Jessica Turner

ARTH-56100: 20th Century Modern Art

Lindenwood University

Dr. Trenton Olsen

December 23, 2022

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries throughout Europe, depicting the female nude in visual art by viewing female models in life drawing classes was restricted to male artists.[1]Women had limited, if no access at all to studying nude female figures in any arts institutions in Western Europe. Despite this barrier, the Welsh and post-impressionist artist Gwendolyn John (22 June 1876 – 18 September 1939)painted particularly revolutionary works of art by studying women close to her, who would also become the subjects for her future nude model compositions; she was inclined to exhibit the pressures women were under to perform domestic duties above becoming an artist, through primarily tone, body language, and the rendering of interior spaces. It was her capability to impregnate her work with depth of feeling, in which led her down a unique path defining the intimacy of a confined life, portrayed through female models.[2]John eventually went on to sketch and paint her own nude portraits, although there were fewer of these works completed compared to those she composed of her peers. Gwen is perhaps best known through writings by her younger brother Augustus John (Jan 4 1878 - October 31 1961), who stated she was (in contrast to his more social demeanour), more of a recluse, who painted and meditated on works slowly, and frequently in isolation.[3]He disapproved of her preference for dwelling in "slums and under-ground cellars," in which no sunlight would touch, although this evidently worked well to employ muted tones to convey her subjects' pensive qualities, and to emphasize the private interior spaces they occupied. [4] Alone time was also very important to her, even though she was caught up in intense relationships, such as that with the prolific sculptor of his generation, Auguste Rodin (Nov 12 1840 - Nov 171917) - she continued to keep her own space, which she preferred neat and tidy; she led a modest and frugal lifestyle, which was certainly reflected in her sober interiors. John was for the most part close to Rodin and her brother Augustus John, both profoundly developed artists. Similarly, both men became entangled with many women, which influenced their work, and they often depicted women whom they preferred to muse over. However, Augustus soon believed his sister had outpainted him later in life, and once stated that she was in fact the"best woman artist of her age."[5]Rodin would create several nude works of John through sculpture, while Augustus focused more on draftsmanship and painting many portraits of his wife Ida, and later, his mistress Dorothy. It could be said that John was certainly, at a point, overshadowed by both men, where her works didn't gain as much attention or traction with critics or historians until much later in life. Nonetheless, John was redefining the modern woman through visual art, by encouraging viewers to gain insight into the mysterious narrative of the introspective and independent new female. Her works subverted the male gaze by repudiating the erotic and romantic ideologies pertinent to the narrative of a happily married woman; and she illuminated the endurance embedded in the pursuit of autonomy - or at least the illusion of a gradual disengaging with marital activity, as a modern woman.

Early in life, upbringing truly influenced her later reserved and quiet manner. In 1884, his mother died, while John was at the tender age of eight, and furthermore, John's unaffectionate nanny was eventually dismissed.[6]She lacked the stability of guardians in her life, and it was these early years in which John developed a lack of verbal communication, as her father provided very little emotional support and was also often cold and unaffectionate with Gwen, Augustus, and their other two siblings; to top it all off, the children were left with their two aunts who also showed very little warmth towards them.[7]We can see how this emotional bluntness received from her family members and caretakers could induce her to conceal emotions or any expression at all unless it was through her quiet contemplation and desire to create art. Witnessing her widowed father at such a young age could have also led her to have inhibitions surrounding marriage, and this increased her ambition to be an independent female artist, or at the very least, live separately from her lovers. She learned early on to control her emotions, and this is evident in her work which is similarly very restrained in terms of the expression on subjects' faces, as well as their costume and body language. However, as a woman, John eventually separated herself from her family, with Augustus being the exception, to pursue her dreams as a fine artist regardless of the obstacles which lie before her. She gained a substantial education in art and practiced under prolific artists who helped to refine her renowned style.

