MA Drawing Research Paper

The Search for Identity in Self-Portraiture

MA Drawing

Angela Ho

1

Introduction

Self-portraiture has been a popular and enduring tradition in the history of western art.

It could be a portrait of the artist, or a piece of art involving him/her in a larger work,

e.g. a group portrait. According to Wikipedia, many historian painters are said to have

included depictions of specific individuals, including themselves, in painting figures

in religious or other types of composition. Such paintings were not intended publicly

to depict the actual persons as themselves, but the facts would have been known at the

time to artist and patron, creating a talking point as well as a public test of the artist's

skill1. This would suggest that self-portraiture is perhaps one of the most difficult

tasks to carry out in art, at least in former times. Thanks to the invention of

photography, artists nowadays have an alternative way of looking at themselves, and

although it seems to deprive painting of some of its importance, it can be used as a

source to study a specific vision and many contemporary painters are still keen to do

self-portraits. Photography can make self-portrait easier to achieve, because we can

now look at a still image of ourselves as a reference to draw, we can measure the

proportion of silhouette much more precisely and objectively, and unlike a mirror, it

captures your reflection in movement and not in a concrete way.

But why are artists interested in painting themselves? The reasons can be varied and

depends on the type of self-portrait he/she wants to achieve, but all self-portraits have

things in common: it is a conscious act, our mood and self-awareness indicate the

projection of our features, shadow, direction and other possible subjects in particular

order, while the authorship shows uniqueness and it will potentially deepen self-

knowledge through expressing or exploring psychological truth2. Self-portraits are not

always open to the public; in fact many people (not only artist) like to do self-portrait

for personal reasons, e.g. erotic or narcissistic pictures. It can be used as a vehicle to

make you feel good or explore the unusual side of you, but most of us are too

1 Wikipedia contributors, 'Self-portrait', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 31 July 2012, 17:21 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-portrait&oldid=505127377> [accessed 4 August 2012].

2 W.Ray Crozier and Paul Greenhalgh, ‘Self-Portraits As Presentations of Self’, (Leonardo, Vol.21 No, 1, 1988) pp. 30.

2

embarrassed to reveal this privacy to the public – we want to keep this secret, but

consciously enjoy the vision. Frida Kahlo is one of the legendary self-portrait artists

in the art world; she painted herself in many of her narrative paintings with

subconscious memories and encounters. They are expressive paintings of life

experience, although many of her work involved her face, very few of them focused

on her appearance, even the close up self-portraits. She always narrated herself with

selective subject matters, and used her distinctive appearance as a source to deliver

her own unique story. Another example could be Rembrandt, who used self-

portraiture to question his persona, role and position in society, it was an expressive

and liberating influence on him, and contributed to an understanding of self-

portraiture as a fundamental means of self-scrutiny3.

There is one type of self-portrait that is very popular in the history of art; artists

painted themselves painting in action. Sofonisba Anguissola, Marie-Denise Villers,

René Magritte, David Hockney and many others have tried to paint this scene. This

particular scene of painting in action has additional strengths: it offers viewers an

interesting sight of a visual studio visit, to reveal a scene of work in process – painting

in a painting. At the same time the image confirms the artist as a professional, because

it gives him/her identity. The two former artists I mentioned are less famous than the

latter two, and their particular self-portraits in the act of painting are both shown as

profile pictures in Wikipedia4. It indicates that this type of self-portrait is

representational and open to the public, because it is inviting viewers to look at the

artist painting. It also has the symbolic meaning of craftsmanship. The painting does

not concern the appearance of the portrait, but the juxtaposition of the objects. At the

same time, the genuine artist who painted the painting has therefore stood out of the

whole scene and viewed himself from an anonymous viewer’s viewpoint, or painted

the reflection from a very large mirror. This method to paint the scene echoes the

classical self-portrait; close up head shot self-portrait in an empty background.

Countless artists have done this type of self-portrait. It has taken root in most people’s

mind of what a standard portrait is supposed to be, and probably because it is so

popular and we always see portrait artists drawing this type of work in tourist areas in

3 Patrick Procktor, ‘Self-Portrait’, (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1991) pp. 48.

4 Wikipedia contributors, 'Sofonisba Anguissola', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 13 May 2012, 05:58 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofonisba_Anguissola&oldid=492318326> [accessed 5 August 2012].

