GM foods, the patenting of genes, the seeking of profits in rainforest medicines . . .)" ("On Alan Bewell‟s Romanticism and Colonial Disease" 10). 60 Jacques Perret. Le Jardin des plantes. Paris: Julliard, 1884. 61 not. 61 In his implied linking of divergent races with the divergent species of animals, Perret thus naturalizes the racist desire for certain groups to be separated from other groups. Thus, the Jardin can again be seen as symbolic of Paris during the Second Empire, where people of different backgrounds and origins co-existed in a modern city. It is interesting that to explain the behaviors of urban people, the author reverts to explanations found in the animal kingdom. Haussmann‟s Paris became a fusion of both the urban world and the natural world. “La révolution industrielle engendre une densité de la population jusqu‟à là inconnue et une telle pollution atmosphérique dans les grandes villes que la présence de la végétation, du soleil et du vent vont rapidement conquérir le statut de bienfaits salvateurs” (von Joest 383). Because the pollution and the density of urban Paris made it difficult for its inhabitants, city-planners incorporated parks into the city. Paris, consequently became “la ville verte” (von Joest 383). Nature in Paris is perhaps, in the words of Haraway, “something we cannot do without, but can never have” (The Promises of Monsters 64). 62 The urbanization of Paris destroys the natural world. However the natural world is necessary for human survival. Paris attempts to compensate for this 61 "Elles s‟éviteraient plutôt et les travailleurs importés eux-mêmes recherchent peu la compagnie du tiers monde" (Perret 15). The quotation reveals the racism and xenophobia that plagued Paris at this time as immigrants from the "tiers monde" moved to the capital to work. In fact, due to the Haussmannization of Paris, immigrants were cast out to the banlieue outside of Paris. 62 Haraway is, of course, speaking from a twentieth-century perspective to critique nineteenth- century mythology. Her postmodernist critique attempts to dissect and deconstruct modernist dichotomies such as nature/culture, indicating that the construction of the former is dependent on the latter. 62 paradox by integrating nature into the city. 63 Thus, the Goncourt‟s narrative suggests that as a representative of his own society, the creative artist too is a mélange of the natural and the urbane. During this period, the Jardin des plantes was the center for both artistic and scientific development. Many artists such as Eugène Delacroix, Rosa Bonheur, Edouard Manet and Henri Rousseau painted animals in the park‟s menagerie. The novel describes this garden as not only a foundation for the avant-garde artistic movement, but also as the very heart of the city of Paris itself. One of the governmental purposes of the Jardin des plantes was to create “une menagerie qui serait un tableau vivant d‟histoire naturelle” (Vezin 46). The menagerie sought to edify the public by using beautiful living images. 63 The Paris of today can even be seen as teetering between the natural world and the urban world. For example, the most modern and fast-paced metro station, Gare de Lyon, also features an underground garden. The Forum des Halles also includes an underground garden and the Bibliothèque Nationale de France—Francois Mitterand has a courtyard inside a modern, glass and wooden building. "The aim is the unification of the interests of society and a natural way of life […] As a climax to the ascent of a monumental wooden stairway, a surprise comes up from the upper level of the heart of the library: a sunken pine forest from the central courtyard. This is no conventional urban park, but a piece of wild nature, a symbolic „primal forest‟" (Dominique Perrault 95-96). The BNF creates the myth that at the very heart of the library and in the middle of the thirteenth arrondissement, there is a "primal forest" and "wild nature." Interestingly, this primal nature is inaccessible to the modern public, as there are no doors or means of access from inside the library. Perhaps this phenomenon indicates that the idea of a virginal nature that is untouched by civilization is only an illusion. One of the ways in which the BNF unifies the "interests of society and a natural way of life" is through literature. After all, the books in the library and its wooden frames are made out of trees. Even today, literature attempts to bridge the gap between nature and civilization. Patrick Blanc, a landscape architect, has integrated tropical plants into urban spaces in Paris and other major cities by using vertical gardening on walls. One example is the vertical garden at the Quai Branly museum. "At first it seemed that the people who lived in these Haussmann-era apartment buildings in the seventh arrondissement were not particularly enthusiastic, but little by little, they came to accept it. Today they are the vertical garden‟s fiercest defenders" (The Vertical Garden 147). This quotation suggests that while the public at first resisted the garden, they eventually embraced the tropical plant wall as an important addition to the nineteenth-century Parisian neighborhood. 63 The comparison to a painting indicates that the menagerie is an artificial aesthetic construction that has little regard to quality of life of the animals within it. In addition to being a popular meeting place for promenades and family visits to the menagerie, the Jardin des plantes was a place where scientific knowledge, such as new findings concerning animal behavior, hybridization and comparative anatomy was disseminated (Milne-Edwards 22). 64 Public lectures on evolution and the ability to observe animals in captivity made people aware of their physiological relationship to animals (Gregory 53). The prominence of the Jardin in the novel indicates that an understanding of animals may be an essential foundation for the artistic process of this time. 65 After all, because animals were absent in urban spaces, it was the role of art, literature and zoological parks to disseminate their image. One of the purposes of the Jardin is to provide the urbane artist with access to particular plant and animal life that he or she would normally not be able to view in Paris. In turn, this experience would enable the artist to better depict the “natural” world. The Notice sur le degré d‟utilité du Muséum d‟histoire naturelle de Thermidor (1792) states that the Jardin des plantes‟ menagerie: a pour conséquence de définir le rôle des artistes, au sein du futur muséum: le peintre, le sculpteur et autres artistes trouveront dans la ménagerie des animaux vivants les plus rares et ils éviteront, en copiant 64 Scientists at the Jardin des plantes included Georges and Frédéric Cuvier, Êtienne and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hillaire (Peters 35). 65 In addition, the Jardin des plantes is an important site for artistic development because it mirrors the human condition. The Jardin des plantes is in part a natural environment containing trees, plants and animals. The institution is also in part an artificial, scientific construction created in the middle of a flourishing, modern city. Perhaps this institution is symbolic of human nature itself, for we are part animal with natural, irrational instincts and drives. We are also complex, intelligent creatures that must function in modern society. 64 fidèlement la Nature, des contresens qui déshonorent quelquefois leurs plus beaux ouvrages (Vezin 46). 66 In the Notice, the menagerie seeks to reshape the role of the artist, as a “faithful copier” of nature in contrast to an artist who would “dishonor” his work by depicting animals according to previous artistic representations. This myth is similar to that of the Goncourt brothers. For example, the authors write of Anatole, “Des journées qu‟il passait au Jardin des plantes à étudier les animaux, il rapportait leur voix, leur chant” (105). This artist‟s ability to study and imitate the sounds of animals illustrates the myth that he is able to communicate with the natural world. As Marie Lathers suggests, the Jardin des plantes becomes a natural “atelier” where painters are able to portray their experience with nature (147). The word “rapporter” in Manette Salomon indicates that the artist functions as a reporter. He may enter into the animal world and then report back his findings to a human public. The Jardin did present the artist with animals that would not otherwise be available, thus fostering creative inspiration. However, it should be recognized that the Jardin des plantes is a civil institution that shapes and filters a person‟s perspective of nature. It thus might inhibit a person from experiencing a so-called “natural” or “animalistic” vision. The nineteenth-century poet M.A. Dépasse writes in his poem “Jardin des plantes”: “Parcourons, sous ses yeux [les yeux de Cuvier], la vaste galerie/ où l‟art sait disposer avec toute symétrie/ où règne en même temps l‟ordre et le bon goût/, où 66 As previously mentioned, in the novel, the atelier where artists copy previous paintings instead of looking at nature for inspiration is located on "Rue d‟Enfer" (120). Anatole escapes this "hell" by going to the "heaven" (544) of the Jardin des plantes, where he is surrounded by the sights and sounds of nature. 65 l‟esprit du grand homme enfin plane partout” (Vezin 10). According to the poem, one of the goals of the Jardin des plantes is to organize nature according to the rationalist principles of order and good taste. The words “règne”, l‟ordre”, “le bon goût”, l‟esprit and grand homme” suggest the notion that human reason must dominate the natural world. In this poem, the word “yeux” reveals the narrative of the Goncourt brothers and other defenders of the Impressionists that one should create art according to one‟s own “natural” or “naïve” vision. For these writers and artists, perception should not be shaped or manipulated according to institutional or rational guidelines. In this museum and menagerie, however, the animals are displayed in accordance with both aesthetic and scientific principles, under the guidelines of Cuvier and other scientists. 67 The institution superimposes artificial aesthetic arrangements onto nature rather than presenting animals and plants in a more organic setting. This perception is similar to Morton‟s concept of “natural artifice” and “artificial nature” that is apparent in Manette Salomon. The notion that the Jardin gives the poet or artist “natural inspiration” is also found in the Dépasse poem. He writes that the Jardin des plantes exhibits nature which “vient inspirer le poète qui cherche le calme des bois” (5). The Jardin could also be seen as a place of respite from the chaotic city. At the end of the Goncourt brothers‟ novel, Anatole lives in an apartment next to the Jardin des plantes, which is described as an idyllic, natural paradise. Like the sages in Laforgue‟s poem and the artist in Mirbeau‟s Dans le ciel,” il s‟abandonne à toutes ces 67 Certainly, the Jardin des plantes today still abides by this idea. In the Galerie d‟Evolution, stuffed parrots are placed strategically on the rafters for the viewers‟ aesthetic enjoyment, similar to the way in which an artist might strategically paint birds in the background of a painting. 66 choses, Il s‟oublie, il se perd à voir, à écouter, et à aspirer” (546). Nature becomes for Anatole a sort of tabula rasa where all previous knowledge is effaced. The book ends with the sentence, “Au milieu de cet univers d‟animaux familiers et confiants comme sur une terre divine encore, l‟ancien bohème revit des joies d‟Eden et il s‟élève en lui, presque célestement, comme un peu de la félicité du premier homme en face de la nature vierge” (547). The novel constructs the fantasy that the entrance of the Jardin des plantes becomes a portal to Eden, a spiritual haven where the artist experiences the happiness that Adam must have felt, unburdened by the heavy weight of knowledge, history or societal expectations. As Crouzet writes, “Le visuel n‟est qu‟une partie, la première certes, de cette sensibilité où s‟enracine l‟expérience première, dernière de l‟homme où le fait exister et l‟être au monde sont dans leur état originel et absolu” (50). 68 The quotation reinforces the nineteenth-century mythology that some were able to experience the “original and absolute state” of being. This fictional experience of oneness with the natural world is ambivalent. As mentioned in the introduction of this chapter: Anatole a devant lui la ménagerie enfermant le soleil et les féroces dans les cages la ménagerie où le roux des lions marche dans la flamme de l‟heure, où le tigre qui passe et repasse semble emporter chaque fois sur les raies de sa robe les raies de ses barreaux (545). 68 It is curious that the artist would experience something close to the "first experience" and the "last experience" of men. The notion of the first experience seems to evoke the myth of the Garden of Eden in which Adam and Eve were able to experience life before their encounter with the tree of knowledge. The first experience also could refer to the first experience of a newborn baby before he or she has become conditioned by knowledge. The last experience could refer to the moment before one‟s death during which memories, knowledge and culture expire. 67 This passage could be read as: the stripes on the tiger correspond to the stripes on the cage, indicating that the status of the animal is analogous to a prisoner. This tragic image reflects the treatment of animals in the nineteenth-century. This passage is one of the only times that the novel mentions that animals were in cages in the menagerie. “La représentation d‟animaux dans leurs cages est assez rare au dix-neuvième siècle; on préfère les imaginer en liberté” (Vezin 54). One reason why people preferred to imagine animals roaming free at this time was because, in fact, the animals were kept in deplorable states of confinement. According the supplément illustré of Le Petit Journal on March 31st, 1895, titled : “La nouvelle rotonde des fauves au Jardin des plantes,” the cages for lions and tigers during the time of the Manette Salomon were “où les malheureuses bêtes tournent ahuries et malades dans une boîte insuffisante où elles se cognent à tous les coins” (103). It is perplexing why a nineteenth-century public who was so fascinated by the similarities between humans and animals would keep them in such wretched conditions that the animals would become ill. Perhaps menageries are a means of confining, controlling and dominating the non-human world. 69 Although, in some ways, the Biblical and Buffonian conception that man should have dominion over animals began to shift in the mid nineteenth-century, the institution of the menagerie reveals the cruel mistreatment of animals at this time. 69 However, it is ironic that Lacepède writes in "Quelques idées concernant les établissements appelés ménageries" in La decade philosophique littéraire et philosophique de 1795, that the Jardin des plantes was "consacré aux animaux innocents et paisibles qui par leurs travaux ou leurs dépouilles peuvent être plus ou moins avantageux à la société" and to "un peuple libre"(in Vezin 46). 68 On the other hand, the fictional tiger in Manette Salomon is mobile inside of his cage. He is able to “passe et repasse” in spite of his confinement. The constraint of the cage could even protect the tiger from harm. According to Nigel Rothfels, animal theorist: the claim of the institutional zoo historians has been that the public zoological gardens of the nineteenth and twentieth-centuries fundamentally differ from early collections of animals because they emphasize science, education, recreation and conservation and are no longer places of simple curiosity or the expression of some sort of cultural or personal power (Savages and Beasts 38). Modern zoos employ the myth that they are actually beneficial to both the public and the animals. Zoos claim to protect and to preserve species of animals that are disappearing in great numbers due to human induced environmental destruction. “Les animaux y vivent sinon heureux puisqu‟ils ne sont plus libres, du moins bien portants, on peut les conserver plus longtemps et c‟est plaisir de les voir s‟élancer, prendre les attitudes qui sont les propres” (Petit Journal supplément illustré 1). In this sense, while the urban environment seeks to destroy animals and plants, it also employs institutions to nurture and protect them. The animal is only able to exist in modern, urban society if it accepts the constraint of the zoo. Similarly, the marginal artist, who is depicted as close to an animal, requires certain societal constraints in order to survive in the modern world. During his life as a bohemian artist, Anatole is described as a parasite several times in the novel. He must live off of other people and stay in his friends‟ houses because he cannot afford to live on his own. When he stays with Coriolis and Manette, “Manette faisait redescendre Anatole à l‟humble place qu‟il avait dans la maison, à l‟infériorité et au parasitisme de sa position” (436). Anatole is like a domestic 69 animal who functions as a parasite off of his owners and is forced to „stay in his place‟ and be treated as an inferior. His status is analogous to the status of animals in modern cities who usually cannot survive on their own accord without being kept as pets in homes or as prisoners in zoos. Anatole becomes a zookeeper at the end of the novel. 70 Both Seigel and Champeau underscore the contradiction that the former bohemian “par son emploi de Jardin des plantes accède une sorte d‟Eden, retrouve un Paradis perdu…” (Champeau 48). These critics note the irony in that by giving up a bohemian lifestyle for a governmental job, Anatole is able to achieve a harmony with nature in an idyllic paradise. This idea might suggest that any artist who desires to be connected to nature must have the financial means to support himself. He or she must in some way be still part of civilization. The novel affirms the artist‟s mythical affinity with animals. Conversely, at the end of the novel, Anatole is connected to animals in his role as a zookeeper in a menagerie who locks animals in cages. As previously mentioned, the Jardin des plantes seems to be an intermediary between the natural world and modern civilization. As a zookeeper, the modern artist is able to experience the “grand bonheur animal” (547) and still exercise human domination over animals. In contrast, there are many instances throughout the novel where the avant-garde artist seeks to liberate his or her own perception from social conditioning. Perhaps one could think of Deleuze and Guattari‟s idea that: “Nous disons que, pour Kafka, l‟essence 70 Interestingly, the article "La nouvelle rotonde des fauves au Jardin des plantes," in the Petit Journal, represents the zookeeper as a defender of animals who does not see them as inferior to human beings. "Comme disait un brave gardien, ce sont des bêtes comme nous " (103). 70 animale est l‟issue, la ligne de fuite, même sur place ou dans la cage” (Kafka 35). Although Anatole is confined to being a part of civil society with his governmental job and his only exposure to animals is through bars, he is still, in some sense, liberated. He becomes in touch with his “animal essence,” which is an integral part of the human condition itself. For Deleuze and Guattari, the animal signifies an escape from the constraints and institutions of society. “Le devenir-animal montre effectivement une issue, une trace effectivement une ligne de fuite” (67). As the previous quotation indicates, this line of escape may even occur within a cage or within the shackles of human civilization because “becoming animal” indicates a transformation during which a person perceives differently from the rest of human society even if he still exists within that society. This transformation is a creative one, allowing for the possibility of novel, artistic breakthroughs. “C‟est une ligne de fuite créatrice” (Deleuze and Guattari 65). This chapter has already mentioned the myth of the “innocent eye,” that the artist sees in a naïve, animalistic manner. The final scene in the novel presents the narrative that Anatole‟s entire body is infused with nature: Ce qui est autour de lui le pénètre par tous les pores et la Nature l‟embrassant par tous le sens, il se laisse couler en elle, et reste à s‟y tremper. Une sensation délicieuse lui vient en monte le long de lui comme en ces métamorphoses antiques qui replantaient l‟homme dans la Terre, en lui faisant pousser des branches aux jambes. Il glisse dans les êtres qui sont là. Il lui semble qu‟il est un peu dans tout ce qui vole, dans tout ce qui croit, dans tout ce qui court (547). 71 This ending is a depiction of Anatole‟s sense of oneness with his environment; he becomes a part of nature. Anatole feels as if he metamorphoses into a tree 71 and then later into different types of animals. The repetition of the word “tout” emphasizes the sensation of oneness because the animals are not individuated. Haraway writes, “An origin story in the „Western‟, humanist sense depends on the myth of original unity, fullness, bliss and terror” in contrast to the sense of “individuation” that occurs in modern life (“Cyborg Manifesto” 151). In addition to the fantasy of a return to wholeness, the text also reveals the creative freedom of Anatole to metamorphose into other creatures and objects. As Deleuze and Guattari write, “Il n‟y a pas lieu de distinguer les cas où un animal est considéré pour lui-même et les cas où il y a de métamorphose. Tout dans l‟animal est métamorphose”(64). Anatole‟s lack of fixed identity and his affiliation with animals gives him infinite creative potential to shift and to transform. According to Deleuzian thought, the possibility of metamorphosis is linked to novel and revolutionary art that “ne passe plus par les codes sociaux et les constructions normatives” (Bouaniche 21). However, because Anatole only finds this freedom inside the institution of the Jardin des plantes, he is both bound and liberated by social norms and codes. The Monkey Artist One of the most prominent examples of the fusion between artist and animal in the novel occurs between Anatole and his pet monkey Vermillon, who Coriolis brought 71 This experience is akin to that of the woman in the short story "The Other Kingdom" in The Celestial Omnibus (1911). 72 back with him from a trip to the Orient. 72 The authors orientalize both the monkey and Coriolis due to their origins: Le singe s‟épouillait attentivement, allongeant une de ses jambes, tenant dans une de ses mains son pied tordu comme une racine; ayant fini de se gratter, il se recueillait sur son séant, dans des immobilités de vieux bronze; le nez dans le mur, il semblait méditer une philosophie religieuse, rêver du Nirvana des macaques” (228). The monkey twists himself into a yoga-like posture, and appears to be meditating to attain Nirvana. “Nirvana des macaques” probably refers to not only the species of monkey, but also to colonized (possibly Indian) people. 73 As mentioned in the introduction, the Goncourts, Laforgue and Mirbeau all associate the figure of the animal at this time with Nirvana or Hindu or Buddhist enlightenment which is an experience of the oneness among all things. This utopic dream of harmony between man, animals and nature is perhaps a means of escaping the industrialization and capitalization of modern Paris. As Haraway writes: Simian orientalism means that Western primatology has been about the construction of the self from the raw material of the other, the appropriation of nature in the production of culture, the ripening of the human from the soil of the animal, the clarity of white from the obscurity of color (Primate Visions 11). This quotation suggests that Western society, for the most part, has attempted to set itself apart from nature, animals and people of color in order to establish its identity. However, this distancing from nature may leave Western man with a sense of loss, and he then 72 Vermillion was inspired by Kokoli, Jules de Goncourt‟s monkey and by some of the paintings of Decamps (Champeau 47). 73 "Macaque" is a racial slur that originally referred to Africans in the Belgian Congo, but it used as an insult against a person of color (Edgerton 180-181). 73 yearns for that which is “exotic” or “natural.” The role of art and fiction at this time begins to bridge this gap. The characters in Manette Salomon are often described as being in the state of an exotic, animalistic oneness with nature. For example, the novel also orientalizes the character Madame Crescent as being Hindu-like.”Son instinct avait naturellement de la religieuse répugnance du brahme pour la bête qui a vécu et qu‟on a tué : pour elle, la boucherie ressemblait à de l‟anthropophagie” (366). Like Brahmans who do not eat meat for religious reasons, Madame Crescent is a vegetarian. 74 She experiences a sense of oneness with animals to such an extent that eating them would be like cannibalism. Coriolis, an artist who is also orientalized in the novel, also does not like to eat meat. Créole, Coriolis avait le cœur et les sens du créole. Dans ces hommes des colonies, de nature subtile, délicate, raffinée, mettant dans les soins de leur corps, l‟huile de leurs cheveux, leur toilette […] N‟aimant pas la viande, se nourrissant d‟excitants et de choses sucrés (285). This quotation illustrates the othering that occurs in the novel. All Créole people are generalized and stereotyped to be refined and almost feminine. 75 Coriolis‟ so-called “delicate” essence is perhaps appalled by the barbaric nature of meat and prefers sweets. The novel creates the myth that the artist is akin to an orientalized animal who views other species of animals as his brothers. In describing Anatole‟s relationship to the monkey Vermillion, the authors write: 74 Morton points out instances of a European interest in vegetarianism due to the knowledge of Hindu practices. For example, "John Oswald (d. 1793), whom Wordsworth may have actually met in Paris, fought in India and was indeed a convert to Hinduism; Medwin and Bewell call it „Brahmanism,‟ which implies a specifically vegetarian caste" ("On Alan Bewell‟s Romanticism and Colonial Disease" 10). 75 Coriolis has "un tempérament féminin" (285). 74 Il semblait 76 que le singe se sentait comme rapproché par un voisinage de nature de ce garçon si souple, si élastique, à la physionomie si mobile; il retrouvait en lui en peu sa race; c‟était bien un homme, mais presque un homme de sa famille (230). When the monkey Vermillon looks at Anatole, it is as if he is looking at a member of his own family. “C‟était bien un homme, mais presque un homme de sa famille” blurs the distinction between human and animal. Anatole is almost a monkey-man: one who fits within both the categories of humans and animals. This quotation also indicates the book‟s reliance on the pseudo-science of physiognomy, which argues that if a person resembles an animal, he or she will have moral and behavioral traits that are similar to animals. As the two spend time together, Anatole adopts the monkey-like characteristics and behaviors of Vermillon. The authors write, “Bientôt avec son goût et son talent d‟imitation, il arriva à singer le singe, à lui prendre toutes ses grimaces, son claquement de lèvres, ses petits cris […] (229)” As Anatole becomes more monkey-like, correspondingly, Vermillon develops an interest in the arts. “Les deux amis avaient déteint l‟un sur l‟autre. Si Vermillon avait donné le singe à Anatole, Anatole avait donné de l‟artiste à Vermillon. Vermillon avait contracté, à côté de lui, le goût de la peinture” (229). This passage suggests a symbiotic relationship between the artist and his monkey, reinforced by the expression “l‟un sur l‟autre” and the chiasmus “Si Vermillon avait donné le singe à Anatole, Anatole avait donné de l‟artiste à Vermillon.” This fictional interchange suggests the myth that the interaction between artist and animal enriched both the artist and the animal. During Vermillon‟s artistic exploration, the monkey eats 76 "Il semblait" indicates that the narrator is speculating what the monkey is feeling. 75 tubes of paint, and he rips up sheets of paper in rage (230). Interestingly, the name Vermillon refers to an Asian red pigment that typically was commonly used in nineteenth-century paints, thus implying the connection between animals and the arts. In addition, it is in the artificial setting of the atelier that the fusion between artist and animal occurs. “Tout à coup, dans l‟atelier, des bonds, des élancements, une espèce de course volante entre l‟homme et bête, un bousculement, un culbutis, un tapage, des cris, des rires, des sauts, une lutte furieuse…” (229). This quotation suggests a conflict between the multiple and the one, as illustrated by the indefinite articles “des” and “un”. While Vermillon and Anatole are two different individuals of two different species who experience “des cris,” “des rires”, “des sauts”, they combine in a tornado-like flurry to become “une espèce”. However, this blending of man and animal only occurs “dans l‟atelier” (229). It is in the artist‟s studio and through the artificial lens of painting 77 that this union between man and animal can take place. Sadly, the monkey‟s artistic capabilities are limited to eating the paint, ripping the paper and painting circles on the canvas: Malgré tout ce qu‟Anatole avait fait pour encourager ces évidentes dispositions à l‟art, Vermillon s‟était arrêté un peu près là. Il n‟avait pu encore tracer, en dessinant d‟après nature, des ronds, toujours des ronds, et il était à craindre que ce genre de dessin monotone ne fût le dernier mot de son talent (230-231). Although this passage highlights the fusion between the bohemian artist and the animal, it also indicates the limitations of such an interaction. The novel could suggest that a 77 The Goncourts admired Decamps‟ paintings of monkeys and monkey artists, which influenced Manette Salomon (Champeau 228). 76 monkey is not capable of the imagination and creativity necessary to produce art, and he is limited to only painting “monotonous” circles. Even though Vermillon‟s expression is very limited, he does paint “en dessinant d‟après nature” which was the goal of many Impressionists. For example, “From the 1880‟s Monet himself repeatedly sought to paint „primal‟ landscapes and seascapes whose geological formations offered startling proof of the great age of the earth; they were for him „marvelous impressions of the world‟s dawn‟” (Fitzwilliam Museum website). The Impressionist movement thus seems to emphasize the importance of simple forms that could represent the earth‟s origin. Taken to its limit, painters who copy elements of nature may reduce their works to the most basic geometrical or fractal shapes, such as the Art Nouveau movement that occurred several decades later. Art Nouveau artists painted the basic, decorative forms of shells, leaves and microscopic animals. For example, Gauguin‟s paintings which feature “decorative color cutouts” are said to convey a sense of “biomorphic vitality” in that they depict trees and other forms of vegetation in their most basic evolutionary forms, illustrating their potential to transform and evolve (Rosenblum and Janson 423). Of course, like the Goncourt brothers, who orientalize many of the characters of the novel, Gauguin‟s depiction of Tahitian women can also be considered to be a reductive orientalization of non- Europeans. As previously mentioned, the Goncourts‟ aesthetic is often one of “natural artifice.” It is therefore logical that “dessinant d‟après nature” would not be considered a viable approach to painting. One of the authors‟ favorite painters was Descamps, whom 77 they celebrate in the novel. “Le Paysagiste saisissant qu‟est Descamps, comme il fait frissonner la nature, comme il dramatise le bois et l‟horizon, quel grand décor, mystérieux et sourd” (Manette Salomon 117). Although Descamps is a landscape painter who may best capture nature, the words “dramatise” and “décor” indicate the artifice of his work. “Il fait frissonner la nature” indicates that his artificial painting is so realistic that it makes nature shiver. The novel suggests that artifice, construction and imagination are necessary to produce great art, instead of a pure reproduction of nature. It is also noteworthy that the authors use the expression “le dernier mot” perhaps either implying that the monkey‟s lack of speech limits his artistic ability or indicating that Vermillon is in fact capable of some symbolic expression. In the 1851 “Guide pittoresque au Jardin des plantes,” A. Henry writes that a monkey family “commence une conversation qui doit être bien intéressante à en juger par la rapidité avec laquelle ils remuent les lèvres” (15). Henry describes the monkeys‟ activity in terms of human speech acts. Although not limited to speech, culture can indeed be construed as a combination of symbolic systems. According to Marcel Mauss, who deeply influenced Lévi Strauss: The different kinds of symbolic systems constitutive of a given society, which are incommensurable, transform at different paces. It is here that the shaman-and the artist- have a role to play….These individuals are placed not exactly outside the symbolic order, which is an impossibility, but its periphery. This is the space occupied by the shaman, the artist, and the „psychopath‟, inventors of idiolect (or what they represent) as such that exist alongside the collectively constructed symbolic order and are used to mediate between the symbolic order and that which escapes or exceeds this order, threatening its integrity and stability (Mauss in Wiseman, Lévi-Strauss, Anthropology and Aesthetics 21-22). 78 In order for a cultural shift to occur, there must be some displacement or even disturbance in the typical symbolic order that humans use to represent their world. Individuals who exist at the periphery of the symbolic order, the avant-garde artist, the psychopath, the monkey, etc., can undermine the “integrity and the stability” of a culture. These fissures in the symbolic order enable a new symbolic order to form. In the twentieth century, some modern artists reduced their compositions to circles and squares. Although Manette Salomon indicates the limitations of Vermillon‟s artistic abilities, it is interesting that in retrospect, the novel could even be prophesying modern art which often uses basic shapes and “monotonous” forms. As Deleuze and Guattari suggest, “L‟expression doit briser les formes, marquer les ruptures et les embranchements nouveaux. Une forme étant brisée, reconstruire le contenu qui sera nécessairement en rupture avec l‟ordre des choses” (52). These “ronds” and “dessin monotone” could suggest such a cultural shift because they are symbols that are outside of the ordinary mode of expression of the time. After all, what seems to be nonsense to one generation could be meaningful to a later generation because of this shift in the symbolic order. Previous criticism on Manette Salomon has emphasized both Vermillon and Anatole‟s artistic limitation. In Le portrait de l’artiste en singe dans Manette Salomon: Copie et polyphonie,” Cabanès writes that the authors sought to “exorciser le démon de l‟imitation en suscitant des personnages perroquets, des artistes-singes” (93). Critic R.B. Grant writes “Anatole‟s fall from the heights of art is shown […] above all through his alter ego, his pet monkey Vermillon […] In one significant scene, Vermillon even tries 79 to paint, but of course accomplishes nothing” (89). 78 In these quotations, Vermillon represents a part of Anatole, or his “alter-ego”, which only imitates nature instead of using the imagination. 79 Lathers argues that “the monkey painter theme was an effective parody of realism or naturalism…” (157). The above passage from the novel certainly does indicate limitations of the monkey‟s artistic ability, and perhaps in effect, the limitations of the Naturalist movement as a whole to achieve art that is genuinely creative or imaginative beyond merely copying nature. However, the above criticism does not take into account the historical importance of the animal in scientific and cultural thought at this time, which was far more significant than a simple imitator of man. Deleuze and Guattari write, “dans le Rapport pour une académie, il ne s‟agit pas d‟un devenir-animal de l‟homme, mais d‟un devenir homme du singe; ce devenir est présenté comme une simple imitation” (25). One must recognize that in the novel, Anatole also imitates Vermillon, and that the monkey is not just an imitation of man. In fact, there may be some creative freedom in a human being taking on animal traits. The novel does also suggest that the emphasis on nature and the myth of the „artist as animal‟ do have some sort of subversive power that may incite a cultural shift. While the novel could suggest nostalgia for a return to a mythical natural state, it also may encourage the idea of France moving forward to develop a new cultural identity. This idea further echoes Benjamin‟s notion that mid nineteenth-century capitalist France 78 Although very limited, Vermillon is able to draw circles instead of "accomplishing nothing." 