The Tumbling Woman and Other Most Disturbing Classical Works of Art

The Tumbling Woman and Other Most Disturbing Classical Works of Art

These are some of the most controversial works of art that have disturbed the mind of mankind.

Maybe one of the fundamental functions of the human faculty is to imitate nature, to fashion a beautiful work of art. Or as Pablo Picasso would put it, “Every child is born artist; the problem is how to keep him an artist the rest of his life.” If the legendary artist from Spain would be given his way, then, art must really be innate to anyone; and when the impulse of it haunts a true artist would simply be hard to resist, giving rise to many works that have become subjects of wonderment and praise. But as life would have it, controversies and scandals have also taken their way into the world of arts and of artists. As follows are some of the most controversial pieces that have disturbed the mind of mankind.

Tumbling Woman

Image Source

Tumbling Woman is a life-size sculpture that depicts the horrible flight of the 9/11 victims. When it was debuted by its creator, Eric Fischl at the Rockefeller Center in New York City, it evoked much controversy since the viewers were vividly reminded of people falling from the World Trade Center. It was met with much anger and anxiety.

The artist argued that his work was nothing but a sincere artistic attempt to put out his feelings and be able to share them, but it appeared to him the people were mourning more for the disappearance of the once mighty Twin Towers than for those who have fallen victim of that most enormous act of terrorism in human history.

Le déjeuner sur l’herbe (The Lunch on the Grass)

Image Source

The Lunch of the Grass is one of the most controversial paintings by the French Painter Edouard Manet. The nude woman in company with fully dressed men during a lunch out was utter shock to the viewers when Manet exhibited his work in 1863. Quite more astonishing is the familiarity of the woman. Manet modeled here after the image of Victorine Meurent whose seductive body is starkly lit. In defense of himself, Manet reasoned that his work was but plain expression of his individual freedom as an artist. But the way his work appeared was really a serious affront to the French society at the time.

84
Liked it
48 Comments
nobert soloria bermosa, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

fantastic work of arts,

CHAN LEE PENG, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Wow, interesting!

MCcaluya, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

nice kuya…

MMV Abad, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

These are great works of artists. Nice article.

Juancav, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

After reading this article, my knowledge of art were increased,thank you.

eddiego65, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Great article, bro.

Darlene McFarlane, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

This is a great collection of art, Unofre. I am often left to wonder what evokes the subject of paintings. I was wondering about the falling woman and appreciate your explanation.

Thank you

wowie lagman, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

very interesting art pieces. good job verniel!

Jilli, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Beautiful art endures throughout the ages and appreciation never wanes. Your commentary is excellent as well as the art work you chose for this article.

neelam pandey, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

yes, the reasons which excite the painters for such pieces must be more unique….anyways, very beautiful and unique collection.

Wilmo Sam, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

The Piss Christ, is really the work of a demented and tortured soul. It’s an insult to any rational and sober-minded human, and to christians in general.

Izzy, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

just a heads up about Madame X, one of the little know reasons that the painting was such a scandal was because she was originally painted with one of her straps falling off her shoulder.

Sargent repainted it with the strap on her shoulder as seen in the picture posted.

Unofre Pili, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Thank you everyone. Hi Izzy, thanks for the info..I never knew about it. Hello Wilmo, you hold a very strong point.

CJ Savvy, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

I agree with Wilmo Sam. That one is foolhardy.

Ruby Hawk, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Some beautiful art does endure thankfully and so does incredibly horrible things that people call art. I don’t know how exactly some of these gross pieces came to be considered art. Thanks for all the interesting information. Best wishes, Ruby

ruby hawk, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

I didn’t mean any of your selections are gross, I meant bad art in general.

william rodriguez II, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

You made it again,bro!

Mark, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

It’s a political and social commentary of 19th century France, not 17th.

Unofre Pili, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Thank you everyone. Hi Ruby, I understaand; Hi William, Thank you. Hi Mark, thanks for the correction, you are right.Its 19th Century France.

miragana, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

Good day!
It is very informative and has a very good quality in it.
I like it…

http://www.Squidoo.com/MPI
mliragana.blogspot.com
ak47mod.blogspot.com

Thank you very much for your time.

jhenz, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

everytime i see paintings like these, i remember my english teacher who taught literary works… she has an amazing intelligence about these kinds. :D

Big Scottie, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

The Tumbling Woman artist Pili, is absolutely right. We care more about the thought of losing the buildings than the poor, poor people who had to throw themselves from a great height because it\’s impossible to stand and burn to death. Note that the national TV stations never once aired the horror of the leapers. My friend told me that he saw it on Spanish TV and the jumpers looked like rain. I cry for them.

papaleng, posted this comment on Sep 25th, 2008

just like anything else Art is a way of expression of one’s emotions and thinking.. I like your article..

claris, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

nice work unofre, inspiring work of art

RJ Chamberlain, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Some great pieces of art work here Unofre. Well researched and written.

Anne Lyken-Garner, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

This is a fabulous piece. When I lived in Paris, I saw most of these (apart from the ‘Christ’one) in the Louvre and other museums there. They are quite striking to look at, and viewed as artistic pieces – copies or not – makes a lasting impression on the mind.

Well done, and well written.

