Landscape with The Fall of Icarus – A Detailed Analysis
Landscape with the Fall of Icarus is a vivid yet controversial landscape painting with many symbols behind it.
In this piece10 sections
- Questions that Occur with The Painting
- The Painting
- Weltlandschaft (World Landscape)
- Analysis of Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
- Iconography
- Further Analysis on The Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
- The Buuren Version
- Technique in Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
- Composition in Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
- Epilogue
Landscape with the Fall of Icarus (Also known as De val van Icarus) is an oil painting attributed to Pieter Bruegel (Also known as Pieter Brueghel or Bruegel the Elder) a prominent artist of the Dutch and Flemish Renaissance, significantly known for his landscapes accompanied by peasants. The painting is a 73.5 cm x 112 cm dimension canvas that pictures the mythological Icarus with a panoramic landscape.
The artist based his painting on **Ovid’s**retelling in the Book viii of Metamorphoses. It is a short myth of the mythological Greek hero Icarus and his unfortunate fall. To summarise the myth; Icarus and his father Daedalus are held captive by King Minos in a prison in Crete. Daedalus, a mythical inventor, makes wings of feathers and wax and places them onto the back of the shoulders of both his and Icarus. Despite the warnings of Daedalus, Icarus flies too close to the sun which causes it to melt the wax that holds the feathers of the wings. Soon, Icarus meets his fate and falls into the sea and drowns.
Having summarised the myth, now let us take a look at the painting.
Have you already detected Icarus in the painting? Not yet? Let’s take a closer look.
Yes, that is Icarus flailing his legs in the water with feathers flying about him. Or were you expecting him in the sky? Flying with spacious wings over the sea with the wind touching his youthful face? If this was the case with you, there is no need to feel gawky, since it is the very picture that comes to our mind when thinking of Icarus; even when he is about to fall, it is very likely we still might think of him in the sky, certainly not in the water. But in this painting, the artist clearly had something else in his mind — something cheeky obviously, when he grabbed his brushes to paint a picture of our poor fellow. We will talk in a short time about what the motivation could be behind this decision, but first, let us touch upon a few things related to this artwork.
Questions that Occur with The Painting
You must have realized that we have chosen to say “attributed” when we mentioned Bruegel’s name in the first place. In 1912, the painting emerged on the art market and before long, it took its place in the collection of the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. However, there was no signature or date on the painting. Long story short; there has been a debate about whether the artist of this painting was Bruegel. And for a long time, the painting was thought to be Bruegel’s.
However today, in light of the modern technical examinations, it is almost certain that the painting is a good copy made by an unknown artist as a reference to a lost work of Bruegel. We do not know where the original painting is and what happened to it, while its replica ended up to this day. Nevertheless, we should be grateful to this unknown artist, because thanks to them we now have a chance to study this significant artwork.
Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium“It is doubtful the execution is by Bruegel the Elder,
but the composition can be said with certainty to be his.”
The Painting
Despite the title itself having the word Landscape, this painting is not merely a landscape painting. Considering the title also bears the name of Icarus*,* the painting seems to be of a mythological subject as well. At first sight, this interpretation sounds enough. But what if we say, there is more to this interpretation than meets the eye?
This painting is actually a mythical narrative that is overshadowed by nature. In other words, the painting focuses on the surroundings rather than the narrative itself. This perspective is much like the use in the Latin literary works — the “cum inversum”. Using this clause in a literary work, time becomes the main event while the principal action becomes a temporal one. What the artist did with this painting is not much different from this case. In the painting, we spot a fallen Icarus; but is this really what the artist wished us to focus on? Taking the dimension of the painting into account, our mythological hero, whose name was given to the painting, is almost invisible. It is the landscape and the other figures that first take the attention of the viewer while the demise of Icarus becomes merely a side event.
Weltlandschaft (World Landscape)
In order to understand Landscape with the Fall of Icarus, it is best to touch upon an art genre called Weltlandschaft(World Landscape). Weltlandschaft first appeared in the works of Joachim Patinir, an Early Netherlandish painter. In his paintings, the Biblical narrative and its figures are diminished among the visionary panoramic landscape. Ironically, Biblical stories become less important than the awe of the surroundings.
