Depicting the female gender and her body, Burdo describes the certain social “rules governing… contemporary femininity (171)”. Further explaining this topic, Burdo states that “women learned to feed others, not the self, and to construe any desires for self-nurturance and self-feeding as greedy and excessive (171)”. By commenting that the excerpt should be taken both literally and figuratively, the sentence is taken literally by stating it is in our modern society that the female gender has a tendency to literally not eat or carry out wanted tasks due to the fact that it is against society or considered greedy to even desire. Taken figuratively, the quote may correspond with the natural instincts of motherhood and wanting to provide for the family or her children before herself. Feeding and giving nurturance to the family/children before herself instead of supplying her needs first and becoming “greedy”.
Corresponding with the idea of motherhood and nurturance, the image entitled Bouguereau William Temptation depicts a mother and daughter at a pond with a “tempting” apple. By viewing the body language of the mother, she seems to be leaning towards the daughter as to give her the apple. However, in opposition towards Burdo’s quote of giving to prevent greed, Leppert states that the two props, the pond and the apple, serve in fact as symbols of vane [mirror] and temptation [apple].
When attempting to pick apart this painting for myself, I could not decide if the mother was in fact attempting to give her child the apple or if she was in some sense taunting the child with it due to the seemingly sly grin on her face and the child’s almost animalistic fixation with the apple. I also wonder if the mother bringing her child to the lush environment with the still, mirror-like pond is indeed for the child’s benefit or for her own. How would a child under the age of 5 really be able to realize the difference in scenery much less appreciate it? Do you really remember the trees and ponds in detail from a trip or park in your childhood?
However, I am taking the positive opinion on this painting. Leppert and Burdo almost completely contradict each other. The mother is greedy for attempting to give her child nurturance [Leppert] but in contrast greedy for keeping the apple and pond for herself [Burdo]. Symbolically, the apple serves as a metaphor for Eve giving into temptation. So, my question is, who is really giving into the temptation: the mother or the child? And further, is the mother full of greed, teaching her child greed, or merely enjoying a piece of fruit; nutrients that humans need not merely desire to survive?
Great piece! I believe that this painting is in support of Bordo's claim. Once we take the title of "Temptation" away from this (That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, eh?) we see a mother with her child. The woman's posture to me says "Hey honey, would you like an apple?" in the most sincere, sweet voice. There is not a speck of greed in this scene, nor temptation (Allusions aside). I believe this is supporting Bordo's "Women should be nurturing and not selfish" which would connect a woman's selfishness with eating thus she is giving the apple to her child to be selfless, nurturing, and thin.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your reading into this picture. I am embarrassed to admit that I didn't even consider the pond being used a mirror like object. That was a very intuitive reading. I also like the interpretation of the mother being malicious towards the daughter by using the apple as a taunting device. I would rather read it optimistically though, at least for the sake of the child in the painting.
ReplyDelete