Nicholas
Reid reflects in essay form on general matters and ideas related to
literature, history, popular culture and the arts, or just life in general. You are free to agree
or disagree with him.
SEEING
WHAT WE CHOOSE TO SEE

Then there was a
moment of enchantment.
Ahead of me was
a large piece of driftwood. As you might know before from this blog (look up
the posting In Praise of Driftwood),
I have looked before, and with interest, at driftwood on this same beach. But
the large piece of driftwood I now saw was very special. From the distance at
which I first noticed it, it had the exact same shape as a stately bird,
long-necked and long-beaked and looking at the sky, perhaps wistfully, as the
rest of its skein or flock disappeared across the horizon.
“What a perfect natural work of art! ” I
thought as I gazed at it from a distance of about fifty metres, moved by its
swan-like or goose-like or teal-like poise.
But as I drew
nearer and nearer the fine and poised bird dissolved. It became a rough piece
of wood, eaten by the sea and its salt, burnt by the sun, with a rough and
hole-ridden texture and looking like nothing in particular except a big piece
of wood.
Is art made out
of this sort of delusion, perhaps? Do we impose upon the natural world shapes
that are not really there, giving them forms that do not belong to them,
endowing them with feelings and qualities that come solely from our own brains?
In effect, do we
see what we want to see, rather than seeing the material thing in front of us?

Now nearly
everything I have said about her was true.
There really was
a rage for l’Inconnue de la Seine,
and there really were numerous imaginative works written about her, by
well-known literary figures, in the 1920s and 1930s.
Nobody has ever
proven that the original story of the mask’s provenance is true; and the
likelihood is that it is not. Anatomists have pointed out that the firmness of
the mask’s skin suggests that the mask was made from a living young woman, and
not from a corpse that had been floating in the water of the Seine for days.
Further, from the 1880s to the 1920s when the legend was at its height, there
are no records from any morgue in Paris referring to a young unknown
woman pulled thus from the river and accorded a death mask. Precise dates and
places and names are missing from the legend, as they are from all urban
legends.
The consensus
now is that the mask was taken from the face of a healthy, young and living
teenage girl – indeed (though as untraced as the story of the love-struck
morgue attendant), early in the rage for l’Inconnue
de la Seine, there was a counter-narrative, which said the face belonged to
the (living) teenage daughter of a Rhenish sculptor, who was astounded at the
morbid fascination his daughter’s face aroused.
I step back from
this, and look at photographs of the mask itself.
What do they
depict?

Is she the
paragon of beauty? I think not. She looks like an ordinary and healthy young teenager.
So what happened
to create this cultural phenomenon of l’Inconnue
de la Seine? I think that, having heard the story of the love-struck morgue
attendant and the death mask, and having imagined the story of the tragic
suicide, those who looked at this attractive but ordinary face read into it the
story they wanted to see. This was a mental illusion akin to the optical
illusion that made me see a stately bird in a weather-beaten piece of wood.
This is indeed a
“figure in the carpet” situation – or perhaps a “canals of Mars” situation. The
fault, dear Brutus, is not in ourselves but in the structure of our brains.
We see what we
choose to see.
No comments:
Post a Comment