Within In the Garden, writer Alan Jacobs comments about the age old biblical story of Adam and Eve and the concept of shame represented by the text and by art throughout history. The main concept that summoned my attention was the idea about how covering up the naked body by fig leaves is more of a deflection to Adam and Eve’s feeling of shame after biting into the forbidden fruit. Jacobs uses the term “pudenda” which literally means “the shameful parts” which references that now their genitals are in shame because of their actions. However, this shame (as Jacobs argues) is not equal between both Adam and Eve. Jacobs uses Masaccio’s Expulsion from the Garden of Eden to point out that while both feel shame, Adam covers his eyes out of shame with his Penis clearly visible and Eve covers both her breasts and vulva leaving her eyes open. This demonstrates how Adam’s shame is more of the traditional shame while Eve’s is the pudenda (or deflection to the genitals).
For me, this idea brings about concepts of the inequality between the sexes and how men are given superiority over women. If the biblical text is vague and just talks about both of them feeling shame and covering their genitals, why is it that Adam is then painted with his genitals showing (but covering his eyes) while Eve is not? My thought is that since a man painted it he might have had the concept of blaming women (i.e. Eve) for bringing forth shame to men (Adam) in the case of the fruit. Thus, putting the idea that men are above women represented by Adam still bearing his nudity and Eve covering her genitals.
Either way this shame is trying to be passed off towards someone else as if the individuals are not guilty themselves. Adam is trying to deflect his actions towards Eve and Eve to the serpent. While they do feel shame, they also feel innocent at the same time. (Maybe this is why their entire body isn’t covered up?) I think this is a relevant comment to society in that no one really wants to take responsibility for his or her actions. There is always some excuse to why somebody or something prevented him or her from completing the desired action or why they failed to complete a task that was intended. Was this human characteristic prevalent since the dawn of mankind? Jacobs leads me to believe that it is.
-Lydell Peterson
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Lydell-
How are they simultaneously suggesting their innocence here? There is a sense, with Adam covering his eyes, of his not feeling guilty, but rather his just not wanting to get caught - like a celebrity escaping paparazzi. (More busted, than feeling shame - perhaps just a difference of a few degrees.)
Given the history of depictions of nudity - of women, and of men - and the ongoing sense of what is acceptable, what is "shameful," the distinctions pursued here are interesting, your investent a sensible pursuit
While I appreciate the time taken and consideration devoted to these blogs, can I ask - what of the survey question? Is your reply to that around here somewhere?
Ahhh the survey...
Filmmaking today is a wise man's guess at an obscure man's attempt.
Post a Comment