Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

September 29

Posted by Jen Graves on Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 9:30 AM

jcs60015fa.jpg
I nearly cried when I saw Charles Willson Peale's dead baby girl, and I think it was from happiness. The painting is called Rachel Weeping. It's on an easily missable side wall in a room crowded with paintings and silver and furniture at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, where I visited in June. This painting is strange, and doesn't do any service to the museum—it doesn't try to put the museum on the right side of history (like the portraits of a black couple and two Native American chiefs at the entrance to the museum's American collection) or to celebrate a local boy done good (Thomas Eakins). It just is.

The painting is like this: You see the baby first. She is life-sized, down front. She's wearing a dress, a bonnet with lace around the face, and her arms are tied down to her sides with a satin ribbon that comes to a bow at her waist. Maybe this is where she died—a ghostly bed, the smoke-gray sheets pulled down past her hands pinned at her sides. She and her bed take up fully half of the painting—the lower half, as if the painting is two paintings; mother and child inhabiting two different worlds already—and this lower half is painted in gray-scale, like a study for another painting. It's not a study, and in this case, the color can only be described as tired. Extremely tired.

jcs80051f1.jpg
If the baby's body laid out on the bed forms a straight line across the painting, then the way that Rachel sits above her, leaning on her elbows, completes a triangle-shaped composition that points up to Rachel's crying eyes. The tears are odd: shapely and prominent, like the thick tears of the unforgettable Madonna by Dieric Bouts, painted in the 15th century. But this 18th-century American mother is not just a study in the mysterious mechanics of sorrow (exactly why we cry, how our tear ducts are connected to our emotions, remains a mystery to science, Chicago art teacher/lifelong art student James Elkins points out in his book Pictures and Tears, which focuses on the Bouts Madonna). Rachel is more complicated. Her eyes, cast upward, form the baseline of another, implied triangle, one with an absent god at its tip. In the intensity of her stare and the tightness of her lips, her fury and disgust are quiet but unmistakable. The artist may be adding his own pain to Rachel's: Rachel is his wife, and the two of them had eleven children. Five died.

In the hierarchy of pain, today we put the loss of children at the top. Is it harder to lose a child now than it used to be?

We don't have eleven babies and watch five die; we have one, two, maybe three, and expect them all to live. When they don't, it is a double tragedy: a child is dead, and the security and predictability of the modern world have collapsed. Then it becomes a triple threat, because nobody wants to look at it. The parents who have lost children in contemporary America are lepers. As medicine grew sophisticated, mourning grew limited and tidy.

Whereas 19th-century parents sat with their children for hours after they died, setting them in poses that made them look like they were sleeping—no tied arms!—in tiny daguerrotypes that many, many other parents could relate to, today there's no communal way to mourn a child. The community is scared shitless by what you've seen. (For this reason I'm forever grateful to JFK and Jackie for including large stones for their two dead infants—one named Patrick, the other unnamed—in their grave site at Arlington National Cemetery, which I also visited in June.)

And it is fucking scary. It didn't happen to me, it happened to the best of my friends. Her son was diagnosed with a flu and was dead within 12 hours. Bacterial meningitis. He was seven months and four days old and had blue eyes and big ears; he smiled seemingly nonstop. When I got to the hospital, he was dead. Life-sized.

Since that happened—four years ago—I've looked hard for paintings and photographs of dead children, and there are plenty. But I haven't seen any—not one—that's life-sized, until now. And this one is not only life-sized, it's unapologetic. This death can't be mistaken for sleeping. She's tied up like an inert package ready to be hauled away. This is the last moment this mother will have with this child, the moment when the mother cannot move, when somebody will have to take the child away from her. This is a terrible moment, and the artist, best known for his commitment to clear-eyed science (he founded the first natural history museum in the country, and his most famous painting pictures him opening the curtain onto that early cabinet of curiosities), refuses to sugar-coat it. Rachel is the subject of the painting, but the perspective is his: she's pictured from a slight height, as if he is standing over her, on the other side of the bed. He can't move, either, and he won't look away: that's why he made this painting. The third and final triangle is the one formed by the three members of this family across this bed, and it is upside-down: the child is the tip, at the base. This triangle's sides are not the same length because of the raised perspective, which seems right, too. No mother and father lose in exactly the same way, which is its own layer of loss.

