Jean Dubuffet: Brutal Beauty

How does one define beauty? It has been a question that has plagued artists and philosophers alike for thousands of years. Beauty needs to meet the popular aesthetic of the day, and as such, changes over time. No one definition of beauty is the same, however. But in Western cultures ‘Beauty’ is perfection- an impossibility that is unattainable - but one that must be reached.

            Jean Dubuffet (1901-1985) reacted against traditional Western beauty standards, particularly in women and the female nude. Walking around his exhibition, ‘Brutal Beauty’ currently on at The Barbican Gallery in London, there is a rawness to it. These paintings aren’t supposed to be ‘pretty’. Life isn’t pretty. Life is hard, brutal even. But that’s not to say there isn’t beauty.

            Even so, I’d be warned, this exhibition challenges your views of beauty, aesthetics and, chiefly, what it is to be ‘human’. My impression was that it’s personal. Dubuffet is asking ‘What are you looking at?’ And not in a nice way either. Take for example, Dubuffet’s impression of nature. Nature and the great outdoors are, supposedly beautiful, but what if we subvert that? Use nature against itself to show just how cruel humanity and, indeed, Mother Nature can be. Remember, our perceived ideals of ‘beauty’ are just a camouflage to what lies beneath. 

            First of all, let's take a walk around this exhibition. The layout is rather idiosyncratic, and it doesn’t help that The Barbican itself, is a maze. There are two floors to the exhibition, and we start upstairs and follow anti-clockwise. It feels unnatural, but curatorial speaking- genius. If our views on what is natural and what is unnatural, what is beautiful and ugly or even what is violence and grace, are being challenged… then we’re off to a great start.

            Dubuffet was considered one of the more provocative artists of the day, he is probably best known as the founding father of Art Brut and enjoying the pursuit of what is considered ‘low art’. Take for example graffiti art, now set aside whether you think its vandalism, anti-social behaviour or a tactile commentary against the state- to Dubuffet it’s an act of creativity. “I realised that millions of possibilities of expression were available outside of the accepted cultural avenues” It’s to provoke a response in you: good or bad? It's a reaction. So, whatever you do, it plays right into his hands. Touché Dubuffet, touché. 

            The curation plays with our ideas of exhibitionism and subversion, for example ‘Large Black Landscape’ 1946. This one will make you look twice. Why? A painting that utilises the colours ‘Black and White’ has the statement of ‘it’s black and white’. However, there is no such thing. Looking closer, just beneath the surface are shapes, structures, stick children with happy smiling faces. But they’ve been carved perniciously into the canvas; the white lines are thin, sharp and run deep. The paint may be dry, but the white bleeds through the black; it looks sticky, the black paint is riddled with lumps and bumps of varying size. So, what lies beneath? And why hide it with happy smiling faces?

Large Black Landscape 1946

            Let’s move on to the more conventional ‘Brutal Beauty’. If there is such thing as ‘conventional brutal beauty’? On the surface Dubuffet’s look at the female nude is refreshing. It’s great for feminism! The women depicted in these very intimate paintings are all different shapes and sizes. There’s no popularised aesthetic that Dubuffet is reaching for. But is it great for feminism? The Guerrilla Girls recently asked for women to take a poll of female nudes versus female artists in galleries because women in art is contested as an aesthetic and representational issue. Well, does it even matter? Dubuffet’s paintings are raw and indiscriminate, take for example ‘Tree of Fluids’ 1950. The body is misshapen and bruised and pink and yellow and pale, the arms are thin the face is round, the teeth, lips, nose and eyes are bulging. Her breasts are non-existent, her vagina is slapped on the canvas because sex appeal is not important here. That sexualised fantasy is not what Dubuffet wants you to see. ‘Fluid’ is the key word here, ‘non-binary’ and ‘gender- fluid’ are trending and being explored as key concepts of what it means to be human.

Tree of Fluids 1950

            There are few paintings in this exhibition that shock you. There’s a tension in the air. A tension between beauty, death and what is natural. Think back, to the Fall 2007 ‘Sarabande’ collection by Alexander McQueen. The last piece in the collection is one of the most iconic McQueen pieces, a rose dress where the live roses deliberately fall off onto the runway signalling the strain between beauty, life and death. The relevance? Let’s look at the piece ‘Landscape with Argus’1955, at first glance the piece seems soft and beautiful, it looks like a pebble beach. But look closer and it becomes apparent that the piece is made up entirely of Butterfly Wings. That now look like eyes. They saw the violence of their wings being stolen. To take the wings of an animal so it cannot fly, for purely aesthetic reasons is cruel. One cannot help but imagine the wings being ripped from their bodies for art - Like the roses falling from the dress to decay. These modes of production, purely for the sake of art is a rape of nature.

Landscape of Argus 1955

            In the end, I didn’t like where this exhibition took me; how dare Dubuffet be a better feminist than I am and how dare he root out my own hypocrisies. Why is a male perspective on beauty so relevant, so infuriating and so dramatic? 

Butterfly wings are flapping. A storm is brewing, and Mother Nature isn’t happy; when it comes to expanding perceptions, Dubuffet has issued a warning: Brace for impact, it’s going to be brutal.

 Jean Dubuffet: Brutal Beauty is on at The Barbican Gallery until the 22nd of August