|
|
|
|
In Picturing
Innocence, art historian Anne Higonnet claims that viewers of an image--be
it Joshua Reynold's 1788 "Portrait of Penelope Boothby" or Lange's
"Damaged child"--experience the work psychologically and emotionally,
as well as visually. She describes the evolution of pictures of children
from little adults to unadulterated innocence and suggests that artists
and viewers alike bring certain predispositions to the work. Until the
mid-eighteenth century, the notion of children "as faulty small adults,
in need of correction and discipline," which derived largely from
Christian beliefs of original sin, prevailed (8).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Around
the enlightenment period of the eighteenth century, popular conceptions
of childhood changed. Society adopted the idea of the "blank slate"
and beginning life in a state of unconsciousness. Art reflected the transition:
no longer vessels of psychological and sexual awareness, children became
asexual, physically neutral, and psychologically unaware. The "Romantic
child" was born. Romantic children, claims Higonnet, "deny, or
enable us to forget, many aspects of adult society
. The Romantic child
makes a good show of having no class, no gender, and no thoughts--of being
socially, sexually, and psychically innocent" (23-24). In comparison
to the Villiers, "Penelope Boothby," for example, attracts adoration;
she does not exert power. She sits meekly with her hands gently clasped.
Her dress and hat mimic adult styles, but the bigness of the clothing compared
to the smallness of her face identify Penelope as a child playing grown-up.
As Higonnet describes: "Reynolds does not quite mock his model, but
her youth, her smallness is rendered as not-being-big-enough, as a discrepancy
between her child body and an adult body that would fit these clothes correctly.
'Penelope' has been endearingly miniaturized" (28). The viewer feels
as though Penelope would topple over if she tried to move, and this makes
her charming. The white dress, moreover, underscores her youth and innocence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
No longer
considered little adults in need of moral reform, children became icons
of innocence and naivete onto which adults could project their own hopes,
dreams, and ideals. Paintings and sculptures of socially ignorant, asexual
children dominated the art world, and the "Romantic child" became
the accepted standard. Because this ideal placed a high value on corporeality,
or the lack thereof, it could be easily adopted within artistic contexts.
Concepts regarding physical bodies are easily demonstrated in visual forms
like paintings. Older works, such as that of Van Dyck, mimicked adult
physicalities in the portrayal of childhood, making no effort to hide
blossoming sexuality. The Villiers boys, for example, stand in a dignified
manner that indicates power and aggression. Paintings of Romantic children,
on the other hand, concentrated on aspects of the body "least closely
associated with adult sexuality, a difference reinforced by the child's
clothing, which wafts in pure white drifts across what would be adult
erogenous zones" (15). Viewers could distinguish between girl and
boy bodies, but they could discern no signs of sexuality.
Moreover,
the naissance of the Romantic child occurred during a period of burgeoning
empiricism, when society first "placed its faith in visual evidence"
(9). According to Higonnet, the idea of innocence "lent itself to
visual representation because the immediate visibility of pictures has
always had a privileged ability to shape our understanding of our bodies,
our physical selves" (8). The invention of photography, a medium
that produced genuine replications of real images rather than imaginative
interpretation like those rendered through painting or sculpture, further
codified the innocent child:
The signs
of Romantic childhood can be as effectively marshaled for the camera lens
as they were previously painted or drawn. By the time photography came to
dominate the representation of children, the image of the Romantic child
had been so completely perfected and so often reproduced that it would not
even have to be consciously summoned up in the minds of photographers. It
had become a visual habit, an assumption, a pattern expected, looked for,
and replicated (86).
Photography
seemed to guarantee the innocence that paintings and sculptures could
only assert.
Interestingly,
Higonnet's theory of physicality resonates with Thomas Fahy's interpretation
of the body during the depression. He describes the potential for physical
deformity as the representative symbol of Depression-era literature and
imagery. He argues both that President Roosevelt's own disability somewhat
shifted perceptions of disabled people from sideshow freaks to everyday
heroes and that the crippled body became a metaphor for "eroded optimism
and opportunity" in the '30s (2-3). According to Fahy, Lange in particular
relied on parts of the body as indicative of struggle and determination.
He explains: "While Lange's images of hands, feet, and backs suggest
some of the ways that land owners and corporations were reducing individuals
to tools for labor, these fragmented bodies also communicate strength
and agency. They represent a universal determination in America to overcome
adverse conditions" (9-10). FSA photographers strove to portray,
albeit ambiguously, the durability of humanity rather than its potential
for devastation in the shape of deformity. Similar to adult projections
of innocence through the Romantic child, this practice left room for hopefulness:
these people retained the physical ability to overcome their poverty and
hardship and, therefore, held onto their faith in humanity. By concentrating
on anonymous body parts, Fahy asserts, Lange allows for ambiguous readings
that simultaneously embrace fatigue and energy.
The FSA
engaged in a balancing act: it portrayed people as victims but in a dignified
way. The subjects of FSA photographers evoke sympathy but without appearing
grotesque or pathetic. Stryker's staff captured humanity and its
senseless suffering. This tension particularly heightens our reaction
to images of children. Kids in FSA photos demonstrated resilience as well
as weariness. They embody a stunted potential. In a different time, under
different conditions, these children would be enrolled in school rather
than picking peas, playing with friends rather than making dinner, showing
the natural exuberance of youth rather than sitting quietly and exhausted.
|
|