79 In addition to imitating animals at the Jardin des plantes, Anatole imitates all the sounds around him. "Il imitait les accents, les patois, les bruits de la rue" (105). 80 relied on images of the primal to distance itself from the recent past in order to make way for the future. The Goncourt Brothers write of Anatole: Il était né avec les malices de singe. Enfant, lorsqu‟on le ramenait au collège, il prenait tout à coup sa course à toutes jambes et se mettait à crier de toutes les forces de crapaud, „V‟là la révolution qui commence (103). This quotation uses the narrative that the wild and untamed nature of the animal could be harnessed as a revolutionary force against traditional academic institutions of the time. Of course, as previously mentioned, this dissertation argues that the animal became a highly important figure of mid nineteenth-century France primarily due to the importance of educational, civil institutions such as the Jardin des plantes. The novel creates the myth that the bohemian artist incarnates the savage spirit of animals, which can revolt against stifling institutions. The novel therefore assigns some sort of insurgent power to the minor or marginalized figures of animals or bohemians. As Deleuze writes, “Les gens pensent toujours à un avenir majoritaire (quand je serai grand, quand j‟aurai le pouvoir). Alors que le problème est celui d‟un devenir-minoritaire” (Dialogues 11). Deleuze points out that minority figures such as children, animals, women and outsiders can be more powerful than the majority because they can provide new ideas and new narratives that differ from the majority‟s discourse. Anatole‟s nickname is the Joke (“La Blague”). Seigel argues that the Goncourt brothers are making fun of Anatole‟s bohemian nature, of which they are suspicious. In contrast, he also could represent the nineteenth-century narrative that people could no longer take cultural, religious or political institutions too seriously. The authors write that la Blague has become “le Credo farce du scepticisme, la révolte parisienne de la 81 désillusion, la forme légère et gamine de blasphème” (108). The Goncourt brothers write that the Blague‟s laugh is “terrible, enragé, furieux, mauvais, presque diabolique” (108). Similarly, in Zola‟s caustic article “Mes haines, causeries littéraires et artistiques,” the author expresses his loathing for traditional institutions because they arrest creativity. He writes, “Meurent les écoles, si les maîtres nous restent.” 80 The tone of this article could certainly be classified as “enragé” and “furieux.” 81 Zola felt that a sort of fever or frenzied spirit was necessary to overturn the institution of the Salon. Zola writes in 1879, “Je voudrais aussi que notre art moderne y fût pour quelque chose, notre fièvre à tout vouloir, notre impuissance, notre déséquilibrement en un mot “ (Zola. “Mes haines” 72). The Goncourt brothers write, “Ce rire qu‟on dirait jouir du bas plaisir de ces hommes en blouse, qui, au Jardin de plantes, s‟amusent à cracher sur la beauté des bêtes et la royauté des lions; la Blague—c‟était bien le nom de ce garçon “ (108). From this passage, Anatole exemplifies this defiant spirit that attempts to subvert all socially- constructed idealizations, event those that exemplify the beauty of animals. In contrast, as previously mentioned, the end of the novel reveals Anatole‟s reliance on the institution of the Jardin des plantes for his own survival. Anatole‟s identification with a monkey reinforces his role as a trickster. Although Henry Louis Gates‟ The Signifying Monkey (1988) was written to explain some of the dominant concepts of twentieth-century African-American literature, there are some 80 Zola. " Mes haines, causeries littéraires et artistiques." Ecrits sur l’art. (Paris : Gallimard, 1991), 72. 81 Similiarly, in discussing advancements in modern art, Jules Laforgue writes, "L‟état le plus favorable de cette évolution est la suppression des écoles, des jurés, des médailles, des meubles enfants, du patronage de l‟état, du parasitisme des critiques d‟art sans oeil, etc" (142). 82 similarities between Gates‟ notion of the monkey as an archetypal figure and Anatole in the Goncourt brothers‟ novel. The monkey uses his playful and humorous nature in order to subvert social hierarchies. As Gates writes in “The Blackness of Blackness: A Critique of the Sign and Signifying Monkey,” “The monkey is a trickster in many folk poems and tales who dupes his friend the lion” (987). The lion is most often described as a royal figure. 82 Thus, as mentioned in the passage in the last paragraph, to spit in the face of a lion is to defy royalty. The official French Salon and the Académie des Beaux-Arts were royally sanctioned institutions. They were vestiges of a monarchical past. The main struggle for the avant-garde artist of the 1860‟s was to gain public acceptance in a society that was used to a particular tradition of art which was grounded on a passé royal system. The depiction of Anatole in the novel is thus ambivalent. On one hand, the novel points out his creative limitations because of his mythical affinity with animals and the “natural world.” On the other hand, it is because of this affinity that he is able to resist stifling institutions that limit creativity. The final compromise in the novel is, of course, achieved when Anatole moves to the Jardin des plantes, where he can be close to animals but still live within the parameters of civil society. Barbizon: The Peasant Artist The imagined link between artist and animal is not only seen through the experiences of Anatole but also through those of Coriolis. This section traces the artistic progression of Coriolis from an Orientalist to a Realist. While there are multiple 82 The lion often signifies royal power. Rothfels writes that the menagerie of the Jardin de plantes also kept lions on display for the aggrandizement of the state (220). 83 possibilities for this change, there are two significant moments in the novel that alter Coriolis‟ painting techniques: his trip to Barbizon and the subsequent death of Vermillon. During the trip to Barbizon, Coriolis, Anatole and Manette encounter a pastoral paradise where uneducated peasants, Crescent and Madame Crescent, are deeply connected to nature. These peasants are portrayed as being in a “natural state”, untainted by education or exposure to civilization. Crescent is a painter and Madame Crescent is occupied with the barnyard animals. Coriolis and Anatole‟s exposure to both members of the Crescent family could be equally important because they both reveal their connection to nature and the animal world. The fictional description of Barbizon echoes the actual artistic school which existed from 1830 to 1870. Critics have linked the character Crescent to the painter Jean Francois Millet (Moore 48). 83 The artists‟ experience in Barbizon coupled with the death of Vermillon are two significant factors which contribute to Coriolis‟ artistic shift and his discovery of a sense of the “natural” within his own society, rather than searching for it elsewhere. The novel creates the myth that leaving Paris to experience a pastoral, non-urban life is essential to the character‟s artistic education. However, it is only through the integration of this experience with Parisian life that the character may achieve a creative breakthrough. 83 In their Journal in September of 1853, The Goncourt brothers write of Millet: Lui l‟habile et le spirituel crayonneur, le brillant et savant aquafortiste, le maître au cochon, affecte doctoralement de répudier toutes les habiletés, les adresses, les procédés tout ce dont est fait son petit, mais réel talent, pour n‟estimer que les maîtres spiritualistes, et ne reconnaître dans l‟école moderne qu‟un seul homme: M. Ingres (Journal: Mémoires de la vie littéraire 45). 84 The Orient gives Coriolis the artistic inspiration to paint colorful paintings of women and animals in exotic lands, similar to those of Delacroix after his voyage to the recently colonized Algiers. While some nineteenth-century artists turned to the Orient in order to find a more “primitive” existence, others turned to rural France. The Barbizon forest, near Fontainebleau, was a remote spot “where sophisticated Parisians hoped to find and usually did find what they presumed incorrectly, to be a pre-industrial world untroubled by economic problems and inhabited by simple, pious and picturesque peasants, whose crude but potent folk art could inspire a search for a comparable directness and honesty” (Rosenblum and Jansen, 421). Barbizon, like the Orient, was a release valve for Parisian artists who sought simplicity and honesty, which was lacking in modern European society. Of course, these city dwellers probably idealized and projected onto the Barbizon people the notion that they were “simple, pious, and picturesque peasants,” ignoring the arduous labor of daily tasks and the devastating economic conditions that eventually contributed to the Revolution of 1848. Within this idealized framework, Barbizon can be seen as a kind of Eden where the artist can live in harmony with the natural world. In the novel, Coriolis, Manette and Anatole decide to take a trip to Barbizon where a new school of artists was practicing a revolutionary kind of landscape painting which featured peasants working in nature with domesticated animals. This school of art contrasts with the Orientalist tradition of painting animals in exotic settings and the historical painting tradition in which nature serves as a background for culturally important events. The novel presents the myth that the characters in the Barbizon forest 85 experience a close connection with the natural world which initiates a new process of seeing and painting. This experience is probably based upon the work of Millet, one of the founders of the Barbizon school. He painted pastoral scenes such as sheepherders, gleaners and peasants baking bread. The Gleaners (1857) portrays three peasant women surrounded by trees and cows crouching down to pick up grains from the dusty ground. The representation of humans unified with their natural environment dramatically contrasts with previous Salon art which often sought to separate humans and nature. For example, the Dutch tradition of Nature Morte, which often features hunted dead fowl and game, emphasizes man‟s triumph over the natural world. Of course, one could make the argument that Millet‟s paintings also show humans dominating their natural environment. The cows and sheep in the paintings are often behind the human figures, and it is implied that they will be used for human consumption. In many of Millet‟s paintings including The Gleaners, the figures attack the earth with sickles or uproot plants from the ground. Such violent actions against the land could also further suggest man‟s dominion over nature. 84 In the novel, Coriolis spends time watching Crescent paint. The narrator idealizes Crescent as naïve, arguing that he is “sans instruction, sans éducation, ne lisant rien, pas même un journal, ignorant de tout gouvernement qu‟il faisait…” (373). The use of negations in this sentence, ”sans”, “ne… rien”, “même pas”, etc., negates the importance of various aspects of culture and civilization: education, books, newspapers, government, 84 In addition, as Millet painted during the Revolution of 1848, many of his paintings have political undertones. His paintings affirm the power of the peasant class, and the sickles presented in his paintings could represent violence against the privileged class (Rosenblum and Janson 221). 86 etc. In this context, the novel seems to be arguing that it requires virtually nothing to be a talented artist, only the basic materials and a sensitive eye. The series of negations seem to strip away all unnecessary cultural forms, in essence creating a tabula rasa, where true creation begins. 85 The myth that Crescent is a painter who paints “from nature” and not according to academic mandates or to intellectual faculties is similar to the ideas of Buffon. Buffon writes in Histoire naturelle (1754): L‟Artiste n‟est arrivé qu‟avec peine et successivement; parce que l‟esprit humain ne saisissant à la fois qu‟une seule dimension, et nos sens ne s‟appliquant qu‟aux surfaces […] la Nature au contraire sait la brasser et la remuer au fond; elle les développe en les étendant à la fois dans les trois dimensions” (214). Buffon describes the limitation of the human intellect to capture the rich nuances of the external world. The human mind is only uni-dimensional, whereas nature is multi- dimensional. Buffon portrays nature as a painter which displays the world in its minute detail and infinite complexity. Nature‟s vast canvas is filled with a profusion of shapes and colors. Conversely, human intellect is linear and contained. Buffon seems to be lamenting the gap between the artist of his time period and nature. The nineteenth- century response to this separation is to depict the avant-garde artist as infused with the natural world. Crescent is an embodiment of this idea. Whereas Buffon describes nature as a painter, the Goncourt brothers describe Crescent as a painter who is one with nature. 85 Crescent seems to be an orientalized character who perhaps embodies the principles of Zen Buddhism which advocates stripping away the impurities of the mind. The Goncourt brothers must have been aware of Buddhism because of their interest in the art of Japan. See Hokousaï (1896) by Edmond de Goncourt. "By being able to lose yourself utterly—everything you have clung to, everything you have built up, all of your accomplishments and your pride—the world may begin anew, and see itself again through your eyes" (Alan Watts What is Zen? 93). 87 In Manette Salomon, Crescent and Coriolis share a symbiotic artistic relationship where both artists learn from each other. This relationship fuses together a perception of the natural world and that of the modern metropolis, symbolizing a new kind of art. Coriolis often chats with the peasant as Crescent paints in his studio. Coriolis enchanté de trouver enfin un peintre qui parlât un peu de son art; Crescent, le sauvage, vivant à l‟écart des habitants du pays, tout l‟entretenant de sa peinture, lui rappelait des tableaux vus à des vitrines de marchands, les analysait en homme qui les avait étudié, flairés, sentis (369). In this passage, there is an artistic exchange between Coriolis and Crescent, similar to the one between Anatole and Vermillon. Coriolis is enchanted by the noble sauvage who is able to speak of art, and Crescent is happy to meet a person who has “studied, breathed and felt” paintings he had seen in shop windows. This fusion between a so-called “natural”, uneducated eye and one that has studied art in an urbane context became a foundation for Realism and Impressionism. As Charles Baudelaire writes, modern art lies “où l‟homme naturel et l‟homme de convention se montrent dans une beauté bizarre, où le soleil éclaire le joies rapides de l‟animal dépravé” (516). For Baudelaire, great art requires attention to eternal, natural elements such as the sun and the seasons and attention to the modern trends of civilization. 86 The painter of modern life aims to depict “le geste, le regard, le sourire” of a particular time period (Baudelaire 518). Thus, the ideal artist must be exposed to both the natural world and be able to rely on physical sensations. The ideal artist must also be acquainted with the current characteristics of 86 "La modernité, c‟est le transitoire, le fugitif, le contingent, la moitié de l‟art, dont l‟autre moitié est l‟éternel et l‟immuable" (Baudelaire 518). 88 modern city life. In this context, this artist can be seen as a fusion between Crescent and Coriolis. Another exchange that happens in the Barbizon occurs when Madame Crescent teaches Coriolis and Anatole to empathize with animals because animals have practically human emotions. Madame Crescent feels “une communion de souffrances avec les bêtes, Leurs maux, leurs joies lui remuaient un peu les entrailles. Elle sentait vivre de sa vie en elles” (367). Madame Crescent feels a mythical sense of oneness with animals, and she experiences their pain and joy as if they were her own. The idea that animals experience almost human agony or pleasure is reinforced in the following chapter of the novel. The artists return to Paris and find Vermillon dying from the cold. Vermillon demonstrates suffering on his face “en faisaient comme un petit malade approché tout près de l‟homme de sa pitié par cet air de souffrance humaine qu‟à la souffrance des animaux”(403). The Goncourt brothers used their observations of a dying monkey at the Jardin des plantes in order to accurately describe Vermillon‟s agony (Vallès 5). They write: “Les yeux attachés sur le dos d‟Anatole, sur la porte qu‟il fermait, avec l‟expression des yeux d‟une personne qui regarde, la tristesse de voir s‟en aller quelqu‟un et venir la solitude” (397). They also mention “ses yeux agrandis de souffrance” (403). The monkey‟s eyes reveal that animals have emotional attachments to other creatures: they understand when people are leaving them, and they can also experience feelings of solitude and suffering. 87 87 Interestingly, as Haraway points out in Primate Visions, empathy and compassion toward animals are often considered to be female traits. "Many have deliberately taken advantage of the greater latitude for women in western culture to acknowledge emotional exchange with the 89 Nineteenth-century writer Georges Rodenbach argues that the artists in Manette Salomon, “Ils sont malades d‟être trop exquis. Ils souffrent d‟être sensibilisés jusqu‟aux nuances. Ils épient pour avoir voulu se hausser aussi loin de l‟homme que celui-ci est loin des animaux” (559). 88 According to Rodenbach, suffering could be an integral part of being a creative artist. The artist suffers because he is supposedly “trop exquis” and “sensibilisés jusqu‟au nuances,” i.e., he is so sensitive that he cannot fit within the rest of humanity. Rodenbach‟s argument that artists are as far removed from man as man is from animals depicts the artist as some kind of outcast. The novel reveals a nineteenth-century myth that the artist may even be so sensitive to the life around him or her that the artist can feel the suffering of another living creature as if it were his or her own. In the novel, Madame Crescent acutely feels the pain of other creatures. Her life is intertwined with the lives of other animals. Similarly, the painter Millet, on whom the character Crescent was based, is said to have foreseen his own death after witnessing the death of a stag. In January, 1875, a stag was pursued into a garden nearby and tortured to death. Millet heard all. „It is prognostic,‟ he said; „that poor animal, which has died near me, announces without doubt that I too am going to die.‟ January 20th, 1875, the long struggle ended (Smith 61). Fictional and biographical accounts of Millet present the fantasy that he was so connected with nature and the animal world that he did not separate the death of an animal with his animals and to affirm the importance of identification or empathy in a way that they believe improves the research" (249). It is fitting that Madame Crescent, as a female, could embody compassion toward other creatures and could encourage an "emotional exchange" with animals. It almost seems necessary for a female to play some role in facilitating for the artistic communion with animals because women are often perceived as closer to animals than men. 88 See "À propos de Manette Salomon. L‟œuvre des Goncourt" in La Revue de Paris of March 15th, 1896. 90 own death. While Millet saw the death of the stag as representative of his actual end of his own life, the death of Vermillon represents a sort of artistic death in Coriolis. The monkey‟s death in the novel symbolizes a breaking point with previous forms of art and indicates a new beginning. After Vermillon dies, Coriolis no longer paints brilliantly colored exotic paintings. As Bernard Vouilloux writes: “Coriolis anagramme de Coloriste (Coloris) meurt dans Vermillon” (89). Shortly after the death of Vermillon, Coriolis has a transformative experience. This experience occurs while the artist watches Parisians walk up and down a street. He describes the people as “comme la fourmi dans la fourmilière”(412). Coriolis decides that he wants to focus on painting the modern Parisian woman in her own milieu. Thus, he no longer wants to create scenes of oriental splendor. Coriolis observes “animals” in their environment like scientists observing ants in an ant colony. Just as the Goncourts observed animals at the Jardin des plantes for their novel, the modern artist can employ the same kind of empirical observation for his paintings. In order to understand the intricate relationship of an organism to his or her environment, the artist can conceive of humans as if they were animals in their natural habitats. In a way, Coriolis‟ transition from being an Orientalist painter to a “painter of modern life” is a process of recognizing the animal nature within one‟s own society. He becomes: un homme quitté par une religion de jeunesse. Il était à ce moment critique, à cette heure de la vie d‟un artiste où l‟artiste sent mourir en lui comme le premier contact de son art: l‟instant de doute, de tiraillé, entre les habitudes de son talent et la vocation de sa personnalité. Il sent tressaillir et s‟agiter en lui le pressentiment d‟autres formes, d‟autres visions, le commencement de nouvelles façons de voir, de sentiment, de vouloir la peinture (413). 91 Coriolis comes into a new way of painting that is no longer shadowed by the naiveté of his youth. No longer restricted by “doubt” or “habit,” Coriolis now sees objects in new and innovative ways. He also experiences an artistic transformation on a basic physiological level (“Il sent tressaillir et s‟agiter en lui...”). This process seems to literally shatter any imitation so that the artist comes into a new way of seeing (“d‟autres visions, le commencement de nouvelles façons de voir”). The use of the verb “sentir” indicates a domination of the physiological over psychological or cultural restrictions (“doute”, “habitude,” “personnalité”). This moment is perhaps an example of destroying “les cadres de sa perception habituelle, l‟entraînant dans ces nouvelles manières de sentir […] Quand la sensation atteint le corps à travers l‟organisme, elle prend une allure excessive et spasmodique. Elle rompt les bornes de l‟activité organique” (Bouaniche. Gilles Deleuze : une introduction 208). This transformative experience shatters Coriolis‟ previous perception to make way for the new. The death of Vermillon could symbolize the death of the exotic, oriental splendor that attracted so many of Coriolis‟ viewers in the novel. The shift from painting foreign beauties in Turkish bathhouses to painting the modern Parisian woman on the street mimics the shift in 19 th century painting from Romanticism to Realism. In fact, Coriolis‟ Realist painting Messe de Mariage bears a resemblance to Courbet‟s Enterrement à Ornans (1850) in its muted colors and banal subject matter. Coriolis also focuses on modern subjects such as women walking in the street. As Charles Baudelaire writes in Peintre de la vie moderne, a modern artist who paints a “courtisane de Titien ou de Raphaël, il est infiniment probable qu‟il fera une œuvre fausse, ambiguë et obscure” 92 (520). For Baudelaire, the modern painter should portray a modern woman who one might find walking on the city streets in order to have a more accurate depiction of the women of 19th-century Paris. In contrast, Jossart Aaron notes in his dissertation chapter on Manette Salomon, the Goncourt brothers have written in their journals that realism was an “insincere, disregard for the methodology of painting. Realists chose subjects that were too real.” (150). As the Goncourt brothers commented on Courbet‟s La femme au perroquet, “Le laid, toujours le laid! Et le laid sans grand caratère, le laid sans la beauté du laid” (Journal. September 8, 1855). The authors‟ affirmation of “the methodology of painting” and rendering the ugly beautiful seems to contradict the ideology of the “natural eye” as portrayed in Manette Salomon. After all, “too real” implies that painting requires some artifice. However, for the authors, ideal art could again be a meeting of the naïve, uneducated, artistic eye (Crescent) and the sophisticated, educated and experienced city- dweller (Coriolis). According to this myth, an artist‟s exposure to animality and nature is essential to the artistic process because it shatters the illusions produced by culture. Manette Salomon portrays the Barbizon as an idyllic, transformative gateway that allows urban artists to connect with their basic physiological and animal nature. In turn, these artists can return to Paris with a refreshed creative ability and a new perspective on life. 93 The Queen Ant As previously mentioned, Coriolis‟ decision to focus on the “beauté de la femme de Paris” (413) occurs when he observes people running around the streets of Paris who are: tourmentés, par la dureté de la carrière, le labeur enragé, la peine de vivre. Il interrogeait ces faces de gens qui courent dans les rues, comme la fourmi dans la fourmière, avec un paquet sous le bras, ou une affaire dans la poche (412). The word ant in French is feminine (la fourmi), and in ant colonies, there are busy worker ants as well as the queen ant who is responsible for giving birth to the entire colony. The authors thus seem to be naturalizing the frantic capitalistic labor of Paris and the torment, rage and suffering that this work brings to the people. As Haraway writes, “Animal societies have been extensively employed in the rationalization and the naturalization of the oppressive orders of domination in the human body politic” (268). While the faces of the men are haggard from overworking, the Parisian women still maintain a sense of splendid, glowing beauty: “ces petites personnes étranges, fleuries entre deux pavés, ce qui s‟enfonce à Paris” (413). According to the authors, women are still able to maintain some connection to nature despite living in an urban environment, like flowers growing in the cracks of the sidewalk. According to the authors, women are closer to nature and animals because they are sexualized beings whose main occupation is to reproduce rather than work or think critically. Champeau writes, “la femme, pour les Goncourt, est à l‟état naturel beaucoup plus proche à la bête 94 que l‟homme parce qu‟elle est dépourvue d‟intelligence, d‟esprit critique…” (306). 89 Women are described as being in the “natural state” and are similar to animals because they supposedly lack reasoning faculties. Interestingly, women in the novel are portrayed as possessing similar qualities as the mythical avant-garde artist who rejects cerebral, intellectual art and is in touch with his or her own animality. When Coriolis meets his Manette, his model-mistress, he is inspired by her beauty, 90 which he seeks to capture on canvas. Manette is described as having the face of a “singesse,” the hair of a “negresse” and the body hair of a goat (269). By the late eighteenth-century, the science of “phrenology” became popular in France. It used faces and skull structure to interpret a person‟s character. “The more a person‟s physiognomy resembled an animal‟s, the less morally and intellectually developed—the less human— he was thought to be” (Rubin 9). In Manette‟s case, her “animalistic” exterior reflects her destructive and sexualized personality. Similarly, the Goncourt brothers write in their Journal, “La femme est toute sensation. Elle n‟a qu‟un sentiment, le sentiment maternel parce que ce sentiment est bestial. C‟est un sentiment de chair et de sang.” 91 The use of the singular “La femme” indicates that one cannot differentiate among different women. All women are the same: they are driven by sensation, bodily functions and the maternal 89 According to Michèle Respaut, such a depiction of women was typical in the nineteenth- century novel. "Sous le masque de la servante incomparable est offert au regard du lecteur, du voyeur, la femme folle et monstrueuse dans sa sexualité déchaînée, une femme que nous retrouvons dans bien des textes qu‟ils soient d‟hommes ou de femmes" (Respaut 50). 90 In fact, despite their numerous misogynistic comments on women, the authors write in La femme au XVIIIe siècle that women were "le centre de ce monde, le point d‟où tout rayonne, le sommet d‟où tout descend, l‟image sur laquelle tout se modèle" (book 2, chapter IX qtd. in Kempf 217). 91 Journal. I (23 Juillet 1865) 1176. 95 instinct instead of intelligence or reason. Conversely, women could be seen as ideal artistic subjects because the authors present the myth that they are closer to animals than men. The depiction of women is twofold: the woman is portrayed as both a destroyer and as a nurturer of the creative process. One author who explores this link between women and animals in Degas and in other painters‟ works is Deleuze. Deleuze describes the work of twentieth-century painter Bacon whose art “constitutes a zone of indiscernibility and undecidability between man and animal” (Francis Bacon 20). Deleuze writes that when one sees flesh, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish whether it belongs to an animal or a person. He writes, “Bacon admires the young woman in Degas‟ After the Bath, whose suspended spinal column seems to protrude from her flesh, making it seem much more vulnerable and lithe, acrobatic” (20). Degas‟ female subjects exhibit the same “vulnerable” and “animalistic” qualities discussed by Deleuze. Degas‟ painting The Song of the Dog (1878) features a cabaret singer who bends her hands to look like the paws of a begging dog. In Degas‟ preliminary sketches of the image, the woman‟s face closely resembles the face of an ape (Rubin 71). Women in the cabaret industry were not respected. As one critic writes, “If man descended from the apes, then lower classes and less respectable humans would present semi-ape-like features” (Rubin 71). In Manette Salomon, both women and people of Jewish origin are considered to be less respectable human beings or even subhuman. In the novel, the romantic relationship between Coriolis and Manette is described almost in terms of bestiality. The text presents Coriolis as the human master while Manette is a wild animal that needs to 96 be tamed. The authors write,”Il semblait à Coriolis la voir reculer devant ses offres, ainsi qu‟un fin et nerveux animal, d‟instincts libres et courants, qui ne voudrait pas entrer dans une belle cage” (283). In addition, because Coriolis is a painter and Manette is his model, when he “captures” her image onto canvas, the artistic process is like capturing a wild animal and putting it into a cage. 92 It is thus fitting that the novel begins and ends in the Jardin des plantes, where Coriolis and his artist friends observe and paint caged animals. However, the text also suggests that Manette resists entering into her cage because her instincts are “libres et courants.” This chapter has discussed the ways in which an animal‟s cage, which can both protect and imprison animals, parallels the societal constraints that mid nineteenth-century Paris imposed on its inhabitants. Manette‟s refusal to enter into her “cage” may suggest her refusal as a Jewish woman to completely assimilate into Parisian society. Lathers understands Manette Salomon in terms of “the processes of acclimatization, naturalization, taming and domestication” (150). Just as France became preoccupied with domesticating foreign animals, it also concerned itself with assimilating foreign people into French society. The character of Manette, a Jewish model, embodies this concern. “The establishment of the Jardin menagerie was just the first significant moment in the history of the concerted introduction of exotic animals in France. It is important to consider this history, for the Goncourt‟s attempted „domestication‟ of the Jewish Manette forms part of this larger 92 There are several Impressionist paintings in which women appear to be in cages, such as Manet‟s The Balcony (1868-69), which depicts Berthe Morisot in a cage-like Balcony. Manet‟s The Railway (1873) features a dog, a little girl and her governess (Victorine Meurent) behind the iron bars of a fence. 97 discourse on evolution, colonialism and the acclimation of „foreign‟ or „savage‟ species” (149). Although the novel offers the myth of the natural aesthetic and the artist as animal, one must recognize that the artists only succeed in painting caged animals. Although Vermillon was free to roam about, his death in the novel perhaps suggests the need for societal protection and perhaps indicates that he would survive better in a zoo. According to the racist and sexist stereotypes found in the novel, Manette‟s status as a Jewish woman makes her close to nature and close to the animal world. Manette‟s mythical natural essence at first inspires Coriolis. However, because she essentially refuses to be “caged” and rejects docile assimilation, Coriolis is eventually unable to paint her. Manette‟s influence becomes artistically castrating. “Un moment arrivait où le talent de Coriolis paraissait vaincu, dompté par Manette, docile à ce qu‟elle voulait de lui. L‟artiste semblait se résigner aux exigences de la femme” (512). Manette‟s desire for Coriolis to paint only lucrative works results in the destruction of his talent. Coriolis paints only what Manette commands. It should also be mentioned that the authors depict Manette in terms of a Jewish stereotype in that she mainly cares about money. The words “vaincu,” “dompté,” and “se résigner” imply a reversal of power. In the beginning of the novel, Coriolis desires to capture Manette on the canvas essentially to put her in her “belle cage.” By the end, Manette‟s brutal and emasculating nature attempts to destroy Coriolis. Seigel writes: “For a country like France to trade its traditional culture for those denatured social forms was, in the Goncourts‟ view, to open itself to domination 98 by those foreign and barbarous elements waiting to overtake it from within: The Jews” (173). One could call into question Seigel‟s opinion that the Goncourt brothers only sought “traditional culture” when the novel and their journals affirm Impressionist and avant-garde art. However, Seigel is correct in pointing out the authors‟ racist, anti- Semitic view that Jewish people could destroy French culture. It would seem that as perceived intermediaries between the artist and the natural world, women, like nature, can both create and destroy. Coriolis concludes, “Quand il y a un homme d‟intelligence il faut qu‟il se trouve une femelle pour lui mettre la patte dessus, le déchirer, lui, mordre le cœur, lui tuer ce qu‟il y a dedans et puis encore ce qu‟il y a là (19). Initially, Coriolis‟ vision of Manette was a catalyst for his artistic creativity; however, she later becomes a destructive influence. This disturbing quote portrays women as primal destroyers of male intelligence. The woman is portrayed as a violent animal that places its “paws” on the man in order to bite, destroy and eventually kill his spirit. Conversely, the authors write “il faut qu‟il se trouve une femelle.” It is curious that intelligent man needs to seek a female who could ultimately be the cause of his undoing. The Goncourt brothers could be inferring that this masochistic tendency in the artist is a necessary part of the creative process. The artist seems to need to suffer in order to create. As previously mentioned, the authors construct the ideology that the artist‟s temperament should be “desintellectualisé, purifié de ce qui est logique, construit, conceptuel” (Crouzet 53). Thus, the novel portrays women as animalistic destroyers who strip away the illusions of civilization so that the artists can see in a more “naturalistic” manner. In contrast, the 99 novel also warns against encounters with the supposedly uncivilized person, such as the woman or the Jewish person. The novel constructs the myth of an idealized nature and the narrative that the avant-gardist is closer to nature and animals than other people. This is perhaps because the artist can paint his or her imagination of the natural world even if it is in decline. Manette Salomon thus certainly emphasizes the quality of “artificial nature” and “natural artifice.” In its attempt to bridge the gap between the urbanized and the natural world, the novel naturalizes many of the horrors of modern civilization, such as the mistreatment and cruelty of animals in the Jardin des plantes‟ menagerie, the racist and sexist views toward women, Jewish people and other minorities, and the society‟s colonial attitudes that seek to assimilate all that is foreign or marginal. Because of these societal pressures and conventions, the artist is perhaps akin to a “caged animal” in the Jardin des plantes. His livelihood and survival is dependent on adopting the mores and practices of his society, yet he his imagined affinity with animals and nature makes him open and receptive to the creative forces of the universe. 