3

many countries, it becomes some sort of craftsmanship or tradition to record oneself.

It is representational, and in fact there is not much difference from a standard passport

self-portrait. Obviously you could argue that the nature of photography and drawing is

very different, but I am writing about the function of this self-portrait as a

representation of identity. This type of self-portrait is easy and convenient to achieve,

there is no creativity required, and obviously the artist will need a certain degree of

painting skills to demonstrate his / her competence at obtaining likenesses5. For many

non art-educated, the importance of technique is the first thing to be admired, and

therefore, I have handily gained approval from the public because my drawing has

always been semi-photographical. Viewers are prone to be drawn to the detail and

photographical quality of the drawing skills6. However, there is a paradox hiding

somewhere in my drawing: the head shot self-portrait is supposed to demonstrate my

strength of confidence, given that I have high competence in technique but I secretly

feel the exact opposite.

Confusion in Self-Portrait

5 W.Ray Crozier and Paul Greenhalgh, ‘Self-Portraits As Presentations of Self’, (Leonardo, Vol.21 No, 1, 1988) pp. 30.

6 Mick Maslen and Jack Southern, ‘Drawing Projects, an Exploration of the Language of Drawing’, (London, Black Dog Publishing, 2011) pp. 12.

4

fig. 1 Us, 2011, Courtesy the artist

Fig.1 is my recent self-portrait; although it is not exactly the kind of portraiture I

wrote about earlier, it shows my face as one of the main focuses in the drawing. I

have a very odd feeling towards it and am somehow disappointed, it is nowhere near a

powerful representation of who I am and it also took me quite a while to recognize it

as a self-portrait. People say this portrait is not of me; I am neither that ugly nor odd,

and maybe they are right. I am in doubt about this drawing. The feeling is almost as if

my soul has jumped out from my body into another person’s and I am looking at the

drawing through that person’s eyes. This experience is not enjoyable nor do I like the

drawing. I became very critical towards it as I am able to identify the discrepancies or

slightly unintentional distorted facial features from the real me. What makes it even

worse is I feel like I have been cloned, and that it might be a copied version of me is

haunting and disturbing. How could I possibly not have been aware this feeling when

I was drawing it? Is it because I had somehow transformed into another person while I

drew? Was I looking at myself like any other objects? The portrait in this drawing is

looking away from viewers, and it is narrative based and therefore it is less

threatening, but I could imagine if the “me” in the drawing were staring at me

(viewer) I would feel incredibly uncomfortable. This is not the same as viewing your

reflection in the mirror: firstly the reflection is the usual face that you recognize

yourself as, and secondly, doing a self-portrait is visualizing the face you believe you

have, and therefore the mirror acts as what your eyes see and you hand acts as what

your heart thinks. When they converge they do not seem to get along at all but the

5

reason is unknown. However there was a tiny amusement after all: because someone

took the effort to depict me in a drawing, I feel flattered and important. I believe this

feeling is natural, when you are being drawn by someone, no matter whether it looks

like you or not, you will always feel happy and excited (unless the intention of the

drawer is to insult you) because it is the face others think you have. It evokes the

feeling of seeing yourself on television or somehow unusual, and feels so bizarre yet

happy. In fact, this is not the first self-portrait that evokes this intimidating feeling; it

has existed for a very long time, but in the past I decided to avoid self-portrait, and

now I feel like I am ready the confront this problem.

“The eye” I mentioned earlier is almost like an outsider of the drawing activity, in

other words – a viewer, that makes me feel more disorientated and lost; is it possible

that I have detached myself as an artist and changed into a viewer’s position once I

have finished a drawing? And if it were true then what is my true identity and how

should I position myself in art practice? Where does the haunting feeling come from,

or is it merely because of the inability to depict myself accurately? I am aiming to

create a series of drawings to answer or investigate this confusion and find out where

all these feelings are coming from.

Investigation of Self-Identity

6

The idea of positioning me as a viewer is interesting; it is like taking a step back to

view the whole activity and it is truly inspiring. This experience seems to echo the

artist Diane Borsato’s statement, accompanied with the image:

fig.2

Diane Borsato, 1999, Rolling on the Lawn at the Canadian Centre for Architecture

I was living near the Canadian Centre of Architecture and walked by it everyday. I was trying to think of new ways to engage myself with the city, and coming home from work one fall afternoon I decided to roll across the entire length of the famous green lawn- instead of just walking by. The lawn seemed to me to be a provocative space- between the museum and the sidewall. Rolling on the lawn shocked my bones and made me dizzy, with the ground and the sky spiraling around me like a tornado. I repeated the action in every season for the following year.