Simon Schama“An idealised composite of the world taken in
at a single Olympian glance.”
ANALYSIS OF LANDSCAPE WITH THE FALL OF ICARUS
The painting presents a panoramic landscape. The blue-green water suggests it is a spring day. There are a couple of birds flying about. On the horizon, the rays of the setting sun create a pink hue over the clouds as the twilight begins to take over the sky.
There are a number of boats sailing on the water, and in the left distance, is a harbour.
In the foreground of the painting, there is a plowman (or ploughman) in a red and beige outfit who steers his plow (or plough). He holds a whip in his left hand while steering the horse with his right. His face is almost hidden under his cap. He seems aloof to the plunge, instead, he keeps his daily work. The horse is equipped and attached to the plough and it makes its path by tracing the lines of the groove.
The Shepherd, The Fisherman, and The Vessel
A shepherd stands in the middle ground of the painting, gazing up. He does not watch the herd since his attention is grabbed by something else in the sky. A dog stands next to him, and the flock of sheep spread around grazing by the seaside. Amongst the flock, there are two black ewes.
In the right corner, at the bottom of the painting, a fisherman with his back turned against the viewer is sitting on the shore; absorbed in his occupation. He is indifferent to the event that takes place right before him.
There is a Portuguese-style vessel floating in the sea. The sails are filled with the wind already, and the ship seems to be about to depart. Five or six sailors have climbed on the masts and seem to conduct the ship in the supposed direction.
While all the figures are engrossed with their tasks, none of them pays even the slightest attention to the unfortunate hero.
Iconography
There are some symbols hidden in the painting that hold their own significance. Let’s begin with the foreground first.
Head of a Man
There is a man’s head in the undergrowth. Most interpret this as the head of a dead man. Some interpret this symbol as a reference to a proverb;
No plough will stop for a dying man.
The Sack Resting against Rock
A white sack filled with seeds to sow the field which is ploughed by the plowman is seen resting against a rock. This is also interpreted as a reference to a proverb;
What is sown on rocks cannot grow.
Dagger and Purse
A black purse is seen on the mound, and a dagger is placed over the purse. This could be a reference to a Dutch proverb;
Sword and money need a good hand.
The Partridge
A Partridge is depicted just next to the fisherman. This bird is another reference to the myth. After Daedalus found his son dead and began to bury him, a partridge flew over and began mocking the mourning father. This bird is actually Perdix, the former pupil and nephew of Daedalus, whom Daedalus pushed off the Acropolis, and caused his death. The motive why Daedalus pushes his nephew is out of jealousy. Since Perdix proves he’s a far better inventor than his uncle, Daedalus pushes him off but during his fall, Perdix is caught and turned into a partridge by Minerva. Since then, Perdix avoids altitudes and flies like a partridge. Just another reference to Icarus who flew too high and close to the sun.
Further Analysis on The Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
Taking the position of this figure in the painting, its size and his red shirt allude to various interpretations.
According to the art historian Yoni Ascher, the plowman has actually finished his work and is about to leave. The position of his left foot could be an implication of his stepping to the left, and probably even taking the dagger and the purse.
His left foot being on the fresh furrow is not a typical act of a skilled plowman. This implies that the plowman does not actually care about the furrows.
Ascher suggests the plowman could be a representation of Philip II of Spain, the ruler of the Netherlands at the time. Philip II was hated by his Flemish subjects due to the harsh taxes he would levy.
Remember the dagger and the purse? These two could be symbols of war and money, and the position of the figure towards the dagger and purse also supports this interpretation. It is well known that Philip II was known for his warmonger.
Yet all these lead us to question another issue:
Why would Bruegel represent Philip II with a plowman?
The plowman is a representation of the working class, and his stepping on the furrow is a reference to the king for his well-known pitilessness towards the aforementioned class. Along with all these suggestions, the plowman’s bright red shirt is also worth considering. The shirt has a regal fashion, colored royal red, which suggests another possible reference to the king. But in the end, all these suggestions are merely interpretations.