100 Chapter 2 Aquatic Visionaries: The Impressionist Artist and the Primordial Animal in Jules Laforgue’s Oeuvre A floor of many colored pebbles lies beneath clear water, with fish at first noticed only by their shadows, hanging motionless or flashing through the liquid, ever-changing net of sunlight. We can watch it for hours, taken clear out of time and our own urgent history, by a scene which has been going on just like this for perhaps two million years. At times, it catches us right below the heart with an ache of nostalgia and delight compounded, when it seems that this is, after all, the world of the sane, enduring reality from which we are somehow in exile —Alan Watts. Nature, Man and Woman, 1 With its undulating, serpentine lines, shell outlines and aquatic animal figures, deep-sea life inspired Art Nouveau artists and avant-garde writers. Jules Laforgue, J.K. Huysmans, Jules Verne, James Ensor and Emile Gallé all depicted majestic sea imagery in their creative works, drawing from the scientific accounts of Charles Darwin‟s theory of evolution, C. Wyville Thomson‟s deep-sea voyage, Hermann von Helmhotz‟s discussion of the vision of sea animals, Jean Baptiste de Lamarck‟s work on invertebrates, popularized science reviews and the recently-opened European aquariums. Europe‟s avant-garde also imitated the motifs in Japanese prints that portrayed waves, fish, turtles and other aquatic animals, offering a new perspective of nature that valued the simplest forms of life. At this time, major European cities experienced drastic changes in their infrastructure. As Paris underwent Haussmannization, the Industrial Revolution transformed Berlin into one of the most powerful industrial centers in the world. The urbanization of European cities was one of the many critical forces that contributed to the public‟s fascination with the deep-sea as an escape or refuge. As a 101 result, European cities opened aquariums during this period (Gamwell 86). This integration of the deep-sea with an urban institution culminates in Jules Laforgue‟s little known poem “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” which was published posthumously in La Revue blanche in 1895 (553). In this poem and in the art criticism L’Impressionnisme (written in 1883, published posthumously in 1903), Laforgue creates the narrative of the artist as a primordial animal to explain the creative process of the nineteenth-century French avant- garde. According to this narrative, a truly creative artist must reject all conscious knowledge and understanding of perception. This is perhaps a reaction to the decline of the Salon and the artistic, political, economic and scientific transformation of the society of his day. Instead, Laforgue argues that basic biological functions and instinctual drives must guide the creative process. Basing his narrative on evolutionary and popular science, Laforgue explains the novelty of the Impressionist and Post-Impressionist movements by creating the myth that the avant-garde eye is biologically similar to a primal animal (L’Impressionnisme. O.C. 1903 ed. 36). “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” idealizes the gaze of snakes, crocodiles and other aquatic animals and L’Impressionnisme favors the imagined vision of “prehistoric man” (Textes de critique d’art 19). Thus, Laforgue uses a mythical representation of the animal and primitive vision to explain the aesthetic of the avant-garde. The profound transformation of European society and its urbanization process at this time propelled writers into a deeper exploration of nature as a creative force. “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” could indicate that the deep-sea is a metaphor for the creative 102 process itself. The poet or artist is like a deep-sea diver who penetrates deeper and deeper into the layers of both the psyche and physical body, discovering frightening, mystical and astounding imagery previously unseen by civilized man (Feuilles Volantes. O.C. III. 103-104). Just as nineteenth-century deep-sea voyages proved that there were biologically primitive creatures living in the previously undiscovered depths of the ocean (Gamwell 85), it is in the undiscovered depths of the artist‟s own mind and body that true creativity takes place. If an artist or writer is able to tap into the unlearned, uncouth, biologically simple aspect of humanity, he or she will see anew. Laforgue fantasizes that the artist will supposedly see closer to an animal or an Eastern sage who has cast aside cultural and intellectual illusions. However, it should also be acknowledged that these animals are locked up in an aquarium inside the institution of the zoo. Thus, although Laforgue presents his aesthetic as “natural,” its inherent artifice and construction shines glaringly through the text. This aesthetic affirms the myth of a virginal, primitive nature in the midst of major urbanization and industrialization. Part of this aesthetic includes menageries, gardens and aquariums: urban institutions which attempt to preserve and safeguard the last traces of untainted animal and plant life. In addition, it is also an aesthetic of both the biologically simple and the infinitely complex. Interestingly, although Laforgue seems to propose a simple or reductive aesthetic which would prune away any illusions or ornamentation, Dottin-Orsini has labeled his aesthetic an “Esthétique scientifique” which includes “le pointillisme, le papillotage les paillettes—tout ce qui émiette l‟univers et le moi en un tourbillon de particules, et en fait un kaléidoscope infiniment mouvant” (27). 103 Although Laforgue presents a “primitive” aesthetic that rejects all cultural knowledge, this citation points out that Laforgue‟s aesthetic is infinitely complex and relies on scientific inventions and discoveries. 93 Thus, Laforgue‟s aesthetic is both complex and simple, scientific and naïve, urban and natural, and multiple and individuated. “À l’Aquarium de Berlin ” In “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin,” the narrator idealizes the way in which the creatures found in the aquarium look at things. The narrator describes the gaze of aquatic animals as being still, sagacious and Buddha-like (O.C. 1903 ed. 35). The descriptions of the creatures seem to affirm an imagined pre-evolutionary state of being, indicating that as creatures evolve, their ways of seeing become conditioned by knowledge. À l‟Aquarium de Berlin—Devant le regard atone, gavé, sage, bouddhique des crocodiles, des pythons (les ophites), etc. Comme je comprends ces vieilles races d‟Orient qui avaient épuisé tous les sens, tous les tempéraments, toutes les métaphysiques—et qui finissaient par adorer, béatifier comme un symbole du Nirvâna promis ces regards nuls dont on ne peut dire s‟ils sont plus infinis qu‟immuables. Mais l‟idéal c‟est les éponges, ces astéries, ces plasmas dans le silence opaque et frais, tout au rêve de l‟eau (O.C. 1903 ed. 35). 94 “In front of” (“devant”) might lead the reader to believe that a viewer stands before an aquarium and gazes at the animals inside. However, the word “gaze” (“le regard”) inverts this idea. The animals are, in fact, staring at the viewer. Already, Laforgue is reversing 93 For example, the artistic movement of Pointillism, like Laforgue‟s art theories, is influenced by optical theories by scientists such as Michel Eugène Chevreul and Charles Henry. This chapter also investigates the influence of evolutionary theorists, such as Darwin and Helmholtz, on Laforgue‟s aesthetic. 94 Et les mystères obscènes de Cybèle (O.C. III 553). The last line of the poem was not included in the 1895 edition of the poem. 104 the typical depiction of the interaction between humans and animals in which animals are usually the objects of the human gaze. As Berger, a twentieth-century art historian, writes, humans place animals in zoos and aquariums in order to be able to view them easily. 95 The human desire to gaze at animals can be seen as a desire to both exert power and dominion over the animal and to express a human longing to live among animals in “nature” (Berger 4-5). The act of looking at animals is thus characterized by a dualism. While man may desire to be one with animals, he is always looking “across ignorance and fear,” (Berger 5) “and the eyes of an animal when they consider man are attentive and wary” (Berger 4). Thus, in Berger‟s essay, it would seem that when humans and animals look at each other, no real communication between animals is possible. It is always thwarted by fear, the impending threat of violence on both sides and the lack of common language between the creatures. Laforgue, on the other hand, does not describe this interaction in terms of fear or misunderstanding. Laforgue‟s description of the animals‟ “blank stares” is possibly an indication of human ignorance of the way in which animals function. 96 95 This idea is similar to that of the "male gaze," which is commonly described in both feminist and visual studies discourse by scholars such as Laura Mulvey as a means for men to possess, objectify and dominate women. 96 It should, of course, be acknowledged that Berger and Laforgue were writing in two very different time periods in two different contexts. 105 In using the word “regard” twice, the poem emphasizes the animal‟s gaze, highlighting both what they see and the way in which they see. This focus on the animals‟ gaze gives agency to even the most primitive organisms such as plasma and starfish. In fact, nineteenth-century scientists and writers began to pay more attention to the biologically simple creatures following Lamarck‟s multi-volume work on invertebrates, which provides detailed accounts of creatures such as worms and mollusks. 97 As Lamarckian scholar Szyfman argues, “l‟étude des invertébrés modifie les idées métaphysiques” (21). 98 The attention to invertebrates reverses the notion that only biologically and intellectually complex creatures merit scientific inquiry. While scientific treatises treat invertebrates as objects, aesthetic treatises imagine how these creatures may experience the world even if they do not have developed eyes. Laforgue essentially anthropomorphizes the animals and describes their vision as akin to those of Eastern sages. The animal‟s sensory experience of the world transcends that of human vision. In fact, rather than portraying the aquatic animals as savage beasts that are incapable of human-like understanding, Laforgue portrays the sea creatures as wise (“sage”) beings who have experienced life to the fullest (“gavé”). They are like Buddhist 99 sages who 97 Laforgue‟s understanding that mutations were inherited by offspring indicates that he read Lamarck ("impressionnisme" 35). 98 Szyfman. Lamarck et son époque. Paris: 1987. 99 I will elaborate on the Orientalization of the animals later in this chapter. 106 “avaient épuisé tous les sens, tous les tempéraments, toutes les métaphysiques”. It is possible to make the comparison between these animals in the poem and avant-garde artists. Laforgue was a defender and theorist of the Impressionists, and scholars have considered his writings as examples of “literary Impressionism” (Dottin-Orsini 29). Like the animals in the poem, the French avant-garde felt that the art of the time had also exhausted all of the possible metaphysics, techniques and trends. Thus, Laforgue‟s poem expresses the decadent theme of exhaustion, implying that the only possibility for creative freedom is through physiological regression to a more primitive state of being. While a discussion of Nietzsche is not tantamount to this dissertation, Nietzsche does argue that the drive to create is similar to the instinctual drives of self- preservation and reproduction. This powerful impulse could be seen to operate on a biological level. Deleuze argues that art does not suspend “le désir, l‟instinct ni la volonté. L‟art, au contraire, est „stimulant de la volonté de puissance‟”(Deleuze. Nietzsche et la philosophie 116). The drive to create or produce is a means of awakening and stimulating a body that has become weak or exhausted. Weakness and exhaustion are leading to disintegration, and in the face of this threat the instinct of preservation, cultivated and honed in the human animal for thousands of years, is stimulated into a bid for power. That the human race is still here proves the strength of this ancient and multifaceted instinct—even in the weakest individuals. How, then does it actually aid in the process of decay? In the condition of exhaustion, the organism is 107 threatened by the anarchy of its drives. Clearly if it is to survive, the anarchy must cease (Ahern 22). This quotation indicates that once the physical body is in a state of exhaustion, it experiences the primal drive of survival in order to combat the sensation of death. The body goes into overdrive and is able to triumph over its own weakness or weariness. Perhaps Laforgue‟s biologically simple creatures are examples of the “weakest of individuals” who can overcome exhaustion. “Becoming animal” may be a viable creative solution for the fin de siècle problem of cultural boredom. The sentiment of exhaustion is evidenced in Laforgue‟s poem “L‟‟Éponge pourrie” (Le Sanglot de la terre.,O.C. I 271): Je sens que j‟ai perdu l‟Art; ma dernière idole/ Le Beau ne m‟émeut plus un malade transport [...] Trente siècles d‟ennui pèsent sur mon épaule [...] Je vais enviant l‟Instinct des multitudes/ Je me traîne; énervé d‟immenses lassitudes, altéré de néant et n‟espérant plus rien. This poem depicts the culture of the late nineteenth-century as characterized by sickness (“malade”), boredom (“ennui”) and nothingness (“néant”) with little hope for redemption. In contrast, “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” offers hope in the possibility of seeing the world with an animal-like gaze. The latter offers the potential to worship (“adorer”) and beatify (“béatifier”) one‟s surroundings as if they were a symbol of promised Nirvana, while the former views life as rotten and decaying. Thus, a reversion to a primal existence is a means of effacing the burden of thirty centuries of history. “l‟Éponge pourrie” seems to suggest that even underneath the deadening weight of history and culture, human beings 108 are still animals, rotten sponges who still operate under the “Instinct des multitudes”. They are rotten (“pourrie”) because deadening culture and thought has tainted their animal essence. The animal in this Laforgue‟s oeuvre could represent a powerful force that destroys old ways of seeing. One could compare this idea to those of Deleuze. For Deleuze, art can contribute to the process of “becoming animal” or mutation and transformation which breaks free from societal limits. Deleuze gives the example of “la force de germination d‟une pomme chez Cézanne and la force inouie d‟une graine de tournesole chez van Gogh” (Deleuze. qtd. in Bouaniche 210). These Leibnizian images of a piece of fruit or a seed carry the potential to transform and mutate into something else. These images thus contain a tremendous power or “force.” Thus, great art, as a powerful stimulant, has the potential to liberate the viewer from stagnant thought, cultural conditioning and the deadening weight of history that limits creative freedom. In contrast, as mentioned in the introduction, one difference between the ideas of this twentieth- century theorist and the nineteenth-century poet is that Deleuze focuses on the impact of painting on the viewer, and Laforgue focuses on the gaze of the artist. Impressionists are “des êtres qui sont nés avec le don très rare de percevoir les choses sous un angle particulier”(O.C. II 223). Laforgue creates the narrative that these avant-garde artists view objects differently from artists, and this perspective shatters conventional taste. 109 Nineteenth-Century and Modern Reception In Laforgue‟s view, classical Salon artists 100 may operate under oppressive rules and conventions that stifle artistic freedom. “Face à l‟institution picturale, Laforgue regrette les Salons et leurs medailles” (Dottin-Orsini 237). In contrast, Laforgue argues that Impressionist, avant-garde artists may have the potential to express original creative breakthroughs. Laforgue was a friend of the Post-Impressionist painter Seurat. Laforgue was also the secretary of Charles Ephrussi, art collector, friend of Manet and Renoir and the director of Gazette des Beaux-Arts for which Laforgue was an official “correspondent in Germany”(Dottin-Orsini 12). Through his relationship with Ephrussi and his numerous reviews for the Gazette des Beaux-Arts, Laforgue was exposed to the work of Monet, Renoir, Degas, Moreau and Morrisot among others (O.C. II 223). Laforgue was, for the most part, well-received by critics in his own time period. Critics often grouped him with other celebrated decadent writers such as Mallarmé, Verlaine, Moréas and Khan who shared Laforgue‟s editor, Léon Vanier. 101 However, he still maintained his status as a minor poet. Many reviews of Laforgue‟s works as well as 100 Such as William-Adolphe Bouguereau, Alexandre Cabanel or Jean-Léon Gérôme. 101 For example, Nineteenth-century critic Félix Fénéon groups Laforgue with other the decadent "esthetes": "Mallarmé, Verlaine, Moréas, Charles Vignier." Les Hommes Aujourdhui 268. In speaking of decadent writers, one journalist writes: "M. Jean Moréas a marqué sa place parmi eux, ainsi que M. Jules Laforgue, un extravagant fantaisiste" (Vir. Le Scapin 1 september 1886). 110 obituaries misspell his name, use the incorrect titles of his works and give the incorrect date of birth. 102 It would seem that Laforgue was not considered to be a canonical writer even though he was recognized as part of the decadent movement. Therefore, Laforgue‟s place in literary history could be described as an insider on the outside. He was a recognized decadent writer whose name people barely knew. 103 He was a forerunner in modern French art criticism, yet he spent most of his time in Berlin, Germany. One could even make the comparison between Laforgue‟s place in literary history and a caged animal inside a zoo or an aquarium. This status as an “insider-outsider” perhaps suggests that Laforgue was ahead of his own time. This idea brings to mind Deluge‟s notion of the minority figure as a revolutionary. Some nineteenth-century criticism describes Laforgue as both a prophet and a missionary. In the L’événement on August 29th, 1886, Mirliton, a journalist, labels Laforgue as part of the “l‟armée prochaine.” In L’Art symboliste in 1889, Georges Vanor 102 For instance, In Le cri de Paris, on September 6th, 1887, Paul Alexis Troublot calls Laforgue "Lafargue." The September, 1887 issue of Le Revue illustré claims that Laforgue died at 25 years old instead of 27 (2). 103 In addition, a few critics dismiss the writer as merely an imitation of Baudelaire or Verlaine. For example, Dottin-Orsini writes, "Ses gouts sont alors à la fois très disparates et conventionnels; il semble reprendre à son compte l‟inventaire des Phares de Baudelaire (un de ses poèmes préferés) et cite les „Grands‟ sur lesquels Taine dissertait." (11). J.L. Debauve writes, "Baudelaire est son dieu et prophète" (193). While one contemporary critic of La Jeune France in September, 1885 believed that Laforgue did have his own voice, he also wrote, "Certes, Jules Laforgue exagère le genre de Paul Verlaine, qu‟il complete par Tristan Corbière" (Debauve, 203). In addition, A. Lange wrote in 1887 that Laforgue was very similar to Verlaine. He adds that Baudelaire, "l‟incomparable sculpteur et musicien de la langue francaise et leur initiateur" (Critique et Littérature. "Symbolisme: Esquisse de la littérature contemporain," p. 280-305). 111 argues that Laforgue “initia aux problèmes beautés et morales du futur.” In Lutèce in August, 1885, L.G. Mostrailes writes, “On sent à la fois qu‟il a la foi, qu‟il croit à sa mission et ce plomb alourdit l‟impertinence que son dédain veut lancer au nez du siècle.” According to this critic, Laforgue does express a certain disdain for his own century. However, the words “foi” and “mission” suggest that Laforgue is a sort of religious apostle who attempts to convince the public of a new way of thinking. The rhetoric that associates Laforgue with the future reinforces his prophetic role. In spite of Laforgue‟s inclination towards modernity, few scholars in recent years have discussed either his theories on modern art or his “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” poem. Chad Wesley Airhart discusses Laforgue‟s aesthetic theory in his dissertation A Journey to Physical Painting. Airhart focuses on Laforgue‟s “process of physical immediacy” and the belief that the Impressionist has “a special optical sensitivity that allows him to connect the eye to the hand” (46-47). Airhart does not discuss of Laforgue‟s incorporation of Helmholtz or Darwin into his works, and he does not connect this narrative of “optical sensitivity” to the animal realm. However, he does make the connection between the “need for speed” and the notion of “primordial oneness or the communal unconscious” (48). There also has been little criticism on Laforgue‟s “ À l‟Aquarium de Berlin.” Scholars have discussed “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” in terms of influencing Ezra Pound‟s work. Peter Nicholls‟ article “Arid clarity: Ezra Pound, Mina 112 Loy, and Jules Laforgue” is an important discussion of the influence of Laforgue‟s aquarium on Ezra Pound‟s work. However, the article does not situate Laforgue‟s poetry within its specific historical, scientific and aesthetic context. Nicholls argues that the Berlin Aquarium focuses on an “almost fetishistic delight in language for its own sake, in the rich „opacity‟ of words to use Laforgue‟s own term” (36). The assumption that the poem uses “language for its own sake” and does not refer to anything outside itself dismisses the possible meanings behind words, in addition to their cultural implications, scientific context or historical framework. Nicholls‟ article also does not take into account Laforgue‟s own aesthetic theory which could be used to illuminate or even undermine his poetry. “In the closed regions of the Aquarium‟s dreamlike, subaquatic worlds words no longer had to cleave to things but could be relished for themselves” (37). This quotation implies that the institution of an aquarium is closely tied to poetic expression, and there is a certain artifice to both poetry and aquariums. However, in dismissing the words of the poem as simply “things in themselves,” this reading also ignores the profound connection that the narrator experiences between himself and the animals in the aquarium. Nicholls‟ approach also refuses to critique particularly loaded terms such as “gaze” and “oriental.” Nicholls‟ reading of the poem therefore ignores possible orientalist or colonialist undertones in the poem. One of the ways in which this dissertation attempts to bridge the research gaps in scholarship on Laforgue is by 113 situating “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” within its own scientific, artistic and historic framework. Laforgue ’s Artistic Mission In his art criticism, Laforgue explains the Impressionists‟ rupture from the Salon by arguing that these artists saw in a “natural” and “naive” manner that could not be governed by institutional mandates. 104 Laforgue writes, “L‟impressionniste est un peintre moderniste qui, doué d‟une sensibilité d‟œil hors du commun…est parvenu à se refaire un oeil naturel, à voir naturellement et à peindre naïvement comme il voit” (Textes de critiques d’art 136). One should note the words “naturel”, “naturellement” and “naïvement.” 105 The word “se refaire” in the above Laforgue quote contributes to the narrative that humans once had a pure, unadulterated vision that was not yet modified or shaped by human knowledge. The writer imagines that although such a vision has been corrupted for most people, the Impressionist artist is able to revert back to seeing „naïvely.‟ Laforgue‟s myth that Impressionists paint in the naïve manner in which they see creates the illusion that Impressionist art is an expression of „true‟ vision in its natural 104 However, the majority of the most well-known Impressionist artists were exposed to many classical sources. "The Impressionists were nevertheless sensitive in varying degrees to the lessons of the past. […] They preferred the freedom with the masses of color that characterized the Venetian school, rather than the severity of drawing inherited from Raphael at the time aestheticized by the interpretation of the Beaux-Arts; the "terriblità" of Michaelangerlo to the miraculous grace of Leonardo da Vinci; and Delacroix rather than Ingres" (Cogeval 40). Hence, there was a historical precedence for some of the Impressionistic techniques, and they did not all appear out of a vacuum, as Laforgue seems to suggest. 105 One definition of the word "naturel" is "Qui n‟a pas été fabriqué, modifié, traité par l‟homme ou altéré" (Le Grand Robert 876). 114 state. 106 Although Impressionist paintings may appear blurry and undefined to the „corrupted‟ eye, Laforgue constructs the myth that they are actually a manifestation of „pure‟ perception. Laforgue writes that in order to see with “natural eyes”: Il faut redevenir primitif en se débarrassant des illusions tactiles. Un oeil naturel oublie les illusions tactiles et sa commode langue morte: le dessin-contour n‟agit que dans sa faculté de sensibilité prismatique. Il arrive à voir la réalité dans l‟atmosphère vivante des formes, décomposée, réfractée, réfléchie par les êtres et les choses, en incessantes variations. Telle est cette première caractéristique de l‟oeil impressionniste (“Critique d‟art” 1903 ed.136). This narrative describes a process of involution during which the artist would attempt to forget previous knowledge of thought, culture and civilization and instead return to using his or her more “natural” faculties. 107 According to Laforgue‟s passage, the ideal artistic 106 Laforgue‟s argument is similar to that of the noted decadent novelist and art theorist J.K. Huysmans in À Rebours (1884). When des Esseintes, the protagonist of the novel, decorates his dwelling, he chooses colors based on an almost mathematical formula. The novel expresses that an individual who is "vraiment artiste" sees colors in a way that is much more "spécial" and "vive" than the average person. En négligeant, en effet, le commun des hommes dont les grossières rétines ne perçoivent ni la cadence propre à chacune des couleurs, ni le charme mystérieux de leur dégradations et leurs nuances; en négligeant aussi ces yeux bourgeois, insensibles à la pompe et à la victoire des teintes vibrantes et fortes ; en ne conservant plus alors que les gens aux pupilles raffinées, exercés par la littérature et par l‟art (23) Like Laforgue, Huysmans believes that the creative artist is someone who perceives differently than the average person, taking into account the millions of diverse nuances and shades of a color. Huysmans argues that the eye of the common man or the bourgeois is not sufficiently refined to appreciate the aesthetic mystery of objects and the infinite varieties of shapes and colors. Huysmans and Laforgue both place the eye of the artist on a physiological level and discuss how the artist‟s physical eye sees differently than that of most people. The difference between their aesthetic theories is that Huysmans believes that the creative artist must be adequately trained and have a profound exposure to literature and culture in order for his eye to become refined and sophisticated. Laforgue, on the other hand, advocates a complete rejection of all previous forms of knowledge and culture. 107 Charles Baudelaire describes a similar process in the "Peintre de la vie moderne." (512). 115 eye functions as almost a prism. “Sensibilité prismatique,” “refracté” and “decomposé” suggest that the physical eye is also able to break up the individual figures themselves into smaller components, varying in color, shade and texture. This obviously explains the Impressionist “dabs” of various colors in order to form a single figure. “Langue morte” indicates that direct, sensory knowledge is more important than knowledge communicated by language. The passage indicates that knowledge and language shape perception, creating “tactile illusions.” A concrete example would be that if a person looks at one side of a tree, the physical eye would see the tree as flat because it could only see that particular side. However, if one is taught by others or by personal experience that the tree is round, he will see the tree as round. This is perhaps what the phrase “avaient épuisé tous les métaphysiques” might mean in the “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” poem: it is a reference to the experience of transcending metaphysical illusions that inhibit the physical functioning of the body in its natural state. 108 This idea is similar to that of Helmholtz, a German philosopher who influenced Laforgue, who argues that “the relationships between the particularities of the painters‟ technique (technique) and 108 This certainly contrasts with the ideas of Huysmans, who argues that a true artist is he who dreams of "l‟idéal, qui réclame des illusions, sollicite des voiles dans le coucher" (A Rebours 23). According to Huysmans in this passage, a creative artist is able to mask reality and transcend nature. Laforgue is much closer to Zola who argues that art should shatter illusions and accurately represent the external world from a specific point of view. When discussing avant-garde artists, Zola writes that art should characterized by le "retour à l‟observation" (Zola 334). 116 our understanding of physiological optics are closely connected with the highest problems of art” (308). 109 Indigenous Aesthetics The reader should take note of the phrase “Il faut redevenir primitif” in Laforgue‟s art criticism (136). One definition of “primitif” is “relatif aux humains contemporains qui ignorant l‟écriture et dont l‟organisation sociale et culturelle et le développement technologique n‟ont pas subi l‟influence des sociétés dites évoluées” (Trésor de la langue francaise 1193). The word “primitive,” 110 of course, is a loaded term which has sociological, anthropological, biological and artistic meanings that may have racist connotations. “Primitive,” similar to the word “natural,” can immediately imply the binary division between civilized/uncivilized, educated/ignorant and complex/simple. 111 Haraway, a post-modern theorist, dispels modernist myths such as “natural”, “primitive” and “origins.” For Haraway, nature is not a physical place, but “it is a topos, a 109 On The Relation of Optics to Painting (1871). Chicago: U. of Chicago Press, 1995. 110 "Primitif"can also mean "qui est considéré comme un survivance des mœurs ou des croyances des premiers hommes dans l‟inconscient individuel ou collectif" (TLF 1193). According to this definition, a "primitive" state of mind does not necessarily belong to a specific time or place; it can be ingrained in the collective or individual consciousness within present-day society. 111 Social Darwinism, for example, suggests that the "fittest" should flourish in a society, while others may be "unfit" to survive. Such a belief justifies poverty, colonialism and racism. 117 rhetorician‟s place, a commonplace. It is a figure, construction, artifact, movement, displacement” (Promise of Monsters 65). After the industrial revolution, when tourists seek to visit nature, they have a difficult time finding it (Promise of Monsters 65). Thus, the concept of nature in urban society is relegated to the discursive field: to poetry, art, fiction and theory. This idea is similar to the phenomenon that many Impressionists painted the non-urban world as it began to disappear. Haraway critiques the narratives about nature and primitivism that Laforgue and other modernist writers constructed. 112 Every story that begins with original innocence, the return to wholeness, imagines the drama of life to be individuation, separation, the birth of the self, the tragedy of autonomy, the fall into writing, alienation, that is war, tempered by the imaginary bosom 113 of the Other (The Cyborg Manifesto 177). The devastating isolation and individuation of modern life inspires the myth of “original innocence, the return to wholeness.” The religious references in Laforgue‟s text such as the Garden of Eden and the “promise of Nirvana” allude to this myth of wholeness that perhaps combats the difficulties of modern, urban life. Similarly, the tempering of the “bosom of the Other” suggests the tendency for modern city dwellers to turn to borrowed narratives for comfort. The borrowed images from Asian cultures such as the “Oriental sages” and “Buddha” and the idealization of the “primitive” in L’Impressionnisme symbolize this need for nourishment in urban life. 112 It should be acknowledged that Haraway also differs from nineteenth-century writers because she is a writer of the digital age, incorporating websites, computer graphics and the image of the cyborg into her theory. 113 The image of the female other is explored in the Goncourt chapter. 118 Laforgue, like many avant-garde writers and artists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth-centuries, reverses the conventional hierarchy between the notions of primitive and civilized, idealizing the “primitive.” The Parisian artist became a modern primitive who acted out a ritual function as magician or shaman by absorbing and re-creating these fetishes in his work….[This was] an antidote for easing the psychic and spiritual needs of its dislocated and disenchanted bohemian society (Straw 18). According to this quote, another role of the avant-garde artist during the late nineteenth- century was to utilize indigenous forms in order to rediscover a sense of magic or spirituality within a deadening bourgeois society. Laforgue elaborates on the notion of “Primitivism” in his description of the Impressionist artist, who is unaffected by “les tableaux amassés par les siècles dans les musées, oubliant l‟éducation optique de l‟école (dessin, et perspective, coloris) à force de vivre et voir primitivement dans les spectacles lumineux en plein air” (133). One set of binary oppositions that Laforgue sets up in this citation is the contrast between “les musées” and “l‟école” versus “plein air.” Whereas Salon paintings were typically painted in a studio where the artist could develop and craft his work from sketches, avant-garde paintings were painted outdoors. The mission of a “plein air” painting was to work directly from nature instead of from sketches. According to Laforgue, painting in “plein air” provides a “natural” framework for artistic creation, where paintings can develop organically from nature like colorful flowers growing in a field. Whereas museums are stagnant, historical collections that accumulate works of art for centuries, plein air 119 paintings are “spectacles lumineux.” Spectacle indicates that such works are dynamic, transformative and transitory forms of artistic creation. As Daniel Grojnowski writes: Laforgue postule que l‟œuvre dépend du cerveau et de l‟œil. Le créateur doit oublier les tableaux qu‟il a vus dans les musées et il doit se défaire des habitudes que l‟École lui a indiquées. La peinture en plein air lui permettra de reconquérir un „œil naturel‟ ( Jules Laforgue et l’originalité 23). Thus, a “natural” setting might enhance the natural functioning of the body. 114 Although Laforgue offers the myth that the Impressionist paintings are a part of nature, in reality, the exhibitions took place in urban environments (Armstrong 239). 