Although this method does not sound reliable, it reveals the process of how Borsato

encountered a problem or ways of experiencing. She chose contact with the lawn

instead of walking alongside it. Clearly distinguishable from conventional ways of

resolving problems, by orientating myself into a different position and perhaps

gaining a similar effect, although I am not physically changing the way to encounter

problems, I have changed the way of looking and experiencing, she continues:

[…]the physical experience that is foreign, new, unprecedented, the awakening that “pure sensation” provokes should thus be understood as the site of true learning,

7

which goes far beyond a knowledge of the body; it aims towards a penetrating comprehension of all aspects of life7.

Hence, I decided to carry on with this assumption of identity to look at Angela Ho,

her drawings, exhibition and even viewers, to be an invisible observer and draw from

an unusual perspective to investigate the confusion. This self-portrait would be

interesting to viewers for quite a few reasons. When a viewer is viewing a piece of art,

this activity between the viewer and the art is intimate and inseparable; although it

might just last a very short few seconds, the viewer is unable to see his/her own

expression directly and in fact, nobody can because the distance between you and the

artwork would be so close to each other, the only one who is able to see the viewer’s

response would be the artwork. I intended to draw from this perspective, because I

want to portray the response of the viewers. This act is like drawing another self-

portrait in an indirect way, because I am one of the many random viewers. At the

same time I can feel the guilt and joy of spying on viewers’ privacy, Josée Drouin-

Brisebois, a curator at the National Gallery of Canada stated in The Viewer as

Performer:

[….] caught in the act, like an interruption, arrest or suspension of an activity in progress, and ambiguously suggests private activity suddenly becoming public. It emphasizes on living action, an on the other, an objectification that is said to occur where observation is concerned: a Sartrean reversal in which the observer or the voyeur suddenly becomes the object of another’s gaze, a disruption. Echoes this view and proposes some interesting variations on the theme of action and observation, as well as on the relationship of a viewer to a scene viewed. With its overtones of an illicit or private activity, and the guilt attached to the voyeurism inherent in the role of observer, the terms for a psychological unfolding are initiated with this phrase.8

Being an invisible observer is a pleasant experience; I am free from being seen or

disturbed, like a ghost who is able to penetrate and move around and see from any

perspective. The joy of drawing from this perspective is like paparazzo who has taken

a picture and cannot wait to share the photos, because they are rare and the effort of

taking those particular pictures would be so much harder than any other scenes.

7 Diane Borsato, ‘Artist Statement, Rolling on the Lawn at the Canadian Centre for Architecture’,1999, < http://dianeborsato.net/projects/rolling-on-the-lawn-at-the-canadian-centre-for-architecture-cca/> [accessed 3 August 2012].

8 Josée Drouin-Brisebois, ‘Caught in the Act: The Viewer as Performer’, 2008, P.183 All further references will be to this edition.

8

Publicizing this private activity does not frustrate viewers; instead, it creates an

interesting sight because it is an indirect portrait of them, which offers an unusual way

to look at themselves, as if the drawing is talking to them. This compounded my

feeling towards my self-portrait, because the artist is expending efforts to include

them in the drawing; it is flattering and amusing but bizarre. I want to share the

awkwardness from my self-portrait and consciously transport it to viewers by drawing

their response (such as taking photographs, scrutinizing the drawing in detail or

simply not paying attention at all.) and make them feel the way I do, as I assume me

and other viewers are equal; therefore it is not a personal self-portrait but an invitation

to participate in the drawing. My drawing is doing two things; firstly it beings out the

concrete existence of the viewers and asks them to question their own visuality and

identity, how they look, see and are unaware what is around them are reflected

consciously by the artist, secondly, it is a self discovery of my personal feeling, which

the viewer may empathize. This two functions echo Louise Bourgeois’s Maman, she

claims: Space does not exist in itself; it is just a metaphor for the structure of our

existence9. These two things are incompatible upon the first thought, but I have

consciously empathized myself into the position of viewers, this act connects the

viewers’ intellectual thinking of exploration of the artist.

