Originally published in June/July 2010 issue of The Pastel Scribbler

Composition and Design Matters – Tiziano and Rubens What do you want to say?

by Charlotte Herczfeld A few weeks ago, I was lucky to be able to see a Tiziano painting of Adam and Eve, side by side with Ruben‟s copy of it. The copy was beautifully rendered, and it was clear that both were masters of oil painting. (Spellings of the name Tizian, Titian, Tiziano differ from country to country, and I‟m going to use Tiziano, as that is how he signed.) One of the most dramatic and symbolic stories from the bible is the one telling how Eve was tricked by the serpent to eat of the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge in the garden of Eden, and then gave a fruit to Adam who also ate it. This story in all its drama was irresistibly embroidered and varied during the middle ages. A very common variety tells of Adam‟s initial resistance to eating the fruit, saying it is forbidden, but after finding out that Eve is changed by it, he also eats in order to not be separated from her.

Tiziano’s painting is always to the left in each pair of paintings, and Ruben’s is always to the right. Photos courtesy of Nationalmuseum, Stockholm. Relaxing on a bench, looking at these two large paintings, I started to get a sense of the paintings sending slightly different messages. It dawned on me that Rubens had made a

© Charlotte Herczfeld, contact the author for republishing rights

Originally published in June/July 2010 issue of The Pastel Scribbler

number of small changes and that they had to be deliberate, as many other areas were copied faithfully. Are Tiziano and Rubens even really telling the exact same story? Maybe not, so let‟s explore the compositional elements of these paintings to see how how small changes in a composition can change the story a painting tells. Let‟s start with the distribution of lights and darks. Tiziano puts a pale Eve in front of a dark background, and so does Rubens. But where Adam is concerned, Tiziano‟s Adam is clearly standing out against a light background, while Ruben‟s Adam is less immediately obvious as the silhouette of a man, due to a darker background, thus shifting the emphasis even stronger towards Eve. Rubens also changes Adam‟s posture, so that Adam is leaning towards Eve, and likewise the trunk of the tree also leans in more in Ruben‟s rendering. Both paintings can be inscribed by the classical concept of composition – the triangle and the circle. Here it becomes even more clear how Ruben‟s change of Adam‟s posture (including the angle of the tree) brings Adam in harmony with the triangle, while in Tiziano‟s composition the figure of Adam is depicted as if he is almost breaking out of the composition, resisting the inward pull. While Tiziano‟s Adam seems to brace himself in the battle of wills, Ruben‟s change of Adam‟s posture makes him look like he is ready to move towards her. It could be argued, quite rightly, that Ruben‟s composition is more efficient and harmonious and balanced. I could so be argued, and it could also be argued that a break of the „rules‟ as Tiziano did is intrinsic to the meaning of the scene, and therefore quite deliberate. Tiziano shows us an Adam who, in accordance with the popular variations of the story, clearly is resisting and trying to stop Eve. But what is Rubens‟s meaning? Now we enter the realm of hermeneutics, which is a long word more or less meaning “my personal interpretation”. As we have three main characters in this story, their interaction as living beings is also important in the composition, one of the main factors is body language. Another important clue to the story is the direction they look. In the Tiziano we find that Adam and the serpent have their eyes locked as in a battle of wills, but in Ruben‟s version, the serpent and Eve gaze © Charlotte Herczfeld, contact the author for republishing rights

Originally published in June/July 2010 issue of The Pastel Scribbler

into each other‟s eyes and Adam looks at Eve. This must be an important clue, as it is a significant change, as is the addition of a large red parrot right over Adam‟s shoulder, which visually balances the hollyhock behind Eve. The hollyhock is a symbol of fecundity – Eve as the mother of mankind – but also of ambition, and the driving force behind Eve‟s eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge is to become like God, which is as ambitious as it comes. The fox behind Eve has many traditional meanings, and one that seems to fit my interpretation is the fox representing cunning and trickery, and also the meaning of: it is easier for the devil to trick humans into doing stupid things if the human lusts after something, like Eve lusting after being like God.