Through the research of Jane Silcock, the access for women to gain an arts education was a crucial step in depicting the female nude as an artist; while an education was also typically critical for a woman to become independent and lead a life beyond marriage and family. It was only through the access of an art school that a female artist could potentially be permitted to view a nude model (even more rare for this model to be female). The rendering of a female nude was also considered a pinnacle moment in an artist’s life, especially in the 19th century.[8]Depicting the female nude was considered the epitome of "ideal beauty," but in 1871, the Royal Academy, despite allowing access to an arts education to 117 women, still banned women from life drawing classes.[9]Understandably, this would deny a female artist from rising to the heights achieved by male artists. However, during that same year in 1871, The Slade School in London offered women the chance to access nude male and female models.[10]Silcock describes this tension bound to women in the arts, even if they gained access to nude models, they were still dealing with the pressures of society, where being an artist and being a good wife did not go hand in hand. From here, we can see how Gwen John consciously chose to maintain her own private space for contemplation and reflection, to ensure her art projected the necessary elements, or characteristics, which were what made her unique. Despite keeping to herself, it was John's relationship with Rodin which influenced her work most strikingly through the transition of 1900 - 1908, where John's work became increasingly abstract and represented "dilemmas and ambivalences" she and other female artists endured.[11]

InMaria Tamboukou's "Beyond Figuration and Narration: Deleuzian Approaches to Gwen John's Paintings," she discusses the many ways in which Johns's work moved beyond “conventions and constraints of figurative painting," contributing to her deviation of the norm in early 20thcentury.[12] Although her work was figurative, such as portraits of young women, John still was creating works of art that were considered radical when informed by Deleuzian philosophy, all while addressing the patriarch at the same time.[13] Similar to Deleuze, John focuses on the faces of her subjects, where the face and body language are tied to the “evolution of the voice.”[14] Without speaking or writing about her work, John was adept at conveying what women were searching for in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in Western Europe. Without knowing, female viewers of her work could subconsciously become more comfortable with seeing women detached from the comfort sought in partnership - a message may be more palatable through visual art than written works for example by Virginia Woolf. According to Deleuze, the face, signifying subjectivity, becomes the icon to translate meaning; and in John’s work, with their barren backgrounds, she seems to consistently draw the viewer directly to the face, and frequently to the hands, which could be just as expressive.[15] Deleuze also stresses the importance of facial expressions being directly linked to language, and disciplinary society, reiterating the power of visual perception rather than a verbal or written message.[16]

After studying at the Slade School in London from 1895 - 1898 where John gained access to nude models, she perfected her technical skills in drawing. She then moved on to Paris to study at Académie Carmen from 1898 - 1899, where she further developed her technical proficiency in portraiture, by studying under James McNeilWhistler.[17]At one point, her brother Augustus recognized Gwen's development under Whistler and stated her works "showed a feeling for character," at which point Whistler corrected him stating it was the tone which mattered, and that Gwenhad a "fine sense of tone."[18]Her works seemed to compose methods employed by Paul Cezanne, as she reduced objects to their basic geometric forms, with thick swathes of muted tones; while her subjects remained persistently that of young women rather than old.[19]

It is surprising that John survived without becoming married during her time at the Slade School, as most women from this school were "forced to marry rather than pursue careers."[20] From 1903 on, John lived the rest of her life in Paris, supporting herself by modelling nude for artists like Rodin.[21]However, there was a thin line between modelling nude for artists, and prostitution, so the possibility of John being humiliated under this process was high.[22]This process which provided her economic stability could also have contributed to her longing to depict independent and detached women in her work. Through her paintings, John radically altered how women were being perceived in the early 20th century, in contrast to how they were expected to act(domestically), in the most subtle way, which in part was revolutionary, due to a lack of artists' rendering women beyond considering the male gaze and objectification at this time. Instead, John considered the female gaze, and as I will argue, she most frequently imbued her works with her own inner state, which she reflected in (or projected onto) other women in her artwork. Her character, as well as societal influences, heavily determined how and what she was painting. She developed a tendency towards more indirect feminist iconography and Deleuzian methodology, which therein differentiated her work from (and thus surpassed) what her male counterparts were creating. John infused her works with elements, in essence, pertaining to her own character. It was her capability to impregnate her work with profound emotion by means of extreme attention to detail, in which set her apart from her contemporaries.[23]Consistently, her work could be described as soft, quiet, a bit detached, confident, relatively aloof, and unashamed.