I am aiming to bring out the surreal existence of the artist in my drawing. Hence, the

eye level, size and scale of all the subject matter in the drawing appear to match the

genuine scene at the exhibition space, which explains the reason I worked on an

enormous scale. This idea echoes Diego Velázquez’s Las Meninas, which I will

discuss in greater detail below. Svetlana Alpers in The Viewing of Las Meninas stated

The frame appears to intersect a room whose ceiling floor, and window bay extend, so it is suggested, to include the viewer[….] The size of the figures is a match for our own. This appeal at once to eye and to body is a remarkable pictorial performance which contradictorily presents powerful human figures by means of illusionary surfaces10.

One of the main differences between Las Meninas and my drawing is the presentation

at the exhibition. Fig 3 shows the picture of Las Meninas at Museo del Prado:

9 Trisha McCrae, Louise Bourgeois. Maman: From the Outside In, 1999 < http://www.artandeducation.net/paper/louise-bourgeois-maman-from-the-outside-in/> [accessed 8 July 2012].

10 Svetlana Alpers, Interpretation without Representation, or, The Viewing of Las Meninas, (The Regents of the Unversity of California,1983), pp.31.

9

fig.3 Las

Meninas at Museo del Prado, 200211

It is hung in the middle of the wall, probably two feet away from the floor. Because

this painting is a historical painting on canvas and it is framed, there could be no other

way of hanging it. The painting includes the floor as almost one-third of the

background, but the edge line between the wall space and floor cannot be the same as

the space outside the frame. For that reason viewers are less likely to interpret the

artist’s intention that easily and the gaze between the figures and viewers will not be

horizontal. I suppose Velázquez has not actually considered the point of representation

at an exhibition, or perhaps there was no such thing in the sixteen century. Five

hundreds year later, I am working on a drawing supported by Las Meninas. Paper is

thin and has the flexibility to fold or crease; therefore it can settle almost anywhere

without being noticeable. You can place it on the floor or glue it in the angle between

the ceiling and the wall.

11 Rocio Gutierrez (photographer), Las Meninas at Museo del Prado, 2002 <http://www.flickr.com/photos/rooo/123259549/> [accessed 2 August 2012].

10

fig.4 Diagram of the folded paper at the exhibition

It is only a piece of paper, but it provides a versatile surface for the artist to draw and

potentially transform the exhibition space. The boundary of my drawing is infinite,

because it extends outside the scene. I intend to leave it unframed to violate the

conventional impression of drawing. In order to match the eye level from reality, the

height of the paper has to be relatively low. The bottom part of the drawing will fold

by ninety degree and placed on floor in order to match the edge between the wall and

floor from the real space. This presentation enhances the illusory effect and changes

the way we look at the drawing. If I placed the drawing at normal height like Las

Meninas then I would not be able to connect the drawing to the real space and viewers

will not be able to reflect themselves in the genuine scene. This interaction is

conceptual; viewers are more or less controlled by the presentation and the drawing.

You might argue that I could draw directly on the walls and the effect or impact of the

illusion might even be more impressive. The problem with that is that I do not intend

to create this illusion only for the given space at the exhibition. I wanted this scene to

connect with any sort of space with any viewers. The figure (fig.5) below is the plan

of my drawing. The reason I am presenting this draft is that I am going to draw two

different perspectives but portray them in one drawing.

11

fig. 5 Plan of the drawing, 2012, Courtesy the artist

I, as an invisible observer am drawing Angela Ho and her poser in her studio space.

When the drawing is finished it is going to be shown in an exhibition and so the

scenario happens to be an illusion of the artist genuinely drawing at the space, which

appears to be a live performance and open studio visit for viewers to participate in.

The reason I captured the artist drawing the poser instead of drawing a self-portrait is

because I could not bear the discomfort of the gaze from the portrait. This type of

self-portrait was mentioned earlier. The artist can use a mirror to reflect him/herself

while painting so the nature of the way to proceed is very much the same as the

standard close up self-portrait. I used the camera to assist me rather than a mirror, but

the theory behind remains the same. The other side of the drawing is the background

of the drawing. Traditionally, the foreground appears to be what is at the front, and

the background provides support or coherence behind the foreground in order to

complete the painting. This order or position of subject matter is perceived from

reality: foreground is usually the main focus of the vision or at least it is the focus

people tend to notice in the first place. My drawing does not work this way. The

background of the drawing is going to be a mirror reflection and therefore it will be

showing the scene in front of the foreground. The mutual point of the foreground and

12

background of the drawing is that they are both publicizing the private and intimate

moment but from a different situation. The foreground is sharing or unlocking the

secret of how the artist processes a drawing. It is interesting to viewers because it is

like visiting a museum that displays how certain things are made, whereas the

background is showing the personal moment of viewers and artwork. These two

scenes reconstitute the relationship between artist, artwork and viewers in a new

format. This joining of the past (artist captured in the act of drawing) and future

(future viewers captured from imagination) does not clash but creates the present.

