My Kid Could Paint That

Marc Chagall, Over the Town, 1918

Married to his first love, Bella Rosenfeld, in 1915, Russian-Jewish painter Marc Chagall took off with her in his works, literally. He did many scenes of them flying through a canvas as seen here when they are painted flying over their home town, Vitebsk. After they married they had a daughter, Iba, and it was after her birth that he made this piece. Over the Town gives a glimpse at the color we will later see from Chagall with the red in the background and the color blacks on their clothing. This was also painting during their last year in Russia. Many intellectuals such as Chagall fled to Berlin and later to Russia in the early 1920s. He was the Commissioner of Arts in Vitebsk and also started an art school before leaving for Paris.

Chagall, Liberation, 1952

After settling there, Bella fell ill and died. During this time he made many stage pieces for the arts and ballets and became well known during his time in Paris. A while after, he found a new muse and love when he married Valentina Brodsky. After their marriage he became using brighter more vibrant colors and distinct lines as seen in Liberation. His time away from love brought out some duller bule's and other colors, but clearly his time in love brought about some vibrant works. Liberation shows exactly that. We see their marriage, celebration with music, and a sense of breaking free.

Both pieces display true Chagall character in his figures, color, composition, and creative mind. All of his ideas just plop onto a canvas like they appear in Liberation all while forming some sort of clarity that we can relate to.

Sargent, A Gust of Wind, 1886

While working on Madame X in Brittany, Sargent painted Judith Gautier. I choose this painting of Sargent's because Judith is absolutely fascinating to me, and Sargent paints her in a way that perfectly describes the person I would imagine Judith Gautier to be.

She grew up thrown into the arts by her father, Theophile Gautier. As a writer he pushed Judith to read outside the box, and she become accustomed to a bohemian lifestyle that she took on "with a vengeance" (Davis 114). Her father asserted his independence and non-conformity by never marrying her mother, which might have something to do with Judith's controversial marriage herself. She married super star bachelor, Catulle Mendes, who was a writer like her father. They climbed into the elite social arts groups together. Because of her desire to climb the ladders, Judith turned the other cheek to her husbands quite public infidelity. Victor Hugo and Richard Wagner helped Judith to realize that she could still stand in social graces on her own as her marriage finally ended in 1874. Relationships with the men she met with her husband quickly turned into flirtations and Judith became the ultimate fan of the arts. As the number one groupie, "she convinced them that she alone understood art and its importance" (Davis 115).

To me she has a lifestyle that has taken her quite a long way, but is she really an independent superstar riding on the backs of these talented artists? If her goal was to become an independent women I'm not so sure because using Hugo for government pension so she can keep living the high life doesn't sound too independent to me. She is definitely one of a kind, and I believe Sargent's painting of her here shows just that. She was known for embracing Asian culture and wore kimonos often - as seen here and alone in the open - and he has painted one of his magnificent portraits in true Sargent fashion.    
 

Cassatt The Boating Party 1893-1894

In the 1890s Japanese art flowed into Paris. Exhibits displayed the block uses of color and the simplicity of designs, a nice breath of uncomplicated air from the impressionists shows. Cassatt enjoyed these exhibitions and took these techniques to her own art. This piece is a transition from her other more impressionistic pieces with fluid brush strokes, such as Tea painted earlier in 1880.

Cassatt, Tea, 1880

At the point in her career when she would have painted Tea, she was studying next to Degas and took to more formal situations with woman with scenes such as this, outdoors with children, while women are getting ready (fully clothed and out of the bathtub, unlike Monsieur Degas). The lines on the walls in Tea are less stressed and the color palette is clearly lighter compared to The Boating Party, where Cassatt goes as far as to almost create a shade of black, secretly forbidden by the impressionists.

After The Boating Party, Cassatt furthered her exploration of Japanese art and produced pieces such as Under the Horse Chestnut in 1898. The transformation of these three paintings show her progression in her career away from classic Impressionism. In Under the Horse Chestnut the block color look and light color palete is displayed. There is no depth, just strong, bland colors and lines that force you to focus on the shapes of the characters. Her clothing and her arms are done beautifully and her study of women with Degas shows through those aspects as she removes the shadows and colors, and the baby's body is also beautifully done with this new style as well.