In the next moment, someone will take this baby. She'll be buried. This act of looking is the last time she'll ever be seen, but she'll never really leave, either. None of them leave, no matter how little other people want to face them. This is why I think this girl made me happy. The only solidarity in loss is in not looking away, and many people have no other choice. Speaking names, too: that's good. I'm lucky enough to be one step removed, but still, I like to say the name of my little friend, my late godson, to new people: His name was Phoenix Lind Anderson, and he was the son of Mike and Linda Anderson. He consoled me after a miscarriage of my own, which happened five years ago today. We didn't get to naming her but I have her picture in ultrasound, and I am keeping it.

Share via

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Newsvine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Email
 

Comments (19) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Urgutha Forka 1
I don't think anybody can deny that's a real nice painting of a broad on a couch.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on September 29, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Urgutha Forka 2
Crap, my comment @1 was for an entirely different paper, stupid multitasking fail... and in light of Jen's story, now I appear as a callous heel.

It is a very sad and touching story.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on September 29, 2009 at 9:47 AM
attitude devant 3
Brava, Jen! Best piece of yours I've ever read. I am sorry for your losses. I am even sorrier that in this culture death is treated as an obscenity, a gaucherie.

I know that painting well, and you're the only other person who's shared her thoughts about it with me. It has a visceral punch: I started to cry the first time I ever saw it. Thanks for dissecting the artifice of it with me and making me love it all over again.

BTW, did you like the one of Peale's sons going up a staircase? He is a forgotten American wonder.
Posted by attitude devant on September 29, 2009 at 9:50 AM
laterite 4
I am at work and was about to cry, because this was a beautiful piece and probably the best thing Jen has ever written, but Urgutha, your mis-posting made me laugh just in time.
Posted by laterite on September 29, 2009 at 10:03 AM
5
Beautiful piece, beautifully and honestly written. Thank you for it.

I too am very familiar with that painting, but have not seen it in person since I had my son six years ago. Knowing how much it affected me back then, I imagine I would also burst into tears if I see it again.
Posted by Donna on September 29, 2009 at 10:13 AM
6
Jen, you've written a moving essay that provides a smart dissection of a beautiful painting at the same time showing how good criticism connects art with personal experience. I agree with laterite -- this is not only one of the best things you've ever written, it's one of the smartest, most powerful pieces I've seen in 18 years of reading The Stranger.
Posted by Smartypants on September 29, 2009 at 10:22 AM
7
Jen, you've written a moving essay that provides a smart dissection of a beautiful painting at the same time showing how good criticism connects art with personal experience. I agree with laterite -- this is not only one of the best things you've ever written, it's one of the smartest, most powerful pieces I've seen in 18 years of reading The Stranger.
Posted by Smartypants on September 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM
joey veltkamp 8
beautiful, jen.
Posted by joey veltkamp http://www.joeyveltkamp.blogspot.com on September 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Fnarf 9
@1, 2: best posting fail I think I've ever seen on Slog. Now we know there's a fetish for everything; Urgutha is into baby corpses!
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on September 29, 2009 at 10:53 AM
10
This is the best art writing/criticism I've seen from Stranger and Jen Graves. Keep up the good work!
Posted by bjank on September 29, 2009 at 11:10 AM
11
Your work is always a joy to read.
Posted by fauxxxe on September 29, 2009 at 11:27 AM
12
It's also my birthday. Thanks for bringing dead babies into it, Jen.
Posted by dwight moody on September 29, 2009 at 11:35 AM
13
Thanks so much, Jen. This was a beautiful, touching post.
Posted by Betsey Brock on September 29, 2009 at 11:49 AM
14
Wow, this is an almost unbearably beautiful piece of writing. Bravo.
Posted by boyd main on September 29, 2009 at 12:18 PM
15
Wow, Jen. These kinds of essays are always my favourite of yours to read, and this one tops them all. Thank you for sharing this story with us.
Posted by sharonArnold http://dimensionsvariable.org on September 29, 2009 at 12:43 PM
16
This painting, and this post, really stopped me in my tracks.

