An analysis of Pieter Bruegel’s Landscape and the Fall of Icarus.
W. H. Auden’s Musee des Beaux Arts”
Pieter Brueghel was a 16th-century Dutch Renaissance painter whose paintings have allegorical meanings. Compared to his contemporaries, who usually depicted religious images, Brueghel is well known for his depictions of landscape images. According to Della Fish (1998), Brueghel may be considered the first artist to delve into landscape painting, and hence he may be considered the inventor of ‘landscape painting’ (140). One of his most famous landscape paintings, which was painted between 1558 and 1668, was his portrayal of the climax of the Greek myth of Icarus behind an Italian landscape. The painting is called Landscape and the Fall of Icarus.”
Within the aforementioned painting, the named subject is barely visible. All that the spectator sees of Icarus are his falling feathers and submerged torso with flailing legs, which are barely visible in the corner of the canvas. As opposed to the minuscule portrayal of Icarus’ image, the painting places emphasis on the landscape that surrounded Icarus’ moment of victory and defeat, as well as the individuals who occupy this landscape. Hence, one is presented with the view of the cliffs and the sea that succeeds these cliffs, as well as the images of a fisherman with his rod, a shepherd with his staff, and a plowman with his plow. The reason for the emphasis on these images, as well as on these individuals, may be traced to the following factors: (1) Bruegel’s presentation of his artistic view that the landscape stands as a setting wherein the various incidents and accidents of human life occur and (2) Bruegel’s desire to remain faithful to Ovid’s text regarding the fall of Icarus.
The initial reason serves as a consistent theme in Bruegel’s works, wherein he uses the landscape as a background to emphasize the existence of various events in human life. This is done in order to prove that life, in itself, is in accordance with the weather and the seasons. In the case of the aforementioned painting, the portrayal of Icarus’ fall, in line with the portrayal of the mundane activities of the other individuals within the painting, may be understood as presenting the viewer with the belief that conditions of the land affect and, in certain cases, determine the fate of an individual.
Within the context of the period in which Brueghel made the painting, either during the 16th century or the 17th century, Jacob Nyenhauis notes that this may be understood as a critique of inequality within society during that time. He states, “This landscape was interpreted as a contrast between the solid value of the toiling peasant’s life and the futility of Icarus’ virtue” (Nyenhauis 44). Life can thereby be seen to be affected by the conditions of the land, in the sense that the outcome of one’s life is also determined by one’s condition within society. Consider, for example, that Icarus’ fall stands as a result of the futility of his quest for greatness. Such a quest, however, is merely enabled by his position within society as a member of the upper class. In contrast, other individuals depicted within the painting, such as the ploughman, are fated to continuous labor since the conditions of their lives necessitate them to continuously work in order to survive. Nyenhauis states, “the painting may well be intended, in part, to illustrate the familiar Flemish proverb: ‘No plough stops for a man who dies’” (44). The proverb, in itself, aims to validate the rigid life conditions of a ploughman who may not stop for death as stopping may cause his own death as well.
As for the second reason mentioned above, it is important to note that Ovid’s account of Icarus’ death also specifies the existence of the individuals within the painting. Within the myth, Ovid states:
Beneath,” someone caught fish with his tremulous rod. The shepherd leaned on his crook, or the ploughman on his handle, and saw them. They wondered how they could take to the air and thought they must be gods. Already, on the left, they passed by Samos, Juno’s isle, and by Delos and Paros. On the right, they passed by Labinthos and Calymne, fruitful in honey… (qtd in Fish 142)
Bruegel’s aforementioned interpretation of the myth of Icarus, however, was negated by W.H. Auden in his poem Musee des Beaux Arts.” In the same way that Bruegel’s aforementioned painting was influenced by Ovid’s myth, Auden’s work was also influenced by another art form. The art form that influenced Auden’s poem was Bruegel’s interpretation of the aforementioned myth. Auden, however, represented the myth of Icarus in a different manner within the poem.
In Musee des Beaux Arts,” translated into English as “The Museum of Fine Arts,” Auden depicts the lonely suffering of Icarus as he falls unnoticed by those around him. Within the poem, Auden states,
In Brueghel’s Icarus,” for instance, everything turns away quite leisurely from the disaster. The ploughman may have heard the splash and the forsaken cry, but for him, it was not an important failure. The sun shone as it has to on the white legs disappearing into the green water, and the expensive, delicate ship that must have seen something amazing – a boy falling out of the sky – had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on. (92)
Auden’s representation of the myth, in this sense, may be understood as presenting a different one as opposed to Brueghel. Unlike Brueghel, who merely emphasizes the occurrence of different events in daily life, Auden emphasizes how these events, despite the instances in which they overlap, remain unnoticed and unappreciated if they have no direct effect on the observer.
From the very beginning of Auden’s poem, he specifies that the poem will discuss the human position” of suffering. He states, “About suffering they were never wrong, / The Old Masters; how well they understood / Its human position… / They never forgot / That even the dreadful martyrdom must run its course / Anyhow in a corner, some untidy spot” (92). In the initial part of the poem, Auden may be understood as presenting his view on society’s treatment of all forms of suffering. For Auden, society places emphasis on suffering as it vilifies and praises its different manifestations. The vilification of suffering is evident as society chooses to disregard its occurrence.
In the case of Icarus’ fate as presented in Brueghel’s painting and Auden’s poem, the individuals who may have seen Icarus’ slow death chose to disregard it. On the other hand, the praise of suffering is evident as a recurring theme in artworks throughout the ages. In the initial part of the poem, Auden himself notes that suffering is a recurrent theme in the works of the ‘Old Masters’. The praise of suffering becomes ironic when compared to the vilification of suffering in everyday life. Since the praise of suffering is evident in works of art, the most well-renowned of which can be seen in the museum (hence Auden’s title for the poem as Musee des Beaux Arts” or “The Museum of Fine Arts”), society may thereby be said to compensate for its refusal to take notice of the different manifestations of suffering in everyday life by creating structures that aim to place it in high regard. Nyenhauis, in his analysis of the poem, notes that the poem portrays “a deep sense of rage and a serious concern for the seeming irreconcilability of the ideal and real world” (45).
This irreconcilability can be seen as religion opts to prevent people from seeing this suffering by alluding to the benefits that it may bring in the spiritual world. It is important to note that the initial part of Auden’s poem alludes to the birth and death of Christ as he states, (W)hen the aged are reverently, passionately waiting/ For the miraculous birth, there always must be/ Children who did not especially want it to happen” (92).
Works cited.
Auden, W.H. Musee des Beaux Arts.” 100 Best-Loved Poems. Eds. Philip Smith and Earl Hammond. London: Courier Dover Publications, 1995.
Brueghel, Pieter. Image of Landscape with the Fall of Icarus.” Museum of Words. By James Heffernan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Fish, Della. Appreciating Practice in the Caring Professions: Refocusing Professional Development and Practitioner Research. Np: Elsevier, 1998.
The grammar and readability within the HTML tags in the given text are correct.
Nyenhuis, Jacob. Myth and the Creative Process: Michael Ayrton and The Myth of Daedalus, The Maze Maker. NP: Wayne State UP, 2003.