Cassatt, Under the Horse Chestnut, 1898

I chose to focus on the middle transition piece because it shows her master of both Impressionist art and the beginnings of her Japanese influence. Her water is still smooth, but the man's coat and the boat begin to show the blocks of color, and the darkness of the man surprised many because, as I said before, black was never the choice color of impressionist painters, and this was a risky move and told viewers that Cassatt was in the process of going in a different direction.

The new direction took Cassatt on world adventures and finally to Egypt in 1910. There she saw true historical art and had an "art crisis," where she had a freak out about creating new art when the old art she was seeing near the pyramids and other artifacts. This forced her to question her art, and she remained in her "art crisis" but kept painting until 1914 when she went blind and had to put up her paint brushes.

Cassatt, Women with a Pearl Necklace in a Loge, 1879

One of Cassatt's most noted works, Women With a Pearl Necklace in a Loge depicts what is said to be her sister, Lidia, at the Paris opera house in a private box. The style of this piece is normal of Cassatt's impressionist side with the light brush strokes and casual lines that make the piece laid back and less formal of a piece for the quite formal occasion. Her high class is obvious and demonstrated by her seat at the opera and her clothes with her playful fan, dress, and flowers.

Formal scenes and domestic images were mostly Cassatt's subjects because she was a woman artist. Although she came from wealth, her father refused to support her artistic career and would only pay for her living expenses and not her art supplies or classes, which after the Pennsylvania School of Fine Arts her classes became sparse when she moved to Paris because women couldn't participate in the academies. Because of this, Cassatt found herself working in private studios with some of the greatest talent. She favored, of course, Degas' private studio time (though nothing romantic, with Degas' purely visual sexual behavior). After training with some of the Impressionist masters, she began working in these domestic scenes, or outings in which women could attend, such as this painting.  

Cassatt paints her at intermission and looking at her from her box seat, the viewer sees the rest the audience in the background, making this piece essentially addressing the audience as the performers. The show itself is at a pause and Cassatt takes a moment to capture the audience in action from the perspective of standing on the stage, looking up at her sister and the mirror image of the entire crowd. The reflection is done pretty well I'd say. Cassatt removes herself from the reflection, even though she would be seeing herself in the mirror as well from this view. She does this to further illuminate the audience as the performers and call attention to their act while they gather to watch the ballet. The viewers of a certain class int eh box seats must come to the ballet with a casual and elegant attitude, like Lidia displays, and be with friends and only concerned with themselves as Cassatt shows in the other boxes and by removing herself.    

Pierre Bonnard, Morning In Paris, 1911

Born in upper-middle class family, Bonnard studied and worked in law as he was told to do at the beginning of his life. He has also, of course, taken art classes on the side and soon decided to take off with his painting and become an artist. He first was shown in an independent exhibition and continued to show in random exhibitions. He became known for his wild use of color and his wicked brush stroke technique using said color. Also, he would draw the pieces he wished to make or even photograph them, make note of the color he wished to use, and then begin painting. He painted a wide variety of themes -  kitchens, bathtubs, or nudes using his wife, or street scenes, landscapes, and still lifes.

This piece, Morning in Paris, shows his Impressionist technique in the movement of the piece and stays true to his own delicate strokes for the detail in the background with the tree and the buildings as well. I really enjoy his use of colors, and feel warm when I look at it on a clearly cold day by the bare trees and the bundled characters. But when you look at the faces, sure they are brushed like any impressionist would do at the time, no one is looking up or appearing happy. The three girls to the left are looking down and sideways and the center one looks quite sad to me. This also matches the expression to the woman on the right. Even the little girl in the center looks left behind or stranded. So I guess you could say Bonnard tricked me. Even though I love his sky and the piece looks full of life, none of these characters appear much like morning people to me.