115 Laforgue creates the narrative that Impressionism sprung from nature. Although many Impressionist works were painted outdoors and featured natural landscapes, they were displayed in urban environments and were part of an urban aesthetic. As Impressionism scholar Robert L. Herbert notes in Impressionism: Art Leisure and Parisian Society: Artists were aware of the gulf that increasingly separated humans from nature, the nature that they now identified with the non-urban world and therefore with the past. For Monet and Van Gogh, for Pissarro and Cézanne, the modern city and its life, especially leisure and entertainment, were no longer eligible subjects because their values lay elsewhere. It was not a tranquil perception, for one could not simply walk out in the countryside and forget the urban world and its anxiety. The contrast between the actuality of contemporary life and the ideals of untainted nature led to an agonized awareness (302). 114 However, in the context of the "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin," it is curious that the Aquarium is an artificial, constructed space. 115 The first Impressionist exhibition took place in 1874 in the former studio of the photographer Nadar at 35 Boulevard des Capucines (Boardingham 50). Exhibitions to follow took place in the Durand-Ruel art gallery and an apartment in Paris. In addition, cabarets and café-concerts such as the Chat Noir in Paris also exhibited Impressionist and modern art work (Schechter 182). 120 In this quotation, Herbert argues that the Impressionists associated urbanity with “anxiety,” “agony”, a lack of “tranquility” and “actuality.” Although the artists were aware of the growing realities of urbanization, they identified with the waning non-urban, pastoral world. The Impressionists, like Laforgue, thus perpetuate the myth of a thriving, untouched nature even if such a nature no longer exists. As Herbert writes, “art replaced nature” (303). Given the Laforgue‟s phrasing “Les tableaux amassés par les siècles,” the author seems to be proposing a rupture with the past cultural forms and artistic education. One could think of Benjamin‟s notion that during a shift in the means of production “there is the absolute effort to distance oneself with all that is antiquated” (4). One can use primal forms in order to create this distance with the recent past. In this sense, “primitive” seems to mean that which is not shaped by traditional Western artistic educational institutions, such as the Royal Academy in Britain or the Académie des Beaux-Arts in France. Laforgue seeks to „de-civilize‟ and „un-educate‟ the “natural” eye by creating the illusion of removing it from the framework of civilizing institutions. According to Laforgue‟s myth, true artistic vision comes from “non en lisant des livres et en fouillant les vieux musées, mais en cherchant à voir claire dans la nature en regardant humainement comme un homme préhistorique, l‟eau du Rhin, les ciels, les prairies, les foules, les rues, etc.” (Textes de critique d’art 19). Laforgue longs for the human race to connect with nature in a way that perhaps only an “homme préhistorique” could. It is also interesting that Laforgue lists water, sky and prairies along with streets and crowds. Laforgue sees the outer world and even metropolitan life as an extension of 121 nature. He believes that museums and books, by contrast, are stagnant and separate from the creative process. The author harkens back to a pre-historic time period during which the daily activity of human beings was infused with the natural world. Urban Aesthetics This aestheticization of urban society can be found in Laforgue‟s reviews of the Berlin art scene. Laforgue dismisses most of the art found in German exhibitions as being heavy and untalented, with the exception of one Swiss artist Arnold Bocklin (“Critique d‟art.” O.C. II 233). Bocklin‟s Isle of the Dead (1880) could be seen as a visual example of Laforgue‟s aesthetic theory. Although Laforgue writes that he is against Bocklin‟s insistence on “trompe-l‟oeil”, the French critic appreciates “le naturel impeccable dans le surnaturel” (“Critique d‟art.” O.C. II 233). In the five different versions of the work, a three-dimensional golden island bursts forth from the sea and appears to be popping out of the painting itself. A boat rows to the island, where traces of civilization, such as a doorway and windows await it. At the very center of this artificial looking island lies a natural preserve, full of untouched black Cyprus trees. Natural elements surround the island as well, such as the churning water and the darkening sky. The painting blurs the boundaries between nature and artifice, civilization and the primal, and the inside and the outside. The possible allusion to the myth of the river Styx and the trompe-l’oeil effect of the painting highlight its role as an artificial construction. However, it is the use of this specific painterly technique of trompe-l’oeil that creates the illusion that the island is actually in front of the viewer and 122 that the viewer is surrounded by nature. Thus, Laforgue‟s aesthetic relies on artifice in order to create the illusion that one is in nature. In contrast, Laforgue denies the necessity of artifice and claims that his aesthetic is only rooted in nature. Laforgue insists that great art depends on “la fraîcheur de la vision” and “une virginité” (Dottin-Orsini 237). According to Laforgue, modern achievements in art are “la résultante de l‟évolution organique terrestre” (“L‟art moderne en allemagne.”O.C. II 337). This instance on the organic, earthly nature of modern art does not acknowledge the urban environment from whence it emerged. In his article on the modern art of Berlin, Laforgue writes “L‟Allemagne pure est à tous égards, en effet, la fille immédiate de la nature” (343). The author anthropomorphizes Germany, describing it as a “pure” and virginal “daughter of nature”, as if it were untouched by industrialization or civil development. Laforgue also orientalizes Germany, considering it a land of “Brahma protestant” with the “Rhin oriental, le Gange” (343). These descriptions contrast dramatically with Laforgue‟s notes for his essay “Berlin, la cour et la ville” in which he reviews his adventures in modern urban environments such as café-concerts, theaters, bars and tobacco shops. For example, in the café-concert, “le spectacle se compose surtout de la chanteuse, des gymnastes, des curiosités et se termine par une pantomime”(OC II 767). The various vaudeville entertainment acts of the café-concert are particular to nineteenth- century urban culture as found in cities such as Paris and Berlin. In his notes, Laforgue seems to be chronicling the details of his specific time and place rather than expressing a nostalgia for a so-called “primal” epoch. For example, Laforgue describes the dress of 123 the singer at the café-concert; “Son costume est de la canaillerie la plus économique jupe court, hautes bottines en satin rose…” (O.C. II 768). Laforgue‟s description of the singer‟s short skirt and high boots could undermine the image of Germany as the “pure daughter of nature”, and instead implies the sexual nature of certain urbane figures. The attention to the woman‟s clothes reflects the Baudelairian notion that: Ces costumes, qui font rire bien des gens irréfléchis, de ces gens graves sans vraie gravité, présentent un charme d‟une nature double, artistique et historique […] c‟est la moral et l‟esthétique du temps. L‟idée que l‟homme se fait du beau s‟imprime dans tout son ajustement, chiffonne ou raidit son habit, arrondit ou aligne son geste, et même pénètre subtilement, à la longue, les traits de son visage (Baudelaire. “Peintre de la vie moderne” 1). Baudelaire argues that the aesthetic of his time is found through the external observation of modern city dwellers. A culture‟s idea of beauty will be inscribed on the clothing, gestures and the face of its citizens. Laforgue plays Baudelaire‟s proposed role of “artist and historian” in his notebooks by chronicling the nightlife, costumes and activities of the Berlin citizens of the 1880‟s. In contrast, in other writings, such as “L‟Art moderne en allemagne” and “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin”, he constructs the myth that Berlin was a timeless, Oriental and natural milieu. In “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” Laforgue‟s artistic and poetic focus is not directed toward the frenzied spirit of modern life but rather toward the stillness of primordial creatures. The text freezes these primitive beings in time rather than glorifying the vast technological and socio-economic developments of modernity. Laforgue‟s aesthetic admiration for the stagnant aquarium is a departure from Charles Baudelaire, who often focuses on the fleeting and transitory nature of modern city life. As one critic writes, 124 “There is more static imagery [in Laforgue‟s poems] than in most symbolic poetry. Laforgue paints or etches memorable word pictures” (Warren, 9). These “memorable word pictures” rarely depict scenes of frenzied modern life. In contrast, in ”Peintre de la vie moderne,” Baudelaire writes: Cet élément transitoire, fugitif, dont les métamorphoses sont si fréquentées, vous n‟avez pas le droit de le mépriser ou de vous en passer. En le supprimant, vous tombez forcément dans le vide d‟une beauté abstraite et indéfinissable, comme l‟unique femme avant le premier péché (518). Baudelaire proposes in this essay that modern art should reflect both the eternal and the ephemeral (506). If one ignores the fleeting trends of one‟s own milieu, the figures in the painting no longer fit within a particular time or place. Baudelaire‟s reference to Eve thus has a negative connotation, while Laforgue‟s poetry expresses the longing to return to an Eden-like state of being. Laforgue writes that the animals in the aquarium have a “regard atone.” According to the Grand Robert, “atone” means “ce qui manque de vie, de vigueur, de vitalité, d‟énergie” (931). This definition, coupled with Laforgue‟s reference to the Garden of Eden, 116 certainly indicates that the aquarium in the poem is indeed a static refuge despite its status as an urban institution. Interestingly, this idea fits in with modern zoological discourse, which often describes zoos in terms of spiritual sanctuaries (Rothfels 211 and Spotte 92). 117 The artifice of Laforgue‟s poem may give the illusion of being in a peaceful, natural utopia. However, when one reads the poem within the context 116 Laforgue uses the word "Orphites" which is a religious group that worships the snake in the Garden of Eden. 117 According to Rothfels and Spotte, Zoos are often described in terms of religious imagery such as "Ark," "Eden" and "Kingdom of God" (Rothfels 211, Spotte 92). 125 of Laforgue‟s other writings on Berlin, one can see that the Berlin Aquarium is as much of a modern, urban institution as the café-concert or the tobacco shop. Thus the poem mediates between an urban and a natural environment just as an aquarium also negotiates the boundaries of nature and civilization. Thus, Laforgue‟s aesthetic is one of mediation, one that blurs the distinction between nature and culture. While Laforgue uses the word “primitive” which would seem to imply that which is outside the framework of modern civilization, his works are very much rooted in urban spaces. Evolutionary Optics Laforgue‟s narrative of the artist as a primitive animal is also rooted in the evolutionary theories of his day. The biological definition of “primitive” indicates species or traits that are characteristic of an older evolutionary form of development. Therefore, a biological definition of “primitif” is “qui appartient aux premier stade de l‟apparition de la vie animale ou végétale” (TLF 1194). Certain primitive traits can be even seen in animals and plant life that exist today. “Primitive traits are characteristics of organisms that were present in the ancestor of the group that is under study” (Unda 2). Laforgue also seems to evoke this definition of primitive. His narrative argues that the primitive eye (and the eye of the untrained artist) can see more acutely than the modern eye whose sharpness has been dulled by cultural illusions. Laforgue creates the fantasy that the primitive eye is able to see nuances of color in a prismatic manner, but the modern eye does not distinguish between various shades of color. 126 Laforgue‟s optical theories are, in part, based on Darwin‟s observations of the eye. In a letter to Charles Ephrussi (December 12, 1883), Laforgue wrote: Je me suis recueilli et dans une nuit de 10 du soir à 4 du matin, tel Jésus au Jardin des Oliviers, S. Jean à Pathos; Platon à Cap Sunium, Bouddha sous le figuier de Gaza, j‟ai écrit en dix pages les principes métaphysiques de l‟Esthétique nouvelle; une esthétique qui s‟accord avec l‟inconscient de Hartmann, 118 le transformisme de Darwin, les travaux de Helmholtz” 119 (O.C. II 850). In this letter, Laforgue indicates that he is a sort of philosophical or religious apostle whose mission is to unify evolutionary, psychological and physiological theories of vision to explain Impressionism. The “Esthetique nouvelle” refers to the techniques of Impressionist and Post-Impressionist paintings which Laforgue naturalizes through the use of scientific theory: Les formes obtenues non par le dessin-contour mais uniquement par les vibrations et les contrastes de la couleur; la perspective théorique remplacée par la perspective naturelle des vibrations et des contrastes des couleurs; l‟éclairage d‟atelier […] remplacé par le plein air, c‟est-à-dire le tableau fait devant son objet, si impraticable soit-il et dans le temps le plus court possible, vu les variations rapides de l‟éclairage des choses (329). Laforgue argues that rather than imposing outdated artistic theories onto the canvas, the artist should paint according to the “natural perspective” of his physical eye and colors of 118 A contemporary German philosopher who argued that the unconscious was the ultimate metaphysical principle and that it is based on will and not reason. 119 In Manuel d’optique physiologique, Helmholz details a semiotic theory of perception, in which he argues that a person receives certain visual impressions of external objects according to the internal functioning of his or her body. For example, Helmholz explains certain optical illusions that can be explained by what we now refer to as cross-dominant vision (3). The author also attributes variations in how different animals see to Darwinian evolution, where one animal may have more evolved eyes than another. 127 the object in front of him 120 . This work should be done as quickly as possible in order to capture the essence of the object in a particular light. Additionally, an important part of his aesthetic is his emphasis on the Impressionist‟s ability to perceive subtle “contrasts” and “variations,” an emphasis which integrates both Darwin and Helmholtz‟s findings on the eye. By examining the nineteenth-century evolutionary theories of vision, it is possible to understand the ways in which Darwin‟s findings on the eye work for and against Laforgue‟s arguments. Critics of Darwin have used the topic of the eye for centuries to combat his theory of evolution. One of their arguments is that an eye of a vertebrate is too complex to have evolved from Darwinian natural selection. Creationists argue that the eye could not have appeared by slight variations and developments over the course of millions of years. Darwin himself understood the skepticism about this idea. 121 Darwin acknowledged that even the most primitive creatures have some sort of response to light, and even the eyes of insects are, in fact, highly developed. 122 However, Darwin argues that scientists have found large variations in the eyes of animals within the same class. 120 The reference to color contrasts come from the optical theories of Chevreul. Although Laforgue presents his aesthetic as "natural" with an absence of theory, it is actually based on scientific thought. 121 Norman A. Johnson. Darwinian detectives. Oxford: Oxford Press, 2007, pages 21-22. Darwin wrote in chapter six of The Origin of Species, "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." However, Darwin did believe that the eye could have developed by numerous, slight modifications because even single-celled organisms contain parts of their cells that are sensitive to light, and these parts could have evolved into eyes (Johnson 22). 122 Their highly motion sensitive eyes contain photosensitive cells and a lens, and they see objects as being pixilated (Johnson 22). 128 The eyes of one species of animals are generally more primitive, and the eyes of another species are more advanced. These differences can be attributed to evolution: One optic nerve is merely coated with pigment and without any other mechanism and from this low stage; numerous gradations of structure branching off into fundamentally different lines can be shown to exist, until we reach a moderately high stage of perfection. In certain crustaceans for instance, there is a double cornea, the inner one divided into facets; within each of which there is a lens-shaped swelling. In other crustaceans the transparent cones which are coated by pigment and which properly act only by excluding lateral pencils of light; are convex at their upper ends, and must act by convergence; and at the lower ends there seems to be an imperfect virtuous substance” (Darwin. The Origin of Species 241). In other words, due to evolutionary developments, some crustaceans see in a complex manner and others see in a simple manner. As previously mentioned, Laforgue imagined the ways in which animals experienced the world around them. Darwin‟s ideas may have influenced Laforgue‟s understanding of animal vision. Darwin‟s description of the eyes of different kinds of crustaceans is similar to Laforgue‟s description of the eyes of different kinds of artists. Laforgue constructs the narrative that Academic and Impressionist artists‟ eyes are physiologically different from one another. Où l‟académique voit les choses se plaçant à leurs plans respectifs réguliers selon une carcasse réductible à un pur dessin théorique, il [l‟impressionniste] voit la perspective établie par les mille riens de tons et de touches, par les variétés d‟état d‟air suivant leur plan non immobile mais remuant. En somme l‟œil impressionniste est dans l‟évolution humaine l‟œil le plus avancé, celui qui juste qu‟ici a saisi et a rendu les combinaisons de nuances les plus compliquées connues (Laforgue. L’Impressionnisme. 1903 ed. 137). 129 Thus, one can perhaps detect a parallelism between the Impressionist who sees the innumerable varieties of tones and colors to the more evolved crustacean in Darwin‟s example whose eye has “a double cornea, the inner one divided into facets” (137) for the eyes of both the Impressionist and this advanced crustacean are more complex and apt to see variations. The advanced crustacean sees “numerous gradations” according to Darwin and the Impressionist is able to see “les mille riens de tons et de touches, par les variétés d‟état” according to Laforgue. In contrast, the academic eye could be compared to lower crustacean whose eyes are “imperfect,” according to Darwin. Laforgue‟s myth that the Academic artist and the Impressionist eye are physiologically different from each other also echoes the work of Helmholtz. Helmholtz divides the eyes of animals into two groups: those that only distinguish between light and darkness, and those that can see form as well. These two types of eyes can both be seen in different classes and species of invertebrates, vertebrates and crustaceans. In terms of animals who can distinguish form, “the ability to do this requires the apparatus of separate nerve fibers in order to perceive light coming from separate luminous points” (Helmholtz 1). Similarly, Laforgue writes, “Où l‟académique ne voit que la lumière blanche […] l‟impressionniste la voit baignant tout non de morte blancheur, mais de mille combats vibrants de riches décompositions prismatiques” (Laforgue. “l‟oeil académique et l‟oeil impressionniste, polyphonie des couleurs” 136). According to 130 Laforgue‟s narrative, although the artists are of the same species, the Academic is biologically similar to an animal who can only distinguish between light and dark, whereas the Impressionist is biologically similar to an animal who can perceive rich nuances of color. Helmholtz writes: 1. Distinguish only light from darkness. This is probably the case of the „eyespots‟ of the lowest forms of animal life (annelids, intestinal worms, starfish, sea-urchins, jellyfish, infusoria, etc.). The only essential purpose for this is a nerve sensitive to light, the peripheral end of this nerve is surrounded by pigment of another and is thus rendered visible. However, it has not been ascertained whether all the pigmented „eyespots‟ in the lower animals actually serve for the perception of light. On the other hand, the reactions to light of some lower animals without „eyespots‟ force us to the conclusion that nerves, sensitive to light but unaccompanied by pigment, may be present in transparent animals, though an investigator has no way of recognizing them (Helmholtz 1). The enumeration of various primitive animals such as starfish, sea-urchins and jellyfish is similar to the line “Ò Mais l‟idéal c‟est les éponges, ces astéries, ces plasmas” in the poem “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin.” Helmholtz‟s argument is that these and other lower forms of animals may see light, even if their “eyes” are not recognizable to humans. In any case, these primitive animals would not be able to distinguish more than light. Thus, it is unclear whether Laforgue idealizes lower forms of animals, that have primitive perception, or animals whose eyes are able to see “de mille combats vibrants de riches décompositions prismatiques” (O.C. 1903 ed. 136). Since Impressionists and Academics both belong to the same human species, which group, according to Laforgue‟s work, has more evolved eyes? If “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” lauds the vision of the most basic aquatic animals such as starfish and 131 Laforgue‟s art criticism argues that an artist must “redevenir primitif” (133), why is it that “l‟œil impressionniste est dans l‟évolution humaine l‟œil le plus avancé”? (137) As Dottin-Orsini explains Laforgue‟s aesthetic theory, “L‟oeil impressionniste par lui est à la fois préhistorique, débarrassé des préjugés académiques, et cet oeil de demain qui peut seul renouveler la peinture” (Dottin-Orsini, 27). This eye is paradoxically “préhistorique” and “de demain” because in returning to a prehistoric way of seeing, the artist may be able to experience true originality. Laforgue explains this contradiction: C‟est parce l‟œil, après avoir commencé par s‟approprier, raffiner et systématiser les facultés, vécu et s‟est instruit; s‟est entretenu dans l‟illusion par les siècles d‟œuvres dessinées que son évolution comme organe des vibrations lumineuses s‟est si retardée relativement à celle de l‟oreille (O.C. II 330). Thus, for Laforgue, so-called cultural evolution has slowed down physiological evolution. Controlling and refining the human eye through education and through illusions in painting impedes the natural expression and development of the physical eye. The solution is perhaps to return to the „source,‟ to our biological ancestors who apparently saw in a more unconditioned way. Impressionism is a means of unraveling such cultural conditioning, encouraging the natural expression of the physiological functioning of the body. Aesthetic Philosophy of the Unconscious Another driving force in Laforgue‟s narrative is the new understanding of the role that the unconscious takes place in shaping human behavior (Dufour 1). Laforgue writes, “L‟art n‟est point un devoir de rhétorique d‟écolier. C‟est tout une vie [...] Il faut s‟en 132 remettre à l‟Inconscient” (Laforgue. Textes de critique d’art Dottin-Orsini 162). Similar to Emile Zola and other Naturalists, Laforgue abhorred artistic education and believed that true creativity was not something that one could rationalize or learn, but rather it came from unconscious drives. Dufour writes, “Laforgue est disciple de Darwin, Hartmann, Chevreul, Charles Henry [et] Gustave Kahn” (1). 123 These theorists all have the understanding that unconscious forces govern human behavior. 124 Each theorist in his own discipline was exploring the supremacy of the unconscious over rational thought. 125 For Laforgue, creativity requires an openness to the vast number of unconscious forces that drive human behavior, rather than a rigid educational framework that seeks to limit and mold the creative process. Thus, in the context of the “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” poem, the narrator idealizes the animals because they do not operate on a conscious intellectual level. They are unconcerned with logic or metaphysical principles. Instead, they are like Buddhist sages who worship and beatify. This spiritual devotion does not 123 Whereas Kahn‟s symbolist poetry foregrounds myths and images that are ingrained in the collected unconscious of human beings, Hartmann, Henry, Chevreul and Darwin describe instinctual and psychological drives. Karl Robert Eduard von Hartmann argues that the unconscious is the ultimate metaphysical principle and that reason is subservient to one‟s will. Chemist Michel Eugène Chevreul and psychobiologist Charles Henry attempt to understand and formulate the unconscious tendency to perceive certain color combinations as brighter and more appealing than others. Laforgue also believed that one of the unconscious forces that was working in humans was the tendency to evolve in order to adapt to one‟s environment. 124 In The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals, Darwin describes several unconscious human instincts that are not controlled by rational thought, such as raising one‟s eyebrows to indicate that one is puzzled (58). 125 Laforgue founded "une esthétique nouvelle sur la philosophie de l‟inconscient " (Dufour 1). 133 occur on a cerebral level, but rather it is based on unconscious faith that cannot be explained by reason. Similarly, the most primal creatures such as sponges and plasma do not function according to a reasoning capacity but instead according to instinctual drives. For Laforgue, creativity operates according to “la loi de la selection naturelle universelle,” which means that the creative process is constantly evolving and improving itself according to a “principe mystique universel,” which one cannot ever fully know, understand or express using thought or language (Dufour 22-23). The writer argues that natural selection was operating in the works of great writers, authors and thinkers of his time period. Genius is supposedly caused by a spontaneous physiological process. Following Darwin, Laforgue writes, “une force transcendantale pousse Beethoven à [composer], Delacroix à chercher des tons, Baudelaire à fouiller sa langue, Hugo à être énorme, Darwin à constater la sélection naturelle, etc.” (Laforgue 154-155). This transcendental force is, according to Laforgue, “la même qui pousse l‟araignée à faire sa toile, et si on la déchire, la faire et la refaire jusqu‟à épuisement” (Laforgue 154-155). In this passage, creative genius is described as being determined by instinctual or biological drives and not by scholastic training. The idea that a force “pousse” (pushes or impels) the individual to perform great artistic acts renders the creative act as deterministic and 134 beyond human control. The notion of a “force transcendantale” is similar to the Lamarckian conception of “la force vitale.” 126 This term is also used in Darwin‟s The Origin of Species, “Instinct127 impels the cuckoo to migrate and to lay her eggs in other birds‟ nests” (342). Just as instinct operates in the cuckoo, Darwin also argues that instinct might be responsible for genius. Darwin writes, “If Mozart, instead of playing the piano forte at three years old with wonderfully little practice, had played a tune with no practice at all; he might be truly said to do so instinctively” (The Origin of Species 333). Laforgue and Darwin both argue that instinct can drive both human and animal behavior. What is perhaps most interesting about the above mentioned passage from Laforgue is that Laforgue indicates that the same “force transcendentale” operates in the revolutionary paintings of Delacroix, the theories of Darwin, the compositions of Beethoven, the writings of Hugo and a spider‟s web. “La même” diminishes the hierarchy between these creative geniuses and such a basic animal as a spider. Both human and non-human animals seem genetically programmed to create art. 126 The "force vitale", according to Lamarck, is an alchemical force derived from the fluids in organisms. Lamarck argued that the spontaneous motion of these fluids caused creatures to develop in a more complex manner and to be able to adapt to their environment. Dottin Orsini writes, "Il a lu aussi Darwin et Lamarck, croit à l‟évolution de l‟oeil en route vers l‟ultra violet, et tire un jugement favorable à l‟impressionnisme: l‟oeil le plus "avancé" fera la meilleure peinture" (27). 127 Although Darwin does not explicitly define the word instinct, he does describe it as an unintentional action often performed without reason or practice (Origin of Species 22). 135 As Darwin asks, “Can we wonder then, that nature‟s productions be „truer‟ in character than man‟s productions?” (The Origin of Species 99). Darwin poses this question because first of all, man‟s wishes are “short and fleeting” compared to the works of nature that occur over long periods of time (99). Second of all, Darwin also suggests that animal instinct may be at times a more accurate and aesthetic process than human reason. Similar to Laforgue‟s example of the spider‟s web, Darwin discusses bees‟ honeycombs and birds‟ nests as examples of architectural marvels. As explained in the section in this dissertation‟s introduction titled, “Darwinian Aesthetic Revolution,” according to Darwin, the honeycombs are not only mathematically accurate and efficient; they are also “beautiful” and “exquisite.” Darwin even hypothesizes that the bees‟ instinctual drive is more effective than that of human craftsmanship with the use of tools and measuring devices. Thus, the creative artist might be inspired by the animal‟s process of intuitive creation; rather than creating art based on reason and calculation. The image of the dark hive, as described by Darwin, (291) suggests that the bees‟ visibility might be reduced, yet they can still produce a marvelous structure using their intuitive knowledge. Similarly, in Laforgue‟s narrative, the “ideal” is the most basic organisms with limited vision who live in the dark depths of the ocean. 136 The Deep-Sea of the Unconscious Mind The deep-sea became a source for artistic inspiration at this time. Before the late nineteenth-century, scientists did not exactly know what types of life existed in the deep- sea beyond the naked eye (Gamwell 86). After the publication of Darwin‟s The Origin of Species, C. Wyville Thomson explored the ocean‟s depths on the Challenger Expedition and discovered thousands of new species of animals and plants. This expedition expanded the public‟s knowledge of the world‟s inhabitable regions by over seventy-five percent (Gamwell 82). According to Lynn Gamwell, a historian, people became fascinated by the “mysterious creatures of the deep. Aquariums were established and Jules Verne took readers on an underwater voyage to meet captain Nemo (Latin for „nobody‟), an early modern anti-hero, the wanderer without a homeland” (86). This quotation perhaps indicates a parallel between the aquariums and the literature of late nineteenth-century France. Aquariums and literature are both means of accessing the majestic, unknown worlds of the deep-sea for the public who is unable to embark upon voyages such as Thomson. The Report of the H.M.S. Challenger (1889) provided hundreds of full-page illustrations to Europeans who were able to view detailed sketches of the sea-creatures even if some were unable to read the textual descriptions in English. 137 In addition, the quotation also suggests that the narrator of the fiction of this time period is a „nobody,‟ one without a fixed identity or place. Similarly, in Feuilles Volantes, Laforgue describes himself in terms of the sea life around him: Je me sens si pauvre, si connu; tel que je me connais, moi, Laforgue en relation avec le monde extérieur, et j‟ai des mines coraux heureux sans rêves, des lionnes de rubis, des floraisons subtiles où l‟œil de la conscience n‟a pas porté la hache et le feu” (103-104). Like the “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” poem, this quote also underscores the idea of exhaustion. Laforgue has exhausted the understanding of himself and his relationship to the external world on a conscious level. This knowledge is, thus, “si pauvre, si connu.” The narrator yearns to explore his own relationship with himself and the outside world on a subconscious level. He seeks magical, dream-like images similar to underwater flora and fauna. Thus, the deep-sea is a metaphor for the unconscious. Just as Thomson‟s Challenger expedition uncovered thousands of primal species that were previously unknown, Laforgue seeks to embark on a voyage to the unconscious mind and discover the unknown aspects of the psyche. This unconscious sea space is an Eden, a place untouched by the signs of civilization, such as hatchets and fire. The deep-sea is also a place where one sees more than what the naked eye sees on the surface of the water. It is where “l‟oeil de la conscience” cannot penetrate. It is thus fitting that in “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin,” the narrator idealizes the gaze of sponge, starfish and plasma because they do 138 not see with “the eyes of human consciousness,” and until fairly recently, the eyes of human consciousness did not see them. In fact, several species of the creatures mentioned in Laforgue‟s poem were discovered during Thomson‟s Challenger expedition. In addition to finding starfish and sponges that had “very much the appearance of the trunk of a tree” (174), Thomson found plasma throughout the Atlantic. He called this substance “an ordinary grey ooze” containing a multitude of animals that traveled along the bottom of the sea (117). Thomson reported that he found “everything in the ooze” (172). Thus, one reason for which this substance could be “l‟idéal” is because it is the material out of which all life originates. Aquarium As previously mentioned, the aquarium can be seen as a metaphor for the human mind and body. The deep-sea was something that had previously not been explored by human beings, and it was filled with beautiful, unknown primal creatures. However, aquariums are urban institutions, and they still fit within the framework of the civilized world. Humans who have animal origins must still function in civilized society. A return to a more primitive state might entail essentially a return to the sea, where all life originated. Since a return to the sea is not actually feasible, the aquarium offers the 139 modern city dweller an opportunity to experience the primal sea life while still living in society. The aquarium also serves for creative inspiration, as artists and writers would be exposed to extraordinary sights. The specific aquarium in Laforgue‟s poem refers to the Berlin Zoological Gardens and Aquarium, which was opened in 1844, during the reign of Frederick William IV, who donated many animals from the royal menagerie to the zoological park (Kisling 89). The aquarium contains fifty tanks of various sizes, and it was constructed in a “grotto-style” with rock-work lining the sides and the backs of the tanks to give the illusion that one is under the sea (“Annual Report of the New York Zoological Society” 90). J.K. Huysmans also wrote on the Berlin Aquarium. Huysmans‟ text drastically differs from that of Laforgue because Huysmans eventually warns against the artificial nature of the aquarium. “L‟Aquarium de Berlin” begins with a description of the ugliness of Berlin and its “insolent” people. Huysmans writes that in contrast to the dreariness of the city of Berlin, when one visits the grottos of the Berlin Aquarium, one is transported to a magical new world where exotic fish glide past brightly colored coral (212). “Il n‟est point sur la terre de papillons ou d‟oiseaux dont l‟éclat se puisse comparer au leur. C‟est le jardin des sirènes et la ménagerie des ondines” (213). These phenomenal creatures are more incredible than all earthly sights. Some of the sea anemones “ressemblent un peu 140 aux anémones de nos jardins et aux cactus; mais les autres!” (214). The phrase “mais les autres!” indicates that there is no earthly description that could compare to the majestic nature of the aquatic animals and plants. Similarly, in Salomé, Laforgue describes the animals in the Berlin menagerie in an almost banal manner. He writes that the giraffes seem “exagérées” and that the birds of prey have deafening screeches (609). However, he writes, “L‟Aquarium! Ah! L‟Aquarium par exemple! Arrêtons-nous ici! Comme il tournoie en silence” (609). The aquarium is a quiet oasis in the midst of a loud and chaotic animal park.In Huysmans‟ text, the author describes the animals in terms of mythological creatures such as sirens or mermaids, and ondines. An ondine is a sea nymph who lost her gift of eternal life because she married a mortal man. These mythical references could indicate that the role of the aquarium is to provide people access to a mythical and majestic parallel universe that is not like anything seen on land. However, the reference to ondines suggests that the sea creatures cannot co-exist with humans. The imagery of mythical creatures recalls Laforgue‟s comparison of the aquatic animals to religious sages. Thus, the two authors describe the maritime creatures as either mythical or spiritual beings. However, at the end of the Huysmans‟ text, the narrator shifts his perspective and describes the ominous aspects of the animals. He focuses on a certain species of crab as “un monstre métallique” (217) and other animals as “faux-dieux” and “démons du 141 paganisme” (218). These descriptions suggest that a human cannot permanently exist in this magical, aquatic world. While the spectator is at first seduced by the majesty of the aquatic animals, they can be in fact dangerous, and they can undermine the viewer‟s perception of reality or truth. At the end of the Huysmans‟ text, the narrator is so relieved to leave the aquarium that he even wants to embrace the Berlin passersby who had formally been deemed as ugly and unpleasant. Laforgue, in contrast, does not highlight a negative or frightening aspect of the aquatic world. His narrator does not seek to escape his “dream of water.” Thus, Huysmans‟ version of the Berlin Aquarium presents an opposing view to that of Laforgue. The latter idealizes the gaze of the aquatic animals as austere, “pure,” spiritual beings; whereas the former denounces the animals as false gods. It would seem that Laforgue‟s poem implies that humans might learn from the animals in the aquarium, and they should emulate the animals‟ vision. In contrast, while Huysman‟s text initially seems misanthropic, the end of the text affirms the human existence and warns against living in the animal realm. 