Art and Macbeth

Art and Macbeth

As an IB Art student, analyzing and interpreting works of art is what we have to do practically every day (I cannot stress the “every” enough).  However, we do so in order to inform our own artmaking decisions and if applicable, to emulate the artist’s style in our own works (either by following their purpose or by following their process of creating the work).  So, let’s dive in to this wonderful piece of artwork that I have analyzed... (DISCLAIMER: although I am in IB Art I am not the most proficient drawer so please excuse the sketch you are about to witness down below).

Due to the redundant analyses of two dimensional works of art (as is common in my second period on a-days) I chose to examine a tangible (4-D) object.   

Citation: “Great Britain and Ireland, 1400–1600 A.D.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/ht/?period=08&region=euwb (October 2002)

(I know you all thought this was my drawing, but in fact it is the original.)

(Here is my beautiful drawing *insert multiple heart eyes here*)

While the artist of the salt vessel that you see above is unknown, it was most likely made by someone in the merchant/tradesman class.  This is because people that built and designed goods such as these were members of these classes- not existing necessarily in the nobility but also not peasants.  The “Standing Salt with Cover” piece was made from gilt silver, is approximately 11 ⅜ inches tall and is estimated to have been created in 1584-1585 in London, England.  

As mentioned above, this salt holder was manufactured during the 16th century in England, a time when England was emerging as a major power in international commerce.  After the reign of Elizabeth I in the late 16th century, there was a shift in the economic and artistic life of the British Isles. England was establishing themselves with a rich literary culture and powerful navy that had significant trading interests.

The salt container is decorated with elaborate designs (see my drawing above for reference) that serve to emphasize the nature of the people that would have possession of this material object (because apparently someone’s worth is amplified when they possess elaborately decorated and designed salt holders??).  Some of the designs include a lions head, a date, and other unidentifiable designs. The lions head serves to exemplify an England nationalistic ideal since the national animal of England is a lion. This further reinforces power and status because if you are of high power, you would most definitely support the system in order to stay in that position of power.

But honestly, this is not too different from the way we purchase goods today.  For example, I have wanted to own a Gucci belt for a very long time (I stress the VERY in the previous sentence).  Maybe it's because I like the style, or maybe it's because I know it's way too expensive for me to afford and I want to demonstrate my wealth (which is non-existent except for when I babysit for a particular family down the street…).  

Citation: Hayes, Olivia. “Still Haven't Nabbed That Gucci Belt? This Irish Retailer's Dupe Is Just €40.” Her.ie, Her.ie, 5 Oct. 2017, www.her.ie/style/still-havent-nabbed-gucci-belt-irish-retailer-selling-dupe-e40-367996)

Just like the Gucci belt with the two giant interwoven G’s, the salt container is marked with elaborate designs to further emphasize its importance.  This belt would not be as special without the well-known Gucci symbols. The same applies to the salt container. If the container was not elaborately decorated with familiar symbols (i.e. the lions head being the national animal of England) would it have the same amount of power?  People of the wealthier classes in 16th century England would look for the best of the best salt containers, and obviously if your neighbor Karen had the barren (rhyme!) salt container with no designs, it wouldn’t be as significant of an establishment of power and influence.

However, I think it is somewhat humorous to think about how this salt container would not be seen in homes today.  It’s crazy to think about how some of the items we use to demonstrate worth may be seen as worthless in the future.  For example, the Gucci belt (again, sorry). The belt in the present may signify wealth and style, but in the future it may become just another clothing piece that shouldn’t be worn in public.  

Therefore overall, this art piece is used to demonstrate the higher status of the wealthier classes in 16th century England.  This art piece is specifically constructed to exemplify a sophisticated status through the intricate designs carved over the surface.  But, I cannot help but ask myself that since we don’t see artworks or pieces like this in households today, will the objects that we deem as valuable and an indication of wealth be “out” as well?

The Black Column

The Black Column

Brontë, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. Peterborough, Ont: Broadview Press, 1999. Print.

Upon the arrival of Mr. Brocklehurst to inspect the school, the happy (eh not happy but maybe slightly less bad) school turns even worse.  His demeanor and actions make the vile Miss Hannigan from Annie seem like a loving mother.  I mean, this man gets upset that little girls are given a small portion of lunch to make up for the meal that was burnt earlier in the day.  Come on man! This guy would rather let these children starve, but oh wait, he’s doing it so that they reject habits of luxury and self-indulgence, because that makes it better???  I can go on and on about how much I hate this man, who by the way I actually know very little about- my opinion has been formed solely off of this chapter, but I feel like I have a sense of duty to bash this man in my blog post in order to stand up for these poor girls.  

For a little visual reference, here is a picture of a man that portrayed Mr. Brocklehurst in the film adaptation of Jane Eyre...

I know its “No Shave November” but come on buddy, the sideburns make you look like you stuck some sheep wool to the sides of your face.  (P.S. there are additional film adaptations and all of the Mr. Brocklehurst’s are just as ugly)

When sweet little Jane is describing this awful man she doesn’t compare him to something absolutely disgusting such as gum on the bottom of a shoe, or a cockroach, or slimy and smelly rats, she instead compares this man to a “black column”.  In the text it says, “the same black column which had frowned on me so ominously from the hearthrug of Gateshead. I now glanced sideways at this piece of architecture. Yes, I was right: it was Mr. Brocklehurst, buttoned up in a surtout, and looking longer, narrower, and more rigid than ever.” (Brontë)  Yeah I don’t know about you but if I was compared to a column I would definitely take it as an insult, but I think being called a cockroach would be worse.  

Jane Eyre was written in 1847 in London, England by author Charlotte Brontë.  During this time period in England, Victorian architecture was very prominent and the most favorable style.  Characterizing this Victorian architecture was decorative trim, tall, narrow arches, pointed windows, and columns.  It is also important to note that by 1887 (after the publication of Jane Eyre) more vibrant colors started to be used aside from the traditional white, beige, and gray tones.  Hmmm now what color did I seem to not mention... BLACK. This is because black columns were not found in the traditional Victorian style architecture of 19th century England.

This indicates that Jane is characterizing this man as not fitting in and contributing anything beneficial to the school.  In fact, he only hinders their growth and development through the implementation of absurd and strict rules that are meant to help the children develop, but in fact does quite the opposite.  

Furthermore… later on in the chapter Jane comments again on Mr. B (he doesn’t deserve to have his entire name written out) when he is saying, “‘My dear children,’ pursued the black marble clergyman, with pathos…” (Brontë).  Here Jane is comparing him to a black marble clergyman.  This is significant because churches of the 19th century in England were often times constructed with colorful marble lined hallways and floors or with pristine marble figures- not with black marble columns.  Therefore, there is an element of juxtaposition within Jane’s description of Mr. B, he is a man not belonging in a religious place (as clergymen are male priests, ministers, or other religious leaders). This parallels his own role within the school that Jane attends- he is meant to seem as important and making the school run effectively when in reality he is an ugly man that the school would be able to function better without (ouch...that might’ve been too harsh…).  

Overall, Jane denoting the idea of a black marble column upon Mr. Brocklehurst impacts the development of his character as an awful man that does not belong.  I hate this man. If you disagree...please don’t visit my blog posts again.