Another version occurs…
In 1935, another version of this painting occurred on the market. But this version had slightly different traits.
The Buuren Version
The version is known today as The Buuren version. This version is more modest since it is an oil painting on wood and the dimensions are 90 cm x 63 cm which is smaller than the previous one. In 1951, the painting was bought by a collector named David Van Buuren.
There are two main differences compared to the first one. One is the presence of Daedalus who also grabs the attention of the viewer. Daedalus is seen flying over the sky with all his grace as if he were a god. This also supports why the shepherd gazes towards the sky.
The other main difference is the position of the sun. In the first version, we see the sun setting. In this case, the sun is at its zenith. This detail is in fact worth emphasising since in the myth the position of the sun has a key role in the fall of Icarus. Remember, despite his father’s warnings, Icarus flies too close to the sun, and because the sun is at its zenith at that time, the wax that keeps the feathers together begins to melt and causes the epic fall
Technique in Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
Landscape with the Fall of Icarus consists of a large canvas rendered with oil paint. There are plenty of thick brushstrokes that grab attention in the first place. The cool colors dominate the painting, while the only red color on the plowman leads the dominant colors. The artist seems to have relied upon the value contrast. The farther the scene is, the higher the value is, and vice versa in the case of the lower value.
The setting has layered stages and the artist created depth by placing the sun on the horizon (this applies to the version at the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium.) The shadow on the ground doubles the lines of the groove, and the spot where the spectator supposedly observes the view gives the impression of being in the shadows. The figures are diminished in the panoramic landscape, and the whole story is dominated by nature itself.
Composition in Landscape with the Fall of Icarus
The composition in the Landscape with the Fall of Icarus has kind of a mapping effect. The ploughman being the largest figure that dominates the centre of the painting with his red shirt is on the top ground, and the shepherd is below the ploughman, while the fisherman is at sea level. There is no wonder why these figures are placed in a particular order since the nature of their tasks requires it. However, Bruegel could have painted this landscape from the sea level and placed, for instance, the fisherman in the center. Instead, he chose to emphasize the plowman. The artist seems to have wished the viewer to follow a certain path. First, we see the red-shirted ploughman and then the shepherd and finally the fisherman. It has a sense of a hierarchical position of these figures.
Placing the red-shirted plowman in the center of the painting is not a coincidence. Bruegel could be laying importance on plowing since agriculture played the largest part in the Dutch economy at that time.
In the end, Bruegel expressed the landscape in a perspectival way. Two figures related to death – one is Icarus and the other is the man under the bushes, seem to have been placed at the margins of the painting. We are not able to see the body of the dead man, while it is the vice versa in Icarus’ case. The painting is enveloped by the body of Icarus and the head of the dead man as if these two pieces are connected to each other.
Epilogue
Landscape with the Fall of Icarus is a painting in the style of the genre Weltlandschaft. In other words, the painting has a Patinir-style landscape. Despite these traits, Bruegel’s largest figure was not part of the narrative subject as it is in Patinir’s case. Instead, it was already a genre figure at that time.
Bruegel created a vivid landscape with soft colors that evoke the spring in the viewer’s mind. However, this is the tip of the iceberg.
At first sight, the painting seems to be a beautifully drawn serene landscape. A closer look helps us to see one dead body and one about to die. Having seen these, it is almost impossible to look at the painting without unseeing the tragic figures. The soft cool colors contradict the subject and after a while, the viewer becomes aware of the dark side of this painting.
Applying this myth to the canvas, Bruegel’s main intention was obviously to indicate the apathy of human nature. Imagine, a young man falling from the sky into the sea – this is certainly not something one could witness every day, yet not a single soul bothers to look at him, let alone give a hand while Icarus struggles in the water. But this is not the only apathy in the landscape. There is a dead man lying under the bushes and no one seems to care. No dead man – not even a dead god can stop the plowman from plowing. The daily task must go on no matter what. Remember:
“No plough will stop for a dying man.”