128 On the other hand, Laforgue is like a prophet or a missionary who convinces others that this illusionary world is true. Huysmans is aware of the dichotomy between the artifice of the aquarium and the “natural” creatures 128 Huysmans writes in the beginning of the text: "La laideur humaine a, ici, un aspect particulièrement insolent chez le galonné, bébête chez la femme, et chez le bourgeois, grave" (205). He later writes, "la laideur des Berlinois paraît douce et l‟on aurait presque envie, ma foi, d‟embrasser, tant on les juge maintenant avenantes, les faces des traîneurs de sabres à monocles et des homéopathes à lunettes d‟or" (213). 142 inside, but Laforgue does not allow this dichotomy to occur. Huysmans points out the contrast between the urban city of Berlin and the magical fairytale land of the aquarium. For him, these are two distinct places. However, Laforgue only presents one reality: the aquarium. He does not present anything outside of it. In Au Rebours, des Esseintes, an intellectual shut-in, places an aquarium in front of a portal in his home. “Il se figurait alors être dans l‟entre-pont d‟un brick, et curieusement il contemplait de merveilleux poissons mécaniques, montés comme des pièces d‟horlogerie, qui passaient devant la vitre du sabord et s‟accrochaient dans de fausses herbes” (31). This passage underscores the artifice of the aquarium, emphasized by the words “méchaniques” and “fausses”. No live plant or animal has any place in des Esseintes‟ constructed world. The image of the aquarium is symbolic for the isolated, artificial bubble in which he places himself. For Huysmans, the aquarium is an artificial lens that gives humans access to a magical, illusionary sea world that does not correspond to one‟s daily reality. The aquarium can be seen as a way of filtering the artistic sensibility through the extraordinarily beautiful colors and shapes that are rare and unique within it. Essentially, it can be seen as a moving painting. However, Huysmans also reveals the danger of dwelling in this incredible but artificially constructed world because one can lose touch with reality. Laforgue, by contrast, idealizes the aquarium as a spiritual utopia that can give the viewer insight into the natural world and the human 143 subconscious. However, as previously mentioned, in view of modern ecological scholarship, the poem does not seem to acknowledge the obvious contradiction that a person views “nature” within a man-made institution. Orient This chapter has explored the myth of the primal animal as a means of breaking through creative barriers and as a symbol of pure originality. L’Impressionnisme argues that if a person comes into contact with a primal, prelapsarian state of being, he or she will see in a creative, innovative manner. This way of seeing is narrated as a radical departure from traditional artistic training. “Le dessin est un vieux et vivace préjugé dont l‟origine doit être cherchée dans les premières expériences des sensations humaines” (Laforgue. O.C. II. 329). This notion argues that artists should draw objects based on the imagined first experiences of human perception, leaving all knowledge, metaphysics and training aside. This idea uses the borrowed narrative of Oriental culture, religion and tradition. Curiously, the narrator of “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” that both the aquarium animals and “ancient races of the Orient” are capable of perception that is not tainted by cultural conditioning. The borrowed images from Asian cultures such as the “Oriental sages” and the reference to Buddha perhaps symbolize a need for nourishment in urban life. “If 144 Orientalism concerns the Western imagination of the origin of the city, primatology displays the Western imagination of the origin of the society itself” (Haraway. Primate Visions 11). While Laforgue‟s text does not have to do with primatology, it does orientalize animals. Haraway argues that because animals cannot represent themselves, modern, Western discourse speaks for them. Animals are thus exoticized, fetishized, anthropomorphized or dismissed. In addition, Haraway writes that the opposition between human and animal is similar to the opposition between West and East because the former has at times held more power than the latter, and the former has sometimes dismissed the latter (Promises of Monsters 10). Laforgue‟s text certainly makes the connection between animals and the Orient. He imagines that the blank stares of the animals are comparable to the Buddhist sages who have exhausted “all the temperaments” and “all the metaphysics.” One could perhaps infer that the sages then have no use for the beliefs and habits of modern European society. Just as Buddhist spirituality would be antithetical to the values of Laforgue‟s own capitalist, urban environment, animals have little place in modern cities. It is the “Other who offers origin, replenishment and service” (Haraway. The Promises of Monsters 65). It is possible that the poem employs the “Other”, (whether it be the Oriental or the animal) as symbols of respite from the chaos of modern life. Drawing again on Haraway‟s quote about the imagined connection between Orientalism and the 145 “origin of the city” and the imagined connection between animals and “the origin of society,” Laforgue‟s idyllic aquatic universe could be a fantasy that imagines a world before urbanization. Laforgue is attracted by the notion of evolutionary primitivism precisely because he opposes the rigidity and tradition of conventional European institutions such as the Salon des Beaux-Arts. Just as Laforgue idealizes the gaze of the animal, so he romanticizes and spiritualizes the gaze of the Eastern sage. Edward Saïd writes in Orientalism, “The Orient was almost a European invention, and had been since Antiquity, a place of romance, exotic beings, haunting memories and landscapes and remarkable experiences” (1). The idea that the Orient could be a European invention indicates that Westerners project onto Eastern countries that which they feel their own society is lacking: the romantic, the surreal and the extraordinary. As Saïd writes, “The Oriental arose out of Western consciousness not by logic and reality, but by a battery of repressions, investments and projections” (8). The syntax of the Berlin poem itself reinforces this idea. Laforgue writes: “des crocodiles, des pythons (les ophites), etc, Comme je comprends ces vieilles races d‟Orient.” The words “comme je comprends” inserted in the middle seem to be an indication of Laforgue‟s own view that links the animals with the “Oriental” races. “Comme je comprends” indicates that the association between animals and the Orient is, in fact, in the mind of the Western narrator of the 146 poem. The narrator was, therefore, aware of the limits of his perspective. The narrator seems to be searching for a means of perception and understanding that transcends the rigid structure of his cultural milieu. Institutions such as the Salon and the Académie Royale had such a narrow and traditional framework for deciding acceptable cultural practices that both animals and Eastern cultures may have provided a viable alternative as a borrowed narrative. The idea that modern European culture could not fulfill one‟s psychic or spiritual needs can also be seen in French art during this time. For the first time in centuries, many French artists in the mid to late nineteenth-century focused on natural landscapes without depicting humans in their paintings. In addition, the French avant-garde artists adopted techniques from Japanese art because they expressed new modes of perception. “Japonisme,” a style that mimics Japanese paintings and woodblock prints became very popular especially among Impressionist and Art Nouveau painters from the 1860‟s onward. 129 Japan had been closed off to other countries during a part of the Edo period from 1636 to 1853 (Chesneau, Gonse and Humbert 3). After Japanese trade ports were forced to reopen, Europe became inundated with Japanese imports, particularly “woodcut 129 Laforgue said in 1882, "Si j‟avais de l‟argent, je collectionnerais des céramiques, des japonais, des toiles aiguës des impressionnistes" (Dottin-Orsini, 15). In addition, Dottin-Orsini writes that Laforgue was an assiduous reader of La Gazette de Paris. "Comme lui, elle [La Gazette] apprécie les albums anglais et japonais, Gustave Moreau, Puvis de Chavannes et certains impressionnistes" (18). 147 prints by the masters of the ukiyo-e school which transformed Impressionist and Post- Impressionist art by demonstrating that simple, transitory, everyday subjects from „the floating world 130 „ could be presented in appealingly decorative ways” (“Japonisme: A Thematic History “ 1). 131 Although most French Impressionists and writers did not actually visit Japan, most of them did visit the Japanese exhibit at the 1867 Exposition universelle which mimicked a Japanese palace in the middle of Paris (Le Monde Illustré 1867). Parisians saw their first formal exhibition of Japanese arts and crafts when Japan took a pavilion at the World‟s Fair of 1867. But already, shiploads of oriental bric-a-brac—including fans, kimonos, lacquers, bronzes and silks—had begun pouring into England and France” (Helbrunn Timeline of Art History). Degas, Tissot, Monet, Van Gogh, Toulouse-Lautrec and Cassatt all appropriated such images into their paintings. The popularity of Japonisme was one of the critical forces of the time that shaped Laforgue‟s aesthetic narrative. Just as Laforgue proposed that artists needed to undergo a shift in perception that departed from previous aesthetic constructs, Japanese art provided artists with an alternative perspective. Impressionists adopted Japanese techniques such 130 "The floating world" is a movement that reflects the transient aspects of Japanese culture during the Edo period and focuses on popular figures such as sumo wrestlers or geishas of the Kabuki theater district. In addition, the line of "À l‟Aquarium de Berlin "all in the dream of water" could possibly refer to "the floating world." 131 See the Museum of Modern Art‟s Helbrunn Timeline of Art History. 148 as truncated figures, using flat blocks of color without regard to depth and placing figures off-center. All of these techniques were revolutionary to European eyes, and they were ways of shattering traditional perspectives and means of artistic representation. Eastern religion also offered a new perspective to the Western avant-garde which felt jaded by Christianity (Mabuchi 35). Laforgue himself was intrigued by the idea of Buddhism as a viable alternative to what he felt was the oppressive influence of Christianity. “It was at this precise moment when Occidental culture sought to establish a new kind of relationship with its natural milieu, so it became aware of the way in which the Japanese captured nature in their art” (Ramsey 33). The European avant-garde adopted a borrowed narrative from the Japanese that painting should depict the human character as a part of nature and not as separate, as opposed to traditional French art where man is usually considered dominant. 132 According to Ary Renan, a French critic, Japanese art has: 132 For example, in Fish in Spring, by Ike no Taiga (1723-1776), giant swirling mountain ranges and a vast serpentine river cover most of the canvas with the exception of a tiny village that is nestled into the folds of the mountains. The fusion of the village and the mountains suggests an integration of human civilization into nature. In contrast, Seaport with the Embarkation of the Queen Sheba painting (1648) by French landscape painter Claude Lorrain features two white marble buildings with towering columns on both sides of the canvas. These impressive buildings conquer the sea, which is filled with ships carrying men who will unload goods onto its shore. This idea of man‟s domination over nature in this painting harkens back to the Western Biblical tradition where man‟s domination over the natural world is sanctioned by God. 149 Une prédilection pour la bête qui occupe dans notre art si peu de place. Nos races ont toujours eu, en quelque sorte, le visage tourné vers en haut. Elles ne voient que le sublime; elles n‟aperçoivent que depuis bien peu de temps le monde extérieur et les êtres inférieurs qui peuplent cependant de la terre au même titre que nous (Ary Renan in “Japonisme et Naturalisme” 40) Renan reinforces the mid to late nineteenth-century narrative that animals are of value and should be represented in art. He laments the absence of animals in Occidental art and praises the Japanese vision of nature. Renan constructs a binary opposition between French and Japanese points of view. While the French have “le visage tourné vers en haut,” the Japanese see animals as “sublime.” Similarly, Laforgue spiritualizes the perception of these animals and describes them as being like Buddhist monks who have transcended all worldly thoughts and beliefs. The aquatic creatures are supposedly “symbols of a promised Nirvana” (35). The concept of Nirvana, borrowed from the Hindu and Buddhist traditions, reinforces Laforgue‟s myth of a primordial, pure or natural state of being that transcends all earthly realms. Nirvana suggests an alternative, heavenly reality that could be a refuge from modern city life. It is also yet another means of destroying previous, antiquated thought processes in order to enter into the new. One definition of Nirvana 133 is an annihilation of previous understanding in order to come into a sense of oneness with all living things (Capriles 146). As Grojinowski discusses Laforgue, “Le seul salut qui 133 It should be mentioned that all of the main authors in my dissertation, Laforgue, Mirbeau and the Goncourt, use the word "Nirvana" in their text to describe a moment of altered perception. In the case of Mirbeau, the narrator contracts meningitis and, as a result, experiences a state resembles to "Nirvana." In the case of the Goncourt brothers, the artist‟s pet monkey Vermillon is described as meditating in a Nirvana-like state (Ziegler 5; Goncourt 268). 150 s‟offre à l‟individu est l‟extinction de la conscience, l‟annihilation du Moi dans un nirvana…” (27). Similarly, Buddhist thought argues that the sage must go through a process of “seeing through all conditioned experiences into their primordially pure and self-perfect true condition, which is the unconditioned, uncreated base of both samara and nirvana” (Capriles 146). Here, the highest spiritual state is the complete awareness of a person‟s own “primordially pure” and “self-perfect” condition. Thus, one must recognize that which is primordial within one‟s self. The use of the word “seeing” seems to indicate that the development of one‟s visual perception is directly related to one‟s spiritual development. The poem also links together perception and spirituality. If animals are supposedly in a spiritual state, the more a person is able to see like an animal, the more spiritual he becomes. Clearly, for Laforgue, the ideal is “ces éponges, ces astéries, ses plasmas dans le silence opaque et frais, tout au rêve, de l‟eau” (35). This idealization of sponges, starfish and plasma indicates that Laforgue privileges the most primitive creatures that do not even have eyes. They respond only to stimuli and must adapt to their environment. Thus, the author seems to be advocating an intuitive perception based on sensory response; the highest ideal goes beyond reliance on the physical eye. In Downcast Eyes, Martin Jay describes the powerful implications of vision in all major religions. He writes: No less symptomatic of the power of the optical in religion is the tendency of the visionary tradition to posit a higher sight of the seer, who is able to discern a truth denied to normal vision. Here the so called third eye of the soul is invoked for the imperfections of the two physical eyes (12). 151 Of course, this notion may seem incongruent with the author‟s advocacy of pure perception and observation. The vision which Laforgue suggests here is a “higher sight” that is more animal-like than human. Laforgue also seems to be borrowing from the Hindu myth of Vishnu‟s dream (Eliade 432). The poet discusses the serpents and aquatic creatures “all in the dream of water.” According to the Hindu religion, the creator-sustainer god Vishnu sleeps on a thousand-headed serpent which floats upon the ocean. While he is asleep, he has a dream, and that dream is the universe. Everything and everyone in the universe is actually Vishnu dreaming the dream of separation. The goal of the Hindu religion is awakening (or Nirvana). Additionally, the word “ophite” in “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” refers to those who worship the snake in the Garden of Eden. The figure of the serpent in both oriental and occidental religious myths symbolizes the concept of creation. 134 As previously discussed, the aquarium itself is Nirvana or a heavenly sanctuary, a spiritual refuge that effaces and replenishes a person‟s beliefs, thoughts and perspectives so that he can be better cope with the stressful, changing nature of modern life. 134 The figure of the serpent could also be related to the origins of human consciousness. As cultural and animal theorist Haraway writes, "Animals have continued to have a special status as natural objects that can show people their origin, and therefore their pre-rational, pre- management, pre-cultural essence" (258). The repetition of the prefix "pre" suggests a mythical "before and after" period during which man becomes cognizant and influenced by the ideas of others. Of course, Haraway was writing in the twentieth-century, and the concept of "management" is not applicable to the nineteenth-century. In the context of this poem, the animals could have symbolized pre-industrialization and pre-urbanization. 152 Further Questions and Paradoxes In his art criticism, Laforgue proposes that the modern artist undergo a physiological transformation during which he would reject centuries of cultural knowledge and aesthetic conventions. Such vision would be so pure and unadulterated that it would resemble that of prehistoric man who has a richer understanding of nature than modern man. The animals in the Berlin aquarium are in such a state of being, for they are similar to Buddhist sages who have transcended cultural illusions and conventions. The poem thus seems to affirm a perceived naïve or primal vision. However, as previously mentioned, Laforgue‟s art-criticism imitates both Darwin‟s and Helmholtz‟ chapters on the eye which argue that some animals have more physiologically evolved eyes than other animals of the same class. It is unclear as to whether Impressionists are similar to the more-evolved animals or the less-evolved animals. It would seem that the vision of the avant-gardist may be naïve, crude and primitive. However, for Laforgue, this vision is actually superior to that of the Academic painter whose eyes have been tainted by rigid conceptions that they miss the mystery and splendor of the outside world. It is also puzzling why the artifice of the glass aquarium is necessary to mediate between the gaze of the viewer and that of the animal. L’Impressionnisme argues against cultural institutions such as museums and art schools because they restrict creative 153 freedom, and instead Laforgue proposes a more “natural” setting for painting and exhibiting. However, “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” affirms the institution of the aquarium, which restricts the freedom of animals and does not allow them to roam freely in nature. Perhaps the natural world can be so mystifying, perplexing or even threatening that most civilized human beings cannot understand it directly. It is only through the frame of the aquarium, the painting or the poem that a person can truly discover a connection between himself and animals. 154 Chapter 3 The Animal and Aesthetic Nihilism in Octave Mirbeau’s Dans le Ciel The imagination, abandoned by reason, brings forth impossible monsters: united with her, she is the mother of the arts and the source of her wonders —Francisco de Goya 135 I discovered that it is necessary, absolutely necessary, to believe in nothing. That is, we have to believe in something which has no form and no color—something which exists before all forms and colors appear […] In constantly seeking to actualize your ideal, you will have no time for composure. But if you are always prepared for accepting everything we see as something appearing from nothing, knowing that there is some reason why a phenomenal existence of such and such form and color appears, then at that moment you will have perfect composure” —Shunryu Suzuki 136 In Dans le ciel (published in installments in l’Echo de Paris from September 1892 and May 1893 and not published in book form until 1989), Octave Mirbeau describes a bourgeois dining room painting of children playing. A group of flies defecate on the painting to the extent that it turns black (60). The flies‟ base animal needs obliterate a conventional work of art. As a result, one could argue that the flies actually create a new “painting” that destroys a false, bourgeois ideology in the process. 137 With such dramatic imagery, Mirbeau presents a narrative that the animal is a source of both destruction and 135 Ilie, Paul. "Goya‟s Teratology and the Critique of Reason." Eighteenth-Century Studies 18.1 (1984): 35-56. 136 Suzuki (1904-1971) was a Zen Buddhist teacher who helped popularize Buddhism in the West. This notion of "accepting everything we see as something appearing from nothing" is an important part of Mirbeau‟s aesthetic philosophy. 137 "Mirbeau invetera une légende devenue vérité d‟Evangile pour tous les commenteurs de l‟avenir" (Michel and Nivet. Préface à Octave Mirbeau: Correspondance avec Claude Monet 7). He celebrated "Manet, Monet et Cézanne avec des forces injures pour les académiques" (Michel and Nivet. Préface à Octave Mirbeau: Correspondance avec Claude Monet 7). 155 creation. Unlike the works of fiction discussed in the previous chapters, Mirbeau creates a decadent aesthetic of fear, horror and disgust. Driven by an anarchist mission to “participer à la grande révolution du regard” (Michel and Nivet. Octave Mirbeau Combats esthétiques 10), Mirbeau accomplishes this task through the myth that the artist is biologically linked to animals. He presents the artist as a savage beast who destroys the artistic traditions of the past. At the same time, Mirbeau describes creativity in terms of biological processes, drawing upon Darwinian and Lamarckian evolutionary theories. Influenced by the Lamarckian idea that spontaneous generation can occur from nothing, Dans le ciel suggests that artistic creation is dependent on the void. The animal is instrumental in creating such a void, for animals can be seen as vile, frightening and destructive. For Mirbeau, nothingness is the blank space out which creativity can be born, similar to the Buddhist idea above presented by Suzuki. Thus, Mirbeau integrates the Buddhist philosophy of emptiness and creation into his aesthetic. In fact, the novel may actually be inscribed within a Japanese painting tradition which leaves unfinished, blank spaces on the canvas to indicate the potential of creation. However, the characters in Dans le ciel are often intimidated by vast, immense spaces and are overwhelmed by the pressure to create. They also express their frustration at their inability to perfectly capture the ineffable and transitory qualities of nature. To solve this problem, the novel presents the narrative of the artist-animal‟s need to leave the city and return to the „natural world.‟ However, at the same time, Dans le ciel suggests that nature does not exist as a separate entity and only exists within the artist‟s own mind. 156 Thus, while Manette Salomon and “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” present the urban menagerie and aquarium as a means of artistic replenishment, Dans le ciel presents the artist‟s mind as a natural retreat. This notion coincides with the disappearance of nature due to the growth of modern cities. Mirbeau also presents a colonialist and orientalist understanding of Nirvana as a means of resolving the feeling of separateness from nature that the modern Western artist may have experienced at this time. This chapter investigates whether the novel presents a revolutionary aesthetic or whether it simply reinforces existing societal structures. It also examines whether the characters‟ affinity with animals limits or strengthens their creative abilities. Dans le ciel illustrates that destruction and creation are simultaneous processes and that they are both integral to the artistic process. In addition, the novel proposes the narrative that the biological drive to create is so powerful that it effaces the importance of the intention of the artist. This chapter examines and critiques the myth found in Dans le ciel that an artist is like a savage animal who kills and devours the old and gives birth to the new. However, this chapter will also explore the limits of this myth. Criticism of the Novel Pierre Michel and François Jean Nivet, Mirbeau scholars, have described Dans le ciel as a portrayal of artistic failure. They argue that the characters are never able to manifest a celestial, creative vision. This argument would seem logical given the facts that the character George, a writer, struggles to create, and Lucien, an artist, destroys his own paintings and kills himself. Michel and Nivet argue that the novel is “un récit des 157 vies avortées” (“Préface.” Dans le ciel 12) and is plagued by an “impuissance créatrice” (“Préface.” Dans le ciel 9). 138 It is true that the language of the novel is often nihilistic. 139 However, such negative imagery is necessary in constructing Mirbeau‟s novel aesthetic. The critics‟ interpretation of the novel as a text on impotence may be partially true, as this idea is seen in many artistic novels such as Zola‟s L’Œuvre and Balzac‟s Le Chef d’oeuvre inconnu. 140 However, these scholars have ignored fundamental concepts that were essential to decadent and avant-garde literature of the fin-de-siècle. These and other scholars also have not taken into account the changing conceptions of the animal during the late nineteenth-century. While Robert Ziegler does affirm Mirbeau‟s „aesthetic of nothingness‟, 141 he argues that the numerous references to animals in Dans le ciel may suggest the characters‟ “sense of inferiority” and “animal servility” (443). These scholars argue that George‟s and Lucien‟s self-described affiliation with animals reinforces their incapacity for creative action or their failed 138 However, Michel also argues that "le nihilisme imprègne tout le récit" (Oeuvre romanesque v. 2 12). The seeming oxymorons of „nihilism‟ and „impregnates‟ illustrates the contradictory nature of the text. 139 For example, on page 55 of Dans le ciel, Mirbeau uses the negative expressions: sans, nul, nulle, ni, ne...que, ne...pas and rien. 140 Michel and Nivet also find this idea in the correspondence between Monet and Mirbeau. In one letter (around September 10, 1887) Mirbeau writes to Monet. "Je comprends vos angoisses, vos découragements, parce que je ne connais pas d‟artiste sincère qui les ait éprouvés et qui n‟ait été injuste, absolument vis-à-vis de lui-même" (50-51). Michel and Nivet comment in the footnotes that Mirbeau "écrira un roman consacré au martyr de l‟impuissance, Dans le ciel." In contrast, one could argue that such a prolific and revolutionary artist as Monet is not an example of a "martyr of impotence." Rather, Mirbeau suggests that frustration and discouragement is part of the creative process itself. 141 See Robert Ziegler‟s chapter "Reaching Up: Dans le ciel" in The Nothing Machine 78-93. However, he writes, "Yet, his aesthetic subjectivism does nothing to bridge the gulf separating heaven and earth, and it has no effect in bringing the artist closer to the unattainable ideal" (89). 158 ambitions. At first glance, this interpretation seems valid given that George‟s father is negative towards him and he only asks him “des choses que l‟on demande aux bêtes familières: „As-tu bien dormi, cette nuit?‟”(36). However, as I will explain throughout this paper, there are many examples in the novel that consider animals to be sources of creative inspiration. It is possible that inherent in the critics‟ understanding that animals are signs of inferiority is the assumption that animals cannot create anything of aesthetic merit. In contrast, during this time period, the public as well as scientists and scholars were beginning to see animals in a new light because people began to understand the evolutionary relationship between human beings and other animals. “Ever since Darwin‟s theory of descent (his The Origin of Species was published in 1859), man no longer appeared to be sovereign over a divine creation designed around him, but a chance product of evolution” (Wolf 7). Although it should not be assumed that Darwin transformed all sense of human superiority, his work did challenge the presumed hierarchies between humans and animals. 142 As mentioned in the introduction of this dissertation, Darwinian thought made a major impact on the popular press and popular entertainment in addition to avant-garde paintings in France. 143 Darwinian evolution initiated an “evolutionary aesthetic” that emphasized the similarity between humans and 142 According to The Comparative Reception of Darwin, by Thomas Glick, many French scientists did not acknowledge Darwinian evolution until the second French translation of The Origin of Species in 1866. The French scientific community had rejected Lamarck‟s theory of transformation in favor of Cuvier‟s anti-transformatist views. It was not until later that the community accepted Darwin‟s theory of evolution (Glick 153). 143 Rae Beth Gordon argues this point in her book Dances with Darwin. Gordon suggests that animals were often associated with the lower class and marginal, artistic figures. While animals may have been seen as "inferior" as Ziegler suggests, they were also associated with creativity. 159 animals. 144 For example, in one cartoon by Charles Amédée de Noel (1878), 145 a man embraces an ape. The caption reads, “Grâce à M. Darwin, la recherché de la paternité n‟est plus interdite.” This example illustrates one of the late nineteenth-century views of animals as a source of ancestry and human origins. Although animals were often mistreated, they did not necessarily always represent inferiority or creative impotence at this time. 146 Furthermore, no Mirbeau scholar has remarked that in the issue of l’Echo de Paris that contained the first installment of Dans le ciel (Thursday September 22, 1892), there was an article immediately following Mirbeau‟s introduction that argued that animals should not be treated as inferior to humans and that animals are a source of creativity. In this article, “Le Regne animal,” Émile Gautier laments that entire species of animals were beginning to disappear, due to human consumption and eradication (Echo de Paris 2). 147 This new awareness of other species of life as being central to our ecological system is also apparent in Dans le ciel. Critics have not really focused on the perceived biological parallel between the avant-gardist and the animal. In Dans le ciel, the avant-garde painter Lucien and writer George are both described as animals whose creative drive can be understood in terms of biological processes. 144 This evolutionary aesthetic visually suggests that some people closely resemble animals, such as apes or dogs in the case of Degas‟ paintings. 145 The cartoon can be found in Le Charivari, 1878. See Ludovic Halévy, Douze années comiques par Cham 1868-1880. 146 Huxley, a Darwinist who was influential in France, argued that "every living creature commences its existence under a form different from, and simpler to that which it eventually attains" (Huxely 74) and reinforced Darwin‟s argument that humans evolved from simpler creatures. 147 See the section "Animals as Creative Symbols" in this chapter for an analysis of this article. 160 Critics of the novel fail to emphasize the centrality of the evolutionary theories to artistic process found within Dans le ciel. 148 It is clear that Mirbeau read both Lamarck and Darwin. Mirbeau writes, ”J‟ose dire que depuis Lamarck, on n‟a rien écrit de plus probant sur les transformations graduelles des êtres […] L‟auteur de la philosophie zoologique et le chapitre de l‟élection avec les courbettes aux relecteurs et les aplatissements devant les comités seraient une belle page de l’Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres” (Chroniques du diable 35-36). Mirbeau underscores the revolutionary nature of Lamarck‟s works compared to other scientific theories of the time. He also affirms “une évolution darwinienne qui mène insensiblement le singe à l‟homme, l‟homme au comédien, le comédien à l‟homme d‟État par une lente dégénérescence…” (Chroniques du diable 35). The above quotations on Lamarck and Darwin reveal Mirbeau‟s affirmation of evolutionary theory which the novelist uses to both interpret and deconstruct the order of the society of his day. Mirbeau‟s work seems particularly interested in Darwin‟s and Lamarck‟s understanding of life processes that both create and destroy. Lamarck writes, “En effet dans l‟organisation, animée par la vie, nous remarquons une véritable puissance qui change, qui répare, qui détruit et qui produit des objets qui n‟eussent jamais existé sans 148 The influence of evolutionary theory on the novel could be dismissed at first glance considering that the novel constantly builds up and then negates various ideologies and theories. For example, one of the characters describes his passion for observing nature : Combien de fois suis-je resté, des heures entières, devant une fleur, cherchant, en d‟obscurs et vagues tâtonnements, le secret, le mystère de sa vie! J‟observai les araignées, les fourmis, les abeilles, avec des joies profondes, traversées aussi de ces affreuses angoisses de ne pas savoir, de ne rien connaitre" (58). The Darwinian notion that one can draw conclusions based on empirical observations of external phenomena is negated with the idea that one cannot truly know anything about nature. 