Botticelli's Birth of Venus

pauldoughton.com - the new art history

Sunday, 5 March 2017

"The Coronation of Venus/Aphrodite" (Venus/Aphrodite crowned by Peitho) - The true meaning of the Birth of Venus.


The Birth of Venus (annotation by p. doughton 2015) 

"Venus/Aphrodite being crowned by Peitho"
 [updated 29-4-2017]

Botticelli's essential focus in the Birth of Venus is furtively presented through the clever use of an inconspicuous fold of cloth which is actually intended to (politely) represent the pudendal cleft located at the base of the mons pubis intended as a reference to the vulva. In Botticelli's pagan inauguration of Venus (and thereby all vulvae) the goddess Peitho confers an all beguiling potential to the vulva and exalts female primary sexual differentiation as the crowning glory of feminine beauty and generative power. The unifying religious ambitions of the influential Florentine philosopher Marsilio Ficino may be detected in the three leaves emerging from the fold of cloth (a reference to the Christian Trinity) the painting thereby possessing the signature of Ficino's religious syncretism. As a wedding commission the painting's courtly conversation revolves around sex and love and actually portrays the precise moment where Peitho (persuasion) confers the power of persuasion (hypnotic artistry) directly to the the vulva/yoni of the young Venus.
~

'Everything in the world is about sex except sex. Sex is about power.'*


In Botticelli's well recognised painting the young goddess Venus receives the metaphoric form of her primary sexual differentiation which is presented as 'the crowning glory of the feminine' from the goddess Peitho (persuasion). The painting is generally understood to have been a wedding painting made for Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ Medici (1463-1503) second cousin to Lorenzo de' Medici (1449-1492) also known as Lorenzo the Magnificent and  destined to be hung above the younger Lorenzo's marital bed.

The Birth of Venus can be correlated with a brief observation made by Pausanias (c.110 –180 AD) in his 2nd century travelogue Descriptions of Greece where many marvels of Ancient Greece are described from direct observation. The central event of the Birth of Venus can be sourced to this small section of text from the travelogue:

[Amongst the images decorating the throne of Zeus in the temple at Olympia :]
     "...Eros (Love) receiving Aphrodite as she rises from the sea, and Aphrodite is being crowned by Persuasion (Peitho)..."  Pausanias Description of Greece 5.11.8  (1.)

It is highly likely that both the narrative and the conceptual development which drives the image would have been revealed to the wedded couple to enjoy. Botticelli's visualised idea of love and desire seems eternally present because while myth is narrated in chronological sequence mythic time is more or less equitable with geologic time frames (eras, eons) to present a cosmological argument. In myth these arguments compress an imagined composite sequence of events and describe them through allegory. For instance the original myth of the Birth of Venus (sea-born from the severed testicles of Uranus) may harbour a cosmogenical intuition alluding to a panspermic origin of life on earth.  This sexualised aeonic myth sees the universe from a mystical spiritual viewpoint as does the writer Deepak Chopra:
"Sexual energy is the primal and creative energy of the universe. All things that are alive come from sexual energy. In animals and other life forms, sexual energy expresses itself as biological creativity.." (2.)
In the Birth of Venus the conceptual gravity of the cosmic myth has been subordinated to the historical and cultural aspects and as presented by Botticelli the vulva is the divine crucible in which the bond of love is forged; still, the great myth lingers. This is to say that the Birth of Venus expounds a cultural conversation hallowing the idea of the vulva as the source of social, temporal and religious power where the firm belief in this knowledge as knowledge participates in that power. As such the Birth of Venus appears sensual and (upon scrutiny) erudite and anciently philosophical and yet Botticelli's argument remains courtly and confined to the time and place of its origin at the court of the Medici. 

To those who understood the paintings cultural meaning it must have been seen as beautifully indiscreet - perhaps even wickedly so - because this stylised presentation is suggestive of all of the qualities of the vulva/vagina in art and religion; all connotations sacred and profane, and all of the complexities of femininity which must involve every aspect of the feminine beginning with the child and concluding with the many lineages of Grand Matronas

Because the sight of primary female anatomy appears to be so visually persuasive the sight of the vulva confirms attraction (otherwise the vagina would not be seen = intimacy) expresses desire and sets physical love aflame. For these reasons it is the goddess Peitho (persuasion) who dutifully crowns the goddess using the anatomical form of her primary sexual differentiation. Conceived as an indivisible unity this pairing of vision & persuasion is also found in John Donne's erotic poem (c.1669) Elegy XIX. To his mistress going to bed:



[Women] Themselves are mystic books, which only we
(Whom their imputed grace will dignify)
Must see revealed. Then, since that I may know,
As liberally as to a midwife, show 
Thyself...


