# data[].attributes.body
This paper will employ a close visual analysis of lustful portrayal of women by different artists of different styles and periods in order to show the different social cultural use of nude female forms as main focuses in art. Although nudity has been seen as a glorified aspect of art in many different cultures and periods, I argue that many nude women portrayed in art are reduced of their beauty and natural state and seen to be objectifications, suggesting a common erotic image of women for contemporary viewers.

Early nudity was particularly related to complex sets of formal ideals, philosophical concerns, and cultural traditions while later nudity focused on artistic innovation in the Renaissance and later academic traditions of the 17th century and later. The first nude portrayals are commonly associated with the western world consisting of the Greek and Roman cultures. These ancient cultures mainly portrayed the male nude forms in order to glorify the human body and the shape of humanity. These nude figures were mainly depicting ancient Gods and heroes in their prime while focusing on geometric clarity and organic equilibrium. Women nudity was very scarce but when finally being practiced, the figures were very distinct  and mainly symbolized divinity of procreation. The female body was also portrayed as formally focusing on idealized  proportions based on mathematical proportions. It is thought that female nudity may have contained sex appeal “yet they were never totally prurient in intent.” (Sorabella).

The objectification of women usually comes to play with the perception of hypersexualization among women. As we know, women have been depicted in nude forms before, but when a woman is depicted in nude as their original selves, the act of sexual liberation comes into play. Some aspects of hypersexualizing women are women pictured in the nude form in daily settings, nature, or even decorous exhibits. The hypersexualization of women is commonly associated with the patterns and aspects of the theory, The Male Gaze. The Male Gaze is a term made by historians that help classify art works as being produced for the male audience by a heterosexual viewpoint. This theory usually represents women as sexual objects and conveys women as an idealized image. The art was frequently marketed as "the study of women" and featured nude women in scenarios that were expressly designed to attract the audience's attention for enjoyment. One method for attracting a male audience was to depict intimate moments of a naked woman, particularly when adding visual distance between the viewer and the painting. The male gaze is a direct source of objectification for women. “[Objectification includes denial of anatomy, denial of subjectivity, not taking people’s feelings into account, but also treating them as mere instrument- Martha Nussbaum” (Lomography). Some main aspects of women objectification seen through the male gaze is enhancing women's anatomy such as elongating such proportions as the waistline, hair, and breast. Women are even objectified by dehumanizing the individuals when removing one's face (removing identity), concealing aspects of the woman’s backstory, and displaying women in perfectly posed stances.

In my art exhibit, I will be showcasing works mostly from the 1600s to the 1900s, including Olympia, Susanna and the Elders, The Turkish Bath, Large Odalisque, and Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe (Luncheon on the Grass). All of which feature nude women as the major focus and are portrayed through the male gaze and aspects of hypersexualization, leading to the ultimate conclusion that these nude women are objectified.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. Titian, Venus of Urbano, 1538, High Renaissance, oil on canvas, 119.20 x 165.50 cm

# data[].attributes.subject
1. Titian, Venus of Urbano, 1538, High Renaissance, oil on canvas, 119.20 x 165.50 cm

# data[].attributes.body
In Titian’s Venus of Urbano we are presented with a nude woman seductively reclined in a bed. A hypersexualized female body is seen when the viewer has no clue as to who this woman is, creating an idealized beauty and generic image of a sexy nude figure in an elegant room.The formal aspects of the Male Gaze theory are evident in the emphasis on the elongated  and curved pelvis as the focal point, surrounded by soft, luminescent skin and long blond hair running down her shoulders. This skin features a pink blush on traditionally idealized parts of the female body, such as the cheeks, knees, feet, and fingers. A more flirtatious and sexual image is seen when the woman is seen to be giving a frisky glance at the viewer who we assume to be a male. A flirtatious tone is further emphasized by the woman's surrogate-like pose, particularly as she gently places her hand over her genitals, giving the impression of both flaunting and caressing them. Her genitals also become a focal point through the alignment of the partial wall's base and the floor pattern, which converge at that spot, underscoring a desired image or implication aimed at a male audience. The picture can clearly illustrate a male audience when including insights of marriage and love through the picture of a sleeping dog hinting at marital fertility and the roses which can be associated with Venus and the constancy of love. Also the bed cushions being of a crimson red color hint signal passion and inflamed desire likely coming from a lover. Through the help of these aspects along with the idea that this painting acted as an “installation…intended for a private viewing hung alongside other highly sexualized paintings showcasing nude female bodies arranged in classicizing poses…” (Jewitt) we can determine this woman is objectified.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Venus of Urbino 1538 | Oil Painting Reproduction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Buy Venus of Urbino 1538 oil painting reproductions on canvas. Museum quality hand-painted Tiziano Vecellio (TITIAN) replica canvas. 100% Guarantee & FREE Global Shipping.