161 elle” (Histoire des animaux sans vertèbres 31). Darwin also argues that both creation and destruction are integral to all life. ”Every being, which during its natural lifetime produces several eggs or seeds, must suffer destruction during some period of its life” (The Origin of Species 99). This last quotation by Darwin relates to Dans le ciel because although the artist creates, he also “suffers destruction” during some periods of his life. Mirbeau adapts the Darwinian and Lamarckian ideas that destruction is a central part of the creative process into his aesthetic theory. In addition to its scientific context, Dans le ciel should be read with its specific aesthetic and literary context in mind. Mirbeau‟s work seems to be influenced by decadent art and literature and Eastern aesthetic and religious philosophies. Decadent artists and writers often use putrid, vile and degenerative imagery to undermine bourgeois conventions. The descriptions of decay and destruction in the novel have been interpreted as a failure on the part of the artist. However, such degenerative descriptions should instead be affirmed as having aesthetic merit in this particular context. In addition, the critics of Dans le ciel have not acknowledged the importance of Hindu and Buddhist philosophies within the novel. This is surprising considering that Mirbeau wrote Lettres d’Inde (1885), which revealed the prominence of Hinduism in his work and numerous articles defending Chinese and Japanese artists such as Katsushika Hokusai. 149 It should be acknowledged that Dans le ciel was published fairly recently and is currently only 149 One can see the similarity between Hokusai‟s works and Mirbeau‟s aesthetic theory. For example, in Hokusai‟s painting Gold Finch and Cherry Tree (1834), a long cherry branch is outstretched amongst an empty, blue sky. The color and shape of the cherry blossoms resemble that of the gold finch sitting on the branch. It appears that the finch essentially had "bloomed" from the cherry tree. This idea suggests both the Buddhist concept of the oneness of life and the Darwinian idea of evolution and transformation. 162 known by a handful of scholars. The novel deserves a more in-depth study. It is thus time to bridge the above research gaps to enrich our understanding of Mirbeau‟s oeuvre and fin-de-siècle literature as a whole. Destruction Darwin and Decadence: An Aesthetic of Decay and Horror As previously mentioned, scholarship has described Dans le ciel as a novel about impotence. Certainly, both Lucien and George speak of their creative frustration and their perceived artistic failures. For example, Lucien has a dream that he plants a lily. “Il se fane, dans ma main, les écailles s‟en détachent, pourries et gluantes, et lorsque je veux enfin l‟enfouir dans le sol, le bulbe a disparu; tous mes rêves ont le même caractère d‟avortement, de la pourriture, de la mort!” (121). “Pourriture,” “gluantes” and “disparu” reinforce the concepts of transience and decay. Although this idea might be perceived as an artistic failure to achieve his vision, decadent writers such as Baudelaire and Gautier were “vociferous advocates of the redemptive and transmutative power of art, they were instrumental in effecting, for the first time, a positive apprehension of the concept of decadence and its attendant connotations” (Flint 1-2). This notion of transmutation on one level indicates the depiction of change within a work of art (such as images of wilting flowers or wind blowing through trees). In Lucien‟s dream, the lily rots and dies in spite the artist‟s intention to plant it. This is a common idea in decadent literature. “This tension between the viscera implied by physical degeneration on the one hand, and transcendent human strivings on the other, 163 is what R.K.R Thornton calls the „decadent dilemma‟” (Sentell 1). The way in which the phrase “lorsque je veux enfin l‟enfouir dans le sol, le bulbe a disparu” is formulated emphasizes the futility of man‟s attempt to control or direct nature. The use of the reflexive verbs “se faner” and “se détacher” indicate that the lily is changing and deteriorating by itself, beyond the control of Lucien. As Darwin writes in The Origin of Species, “How fleeting are the wishes and efforts of man! How short his time! And consequently how poor his products will be, compared with those accumulated by nature during whole geological periods. Can we wonder then, that nature‟s productions be far „truer‟ in character than man‟s productions [...]” (121). In acknowledging the difficulty for man to realize his creative vision, the novel also acknowledges the incredible power of nature to both destroy and create simultaneously. A “true” art reflects the organic process of nature that is both deterioration and re-birth, despite the individual intention of a particular artist. 150 This decadent focus on destruction and renewal can be linked to Darwinian thought. Decadent literature is indebted to evolutionary theory for several reasons. First, as the above quotation indicates, Darwin emphasizes the beauty of the processes of nature that are not products of either God or man. As Mirbeau writes in Dans le ciel, “Mais voir 150 Mirbeau wrote "La nature est tellement merveilleuse qu‟il est impossible à n‟importe qui de rendre comme on la ressent; et croyez bien qu‟on la ressent moins belle encore qu‟elle n‟est. C‟est un mystère" (Correspondance avec Claude Monet 50). Similarly, As Frederick Harrison wrote in "Decadence in Modern Art" (1893), "Direction!—there perhaps lies the root of the matter, and the source of our danger. The essential claim of „modernity‟ is to assert the absolute independence of Art, and to defy any sort of condition of limit whether of tradition, philosophy, morality or even good sense" (436). Harrison advocates that artists and writers should attempt to express that which comes "naturally," without hindering their creative process by imposing rational or metaphysical limitations. 164 de la beauté autour de soi, de la beauté vivante, de la beauté terrestre” (29). 151 Secondly, both Darwin and Lamarck emphasize the changing and degenerative qualities of nature. 152 For example, Darwin writes, “The space which one branch of the tree of life occupied after its decay, will be occupied by the vigorous shoots from each branch” (Darwin. Notebooks 152). Decadent literature aestheticizes this process of degeneration and renewal. Thirdly, Darwin argues that humans are capable of the same emotions as animals, such as rage and terror. As Susan Navarette points out in The Shape of Fear: Horror and the Fin de Siècle Culture of Decadence, Darwin concluded from his observations of behavioral and physiological phenomena that he was able to understand the inner conflicts occurring in both humans and animals (5). Humans and most animals experience fear and terror in similar ways. For example, “the heart beats quickly and violently, so that it palpitates or knocks against the ribs […] The hairs also on the skin stand erect; and the superficial muscles shiver. In connection with the disturbed action of the heart, the breathing is hurried” (Darwin. Expression of the Emotions 290). In addition, a similar theme found in both Darwin and decadence is that even a seemingly calm and pleasant person might be masking animal-like horror. As Navarette cites from Darwin‟s notes, “It is difficult to believe in the dreadful but quiet war of organic beings going on [in] the peaceful woods [and] smiling fields” (Darwin. Notebooks 98). Thus, Darwin 151 In addition, Lucien says that in contrast to traditional painting that might label certain groups of flowers " inharmonique ", " Dans la nature, c‟est toujours beau. La nature se fiche des théories, elle! " (91). 152 As mentioned above, Lamarck argues that nature is something "qui change, qui répare, qui détruit et qui produit des objets qui n‟eussent jamais existe sans elle" (Histoire des animaux sans vertèbres 31), and Darwin writes that some destruction is necessary for creation (The Origin of Species 101). 165 concluded that all species are motivated by survival and competition with other species despite outward appearances. Decadent literature reveals the inner, animalistic horrors that may be operating in every human being and thus creates an aesthetic of horror and terror. In the Dans le ciel, the focus on animalistic horror stirs the imagination. For example, George describes his time spent in a frightening house, in which : Des rampants hideux d‟insectes noirs et de larves, d‟innombrables toiles d‟araignées pendaient aux angles, se balançaient aux poutres. N‟allais-je pas voir planer, tout à coup, au-dessus de ma tête le vol des hiboux et des chauves-souris? Je sentais véritablement peser sur moi la vague horreur des maisons hantées, l‟indicible effroi des auberges assassines (32). This quotation focuses both on the seen and the unseen. There are frightening traces of animals, such as the spider webs and insect larvae scattered throughout the house. The horror and disgust of these seen objects sparks George‟s imagination. He asks the question, “N‟allais-je pas voir planer, […] le vol des hiboux et des chauves-souris?” He then goes on to imagine haunted houses and assassins. His deep-seated fear and desire for self-protection cause him to envision a myriad of possibilities and outcomes. This fear of the animal in the novel may represent a catalyst for creative thoughts and images. As Darwin writes in The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals: The word „fear‟ seems to be derived from what is sudden and dangerous; and that of terror from the trembling of the vocal organs and body. I use the word „terror‟ for extreme fear; but some writers think it ought to be confined to cases in which the imagination is more particularly concerned (290). Darwin presents the physiological signs of fear and terror in both humans and animals, and he also presents the link between terror and creativity. After all, Lucien asks the 166 question, “ Est-ce que l‟art, c‟était vraiment cette torture, cet enfer?” (90). For these characters, creativity may require an artist to experience the “hell” and “torture” of primal fear. 153 The Fly-Poet and the Spider-Artist: Writing and Painting as Animalistic Processes The novel thus links the avant-garde artist to dangerous animals. For example, in Dans le ciel, there are many parallels between the artist Lucien and a spider. First of all, Mirbeau uses the same word “toile”, which means both web and painting in French, to describe the creations of the two creatures. Both Lucien and the spider are violent, vicious and ominous creatures of the night. In the text, the spider represents the artist, and flies represent poets. George believes that he hears the spider telling him: Tu es triste, tu te désoles, et tu pleurs!... C‟est ta faute…Pourquoi as-tu voulu être mouche, quand il t‟était si facile, d‟être comme moi, une joyeuse araignée… Vois-tu, dans la vie, il faut manger ou être mangé…Moi, j‟aime mieux manger […]. Les mouches aiment le soleil, elles aiment la lumière, les fleurs, ce sont des poètes… Elles viennent s‟embarrasser les ailes, dans les fils tendus près de la fleur, dans le soleil… Et tu les prends, et tu les manges… (67). The spider describes poets as flies because they depict their love of nature, sun, light and flowers. In contrast, the artist-spider traps the fly-poet who lauds nature and devours it. Thus, the aesthetic advocated in the novel is not an exaltation of nature. It is, in part, an aesthetic of destruction, justified by the destruction found in the natural world. Just as a spider devours its unsuspecting and perhaps naïve prey, the avant-gardist destroys superficial art. This idea of “eat or be eaten” is perhaps alluding to the Darwinian concept 153 In this context, "primal fear " means the fear that one‟s very survival might be threatened. 167 that every species must “struggle for life” (The Origin of Species 98). Each species must compete with other species in order to survive. Darwin writes, “We forget, that the birds which are idly singing round us live on insects or seeds and are thus constantly destroying life, or we forget how largely these songsters, or their eggs, or their nestlings are destroyed by birds and beasts of prey” (The Origin of Species 98). According to this idea, every creature must prey upon another for its survival. For Mirbeau, the artist is no exception. In the above passage, the visual artist attacks and preys upon the writer. This idea may imply a hierarchy between visual arts and the written word. The spider‟s statement is ironic considering that it is written in an Impressionistic novel that attempts to capture the artistic climate and processes of the 1890‟s. While poets and artists are both animals, according to Dans le ciel, poets are meek and laudatory and visual artists are strong and destructive. George and Lucien perhaps embody this idea. George, a writer, is a self- described “rien” (55), and Lucien is an “assassin” (83). According to the novel, poets and naturalist writers have an almost parasitic relationship to nature because they describe their love of “light” and “flowers.” In contrast, according to Dans le ciel, the avant-garde painter may deny the existence of nature entirely. In addition, in contrast with the writer, the artist may be incapable of articulating his own creative process. While discussing nature, Lucien says: Écoute moi bien qu‟elle n‟existe pas, qu‟elle n‟est qu‟une combinaison idéale et multiforme de ton cerveau, une émotion intérieure de ton âme !... Un arbre… un arbre !... Eh bien, quoi, un arbre ?... Qu‟est-ce que ca prouve ?... Les naturalistes me font rire… Ils ne savent pas ce que c‟est la nature… ils croient qu‟un arbre est un arbre, et le même arbre !... Quels 168 idiots !... Un arbre petit, mais c‟est trente-six mille choses… c‟est une bête, quelquefois… c‟est, c‟est… est-ce que je sais moi ? (92-93) Lucien expresses the Symbolist idea that nature is only a reflection of inner, psychic states. For him, nature is not a fixed object, but something that transforms and evolves according to the interior processes of the person viewing nature. George comments that Lucien‟s speech is full of “tant d‟incohérences, tant de contradictions” (93). Although Lucien claims that Naturalists do not know what nature is, he too is unable to articulate his understanding of nature “C‟est, c‟est…est-ce que je sais, moi?” (93). Furthermore, this last statement of “est-ce que je sais, moi,?” could imply that while literary impressionists or Naturalist writers use narratives to describe both art and nature, the avant-garde artist is unable to articulate his own process. 154 All of the authors of fiction in this dissertation create the tightly knit narrative of the „artist as animal‟ to explain a particular aesthetic that occurs in painting. However, Lucien is unable to create a narrative about his creativity. His language is full of contradictions, incoherencies and broken utterances. Both Lucien and the spider have a series of ellipses between words, perhaps indicating logical gaps. Because the painter uses visual cues instead of words, he is depicted in the novel as lacking human speech and human reason. In this way, the artist may be perceived to be closer to animals than writers. Interestingly, as a writer, Mirbeau uses literary techniques to portray the artist as “savage” and illogical. Lucien‟s speech is an example of decadent, degenerative writing. According to Navarette, decadent literature can be “stylistically and linguistically 154 Lucien says in the novel, "Tu comprends, moi, la littérature, ce n‟est pas mon métier. Je n‟y entends rien... Quand c‟est beau, je sais que c‟est beau, voilà tout!" (86). 169 degenerative, as well as structurally unstable,” and there is often “linguistic disruption, stylistic decomposition, hesitancy, and instability—that thereby duplicate the process by which evil bursts through the calm surfaces of daily living” (5). This kind of unstable, illogical writing is another means of reinforcing the narrative of „artist as animal.‟ However, at the same time, Lucien‟s disoriented speech is a means of deconstructing and undermining logical narratives. The gaps in his speech that supposedly imitate the possibility of “evil” interrupting the “calm surfaces of daily living,” paradoxically, could also allow for creative freedom. In Dans le ciel, the logical gaps in the artist‟s speech perhaps allow for multiple interpretations of paintings in the absence of a tightly constructed narrative. The literary impressionists and art-critics of this time construct myths and narratives to explain the aesthetic of Impressionist and Post-Impressionist paintings. For example, to explain the blurry, patch-work like quality of Impressionistic paintings, Laforgue uses the narrative that the eyes of an Impressionist painter are physiologically different from academic painters, and he attempts to support this claim through the use of evolutionary science. Mirbeau uses the narrative that the creative process is governed by certain evolutionary concepts such as “spontaneous generation.” The painter may not interpret his or her own work within the framework of a particular narrative designed by the literary impressionists. 170 In portraying the artist as an inarticulate savage, the literary impressionists reinforce their role of articulating the impressionists‟ creative process. However, Mirbeau was conscious that such narratives may be unfaithful to the works of art themselves: 155 Ce que je pense des critiques, je le pense moi-même, lorsqu‟il m‟arrive de vouloir expliquer une œuvre d‟art. Il n‟y a pas de pire duperie : duperie envers soi-même, envers l‟artiste, envers autrui […] comment faire ? Le mieux serait d‟admirer ce qu‟on est capable d‟admirer, et ensuite, de se taire”(Vallotton. La Revue Blanche. Javier 1910). Of course, Mirbeau does not remain silent about his theories on art, and he does formulate the narrative of „artist as savage animal‟ in the novel. In Dans le ciel, Lucien is depicted as this kind of monstrous animal. A self- described “cochon” (87) and “brute”(89), Lucien is “le fils d‟un boucher de chez moi” and “un artiste, ou un assassin” (83). Lucien violently attacks the canvas like an animal would violently attack his prey. Consequently, even George, his friend, is terrified of him. 156 While speaking of Lucien, George comments, “Son regard m‟effrayait en ces moments, son regard était pareil aux regards hallucinants des figures de ces toiles” (89). As the word “toile” suggests, Lucien captures terrifying faces in his painting just as a 155 The Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau all were enthusiastic about the influence of Eastern religion on Impressionist paintings. Most Impressionists did acknowledge this influence. However, Camille Pissaro, an Impressionist, denied that his work fit into the framework of Eastern religion, and he also denied the influence of literature on his paintings. Camille Pissaro said: The frightened bourgeoisie, astonished by the immense clamor of the disinterherited masses, by the insistent demands of the people, feels it necessary to lead the people back to superstitious beliefs. Hence the bustling of religious symbolists, religious socialists, idealist art, occultism, Buddhism, etc. (Marlais 98). For Pissaro, occultism and Buddhism were false beliefs that were imposed on art by a disenchanted bourgeoisie. 156 The narrator perceives Lucien‟s art as "terrifiant," "vulgaire" and "surnaturel." (92). 171 spider captures flies in its web. Lucien‟s gaze is as dark, savage and frightening as the works of art he produces. Interestingly, like the spider, Lucien also experiences periods of inactivity. George describes the spider in a state of rest: “Elle demeure inactive, ne tisse aucune toile, ne se livre à aucune embuscade”(66). Similarly, as previously mentioned, both George and Lucien often feel incapable of creation. 157 However, as George constantly moves the lamp where the spider rests (“par instinct de taquinerie”), “l‟araignée remonte le longue du fil invisible, comme un gymnaste, suit le plafond et redescend sur un nouvel fil, jusqu‟à ce qu‟elle ait retrouvé sa place, à la chaleur de la lampe” (66). Then, the spider returns to sleeping. It moves again when George moves the lamp. The spider is in a state of rest, during which it does not create or spin a web until an instinctual need arises. Thus, the spider fluctuates between immobility and activity as well as creation and destruction. Instinct drives the spider to act, and it does not concern itself about moments of inactivity. “J‟aurais été l‟araignée humaine quand même j‟aurais joui de la joie des meurtres!... Est-ce que j‟aurais été heureux, plus heureux? Est-ce que je n‟aurais pas été toujours écrasé par le mystère de ce ciel, par tout cet inconnu, par tout cet infini qui pèse sur moi?” (67). One difference between the artist or writer and the animal is that while a human might fear the unknown and may feel frustrated trying to express the ineffable quality of nature, an animal does not have this concern or frustration. The novel focuses on the gazes of both the avant-garde artist and the spider. George says: “Je regarde l‟araignée…les minutes passent, les heures s‟écoulent, je 157 For example, Lucien says, "Je suis un impuissant" and "un raté" (129). 172 regarde la petite araignée, immobile, et il me semble qu‟elle aussi me regarde avec ses huit yeux, ironiquement fixés sur moi” (67). In this quotation, like in Laforgue‟s poem “ À l‟Aquarium de Berlin,” not only does the narrator stare at an animal, but the animal also stares back at him. The act of staring back reflects some agency and power. Although the narrator of Dans le ciel acknowledges the difference between him and the spider (the spider has eight eyes while he does not), there seems to be some communication between the two beings. However, George is particularly afraid of Lucien‟s eyes. “Il avait dans ses yeux une lueur--nullement diabolique--et comme il n‟y en avait pas de semblable, dans les yeux des autres” (83). Similar to the works of Laforgue and Zola, 158 Lucien‟s eyes are described as physiologically different from those of other people. He is presented as an artist-animal or artist-demon that sees differently than ordinary human beings. Deleuze argues that “l‟écrivain est un sorcier” (Mille plateaux 294) and an animal-demon.” On dira qu‟un devenir-animal est affaire de sorcellerie parce qu‟il implique un premier rapport d‟alliance avec un démon” (Mille plateaux 302). The mythology of the innovative artist or writer as a sorcerer or a demon suggests that he conjures up material that is not accessible by way of rational or intellectual means. The creative act could depend on the writer or artist to tap into the animal or demonic part of his subconscious. As a native of the Perche region that 158 In L’Œuvre, Zola writes,"D‟un regard ardent et fixe, où brûlait l‟affreux tourment de son impuissance […] Qu‟avait-il donc dans le crâne, pour l‟entendre ainsi craquer de son effort inutile ? Était-ce une lésion de ses yeux qui l‟empêche de voir juste ?" (L’Œuvre 64). In this passage of L’Œuvre, Zola describes the artist Claude Lantier as having a hereditary lesion in his eyes that is the cause of both his creativity and his artistic impotence. The lesion causes him to forget the fundamentals of design, which contributes to his revolutionary artistic breakthroughs. 173 traditionally depicted magical or supernatural imagery in its folklore, Mirbeau upholds the Perche tradition, of the “rôle des animaux comme des vecteurs de la transmission des sortilèges” (Ragon 37). As Deleuze writes, “Le diable est transporteur, il transporte des humeurs, des affects ou même des corps” (309). Essentially, the devil, the magical or biological can all be ways of explaining irrational phenomena that do not fit within the framework of our logical, civilized society. Lucien‟s creative process is mythicized as demonic and animalistic. While the novel typically depicts George as less demonic than Lucien, it does describe him as a dark creature of the night. “La nuit venue, comme une chauve-souris, je m‟arrachais à mon trou d‟ombre, et j‟allais le long de quais, sur les ponts, partout où Lucien et moins avions passe des heures de morne rêverie, j‟allais revoir l‟obscurité inquiète” (100). In this passage, the writer is like a bat that leaves the isolation of its home at night to frequent the dark, peripheral spaces of the city. Thus his interaction with the ordinary, everyday life of humanity is marginal, interacting with the dark and bizarre aspects of life. In the beginning of the novel, the first narrator is concerned that George is in a desperate mental state. “Que va-t-il devenir? On le trouvera, un beau matin, mangé par les araignées et les rats” (33). The threatening possibility that rats or spiders might eat this writer could indicate the looming threat that the animal world indeed might devour the creative writer. Deleuze describes the movie Souvenirs d’un spectateur (1972) in which a pack of rats devour the hero at the end of the film. Deleuze writes, “un devenir- moléculaire avec le pullulement des rats, la meute qui mine les grandes puissances molaires, famille, profession, conjugalité” (285). Deleuze highlights the destructive 174 aspect of animal nature that can eat away the components of bourgeois human life: family, profession and romantic relationships. George‟s “animal nature” keeps him from having a meaningful relationship with his father who cannot stand George‟s silence, which the father refers to as being dog-like. George is also unable to consummate his love with Julia, and he is a failure professionally. While the lack of achievement in these areas could be conceived of as failures, this is only so in terms of a bourgeois value system. Thus, it may not be possible or even desirable for the avant-gardist to ever fully accomplish traditional goals for he aligns himself more with the animal than with the human. Urban/Internal Aesthetics The scene in the novel in which George compares himself to a nocturnal creature that hides in the shadows of the city illustrates a different vision of modern, urban spaces than that of the Goncourt brothers and Laforgue. However, like the other fictional works discussed in this dissertation, Mirbeau‟s oeuvre does create the narrative that the avant- garde artist longs for a mythical nature that is untarnished by modern, city life. In Dans le ciel, Paris is described as dark and frightening. The characters only go out at night, which reinforces their marginal status. They do not receive any artistic inspiration from cultural sites or artistic venues. Lucien “évitait autant qu‟il pouvait, les crèmeries artistiques, les cafés littéraires. C‟était une sorte de repos intellectuel, une trêve aux préoccupations qui lui cassaient la tête et lui brisaient l‟estomac” (93). 175 For George and Lucien, frequenting literary and artistic places in an urban environment is associated with a rupture (“ une trêve”, ”cassaient”, “ brisaient”) from the proper physical functioning of the bodily organs, and perhaps from nature as a whole. Lucien says, “ Paris me mange le cerveau, me mange le cœur, me rompt les bras…On ne sera heureux que lorsqu‟il n‟aura plus que des champs, des plaines, des forêts” (97). The novel depicts Paris as devouring and destroying the sensitivity of the avant-gardists‟ physical body. While in the city, the artist-animal is in exile from the natural world. Strangely, while the novel contains a sense of nostalgia and longing for nature, it also negates the idea that nature actually exists outside of one‟s own mind. Lucien clearly states that “elle n‟existe pas” (92) and that “ Tu t‟imagines qu‟il y a des arbres, des plaines, des fleuves, des mers… Erreur, mon bonhomme…il n‟y a rien de tout cela, ultérieurement du mois…tout cela est en toi”(92). This statement is obviously contradictory because if the artist could experience nature inside of himself, he would not feel the need to leave the city. Therefore, like Manette Salomon and “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin,” Dans le ciel both creates and destroys the myth of an untouched “ nature” that is separate from civilization and the myth that the artist-animal belongs in nature and not in the city. What is unique to Dans le ciel is that it expresses ambivalence between the Naturalist movement and the Symbolist movement. Naturalism attempts to express both the biological processes found in nature and the physiologic processes found in the body. Symbolism denies the importance of an external nature and instead focuses on inner 176 states of consciousness. 159 Furthermore, unlike Mirbeau‟s novel, the works of the Goncourts and Laforgue depict the menagerie or the aquarium as places of respite and creative freedom within an urban city. However, in Dans le ciel, the only “repos intellectuel” occurs when the characters retreat into themselves (93). Simliar to Manette Salomon in which the artists leave the city for the countryside, in Dans le ciel, Lucien escapes Paris to live in the wilderness. However, he only experiences “l‟horreur de la nature, l‟inutilité du dessin, l‟outrance des couleurs...” (129). Like animals in urban cities, the artists do not feel free to roam within the city, and they no longer feel that they belong to the natural world. However, when Lucien does leave the city to live in a more rustic environment, he experiences a transformation. At the end of the novel, Lucien metamorphosizes into a caveman-like savage. “Il va falloir m‟installer, me trouver une chambre, entre ces murs en ruine, en chasser les rats et les hiboux, qui, depuis des siècles, mènent la leur mystérieuse vie [...] Je vais être un autre homme” (118). This “autre” homme is a rapacious, half-human, half-animal. As this passage indicates, Lucien dwells in isolation and becomes almost a “caveman” not able to relate to the rest of modern humanity. Like the narrator of Laforgue‟s poem “At the Berlin Aquarium,” after many laborious attempts at painting, Lucien also “s‟épuisait en paroles, en théories, en gestes désordonnés” (128). 160 The artist has actually exhausted the limitations of language and rational 159 The novel perhaps reflects Mirbeau‟s own ambivalence about these two movements. The author at first was an avid defender of Naturalism and then later denounced the movement in favor of Symbolism (Marlais 98). 160 Perhaps one could view Lucien‟s eventual suicide "in the literal sense that there was no more to be said" (Chesterton 100). 177 thought. Consequently, he loses all connection with civilization, as indicated by the adjectives “inculte” and “délabré” in the following quotation: “Ses cheveux longs, sa barbe inculte rendait encore l‟aspect de son visage plus délabré. Et dans ses yeux brillait une lueur de fièvre” (123). The fact that the dim light shining in Lucien‟s eyes reveals a fever reinforces the nineteenth-century myth of the creative artist as a madman whose insanity reveals itself through his eyes. Dans le ciel thereby constructs the narrative that the perceived insane, demonic, animal nature of the avant-gardist both destroys and supersedes the status quo of conventional bourgeois art. Nirvana: the Freedom of Nothingness According to both Mirbeau and Laforgue, in order for creation to begin, a person must rid himself or herself of all that impedes the creative process. In essence, this process causes a sort of void from which pure creativity can take place, untarnished by prejudices, concerns and traditions. L‟homme doit chercher finalement à affranchir son esprit de tous les détruits de préjugés ataviques que l‟évolution de ses ancêtres a laissé dans les formes de son cerveau. Le jour où cet affranchissement s‟opère, c‟est- à-dire le jour où l‟homme est complètement délivré de tous les soucis et de l‟inquiétude qu‟entraîne l‟interprétation ordinaire des faits humains, le jour où il est dégagé de tous les liens qui entravaient sa pensée où il voit librement le cours de la vie. (Mirbeau. Lettres de l’Inde 44-45). After undergoing this process, a person is able to “franchir les immenses espaces du vide et de vivre la vie intellectuelle des planètes futures. C‟est alors qu‟il devient Mahatma-- magna anima “ (Mirbeau. Lettres de l’Inde 44-45). Like the narrator of Laforgue‟s poem, humans must be emancipated from the prejudices, concerns and ideas of the past 178 which condition not only their thinking (pensée) but their sight (voit) as well. By destroying the thoughts of the past, man is able to see and think clearly, and he will thus become enlightened. Mirbeau and Laforgue both affirm the borrowed narrative of Hindu and Buddhist enlightenment to explain their quest for liberation from the mores of their time. Both authors connect the Eastern concept of Enlightenment with animality. In fact, as Octave Mirbeau points out, the word Mahatma, enlightened sage, means magna anima in Latin. Mahatma and animal have the same root, atma in Sanskrit (soul or highest self, connected to all other life) or anima in Latin (to give life or to give movement) (Mirbeau Lettres de l’Inde 65). Although anima and atma have similar meanings they are not etymologically related. It is possible that Mirbeau was attempting to bridge the gap between Eastern and Western thought by constructing a spurious etymology. According to Mirbeau‟s reading of Buddhism, an illuminated human being supposedly functions beyond the constraints of human thought, culture or tradition. He or she is constantly evolving and transforming. In fact, in Buddhism, once a person becomes enlightened, he or she breaks the cycle of reincarnation or continued rebirth. One could take this idea metaphorically to indicate that an illuminated being transcends the constraints of the past. It could be argued that the enlightened avant-garde artist sees and paints from this liberated, unconditioned state and seeks to convey this state of being to others. Mirbeau claims to be a defender of non-Western peoples against racist ideology and oppression. In his Combats esthétiques, he extols the beauty and craftsmanship of 179 Chinese ceramics, arguing that they are superior to those of the West. Mirbeau comments: “Voici donc les Barbares à peau jaune, dont les civilisées d‟Europe à peau blanche violent le sol !... Nous sommes toujours les mêmes sauvages, les mêmes ennemis de la Beauté, les mêmes sanglants chrétiens que brûlèrent la bibliothèque d‟Alexandrie “ (367). Although Mirbeau attempts to defend Eastern art and culture against the „savage‟ West, he ultimately reinforces the power and strength of Western culture. As Haraway writes in the “Cyborg Manifesto,” the narrative of “innocence, and the corollary insistence on victimhood as the only ground for insight, has done enough damage” (157). Mirbeau‟s portrayal of an enlightened, Eastern sage as innocent and naïve also depicts the sage as a ready-made victim for imperialist attack. In fact, the myth that an Eastern sage is “délivré de tous les soucis et de l‟inquiétude” could indicate that he is unaffected by colonialist repression, thus justifying his exploitation. Similarly, Mirbeau describes “la faiblesse souffrante de leur corps” (“Colonisons”1). As Ioanna Chatzidimitriou writes in “Lettres de l’Inde: Fictional Histories as Colonial Discourse”, ”As long as power is negotiated in discursive modes that exclude the racial other by revealing him, the discovery of the “pauvre petit hindou,” victim of the British, empowers both colonial rulers‟ imperialist Pondichéry” (13). Mirbeau idealizes India as France‟s “other”, and he views the country as a spiritual land that allows people to become liberated from conventions and concerns. At the same time, Mirbeau‟s text also reinforces colonialist narratives. Mirbeau also orientalizes Impressionist paintings. He writes that Claude Monet has become “libéré des conventions des réminiscences” and “L‟art disparait, s‟efface” in 180 his paintings. 