Picasso, Death of Marat, 1931

Click here to watch video

Picasso's Death of Marat gave me nightmares...once I figured out which limbs belonged to who. He paints Charlotte Corday towering over the tiny headed Marat as she gruesomely stabs him in the chest. This piece reminded me of "Monster" by Eminem because of the way he paints Corday. I see her losing her mind here, like the hatred she has for Marat takes over as she looks like she is about to take his head off. The story I know, that Corday meticulously planned her assassination of Marat. She thought through the whole process and here, Picasso takes the scene and makes it a passionate murder. Not one of trying to save her people, but a rage-fueled strike. Giving me the feeling that she is "friends with the voices inside of [her] head."

All of Eminem's verses talk about his struggle finding fame, his voice, and fighting with the "monsters" in his head. Though Corday appears to be the monster here, Marat gained his fame during the French Revolution sentencing any potential threat to death by simply writing them off. Clearly, the monster took over for him and he made a name for himself that Corday could not stomach. The actions that Marat took throughout the French Revolution may have been what he thought was right for the new republic, but "trying to save" the people didn't work as well as he had hoped. The terror is a good example of the monster taking over what once was a good idea (overthrowing the king that is).

I guess my point is that I see both Corday and Marat as the monster here. I see Corday as a monster because of how viciously Picasso painted her here, and I think it plays well with the song to say that the monster took over when she murdered Marat, even if it was a preconceived action. Not so much from this painting in particular, but I do see Marat as a monster for The Terror and though he may look small and weak in his bathtub here, his "monster inside of [his] head" caused much larger problems than Corday's act of vengeance.

Witches In The Air Goya, 1789

During the romantic movement, interest in witchcraft arose in the subject of paintings. For Goya, his interest came from a deeper place. During this time (the Ominous Decade) in Spain, Goya took a stand agains the Spanish Inquisition for hunting witches and driving people away from a non-religious based government, but towards the church by using witchcraft nonsense to draw attention. This piece is one of six he did for the Duke and Duchess of Osuna in 1789 to decorate their country house. Which had me thinking: if I were to decorate my country house, I know I would want a picture of three wizard-like figures with giant dunce caps holding a naked man in the air with another man running away, another taking cover on the ground, and who can forget the donkey in the shadows. Yes, that is what I would need in my country home. A warm cozy welcoming, I'd say.

But honestly, I do love this piece. It screams Goya and illustrates his struggles. I have seen his ups and downs as a painter  and this painting certainly shows his dark places. The man lying on the floor covering his head draws me the most, after the man being hovered in the air of course, but the man on the ground is giving up, he isn't running away, though he clearly doesn't want what is coming, but he lays there waiting anyway. That to me illustrates Goya not liking whats going on around him, but shutting down anyway and waiting for the next blow.

A confusing thing about this painting to me is the man walking away. Goya uses shadows and lighting very well in this piece, also movement of the body in the air, but the man moving away from the scene does not look like he is in any hurry. He looks to me like he has covered his head and is strolling away like he was never seen. I like to think that he was the one who delivered the man hanging in the air, that is what makes most sense to me, but I couldn't find the story behind what was actually happening here. And as long as I'm on topic of confusing things Goya paints, I like the donkey, it doesn't bother me really, but no story I can make up looking at this painting includes a donkey. So on behalf of me loving Goya and not finding much information on the story, I'm going to have to let that one slide, too.

I don't normally write about what I don't know about a painting or the stories I can come up with while looking at them, but Goya gives me that opportunity or a feeling that as a viewer I can do that. This may be a personal thing, but I'd like to think that anyone who knows Goya' story form tapestries to tragedies can also feel this way while looking at a painting of his.  

