Art and Intimacy

                The intimacy of art is a concept that has been discussed throughout the ages.  Whether the art in question were depictions of Hellenistic beauty conveyed through nude portraits or more conventional controversy of painting Muslim women without their Burkka’s, we are constantly reevaluating art with a question in our mind.  What forms of intimate depictions should be deemed appropriate and inappropriate?  In this paper, we will explore the concept of intimacy through the film “The Girl with Pearl Earrings” and discover how our concept of what is and is not appropriate forms of intimacy, in regards to art, have historically evolved.

                The film “The Girl with Pearl Earrings” is the portrayal of renowned painter Johannes Vermeer and his interactions between his patron, his family, and his new servant Grit.  In the film, we are presented with Grit being tasked to serve in the Vermeer home due to her father becoming blind.  While in the home, Grit discovered that her master, Johannes Vermeer, is a painter and she becomes fascinated with his paintings as well as partaking in the production of creating paint.  However, Vermeer’s wife appears quite tense throughout the film and it is ultimately revealed that she is uncomfortable with Vermeer’s interactions with females in the past and this ultimately results in Grit being removed from the home after Vermeer completes a painting of her in secret.  What we must ask ourselves is what were the attitudes/beliefs in Vermeer’s time that would have been deemed appropriate/ inappropriate and how have these ideas evolved.

                We will begin by examining what forms of art were deemed appropriate at this time.  In the film we see Vermeer painting numerous paintings for his wealthy patron.  Historic paintings that are shown include “Woman with a Pearl Necklace,” “Woman with a Water Jug,” and “Girl with a Pearl Earring.”  We can deduce from this information that the creation of art itself is not what was considered inappropriate.  This is in contrast to certain dystopian ideas that suggest that the creation of art is dangerous and should not be encouraged. Vermeer’s paintings were clearly valued in the film which stands to suggest that his paintings were considered appropriate. 

What should also be taken into consideration in regards to what was appropriate at the time in is the lavish church that is shown in the film.  The church is the only primary source of power over the society which is evidenced in the scene where the whole town in showing up to the service.  While inside the church, everybody is quiet and respectful which shows their level of respect for this institution.  What should be noted is that the church is decorated in ornate art designs, paintings, and fancy stained glass.  The clothing that the priests wear also appears to be of a higher caliber than the common people wore.  The structure of the building is quite grand and stands in stark contrast to the older, crumbling buildings that are universally seen throughout the town.  This further provides proof that art structures, clothing, and paintings were deemed inappropriate but rather, encouraged.

Now that we have established that the buildings, clothing, and paintings were not considered inappropriate, we must discover what it was that made Vermeer’s wife so uncomfortable.  It is clear that Vermeer’s wife cherished the time he spent with her as is evidenced in an erotic piano scene which Grit stumbles into.  However, this scene serves as a stark comparison between the following piano scene in which Grit is setting the table but Vermeer keeps staring at Grit with his wife in the room.  This scene works in conjunction with an early scene in which a fellow servant is introducing Grit to the home and informs her that Vermeer has painted servants in the past, much to the displeasure of his wife.  What should also be taken into consideration is the scene in which the patron attempts to rape Grit.  He reveals one of the key pieces of evidence we need in constructing our argument when he says, “I’ll be you serve your master well when your alone with him.”  As the audience, we know that Grit has not slept with Vermeer, but the fact that she spends time alone with him is what has led others to speculate and create rumors that the two are sleeping together.  It is the fact that they are alone together that is what is deemed inappropriate in this film.

What we must also consider inappropriate how intimate Vermeer is with Grit.  His constant staring, caressing, and standing up for Grit is enough to make any wife suspicious.  Also, we notice that throughout the film Grit wears a head covering, something that was very common in the world of Christianity.  She never removed her covering throughout the entire movie except for one scene.  Vermeer asks her to remove her covering and she is shocked at first, but ultimately relents.  Vermeer grants her temporary privacy only to come into the room and stare at her as her hair is uncovered.  This would be the modern day equivalent of looking at a Muslim woman who is not wearing her Burkka.  Definitely something that would be considered taboo today.  It is the intimate act of seeing and touching other women is what is to be considered inappropriate in this film.

Now we will shift our focus into how our labeling of art has evolved since Vermeer’s time.  Today we have a wide variety of art that we see on a normal basis from Andy Warhol’s Campbell soup cans at the store, to Jackson Pollock impressions hanging up in hotel lobbies.  There are various forms of acceptance/rejection to be found in today’s society, possibly more so than in Vermeer’s time.  The concept of post-modern art for one is a subject that is either quickly rejected or accepted.  However, following in the vein of the film, a popular form of expression that is experiencing an explosion in today’s society is pornography. 

Today classical nude paintings found in Rome and Greece are widely celebrated as an artistic depiction of the human body.  Pornography however has not yet found this sort of celebration; rather it is widely regarded with an open rejection.  Pornography itself has experienced an evolution from its early formation in magazines to its current availability for free online.  The question that we are still struggling with today is what forms of intimate depictions should be deemed appropriate and inappropriate?  Why is it that a classical nude statue of Diana is greeted with celebration and enthusiasm while a woman showing her breasts in Playboy is greeted with scorn and rejection?  While it is true that as pornography becomes more and more accessible that our tolerance towards it will increase, will we at some point reach an ultimate stand and say this is where we will not cross the line or will we simply continue to allow more and more exposure?

After examining appropriate/inappropriate forms of art in the film “Girl with a Pearl Earring” as well as discussing intimacy in today’s controversial art, pornography, we can ultimately conclude that this is ultimately a struggle that we will continue to have.  Different cultures have varying beliefs as to what forms of intimate depiction/creation are acceptable.  The shocking event of seeing a women with her head uncovered in the past would simply be greeted with a nonchalant shrug today.  Our standards have evolved and will continue to evolve.  The one that that we can be certain of is that intimate art will continue to remain controversial.