Let‟s zoom in, and look at the smaller details, starting with the head of the serpent (above). It looks like a cherub, but instead of wings it has snaky tendrils. Tiziano shows the serpent with hints of horns, while Ruben‟s has chosen to omit them. Tiziano‟s serpent is serious and intent, while Ruben‟s is a leering cupid. Tiziano‟s Adam is as serious as his serpent, with the interaction depicting a battle of wills. Ruben‟s Adam watches Eve with an open mouth, and an another kind of intent.

© Charlotte Herczfeld, contact the author for republishing rights

Originally published in June/July 2010 issue of The Pastel Scribbler

Eve is focused on reaching the fruit in Tiziano‟s version. While Rubens gives her liquid eyes, dilated nostrils, a red mouth with the tip of her tongue visible.

And the final detail, Adam‟s hand as it connects with Eve‟s arm. Tiziano paints Adam as trying to hold Eve back, and her nakedness is understated. Rubens uses both value and colour to put a greater emphasis on this detail, and shows the fingers of the hand as active, just starting to move slightly „south‟, as if to caress or pinch. It seems that Ruben‟s main idea was to paint an erotic image disguised as a classical biblical scene. All the clues we have examined point in that direction, but are we chasing red herrings here? After all, the circumstantial evidence is a bit weak, and subject to personal interpretation. Maybe Rubens just exercised his own artistic abilities, bringing more movement into an improved composition and version of Tiziano‟s original? Enter from the left: Parrot After the discovery of the Americas, Brazil was regarded as a paradise on earth, a garden of Eden. As the forests were filled with large parrots, it was thought that the biblical garden of Eden must have had parrots. In Eden, all animals could talk, the myth said, and after the fall, the parrot was the only animal retaining speech. The parrot came to symbolize Eden, but also Eve. Ah, the introduction by Rubens of the parrot fits the scene perfectly. It makes sense, until we start to wonder if this classic scene really needs a symbol of Eden, as we are clearly there, with Eve as clearly present. The symbol is superfluous in a painting based on the traditional © Charlotte Herczfeld, contact the author for republishing rights

Originally published in June/July 2010 issue of The Pastel Scribbler

iconography of the garden of Eden with tree in the middle and Adam and Eve on each side of the tree. Then why is it so blatantly there, the parrot? Symbols shift meaning over time, and in the 1600s, when Rubens lived, the parrot had become a sign of sexual lust. Aware of the subtleties of his changes, Rubens put a big red “road sign” in the painting, so the initiated viewer wouldn‟t miss the titillating message. There are at least three more clues in Ruben‟s version, strengthening my argument, but I‟m leaving them for you to find. Final Thoughts We‟ve found that Rubens disguises an erotic picture as both a biblical scene and as a copy of an earlier great master of painting. In doing that, it could be said he trivializes into mere carnal lust what in Tiziano‟s version is a deep psychological and religious archetypical story about mankind‟s tendency to let misplaced superbia (pride), invidia (envy), and avaricia (greed) govern their choices and actions. Envying God, being greedy for his knowledge and power, and the supreme folly of being proud to think herself to be God‟s equal, Eve ate of the fruit, and gave to Adam to eat, and he ate. This momentous mistake, this pivotal point in the story of mankind, led to man having to suffer the consequences, being cast out of Eden, and subjected to work, disease, aging, and finally death. The message of the devout Tiziano can be interpreted as: Think carefully, know what follows the action, and weigh the benefits and the drawbacks before rushing along with what you desire. Or else. For every action, there is a consequence Adam leaning out of the harmonious composition is a discord, one we spot instantly, and it seems Tiziano very deliberately used it to convey the deeper meaning. Rubens may have been the greater painter, but Tiziano was the greater Artist. © Charlotte Herczfeld

© Charlotte Herczfeld, contact the author for republishing rights