Jean Auguste Ingres, Odalisque with a Slave 1842

Odalisque With Slave 1839

The story from this pieces comes from Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's Turkish Letters in 1763. I read some of her letters of her travels for a while. The woman had some pretty great adventures. Though I couldn't find the exact part referencing her being serenaded in a bedroom, I did find her writing about her time at the Turkish Baths, though:

"In one of these cover'd Waggons I went to the Bagnio about 10 a clock. It was allready full of Women. It is built of Stone in the shape of a Dome with no Windows but in the Roofe, which gives Light enough. There was 5 of these domes joyn'd together, the outmost being less than the rest and serving only as a hall where the portress stood at the door. Ladys of Quality gennerally give this Woman the value of a crown or 10 shillings, and I did not forget that ceremony. The next room is a very large one, pav'd with Marble, and all round it rais'd 2 Sofas of marble, one above another. There were 4 fountains of cold Water in this room, falling first into marble Basins and then running on the floor in little channels made for that purpose, which carry'd the streams into the next room, something less than this, with the same sort of marble sofas, but so hot with steams of sulphur proceeding from the baths joyning to it, twas impossible to stay there with one's Cloths on. The 2 other domes were the hot baths, one of which had cocks of cold Water turning into it to temper it to what degree of warmth the bathers have a mind to."- Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, 1 April 1717. 

This scene sets the tone that I see painted here, I can see the lavishness of the Baths and the heat and luxury odalisque is in. She has a face of peace and exhaustion about her, I can't tell if this is because she is being sung to sleep or because she is hot and tired. Either way, I see her just having gotten out of the baths and enjoying her Turkish adventure. even though I know that the painting was commissioned by King Wilhelm I of Wurttemburg this story creates a larger escape for me. Executed well and a fine product for its time, Ingres' Odalisque with Slave is brilliantly colorful and interesting.  

David Cupid and Psyche 1817

Why mess with a good thing? I mean sure, your sisters probably had solid points and they are your family, but still, if you had everything you could imagine, why screw it up? I think I'd tell that to Psyche's face if I ever saw her. Granted, she is probably still walking the earth performing terrible tasks that were sentenced to her for life as she searches for her runaway lover, but still I feel for the girl. I love this story, I think it is perfectly indicative of girls and insecurities, and I love that even Aphrodite struggled with the same mean girl crap high school girls go through. But instead of just saying, "I'm gonna kill her," she plagued a town and forced them to leave her enemy for monster meat. She wins the original drama queen crown.

Before I continue with what I think of David's painting of Cupid and Psyche in their happier times, I'll tell you how this whole thing played out: Psyche was really hot and Aphrodite became quite the jealous goddess. She cursed Psyche's town until her own father left her tied up to be eaten by a monster. Cupid, son Aphrodite, saved our damsel and married her. Mom wasn't crazy about this obviously, and neither were Psyche's sisters back home. Nevertheless, Cupid spoiled the heck out of Psyche, gave her a palace and everything she wanted during the day and time alone with him at night. He insisted on this and told Psyche that she was never allowed to look at him. He wanted her to love him for him and not his super hotness. They were both happy, but of course Psyche's dumb, mortal feelings got in the way. Her sisters began to question her about their arrangement, saying things like, "Well he must be a gross monster-thing, and you're stupid for not looking at him." The reappearing theme of physical appearance and insecurities, much like that of Aphrodite, got the best of Psyche. She took and candle into Cupid's room one night and saw how gorgeous he was. She gawked over him for so long that wax from her candle dripped onto him, woke him, and disgraced by her disobedience, made him fly away forever. The End.

So like I said, this is a happier time in their marriage. We see Psyche turned away from Cupid and her curvy, open figure against Cupid's very angular and muscular figure. I will say, David painted Cupid a little extra happy and also extra young in this piece. Other critics comment on this as well, and I say that the boy is filled with the chillest swagger and looks like he has got it made with his lady. His rosy cheeks and the color of his skin along with the amazing red draping over the bed makes this piece warm, a little sensual, and, clearly, naughty. Of course Psyche looks a little down that she can't see her lover,s face, but she cozies up to him. Though the contrast in her softness and his rigid figures stick out, they also fit together nicely and demonstrate all of David's talent.

Bruegel Mad Meg, 1562

Flame Princess tells Finn that she wants to do things her way and turns up the heat. She loses control as her powers take over...fire addict. Her behavior reminds me of Meg's, she breaks the rules by burning down the doors much like Bruegel paints Meg breaking out of classic women's roles. Meg throws herself in harm's way knowing her own strength to make it out, and the Flame Princess allows her strength to overcome her and turns into the evil shrewd-like woman that Meg represents. Both characters are powerful without question, and both have the capability to influence others with their strength.