161 Mirbeau seems to be arguing that Monet‟s art is an art of nothingness, an act of self-destruction. Monet‟s art destroyed many art conventions of the past, including the tendency to copy nature in a realistic, mimetic way. Particularly in the later, more abstract paintings, Monet‟s art even seems to efface itself. For example, Les Nymphéas (Les Nuages) (1903), depicts a pond surrounded by green patches of grass. On the bottom of the painting, the green spots become more and more sparse, as if they are floating away. It is as if in the painting itself, the grass is being “unpainted.” Inside the pond is blue water mixed with wispy strokes of white. The reflections of two clouds in the pond form white, vacant holes in the center of the painting. Essentially, Monet made the very heart of the painting unfinished, unpainted. Although Les Nymphéas (Les Nuages) is a painting and Dans le ciel is a work of fiction, Mirbeau‟s work also expresses the importance of empty space because the text is often disjointed and contains gaps. Monet‟s painting also challenges conventional concepts of space, causing the viewer to be unsure of what is sky and what is water. While at once emphasizing the unformed or the void, the painting also reinforces the unity of all things. In Dans le ciel, Mirbeau, as a valiant defender of Monet and other Impressionists, “revises the traditional account of God‟s creation of the world by substituting the oxymoron of divine creation through destruction” (Hawthorne 139). The “oxymoron” that Mirbeau proposes is that the artist must destroy all that is false or outmoded in order to produce a truly innovative creation. Thus, Dans le ciel attempts to be a “révolte métaphysique, rébellion contre tout ce qui opprime et mutile l‟homme, angoisses, et hallucinations, 161 Mirbeau."Claude Monet." Le Figaro. (21 Nov. 1884): 23. 181 alternances d‟exaltation et de dépression, quête perpétuellement déçu d‟absolus en art et dans la société—le Beau, le Vrai, le Juste—” (Michel and Nivet 16). According to this statement, the novel revolts against the metaphysical ideals of beauty, truth and justice which prevent a person from seeing what truly exists in front of him. The Buddhist concept of space is of particular importance to Dans le ciel. In the novel, Lucien and George are obsessed with the sky and with space. The constant use of ellipses between words in the novel reinforces the importance of space to the act of creation. The novel perhaps borrows from Eastern conceptions of space. As Watts writes: Buddhists describe the ultimate reality of the world as shunyata, which is often translated as „emptiness‟ or „the void‟, but full of all possibilities. The basic doctrine of Buddhist Mahayana philosophy is given in the Heart Sutra: Form is emptiness: emptiness is form. To indicate this idea in Chinese, they use a character for shunyata or emptiness that also means „sky‟ or „space‟ (The Way of Zen 80). In this sense, creation and space are one and the same for space is necessary for creation to exist. As previously mentioned, Japanese paintings often include a large space on the side of the canvas as an indicator of the potential for creation. Mirbeau was, after all, a great advocate for Eastern art, arguing that Japanese prints created, “une telle évolution de la peinture française à la fin du XIX siècle” (Mirbeau qtd. In Aitken 219-220). One reason that Japanese works revolutionized French art was that they taught French painters to attempt to express the ineffable and fleeting qualities of nature (Mirbeau. Letters to Claude Monet 237) and to depict “nothingness” in their works. Mirbeau called the Japanese, the “petits diables de rien de tout” (Combats littéraires 565). The overbearing sky in the novel could be a similar image as open skies in Japanese art, symbolizing a blank canvas waiting to be filled. On one hand, the weight of the immense sky is 182 overwhelming, just as is the pressure for the writer and the artist to create. “Le ciel!... Oh! le ciel!... Tu ne sais pas comme il m‟écrase, comme il me tue!” (26). 162 On the other hand, it is this blank sky that drives the artist and writer to attempt to fill the blank spaces that surround them. Mirbeau championed the concept of “nothingness” in his writings, which he linked to iconoclasm, creativity and Nirvana. The author wrote in L‟Abbé Jules, “On arrive plus aisément à fabriquer un Jésus-Christ, un Mahomet, un Napoléon, qu‟un Rien” (417). The capitalization of “Rien” suggests that Mirbeau holds nothingness to be as much of a deity as any of the above religious or political icons. The contradiction of “fabriquer…un Rien” reveals Mirbeau‟s own paradoxical creative project. As Ziegler writes, “ In an era when reality was aestheticized as collectibles, Octave Mirbeau (1848- 1917) unleashed his fiction like a destructive machine, setting fire to stale material, obsolete ideas, discredited ideologies, burning them as fuel and expelling texts as clean emissions” (The Nothing Machine 7). In contrast to the Realist literature of the mid nineteenth-century, which has an almost fetishistic appreciation for external objects, Mirbeau‟s literature of “nothingness” annihilates the importance of both bourgeois objects and conventional ideologies. 162 Interestingly, the sky was an inspiration to many artists during the fin-de-siècle and the debut of the twentieth-century. "Artists working in the styles of biomorphic abstraction found continued inspiration in astronomy, as many new galaxies were discovered and classified" (Gamwell 217). For example, La Nature, a popular science review, featured an article on November 17, 1891, that argued: "Les habitats de Mars, plus avancé que nous dans la science astronomique, comme le suppose un de nos spirituals astronomes, s‟ils songent à provoquer avec leurs voisins terrestres un échange de communication télégraphiques" (638). Although the characters of Dans le ciel feel crushed by the sky, it is important to recognize the sentiment of enormous potential for new discoveries in the sky that occurred during the same time period. 183 Although the author may reject many beliefs of the society of his day, he does affirm the borrowed concept of Nirvana from the Buddhist and Hindu religions. For Mirbeau, the idealized state of “nothingness” is similar to Nirvana, or spiritual liberation. In “Lettres de l’Inde,” Mirbeau imagines seekers outside the Buddhist temple of Kandy. “Il n‟y avait, comme dans celles des martyrs, plus rien de terrestre, plus rien qu‟un rêve de libération corporelle, une attente de l‟au-delà, la nostalgie des rayonnants et fervents nirvanas” (1). The repetition of “plus rien” suggests that for Mirbeau, like Laforgue, Nirvana is a means for a person to become liberated from all earthly concerns. Mirbeau proposes the orientalist fantasy that the Western reader may be able to be freed from beliefs and worries by experiencing an idealized Indian spiritual state. However, the author‟s description of Nirvana also has colonialist undercurrent. The colonized subjects, the Indians, are presented as “martyrs” who dream of “libération corporelle.” Mirbeau does not suggest that the Indians become free from British oppression through revolution, but rather through a spiritual awakening. The dream of Nirvana may perpetuate oppression under the colonial rule. At the same time, Mirbeau‟s emphasis on a state of “nothingness” can offer creative freedom because it vitiates antiquated ideas. Unformed Aesthetics Dans le ciel contains the narrative that destruction as well as the “unformed” are necessary parts of the artistic process as well as life as a whole. In the novel, the animal is sometimes associated with blank space. For example, the narrator comments: “J‟ai eu peur. On eût dit que des cris sinistres, des clameurs de foule, des miaulements de fauves, 184 des rires de démons, des râles de bêtes tuées, pénétraient en ce louche réduit par les joints des fenêtres, les fissures des portes” (32). In this section of the novel, the narrator describes an experience during which he feels vertigo and hears strange noises in his ears that remind him of “bourdonnements de guêpes” (31). The primitive animal cries are able to penetrate through the cracks of the windows and doors that remain unsealed by humans. This notion of cracks and fissures through which frightening animals can enter haunts both the writer and the artist. It would seem that creative artists are able to access a sort of portal into the animal world that most of humanity has sealed off. “Cris”, “clameurs”, “miaulements”, “rires” and “râles” are all animal-like vocal expressions that are unconcerned with human language. Thus, the creative realm that has been untouched by human consciousness is rendered inexpressible by human language. As Deleuze and Guattari write in their analysis of Kafka, “Bref, le son n‟apparaît pas ici comme une forme d‟expression, mais bien comme une matière non formée d‟expression, qui va réagir sur les autres termes” (6). The above passage from Dans le ciel reveals the unformed modes of expression that express the potential of creativity. Interestingly, unlike the rest of the novel which contains ellipses that provide a blank space in between words, this passage does not have ellipses. The passage is completely infused with animal-like images. As Francisco de Goya said, “The imagination, abandoned by reason, brings forth impossible monsters: united with her, she is the mother of the arts and the source of her wonders” (Ilie 35). As the father of decadent art, Goya suggests that true art stems from a monstrous, animalistic side of man that arises when reason is shut down. In his The Sleep 185 of Reason Produces Monsters (1799), an artist or writer falls asleep at his desk on top of papers and pens. In the darkness of night, owls, cats, bats and other nocturnal creatures surround him, appearing as if they are emerging from his body. These frightening animals are sketchy and nebulous in the distance, but they appear more and more clearly the closer they are to the artist. Like Goya‟s work , Dans le ciel seems to indicate that the artist is a vehicle for expressing the animalistic and irrational side of life once reason “sleeps.” This myth is important and interesting because it demonstrates in a similar fashion as Dans le ciel the view in decadent literature and art that animals can be muses that inspire artistic creation. Decadent literature advocates an “embrace of unbridled libido, the abnormal and the gruesome, of monstrous products of the imagination, of lust and violence, of the shady sides of existence” (Wolf 10). The affirmation of lust, violence and the monstrous in Mirbeau‟s novel indicates a celebration of the animalistic side of humans, freed from reason and convention. 163 Similar to Deleuze and Guattari‟s notion that animals can be linked to new artistic forms by creating “ruptures” in ordinary modes of expression (Kafka 52), animals in Dans le ciel represent a space of creative freedom. 163 Le village de Yatsuhasji à Okazaki (1835) by Kunisada Utagaura, which Claude Monet owned, expresses a similar idea to Goya‟s painting. The print is folded in threes, and a different actor is featured in each of the three folds, making a colorful gesture and expression. A giant cat stretches across the background of the print, appearing in each of the three folds and appearing to morph into the various actors. "Okabe, à l‟arrière plan sur cette estampe est metamorphosée en chat" (Aitken 90). This print seems to reflect the idea found in Dans le ciel that the creative person (in this case the actor) may channel animals for inspiration. "Surrounded itself to the imagination and to the fascinating and—once the rational mind was switched off—dangerous dimensions that it probed. Thereby stood in contrast to the academic style and to the opinion that art functioned according to clear rules and could therefore be taught" (Wolf 9). 186 Creation Animals as Creative Symbols As previously mentioned, one blind spot that can be found in the criticism on Dans le ciel is the assumption that the animals in the novel indicate artistic inferiority. In the “The Uncreated Artwork of Octave Mirbeau”, Ziegler writes, “Throughout the novel, Mirbeau‟s use of theriomorphic imagery, his description of the peacocks, swans, dogs, and spiders that fill his characters‟ world, suggests his characters‟ sense of inferiority or their dreams of elevation, their retreat to a plane of animal servility or their wish to take wing and fly over the world” (443). To a certain extent, some of the animals in the book could point to Lucien‟s artistic impotence. For example, just as Lucien feels incapable of creation at the end of the book, the artist locks himself in a room with a peacock. While this is not my own interpretation, according to Ziegler, the peacock could be seen as symbolic of impotence because it does not soar in the sky. One can discover many tensions and ambiguities concerning whether the link between artist and animal is one of inferiority or inspiration. Probably the most convincing textual evidence that would justify Ziegler‟s argument is that Lucien identifies with a dog who howls at the moon. “Il me semble que c‟est la plainte de l‟homme, que c‟est la révolte de l‟homme, qui monte contre le ciel; ce chien qui aboie, oui, c‟est la voix même de la terre” (118). On one level, one could interpret this quotation that the artist‟s attempt at painting is as futile as a dog howling at the moon. The dog and the artist have “la voix même de la terre,” meaning that they are both earthly creatures that attempt to communicate with the celestial. Their “revolt” produces no results. In this 187 context, it would seem that animals represent the artists‟ sense of inferiority. However, the following quotation on the same page may yield a different interpretation of the text: “Oh peindre de la lumière, cette lumière, qui, de toutes parts, me baigne!... Peindre les drames de cette lumière, la vie formidable des nuages! Étreindre cet impalpable; atteindre à cet inaccessible!” (118-119). Thus, Lucien‟s artistic quest is to paint the nuances of the light that bathes him. Light represents that which is impalpable and inaccessible because it is fleeting and constantly shifting. Mirbeau describes his friend Claude Monet‟s fascination with moonlight, and his ability to actually express its fleeting, impalpable nature. 164 “Dans le sommeil de la nuit, blanche des dentelles de la lune; et il a exprimé sous ses aspects changeants, sous les plus fugitifs lumières. Il a rendu ce que les Japonais seuls avaient pu faire jusqu‟ici, et ce qui semblait un secret perdu, l‟impalpable, l‟insaisissable, l‟air enfin” (237). Mirbeau‟s text reflects the difficult struggle of the artist to be able to express nature. On one hand, this quest may seem as futile as a dog howling at the moon. However, on the other hand, dogs are able to communicate with other dogs via the moonlight, just as extraordinary artists like Monet are able to engage with moonlight and express the seemingly ineffable, impenetrable aspects of nature to others. Thus, in reducing the presence of animals in the novel to merely represent the characters‟ alleged “sense of inferiority,” Ziegler ignores 164 The author fantasizes about the first moment when Monet encountered a Japanese print. "J‟ai souvent pensé, dans ce voyage à cette journée féerique où Claude Monet, venu en Hollande, il y a quelques cinquante ans pour y peindre, trouva, en dépliant un paquet, la première estampe japonaise qu‟il lui eût été donné de voir […]. Rentré chez lui, fou de joie, Monet étala „les images‟. Parmi les plus belles, les plus rares éprouvés, qu‟il ne savait pas être d‟Hokousai, d‟Outamaro. Ce fut le commencement d‟une collection célèbre. (Mirbeau qtd. In Aitken 219- 220). 188 the possibility that the animal in the novel represents revolutionary art as a violent, brutal revolt against tradition and a new kind of aesthetic This interpretation of the artist‟s inferiority in the novel is therefore problematic for several reasons. First, animals are not depicted in terms of servility in the novel. For example, the writer had a dog who “avait rompu sa chaîne, et que lui aussi avait fui...” (29). In this context, the dog possesses an inherent sense of freedom that refuses domination or control. One could liken this idea to the Deleuzian notion that becoming animal is “la ligne de fuite créatrice” (Kafka 65). The term “therimorphic” certainly suggests this metamorphosis of human to animal. Becoming animal suggests a retreat from the stifling conventions of the human condition, hence fostering creative breakthroughs. Rather than merely “wishing” to soar above the rest of humanity, George and Lucien experience biological drives that force them to create on physiological levels (89). Perhaps this Ziegler does not fully take into account that French society‟s perceptions on animals were changing during the time of the first journal publication of Dans le ciel. For example. In “Le Regne animal”, the article that immediately followed the first installment of Dans le ciel in l’Écho de Paris, Émile Gautier writes that animals have greatly contributed “à l‟évolution du travail humain de l‟art, de la science, de la sécurité générale [...] sans animaux, l‟homme ne serait probablement sorti de l‟animalité” (2). Gautier writes that virtually all aspects of human existence, including food, clothing, shelter, medicine, technology and arts and crafts are in some ways dependent on nature 189 and animals. 165 Gautier indicates that animals are integral to the artistic process. They are thus not indications of artistic inferiority as Ziegler suggests. As Gautier writes, “la collaboration de nos „frères inférieurs‟ est de plus en plus indispensable […] Ce qui y a de meilleur que l‟homme...c‟est le cochon d‟inde... “(2). 166 This statement suggests a possible re-evaluation of the role that animals play in arts and crafts, the sciences and virtually all of human productions. Gautier also points out the cruel nature of slaughtering animals in the name of scientific curiosity. The fact that animals die in the name of progress is “Cruelle-oh! Combien cruelle enigme” (2). Gautier‟s article indicates that since animals are disappearing, their presence has become even more valuable. Similarly, in Dans le ciel, Lucien writes in a letter about his stay in Porte-Joie that indicates an awareness of preserving animals as ecological resources. He makes the ironic statement that “d‟ailleurs, les règlements de pêche sont admirables. Ainsi, il est défendu de pêcher aux époques où il y a du poisson; il est permis de pêcher aux époques quand il n‟y en a pas (117). In addition to fish, Lucien also notes other regulations placed on eating other kinds of animals: 165 The article points out that leather, honey, wool, cheese, cashmere, etc., all come from animals. Scientists can even improve "la vision humaine en fabriquant des plaques photographiques impressionnables à distance, c‟est-à-dire en quelque sort, des yeux artificiels avec des retines de lapins" (2). This notion certainly suggests the understanding that animal vision can be comparable if not superior to human vision. 166 This quote seems to have more than one meaning. On one hand, the idea that an animal as small and insignificant as a guinea pig is more important than man could shock the reader. On the other hand, the quote may literally mean that guinea pigs in modern society are more valuable to humans for the purpose of scientific experiments. As mentioned in the previous footnote, one scientific experiment that Gautier mentions in the article is the replacement of a human retina with that of a rabbit. This procedure is interesting considering Laforgue‟s discussion of human and animal eyes. Gautier‟s article argues that since human development and well-being is often dependent on the exploitation of animals, humans should not treat animals as inferior to them. 190 L‟administration, charitable et prévoyante, permit seulement qu‟on fasse, de temps en temps, une petite cueillette, pour les hospices des pays circonvoisins. Ajoute à cela lorsque des bêtes--vaches, veaux ou moutons--périssent, elles sont aussi envoyées aux mêmes hospices, et tu auras, tout de suite, une idée d‟alimentation […] (117). Thus, Dans le ciel appeared during the beginning of an ecological awareness that took into account the systematic exploitation of animals. While animals were being used in scientific experiments, people also became more concerned that animals were disappearing and made efforts to preserve their existence. As Lippit reflects on the disappearing animal population, he writes, “Kojève has suggested that human beings love animals for the same reason as they love the dead” (“From Wild Technology to Electric Animal” 119). Lippit, Nigel Rothfels, an animal scholar, and John Berger, an art critic, all argue that animals played a fundamental role in late nineteenth-century 167 and early twentieth-century because many species were becoming extinct. “Human advancement always coincides with a recession of nature and its figures—wildlife, wilderness, human nature and so forth” (Electric Animal 1). These traces of an ecological paradigm shift within an artistic novel could suggest that one role of the artist is to preserve the image of the animal within his or her art. After all, Lucien‟s father thought he was going to “abandonner la peinture pour l‟agriculture” (116). The novel presents the link between the agriculturalist and the artist: for the artist nurtures and fosters the creative “life” of nature in his or her paintings. 167 However, it should be recognized that these scholars are looking at these issues from a twentieth-century perspective. 191 The Spontaneous Generation of Art In the novel, the artistic becomes an expression of nature itself. George describes his creative process. Il y avait en moi quelque chose que je n‟avais pas encore senti vivre en moi, quelque chose que je n‟aurais pu définir mais qui me soulevait de terre, me rendait léger presque impondérable vraiment comme lorsque la nuit, en rêve, je traversai des espaces aériens, les pieds dans le vide, le front dans les étoiles, les bras étendus et battant ainsi que les ailes (85). In this quotation, the author constructs the narrative that the creative drive is an indefinable biological process that begins in the void as well as within the artist himself. “Quelque chose”, and the phrase “je n‟aurais pu définir” reinforces the ineffable nature of the creative drive. The creative act is thus not within the grasp of human knowledge, rather it is in the biological (“senti vivre en moi) and cosmological (“les espaces aériens,” “les étoiles”) and subconscious (“en rêve”) realms. The narrator‟s biological drive to write lives within him and causes him to feel like he has taken off into the sky, above earthly human concerns. With his head in the stars, the narrator comes into contact with the unknown, irrational elements of nature. He is standing in the void of the uncreated and the undeveloped. This void is essential for all creation to take place. The narrator becomes bird-like, flapping his arms are if they were wings. If an artist is sensitive and open to all impressions, his being resonates with events and movements throughout the universe. This inspiration comes not only from the intellect, but also the „visit of the muse‟ is also a concrete physiological phenomenon…The artist‟s central nervous system becomes a conductor of telepathic communication, picking up the wave vibrations that is, as one says, „in the air‟ (Gamwell 209). 192 As the above quotation suggests, George‟s „visit of the muse‟ is actually a biological drive that allows him to be connected to the unconscious forces of life. Similarly, Mirbeau describes Claude Monet‟s work in an article on the Figaro on March 10 th , 1889: Tout est combiné, tout s‟accorde avec les lois atmosphériques, avec la marche régulière et précise des phénomènes terrestres ou célestes. C‟est pourquoi il nous donne l‟illusion complète de la vie. La vie chante dans la sonorité de ses lointains, elle fleurit, parfumée avec ses gerbes de fleurs” (246). According to Mirbeau, Monet is so sensitive to the inner workings of the earth and heavens that he breathes life into his paintings. Although it may be an “illusion” of life, his work seems to be a microcosm for nature, filled with the sound of singing landscapes and the smell of flowers. In Dans le ciel, Lucien does succeed in painting several works. However, at the end of the novel, he becomes overwhelmed by attempting to capture nature: Il se passe dans le ciel trop de choses qu‟on ne comprend pas... Il y a trop de fleurs, trop de plaines, trop de forêts, trop de mers terribles... Et tout cela se confond. Les forêts flottent comme des mers, les mers s‟échevèlent comme des forêts, et les fleurs m‟endorment de leurs poisons. Il se dégage de là, vois-tu, une grande folie et une grande terreur (122). While Monet‟s works create an almost living universe, Lucien‟s fictional artistic works eventually create a warped, alternative reality that does not correspond to the laws of nature. Although Lucien was initially inspired by the ineffable quality of nature, his inability to capture nature becomes frustrating and stifling. Thus, Michel and Nivet write that the novel describes the “Souffrance de l‟idéal, chimère inaccessible, qui „empoisonne‟ l‟existence, écrase l‟individu et le laisse pantelant et frustré”(13). However, 193 this notion of struggle and exasperation is also perhaps necessary for the production of art. This part of the novel may recall the passage in which George feels like he is sprouting wings, this image of an artist with wings could also allude to the myth of Icarus who was able to fly in the sky with artificially constructed wings. Ignoring the warnings of his father, Icarus flew too close to the sun, which melted the wax on his wings. He plummeted to his death while flapping his bare arms. The possible allusion to this myth indicates that the creative person can at times transcend the ordinary human realm, soaring to new and unbelievable heights, but he can also fall from those heights. This myth could also suggest that part of the creative process involves a metamorphosis from human to animal. Painters, sculptors and inventors often use nature as a source of inspiration. For example, airplanes allow human beings to “traverser des espaces aériens” as if they were birds. However, as the myth of Icarus suggests, it is difficult for the creative person to remain animal-like. The human being is not equipped to fly amongst the birds forever. Tragedy can ensue when the artist must come back to the ground and live in the human realm. As Baudelaire poses the question in Hymne de la Beauté, “Viens-tu du ciel ou sors-tu de l‟abîme?” (24). Pierre Michel argues the artist is caught between looking “vers „le ciel‟ l‟azur inaccessible et écrasant. L‟idéal qui ne se laisse entrevoir que pour mieux esquiver la prise; et vers la terre, les plaisirs au goût de cendre, les hommes brutaux, et incompréhensifs, la société mercantile” (Œuvre romanesque v. 2 9). Ironically, the humans of the characters‟ society are more savage, brutal and apathetic than the animals around them. The allusion to Icarus can thus foreshadow the demise of 194 both George and Lucien. At the same time, this deterioration of the two men is integral to the creative process itself, for it lifts the writer and artist above human understanding. In the above quotation from the novel, the artist‟s body is infused with the sky. Lynn Gamwell writes, “The unified explanation of nature, coupled with the influence of panpsychicism (the view that all matter has consciousness), encouraged artists to make graphic expressions of the merger of microcosm and macrocosm” (207). This indicates the belief of some artists that they were able to connect to the cosmological realm as well as the microscopic. 168 According to the text, the artist is a sort of antenna that can receive signals on both microscopic and macroscopic levels and infuses them, thus expressing the creative forces of nature that behave on both cosmological and finite levels. The creative act is also depicted in terms of Lamarckian spontaneous generation during which the forms on a canvas germinate and take on a life of their own. Hélène Trépanier notes, “À l‟instar de l‟alchimiste, Lucien aspire à transformer la matière en une substance supérieure afin que les images et les formes picturales prennent vie” (Trépanier 54). Perhaps Lucien‟s art is not so much a process of alchemy but of Lamarckian “spontaneous generation.” The passage to which this citation is referring in the novel occurs after Lucien paints on a canvas. Mirbeau writes: “Les figures peintes autour de moi s‟animaient d‟une vie terrifiante, tendaient vers moi des regards surnaturels, des bouches vulgaires, d‟un ricanement sanglant” (92). The process of creation that the narrator is describing evokes Lamarck‟s concept of “the power of life,” a natural force 168 For example, Gamwell describes Joan Miró‟s Birth of the World (1925), which integrates both the microcosm (an egg) and macrocosm (planets and stars). Miro paints constellations "against an empty background space. The artist painted spheres and stars that float weightlessly, without gravity in the void, then connected them with lines to form pictures" (217). 195 which stirs up the movement of internal fluids and causes the spontaneous generation of living creatures (Gregory 72). Like Lamarck, who did not believe that God was necessary to generate life, Mirbeau does not mention the creator (Lucien) of the artistic life forms. He instead uses the reflexive verb “s‟animer.” Mirbeau proposes the idea that the painting can take on a life of its own and evolve into a creation that the artist never intended. This is similar to when Lucien says to George “Tu veux écrire? Tu sens en toi quelque chose qui te pousse à écrire?...” (85). This idea that a biological impulse “pushes” a creative person to write or paint something that is beyond the artist‟s control dramatically contrasts with the institution of the Salon that judged art based more on the social class and the education of the artist than the work itself (Hoek 62). Instead, Mirbeau proposes an art that is constantly shifting, reinventing itself and evolving with time and with new viewers. The repetition of the word “moi” in the above passage focuses on the perception of the viewer rather than the status of the artist. In Dans le ciel, the work of art itself is more important than the artist who creates it. Thus, the myth of „artist as animal‟ evolves in Mirbeau‟s novel and becomes the myth of “the work of art as animal.” Similarly, Lucien discusses “le retour de l‟art aux formes embryonnaires, à la vie larveuse” (129). Furthermore, he also elaborates upon his artistic study of manure, titled Le Fumier. He says that when a person looks at manure: Quand on cligne de l‟œil, voilà le tas s‟anime, grandit, se soulève, grouille devient vivant...et de combien de vies? Des formes apparaissent, des formes de fleurs, d‟êtres, qui brisent la coque de leur embryon...C‟est une folie de germination merveilleuse, une féérie de flores, de faunes, de chevelures, un éclatement de vie splendide! (97). 196 When the artist looks at a pile of manure, he or she might see it in one way. Then as soon as the artist blinks his or her eyes, the pile mutates, transforms and „becomes alive” in a new way. As Lamarck writes, “Les mouvements excités dans le fluide propre des petits corps gélatineux dont je viens de parler, constituent des lois en eux ce qu‟on nomme la vie, car ils les animent (Lamarck 177). In the passage from Dans le ciel, “Tas” can mean a pile of manure but it can also mean spot on a painting. Especially when painting with watercolors, the artist cannot always control whether the paint drips or expands or merges with the other colors. It is as if the paint itself is alive and is creating the work of art in a dynamic way that goes beyond the scope of the painter‟s intention. Thus, when critics lament the fact that the artist cannot always communicate his celestial vision, this notion is not a tragedy. The creative act can transcend the author‟s intention, and it can turn out to be something greater than his original vision. Thus, in Mirbeau‟s narrative, one commonality between an animal and an artist in the processes of creation is the lack of intentionality or will. As Lamarck points out with animals, “C‟est la puissance de leur sentiment intérieur ému par des besoins, qui les entraîne et les fait agir immédiament, sans préméditation et sans le concours d‟aucun acte de volonté de leur part” (17). In this sense, the irrational, biological drive to create might be the same drive that causes the behavior of animals. This drive, in Lamarckian terms is called la force des choses or simply la vie. Lamarck believes in “la proposition générale qui consiste à attribuer à la nature la puissance et les moyens d‟instituer la vie animale dans un corps, avec tous les facultés que la vie comporte” (166). Here, “la vie animale” suggests a life force that 197 animates a body or an object. Thus, the artist can be seen as animal because he is animated by this life force, and this life force also animates the content of his paintings. Manure is symbolic for the artistic process because it represents both decay and re-creation. It is excrement that fertilizes “combien de vies” of flora and fauna. If the passage in which George envisions himself in outer space represents the macrocosm, this passage on manure represents the microcosm. The artist can draw from the infinite potential of lives that can germinate from a pile of manure, just as a single stroke on the canvas might manifest itself in an infinite possibility of forms. In this sense, it is not accurate to describe this novel as one of merely impotence, for the artist is preoccupied with the seeds of creation. “Le 27 septembre 1890, Mirbeau écrit à Monet: „Je vois dans les tas fumants les belles formes et les belles couleurs qui naîtront de la! Comme l‟art est petit à côté de ça!‟ [...] Mirbeau voit dans le fumier le symbole de l‟éternelle transmutation de la matière, au sein d‟une nature qui fait de la vie avec de la mort, du beau avec de l‟immonde” (Michel and Nivet qtd. in Dans le ciel 146). This concept is an important part of decadent literature because death and decay can contribute to new life and new ideas. Regeneration in Darwinism and Buddhism If the transmutation of material does exist, then nothing truly dies. A corpse can enrich the soil, giving food to new plant life that will sprout, grow, produce seeds and 198 eventually die, and the cycle repeats. 169 “Les formes qui prennent les choses se renouvellent et ce renouvellement incessant crée une évolution des atavismes qui perpétuent chez les êtres un état de bien ou du mal. L‟homme, comme tout animal, étant sujet à cette évolution” (Mirbeau. Lettres de l’Inde 44). In this quotation, Mirbeau seems to be fusing the Hindu and Buddhist concept of reincarnation with the Darwinian concept of evolution. In biology, an atavism is a primitive, ancestral trait that reappears in more evolved beings during the course of evolution. The word “atavisme”, is in Latin atavus or ancestor, and is in Sanskrit avatar, meaning descent or reincarnation. Mirbeau reinforces man‟s link to animals by emphasizing the idea that primitive traits can be passed on from generation to generation. 170 The concept of reincarnation indicates that death can be seen as a transition to another state rather than an ending of life. Art that focuses on death and decay can also be viewed focusing on rebirth and regeneration. In his fictional Lettres de l’Inde (1885), Mirbeau stresses the link between Darwin and Buddhism and Hinduism. “Je me figurais d‟avance le spectacle de ces sages, vêtus à la grecque et dissertant sur Compte et Darwin, avec des gloses de Buddha-Gosha et je me réjouissais de prendre part à une joute mi-théologique mi-buchérienne” (40). 171 This 169 This idea is apparent in Diderot‟s Le Rêve d’Alembert. Dans le ciel can be seen as both an engagement with and a departure from eighteenth-century ideas. While Mirbeau expresses a similar philosophy to Diderot and Leibniz concerning regeneration and the interconnectedness of the microcosm and macrocosm, Mirbeau‟s ideas on the animal, for the most part, are a radical departure from those of Buffon. 170 However, as mentioned earlier, ancestral ideas and metaphysical beliefs may also be passed down from generation to generation. While the novel indicates that the avant-gardist should become in touch with his own primitive physiological functions, he should also break free from the metaphysical ideas and prejudices of the past. 171 Ludwig Buchner (1824-1899), was a Darwinian scholar who wrote on the origins of form. 199 description of Buddhist sages is obviously Mirbeau‟s projection. However, it is interesting that he would imagine that Buddhists would be discussing Darwin‟s ideas and would integrate these ideas into their theological framework. 172 Similarly, Mirbeau links Darwin and the Orient in his discussion on the beauty of a Chinese vase. “Pour une observation naturaliste, qui eût réjoui Darwin, et qui prouve chez les Chinois anciens—ils sont toujours anciens—une science profonde et un immense amour de la nature et de la vie, l‟artiste admirable qui modela cet oiseau y retrouve la forme ancestrale du poisson” (Mirbeau. “Sur un vase de Chine” 366). Mirbeau creates the orientalist myth that the Chinese artist is so deeply connected to nature that he would be able to see the evolutionary origins in the animals that he painted on the vase. Mirbeau therefore connects the “ancient” Chinese painter to the ancestral form of the bird. The pre-Darwinist way of thinking was that humans must dominate animals. This ethos uses a Judeo-Christian ethic to justify the subjection of animals. 