As a wedding commission the painting narrates the story found on the statue of Zeus in Greece by Pausanias at Olympia. Botticelli's has interpreted this brief description as the moment when Peitho confers a persuasive empathetic force directly to the vulva/yoni of the goddess of love and by this act Venus is ordained (by will of the gods). The earthly fabric held by Peitho represents the anatomical form which must now remains directly linked to the cosmic (therefore sacred, holy etc.) and so Botticelli is narrating a precise (though imagined chronology) of a 'moment in myth'. Peitho's action exalts the vulva as no less than the completion of female beauty and so this inauguration of Venus initiates the sanctification of the vulva and therefore all vulvae through all time.
Botticelli's essential focus within the structure of the Birth of Venus is furtively presented by clever use of an inconspicuous fold of cloth which is actually intended to politely represent the pudendal cleft


Fig. 1. Birth of Venus (Detail)

When scrutinising the image it may be clearly seen that during the development of the Birth of Venus the paintings Grand Motif  -  actually a mons pubis metaphor emphasising the form of the pudendal cleft (aka cleft of Venus). The right side (and lower left) has been altered during the paintings development and that original small fold of cloth held to Venus by her attendant has become fuller, rounded, and more symmetrical. 



Fig. 2.  Birth of Venus (Detail)

Fig. 3. Hysterical Sexual. Anish Kapoor. Fibreglass and gold - 2016
























Botticelli has pursued his folded metaphoric vulva developing the form with greater confidence. That formerly simple fold has now become symmetrical, fuller and decidedly emblematic (compare Botticelli's symbolic form (fig. 2.) with Anish Kapoor's distinctive 2016 Hysterical Sexual (fig.3)


This alteration has placed a grander and more proportionate symbol in the hand of Peitho and with this alteration Botticelli has further incorporated Marsilio Ficino's religious sycretism and it appears that Ficino's enthusiastic reconciliation of pagan and Christian philosophies has been introduced into this cosmogonic myth. It can be seen that Botticelli's original idea has clearly become a symmetrically emblematic and now become further emboldened by advancing the influential Florentine's narrative and this goes well beyond merely narrating the text of Pausanias. 

Clearly there has been a change of direction and where the form of  the cloth has been rearranged there are three points of a leaf (fig 2.) that can be seen to emerge from within the depth of the fold. The appearance of these leaves from the fold of cloth is actually something a magician might do with a coin and a piece of silk and certainly intends to announce something rather magical. It very much seems that Ficino's influence is being exercised (directly or indirectly) and that the three points materialising from the fold actually represent the Christian trinity.  [It is imperative to this argument that a detailed full screen view of this fold be viewed here where a clear view of the alterations made by Botticelli can be clearly defined.] 

While it is possible that these alterations to the grand motif might have come from a number of Lorenzo's tutors (or perhaps even reflectively by Botticelli himself) that passionate 'spiritual guide' that the historian Ernst Gombrich locates in Ficino is still the likely candidate. One senses that Ficino's syncretizing influence has had a persuasive effect on the course of this painting just as the presence of Ficino himself might influence the court and Lorenzo.

Those alterations to the Birth of Venus indicate a dramatic change of mind occurring during the painting's development and with this slight adjustment the coronation which was creatively narrating Pausanias by Botticelli now heralds the goddesses emergence into the world and inversely the emergence of the world from the creative (sexual) nature of the goddess; now the presence of these three points very strongly infer that this is a Christian world emerging from a pagan past - and there you have Ficino!
                          

~




Fig 4. The Coronation of Venus Anadyomene. Annotated detail with nimbus.


That fold is not simply a possible motif - it has become emphatically emblematic - and the cloth which is embroidered with flowers and leaves emphasises the earthly element so to say this magic has been bestowed the physical vulvae of all women as if to say to the Venusian gender 'as you are intoxicating as you are beautiful as you are powerful'. At no time should it be lost that this painting of 'desire exalted' was designed by men and the act of Peitho crowning Venus stresses the shift from a woman being a merely beautiful object to the goddess becoming obviously an exalted object of great sexual desire. This should be contextualised and considered in the same respectful manner in which the yoni is traditionally revered in Hinduism.

By placing a nimbus around the grand motif (fig 4.) the idea of sanctification becomes clearer and that Peitho is actually crowning Venus will become more readily conceivable. This crowning is the design event and the visual foundation around which the entire painting pivots structurally . The robe presented to Venus by Peitho is not the starry robe as most incorrect attributions often attest (it is clearly 'earthly'). The embroidered design of flowers set upon sumptuous fabric must also indicate the youth of the goddess - consider here Flora's dress in Botticelli's Primavera (c.1482). 


