Bill Millis and
his family have made a generous donation to The Norman Rockwell Museum in Stockbridge,
MA: namely the cute and sentimental picture often called “Puppy Love.”
It’s a wonderful
gesture on the part of the Mills family (my North Carolina neighbors), and I’m sure the museum staff is overjoyed
to have the famous image on its way to them.
Still, as a Rockwell fan, I have to say—I can’t wait for this picture to
get out of the news. This picture strongly
reinforces a widely-believed set of notions about Rockwell. To wit: Rockwell painted cute kids doing cute
stuff with their cute dogs. Or their
cute grandfathers. Or with other cute
kids. There’s nothing deep or
challenging about the art. Nothing very
interesting, either. Rockwell is exactly
what the word “kitsch” was made for.
Sentiment, artificiality, depthless nostalgic schmaltz.
That’s Rockwell’s public image, no doubt. The trouble with this image is that it’s just
false.
Now, admittedly, Rockwell did
paint plenty of mere cute pictures of cute kids. And these images are endlessly reproduced on
calendars and coffee mugs and jigsaw puzzles and all variety of
knick-knacks. Take all that for what you
like. I’ll admit to enjoying many of the
cute pictures. Take this one, for
example, which is delightful:
This is Rockwell’s take on Ruby Bridges, who, in 1960, was the first black child to attend a previously all-white school in New Orleans. This was ordered by a court, and not well received by many of the white parents, who protested outside the school (and who pulled their own children out). Ruby Bridges was indeed escorted to and from school by US Marshals, to protect her from the angry crowds outside.
“The Problem” does not stand
alone. Rockwell made many other
paintings that simply won’t fit into the little box with the “Rockwellian”
label on it. Take a few moments to look
a little more carefully at what Rockwell really painted—rather than what you
think he painted—and you’ll see some surprises.
I’m not claiming that he painted a great deal of darkness and
misery. He didn’t. I’m claiming that he did not paint only a
superficial, sentimental world. It
follows from this that the standard-issue dismissals of Rockwell as a mere
kitsch painter are simply not defensible.
Here, as a start, are ten Rockwells that help to undercut this kitschy
image.
10. “Glen Canyon Dam”
In 1969, the US Department of the
Interior hired Rockwell to paint its grand new achievement. Rockwell flew out to view the dam, but
hesitated. He told his employers that he
was a people painter: if they just wanted a picture of the dam itself, they
could find a better person for the job.
Then he asked if he could include some people in his painting. The answer was ‘yes,’ and the result is what
you see here. Probably not what the
government was looking for. The dam had
been built primarily on land obtained from Navajo Indians, many of whom went on
to work on the dam’s construction. Like
many such projects, however, it proved highly controversial, and by 1969 the
environmental and cultural effects were coming to be widely recognized. Rockwell’s sympathies seem pretty clear
here. The Indians are in the foreground,
standing over the dam, taking up much more space than the dam, and providing
all the real interest in the image.
Which is more important?
9. “The Long Shadow of Lincoln”
This was published by the Saturday Evening Post in 1945, as an
illustration that accompanied a Carl Sandburg poem of the same title. The soldier in the center is an amputee, and
that’s a military grave marker there on the right of the image. This tone of the picture is definitely
somber, which suits the poem well.
8. “Murder in Mississippi”
This is a 1965 painting done for Look Magazine. Look
actually published an oil sketch of the picture, rather than the final,
polished oil painting. The image depicts
the murder of 3 civil rights activists.
In 1964, Michael Schwerner, James Chaney and Andrew Goodman were part of
an effort to register blacks to vote in small town Mississippi. One night, they heard about a church arson
and drove out to investigate. They were
intercepted by a deputy sheriff, who apparently helped the local Klan drive the
young men out into the countryside, where they were murdered and buried. Rockwell’s grasp of the reality of the
situation is profound: the murderers are mere shadows—a lack of light. Only the three young men matter.
7. “Huck and Pap”
Here’s a nice cute kid
picture! Only there’s something a bit
unusual about this kid. There’s no fun
in his eyes. Just fear. This is Huckleberry Finn, discovering his
father has returned. Pap, of course, has
learned of Huck’s discovery, with Tom Sawyer, of a bundle of money. He is a menacing figure in the book, and
Rockwell manages to capture this sense of menace in this picture. Rockwell illustrated both Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn in the late 30’s, and the illustrations are among
his best. The pictures for the exuberant
Tom Sawyer are full of silly youthful
hijinks, just like the book. But the
pictures for Huckleberry Finn capture
that book’s much more adult and sometimes even oppressive feel.
6. “Due Date”
This 1938 Post cover seems like a light picture of an artist trying to come
up with an idea. But it may be that
there’s much deeper meaning lurking in the picture: it may be that there is a
hidden reference to an abortion. In her
biography of Rockwell (Random House, 2001), Laura Claridge argued for this
interpretation, suggesting that Rockwell and Mary had traveled to England that
year in order for Mary to have an abortion.
If it were true that when he painted this, Rockwell had recently been
involved in an abortion, then the picture suddenly takes on a whole new layer
of meaning. “Due date,” when pregnancy
is on the horizon, means one thing. “Due
date,” when an assignment must be completed, means something quite
different. If Claridge is right about
the Rockwell abortion, then it just makes good sense to think this picture has
something to do with it. (In my opinion, the evidence for this supposed event
is very weak. In other words, my own
opinion is that there’s no good reason to believe that Mary actually had an
abortion. And as such, I am not
convinced that this picture really does hide this deeper meaning. But I include it here anyway because if
Claridge is right, then this is a pretty extreme case—a picture that really
seems just comical, but that turns out to hide a very dark secret.)