Balzac, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Some people -to their convenience- like to project their feelings or personality traits to a work of art. This psychological exercise pretends to be taken as truth, failing flat to even comment on the real meaning. Truly a work of art doesn’t not pretend to be a treatise of reason; but something beyond the mere projections of the viewer. In truth, a work of art is an inspiration of reality -inner or outer-, through the artist. It is a re-working of the incipient consciousness of mankind. Moreover, it is a faithful mirror of the humanity of the seeker of truth; to the point that it is more truthful of the viewer, and his projections, rather than the artist who was the viaduct of that fresh revelation.

Excellent work; really, a great article. Thank you. Best Regards.
I’d like to add you as a friend, with your permission.

Judy Sheldon, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

While we may not agree with another on their view, it does not take away from their right to express it. I find degrading Christ as very offensive, but perhaps the nun is correct in that our actions do that daily.

Wonderful article.

Mark Gordon Brown, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Well that was refreshing. This kind of art I enjoy, it provokes thought and emotion.
This is CLASSIC art – for a reason.
Unlike “contemporary or modern art” some of which is made purely for shock value and has no moral value to society.

satya4u, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

A harsh reality, pain inflicted on society by its own people had ignited the very emotion of the artist and as a result came into existance these master peices of rare artistic work.Good work Pilli.

Josey, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Nice article. Children are born artistists, and dancers, and singers and everything else. It’s strange that the older they get, the less confidence they have in their creativity.

Jan, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Very interesting article! It would be hard to find enough different pieces of art that everyone would agree with…I too feel the piece degrades Christ…I understand the nun’s view..and can understand that but I do not like it. The tumbling woman piece was not what I would have expected but everyone sees things differently…just like the French painting of the woman in the black dress…anyhow…Great article!!

edel, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Raft of Medusa is mislabelled.
The painting was entitled ‘Shipwreck’

Melissa P., posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Truly a reminder that Art is “in the eye of the beholder,” or perhaps, in the eye of the artist that makes it.

Though as disturbing as it is, I can agree with the Tumbling Woman’s artist and his reasoning behind it.

acecampillo, posted this comment on Sep 26th, 2008

Another great article from a great writer!

valli, posted this comment on Sep 27th, 2008

Controversial art pieces.

Moses Ingram, posted this comment on Sep 27th, 2008

Excellent!

Kim Buck, posted this comment on Sep 27th, 2008

Wonderful conversation starters.

Andrew, posted this comment on Sep 27th, 2008

Nice collection but what about the elephant dung virgin painting that Guillianni so infamously lambasted on television without having actually seen it? That one actually got attacked by an angry viewer and damaged.

Author Joel Krupa, posted this comment on Sep 28th, 2008

I personally had no problems with all of the pieces, minus the Christ one. Though, I have to agree with the nun on this one. The world does it to Him daily. If only we were more careful– I never got recognition for the “nice” things I’ve published, but lo and behold, they love my horror. Go figure. Ah, we’re all hypocrites anyway.

thestickman, posted this comment on Sep 28th, 2008

Disturbing, some of these. I’ve seen worse though and found nothing that offends me to the point of wishing boycott. Something I don’t like, I merely dismiss.
Great article, nicely written.

Melody Arcamo Lagrimas, posted this comment on Sep 30th, 2008

They are indeed controversial and some are disturbing to some degree. Great presentation, Unofre.

Verniel Cutar, posted this comment on Sep 30th, 2008

hey hey! thanks for transforming this aricle into a semi art exhibit! Great job, bro

tracy sardelli, posted this comment on Oct 1st, 2008

Wonderful article, thank you Unofre.

Ash Larp, posted this comment on Oct 1st, 2008

Genius, pure genius.
I am astounded and in a state of shock. Bravo I say, well done indeed.

kate smedley, posted this comment on Mar 29th, 2009

I’ve seen Guernica, it is a disturbing painting, I’d not heard of the sculpture before, that is very shocking. Some excellent choices, I also like Manet very much. As the last comment said, this article is genuis.

Maldoror, posted this comment on May 4th, 2009

Some suggested additions:

Felicien Rops: “Calvary” or “The Temptation of St. Anthony”, plust numerous blasphemous erotic drawings.

Not sure if Rops ever experienced widespread outrage in his time, but his illustrations are shockingly blasphemous for the late 1800s. He was truly a classic decadent and was friends with controversial figures such as Baudelaire.

Joel-Peter Witkin: just about anything, but “The Kiss” is one of the most arresting.

Photographer that often uses real human and animal body parts as subjects and deformed people as well. Despite their grotesqueness, the arrangements are strangely beautiful and rendered in a daguerrotype fashion.

Jake, posted this comment on Jul 31st, 2009

Your caption for The Raft of the Medusa is perplexing.

“…depicts the desperate survivors of the French frigate Medusa who was notorious for robbing a French bank.”

I’m sorry, but the Medusa was a ship, not a person. What has this to do with a bank robbery?

The painting documents a catastrophe that involved extreme suffering and cannibalism. It was a political comment on the incompetence of the French Navy and monarchy.

The painting broke new ground. It inspired the path for the new, vigorous genre by artists such as Delacroix.

An excellent analysis is available on Wikipedia.

Leave a Response
comments powered by Disqus