~


In Rudens ("The Rope") by the Roman playwright Plautus, a character remarks te ex concha natam esse autumant, cave tu harum conchas spernas (Act III, Scene iv, 704): since Venus is said to have been born from a shell, so the goddess should not neglect the "shells" of the two young women who have sought protection at her altar.  
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/aconite/dacosta.html James Eason: Da Costa and the Venus dione: The Obscenity of Shell Description. 


Fig 5. Mouth or opening of a conch shell.



In the Birth of Venus Botticelli has clearly re-invented that fold as a metaphoric reference to the vulva which may also invoke the mouth or opening of the conch shell. Symbolically the vulva is seen as the earthly counterpart of a divine feminine force whose physical form is to be found in phenomenological correspondences such as certain sea shells.  



Fig 6. Orpheus. (Formerly attributed to Giorgione)Venetian,  c.1515.


Turning to the Widener Orpheus Pan employs the conch to instruct the seated Venus of the sacredness of her form and educate her to the grand correspondences found in nature. The Romans saw this correspondence in the mouth of the conch (figs 5-6.) however the Greeks made supreme the almost perfect form of the cockle/scallop shell which in no way bears any resemblance  to the form of the vulva and this is because the Greeks saw the similitude of the vulva in the flesh of the creature residing inside the cockle shell. These distinctions are actually the fundamental distinctions between the two cultures at core and if we were to press further one might find that the Greeks held no shame in the open graphic understanding the explicit anatomy of the vagina whereas the Romans seemed to have reservations of going beyond the threshold of the mons pubis. The hand that was placed over the pudenda became the hand of shame where for the Greeks this was modesty or embarrassment but there was not the assumed cultural imprint of shame.

~

The Alterations to the Fold.

In fig. 5 the first joint of the forefinger can be discerned through the overpainting, and the shadow of the gap between forefinger and middle finger can also be detected. Peitho's thumb has been clearly shortened to accommodate the idea of 'grip' and 'pressure' to the added cloth nearest the web of the thumb.

Fig 7. Birth of Venus (detail with annotations).

Referring to fig 7, the straight line markers radiating from positions a & mark the three areas of overpainting which have been added to the original design. Rather than an asymmetric piece of cloth which this section portrayed originally, a large area to the right side has been added - as has a smaller area to the lower left of the fold, giving the form more symmetry and which is far less likely to be misinterpreted as a simple, random fold. Botticelli's addition to the original form expounds upon the importance of the pudenda/shell motif. One can conclude that the annotations made to the cloth were an afterthought because clearly that fold has been developed to present a grander, symmetrical shape; it has become larger, rounded, and more full in appearance, and what this alteration to this small piece of cloth now achieves, is an effect of emblematic significance. 

[A detailed full screen view of this fold can again be viewed here .] 

It appears to my eye that there may have been a petaled flower form - perhaps one of Botticelli's roses - originally emerging from the folded cloth and that faint petals may still be residual (faintly) but which was reinvented in favour of the tri-leaved greenery over the pink of a rose. 



Fig 8. Flora's hand clasping roses. Primavera (detail)


It appears that Botticelli may have been intending to make an association with the roses clasped under the hand of Flora (fig 8.) in the Primavera (c. 1482) for is . If there were originally one of Botticelli's stylised roses (overpainted) from where the tri-leaved plant now emerges the argument for Ficino's influence increases and that plant emerging from the fold also revisits another idea used in the Primavera where plants emerge from the mouth of Chloris. It is common to find elements from an artist's oeuvre to reappear in later works. If so, the grand act - that of Peitho crowning Venus - would remain intact but the painting would have portrayed a beautifully simple visualisation of a pagan narrative but which has now been altered by the emergence of those three leaves which represent the Christian trinity. 
~


Two contemporary examples of comparably emblematic vulva motifs occur in the recent work of Anish Kapoor. These glossy and distinctly glabrous vulva forms find resonance with Botticelli's vulva abstraction and comparably each Kapoor clearly references the mons pubis, vulva and the pudendal cleft - (a feature which rarely occurs in European classical art). 


Just as there are metaphoric correspondence between Botticelli's fold and Kapoor's Hysterical Sexual the mouth of the conch shell reveals this metaphoric correspondence in nature. And if one might be uncertain of correctly identifying the abstract form of a vulva Kapoor's titled work  Gold Pussy reinforces the forms intention as a grand motif (fig 9.).

.
Fig 9. Gold Pussy. Anish Kapoor. Stainless steel and gold, 2015




Fig 10 Three comparable forms reminiscent of the Vesica Piscis (Vesica Pisces).




Botticelli's fold intends to replicate the form of the pudendum femininum. In a sacred form the vulva is often geometrically designed by the interlocked circles which form the Vesica Piscis (see fig. 10) and this notion could also be considered present in  Gold Pussy by Anish Kapoor (fig 9). 


