Jenkins_Object_Annotation_2

Context: “Venus with an Organist” by Titian, produced between 1545 and 1552. One of three variants of the same scene, with small differences between them.

Subject: The subjects of this composition are the goddess, Venus, and an unnamed organist. Titian utilizes the viewer's imagined experience of an interconnection between sound, gaze, and movement. The barking of a small dog in the bottom right of the painting acts as a sonic interruption in the aural landscape of the organ playing, as the man pauses, removing one hand from the keys, and turns toward the sound behind him. Out of the three variations, this piece is the only one that aligns with the concept of combining temporality with aurality. It creates a chronology of events within the implied sounds of the narrative painting, shifting from organized to disorganized. The dog barks, the music stops, both the man and Venus turn, and their gazes shift downward to the dog. In the version with the Cupid whispering to Venus, the organ player does not remove a hand from the keys, implying the soundscape of his playing does not cease even with the presumed interruption. Additionally, assuming Cupid is a corporeal being like Venus and the organist, he wouldn’t have been able to hear the whispering behind them, especially over the sound of an organ.

Style: The composition is organized in the traditional Renaissance fashion, with the division of masculinity and femininity in opposing spheres. Venus is lounging on the right, and the male organist is in the act of playing on the left. They are also portrayed in an idealized fashion, with Venus taking the form commonly seen in statues of women in antiquity.

Eberhart: Eberhart also uses this piece as an example of the gendered hierarchy of the senses: the “intellectual” senses of action, such as the male organist representing aurality, and the epitome of femininity, Venus, as the “lower” senses. She is shown nude, evoking the potential for lustful sight, and placing a hand on the source of the disruption in the aural tapestry of the scene. (pg.85)

Puglisi: The ephemeral nature of the sound of the barking dog contributes to the accentuation of the transitory nature of the scene and reflects the spontaneity of life. (pg. 116)

Jeffrey: Taking an opposite stance to Eberhart, who suggests that the spatial dynamics of the scene both define and are determined by sound and the things that produce sound, Jeffrey argues that the sound itself is what shapes the space. For example, the positioning of the priest in the churches of Byzantium changed based on where he would be best heard by the audience. (pg.18)

Questions: How would the positioning of the organist in proximity to Venus contribute to the extent to which the viewer was able to cotextualize the narrative of the scene? How does the combined effect of temporality with aurality enhance the sensory experience of the viewer? In relation to the other variations of the painting, what does the lack of a “Cupid” figure here imply about the intended chronology of the scene’s narration?