THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE STOLEN PAINTING
Human consciousness has expired.
On the cadaver he squats, gloating, mired.
Seated in triumph, he turns to crow.
Each time he deals the corpse a blow.
Victor Hugo
What do you see? What do you feel?
Is it pain or is it ecstasy
that keeps you afloat in space?
P.K. BAPH. Vl. 141.
No sinister adjuncts lend their banal significance.
No hint of melodrama injects its facile role.
Simply by interpreting in his sober, magisterial style,
the dynamism of these figures and by capturing gesture and attitude,
the painter reveals the ardent fanaticism of these men,
their implacable purpose.
J. ALboise in L 'Artiste, 1 889.
Ingenious, somewhat studied compositions
recalling the witty groupings
employed with felicity by Gerome.
Adding a novelist's skills to those of the painter,
he plays cleverly on our curiosity as spectators
who arrived too late.
M. F. Lajenevais, Revue des Deux Mondes, 1 889.
Rare is the artist so assured of the present and the future.
He is not merely an instinctive master of composition.
His sense of history preserves him
from the pitfalls of dusty scholarship.
Lt was aLso said,
""ALways a painter, Monsieur Tonnerre
""is now an artist, in the highest sense of the word.""
And yet...
ALas! And yet...
How could such paintings provoke a scandal?
And yet...
How is it that only six paintings...
Seven.
How is it that a simple scandal,
a mere stir in fashionable Paris
became transformed into an affair of state?
ALas.
Today we look and look again at these paintings.
There is nothing shocking about them,
no common link between them, not even a unity in style.
In some,
the striking thing is the attention to detail
but also a lack of care in the overall composition.
In others,
the flowing strokes and vivid colours
but also the static quality of the compositions.
Yet others indulge
the excessive illusionism of a theatrical decor
but also
seem contradictory in their composition.
That these six paintings should pose such questions is understandable.
Seven paintings.
But a scandal,
intervention by the authorities...
ALas! Thrice aLas!
And yet...
And yet onLy seven paintings
preserve their mute testimony.
A scandal so great that the authorities,
for once in agreement, felt impelled to bury it.
The press was silent,
spies infiltrated the salons
and others, diversionary scandals, seemingly by chance,
overtook the people most concerned with these paintings
executed more or less skilfully by an obscure disciple of Gerome:
the painter Tonnerre.
Two comments...
Two comments concerning the paintings.
And two further comments.
Two further comments, but these of a more generaL nature.
FirstLy,
the seven paintings do have a common factor.
ALthough one of them was the object of particuLarLy viruLent attacks
- we shaLL see why our parents were driven
to react in this way -
and aLthough two or three others among the paintings
were heLd to be pureLy and simpLy shocking,
the fact is
that the scandaL centred on the exhibition as a whoLe.
On aLL the paintings,
each and every one of them.
SecondLy,
if we cLoseLy examine each painting in turn,
we cannot but be struck by a number of curious detaiLs.
This one, for exampLe.
We see two Crusaders in the act of pLaying chess.
The composition is theatricaL, you say.
Yes, but what does that mean, ""theatricaL?""
The gestures?
The positioning of the figures?
No, not at aLL.
The effect you describe as theatricaL
derives from one simpLe detaiL:
the Lighting.
From the two rays of Light, one entering by the window on the right,
the other by the window on the Left.
Which impLies a worLd with two suns.
This, L might add, is onLy one exampLe.
To turn now to the two comments
of a more generaL nature.
Let us consider the historicaL context and say,
firstLy,
the paintings did not show, they aLLuded.
And what our fathers saw,
what was on everyone"s Lips
at the point when the eight powers intervened,
was The Ceremony.
And, at that time in ceremony, whose rituaL is now Lost,
which today we can scarceLy begin to imagine,
the ceremony
was on the verge of becoming a matter of common knowLedge.
This couLd not go on.
Which is why, some months after the exhibition,
poLice raided the painter"s house
and burst in on the ceremony.
And why the authorities had no aLternative.
They had to act quickLy.
SecondLy,
the painter Tonnerre defended himseLf.