Fig. 11. The approximate proportions of a vesica piscus.



It quite possible that the Vesica Piscis is present in Botticelli's painting in terms of the paintings proportion because according to the calculations of Mr Gary Meisner the Birth of Venus also meets the mathematical requirements of an artwork steeped in the proportions of the Golden Mean. Meisner observes:   


"If the thickness of the canvas were o.5 centimeters, the dimensions of the frame wrapped underneath the four sides of the canvas would have been 171.5 x 277.5, the ratio of which is … 1.618, the golden ratio.  Whether exact or not, the dimensions are so close that one might rather easily conclude from this that Botticelli’s intent here was to begin this great work of art with the perfection of a Golden Ratio"

This being so a secondary 
proposition involving the geometry of the Vesica Piscis might also be suggested. However as there is no clear proof of the intention (beyond the measurable existence of pi itself). Acceptance of the Vesica Piscis as an integral part of the paintings plan is not critical to the elucidation of the paintings meaning but the possibility that it may exist must at least be considered as this concept can be geometrically aligned (see fig. 11) with Botticelli's design. 

~


Gustave Courbet's The Origin of the World (c. 1886) exhibits the vulva as a benign anatomical fact in the paintings immediate foreground and the bottom, thighs, stomach, breasts & nipples appear in foreshortened concentration. It could be suggested of this rendering that one may not isolate the vulva from any element of female anatomy.


Gustave Courbet's 'L'Origine du monde 1866 (The Origin of the World).
This rather confrontational presentation is further pronounced by Courbet's realistic rendering however the anonymity of the subject depersonalises intimacy and so makes a generalisation of the vulva's form. Through the title of Courbet's painting's (and of course visually) one might also read that Botticelli and Courbet are somewhat united philosophically. 

Courbet's realism thrusts the vulva to the foreground without adherence to any particular form of religiosity whereas Botticelli's fold forms an undeniable reference to Italian mythology and further incorporates a fusion of the Christian Trinity into this solemn pagan theme. More abstractly the three aspects of the Trinity references the foundations of the three dimensional world and therefore the vulva is presented in both paintings as the unchallenged entrance of spirit into matter. 

This is to say that creation and all apparent regeneration of the phenomenological world emerge through the generative force of the feminine and this must allude to the origin of the world on a cosmic scale
~

Fig 10. Birth of Venus (detail) with annotation by the author.
That small fold next to the beautiful face of Venus has been obfuscated and overwhelmed by variations on the same confused interpretations for five over hundred years. The immediacy of the Birth of Venus always intended to parallel the sum of her beauty in unabashed physical totality and here the vulva subtlety indicates the gateway to paradise both temporally and spiritually and represented here as the persuasive glory of the young goddess

Botticelli's Venus is actually invisible, as the goddess is in the process of being crowned by the physical archetypal form offered her by Peitho (persuasion) and what is more persuasive and appropriate to be sited above the marital bed (the paintings intended site) than an image dedicated to goddess of love and of lovers. Venus/Aphrodite is shown in Botticelli's painting as a divine emanation in the process of her mythical manifestation which is actually narrated by Botticelli as her coronation according to the observation of Pausanias



Fig 11. Birth of Venus with annotation by the author.
Even without the annotation above (fig. 11.) the metaphor is as emblematic as before because we now know the intention. By altering the fold in the hand of Peitho the painting is no longer a homage to the Greek myth but embraces the Italian  pudenda metaphor with an emblematic power. The earthly form of Venus is associated with and so defined by the vulva which is the physical form of her primary sexual differentiation and in Botticelli's painting the mysteries pertaining to the vulva as the matrix of creation crowns her glory. 

The painting is specifically feminine and intimately linked to water, salinity, and of course that anatomical key to to a fulfilled experience of human love and the potential doorway to divine/cosmic love (conceptual love) - the vulva/yoni. This is a conversation of sexual attraction, generative power and human anatomy and these conversations pursue the crowning beauty of the feminine whose harmonious form belies the entrance to this dimension through that irresistible and most genial human act. As is historically recognised the most fitting site for such a wedding gift was above the marriage bed of the newlyweds.
~



1. Pausanias "Description of Greece" 5. 11. 8 (trans. Jones) (Greek travelogue c. 2nd A.D.) 

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Paus.+5.11.8&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0160



3. Meisner, G. "Botticelli, The Birth of Venus and the Golden Ratio in Art Composition."

* Often misattributed to Oscar Wilde - of origin unknown though as a meme appears randomly through a variety of media and possibly more in step with Michel Foucault than Oscar. 

~

link to



Do visit my TUMBLR



  pAuL ©1997 - 2017