Meg inspires the other women to join her pillage on hell, but the Flame Princess' powers of destruction impact Finn in a different way. She puts Finn in danger when her fire powers take over and she loses control. The beauty of Mad Meg is how Bruegel paints her in complete control of her actions, she knows how to get what she wants. The Flame Princess, in search for short cuts, loses this control and puts herself in danger.

Fuseli, Titania and Bottom, 1790

Come, sit thee down upon this flowery bed,
While I thy amiable cheeks do coy,
And stick musk roses in thy sleek smooth head,
And kiss thy fair large ears, my gentle joy.
 - A Midsummer Nights Dream, Act IV, Scene 1, 

As previously discussed, Henry Fuseli studied Shakespeare and many of his plays. This fascination drives from his amusement in the supernatural. Fuseli looks to paint scenes that give him more freedom to explore things like the contemporary dress that Queen Titania's fairies are wearing. In this piece, Oberon has cast a spell on the Queen which makes her fall in love with Bottom who's head is now that of an ass. Fuseli paints her desperately seductive as she tries to win Bottom's affection.

Here, Fuseli uses common Rococo techniques, such as the detail in the light. The fairies are wonderful, they are also wonderful at creeping me out. The baby fairy on the bottom right has a butterfly for a head and looks disconnected from the ones above who await orders from their queen. The fairy on the left holds the dwarf by a leash represents the young and beautiful conquering the old, and "the senses over the mind." These two characters reflect the play as a whole and mystery verses fact throughout the story. 

Leonardo da Vinci, Leda, 1506

Fuesli brings this piece together quite well with influences from many other artists. He is known for having studied Leonardo da Vinci's work and paints Tatiana's seductive pose from da Vinci's, Leda. He uses the curve of the head to show her eyes locked on him as she whispers to him promising him anything he wishes. The smooth curves of the body draws the eye up her body through her hand in both pieces, but Titania and Bottom, Titania's hand is raised, which forms a stronger line and divides the canvass.

Henry Fuseli paints other scenes from this Shakespeare play, but this one is my favorite. It stands out to me because of the clash of styles, not in the style of painting so to speak, but the choices of clothing and different stories illustrated the fairies in a circle around Bottom and Tatiana. The dwarf-like fairies dispersed throughout creep me out and interest me. Yet the subject is so big and illuminated that if you weren't looking for them, you could miss the small details Fuseli can put in his imaginative, mystical scenes.

Fuseli, Lady Macbeth Sleepwalking, 1781-1784

Henry Fuseli was born in Zurich, Switzerland and was an active member in the church. Growing up, his father, a landscape painter, planned for him to work in the church. Fuseli had other ideas, so he left and pursued writing, He had many artistic influences in his life so it was not shock that when he first left home Fuseli wrote random pieces to bring in money. When he became tired of writing he found another interest that he fell in love with, drawing and painting. This led to his art pilgrimage that started in 1770 in Italy and ended in Britain in 1779.

While in Britain, Fuseli acquired his first commission at a Shakespeare gallery. He had studied many of Shakespeare's works, so this project led to many sketches and interesting works. This particular piece, Lady Macbeth Sleepwalking, Fuseli paints a scene towards the end of the play where Lady Macbeth starts sleepwalking and dreams of blood on her hands after her crusade to power. She runs through the dark halls obviously frightened and holding her hand in the air. She is turning away from her hand not wanting to see all of the damage she has caused.

During his Shakespeare project Fuseli was quoted saying, "All minute detail tends to destroy terror." The quote certainly explains the lack of background, but we stills see his talent in the shadows. A trend of rococo painting is this use of space and darkness which Fuseli uses well here. He shows the rushed movement of Lady Macbeth as she hurries down the hallway in her clothing and body, as well as the light in her hand pushing backward. The couple in this picture look extremely interrupted. They are positioned as though they were enjoying their time in the dark until the frazzled Lady Macbeth ruins their fun. With some imagination you can see my amusement with the couple. Regardless, Fuseli does a wonderful job here playing with the ribbon in the fiery red hair and the work is spectacular. It's nice to be able to take something like Shakespeare's plays and be able to read, study, act, and paint these sorts of things so that the mind can absorb the original work in different ways.