From LtaLy, he made his appeaL.
AffectingLy, by Letter, he decLared his innocence.
CLeverLy, he turned the ruLes of the game upside down.
He decLared that the ceremony did not exist.
That what was known by that name,
what the poLice saw with their own eyes
was mereLy a re-enactment of his paintings
through medium of tabLeaux vivants,
no more no Less.
We can imagine today
what the reaction to this defence must have been
within the ranks of the eight powers.
We can guess how some peopLe must have smiLed ironicaLLy
and others Laughed quite openLy.
Lt was inevitabLe that our parents shouLd have reacted in this way.
But we have other means of anaLysis today.
And L think L know
what the painter Tonnerre reaLLy meant to say
when he protested his innocence.
GuiLty as sin, he was.
What a terribLe reveLation.
The painting did not aLLude, they showed.
They were the ceremony.
And yet...
The paintings do not show, they aLLude.
The paintings...
re-enacted through the medium of tabLeaux vivants
do not aLLude.
They show.
After opening the door
the collector shows us into a drawing-room
overlooking a large garden.
He approaches the window.
With the aid of binoculars, we can see at the foot of the garden
the reproduction of a mythological scene in a tableau vivant.
Near a lake,
the Huntress muses with her bow.
Sheltered by the foliage,
Actaeon's eyes waver between this vision of Diana
and a glimpse of his prey.
Is the third figure really necessary?
Why this third person?
And why does he hold a mirror?
WeLL, the mirror you mention
wouLd have been to dazzLe the prey.
Ln this sense the roLe of the third figure in the Diana and Actaeon
wouLd assume an unexpected importance.
Lt wiLL indeed have escaped no one that, extraneous to the scene,
this third figure invades it pureLy to watch the watcher.
Ln another sense, it is not impossibLe
that the prey is none other than Actaeon himseLf,
metamorphosed as a punishment
for having dared cast his eye on the goddess.
Yet what is there in this painting
to make us think it is the first of a series?
What leads us from it to the one we may consider
the next in sequence?
At the risk of upsetting a somewhat faciLe train of thought,
L wouLd Like to inject a certain doubt.
Suppose the Diana the Huntress theme were mereLy a red herring.
Suppose the anomaLous eLements were mereLy snares.
And that the traiL must be sought eLsewhere.
A traiL indicated
by a detaiL, minor but nevertheLess exposed to fuLL view.
Let us aLLow that,
as an absurd piece of hunting equipment,
the mirror offers a thematic cLue
which might further our pursuit.
The collector is asking us
to ignore the narrative element,
the arrangement of objects
and even the object of the character's scrutiny.
Look at the mirror.
The mirror refLects the sun"s rays.
Let us trace their direction.
Here we see the sun's rays reflected by the mirror
and falling onto a basement window.
A game of chess is interrupted by the arrival of a Crusader.
One then realizes that the sun is entering by the window on the left
while the same rays, reflected by the mirror from the preceding painting
are cast on the scene through the window opposite.
Thus the riddle of the two contradictory rays is solved.
The Arrival of the Crusader.
L think that
the untenabLe aspect of the theme wiLL not have escaped anyone.
Whence comes this Crusader?
What does he interrupt?
How, coming directLy from the Crusades,
couLd he burst in on the scene
and surprise the pLayers?
And these pLayers,
what are they hiding
that they shouLd be surprised by the arrivaL
of a new character?
A new character...
The disturbing presence of the page wiLL, L think, have escaped no one.
The page who makes a great show of his consternation
before the other characters in the painting
whereas we,
and we aLone,
can gLimpse his secret smiLe.
If we accept
that this painting follows the preceding one in the series,
which can we take to be the next,
and why?
L think you wiLL have noticed that the characters are TempLars.
As you see, the painter has respected the hierarchy within the Order.
Let us now consider this hierarchy.
On the Lowest LeveL,
aLmost marginaL to the composition,
is the page.
Then the two TempLars, equaL before the Grand Master.
Respecting the painter"s intentions,
Let us carefuLLy observe the Grand Master.
What is his attitude?
Let us examine with renewed attention
each detaiL of his cLothes,
the severity of his eye,
the cLenched Left hand.
Let us accept the astonishing gesture of his right,
indicating the mirror.
A mirror reflecting what?
The window behind which, in the first painting,
another mirror reflects the sun
shining through this painting's window.
Crude conjecture.
Perhaps one might now venture the hypothesis of a group of paintings
whose interconnection is ensured by a play of mirrors.
Conjecture.
One might see the painter's oeuvre as a reflection
on the art of reproduction.
CertainLy not. That is not the way to Look at this painting.
The effect must be considered
in a totaLLy different way.
Otherwise
we shaLL become entangLed in the snare set for us.
Ln this particuLar case, the thing to be considered
is the form of the mirror.
With due care, however, for therein Lies another snare.
We must not Linger over the significance of this form
to the theme.
Lt is common knowLedge, more common within each day,
that the crescent moon
is a Saracen symboL.
No one can faiL to be aware that the presence of so impious a token
within the Order
is surprising, to say the Least.
Today,
though they find it difficuLt to accept, everyone knows
that the presence of this token in the Order was, aLas, probabLe.
But this is of no consequence. None of this matters.
What matters
is the form itseLf,
the fact that this crescent
shouLd be reproduced in another painting
which L now invite you to consider.
A series ofpaintings linked by minor details
sometimes skilfully inserted extraneously to the theme:
the ray of light in the mirror,
the second mirror in the shape of a crescent.
And now...
L wouLd Like to draw your attention
to the extreme care with which the painter has pLaced the mirror.
So that it is reaLLy impossibLe to err
in arranging the tabLeau vivant.
Is such care likely?
What eLse is the painter"s purpose
but to draw our attention
to what is refLected in the mirror when the tabLeau is arranged?
Look, it is he one sees refLected in the mirror.
But now Let us consider the Lighting effects.
The chiaroscuro, obviousLy, is arbitrary.
Why shouLd certain figures, perhaps not the most important,
be priviLeged
and others remain a shadow?
But setting aside the Lighting, Let us concentrate on the figures.
ALL becomes cLear.
Let us reverse the Lighting.
Let what was pLunged in shadow emerge into the Light
and what was cLearLy visibLe return to the darkness.
The mask.
There is the Link with the next painting.
We must then ask:
which is that painting and why does the mask lead us to it?
Now the collector explains that this painting does not exist.
That it is the stolen painting
and that all we know of it is that there was a mask.
A certain number of problems now present themselves.
If the previous painting does indeed lead us to this one,
then obviously there will be a hiatus in the series.
And with the trail lost,
how can we establish the order of the paintings?
No one wiLL ever know what in this painting
was to have Led us to the one L postuLate as the next in the series.
Here is the scandalous painting rejected by the Salon in 1887.
Apparently exhibited in private,
it was, inexplicably, acquired by the state.
What, in this painting, couLd have provoked a scandaL?
Was it enough simpLy to show peopLe of some sociaL prominence
in attitudes which are in fact quite commonpLace
whiLe cLaiming that they had agreed to act as modeLs
for the painting?
Might this painting
not be interpreted as a means
of stifLing the rumours
which Lay behind the scandaL
and which tarnished the reputation of a respectabLe famiLy?
But in that case, where wouLd the scandaL Lie?
Maybe...
the fact of having posed for this scene from famiLy Life,
no matter how commonpLace or innocent it be,
maybe this fact in itseLf
was feLt to be totaLLy unacceptabLe.
Ln fact, aLthough the scenes are indeed commonpLace,
it is nevertheLess true
that the fact of having exhibited themseLves,
the fact of having assembLed the protagonists of a scandaL
might be interpreted
as ostentation,
as acknowLedging and condoning
what pubLic opinion wouLd have described as an ""unspeakabLe vice"".
But are these scenes indeed so innocent?
Can we assert
that they are entireLy free from certain obscurities?
Who knows
but that these scenes reveaL aspects of the scandaL
instantLy recognizabLe to the initiated?
There is certainLy something disturbing
about these scenes from daiLy Life.
We may note that in each of them
someone has just committed,
or is preparing to commit,
a reprehensibLe act which we do not see.
That in both cases,
a third character is in the act of watching
and that through his air of frank disapprovaL, this character
provokes the desire
to commit the forbidden act.
A disapprovaL that he dispLays to the spectator
but conceaLs from the characters.
Perhaps
in order to guard himseLf
against any eventuaL accusation of compLicity.
The grouping tells us, however,
that those who have been discovered, as it were,
are pointedly turning their backs on the spy.
Knowing this, and accepting this situation,
the spy therefore does indeed participate
as an accomplice
in the public exposition
of the moments preceding and following
the reprehensible act.
And since the reprehensibLe aspect of this act
resides in the intention,
is not the exposition of these moments much more so?
Does this not open up
LimitLess possibiLities for interpretation?
PossibiLities
reaching beyond the act itseLf,
which, as we need not now deny, did indeed take pLace.
But was this not enough to provoke a scandaL?
Furthermore,
L shouLd add that these events
and pubLic rumours
have come down to us by way of a LittLe roman-a-clef.
A brief resume of this LittLe noveL
wiLL give us some idea of the enormity of the events
which rumour endeavoured to conceaL.
The beginning of the noveL
describes a betrothaL scene.
Tha Marquise de L. has invited her friends to a reception
to announce the engagement of her niece O.
who is aLso her ward,
to the Marquis de E., a friend of the famiLy.
The Marquise is presented from the outset as a domineering woman
swayed by vauLting ambition.
The anonymous author makes no secret of his sympathy for the Marquis,
portrayed as a man of thirty-five,
kindLy by nature
and forced by the ruin of his famiLy
into a marriage of convenience.
The Marquis is shown
as the victim of a cunning pLot
devised entireLy by the Marquise de L.
At the end of the first chapter
the Marquise suspects her niece"s betrothed
of a questionabLe interest
in young L., her nephew and ward.
The Latter is described as a boy of very winning ways
not entireLy unaware of the interest he has awakened in the Marquis de E.
The author has earLier informed us that the Marquise had pLanned
to marry the two cousins, the young L. and the young O.,
thus uniting the fortunes of the coLLateraL branches of the famiLy.
Ln securing her niece"s hand,
the Marquis de E. spoiLed her pLan.
But her discovery of the interest shown in the boy by the Marquis
Leads her to devise the sinister pLot
which is reveaLed in Chapter Two.
This is
to encourage the reLationship between the Marquis and young L.
in order to provoke a scandaL
which, by ruining the reputation of the Marquis,
wouLd make impossibLe the marriage
to the girL O.
At this point, matters are compLicated
by the entry of a new character,
EL Senor de H.,
Knight of the Order of MaLta
and Spanish envoy to the HoLy See.
Since this person is aLso attracted by young L.,
he provokes the jeaLousy and rivaLry
of the Marquis de E.
E. and H., being friends of Long standing
in view of their affiLiation to the same secret society,
agree to settLe their quarreL through a game of chess
with the Loser undertaking
to renounce aLL cLaim to the hypotheticaL favours of the boy L.
The betrothed girL happens to witness this scene.
Perceiving the disquieting impLications of the scene
without reaLLy understanding,
she teLLs to her aunt.
The Latter, we Learn in Chapter Four, is now resoLved to act.
Ln pursuance of her pLan, she therefore summons the Marquis.
Arriving at the appointed pLace,
the Marquis finds the Marquise partiaLLy uncLothed
chaLLengingLy exhibiting herseLf before his eyes.
Understanding the aLLusion
to his Lack of interest in the fair sex,
he Loses his temper and offers to strike her.
The girL, witnessing the scene,
assumes it to be a Lovers" quarreL.
Convinced that she is betrayed, she determines
to confront her aunt.
Ln Chapter Five,
reaLizing that she has aroused
new feeLings between the betrothed,
the Marquise summons the girL O. to a cLandestine meeting.
At this meeting, the Marquise apprises the girL
of her fiance"s unnaturaL tastes.
Seeing this reveLation as a mere stratagem
to part her from him,
the girL reacts vioLentLy.
Their quarreL is witnessed by H.
who decides to propose an aLLiance with the Marquise
with a view to aLienating the boy L. from the Marquis.
Thus it is that, for the fist time in the story,
young L. takes the initiative
and confesses his Love to the Marquise.
This scene is witnessed by the girL, now doubLy jeaLous of her aunt
but unabLe to choose in her heart
between young L. and the Marquis.
She confides in her fiance.
These reveLations cause the Marquis to faLL into a deep depression
intensified when he witnesses a strange scene
between young L. and H.
Ln this scene,
H., a stag"s head in his hand,
is attempting to persuade the boy to pose as Diana the Huntress.
The Marquis, bursting in the scene,
provokes his friend H. to anger.
He reproaches him with his Lack of integrity
in faiLing to keep his promise to renounce the boy.
Lntervening
to reproach E. for having abandoned him to a foreigner,
the boy aggravates the quarreL.
Ln Chapter Ten,
we come to the scene of the dueL between E. and H.
during the course of which young L.
is simuLtaneousLy arbiter, second,
sponsor and occasion of the dueL.
Ln despair, beLieving herseLf the cause of the dueL, O. intervenes.
WhiLe the Marquise watches from a distance,
at Last savouring the scandaL she has anticipated for months.
UnfortunateLy, both adversaries miss their mark
and H."s buLLet accidentaLLy wounds the girL O.
PoLice arrest the protagonists
but intervention of E."s famiLy
secures their prompt reLease.
Accused of attempted homicide
and obLiged to pLead insanity
to escape the Law,
H. is confined to an asyLum not far from Paris.
Ln the penuLtimate chapter,
we find the girL O. affected by her wound.
Ln the deLirium of her fever
she sees herseLf as St. Theresa
and her cousin as the angeL conducting her to heaven.
The Marquis visits her,
but seeing him as the deviL himseLf,
she repuLses him vioLentLy.
Ln renewed deLirium,
now imagining herseLf to be a BabyLonian harLot,
young O. repuLses her angeL of redemption
and stiLL seeing the Marquis as the deviL, impLores him
to conduct her to heLL
thus obeying a command given by St Theresa.
FoLLowing a Long and grievous convaLescence,
O. forgives the Marquis de E.
We find aLL the characters assembLed at a famiLy gathering.
SuddenLy Senor H. reappears,
having fLed the asyLum with the aid of members of the secret society,
aLerted by the Marquise.
H. pubLicLy accuses E.
of faiLing to keep his promise
by continuing to importune young L.
The Latter intervenes
to accuse H. of aLienating him from his aunt.
The girL O., finaLLy grasping the situation, breaks with E.
But the story does not end as the Marquise wouLd have wished.
That very night, the boy L. is carried off by H.
aided by members of the sect
and taken to their mansion in the rue de La Pompe.
PromptLy aLerted by the Marquise,
the poLice intervene
and interrupt a strange ceremony invoLving young L.
as both priest and sacrifice.
The protagonists aLL find themseLves in prison
and are reLeased on payment of a substantiaL baiL.
Young L. is found hanged in his ceLL
and the taLk is either of suicide or a crime.
Can we accept that what lies behind these paintings is merely a novel?
We can then say that the protagonists
simply portrayed the novel's theme
as if it were a ceremony.
We have not yet seen or said everything.
Two paintings remain.
We have travelled a difficult road to come this far.
Will we manage to travel it to the end?
Will we remember all the arguments and counter-arguments developed?
Will we have time to expound other doubts,
to point out the innumerable thematic clues to the intrigue?
Ln this painting we may perceive
certain eLements of previous paintings.
This group, for instance,
recaLLs the painting Tortures of the lnquisition.
This one, The Game of Chess.
This character evokes Diana the Huntress.
But the other characters?
The naked women? The clowns and demons?
We shaLL expLain them
through the hypothesis of the stoLen painting.
The collector once again requires us
to forget the thematic clue
and to concentrate on the composition.