This scene is not imaginary fantasy, but a concrete scenario of what is/will be

happening at the exhibition, because I am drawing the viewers’ response in the

reflection. And the perspective or vanishing point is behind the mirror reflection. (see

fig 6)

fig. 6 Side

view of the plan for the drawing, 2012, Courtesy the artist

Pictorial Representation and Studies on Las Meninas

Mirror does not only reflect vertically, it reflects the spread of the objects like light in

front of it. And therefore if I were drawing from the viewpoint of the artwork the

13

dimension would be much broader. My drawing is three-dimensional with two-sided

viewpoint located outside the drawing, but exactly opposite to each other (fig. 6) both

of them are in the center of the drawing, but only one of them is shown in the

reflection. The other one is hidden behind the mirror, which is one of the functions of

the mirror. It is also a vehicle to deliver the scene in front of the foreground.

Obviously the viewpoint comes from the invisible observer, at the foreground of the

drawing. The invisible observer stands by the side view of the artist and poser. This

perspective of looking is a classic reading of representation, John Searle, an American

Philosopher proposed an axiom of representation which corresponds to this

viewpoint.

Fig. 7 John R. Searle, 1980, Las Meninas and Representation, pp.481

The way that classical pictorial representation combines resemblance, aspect, and point of view is as follow: the artist (or camera) sees on object or a scene from a point of view, and that point of view must lie outside what is seen, since we cannot see the eye with which we are seeing, the artist then produces on a flat surface an object such that if the observer has the appropriate point of view in front of the flat surface he will have an experience like the visual experience that artist had.

14

Searle claimed, traditionally, the perspective the artist sees and the vision he paints

should be identical and this perspective is under visual aspects. And therefore when a

viewer looks at the painting, that viewpoint is the viewpoint of the artist. This is

known as illusionist reading. Most of us believe as if we were seeing the scene from

the point of view of the artist, but the distance of looking is different. For viewers we

look at the picture from much closer than the artist looked at the original scene. But

this is not always true; some artwork (e.g. Anamorphosis) requires viewers to look

from an unusual angle in order to recognize the object in the picture.

[….]this in turn underlies our ability to see P as a pictorial representation of O under F. in the case of fictional and fictionalized pictures the artist need not have actually seen the objects he is painting. Indeed the object mat not exist…12

This statement supported the idea for the background of my drawing. The viewpoint

is located at the back of the mirror reflection (in other words, behind the drawing),

this perspective is logically impossible, because it has been blocked by the mirror, but

that does not mean it does not exist. Imagine if I were drawing on tracing paper and

the drawing is hung in the middle of space. I would be able to view this ‘background

scene’ from the back of the drawing. Although the situation now does not allow me to

view this particular perspective, I could still imagine it and it is not contradictory nor

does it violate the real scene. Unlike Las Meninas, John Searle claimed the painting is

paradoxical.

12 John R. Searle, Las Meninas and the Paradoxes of Pictorial Representation, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Spring, 1980), pp. 481 <http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1343104?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21100962753883> [accessed 31 July 2012] All further references will be in this edition.

15

fig.8 Diego Velázquez, Las Meninas, 1656. Museo del Prado, Madrid

The mirror reflection is one of the prominent subject matters that enhance the

curiosity of Las Meninas. Upon the first glance, we would be aware that almost all the

figures in the painting are staring at us. The painter on the left is painting and his

position and gaze suggests he is probably painting us. This confuses our identity – are

we seeing or being seen? My drawing has the same doubt or confusion, but this is

done in a different way. I am clearly drawing the viewers and the scenario happening

in reality. Therefore it makes perfect sense that I have included my viewers as one of

the subject matters in the drawing. This act suggests viewers are not only people