173 In contrast, the mid to late 19th-century fascination with Darwinian evolution can perhaps be linked to the avant-garde fascination with Buddhism and Hinduism. These Eastern religions stress the oneness of all living creatures, the relationship of an organism to its environment, the quest for amelioration and transformation and the annihilation of illusion and false beliefs of separation. In addition, as previously mentioned, similar to the concept of reincarnation, Darwinian evolution argues that primitive traits can reappear in more evolved beings. However, some people have taken a colonialist and racist interpretation 172 This imagery resembles a contemporary version of The School of Athens (1510-1511) by Raphael. 173 However, this ethos is still shared by many people today. 200 of this idea, assuming that the “more developed” cultures of the West have evolved from their “primitive ancestors”. In his attempt to defend Eastern cultures, Mirbeau is guilty of orientalization and othering. As Haraway writes, orientalist and colonist discourse assumes that a person from the West is “one who is not animal, barbarian, or woman; man, that is, the author of a cosmos called history” (“Cyborg Manifesto” 157). In associating the East with animals, Mirbeau reinforces orientalist narratives. At the same time, in portraying Lucien as an animal and as a barbarian, Dans le ciel perhaps creates cracks and fissures into the dominant discourse of the West. Thus, it is also possible that the characters of the novel are Deleuzian minor-heroes who attack conventional ideas and perceptions through their animalistic behaviors. Gathering from Buddhist and Hindu thought as well as Darwinian and Lamarckian ideas, Dans le ciel reveals that creation and destruction are simultaneous processes. The avant-gardist who expresses the transitory, decaying nature of life also expresses its potential to germinate and flourish. The animal is central to the novel because the animal, guided by La force des choses or la vie, both destroys and creates life. The avant-garde artist is perhaps closer to animals than most human beings because he or she is in tune with life‟s energy, which is can often seem irrational, magical and even macabre. Lucien is particularly in touch with the illogical, animalistic side of life. Toward the end of his life, Lucien locks himself in his room and desperately attempts to paint a live peacock. When he is unable to achieve his vision, he both kills himself and the bird. “Près de la toile renversée et crevée, près du paon mort, le col tordu, Lucien étendu, dans une mare de sang, toute sa barbe souillée de caillots rouges, Lucien, 201 l‟œil convulsant, la bouche ouverte en un horrible rictus, gisait” (144). The lives of the painting, the animal and the artist are interdependent. When one cannot live, the others cannot live either. Ziegler, Michel and Nivet interpret the death of the protagonist as the failure of the avant-garde artist to fulfill his ideal. However, critics have highlighted the many references to Van Gogh in the novel, including his suicide. While Van Gogh cut his own life short, he left behind revolutionary techniques and color theories which were employed, developed, altered and improved by artists for generations to come. The legacy of Van Gogh did not die; the seeds that the artist planted germinated and evolved. Thus, the depiction of the animal in this text does not indicate weakness or impotence, but rather it indicates the debut of a modernist aesthetic. Mirbeau‟s novel develops and reworks several motifs that are present in the previous two chapters of this dissertation. First of all, Dans le ciel takes the narrative of the „artist as animal‟ to another level because unlike the artists in the works of the Goncourt brothers and Laforgue, the artist is portrayed in Dans le ciel as a vicious and violent beast who attacks antiquated and insincere works of art and ideologies. Mirbeau thus develops an aesthetic of fear and horror that are in line with both the decadent literary tradition and Darwinian thought. Mirbeau also develops the myth of the „artist as animal,‟ as defined by the Goncourts and Laforgue, by applying the concept of „spontaneous generation‟ to painting. Mirbeau thereby creates a narrative of „the work of art as animal,‟ depicting paintings as creatures that can change and evolve. In contrast to the Naturalist tradition, in the Symbolist tradition, art is superior to nature. In Dans le ciel, works of art are subject to the same biological processes as nature. As in Manette 202 Salomon and in”À l‟Aquarium de Berlin,” the fictional artist in Dans le ciel does experience a sense of longing for an untainted, natural world. However, Mirbeau‟s novel also denies the existence of nature completely, arguing that it is in the mind of the artist himself. Whereas the artists in Manette Salomon and the narrator of “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” retreat to the urban zoological park for solace, the artist of Dans le ciel retreats within his own mind. Finally, like the Goncourt brothers and Laforgue, Mirbeau orientalizes the avant-garde artist, arguing that such artists need to experience a complete dissolution of conventional beliefs and ideas similar to the Buddhist and Hindu experience of Nirvana. Mirbeau‟s understanding of this phenomenon has perhaps even more colonialist underpinnings that that of Laforgue or Goncourt. Ironically, the more he combats the structure of the Western society of his day, the more he reinforces it. However, the artist in Mirbeau‟s novel is similar to those depicted in Manette Salomon and Laforgue‟s writings because he is forced to create a revolutionary aesthetic within the framework of his own society and all of its oppressive limitations and outdated mores. 203 Conclusion The Stakes of the Project What is at stake in this analysis of the „artist as animal‟ myth in nineteenth- century France? First of all, this dissertation impacts the fields of nineteenth-century literary and historical scholarship because it brings to light many ideas, concepts and works of fiction that have not been diligently investigated by critics. Scholars have not rigorously discussed the importance of evolutionary theory and Eastern spirituality in the works of the Goncourt brothers, Laforgue and Mirbeau. These fields of thought are both essential to understanding a particular aesthetic of this time period. This dissertation also challenges our assumptions about what it means to be an animal, both in the nineteenth-century and today. Most of the criticism of the literary works discussed in this dissertation contains the inherent assumption that animals are inferior to humans--either that they are only poor imitations of human beings or they are symbols of human failure. However, the research in this dissertation has indicated an understanding of animals as creative beings that spark artistic inspiration. Just as Darwin aestheticizes honeycombs and birds‟ nests as works of art that are exempt from human thought, traditions and rules, the literary impressionists sought creative freedom through contact with one‟s more “animalistic” and instinctual faculties. The notion that we may have something to learn from animals threatens our political and philosophical investment in being human, and it undermines our notions of creative achievement. For this reason, although this dissertation argues that these works of fiction merit wider readership and more critical attention, they will probably always remain minor works. 204 After all, who is willing to place Degas‟ ballerinas on the same instinctual level as a spider‟s web? This dissertation also impacts ecological scholarship. My research has demonstrated the beginning of an environmental concern for the disappearance of animals in mid to late nineteenth-century France. It also has indicated the necessity of modern day zoological parks and works of art and literature to conserve the image of animals. As this phenomenon still occurs today, this dissertation could expand others‟ awareness of the ways in which our society replaces wildlife with artificial images of “nature” to satisfy our need to be near flora and fauna. Such images encourage complacency toward our current environmental crisis. Thus, it is possible that “what is at stake is not another exercise in deconstructive frivolity but instead the fate of life on earth” (Keegan 1). Oppression or Freedom? The narrative of the „artist as animal‟ hence indicates both oppression and freedom. This narrative evokes both a Benjaminian and a Deleuzian understanding of the literary impressionists‟ projects that are discussed in this dissertation. For Benjamin, the longing to return to a more „primitive existence‟ in which humans co-exist peacefully with animals masks and reinforces the ideological superstructure of capitalist society. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLauglin, the translators for Benjamin‟s Arcades Project, explain that Benjamin understood that the political, economic and aesthetic aspects of nineteenth-century Paris fit “under the general category of Urgeschichte, signifying the „primal history‟ of the nineteenth-century. This was something that could be realized only 205 indirectly through „cunning‟” (ix). “Cunning” implies deception. For post-modern and post-colonialist theorists such as Haraway, this fantasy of „primal history‟ strengthens racist, sexist and orientalist beliefs. For some animal theorists such as Berger, zoological theorists such as Rothfels and environmental theorists such as Morton, this narrative corresponds to the mistreatment of animals and the disappearance of ecological resources at this time. However, if interpreted in a Deleuzian sense, the notion of the „artist as animal‟ could be liberating. For this theorist, animals are modern subjects that represent the possibility of freedom within the structure of society. Animals signify “un courant alternatif, qui bouleverse les projets signifiants” (Deleuze and Guattari. Mille Plateaux 285). Ironically, in Manette Salomon, “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” and Dans le ciel, the myth of the „artist as animal‟ is both about liberation and containment. As Haraway writes, “Irony is about contradictions that do not resolve into larger wholes, even dialectically, about the tension of holding incompatible things together because both or all are necessary and true.” (Haraway “Cyborg Manifesto” 150). There is certainly tension and ambivalence in Manette Salomon about the role of both the avant-gardist and the animal in mid nineteenth-century society. This novel seems to represent an intermediary between a pre-Darwinist and post-Darwinist society. This society expresses the physiological and behavioral similarities between humans and animals, which can be a great source of artistic freedom. However, the novel chastises those who are supposedly most „animalistic‟ and therefore most marginal. Manette Salomon thus expresses racist, sexist and orientalist prejudices. Furthermore, while the characters 206 express an avant-garde contempt for traditional institutions, they are dependent on these institutions for their very survival. The only possibility for freedom is behind the bars of the Jardin des plantes‟ menagerie, in which the artist and the animal are both protected from and protected by a society that seeks to both celebrate and contain them. Laforgue‟s writings express a similar idea, for the physical eye of the avant-garde artist can be liberated from the constraints of human thought and convention. This artistic liberation can also occur within the framework of a cage. Even if the urban artist‟s only contact with the natural world is through the glass of a city aquarium, he still is able to experience a sense of oneness with animals by seeing in a similar way to them. However, Laforgue‟s text differs from that of the Goncourts because it is more affirmative of the possibility of an avant-garde revolution in vision, and it attempts to use Darwinian science to support its claim. In spite of being set within a zoological park in which animals are not free to roam as they please, Laforgue‟s various versions of “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin” are optimistic about the role of the animal as a source of liberation, mystery and awe. The aquarium represents freedom for Laforgue because it is perceived as an escape from urban society (although it is indeed a part of urban society). The aquarium thus evokes orientalist and utopist fantasies of the Far East, a place where sages are supposedly liberated from the concerns of modern, Western society. Diverging from Huysmans‟ interpretation of the Aquarium, Laforgue denies that the animal can evoke feelings of fear or horror. In contrast, in Dans le ciel, Mirbeau incorporates the feelings of terror that humans feel towards some animals into an aesthetic. This aesthetic, inspired by Darwin, 207 Lamarck, decadent literature and Buddhist thought, destroys the old so that the new can be created. Like Laforgue, Mirbeau presents the orientalist fantasy of escape from outmoded beliefs and conventions through Buddhist enlightenment. Most of the authors convey the notion of “becoming animal” in a similar sense--it is a means of escaping traditional values and institutions. However, Mirbeau is unique in that the work of art “becomes animal” itself and thus escapes the tyranny of the author‟s intentions, theories and beliefs. The other possibility for revolutionary freedom for Mirbeau is not a retreat into nature in the topographic sense, but a retreat into the perception of nature in one‟s own mind. Dans le ciel does not express nature as a concrete, external reality. Rather, animals and plants exist within one‟s own self. Tapping into the “animal” part of the self, with all of its fear, rage and terror, can stir the imagination and spark creative insights. However, if a person becomes too affiliated with animals, he or she may lose touch with humanity. Thus, the narrative of the „artist as animal‟ suggests the idea of freedom within constraints. The constraints during this time were multiple. First of all, the urbanization of cities destroyed wildlife, making it difficult for painters to observe plants and animals in their native environment. In addition, traditional institutions and much of the public were unsympathetic to the novel techniques of avant-garde painters, thus inciting creative frustration. Thirdly, the lack of royal or aristocratic patronage during the Third Republic made it difficult for the very survival of non-institutional painters. In light of these factors and the popularity of evolutionary theory at this time, it is easy to see why literary impressionists created the narrative that the avant-garde artist had a similar status to the 208 animal in modern cities. It was nearly impossible for most animals to survive unless they fit within the framework of the zoo. The avant-gardist too found „freedom in a cage.‟ These literary impressionist works may at times reinforce the structure of their society, but they also manage to find means of creative expression within that structure. Despite all the constraints that the Impressionists and Post-Impressionists experienced in their own time, their paintings are some of the most celebrated and well- known in the world today. The Impressionists‟ affiliation with nature is perhaps what most attracts the urban viewer to their paintings. Even if signs of wildlife are not apparent in most modern cities, we are still able to see plants and animals on a daily basis. Manet‟s cats ravage the background of computer screens. Degas‟ horses stampede through living rooms. Monet‟s water lilies brighten up sterile office walls, giving us an imaginary window to a tranquil and idyllic garden in spite of our hectic, modern lives. Perhaps beyond our love of this visual beauty, our age owes more reflection and respect to the nineteenth-century literature that sought to record, examine and enhance an aesthetic that is still so prevalent in the twenty-first century. 209 Bibliography Ahern, Daniel. “Decadence.” Nietzsche as cultural physician. University Park: Penn State Press, 1995. Airhart, Chad Wesley. A Journey to Physical Painting. Diss. U. of Texas, 2005. Aitken, Geneviève and Marianne Delafond. La collection d’estampes japonaises de Claude Monet. Paris: La Bibliothèque des Arts, 2003. “Annual Report of the New York Zoological Society Charted in 1895.” New York: The New York Zoological Society, 1920. Armstrong, Carol. “The French Impressionists et al.: Three exhibitions.” Art Journal (1987): 293. Aristotle. History of Animals. Cambridge: Harvard, 1991. Aristotle. Politics. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1998. Balzac, Honoré de. Le Chef d’oeuvre inconnu. Paris: Gallimard, 1993. Bancel, Nicolas, Pascal Blanchard et al. Zoos humains. Paris: La Découverte, 2002. Baudelaire, Charles. “Hymne de la Beauté.” Les Fleurs du Mal. Livres de Poche. Paris, 1972. Baudelaire, Charles. “Peintre de la vie moderne.” Ecrits sur l’art. Paris: Livre de Poche, 1999. Benjamin, Walter (trans. Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin).”Paris: Capital of the Nineteenth-Century.” The Arcades Project. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 2003. Benjamin, Walter (trans. Harry Zohn).”The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” Illuminations. New York: Harcourt, 1968. Berg, William J. The visual novel: Emile Zola and the art of his times. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992. Berger, John. “Why Look at Animals?” About Looking. New York, 1980. Bertu, Charles Francois. Dame Giraffe. Paris: Librairie française et étrangère, 1827. 210 Boardingham, Robert. Impressionist masterpieces in American museums. Hugh Laute Levin and Associates, 1996. Bouaniche, Arnaud. Gilles Deleuze, une introduction. Paris: Poche, 2004. Bozetto. Roger and Arther Evans. “Intercultural Interplay: science Fiction in France in The United States (As Viewed from the French Shore).” Science Fiction Studies 17.1 (1990):1-24. Buffon, Georges Louis Leclerc. Collection aux animaux quadrupèdes. Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1775-1777. Buffon, Georges Louis Leclerc. Discours sur le style. L’abbé J. Pierre. Paris: 1896. Buffon, Georges Louis Leclerc. Histoire naturelle générale et particulière, avec description du Cabinet du Roy. Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1754. Buffon, Georges Louis Leclerc. Œuvres complètes. Paris: FD Pillot, 1831. Cabanès, Jean-Louis. “Manette Salomon: Copie et polyphonie.” Voix de l’écrivain: mélanges offerts à Guy Sagnes. Toulouse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail, 1996. Capriles, Elias. Buddhism and Dzogchen Buddhism: A Dzogchen Outlook I. Victoria: La Llave, 2000. Carr, Reg. Anarchism in France: The Case of Octave Mirbeau. Montreal: McGill U. Press, 1977. Collins English Unabridged Dictionary. New York: Collins, 2003. Champeau, Stephanie. La notion d’artiste chez les Goncourt. Paris, Champion, 2000. Chesteron. G.K. “Writing „Finis‟ to Decadence,” Independent (1917): 100. Chou, Shiuh-huah Serena. The Organic Metaphor Demystified: Rhetoric of Environmental Change and Environmental Preservation in Contemporary American Nature Writing. Diss. U. of Southern California, 2007. Clark, T.J. Image of the People: Gustave Courbet and the Second French Republic 1848-1851. Greenwich: New York Graphic Society, 1973. Clark, T.J. The Painting of Modern Life. Princeton: Princeton U. Press, 1984. 211 Clottes, Jean (trans. Meg Conkey, ed. H. Morphey). Animals into Art. Sydney: Unwin Hyman, 1989. Cogeval, Guy. From Courbet to Cézanne—A new 19 th Century. Paris: Musée d‟Orsay, 1986. Constable, Liz, Dennis Dennisoff and Matthew Potolsky, ed. Perennial Decay: One the Aesthetics and the Politics of Decadence. Philadelphia: Univ. of Penn, 1999. Crane, Stephan. American Impressionist. Diss. U. Wisconsin. 1969. Crosland, Maurice.”Popular Science and the Arts: Challenges to Cultural Authority in France Under the Second Empire.” The British Journal for the History of Science 34.4 (2001): 301-322. Courbet, Gustave. Enterrement à Ornans, 1850. Crouzet, Michel. “Préface.” Manette Salomon. Paris: Gallimard, 1996. Danto, Arthur. “Animals as Art Historians.” Beyond the Brillo Box: The Visual Arts in Post Historical Perspective. Los Angeles University of California Press, 1998. Darwin, Charles. The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals. Oxford: Oxford, 1998. Darwin, Charles. Notebook for the Transmutation of Species. Darwin Online. <http://darwinonline.org.uk>. Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species. New York: Plain Label Books, 1972. “Darwin Endless Forms.” Fitzwilliam Museum of Cambridge website. Darwin Endless Forms. 4 October 2009. 2 February 2010. <http://www.darwinendlessforms.org>. Daston, Lorraine and Gregg Mitman. Thinking about Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism. New York: Columbia U., 2005. Daston, Lorraine and Peter Galison. Objectivity. New York: Zone Books, 2007. Debauve, J.L. Laforgue en son temps. Neuchâtel : Éditions de la Baconnierè, 1972. Deleuze, Gilles (trans. Daniel Smith).”Becoming Animal.” Francis Bacon: The Logic of Sensation. Minneapolis: U. of Minnesota Press, 2002. 212 Deleuze. Gilles. Dialogues. Paris: Champs Essais, 2008. Deleuze, Gilles. Nietzsche et la philosophie. Paris : Presses universitaires de France, 1973. Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Félix. Kafka pour une littérature mineure. Paris : Les éditions de minuit, 1975. Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Félix. Mille plateaux. Paris : Les éditions de minuit, 1980. Deleuze, Gilles and Félix Guattari. Qu’est-ce que la philosophie. Paris: Les Éditions d‟éditions de minuit, 1991. Dépasse, MA. Le Jardin des plantes: poème descriptif. Paris: Schneider Derrida, Jacques. L’animal que donc je suis. Paris: Galilée, 2006. Descartes, René. Discours de la méthode. Oxford: Oxford, 2006. Diderot, Denis. Rêve d’Alembert, Paris: GF Flammarion, 2002. Dufour, Médéric. “Une philosophie de l‟Impressionnisme: Étude sur l‟esthétique de Jules Laforgue,” 1904. Edgerton, Robert B. The Troubled Heart of Africa: A History of the Congo. New York: St. Martin‟s Press, 2002. Eliade, Mircea, ed. The Encyclopedia of Religion. New York: Macmillan, 1987. Fellenz, Marc R. “The Human Animals in the Menagerie: The Child, the Hunter and the Artist.” The Moral Menagerie: Philosophy and Animal Rights. University of Illinois Press. Chicago: 2007. Fénéon, Félix. Paris: Les Hommes Aujourd’hui, 1890. Fitzmaurice-Kelly. James. “Preface.” Renée Mauperin. London: Vizetelly & Co., 1988. Forster, E.M. The Celestial Omnibus. New York: Kessinger Publishing, 2005. Gamwell, Lynn. Exploring the Invisible. Princeton: Univ. Of Princeton Press, 2002. Gates, Henry Louis. “The Blackness of Blackness: A Critique on the Sign and the Signifying Monkey.” Literary Theory: An Anthology. Blackwell, 2004. 213 Gautier, Emile. “Le Regne animal.” L’Echo de Paris. Thursday September 22, 1892. Gedde, John. A New Discovery of an Excellent Method of Bee-Houses & Colonies. John Gedde, 1675. Goncourt, Edmond. La faustin. New York: Brenanto‟s Publishing, 1916. Goncourt, Edmond et Jules de. Journal: Mémoires de la vie littéraire. Paris: Bouquins, 1989. Goncourt, Edmond and Jules de. Manette Salomon. Gallimard, 1996. Goncourt, Edmond and Jules de. Manette Salomon. Paris : Fasquelle, 1867. Goncourt, Edmond and Jules de. “Preface.” Chérie. Paris : Charpentier, 1901. “Goya‟s Teratology and the Critique of Reason.” Eighteenth-Century Studies 18.1 (1984), 35-56. Grant, R.B. The Goncourt Brothers. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1972. Gregory, Frederick. The History of Science: 1700-1900. Chantilly: The Teaching Company, 2003. Hannoosh, Michele. “The Poet as Art Critic: Laforgue‟s Aesthetic Theory.” The Modern Language Review 79.3 (1984): 553-569. Haraway, Donna. Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science. New York: Routledge, 1989. Haraway, Donna. “The Promises of Monsters: A regenerative politics for inappropriate/d others,” Haraway reader. New York: Routledge, 2003. Haraway, Donna. Simians, Cyborgs and Women--The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991. Harrison, Frederick. “Decadence in Modern Art.” Forum 15 (1893). Hawthorne, Melanie Claire. “Octave Mirbeau‟s le Jardin des Supplices”. To Whom does the Fruit Belong: The Theme of the Garden in the Nineteenth-Century French Novel. Diss. U. of Michigan, 1987. Helmholtz, Herman von. Treatise on Physiological optics 1-3. Southall, 1882. 214 Hoag, R.J. New Worlds, New Animals: from Menagerie to Zoological Park in the Nineteenth-Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins U. Press., 1996. Hoek, Leo. Titres, toiles et critique d’art : déterminants institutionnels du discours sur l’art au dix-neuvième siècle en France. Paris: Rodopi, 2001. Holmes, Anne. Jules Laforgue and Poetic Innovation. Oxford: Clarendon, 1993. Huneker, James. “The Buffoon of the New Eternities: Jules Laforgue.” Ivory, Apes and Peacocks. New York: Sagamore Press, 1957. Hurt, James and James Hurt. “Realism and Naturalism.” Literature of the Western World 2. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1997. Huysmans. J.K. “Au Rebours.” Oeuvres completes XV-XVI. Geneva: Stakine 1972. Huysmans. J.K. “L‟Aquarium de Berlin.” Œuvres complètes XV-XVI. Geneva: Stakine 1972. Ilie, Paul. “Goya‟s Teratology and the Critique of Reason.” Eighteenth-Century Studies 18. 1 (1984): 35-56. Imbs, Paul. Trésor de la langue française; dictionnaire de la langue du XIXe et du XXe siècle (1789-1960). Paris: Éditions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1971. Janson, H.W. and Robert Rosenblum. Art of the 19 th -Century Painting and Sculpture. London: Thames and Hudson, 1994. “Japonisme: A Thematic History.” Helbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: Museum of Modern Art, 2009. Jay, Martin. Downcast Eyes, Los Angeles: University of California, 1994. Jossart, Aaron. Acts of Viewing in Stendhal, Zola, Maupassant, and the Goncourt Brothers. Diss. U. of Wisconsin, 2007. Kelly, Dorthy. Telling Glances: Voyeurism in the French Novel. New Brunswick: Rutgers, 1992. Keegan, Bridget. “Timothy Morton. Ecology Without Nature: Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics.” Studies in Romanticism (2008). 215 Kempf, Roger. “La misogynie des frères Goncourt.” Les Goncourt dans leur siècle: un siècle de “Goncourt.” Lille: Presses U. Septentrion, 2005. Donald, Diana, Richard Kendall et al. Endless Forms: Charles Darwin, Natural Science and the Arts. Cambridge: Fitzwilliam Museum, 2009. Kisling, Vernon. Zoo and Aquarium History. London: CRC Press. Laforgue, Jules. “À l‟Aquarium de Berlin.” La Revue blanche 49, (1985): 553. Laforgue, Jules. Œuvres complètes. 1903. <http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark/12148/bpt6k80142t>. Laforgue, Jules. Œuvres complètes. Lausanne : L’Age d’homme, 1986. Laforgue, Jules. Textes de critique d’art (ed. Mireille Dottin-Orsini). Lille : Presses universitaires de Lille, 1988. Laissus, Yves and Jean-Jacques Peter. Les Animaux du Muséum: 1793-1993. Paris: Muséum national d‟histoire naturelle, 1993. Lamarck, Jean Baptiste. Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres. Paris: Verdière, 1815. “La nouvelle rotonde des fauves au Jardin des plantes.” Le Petit Journal supplément illustré (31 mars 1895). Lange, Antoni. “Symbolisme: Esquisse de la littérature contemporain.” Critique et Littérature, 1887. Lathers, Marie. “Models, Monkeys and Naturalism.” Bodies of Art. French Literary Realism and the Artist’s Model. Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 2001. Lefrère, Jean-Jacques. Jules Laforgue. Paris: Librairie Arthème Fayard, 2005. Le Gaulois. “A propos du Banquet Goncourt 1895”. 5 April, 2009. <http://www.goncourt.org/banquet_goncourt3.htm>. “Le Muséum: Muséum national d‟histoire naturelle” 15 March, 2008. <http://www.mnhn.fr/museum/foffice/transverse/transverse/accueil.xsp>. Liebman, Elizabeth. Painting Natures: Buffon and the Art of the Histoire naturelle. Diss. Northwestern U., 2009. 216 Lippit, Akira. Electric Animal: Toward Rhetoric of Wildlife. Minneapolis: University of‟ Minnesota Press, 2000. Ireson, Nancy. Interpreting Rousseau. London : Tate, 2005. Mabuchi, Akiko.”Japonisme et Naturalisme.” Japonisme. Tokyo: Musée d‟art national occidental, 1988. Mack, Maynard. “Realism, Symbolism, and European Realities.” Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces 2. New York: Norton, 1995. Manet, Edouard. The Balcony, 1868-69. Manet, Edouard. The Railway, 1873. Marx, R. “Les Goncourts artists et esthéticiens.” Revue Encylopédique 102 (1895). Matsuzawa, Tetsuro. “Understanding the Chimpanzee Mind Through Both Field and Laboratory Research.” Kyoto U. Kyoto. July 6, 2009. Michel, Pierre and François Jean Nivet.”Préface.” Dans le ciel. Paris : Échoppe, 1989. Milne-Edwards, Alphonse. Recherches pour servir à l’Histoire naturelle des mammifères. Paris: Planche, 1874. Mirbeau, Octave. Chroniques du diable. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1995. Mirbeau, Octave. “Claude Monet.” Le Figaro. 21 Nov. 1884, 23. Mirbeau, Octave (ed. Pierre Michel and François Nivet). Combats esthétiques. Paris: Librairie Séguier, 1993. Mirbeau, Octave (ed. Pierre Michel and François Nivet). Correspondance avec Claude Monet, Le Lérot, 1990. Mirbeau, Octave. Dans le ciel. Caen : l‟Echoppe, 1989. Mirbeau, Octave. Lettres d’Inde. Caen: l‟Échoppe, 1991. Mirbeau, Octave. Œuvre romanesque v. 2 (ed. Pierre Michel) Paris: Boucher, 2000. Moore. “The Literary Methods of the Goncourts.” New York: Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 1916. 217 Montaigne, Michel de (ed. Michael Screech). An Apology for Raymond Sebond. New York: Penguin Classics, 2003. Morris, Francis et al. Henri Rousseau: Jungles in Paris. New York: Abrams, 2006, 21. Marlais, Michael Andrew. Conservative Echoes in Fin de Siècle Parisian Art. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press, 1992. Mauperin, Renée. De Goncourt. New York: PF Collier & Son, 1902. Millet, Jean François. The Gleaners, 1857. Morton, Timothy. “All the corners of the buildings.” Ecology without Nature. 15 May, 2009. <http://ecologywithoutnature.blogspot.com>. Morton, Timothy. Ecology without Nature Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics. Cambridge: Harvard U. Press, 2009. Morton, Timothy. “On Alan Bewell‟s Romanticism and Colonial Disease.” Romantic Circles Reviews 3.3 (2000): 20. Mostrailes, L.G. Lutèce 192 (1885). Mulvey, Lara.”Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.”Screen 16.3 (1975): 6-18. Nicholls, Peter. “„Arid clarity‟: Ezra Pound, Mina Loy, and Jules Laforgue.” The Yearbook of English Studies 32 (2002). Perret, Jacques. Les Jardin des plantes. New York: Juilliard, 1985. Ragon, Michel, Jean Vigile, et al. Colloque Octave Mirbeau. Paris: Éditions du Demi Cercle, 1994. Ramsey, Warren. Laforgue and the Ironic Inheritance. Oxford : Oxford, 1953. Respaut, Michèle. “Regards d‟hommes/corps de femmes: Germinie Lacerteux des Frères. Goncourt.” French Review 65 (1991): 46-54. Richards, Roger. Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior. U. of Chicago Press, 1989. Roger, Jacques and Leslie Williams. Buffon: A Life in Natural History. Cornell U., 1997. Rothfels, Nigel, ed. Representing Animals. Bloomington : Indiana U. Press, 2002. 218 Rothfels, Nigel. Savages and Beasts: The Birth of the Modern Zoo. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins Press, 2002. Rousseau, Henri. Tiger in a Tropical Storm (Surprised!),1891. Rubin. Impressionist Cats and Dogs. New Haven: Yale U. Press, 2003. Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1979. Schechter, Joel, ed. Popular Theater: a source book. New York, Routledge, 2003. Schor, Naomi. Reading in Detail Aesthetics of the Feminine. New York: Methuen, 1987. Seigel, Jerrold. Bohemian Paris Baltimore: John Hopkins, 1999. Sentell, Amy Lauren. Spain’s decadent dilemma: Science and art versus nature in the forgotten novel of the fin de siglo. Diss. U. of Virginia, 2009. Shattuck, Roger. The Banquet Years; the origins of the avant-garde in France, 1885 to World War I: Alfred Jarry, Henri Rousseau, Erik Satie and Guillaume Apollinaire. New York: Vintage, 1968. Shattuck, Roger. “Object Lesson for Modern Art.” Henri Rousseau. New York: MOMA, 1984. Stivale, Charles. “Overview.” Gilles Deleuze’s ABC Primer with Claire Parnet. 14 October, 2008. <http://www.scribd.com/Gilles-Deleuzes-ABC Primer/d/6544507>. Straw, Petrince-Archer. Negrophilia. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2000. Spotte, Steven. Zoos in Post Modernism. Cranbury: Associated U. Press. 2006. Szyfman, Léon. Lamarck et son époque, Paris : Masson, 1987. Trépanier, Hélène. Mythe de Van Gogh dans la littérature chez Octave Mirbeau, Dans le ciel : Antonin Artaud, Le suicide de la société. Ottawa : National Library of Canada, 1967. Unda, Faride. “Introduction to Phylogenics.” The Science Creative Quarterly, 2008. Vanor, George. L’Art symboliste. Paris: Vanier 1889. Vezin, Luc. Les Artistes au Jardin des plantes. Paris: Herscher, 1990. 219 Von Joest. “Haussmann‟s Paris: A Green Metropolis?” The History of Garden Design: The Western Tradition from the Renaissance to the Present Day (ed. Monique Mosser and Georges Teyssot). London: Thames & Hudson, 2000. Vallès, Jules. “Chronique parisienne.” La Situation. 10 novembre 1867. Watts, Alan. Nature, Man and Woman. New York: Vintage, 1991. Watts, Alan. The Way of Zen. New York: Vintage, 1957. Watts, Alan. What is Zen? New York: New World Library, 2000. Wiseman, Boris. Lévi-Strauss, Anthropology and Aesthetics. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press, 2007. Wolf, Norbert. Symbolism. New York: Taschen, 2009. Wolfe, Cary. Animal Rites. Chicago: U. Chicago Press, 2003. Ziegler, Robert. The Nothing Machine: The Fiction of Octave Mirbeau. Rodopi, 2007. Ziegler, Robert. “The Uncreated Artwork of Octave Mirbeau,” Nineteenth Century French Studies 35, (2007). Zola, Émile. Carnets d’Enquêtes. Paris: Terre Humaine, 1986. Zola, Émile. Écrits sur l’art. Paris: Gallimard, 1991. Zola, Émile. L’Œuvre. Paris: Gallimard, 1983.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This dissertation examines the narrative found in Edmond and Jules de Goncourt’s Manette Salomon (1867), Jules Laforgue’s "À l’Aquarium de Berlin" (1895) and Octave Mirbeau’s Dans le ciel (1892-1893) that the avant-garde artist has an affinity with animals. This mythology, fueled by Darwinian and Lamarckian evolution and popular science, is an attempt to explain the aesthetic of Impressionist and Post-Impressionist paintings. These authors portray avant-garde artists as naive animals whose work undermines the rigid and outmoded values of the artistic institutions of their day.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The Chinovnik and the Rond-de-cuir: bureaucratic modernity in nineteenth-century Russian and French literature
Asset Metadata
Creator
Nettleton, Claire Correu
(author)
Core Title
Primal perception: the artist as animal in Nineteenth-Century France
School
College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
French
Publication Date
09/09/2014
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
"A l'Aquarium de Berlin",animal,aquarium,Art,Art Nouveau,artist,avant-garde,Benjamin,Dans le ciel,Darwin,Deleuze,Ecology,Evolution,Goncourt,Haraway,impressionism,Impressionist,Jardin des plantes,Laforgue,Manette Salomon,Mirbeau,Morton,OAI-PMH Harvest,perception,Post-Impressionism,Post-Impressionist,vision,Zoos
Place Name
France
(countries)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Szabari, Antonia (
committee chair
), Lippit, Akira Mizuta (
committee member
), Norindr, Panivong (
committee member
)
Creator Email
claire.nettleton@gmail.com,nettleto@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c127-394138
Unique identifier
UC1189921
Identifier
etd-Nettleton-4124 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-394138 (legacy record id),usctheses-m3427 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Nettleton-4124.pdf
Dmrecord
394138
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Nettleton, Claire Correu
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
"A l'Aquarium de Berlin"
aquarium
Art Nouveau
avant-garde
Benjamin
Dans le ciel
Deleuze
Goncourt
Haraway
impressionism
Impressionist
Jardin des plantes
Laforgue
Manette Salomon
Mirbeau
perception
Post-Impressionism
Post-Impressionist