The myth of the artist’s persona in relation to Gauguin and Van Gogh

 What is it, how did it begin and how has it developed?

Today we all recognise a common stereotype of an artist’s persona; who creates different, non conformist works who are considered to be outlaws of society and whom must have conjured ideas from either mental illness, alcohol abuse or letting their strong emotions and personal circumstances cloud their ideas of traditional artistic methods.  We can go as far to say that this stereotype has become the “myth of madness” of the artist’s persona, which we can strongly attribute to the two biggest makers of myth from the post-impressionists movement, Paul Gauguin and Vincent Van Gogh.  We can describe the works of both artists to be an expressive intervention which was later to be recognised as works of a genius that was to be fundamental in the pioneering stages of expressionism.  In this essay I aim to consider selected works of both artists, in order to gain an in-depth explanation as to what the myth was in relation to both artists psyche, were they interlinked? What the initial causes of the myth were and most interestingly how the myth of persona was developed through both artists’ careers and also its influence throughout art, all the while celebrating the heights of their creations, which they are most considered as being today.

Van Gogh and Gauguin shared quite an ambiguous friendship, but within their friendship they shared a notion that was to become a common goal among the artists, this was the creation of the myth of the artist. In order to see how this myth was created, it is important to consider both the artists social situation within their environment in Paris, the kind of work that they were producing in relation to this, which caused them to pioneer such an expressive invention. “Modern painters, lonely and poor, are treated like madmen and as a result do become mad, at least as far as their social life...we must be absolutely ready to accept poverty and social isolation.”[1] These, Van Gogh’s words clearly suggest that what the two men were expressing was a struggle within their artistic environment; we can go as far to say that they were pronounced outcasts and suffered rejection from the art world. Van Gogh who had failed as a minister was at the time painting dark, solemn paintings that centred themselves on peasant life, the most famous and a prime example is the Potato eaters. He wanted to make a mark in the world and if not through ministry he would definitely prove himself through his art. His brother Theo was employed through the art industry through selling paintings at “Goupils Gallery”[2] in Paris. Van Gogh would send Theo his paintings to be sold, but only sold one painting in his lifetime. Consequently his brother came to be the constant source of income for Van Gogh who preferred to lead a more austere lifestyle; alone with his art. Van Gogh was a highly emotional and intense individual whom also suffered with mental illness, suggested as bipolar disorder, which can be considered as the catalyst for his innovative creations. It is evident that Van Gogh lived a life of misery and desolation having sold no paintings alongside an obscured view of mankind and nature. It is the concern for human suffering, the lifelong conquest of a both artistic and spiritual struggle that we see in his paintings, which would later become the myth of madness. Coincidently it was a similar struggle that Gauguin found himself reacting against. His paintings were not selling as well as he had much anticipated and with a burning ferocity embarked upon establishing a rebellious character-morphing based persona that would lead to his art being centred upon him. This was achieved through religious iconography, the idea of him being a savage along with ideas of primitivism. He wanted to be considered as anybody and anything but himself which was a failed artist, which also included him leaving his family and own environment. This establishes that the myth of the artist’s persona began and is most evident in self portraits, which were representations of a confessional struggle for existence.

So we have established the main origins of the myth of the artists persona, now it is essential to make a point of when it was first relevant in Van Gogh’s and Gauguin’s art, by considering some examples that show the pioneering stages , main themes and ultimately as well as its development through the course of self portraiture. Gauguin’s myth of persona was presented in a mixture of mediums such as paintings, drawings, wood carvings, sculptures, bronzes as well as ceramic pieces. The first of Gauguin’s manifestos of being an outcast from society again unites Van Gogh as a kind of companion of hardship by sending him his works and letters to project each other’s concerns and aims. The piece that Gauguin sent and dedicated to Van Gogh was a self portrait named “les misreables a l’ami Vincent” and with it a letter explaining “I have painted him in my own likeness, so you have a picture of myself at the same time a portrait of all of us, poor victims of society”[3]. Gauguin had represented himself as the convict Jean Valjean from Victor Hugo’s novel “les miserables”. This suggests that Gauguin thought of himself as a poor, victimised convict, which he also attributed to all the suffering European artists in the same situation, classifying them as “others”.  One major theme that Gauguin included in his myth of persona was religion. The paintings which signify this need for recognition of pain and suffering which equated to that of Christ are the “Christ on the Mount of Olives” and the “Yellow Christ” executed in a style named Synthecism.  The Identification with Christ and the notion of rebellion at the same time are clearly represented in his 1889 self portrait Halo and snake. Thomas Buser’s article on Gauguin’s religion points out the idea of Gauguin creating this dual persona, “On more than one occasion Gauguin himself brought attention to what he considered his dual nature of sinner (snake and apples) and saint (the halo)”[4].  In the portrait we can identify the symbolism Gauguin uses to serve this idea, through the use of the apples and snake which are direct references to the ideas of expulsion and rebellion. Alongside the halo upon Gauguin head, a signifier of angelic saints which corresponds to and adds to his idea of struggle and persistence in his attempt to “save art”. This leads us to another of his myth making developments, the idea of his travelling savage persona which is significant in his move to Tahiti by sea voyage in 1981[5]; place of nature, primitivism and simplicity, which enabled him to explore his inner self and non-European personal visions.  As a reference point to his later savage self portraits he sculpted a stone Tahitian Goddess figure known as Oviri whose name translates as “wild savage” which served as an “adjective applied to himself”[6] .He portrayed his “savageness” in a bronze head, an entirely new man is represented that seemed to have neglected all sense of aesthetics and favoured a more rough, grotesquely harsh and ultimately primitive technique, which of course is also represented in the Oviri. As well as producing these primitive works, along with depictions of local Tahitian women, Gauguin also incorporated into his persona as being a free-loving savage. Noa Noa a personal journal was written to illustrate his expressions of a primitive hardship, of himself- all with a public view that would accompany his paintings. Goldwater describes the Journals tones as being “one of self conscious revolt against a watching world”[7]. This suggests his Myth of the artist was not only pictorial but also literary developed.  On returning to Europe from Tahiti, Gauguin was to again be faced with the same reactions to his work, which he sought to abolish in the visit to Tahiti. Upon deciding to permanently reside in Tahiti were he wrote to William Melford in 1897 expressing his once again angry and deflated condition, “ever since my childhood I have been pursued by bad luck. Never a chance. No friends. Everything always turning against me...what is the good of virtue, work, courage, the highflying spirit of humanity?”[8] Struck down with illness and continuous low morale, we see a darkening of Gauguin’s portraits and more interestingly the return of the representation of Christ.  One of his last depictions of Christ, self portrait “pres du Golgotha”[9] seems to be a representation of Gauguin’s deterioration and the conclusion of a long vendetta towards the artist; overall an image of a worn out, mentally exhausted and a self professed failure of himself and humanity in general.

For van Gogh his personality in his paintings was expressed through his use of paint, this is evident when we compare his earlier portraits to his much later works. Although we see development of his personality and attitudes towards his condition in his letters to his brother Theo, outlining his artistic ambitions and own personal hardship. Van Gogh’s style when he is painting in Paris is similar to the peasant paintings he was painting alongside. Dark and murky tones are used with minimal expression of brushwork, compared to his later works which became distinctive of his harsh, thick painting technique. It seems as though at this stage Van Gogh was experimenting with tone, colour, brushstrokes and viewpoint in order to present his idea of struggle. After Vincent had moved to southern France where he was inspired by the sunlight bright colours within nature and also the hope of establishing a utopian art colony, where the break from isolation could be made through the colonisation of likeminded artist who were in the same position as himself and Gauguin, here we see a distinct change within his artistic style which fundamentally privileged exaggeration.  Gauguin joined Van Gogh in Arles to pursue their dedication to art and define themselves as great artists who were to create something in Van Gogh’s words “which lives longer than ourselves”[10], which was of course the notability of creating modern art and the breakaway from society as art rebels; through the myth of artistic persona. It was this stage in their careers at Arles which saw that these ideas were to become just that, for it is the famous incident in the house at Arles which saw the escalation of Van Gogh’s illness amalgamated with his artistic expression. In a similar way to Gauguin, we can see a type of characterization which represented his temperament at a specific moment in time and place which was represented by his “physiognomic projections” within his paintings[11]. Consequently this is evident following the incident in the house at Arles when Van Gogh advanced towards Gauguin with a blade, his mental health was severely suffering. The self portraits which were painted at Arles tell the story of his emotions which add to the myth of madness which was now rapidly developing. A strategy both Van Gogh and Gauguin tried was to paint themselves as smartly dressed, intellectual members of Parisian society, in hope of this selling more works to customers and in essence complying to arts expectations, which would only end up causing more resentment towards buyers and critics in Europe. Hence the Myth of the artist can be described as an escalation, if we look at Van Gogh’s self portrait which he dedicated to Gauguin before the incident at the house; we see a hub of emotion and struggle in his eyes and to be fair the whole tone and mood of the painting suggests deterioration.  The self portraits of him with a bandaged ear radiate a sense of quiet desperation as most of his canvas is composed of his figure, creating the idea of a need for intimacy and consolation. We can see a transformation in Van Gogh’s work whilst at a mental hospital that he admitted himself to after the incident; this is considered to be a major contribution of his artistic breakthrough, having painted the famous “starry night” which features his trademark swirling brush strokes that signify a sense of movement which is also used in one of his last self portraits before his death which epitomises the idea of physiognomy of his mental state. One of these portraits that were painted in the hospital unit in 1889 shows a flipped viewpoint of Van Gogh so that his mutilated ear cannot be seen; instead we see a pair of piercing blue eyes which gaze straight at the viewer, heightening intensity. Blue tones swamp the canvas which is also the main colour in much of his later portraits, and are prominent in the skin tone which contributes to the idea of his body and mind deteriorating into a deeper episode of depression; leaving only the complimentary colour orange to highlight his facial hair and detail on his clothing.  

In conclusion, considering both Van Gogh and Gauguin’s collaborative aims towards a myth of artistic identity, the one recurring theme that initiated and developed the myth was the artists fight against struggle against their seclusion from European society. The myth began with the refusal of their artworks in France, therefore self characterization seemed the only way to rebel against the domain and create something that would literally live forever and indeed it still remains one of the most recognised themes that run through art today. Van Gogh seemed to adopt the role of an austere, lonely monk like character who longed for comfort from other artists who were suffering the same plights.  Although a major factor that made this “myth of madness” that everybody identifies Van Gogh with today is his mental illness and the use of intoxications, namely alcohol. It is interesting though to consider that the mental illness that Van Gogh suffered seemed to pave the future of his creativity through to the introduction of vibrant use of colours, and then proceeding to create his own style of painting which from his autobiographical, physiognomic self portraits is evident, all of which narrate his decent into madness.  Whereas Gauguin still sympathised with this idea of struggle, he chose to deal with it through self characterisation, of a storyteller type traveller that by splitting and developing his persona through a dualism of saint and sinner. This idea is summed up by Gauguin in a letter to Mette in 1888, “I have two natures within myself, the Red Indian and the sensitive one, the sensitive one has disappeared and this allows the Red Indian to go ahead with determination”[12]. This aim of establishing a complex interchanging persona that included characters from literature, religion and the creation of the savage was to express and exemplify his rebellion but at the same time crave for acceptance within the European art world. The myth of the artist persona is developed to a point of tragedy, in both the cases of Van Gogh and Gauguin which is made evident in the escalation of self portraits which signify the raw emotion of the artist and the defeat of humanity with illness. All of which encompass the notion of struggle yet a quest of spiritual determination.  It seems the Gauguin and Van Gogh’s portraits agreeably needed to be painted to provide ‘a consolatory art for distressed hearts!’[13]

Bibliography :

Crispino,E, Van Gogh, the Oliver Press, 2008.

Edwards,C, Van Gogh and God: a creative spiritual quest, Loyola Press, 1989

Goldwater, R.J, Primitivism in Modern Art, Harvard University Press, 1986.

Mittelstadt,K, Gauguin’s self portraits, Bruno Cassirer Ltd Oxford, 1968.

Web Sources:

http://vangoghletters.org

Articles:

T.Busmer, Gauguin’s Religion, Vol. 27, No. 4 (summer, 1968), pp. 375-380 Published By: College Art Association, Accessed: 30/11/2010 09:37

P.M.Jones, Vol. 57, No. 1, the Reception of Christian Devotional Art (spring, 1998), pp. 84-86 Published By: College Art Association, Accessed: 30/11/2010 09:39

---

[1]  K.Mittelstadt, gauguins self portraits, 1968. Pp.5.

[2] C.Edwards, Van Gogh and God: a creative spiritual quest, Loyola Press, 1989. Pp.15.

[3] .Mittelstadt, Gauguin’s self portraits, Bruno Cassirer Ltd Oxford, 1968. Pp.5.

[4] T.Busmer Vol. 27, No. 4 (Summer, 1968) page 376.

[5] E.Crispino, Van Gogh, the Oliver Press, 2008. Pp18                                                                                    

[6] E.Crispino, Van Gogh, the Oliver Press, 2008. Pp18.

[7] R.J.Goldwater, Primitivism in Modern Art, Harvard University Press, 1986. Pp64.

[8] Mittelstadt, Gauguin’s self portraits, Bruno Cassirer Ltd Oxford, 1968. Pp31.

[9] Mittelstadt, Gauguin’s self portraits, Bruno Cassirer Ltd Oxford, 1968. Pp9.

[10] Mittelstadt, Gauguin’s self portraits, Bruno Cassirer Ltd Oxford, 1968. Pp.5.

[11] Vol. 57, No. 1, The Reception of Christian Devotional Art (Spring, 1998), pp. 85.

[12] Mittelstadt, Gauguin’s self portraits, Bruno Cassirer Ltd Oxford, 1968. Pp27.

[13] http://vangoghletters.org (Van Gogh’s Letters, To Paul Gauguin. Arles, 21^st January 1889).