16

visiting the exhibition, but members involved in the whole activity, which confirms

their importance, but at the same time, this reassurance makes people wonder about

their identity, whether they are viewers or the spectacle? Las Meninas, on the other

hand, is a mystery. Michael Foucault states in The Order of Things that:

We are observing ourselves being observed by the painter, and made visible to his eyes by the same light that enables us to see him. And just as we are about to apprehend ourselves, transcribed by his hand as though in a mirror, we find that we can in fact apprehend nothing of that mirror but its lusterless back.13

However, the mirror reflection at the back seems to unlock the confusion. Foucault

and Searle were convinced that it is a reflection of the King Philip IV and his second

wife standing in front of the painting, which makes them the spectacle of the painting

on the canvas. In other words Las Meninas is a painting from the perspective of the

Royal couple, which makes it a paradox because how was Velázquez able to paint Las

Meninas when his point of view is taken by someone? Does he also consider himself

as an outsider of the painting and did he paint Las Meninas from imagination? My

drawing, on the other hand, is much more straightforward as I am viewing from an

outsider’s point of view, and that view is not taken by anyone. Apart from the

perspective of looking, Las Meninas and my drawing have quite a few similarities.

The figures in the painting narrate some ambiguous activities: they might be in the

middle of something or about to do something else. Many art historians have tried to

interpret the scene or any deeper meaning based on their knowledge of Velázquez or

the history of the period of time. My intention is not to study the meaning of it.

Whatever they are trying to do in the painting, they are caught in the act. This

includes the painter who is caught in the act of painting on the left; the only part of the

painting that is clearly stated without ambiguity – this connects to my drawing.

Caught in the act is a capture in motion, we are aware that the scene would only hold

for a few seconds and therefore Las Meninas and my drawing both indicates

movement in the act; they are lively and vivid.

The function of the mirror in Las Meninas and my drawing is the same; it is revealing

the subject in front of the artwork, which enhances the oddity or interest of the

13 Michael Foucault, In English, The Order of Things, (Pantheon Books, 1970)< http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/theory/Foucault-Order_of_things-text.html> [accessed 19 June 2012]

17

dimension. Although the mirror in Las Meninas is far subtler, it is intentional. It is

implying the existence of the Royal Couple and the figures in the painting are more or

less looking at them. We, the viewers are sharing the same perspective as the Royal

Couple. This affects us in a way different from my drawing. The only figure that is

not paying attention to any of the surroundings is the dog. It is again the total opposite

to my drawing. The figures in my drawing have no exchangeable gaze to viewers. The

only figure who is looking towards the viewers is the cat, but viewers are not able to

exchange gazes at all, because it is located at the ankle level to the viewers, but it

presents the same function as the dog in Las Meninas. As Peter Levine, an American

Research Director of Tuft’s University stated

Pets are domesticated nature, and nothing could be more domesticated than a large hunting dog that allows a dwarf to step on its back without moving […] Painting, too, is domesticated nature: it is infinite, shifting space reduced through magical artifice to a flat, motionless surface [….]We look at nature; nature doesn't look at us. We look at paintings, and usually paintings don't look at us. But Las Meninas is an unusual painting, one in which the artist has to peer around a large canvass to look in our direction. […]All this is enough to make you wonder how natural the painting really is.14

The main connection between Las Meninas and my drawing is that we both look at

viewers, which offer them an invite or place them a position. This makes the art

unusual and so it seems to violate the naturalism of painting or I would prefer to see it

as breaking the boundary of presentation in painting and drawing. Las Meninas is an

intellectual painting indeed, it requires patience and curiosity from viewers to explore.

Because of its complexity, it also requires viewers to study the foreground and

background in relation in each other. Many art historians have studied Las Meninas

through different approaches. Their findings are contradictory and cancel out one

another. I am not particularly convinced by any single historian nor do I argue for the

truthful interpretation of Las Meninas. My own realisation is that we will not be able

to identify the genuine meaning of Las Meninas. In fact it is not necessary.