Dying children have been in my world, too.

My son was born three months early and spent his last trimester in the NICU at Swedish. Far from the quintessential romantic birth experience, for three months we lived in a limbo where babies lived and died. My son is fine now, but his beginning was wrought with the fear of endings. We lost two little friends we met in the NICU.

Thanks for sharing about yourself. My miscarriage anniversary is in March.

Your question, Is it harder to lose a child now than it used to be? -- I've wondered that too.

Phoenix is a beautiful name.

Posted by gettingtoknowyoubetter http://gettingtoknowyoubetter.wordpress.com/ on September 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM
17
This made me cry. I'm so sorry for your loss, and for Phoenix's parents. And for the Peales. It's every parent's worst nightmare, and some have to live the nightmare. I can't think of anything harder. But if my son died I think I would still be glad to have known him for the time I did, and even though I'd be so devastated at all the experiences he missed, I'd be glad that for a handful of months he was able to know love and cuddles and song and the pleasures of warm sunlight and sweet-tasting food. I hope these little lives can be celebrated as well as mourned.
Posted by siduri on September 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM
18

I am lucky enough to be Phoenix's mom (as well as our youngest son, Gabriel) and to have Jen as my best friend. She is indeed remarkable and I am lucky in that as well.

I don't think it is easier to lose a child now than it used to be. I have talked to very old women who lost a child 60 and 70 years ago who, to their own dying days, hungered to speak of the child they lost and in that, claim them again as their own. I have seen that love expressed in the writings of bereaved parents of long ago and in a historic cemetery dotted with majestic monuments to children who died 100 years ago.

Last year, on the anniversary of Phoenix’s death, I cleaned the ancient grave of a child buried not far from my son underneath all the years of accumulated grime, found the remnants of an inscription that said, "… all the light, all the joy we buried with our darling boy." A friend who lost a teenage son told me she didn't think it was possible to love a child any more that you do at the time they die - and I don't think the ferocity of that love changes through the centuries.

In that enduring love is life. As one commenter noted, it is the life that went before the death that matters most. Phoenix's short life was brilliant and full of love and laughter. and I will always be proud to be his mother.

On today, the anniversary of Jen's miscarriage, I am also thinking of another little being who will not be forgotten. I remember.

Posted by Linda on September 29, 2009 at 5:06 PM
19
As the Dad of a 10 month old girl, who never imagined he would be one (44 year old gay men tend not to become dads that often), I find that life is full of surprises that I hadn't realised where going to happen to me.

The idea of losing my beautiful daughter was never something I considered until reading Jen's article. I am sitting in my office feeling slightly teary at the thought.

I have to agree that the pain that I would feel would be of a different type to that of a mother, but I would also say that it would be as deep, as life long and as meaningful. I know that Jen wasn't saying that Dads suffer easier or shallower, but I thought that I would state it very clearly.

The friend who I helped to make our gorgeous daughter, suffered a miscarriage on the way to her conception and birth and I am often drawn to think about that lost possibility. I often wonder if it would have been a boy or a girl and what would have happened had that child arrived and not the amazing bundle we ended up with.

Thank you for reminding me to cherish every moment I have with Georgina and not to waste any of them.

I can only barely understand your feelings of loss for Phoenix Linda. He sounds like he was a delight to you and all who knew him, but know that others understand it and thank you for letting Jen talk about him.

Thank you Jen for sharing your feelings about your loss too.
Posted by Malcolm in Sydney on September 29, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Add a comment

 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use