Cleopatra

PART 1 – CLEOPATRA QUESTION Carefully read the following extract several times. What impression does Dio give of the relationship between Cleopatra and Antony, and how does this impression relate to other Roman attitudes found in the chapter' ANSWER Cassius Dio was a Roman historian writing over two hundred years after the deaths of Cleopatra and Marc Antony. His audience would have been Roman citizens and therefore his writing would most likely be slightly bias to the Roman viewpoint. This is not to say his account was inaccurate, merely that his sources of information would probably have come from Romans as opposed to Egyptians since the Romans won the conflict. When writing about the relationship between Cleopatra and Antony, Dio using phrases such as “enslaved......laid him under some spell......enchanted and enthralled”. (Open University 2010), to describe Cleopatra’s influence. This implies that Antony was not acting under his own free will that Cleopatra controlled him, thus relinquishing him from all blame, and laying it at her feet. Dio claims Cleopatra hoped to rule Rome, Antony seems to encourage her ambition and calls her “Queen”, (Open University 2010), this image would have invoked hostility and suspicion among the Romans as they hated any allusion to a monarchy after their bitter conflicts in the past. This further emphasizes Cleopatra’s over powering influence on Antony that he would embrace a concept that he had once fought against. Dio creates an image of Antony as having left all things Roman behind to embrace all things Egyptian. Antony is said to dress like them, he is shown in paint and sculpture as one of their gods, he even walks side by side with Cleopatra’s eunuchs. This new image of Antony shows that Cleopatra’s domination of Antony is so complete that he has lost his very identity. Dio’s assessment of Antony and Cleopatra’s relationship casts her in a very negative light this opinion seems to be shared by Plutarch who was also a Roman writer. Plutarch begins his account of the relationship between Antony and Cleopatra by describing their first meeting. He portrays her as arrogant in the way she ignored Antony’s summons and she sets herself up as his equal by arriving in her own time. The extravagant manner in which Cleopatra arrives serves to undermine Antony’s position as the one in charge, showing how from the start she set out to dominate their relationship. Plutarch describes Antony’s love for Cleopatra as being “the final and crowning mischief”, (Fear, 2008, p9). He blames Cleopatra for destroying all the good in Antony. As Dio does, Plutarch implies that Antony was unable to resist her. Octavian’s speech though written by Dio still has some use as it serves to reflect his feelings, if not his words. Octavian seems to share the opinion that Cleopatra is in charge, that she makes the decisions and that Antony is powerless to resist her demands. All three men portray the relationship between Antony and Cleopatra negatively. She is seen as a strong dominatrix figure leading a helpless Antony to ruin and destruction. All three insist on taking the blame from Antony because as a once great Roman general he could not be seen to willingly turn his back on the greatness of Rome for a mere woman. PART 2 – CEZANNE QUESTION Look carefully at plate 1.3.3, The House of the Hanged Man at Auvers, 1872 – 1873, by Paul Cezanne. In not more than 500 words, explain why you think this painting was dismissed so scathingly by some critics when it was exhibited with the Independents in 1874. ANSWER At the time Cezanne painted the House of the Hanged Man, the style people were used to seeing was very traditional in that there were certain rules that everyone was supposed to follow. These involved the use of light to enable objects or figures to take on a three dimensional aspect, the term for this is modelling. Delineation is when an artist produces an accurate visual representation of their subject. Brushwork at the time involved painstakingly hiding all evidence that paint had been applied. Composition was extremely important as it was the way in which the artist used techniques such as modelling to create a virtual space that allowed the spectator to see more than the literal surface of the painting. When looking at The House of the Hanged Man the spectator would have instantly noticed the brushwork which is clearly visible. This served to emphasize the fact that it is a painting; it forces the spectator to see and accept the fact that the painting has a literal surface. Critics at this time used this as an indication of Cezanne’s lack of skill, they assumed that he was incapable of hiding the brushwork and did not contemplate the idea that he set out to make it visible. Modelling is not used to make this landscape three dimensional, Cezanne’s style of layering paint in unblended colours serves to make the canvas look flat and dense. Cezanne makes no attempt to create a painting that draws the spectator in; his landscape lacks depth as a result of a shallow and indistinct picture space. This serves to force you back a step, thus prohibiting any emotional engagement. Compared to traditional landscapes Cezanne’s House of the Hanged Man looks rough and crude, all hard edges and no softly flowing lines. At the time when Cezanne exhibited his work, it was compared to the artistic talents of painters like Nicholas Poussin. Plate 1.3.21 entitled; Landscape with a Calm, is an example of his work. It shows a landscape painted in the traditional way, no visible brushstrokes and a composition that draws you in and allows you to imagine that what you are seeing exists so that you can almost touch it. The inclusion of people interacting with nature also helps to create a sense of reality that Cezanne’s landscape lacked. One critic of Cezanne in 1874 calling himself Jean Prouvaire, ridiculed him for carrying his paintings to be exhibited on his back as though this was a reflection of Cezanne’s lack of professionalism. When critics looked at Cezanne’s paintings they expected to see something they were familiar with, something they could identify, an exact visual representation that drew them in. What they got instead was something they didn’t understand, that required them to look deeper, beneath the surface to what Cezanne’s paintings represented rather than some superficial imaginary world. Because of this departure from tradition Cezanne’s work was denied recognition as art and this is why his paintings in general and The House of the Hanged Man at Anvers in particular was dismissed so scathingly.