5. “Homecoming Marine”
This is one of those deceptive
images that you can mistake for a happy little homecoming story, until you take
a minute to really look at it. The young
man in the center is just back from the war, obviously, and the newspaper
clipping tacked to the wall shows he has acquitted himself well. The local men and boys gather round to hear
his war stories, only there’s no “shoot ‘em up” excitement in this
picture. It’s as though he tried to
start telling these men what it had been like, but simply found he
couldn’t. Everyone is speechless. Some of the older men had probably been
through World War I, and were able to understand, to some extent. The image is deeply moving and intense.
4. “Solitaire”
I find this to be one of the
saddest of Rockwell’s Post
covers. I have not seen the original, at
least not to my recollection, so I can’t be entirely sure about this—the
reproductions I have seen haven’t been of the highest quality—but it seems
almost certain to me that the man is not wearing a wedding ring. So there he sits in his hotel, on the road,
all alone—but he isn’t looking forward to getting home to his family. He may have a home, but he’s just as alone
there as he is here in this cheap hotel.
It’s not a romantic image of the free and easy life of the traveling
salesman. It’s a sad, lonely little
picture of a middle-aged man with nothing but his work. As I said at the outset, I’m not claiming too
much for these images. I’m not
suggesting this is like one of Goya’s masterworks of horror and
abandonment. But the Rockwell remains a
real picture of loneliness and isolation.
3. “Orphan Train”
Here is an illustration for a 1951
story published in Good Housekeeping. I have never read the story, but I think I
can more or less get the gist from this picture. I find the image anything but cute—I find the
posture of the lady, presumably hoping to adopt an orphan, tremendously
affecting. The little basket of goodies
at her feet, the slight lean forward, the hesitant motion with her hands, the
upraised face as she meets the boy who she hopes will soon be her son, and all
that vast stretch of green in between them: it is all very powerful.
2. Nude
This is a picture of Jackie Wells, who posed for Rockwell in an art class he was taking, shortly after the death of his second wife. This is one of very few nudes Rockwell made, apart from his early days in art school of course. He did make some other images that incorporated nudes (including two—more, if you count a nude statue as a nude—that made it onto the cover of the Post). But I know of no painting in Rockwell’s complete body of work that is simply a nude, apart from this painting of Jackie Wells. It stands alone.
In one sense, though, it does not stand alone—it is an unpublished painting, just one that Rockwell made for his own purposes. The other images I’ve included in this little list have all been published. But there’s not necessarily any good reason to stick to the paintings that Rockwell actually sold. If you take a look through Rockwell’s unpublished images, you’ll find some additional surprises. Just two of them, I’ll throw in here as bonuses
Yes, that is a Rockwell. It’s called “Blood
Brothers.” The next picture is
“Pollution.” (Rockwell fans will
recognize it as a play on an earlier, and cheerier, Rockwell image.)
1. “Norman Rockwell Visits a
Country Doctor”
This is another one of those
images, like “Homecoming Marine,” that might at first just seem cozy and
sweet. And maybe it is. But there’s something awfully sad about the
poor little boy way off on the right.
Even the doctor’s dog is closer to the family than this young fellow
is. This picture was published in the Post in 1947, which suggests that the
mother and father had been separated by the War for some years, thus explaining
the significant age gap between the two children here. If Dad was off at war for several years, that
means the older boy was home with Mom for quite awhile. Then Dad came home, and then the new baby
arrived. It doesn’t take some kind of
crazy Freudian Theory to think that the older son might be made to feel a bit
set aside—cut off, isolated—by all these new arrangements. And it doesn’t take an awful lot of crazy Art
Critic tomfoolery to notice that the gun on the wall is pointed right at Dad’s
head.
Don’t
take me wrong, I’m the last person to suggest that Rockwell is trying to do
anything really ugly with this picture.
But I do think that he has observed some kind of pain in the midst of
this happy family, and has brilliantly built it into his picture. As I say, you might not pick up on any of
this right away, and you might even think, after reading this, that I’m just
another lunatic art critic. But I do
hope you’ll pause a bit over this picture and make an effort to see more than
just a warm cozy image of a family at the old fashioned doctor’s office. Maybe Rockwell has done more here than you’d
assume. Maybe he does that pretty often.
The upshot of all
this is: don’t make up your mind about Rockwell’s work until you’ve taken some
time to actually look at it—apart from the few sentimental and lovable images
that you see on Norman Rockwell calendars or collector plates. I think the vicious condemnations of these
cute pictures are terribly overblown. There’s
no harm in cute pictures. And while
“Puppy Love” is far from my favorite Rockwell, I can’t quite bring myself to
see it as a bad thing. But whatever you
think of these cute pictures, they’re not all there is to Rockwell. There’s a great deal more to see, if you take
the trouble to look.
What you should not do, as a result of reading this
little essay, is assume that behind the generally positive and happy exterior
of Rockwell lurks a dark and brooding presence, who sees the world as a hateful
place, worthy of contempt and condemnation.
No, Rockwell is clearly a philosophical optimist. Nothing here contradicts that. But optimism is far from utopianism, and it’s
certainly not a falsification.
I am glad that you are doing this undertaking of writing about Norman Rockwell, as I agree with you that a lot of his work ought to be given serious consideration. By the way, I have the image of "Lift Up Thine Eyes" from a Saturday Evening Post framed, and hanging on a wall in my home, and I was just wondering about it to look it up. That is how I found your blog spot.
ReplyDelete