Philosopher Umberto Eco suggests that arts, including music, literature, and visual

art, have effectively shifted from the production site of meaning from the author to the

recipient:

14 Peter Levine, Trying to Look at Las Meninas, Journal, 2005 <http://www.peterlevine.ws/mt/archives/2005/11/trying-to-look-1.html>[accessed 1 August 2012]

18

In fact, the form of the work of art gains its aesthetic validity precisely in proportion to the number of different perspectives from which it can be viewed and understood. A work of art, therefore, is a complete and closed form in its uniqueness as a balance organic whole, while at the same time constituting an open product on account of its susceptibility to countless different interpretations which do not impinge on its unadulterable specificity. Hence, every reception of a work of art is both an interpretation and a performance of it, because in every reception the work takes on a fresh perspective for itself.15

Our perceptual systems can only translate information through what we already know.

We know what orange looks, smells and tastes like so we all recognize it. But we are

not able to recognize anything new though, that might require further use of

imagination but because we have neither the experience nor knowledge of it and

cannot imagine it either. That is why art historians and viewers can never understand

the same way as the artist does when they look at art. What they could see is the

painted picture and try to interpret it through the knowledge available.16

Conclusion

15 Josee Drouin-Brisebois, ‘Caught in the Act: The Viewer as Performer’, 2008, P.29

16 Simon Abrahams, Why Painters Painted Themselves, Blog (2011) < http://www.everypainterpaintshimself.com/blog/why_painters_paint_themselves/> [accessed 2 August 2012]

19

My interpretation of my drawing comes from the artist’s first-hand experience;

therefore it is the most convincing statement, as I am the only person who has fully

experienced this perception of the genuine scene. This interpretation also unlocks my

confusion of identity, I could not and I have not been a viewer of my artwork because

I knew everything about the drawing. This experience only belongs to me. When I

said I felt haunted about my own self-portrait, this feeling also belongs to me only

because to any genuine viewers that drawing would only be a portrait of someone.

The reason I felt uncomfortable is due to my personal character, to create a close up

self-portrait requires narcissism and perhaps I am not naturally that vain or self-

obsessive. Therefore, the uncomfortable feeling about headed self-portrait would

never change, but it does not mean it is an unsolved problem, because there is no

reason why I must draw myself. At the same time I believe if a portrait only depicts

the appearance of oneself then it cannot be considered a particularly interesting

drawing.

Nevertheless, imagining me as an invisible observer was a fun experience. I explored

new ways of looking and realised how little I would able to see if I were only looking

from a fixed viewpoint from certain eye level. I am awed by the nature of

surrounding. It seems to suggest that every drawing I did has been drawn by nature,

and my job is to capture them on paper. This drawing experience brought me to revisit

the scene of drawing in action, as well as predicting the future as I drew the viewers

responding to my drawing before it opens to the public. This anticipation is based on

the response from previous exhibitions. It is a time traveling journey more than

observation of the artist’s life, because I have always been the same person no matter

how I tried to detach my original identity; I am aware that the person I am observing

is me and realized how different I felt and looked when I revisited the old me. Hence,

the assumption at the beginning was actually problematic, because I am not able to

transform myself into someone completely random; the realization comes from the

blocked view. One of the hardest parts of doing a self-portrait is that you have to be

honest, not only honest to your genuine appearance, but the mood at the time you

drew. When everyone says the self-portrait (fig.1) is not of me, I am not that ugly or

unpleasant, that is because they are referring to the physical appearance of me, but at

the time when I drew that self-portrait, I was feeling annoyed and perhaps it explains

where the ugliness is coming from. Viewers are not able to imagine or realize this

20

feeling because this is something foreign to their perceptual systems. This honesty

seems to resonate in every bit of my drawing, including the subject matter and the use

of medium. Pencil is a direct, simple, honest and modest tool, but its versatility is

incredible. After all, my drawing is a very sincere and genuine self-discovery and I

have leant to share my honesty through the experience of drawing and looking from a

new perspective.

Now, the last thing that is missing from the whole research paper is the object in front

of the drawing. Apart from the viewers, there are three optical devices called

Zoetrope, they appear on the background of the drawing. In reality, I have concretely

made them and placed them in the position you see in the drawing, which is part of

the project and idea that initiated the drawing. The content of the drawing inside the

Zoetrope clearly echoes the big drawing, although I could have just drawn some other

small drawings on pieces of paper and the idea would still work, the result would be

much less interesting. Viewers are able to view the moving images like animation; it

breaks the boundary of drawing as a still image and therefore enhances the experience

of viewing. It is like viewing a fast forward version of the big drawing in detail, which

allows viewers to time travel like the artist. At the same time, it invites participation

from viewers, not quite the same way as the big drawing because viewers would need

to physically engage with the Zoetrope. It suggests the piece of work is not complete

without viewers and therefore it doubly highlights the importance of viewers.

