The great French
diarist Jules Renard (1864-1910) had small interest in non-literary art
forms. When Ravel approached him wanting to set five of his Histoires naturelles, Renard couldn’t see the point; he didn’t forbid it, but declined to go to the premiere. He sat through Debussy’s Pelléas et Mélisande
and found it a ‘sombre bore’, its plot ‘puerile’. His attitude to
painting was a little more responsive: he admired (and knew) Lautrec,
and approved of Renoir; but he found Cézanne barbarous and Monet’s
waterlilies ‘girly’. This was less philistinism than a robust admission
of his own areas of non-response. And he did write one wonderful thing
about painting, on 8 January 1908: ‘When I am in front of a picture, it
speaks better than I do.’
Edgar Degas, ‘Three Women at the Races’ (1885)
It
is a chastening remark, because most of us, when in front of a picture,
do not give the picture time enough to speak. We talk at it, about it,
of it, to it; we want to forcibly understand it, get its measure,
colonise it, ‘friend’ it. We compare it to other pictures it reminds us
of; we read the label on the wall, confirm that it is, say, pastel on
monotype, and check which gallery or plutocrat owns it. But unless we
are highly trained, we don’t know enough to recognise more than roughly
how the picture relates to the history of painting (because it always
does, even if negatively). Instead, we hose it with words and move on. The centenary year of Edgar Degas’s death might be a good time to rein
in our chatter. Though Renard does not seem to have come across Degas,
or commented on his work, the two had similar (and similarly only
half-true) reputations: as bearish plain-speakers who preferred to be
left alone. And Degas would have approved Renard’s verbal humility in
the face of a picture.... [mehr] https://www.lrb.co.uk/v40/n01/julian-barnes/humph-he-ha
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen