Some face time with Magritte

René Magritte.

He's a Belgian painter whose work I first encountered when I watched "The Thomas Crown Affair"(1999). As a Surrealist, he featured illogical ideas and characters placed in unrealistic situations in his paintings. When I was at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art for a second time, I made sure that I visited his collection which was currently on view there.

One of the first paintings that caught my eye was a painting called "Le lyrisme" (1947). It has a caricature of a man with a pear-shaped head, apparently upset with a disembodied pear. The strokes reminded me of Vincent van Gogh. But reading up on this painting, I learned that the disembodied pear is supposed to be the sun! Now that's surreal! "Le lyrisme" means an expression of a strong personal emotion ("un style emphatique et passionné"). In the painting's case, I assume that Magritte was trying to convey distress or anger. But why direct anger to the sun? I don't buy the idea that the pear-sun is supposed to represent Louis Philippe I of France because this French king lived before his time. Magritte lived during World War II and this painting might be a violent reaction to whatever he was experiencing at that time.

I have always associated Magritte with clean lines and interesting use of light and shade. Hence, if I didn't see "Le Stropiat" (1948) in the SFMOMA's Magritte exhibit, I wouldn't have known that he painted it. Apparently, Magritte painted in this sloppy manner in his "Vache period", perhaps as a way to inject humour to an otherwise serious painting. "Le Stropiat" is actually a bearded bespectacled man who has a lot of pipes stuck to his face. He's also holding a pocket watch with his remaining hand. The other one's been amputated. Is this guy trying to smoke himself to death? I assume that this man isn't poor because (1) he can afford a lot of pipes; and (2) he has a pocket watch. 

"Son of Man" (1964) is the Magritte painting I encountered in "The Thomas Crown Affair" and it also happens to be one of my favourite paintings from the Surrealist style. It features a man wearing a bowler hat and an overcoat, whose face is partially covered by a floating apple. The expression "son of man" is used several times in the New Testament to refer to Jesus. I'm not sure how this expression relates to the painting though I assume that the bowler man is immune to temptation because he did not eat the apple. Plus he seems perfect, because of the way he's dressed... In this context, I reference Jose Rizal because Ambeth Ocampo differentiated the man from the legend through his essays in "Rizal Without the Overcoat". On the other hand, the painting is compelling because the viewer cannot see the man's face. Magritte created tension in the audience; there is no catharsis because the audience's view is incomplete... and we just have to move on because the apple won't get out of the way. 

And then there's "Le liberateur" (1947), which to me, is downright Monty Pythonesque. The sky became layers upon layers of archways, with clouds floating in the recesses. The man is depicted in an absurd way, with shapes that recur in many of Magritte's paintings found on his torso. "Le liberateur" is supposed to be an exploration of the subconscious but I don't get the connection with the painting's title. How could a liberator liberate when he doesn't have a head, he is seated as if waiting for the bus, and he apparently needs assistance when walking, right? But surrealism is about jolting people from their reverie through absurdity so I guess this liberator is shaking us awake.

I certainly enjoyed seeing the Magritte paintings at the SFMOMA. They were funny and thought-provoking. How I wish my museum-hopping friends could see this exhibit!