Most particularly, we can see this characterized in her 1909 painting Nude Girl (Fig.1), where John paints an intimate, nude portrait, of Fenella Lovell (Fig 1). Lovell seems to be leaning against a dirty green wall, but we can also see a chair behind her. It looks as though the chair is painted onto the wall, with Lovell almost spilling out of the canvas. Her breasts are exposed, and she is wearing nothing but a necklace, draped with a light blue blanket which covers her genital area and most of her legs. However, the blanket seems to be in a moment of slowly sliding down her hips and legs, as her hands are not grasping it, but are limply placed at her sides with her palms facing up. What is unique is Lovell's shameless recognition of the blanket slipping, possessing a powerful association with the asexuality contained in her body - the birth of a woman comfortable in her nudity without implying the necessity of sex. Simply put, she does not care that her naked body is on view. Lovell's face looks rather gloomy or indifferent, with tones of green, grey, and small amounts of pink around her eyes, as though she had been modelling for John for a sufferably long time. Lovell is infused with a disinterest in being captured by John, no matter how long it takes, rather than the vitality of a falsely enthusiastic model portrayed through vibrant tones.

In contrast to this, and leading up to her portrait of Lovell, John painted herself very differently in two works from 1900 to 1908. In her 1900, SelfPortrait (Fig. 2), John is fully dressed, looking stoically out at the viewer, sitting upright and seemingly abundant in self-worth. John contains a strong sense of courage with her hands at her hips, while her body is on a slight angle. This portrait also differs in style greatly from her SelfPortrait Nude Sitting on Bed painted in 1908 (Fig. 3). Jane Silcock describes the contrast between John's Self Portrait, 1900, of which is more reminiscent of Rembrandt, to her "modest" nude self-portrait on the edge of her bed in 1908, which she claims is due to John's change in life and education during this time, especially with her relationship to Rodin, in which her work began exhibiting a "remarkable transformation."[24]However, this relationship with Rodin broke down in 1910, a time when she moved to Meudon, a French town, where her subjects changed to that of the Dominican Sisters Charity, who had a convent in Meudon.[25]We can see as she aged and gained more experience painting, her work increasingly became more about other women, including nuns, fully clothed, in a state which was seemingly void of any emotion, and with a state of inertia. Her subjects were often devoid of anything around them other than perhaps a chair, some flowers, a book, or a cat. The repetition and consistency in her painting have been referred to as being due to the influence of her eventual conversion to Catholicism in 1913.[26]It was after this conversion which we see an abundance of portraits she depicted of nuns, all while her nude portraiture runs dry.

To Johns's benefit, she was in a city which was considered the center for producing nude female self-portraiture, such as by artists Paula Modersohn-Becker and Henrietta Rae -who both produced nude portraits before John.[27]Without this influence and encouragement from other women producing nude self-portraits, John perhaps may not have had the confidence to do so. But even John departed from what Parisian women were displaying in their female subjects, as John's rendering of portraiture displays an alarmingly moody, unriveting state of women, where they are far from idealized, and psychologically difficult to decipher, as though they could be hiding something, or perhaps not hiding anything (which is most stunning). Her subjects seem to be doubtful of the burden of a life consisting solely of marriage. They were not embellished by a partner by their side but rather contained an air on the brink of defining their own path. Her subjects were their most unremarkable selves without any desire or expectation of the male gaze. This is what makes Johns's works so truthful, and transparent, ironically, although these women possess an enigmatic aura. Therefore, her works almost function as contradictions, which is something women including John were still feeling in early 20th century France, as they were split between societal expectations of motherhood and domestic life, which contrasted greatly with being an independent female artist- the two were not expected to be juggled at the same time.

Looking at the influence of Rodin and Johns's brother Augustus, we can see John built her own path, as her works greatly departed from her male counterparts. She led a path depicting the iconography of women very differently than had been previously seen. More than perhaps, what was included in her works, was a prolific sense of what was missing: the objectification of women, hyper-stylized and idealizedversions of women's bodies, and of course accentuating the curves, softness, and overall feminine depictions of women. In Nude Girl, John punctuates the barren psychological landscape of Lovell, with a voidness that implies this nude portrait subverts the male gaze. Furthermore, in Nude Girl, we can see how the formal qualities of this work align with her life as a relatively isolated artist. She consciously moved away from the bustle of modernity, and unnecessary desire to characterize modernity’s speed (as seen in futurism from 1912), the juxtaposition of odd subjects (such as surrealism from 1910), or even a sense of absurdity (found in Dada from 1916) - it is clear that none of these Avant Garde styles inspired her work, even though many of these movements took place where she was situated, in Paris, France, during the same period. The originality of John's work can also be seen as a result of her resistance to the formalist qualities found in cubism, or Fauve's brilliant use of colour- although in Paris her work was still adorned with the "understatement and reticence" of British art.[28]

Perhaps due to John's desire to be in her own company, her visual art still took a more traditional path in terms of style. Her unique expression of subject matter, colour palette, and technique equivalent to old masters, gave her leverage into being a prolific female painter of the 20th century. There were few, if none at all, female artists depicting women with such technical aptitude and honesty. Interestingly, it also seems as though Lovell, including other women who were painted by John, all portrayed the same qualities as John. Even if these women had exciting, vibrant, social lives, it was completely indiscernible in John’s paintings. It begs the question of whether John painted these women as isolated from the social perks of modernism, in order to provide herself relief in knowing there were women living just as isolated as her (away from married life) - or - if she transformed these women into more aloof, unashamed, independent and detached from their more realistically domestic and communal lives they normally led.

The position in which John's subjects are, indeed suggests a more psychological reading, as they are frequently in intense inner worlds, or perhaps draped with a veil of uncertainty. Through John's portrayals of women, including nude women, we can sense a consistent theme in which the subject radiates or highlights John'sinner state: intensely reflective and detached - although, a barrier between viewer and subject makes the reading incredibly difficult to discern, including the thoughts of the subject or state of John when she painted her subject. The interior world depicted by John is often quite barren, or rather empty, uncluttered, and rather than peaceful seems a bit gloomy, lacking in objects or colour. This lack of stimulation renders a quiet space in which her subjects are placed. Her artworks all carry similar backgrounds, in which her subject is seated either within an arid room against a wall or with simply just a muted tone as the background. She would also frequently paint her cats, which were known to come first to her above all else, and were dependent on many of her decisions - they even prevented her from returning to London, which was the deciding factor on her limited ability to visit her father in Wales.[29]In one letter sent from Gwen to her artist friend Ursula Tyrwhitt, she mentioned: "A cat or a man, it's the same thing."[30] A bold statement, which reiterated her obvious lack of necessity for a man. However, her commitment to her own cats could otherwise suggest that the presence of her cats replaced that of a man/partnership, and in fact, she cannot live without a man as long as he is distant and low maintenance(similar to a cat).

John's first public exhibition was at the New English Art Club in 1900.[31]In John's entire lifetime, there was only one solo exhibition held for her, at the Chenil Galleries, London, in 1926, where her works were best understood next to her contemporaries, and which was deemed a major success.[32]John died in 1939 due to stomach ailments, at the young age of sixty-three.[33]Yet, her works live on to represent an early representation of defiance against male presence, and the blooming of female camaraderie.[34]Although it may not be directly interpreted in her works, she was redefining the luxury of a woman spending time alone, connoting the direction necessary to upend what was typically considered the norm in society.

Studying the formal and iconographical feminist qualities of John's oeuvre, a line can be drawn between that of the independent woman of the 20th century and the influence of an early 20th-century artistic lifestyle on the search for life beyond domestic ties. As one of the first female artists to gain an arts education, Gwen pioneered the post-impressionist movement, and generated a means of painting women into a future of autonomy and agency over their lives - regardless of the ostensibly lonesome path they may regularly find themselves in. The social significance of John's work Nude Girl can be conveyed as a precursor and contribution to the feminist art movement; overlapping with John's artistic career was also a moment in time when European and North American women gained the right to vote - a time in which is inseparable from the identity John was forming through her art. Johns's art functioned to serve the niceties of female friendship and alliance, perhaps a necessary ingredient to the oddities (and adventures) of life without a man, whether through her early friendships, or later relationships garnered through the Dominican Sisters Charity convent. 

Bibliography

[1] Silcock, Jane, "Genius and Gender," The British Art Journal, 19, no. 3 (2018/2019): 20, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48584546.

[2] Simpson, Pamela H, Review of Gwen John: A Painter's Life by Sue Roe, Woman's Art Journal, 23, no. 3 (2002 - 2003): 37.

