Women in Water: A Comparison of John Everett Millais’ 'Ophelia', and Francesca Woodman’s 'Untitled Boulder, Colorado'.

The following text furthers my concern/interest with certain depictions of women within art (again using a Pre-Raphaelite example) that I touched upon on the last post:

John Everett Millais - Ophelia (1852)

                                    Francesca Woodman - Untitled Boulder, Colorado (1976)                                       

Both pieces feature rivers, both have women in them, yet the presentation of such differs. In a clear, observational way, one is a Pre-Raphaelite painting, and the other a modern, 20^th Century photograph. In a more conceptual – and perhaps tenuous – way, these works have different connotations due to the myths or stories that possibly influenced them, and that of the artists themselves. Whilst both of these comparative approaches have certain esteem, it’s the more conceptual angle that seems to provide the most scope for interest, specifically in terms of the traditional – often derogatory – presentation of women in art and how this has altered.

Looking  at the direct, observational differences between the works, Ophelia is depicted as a Pre-Raphaelite beauty, and surrounded by flora of a similar aesthetic. On the other hand, Woodman appears in greyscale; an almost ghostly figure, perhaps pertinent for her graveyard surroundings. Thus, you could interpret Woodman as providing commentary of the death of female respectability, or the lack of independent presence and voice that women in art are traditionally given. Whereas Millais’ is seemingly celebrating the beauty and tragedy of such women, something not alien to human psyche regarding art and literature at the time[1]. There’s also the question of focus: Ophelia is unequivocally the focus of Millais’ piece, where Woodman (although definitely a focus) is less so. Again, this could be commentary by Woodman of the traditional lack of female agency in art, or it could in fact be an attempt to lessen of the objectification of women, when taking the focus of Ophelia into account; it seems we are to marvel as her beauty despite the obvious distress she was and is in.[2] Perhaps the real difference here is the artists themselves; one may feel more protective of Ophelia as she was painted by a male artist, thus bringing forth notions such as the male gaze[3], whereas Woodman’s piece feels like an active point of utilising her own body, and thus her power.

A major similarity between the two works is that the women within them both lie in bodies of water (seemingly rivers), which when paired with the stories or myths they may take influence from – in the case of Ophelia, Shakespeare’s Hamlet is certainly its influence, and there’s evidence that Woodman was greatly inspired by the myth of Apollo and Daphne[4], which seems likely for this image, as she almost entwines with the roots of the tree – may provide further conceptual poignancy regarding women, particularly in terms of women being ‘ravaged’ by nature. Although nature is a typically considered a feminine entity, it’s men that wrote these tales, and men that caused these women’s demises; in both tales women are punished for either being driven ‘mad’, or pursued by men. Yet when a woman handles such a tale, it morphs, perhaps as an act of reclaiming feminine nature and empowerment. Instead of being helplessly enveloped by the river, Woodman seems to fight against it, or at least to have autonomously made the decision to be in its water. Or possibly Woodman made a mostly aesthetical decision; she was able to make her limbs flow and merge with the water and tree, highlighting similarities between the human form and that of nature, something she would then seemingly share with Millais’ depiction of Ophelia. It’s maybe due to the modern context we place her photograph in (even down to its very medium) that elicits such feminist-inclined connotations, or at least those with more of a ‘modern’ view of women in comparison to Millais’ painting. However, it feels as though the really significant difference between the works is their creators; it’s a much more comfortable experience knowing that the instigator of a naked woman was the women herself. 

---

[1] Shakespeare’s Hamlet from which Ophelia derives is a tragedy, a form that went on to influence Gothic fiction, which played with and developed human tendencies of sadism and deriving pleasure from tragedy and death. Ophelia drowns in the river after apparently being driven mad by her father’s death.

[2] A notion only furthered by Millais’ painting process during which his model became very ill when the bath she was posing in went cold and he didn’t notice.

[3] Laura Mulvey’s Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema published in 1975 asserted a ‘male gaze’ viewing and presenting women in a voyeuristic and fetishistic manner in the (influential) era of Classic Hollywood cinema, because heterosexual men controlled the cameras. This is something that can also feel relevant when applied to artworks.

[4] “The Greek myth of Apollo and Daphne tells of a wood nymph who – on being remorselessly pursued by the love stricken god – begged the gods for help to escape. Hearing her plea, her father cast an enchantment that transformed her into a tree, her feet becoming roots, her arms branches and her skin bark.” – Tish Wrigley, Francesca Woodman’s Inspirations, AnOther Magazine, 2014.