I do not think Emerson hits on the true explanation of why man feeding
is not an attractive subject for the painter. It is not that the diet
is base and is hidden in caves and cellars, or that the world is not
present at the feast. It is because eating is a purely selfish animal
occupation; there is no touch of the noble or the idyllic or the
heroic in it. In the act man confesses his animal nature; he is no
longer an Emerson, a Dante, a Plato--he is simply a physiological
contrivance taking in nutriment. The highest and the lowest are for
the moment on the same level. The lady and her maid, the lord and his
lackey are all one. Eating your bread on a mountain-top or in the camp
of lumbermen or with a beautiful maiden in the wilderness adds a new
element. Here the picture has all nature for a background and the
imagination is moved. The rye and the oatcake now become a kind of
heavenly manna, or, as Fitzgerald has it, under such conditions the
wilderness is Paradise enow. The simple act of feeding does not now
engross the attention. Associate with the act of eating any worthy or
noble idea, and it is at once lifted to a higher level. A mother
feeding her child, a cook passing food to the tramp at the door or to
other hungry and forlorn wayfarers, or soldiers pausing to eat their
rations in the field, or fishermen beside the stream, or the haymakers
with their lunch under a tree--in all such incidents there are
pictorial elements because the least part of it all to the looker-on
is the act of eating.
In Da Vinci's "Last Supper" the mere animal act of taking food plays
no part; the mind is occupied with higher and more significant things.
A suggestion of wine or of fruit in a painting may be agreeable, but
from a suggestion of the kitchen and the cook we turn away. The
incident of some of Washington's officers during the Revolution
entertaining some British officers (an historical fact) on baked
potatoes and salt would appeal to the artistic imagination. All the
planting and reaping of the farmers is suggestive of our animal wants,
as is so much of our whole industrial activity; but art looks kindly
upon much of it, shows us more or less in partnership with primal
energies. People surrounding a table after all signs of the dinner
have been removed hold the elements of an agreeable picture, because
that suggests conversation and social intercourse--a feast of reason
and a flow of soul. We are no longer animals; we have moved up many
degrees higher in the scale of human values.
Emerson's deep love and admiration for Carlyle come out many times in
the Journals. No other literary man of his times moved and impressed
him so profoundly. Their correspondence, which lasted upwards of
forty years, is the most valuable correspondence known to me in
English literature. It is a history of the growth and development of
these two remarkable minds.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account