[3] John, Augustus, "Gwendolyn John," The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, 81, no. 475 (1942): 238, accessed December 11, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/868513.

[4] Ibid, 237.

[5] Sackerlotzky, Rotraud, "Gwen John: Interior: The Brown Teapot," The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, 75, no. 3 (1988): 99, accessed December 10, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25160024.

[6] Ibid, 100.

[7] Ibid, 100.

[8] Silcock, Jane, "Genius and Gender," The British Art Journal, 19, no. 3 (2018/2019): 20, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48584546.

[9] Ibid, 20.

[10] Ibid, 20.

[11] Ibid, 22.

[12] Tamboukou, Maria. “Beyond Figuration and Narration: Deleuzian Approaches to Gwen John’s Paintings.” Deleuze Studies, vol. 8, no. 2 (2014): 231, accessed December 20, 2022, https://doi.org/10.3366/dls.2014.0144

[13] Ibid, 231.

[14] Ibid, 231.

[15] Ibid, 231.

[16] Ibid, 231.

[17] Silcock, Jane, "Genius and Gender," The British Art Journal, 19, no. 3 (2018/2019): 21, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48584546.

[18] Sackerlotzky, Rotraud, "Gwen John: Interior: The Brown Teapot," The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, 75, no. 3 (1988): 104, accessed December 10, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25160024.

[19] Ibid, 104 -106.

[20] Liption, Eunice, and Zemle, Carol, "Female Painter, Male Model," The Women's Review of Books, 4, no. 3 (1986): 11, accessed December 13, 2022, http://www.jstor.com/stable/4019898

[21] Silcock, Jane, "Genius and Gender," The British Art Journal, 19, no. 3 (2018/2019): 21, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48584546.

[22] Ibid, 11.

[23] Shone, Richard, "Gwen John at Anthony d'Offay," The Burlington Magazine, 118, no. 876 (1976): 175, accessed December 18, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/878325.

[24] Silcock, Jane, "Genius and Gender," The British Art Journal, 19, no. 3 (2018/2019): 21, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48584546.

[25] Tester, Keith, Review of Nomadic Narrative, Visual Forces: Gwen John's Letters and Paintings by Maria Tamboukou, New Blackfriars, 92, no. 1041 (2011): 643, accessed December 18, 2022, DOI:10.1111/j.1741-2005.2011.01453.x.

[26] Liption, Eunice, and Zemle, Carol, "Female Painter, Male Model," The Women's Review of Books, 4, no. 3 (1986): 11, accessed December 13, 2022, http://www.jstor.com/stable/4019898

[27] Silcock, Jane, "Genius and Gender," The British Art Journal, 19, no. 3 (2018/2019): 20, accessed December 12, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/48584546.

[28] Sackerlotzky, Rotraud, "Gwen John: Interior: The Brown Teapot," The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, 75, no. 3 (1988): 109, accessed December 10, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25160024.

[29] John, Augustus, "Gwendolyn John," The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, 81, no. 475 (1942): 238, accessed December 11, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/868513.

[30] Tamboukou, Maria. “Beyond Figuration and Narration: Deleuzian Approaches to Gwen John’s Paintings.” Deleuze Studies, vol. 8, no. 2 (2014): 231, accessed December 20, 2022, https://doi.org/10.3366/dls.2014.0144

[31] Denney, Colleen, "A View of the Open Sky: Gwen John's Early Modern Portraits and Interiors," Woman's Art Journal, 42, 1 (2022): 34, accessed December 19, 2022, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A714076559/AONE?u=sain20269&sid=summon&xid=145517d8

[32] Sackerlotzky, Rotraud, "Gwen John: Interior: The Brown Teapot," The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, 75, no. 3 (1988): 109, accessed December 18, 2022, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25160024.

[33] Simpson, Pamela H, Review of Gwen John: A Painter's Life by Sue Roe, Woman's Art Journal, 23, no. 3 (2002 - 2003): 36.

[34] Denney, Colleen, "A View of the Open Sky: Gwen John's Early Modern Portraits and Interiors," Woman's Art Journal, 42, 1 (2022): 34, accessed December 19, 2022, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A714076559/AONE?u=sain20269&sid=summon&xid=145517d8