Traditionally, self-portrait is autobiographical and self-exploratory. It is hard to attract

viewers’ attention. Why do we bother to study someone’s autobiography, especially

someone ordinary? My self-portrait is an unusual one, because I am using the eye of

viewers to experience and project the artist as a subject for us to visit. It is a drawing

dedicated to us. The whole experience is like participating in a game. A game without

winning or losing, just a realization or recalculation of the relationship between artist,

artwork and viewers.

Bibliography

21

Alpers, Svetlana, Interpretation without Representation, or The Viewing of Las Meninas, Representation I:1 (The Regents of the University of California, 1983)

Crozier, W. Ray and Greenhalgh, Paul, Self-Portrait As Presentations of Self, Pergamon Journals Ltd (Great Britain, Leonardo, 1988)

Cohen, Ted and Snyder, Joel, Reflexions on Las Meninas: Paradox Lost, (The University of Chicago, 1980)

Drouin-Brisebois, Josee, Caught in the Act: The Viewer as Performer, (Ottawa, National Gallery of Canada, 2008)

Maslen, Mick and Southern, Jack, Drawing Projects, an Exploration of the Language of Drawing, (London, Black God Publishing Ltd, 2011)

Procktor, Patrick, Self-Portrait, (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1991)

Online Resources

Abrahams, Simon, Why Painters Painted Themselves, Blog (2011) < http://www.everypainterpaintshimself.com/blog/why_painters_paint_themselves/>

Borsato, Diane, Artist Statement, Rolling on the Lawn at the Canadian Centre for Architecture,1999, < http://dianeborsato.net/projects/rolling-on-the-lawn-at-the-canadian-centre-for-architecture-cca/>

Foucault, Michael, The Order of Things, Pantheon Books, (1970)< http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/theory/Foucault-Order_of_things-text.html>

Levine,Peter, Trying to Look at Las Meninas, Journal, 2005 <http://www.peterlevine.ws/mt/archives/2005/11/trying-to-look-1.html>

McCrae, Trisha, Louise Bourgeois. Maman: From the Outside In, Blog, 1999 < http://www.artandeducation.net/paper/louise-bourgeois-maman-from-the-outside-in/>

Searle, R John, ‘Las Meninas’ and the Paradoxes of Pictorial Representation, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 6, No. 3 Spring, (1980) <http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1343104?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21100962753883>

Wikipedia contributors, 'Sofonisba Anguissola', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 13 May 2012, 05:58 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sofonisba_Anguissola&oldid=492318326>

Wikipedia contributors, 'Self-portrait', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 31 July 2012, 17:21 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Self-portrait&oldid=505127377>

22

Wikipedia contributors, 'Las Meninas', Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 24 July 2012, 05:44 UTC, <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Las_Meninas&oldid=503898124>

Further Reading

Barthes, Roland, The Death of the Author, American Journal (1967)

Berger, John, Berger on Drawing, (Occasional Press, 2007)

Benton, Michael, Studies in the Spectator Role, (London, RoutledgeFalmer, 2000)

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice The Phenomenology of Perception (London: Routledge, 1962)

Duve, Thierry de, How Manet’s A Bar at the Folies Bergère Is Constructed, (The University of Chicago, 1998)

Kahneman, Daniel, Thinking, Fast and Slow, (Penguin, 2011)

Kennedy, Dennis, The Spectator and the Spectacle, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009)

Schmitter, Amy.M, Picturing Power: Representation and Las Meninas, (Blackwell Publishing, 1996)

Stamelman, Richard, Critical Reflections: Poetry and Art Criticism in Ashbery’s “Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror, (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984)

Stein, Roger B, Thomas Smith’s Self-Portrait: Image/Text as Artifact, Art Journal (1984)

Online Resources

Ivy, Jeanne, The Exploration of Self, http://userpages.umbc.edu/~ivy/selfportrait/intro.html [accessed 30 July 2012]

Rivera, Natialia, Las Meninas, http://evergreen.loyola.edu/brnygren/www/Honors/velazquez.htm [accessed 7 July 2012]

Culture Now: Tracey Emin, Institute of Contemporary Arts, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wouyb5KQM9k [accessed 4 June 2012]

23