Ln this painting, as in the preceding ones,
characters are grouped in threes.
Each group of three recaLLs a scene from an earLier painting,
aLthough there is, so to speak, no Linking story.
Let us turn our minds back to the previous painting.
From there, let us follow the thematic clue.
We see that the story moves from painting to painting
Iike the hands of a watch.
Let us ask where this series of scenes from family life is taking us.
We will now examine the characters of the scandalous painting.
Let us trace
each character's gestures, painting by painting.
We now see that, in moving from one painting to the next,
the characters are slowly completing the circle,
each in his own way.
The circLe is not perfect, you wiLL say.
But what we have here are reaLLy curves
which form circLes of unequaL diameter if compLeted by imagination.
And these circLes may be cLassified roughLy in three groups,
of decreasing importance.
And the circLes of each group are combined,
their respective product is, of course, a sphere.
Spheres which we can in turn imagine as combined or not
but which stiLL evoke spheres.
But any movement effected by a human being
Ieaves an imaginary trace comparable to a curve.
We shaLL return to this.
Curved lines which suggest circles.
Circles leading to the sphere.
The blazing sphere which dominates the last painting in the series.
Baphomet,
an androgynous demon.
The principLe of non-definition.
Ln defiance of time.
An immacuLate body without souL
caressed by the breezes which are wandering, bodiLess souLs.
AssaiLed through the seven orifices
by wandering souLs seeking their reincarnation.
SouLs
aLready despairing of the day of resurrection.
Ls this not what we have seen repeated in aLL the paintings?
Ls it not the very heart of the paintings,
their occuLt theme?
The reaL cause of the scandaL?
Worshipped by the TempLars,
reLigion within a reLigion of a state within a state?
StiLL worshipped today
in secret ceremonies
masquerading as mere debauches.
So that is the real reason for the scandal?
Lt is.
But if all the paintings portray the cult of the androgyne,
what is the role of the painting Diana the Huntress?
L shaLL expLain through the hypothesis of the stoLen painting.
The collector, visibly exhausted,
now invites us to consider
the Tonnerres from a fresh standpoint.
What you have seen
are mereLy some of the ideas these paintings have inspired in me
over the years.
Hence, perhaps, their fragmentary nature.
But today...
now that L have once again
recreated The Ceremony for you,
a doubt assaiLs me.
And L ask myseLf
if the effort was worthwhiLe.
L have, L confess, many doubts.
The enigma has been soLved, certainLy,
and that shouLd satisfy us.
But we are not satisfied.
What matters to us,
we humbLe mortaLs,
that the authorities shouLd fear the ceLebration of a cuLt
because this cuLt is the expression
of something more vast?
What matters to us,
we humbLe creatures of this worLd,
if this ""something more vast""
be a revivaL of the cuLt of Mithras?
Can we summon interest in the fact
that a cuLt Like this
is, in effect, the equivaLent of miLitary discipLine?
And that miLitary manoeuvres,
pomp and parades
are mereLy one aspect of the ceremony
these paintings compLete.
Can we feeL fear
at the reveLation that miLitary Life
and aLL that these paintings represent
are the ceremony
whose soLemn expression
signifies the mutuaL annihiLation of the ceLebrants...
totaL war?
No, L do not think so.
L do not think so.
Any such eLucidation wouLd take too Long for us to grasp.
Furthermore,
the cunning stratagem whereby
it is divided in three superimposed riddLes
wouLd hardLy speed us
towards our goaL.
And yet,
L know that something wiLL be retained.
L know
that at this very moment
the paintings are beginning to fade from memory.
L know that the snare set by the painter Tonnerre
is beginning to show resuLts.
The gestures,
the same gestures repeated from painting to painting
Loom up,
in isoLation,
to better efface the paintings themseLves
and what they represent.
So,
Let us forget.
Let us aLLow
the paintings to fade...
to vanish...
so that aLL that remains
is the isoLated gestures,
the gestures of The Ceremony.
So saying,
the collector courteously shows us to the door.
SubtitLing: B. B. COM - Paris