Caravaggio David and Goliath, 1605

"Now this is the point. You fancy me mad. Madmen know nothing. But you should have seen me. You should have seen how wisely I proceeded – with what caution – with what foresight – with what dissimulation I went to work! I was never kinder to the old man than during the whole week before I killed him. And every night, about midnight, I turned the latch of his door and opened it – oh so gently! And then, when I had made an opening sufficient for my head, I put in a dark lantern, all closed, closed, that no light shone out, and then I thrust in my head. Oh, you would have laughed to see how cunningly I thrust it in! I moved it slowly – very, very slowly, so that I might not disturb the old man's sleep. It took me an hour to place my whole head within the opening so far that I could see him as he lay upon his bed. Ha! would a madman have been so wise as this." – Edgar Allan Poe, Tell Tale Heart

Caravaggio, a master of dark and light, creates a few portraits of David killing Goliath. I have seen this painted many times, seen the sexy sculpture of David by Donatello and paintings that display a young boy overcoming his fear. Of course, the picture here is much different. We see David holding Goliath's head, or rather Caravaggio's head, with his stale, emotionless face. The agony in the face shows his life ripped away from him so suddenly and almost as if he didn't deserve it. But we know from the story that Goliath was no saint, and neither was Caravaggio. 

What strikes me most, and reminded me of Poe's Tell Tale Heart, was obviously the meticulous nature of David and the killer in Poe's story. David looks as if he does this sort of thing for a living, and the methodology of the killer plus his excitement makes these characters a bit more than creepy Granted, Poe and Caravaggio had a particular dark taste in their works, but the combination of these go particularly well together for me. They make me uneasy because people don't simply kill for sport if they aren't getting paid or have some serious troubles. Caravaggio paints the suffering it causes him, but we lose the intensity in David's face which makes the murder less personal and more terrifying. The same way – or even the worse way – the excitement the killer has to tell his story, explain the murder in full, because he is proud of his work. 

Edgar Allan Poe and Caravaggio were both masters of dark and light. Caravaggio can use the darkness in his paintings to help illuminate emotion and pain. In his particular story, Poe uses a the lighter tone of the killer to make Tell Tale Heart so riveting and horrifying.      

Art in Metamorphoses
Centuries of Ovid's Influence
Curated by Natalie Dockhorn

Ricci, Jupiter and Semele, 1695

"As she was ignorant 
Of the game she was playing.
She laughed 
To have won the simple trick
That would wipe her out of existence

So easily. 'I want to see you,' she said,
'Exactly as Juno sees you when she opens
Her arms and body to you. As if i were Juno,
Come to me naked-in your devine form.'
Too late"
-Ovid's Metamorphoses

One of Jupiter's many lovers, Semele, is with child, and a jealous Juno goes after the girl. Posing as a nurse, Juno begins to talk with Semele about the father of her child and Semele starts to question the true identity of the father of her child. When Jupiter comes to visit Semele the next day, she asks a request for him, to which he says he will grant whatever she wishes. Semele asks Jupiter to come to her in his godlike form and show her his true self. Reluctant to do so and sorry that he ever promised her anything, Jupiter unveils his bright supernatural self. Upon seeing this image of immortality, Semele cannot bare the brightness and is immediately incinerated. Desperate to save his child, Jupiter takes the baby from Semele's womb and sews the baby onto his side. Later, Bacchus is born from Jupiter's side, and that is why the god of wine is said to have been 'twice born.'

Right before the crazy immolation, Ricci paints Jupiter and Semele as Jupiter reveals himself to her. Clearly he has a skill for curvaceous bodies, Ricci does a nice job of making the scene intimate between the two bodies, but also hides the most important character of the baby by having Semele's body facing away. Also her foot underneath her leg sticks out to me because it seems quite small and like it wouldn't fit the rest of her body. Beyond that I think this painting is a fair representation of the myth and Semele's face turning away and lifting up the blue draping lets the viewer see that her wish will not turn out in her favor.