# data[].attributes.headline
2. Gentileschi, Susanna and the Elders, 1610, Italian Baroque, Oil on canvas, 170 x 119 cm

# data[].attributes.subject
2. Gentileschi, Susanna and the Elders, 1610, Italian Baroque, Oil on canvas, 170 x 119 cm

# data[].attributes.body
In this picture, Susanna and the Elders, the theme of objectification is a little more obscured especially because the artist is a woman. The background story highlights the objectification and hypersexualized desire men project onto women, presenting this dynamic through a woman's perspective of a similar experience. This approach makes the scene feel more authentic from a female point of view. The features of Susanna aren't as idealized as men artists who portray the same story make it. In this case we can observe a malaise nude woman who is seen to be in discomfort and repulsion when awkwardly turning her head and body away from the men. Though the natural softness and curve of her skin along with the peaking breast can resemble little aspects appealing to the male gaze. Hypersexualization can be seen when the men are pictured during a woman’s bath time, a place they are forbidden to be, violating her privacy. The depiction of the “spare background keeps the viewer’s attention focused on the interaction between Susanna and her oppressors, and emphasizes the sense of entrapment”(Baskind) and aiding the idea of how unnatural it is to see men in this environment, especially being clothed among a nude woman. The portrayal of this specific event also emphasizes the nude woman herself when “There is a stark contrast between the heavily robed, shadowy men…”(Foundations) highlighting the pale nude figure. The men continuously taunt the nude woman when whispering in her ear and brushing against her hair hinting at their sexual desires with the woman. The woman is told being told that if she does not submit to sexual frolic with the men, sexual violence will occur along with the mis information of her being accused of adultery. The lustful image men project onto this woman, coupled with the hypersexualized desire for her body, culminates in the portrayal of her being objectified by men.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A lifelong fight against sexual violence.

Artemisia Gentileschi's first known work, Susanna and the Elders, re-tells chapter 13 of the Book of Daniel, a popular theme in Renaissance and Baroque painting. In the story, a Hebrew girl Susanna is spied on while bathing by lecherous elders. The creeps attempt to blackmail her for sex, and when she refuses she's put on trial for their false claims. Susanna is eventually vindicated and the elders executed for their crime.

Sexual violence was already a theme for Gentileschi, and horrifyingly, a year after painting this scene, Gentileschi herself was raped by her tutor, Agostino Tassi. Tassi was put on trial for taking her virginity and refusing to marry her after 'stealing her virtue' and was sentenced to a year in prison he would never serve. Susanna eventually found justice, and Gentileschi did not. Her future work was dedicated to depicting justice against violent men in the most brutal fashion.

Cite this page

Reed Enger, "Susanna and the Elders," in Obelisk Art History, Published January 31, 2016; last modified November 08, 2022, http://www.arthistoryproject.com/artists/artemisia-gentileschi/susanna-and-the-elders/.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A lifelong fight against sexual violence. Artemisia Gentileschi

# data[].attributes.headline
3. Ingres, The Turkish Bath, 1862, Orientalism, Oil on Canvas, 108 cm

# data[].attributes.subject
3. Ingres, The Turkish Bath, 1862, Orientalism, Oil on Canvas, 108 cm

# data[].attributes.body
In Ingres’s painting The Turkish Bath the use of a tondo (circular) frame “provides a sense of intimacy and enclosure, drawing the viewer’s gaze into the languid atmosphere” (Artchive) suggesting that the painting is depicted through the male gaze especially when composed of a female only atmosphere. The bathing room is clearly seen in the male gaze when showcasing nude women in perfectly posed stances when rinsing off, chatting, drinking, and dancing. These women can also be seen to be as dehumanized figures hinting at characteristics of objectification because it is known that the male artist was not among the women in their bathing room, “[Ingres] takes figures from previous pictures, in particular The Valpincon Bather in which we see the woman with her back towards us” (Museoteca). The non-life like figures are especially seen to be fictional when being illustrated symbolizing decorative patterns like arabesque and cold lighting that towns down relief of the figures. Hypersexualization of the women is clearly expressive when the nude women are depicted in an oriental and luxurious background. The women's bodies are also depicted with palpable softness showing interest in sensuality of the female body along with being dressed in jewelry and fabrics. Lastly, eroticism is shown when there are two women closely seated next to each other with one caressing the breast of the other woman lying beside her suggesting images of objectification in the male gaze.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Turkish Bath (Le Bain turc) is an oil painting by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, initially completed between 1852 and 1859, but modified in 1862.[1] The painting depicts a group of nude women at a pool in a harem.[1] It has an erotic style that evokes both the Near East and earlier western styles associated with mythological subject matter. The painting expands on a number of motifs that Ingres had explored in earlier paintings,[1] in particular The Valpinçon Bather (1808) and La Grande odalisque (1814) and is an example of Romanticism.

# data[].attributes.headline
4. Edouard Manet, Olympia, 1863, oil on canvas, 1863,130 x 190 cm

# data[].attributes.subject
4. Edouard Manet, Olympia, 1863, oil on canvas, 1863,130 x 190 cm

# data[].attributes.body
In Edourd Manet’s painting Olympia, we are presented with a modernistic depiction of a nude woman.The woman is portrayed in a seductive attitude, exhibiting her body in a way that suggests a dirty and obscene beauty. Though some aspects of the male gaze usually enhance female bodies to create a more appealing look, Manet’s Olympia does the quite opposite; he keeps the natural round stomach of the girl along with her short legs and strong hands paired with her delicate shoulders.The display of one's natural physique was severely criticized by viewers, who said, "[her] red hair is positively ugly, her face is stupid, her skin is deathly pale" (Arte 7:32), resulting in the diminution of one's inherent beauty. The visual distance between Olympia and the viewer suggests that the woman is in the presence of a male customer. Her hand resting on her thigh conveys an immodest connection between her and the viewer. The decorative divider in the background and the presence of a servant holding up a gift of flowers—possibly symbolizing payment for sex—suggest that the woman is part of a brothel. Especially as the woman is depicted naked yet adorned with ornaments, creating a more lustrous image, it suggests she is portrayed in a manner that aligns with the concept of the Male Gaze. The ribbon, or what appears to be an orchid flower in her hair, is thought to symbolize a sexually suggestive form. The shoes slipping off her feet and the black cat are believed to reference loose women, with the term “chausson (slipper), which referred to an “old prostitute” (Dolan, pg. 1) The loose hold of the shawl conveys a playful and teasing image, while its spillage beneath her figure may symbolize her social class within the spectacle of feminine allure. At the same time, it hints at the woman losing the sense of clarity she once possessed signifying the image of being objectified.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Smarthistory – A-Level: Édouard Manet, Olympia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Manet decided to replace the idealized female nude with the image of a known prostitute. It didn’t go so well.

# data[].attributes.headline
5. Edouard Manet, Le Dejeuner sur l’herbe (Luncheon on the Grass), 1863, oil on canvas, 207 x 265 cm

# data[].attributes.subject
5. Edouard Manet, Le Dejeuner sur l’herbe (Luncheon on the Grass), 1863, oil on canvas, 207 x 265 cm

# data[].attributes.body
In Luncheon on the Grass, Manet depicts a nude woman among two dressed men in a nature scene. This painting off the bat seems to give a hypersexualized image of the nude woman that embodies and visualizes sexuality. To the left bottom corner we can see that the woman had taken off her dress before eating and socializing with the men, giving a scandalous image towards the woman's nature and appearance. And among the food on top of her dress is an oyster hinting at female sexuality. The nude women especially among clothed men creates a lustful image and is thought as diminishing her allure and “absurdity… of the nude in accompaniment of dressed males in an outdoor setting,[is] a highly improper event…” (Læssøe pg 195). It is not specifically known, but it can be inferred that the woman is a prostitute. The character’s elongated body (mostly being her long legs and arms) and larger than life depiction has aided in continuous aspects of objectification of a woman's body. A sexual tension can be felt among the nude woman when her foot points towards the crotch of the man with a hat while he points at her. The nude model seems to be “highlighted”  with a studio lighting with minimal shadows making her look dehumanized and helps make her nudity known to the viewer. With her gaze struck towards the viewer, it resembles an aspect of the male gaze leading to the idea of objectification.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(French: [lədeʒœnesyʁlɛʁb,-ʒøn-]; The Luncheon on the Grass) - originally titled Le Bain ( The Bath) - is a large oil on canvas painting by Édouard Manet created in 1862 and 1863.

It depicts a female nude and a scantily dressed female bather on a picnic with two fully dressed men in a rural setting. Rejected by the Salon jury of 1863, Manet seized the opportunity to exhibit this and two other paintings in the 1863 Salon des Refusés, where the painting sparked public notoriety and controversy. Though the work increased Manet's fame, however, it nonetheless failed to sell at its debut.

The work is now in the Musée d'Orsay in Paris. A smaller, earlier version can be seen at the Courtauld Gallery, London.

Édouard Manet - Déjeuner sur l'herbe (Courtauld Gallery, London)

The painting features a nude woman casually lunching with two fully dressed men. Her body is starkly lit and she stares directly at the viewer. The two men, dressed as young dandies, sit with her. In front of them, the woman's clothes, a basket of fruit, and a round loaf of bread are displayed, as in a still life. In the background, yet too large in comparison with the figures in the foreground, a lightly clad woman bathes in a stream. The man on the right wears a flat hat with a tassel, a kind normally worn indoors.

Despite the mundane subject, Manet deliberately chose a large canvas size, measuring 81.9 × 104.1 in (208 by 264.5 cm), normally reserved for historical, religious and mythological subjects. The style of the painting breaks with the academic traditions of the time. He did not try to hide the brush strokes; the painting even looks unfinished in some parts of the scene. The nude is also starkly different from the smooth, flawless figures of Cabanel or Ingres.

A nude woman casually lunching with fully dressed men was an affront to audiences' sense of propriety, though Émile Zola, a contemporary of Manet's, argued that this was not uncommon in paintings found in the Louvre. Zola also felt that such a reaction came from viewing art differently from the perspective of "analytic" painters like Manet, who use a painting's subject as a pretext to paint.

There is much not known about the painting, such as when Manet actually began painting it, how he got the idea and how and what sort of preparatory works he did. Though Manet had claimed this piece was once valued at 25,000 Francs in 1871, it remained in his possession until 1878 when Jean-Baptiste Faure, opera-singer and collector, bought it for just 2,600 Francs.

The figures of this painting are a testament to how deeply connected Manet was to Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Some[who? ] assume that the landscape of the painting is meant to be l'Île Saint-Ouen, which was just up the Seine from his family property in Gennevilliers. Manet often used real models and people he knew as reference during his creation process. The female nude is thought to be Victorine Meurent, the woman who became his favorite and frequently portrayed model, who later was the subject of Olympia. The male figure on the right was based on a combination of his two brothers, Eugène and Gustave Manet. The other man is based on his brother-in-law, Dutch sculptor Ferdinand Leenhoff. Nancy Locke referred to this scene as Manet's family portrait.

What many critics find shocking about this painting is the interaction, or lack thereof, between the three main subjects in the foreground and the woman bathing in the background. There are many contrasting qualities to the painting that juxtapose and distance the female nude from the other two male subjects. For example, the feminine versus the masculine, the naked versus the clothed, and the white color palette versus the dark color palette creates a clear social difference between the men and the woman. Additionally, some viewers are intrigued by the questions raised by the gaze of the nude woman. It is indeterminable whether she is challenging or accepting the viewer, looking past the viewer, engaging the viewer, or even looking at the viewer at all. This encounter identifies the gaze as a figure of the painting itself, as well as the figure object of the woman's gaze.

As with the later (1863) and other works, Manet's composition reveals his study of the old masters, as the disposition of the main figures is derived from Marcantonio Raimondi's engraving The Judgment of Paris ( c. 1515) after a drawing by Raphael. Raphael was an artist revered by the conservative members of the Académie des Beaux-Arts and his paintings were part of the teaching programme at the École des Beaux-Arts, where copies of fifty-two images from his most celebrated frescoes were permanently on display. Le Bain (an early title for Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe) was therefore, in many ways, a defiant painting. Manet was cheekily reworking Raphael, turning a mythological scene from one of the most celebrated engravings of the Renaissance into a tableau of somewhat vulgar Parisian holidaymakers.

Scholars also cite two works as important precedents for Manet's painting Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe: The Pastoral Concert by Giorgione or possibly Titian (in the Louvre) and Giorgione's The Tempest, both of which are famous Renaissance paintings. The Tempest, which also features a fully dressed man and a nude woman in a rural setting, offers an important precedent for Manet's painting Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Pastoral Concert even more closely resembles Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe, as it features two dressed men seated in a rural setting, with two undressed women. Pastoral Concert is in the collection of the Louvre in Paris and is likely, therefore, to have been studied by Manet.

According to Antonin Proust, he and Manet had been lounging by the Seine as they spotted a woman bathing in the river. This prompted Manet to say, "I copied Giorgione's women, the women with musicians. It's black that painting. The ground has come through. I want to redo it and do it with a transparent atmosphere with people like those we see over there."

There may be a connection between Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe and the work of Antoine Watteau. Manet's original title, Le Bain, initially drew the main attention to the woman near the water. This bathing figure alone is quite similar to the figure in Watteau's La Villageoise, as both women crouch or lean over near water, simultaneously holding up their skirts. It is possible that Manet adapted this pose, which is more clearly seen in a sketch of his, years before his creation of Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe.

There were many mixed reviews and responses to Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe when it was first displayed and it continues to yield a variety of responses. The initial response was characterized by its blunt rejection from the Paris Salon and subsequent display in the Salon des Refusés. Though many critiques were rooted in confusion about the piece, they were not always completely negative.

Odilon Redon, for example, did not like it. There is a discussion of it, from this point of view, in Proust's Remembrance of Things Past.

Le Capitaine Pompilius, a contributor for Le Petit Journal, thought the characteristically "male" colors of the piece brought the countryside into the salon, but thought the painting was underdeveloped.

Castagnary, appreciator of realist works, identified it as a nice sketch but said it lacked sincerity and lost the definition of the anatomy of the subjects. He also described Manet's painting technique as "flabby".

Arthur Stevens, contributor for , praised Manet as a talented colorist but felt that he neglected form and modeling in this piece.

Thoré, Paul, and Louvet loved the energy of the colors but found the brush strokes to be uneven.

One interpretation of the work is that it depicts the rampant prostitution present at that time in the Bois de Boulogne, a large park on the western outskirts of Paris. This prostitution was common knowledge in Paris, but was considered a taboo subject unsuitable for a painting.

Criticism of the subject matter

Louis Étienne characterized the painting as a puzzle, while describing the nude female as "a Bréda of some sort, as nude as possible, lolling boldly between two swells dressed to the teeth. These two persons look like high school students on holiday, committing a great sin to prove their manhood."

Arthur Stevens could not understand what the painting was saying.

Didier de Montchaux found the subject to be "fairly scabrous".

Thoré described the nude as an ugly and risqué subject matter, while describing the male on the right as one "who doesn't even think of taking off his horrible padded hat outdoors ... It's the contrast between such an antipathetic animal to the character of a pastoral scene, and this undraped bather, that is shocking."

Philip Hamerton, an English painter and contributor at the Fine Arts Quarterly, had an affinity for the characteristic photographic detail of the Pre-Raphaelite paintings. Though he did recognize the inspiration from Giorgione, he found Manet's modern realism to be offensive in this situation. His disapproval of Manet and similar artists was related to the idea of indecency behind "vulgar men" painting nude women.

Though the peculiarity of the combination of one female nude with three clothed figures sparked mixed responses, the lack of interaction of the figures in addition to the lack of engagement by the nude woman provoked laughter instead of offense. Anne McCauley claimed that laughter as a response represses the sexual tension and makes the scene rather unthreatening to the viewer in the end.

The Luncheon on the Grass is the greatest work of Édouard Manet, one in which he realizes the dream of all painters: to place figures of natural grandeur in a landscape. We know the power with which he vanquished this difficulty. There are some leaves, some tree trunks, and, in the background, a river in which a chemise-wearing woman bathes; in the foreground, two young men are seated across from a second woman who has just exited the water and who dries her naked skin in the open air. This nude woman has scandalized the public, who see only her in the canvas. My God! What indecency: a woman without the slightest covering between two clothed men! That has never been seen. And this belief is a gross error, for in the Louvre there are more than fifty paintings in which are found mixes of persons clothed and nude. But no one goes to the Louvre to be scandalized. The crowd has kept itself moreover from judging The Luncheon on the Grass like a veritable work of art should be judged; they see in it only some people who are having a picnic, finishing bathing, and they believed that the artist had placed an obscene intent in the disposition of the subject, while the artist had simply sought to obtain vibrant oppositions and a straightforward audience. Painters, especially Édouard Manet, who is an analytic painter, do not have this preoccupation with the subject which torments the crowd above all; the subject, for them, is merely a pretext to paint, while for the crowd, the subject alone exists. Thus, assuredly, the nude woman of The Luncheon on the Grass is only there to furnish the artist the occasion to paint a bit of flesh. That which must be seen in the painting is not a luncheon on the grass; it is the entire landscape, with its vigors and its finesses, with its foregrounds so large, so solid, and its backgrounds of a light delicateness; it is this firm modeled flesh under great spots of light, these tissues supple and strong, and particularly this delicious silhouette of a woman wearing a chemise who makes, in the background, an adorable dapple of white in the milieu of green leaves. It is, in short, this vast ensemble, full of atmosphere, this corner of nature rendered with a simplicity so just, all of this admirable page in which an artist has placed all the particular and rare elements which are in him.

Zola presents a fictionalised version of the painting and the controversy surrounding it in his 1886 novel ( The Masterpiece).

James Tissot, La Partie Carrée, 1870

In L'Oeuvre, Émile Zola's 1886 novel about a painter, a work by his main character, Claude Lantier, exhibited in a fictional salon des refusés, resembles Manet's painting.

Claude Monet, Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe, 1865-1866, Musée d'Orsay, Paris

Claude Monet's own version of Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe from 1865-1866, was inspired by Manet's painting.

French painter James Tissot, painted La Partie Carrée, in 1870; arguably a tamer version without the nudity of Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe.

Paul Cézanne, Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe, 1876-1877, Musée de l'Orangerie

Paul Cézanne painted the same theme in his Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe (1876-1877), Musée de l'Orangerie, Paris. It is not certain, however, that Cézanne was responsible for the title of the work, but it does incorporate many of the same elements of subject in the piece. For example, Cézanne's clothed female subject poses similarly to the model of Manet in which her chin rests in her hand. The male figure, meant to resemble the painter himself, mimics the hand gesture of the man furthest right in Manet's piece.[20] The composition of Cézanne's painting also bears resemblance to Bacchanal (between 1627 and 1628), by Nicolas Poussin, whose works in the Louvre were periodically copied by Cézanne. It is possible that Cézanne's Déjeuner represents nothing more than the joyful memories of outings in the countryside around Aix-en-Provence, known especially from the testimony of a childhood friend of the painter, Émile Zola.[21]

Pablo Picasso, Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, 1907, MoMA

Manet's painting inspired Picasso as he completed the largest concentration of art prompted by a single work during the 20th century, consisting of 27 paintings, 140 drawings, 3 linogravures and cardboard marquettes for sculpture carried out between 1949 and 1962.[22] Picasso also adopted some of Manet's techniques involving exploitation of the nude in the foreground as evident in his work Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, 1907.[6]

Paul Gauguin may have been inspired by this piece in creating his 1896 work Where do we come from? Who are we? Where are we going?, as there is a similarity of Manet's depiction of the nude woman and Gauguin's Tahitian woman.[6]

Max Ernst painted a parody version of this piece named Le Déjeuner sur l'Herbre in 1944. He inverts the painting, replaces the nude woman with a fish, and adds an 'r' to the title for comedic effect.[23]

The painting inspired the 1959 film of the same name by Jean Renoir.

Alain Jacquet copied in 1964 the composition of Manet in his Déjeuner sur l'herbe:, a serie of 95 serigraphies portraying the art critic Pierre Restany and the painter Mario Schifano, one of which was left in the lobby of the hotel Chelsea in New York City for payment of his room.

Peruvian painter Herman Braun-Vega produced many works inspired by this painting. One of the first, Les invités sur l'herbe, 1970, Musée d'Art Moderne de Paris,[24] is a mix between Las Meninas by Velazquez and Le déjeuner sur l'herbe by Manet, which features Picasso and Velasquez as naked guests. It is a tribute to Picasso who produced both a series of paintings inspired by Le déjeuner sur l'herbe and an other series inspired by Las Meninas. It also is part of a series called Picasso dans un déjeuner sur l'herbe described as "seriously hilarious" by art critic John Canaday.[25] Later Braun-Vega produced other inspired works like Encore un déjeuner sur le sable,1984, where he pictures himself in place of one of the characters. This work as the following ones is typical of the syncretism that characterizes the work of Braun-Vega from the 80s. He mixes contemporary characters (mainly south american ones) with Manet's characters as he does in Cita en el campo and Cita en la Playa in 1985; Fin d'un déjeuner sur l'herbe in 1987 and Picnic en el Patio in 1988, showing critical irony about his time as in I love the neutron bomb, lithography,1986. He also moves the scene to Central Park for his 1999 New-York exhibition[26] with, Le déjeuner in Central Park (Château Malescasse collection[27]).

New Jazz Orchestra released the album titled Le Déjeuner sur l'Herbe in 1968 and its cover shows a photograph resembling Manet's painting.[28]

It was copied in the cover photo of the Bow Wow Wow LP See Jungle! See Jungle! Go Join Your Gang Yeah, City All Over! Go Ape Crazy!, and the EP The Last of the Mohicans. Controversy arose because the naked girl (lead singer Annabella Lwin) was only 14 at the time.

It was also parodied by Neon Park in the cover of Lowell George's only solo album, "Thanks I'll Eat It Here" with Marlene Dietrich, Fidel Castro and Bob Dylan as the diners.

Priit Pärn used the painting as the basis of the 1987 short film Eine murul (Breakfast on the Grass), depicting the day that led to the four subjects of the original painting meeting for their luncheon.

Mickalene Thomas has produced Le déjeuner sur l'herbe: les trois femmes noires (2010). The painting is both a critique of and reference to Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Thomas' piece portrays three bold, black women adorned with rich colors, patterned clothing, and radiant Afro-styled hair; the women's positioning and posing is reminiscent of the subjects of Manet's piece, but the gazes of all three women are fixed on the viewer. Thomas created the painting, her largest piece at the time, in 2010 after being commissioned by the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York City.[29]

Gilbert Shelton parodied it for the cover of The Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers comic #3.

1. ^ Catalogue des ouvrages de peinture, sculpture, gravure, lithographie et architecture : refusés par le Jury de 1863 et exposés, par décision de S.M. l'Empereur au salon annexe, palais des Champs-Elysées, le 15 mai 1863, Édouard Manet, Le Bain, no. 363, Bibliothèque nationale de France

2. ^ Tucker, Paul Hayes (1998). Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 5-14.

3. ^ Armstrong, Carol (1998). "To Paint, To Point, To Pose" Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. pp. 93-111.

4. Ross King. ^ The Judgement of Paris: The Revolutionary Decade that Gave the World Impressionism. New York: Waller & Company, 2006 ISBN 0-8027-1466-8.

5. ^ John Rewald,The History of Impressionism, The Museum of Modern Art, 4th revised edition 1973, (1st 1946, 2nd 1955, 3rd 1961), p. 85. ISBN 0-87070-369-2.

6. ^ Laessøe, Rolf (2005). "Édouard Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe as a Veiled Allegory of Painting". Artibus et Historiae. 26 (51): 197. doi:10.2307/1483783. JSTOR 1483783.

7. ^ Fried, Michael (1996). Manet's Modernism or, The Face of Painting in the 1860s. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. pp. 56-57.

8. ^ Fernand Desnoyers, La peinture en 1863 : Salon des refusés, A. Dutil (Paris) 1863, Bibliothèque nationale de France (in French)

9. ^ McCauley, Anne (1998). "Sex and the Salon" Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 41-44.

10. ^ Louis Étienne, Le jury et les exposants: salon des refusés, Paris, 1863, p. 30., Bibliothèque nationale de France

11. ^ Locke, Nancy (1998). "Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe as a Family Romance" Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 121.

12. ^ "Paul Cézanne, Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe (1876-1877), Musée de l'Orangerie, Paris". Archived from the original on 29 October 2014.

Brombert, Beth Archer (1996). Édouard Manet: Rebel in a Frock Coat. ISBN 0316109479.

King, Ross (2006). The Judgment of Paris: The Revolutionary Decade that Gave the World Impressionism. New York: Waller & Company. ISBN 0802714668.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(French: [lədeʒœnesyʁlɛʁb,-ʒøn-]; The Luncheon on the Grass ) - originally titled Le Bain ( The Bath) - is a large oil on canvas painting by Édouard Manet created in 1862 and 1863. It depicts a female nude and a scantily dressed female bather on a picnic with two fully dressed men in a rural setting.

# data[].attributes.body
Jewitt, J. R. (n.d.). Titian, Venus of Urbino. Smarthistory. Retrieved December 8, 2024, from https://smarthistory.org/titian-venus-of-urbino/

FOUNDATIONS: SUSANNA AND THE ELDERS. (2021). In History today (Vol. 71, Number 9, pp. 4-). History Today Ltd.  https://caccldiablo.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01CACCL_DIABLO/1tubmvq/cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2586552183

Baskind, Samantha. 2020. 'Susanna and Gentileschi Exposed' , in The Visual Commentary Of Scripture ed. by Ben Quash. (London: The Visual Commentary on Scripture Foundation). [Accessed 8.12.2024]https://thevcs.org/susanna-and-elders#susanna-and-gentileschi-exposed

Artchive. (n.d.). The Turkish Bath, Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, 1862. Retrieved December 8, 2024, from https://www.artchive.com/artwork/the-turkish-bath-jean-auguste-dominique-ingres-1862/

Museoteca. (n.d.). The Turkish Bath by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres. Retrieved December 8, 2024, from https://museoteca.com/r/en/work/2119/ingres_jean_auguste_dominique/the_turkish_bath/!/

ARTE France, Infobase, film distributor, ARTE France, & Infobase, film distributor. (2016). Manet [1832-1883]. ARTE France,.

https://caccldiablo.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01CACCL_DIABLO/106b8ud/alma991003631331105345

Dolan, T. (2015). Fringe Benefits: Manet’s Olympia and Her Shawl. The Art Bulletin (New York, N.Y.), 97(4), 409–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043079.2015.1043828

Læssøe, Rolf. Édouard Manet’s Le Déjeuner sur l’Herbe as a veiled allegory of painting. Winthrop University, JSTOR. Retrieved December 7, 2024, from https://faculty.winthrop.edu/stockk/Modernism/Manet%20Dejeuner.pdf

# data[].attributes.headline
additional information (if glitching occurs):

# data[].attributes.subject
additional information (if glitching occurs):

# data[].attributes.body
Additional Information: link to overview of whole art show (not in Slide form)- https://padlet.com/elyianainiguez/portrayal-of-women-in-art-over-the-years-the-objectification-udd6oq8r3umfyea2                                                                                                                                                               link to Google Doc Drive (incase works cited links don't work in padlet slideshow)- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1huaAQYsyjj_hE5G_pbVgRhZ_mhaEHlrxuArOEfenHIc/edit?usp=sharing                                                                                                                                                                  Note: links used for images are not the sources for the information and quotes for the images!!