Art in Metamorphoses
Centuries of Ovid's Influence
Curated by Natalie Dockhorn

Baldung Grien, Pyramus and Thisbe, 1530

Art in Metamorphoses
Centuries of Ovid's Influence
Curated by Natalie Dockhorn

Waterhouse, Echo and Narcissus, 1903

"The moment Echo saw Narcissus
She was in love. She followed him
Like a starving wolf
Following a stag too strong to be takled.
And like a cat in the winter at a fire
She could not edge close enough
To what singed her, and would burn her.
She almost burst 
With longing to call out to him in somehow
Let him know what she felt.
But she had to wait
For some other to speak
So she could snitch their last words
With whatever sense they might lend her."
-Ovid's Metamorphoses

Caravaggio, Narcissus, 1599

Narcissus, considered the boy next door who girls and men alike cannot control their attraction for, would rather be out hunting then indulging in the attention of his fans. A nymph cursed by Juno is forced to only speak the last words of the sentences she hears. The nymph's name is Echo, and when Echo falls for Narcissus, she waits patiently for someone else's words so that she may tell him her feelings. The story goes that Narcissus does not feel the same for Echo and the nymph proceeds to beg the gods to punish the man for not loving her back. This prayer is received by Nemesis, the god of revenge. For Echo's revenge, Nemesis finds Narcissus after a long days hunt and punishes him by having him fall in love with is refection in the stream.

Narcissus has been painted through the years looking into his refection and withering away with self absorption. Earlier works, such as this Caravaggio painted in 1599, shows  pieces new techniques and perspective, which this particular myth allowed. Waterhouse painted Echo in the scene as well and also puts Narcissus laying all the way down to the stream. This positioning and the other character adds to Narcissus' self-obsession to not even notice his almost lover. Both paintings show a different type of loneliness in them. The loneliness of Echo as she watches her love in Waterhouse's, and the complete darkness of being still and alone in Caravaggio's demonstrate the transformation of the story over the years.

Art in Metamorphoses
Centuries of Ovid's Influence
Curated by Natalie Dockhorn

Rubens, Fall of Phaeton, 1605

"'You God of the Gods,
If my annihilation 
Has been decided, why drag it out?
Where are your thunderbolts
To finish the whole thing quickly
If I am to end in fire
Let it be your fire, Oh God,
That would redeem it a little.
I can hardly speak.'"
-Ovid's Metamorphoses

Determined to find his father, and prove that his father is, in fact, Apollo, Phaeton goes to see his absent dad and asks for a favor. Apollo, being a show-off like most Gods, tells his son that he will give his whatever he wishes. Phaeton then asks to drive his chariot and light the sky. Upon this request, Apollo explains the difficulty of the task, his clear concern, and is generally not supportive of the idea. Phaeton, being ignorant and a smart-ass, tells his new-found father, that if they are related then this task should be a breeze.

Setting off, Phaeton proceeds to light the whole earth on fire, destroying everything the in its path. The horses go mad, and Phaeton is out of control. The Earth tells Zeus the above quote and pleads for him to end her suffering by ending Phaeton. Zeus eventually has no choice and throws a thunderbolt into the son of Apollo.

Ruben's painting of this scene is cluttered and confusing, but I enjoy that because I can only image this myth being exactly that. Parents making wrong choices, kids being stupid, and the big man having to think on his feet to end it all...and all of that happening so quickly. I can only think that Ruben's used all of this fast action to paint Phaeton falling from the chariot. Looking at this piece, I don't know where to start. I understand that the bolt has been thrown by the light in the sky, but the horses and and people are everywhere, moving in terror and hoping not to get burned. I really enjoy the darkness at the bottom of the painting, I think it perfectly fits the falling of Phaeton into the darkness he created.

Art in Metamorphoses
Centuries of Ovid's Influence
Curated by Natalie Dockhorn

Reni, Nessus and Deianira, 1621