Circus Sideshow (Parade de cirque), Georges Seurat, oil on canvas, 1887-88. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Bequest of Stephen C. Clark, 1960.
By Chantelle Castillo
There it was, towards my right, in Gallery 825. Hung this very alluring but peculiar painting. Circus Sideshow by Georges Seurat. As I witnessed it from afar, immediately, I was drawn into it. I began to think to myself “Oh what is this about?”. I have always been intrigued by art that seemed to be already telling a story, and for me when I first saw Circus Sideshow, it had felt as though Georges Seurat was already saying something with this painting. What I had first noticed was the faintness of the painting. It’s almost as if you had to look at it a little bit longer or even a little bit closer just to be able to see its full details. The faces and the figures of the people painted by Seurat seem as if they were painted by tiny little dots.
The faintness had also reminded me of the effect that a spray-can would have on a canvas, with its faint hues and spotty features. It was something I hadn’t seen before with a painting. The spottiness of the painting is what had given me its allure. Each little dot constructs an entire scene. Creating an image.
As I continued to look at the painting, I saw a man standing in the middle, which immediately drew my attention. He stands in the center while leaning on one leg while playing the trombone on a stage. He wears a pointed hat that reminds me of the costume of the nutcracker. While below him, we see a small gathering. An audience of onlookers. Some of the people are looking off to the side; others are staring directly at him. Alongside the man in the middle, we see two other men besides him. Their attire also seems to match the man in the middle. Their outfits are made out of tight pants with tail suit jackets. One of the men wears a ruffled collared white shirt with an open jacket while the other is wearing a collared shirt with a tie with a closed jacket. He carries a long baton under his arm, standing as a maestro would. Observant, still, strong. He stands with his arms behind his back while the expression on his face tells us that he’s listening or even watching. Behind the man in the middle, we also see three other men who are also playing the trombone.
Two of them seem to be playing a strong note, as we see their cheeks full of air, as they blow into the instrument. The rest of the painting, like the background, seems to not have an obvious setting. The colors are dark, and we see a low hue of purple, green, blue, and some orange. The colors seem to be muted, carefully placed to draw your attention to where Seurat where like for you to see. Especially at the man in the middle.
The most significant part of this painting for me has been the man in the middle. Not only was he in the center of the painting, but I had distinctly become interested in the way he was posing. As he leaned on one leg, becoming the center of attention, it had intrigued me
how the audience below him seemed to be a bit more distracted or more so preoccupied, as they were looking off to the side or at each other. Barely, really noticing him. As the viewer of this painting, his presence is almost unavoidable but to the small gathering in the painting, the man in the middle was just their background. Feeling as though the music from the trombone players had also become music to just fill in the space or to provide a sense of ambiance, even a form of entertainment for the night. I had started to wonder.
Was Seurat making a commentary? It had made me start to question the dynamics behind the spectacle and the spectator. This interesting nuance or dance within the painting begins with the relationship between the center stage trombone player and the small crowd below him. Highlighting this dissonance between them, Seurat had barely painted their facial features, but their body language conveys a different message, even a different note. As their heads are turned off to the side, it had made me question if the audience was simply enjoying the music or just looking to be entertained. I had continued to wonder if Seurat was making a statement with his perspective on the audience. Are we, as an audience, obsessed with just being entertained? It had made me reflect on the dynamic that artists can tend to struggle with, the dynamic between the perception of the viewer, and the perception of themselves and their own art. As artists tend to prioritize the feeling or the message that they would like to convey through their own art, they can’t help but face the uncertainty that can come from the perception of the viewer or the audience and whether that perception will either make or break their art.
As the man in the middle stands there playing alone, appealing to the crowd but still not able to fully grasp them, he falls into the background. While this dissonance between the crowd and the main in the middle becomes the foreground. The feeling that the man in the middle conveys becomes rather ambiguous and melancholic. As we notice little to no details in his facial expression, it can leave us to still wonder. Which I believe is also the beauty of this painting, the continuation of wonderment between the artist and the viewer. Leaving us with more to observe while the work of the artist continues to expand throughout time. Especially when Seurat’s painting of ‘Circus Sideshow’ had created and pioneered a whole new technique. Discovering a different way of painting. Pointillism.
Pointillism is a fascinating approach in which you can paint something. Inspired by the impressionist movement, this technique of art was born out of painting tiny yet distinct dots next to one another in order to form an image. When creating this painting, Seurat had found himself painting in a way that his fellow artists at the time had never seen before.
Having his artistic choice being on the threshold of something completely new, contrasting with a lot of his fellow artists at that time and what they were doing. (Meyer, Art In
Context) From a historic perspective, you can understand the influence that Seurat had during this time by referring to the works of Vincet Van Gogh. To my surprise, Van Gogh had also adopted this stylistic approach of Pointillism, as you can see with his painting, ‘Starry Night’. You can see how Vincet Van Gogh had become influenced by Seurat’s artistic style of Pointillism and incorporated it into his own paintings, in his own way. Instead of painting dots, Van Gogh chose to do short dashes or short lines of paint, almost as if he was creating small, dotted lines with his brushstrokes. Another artist is Maximilien Luce, with his artwork ‘Morning, Interior’. In this painting, you can instantly see the inspiration behind each of the details surrounding the man in the painting and the objects in his room. When observing his painting, you really get to see each dot and how each brushstroke made contributed into making his painting come to life. (Berry, The Collector).
It was very intriguing to observe ‘Circus Sideshow’. As the painting revealed many more layers to discover. From the point of history, where Georges Seurat created Pointillism. Through his influence in the way his artistic style was incorporated in a Van Gogh painting and various other artists who were inspired by Seurat during the impressionist movement. Seurat involved various elements into his artwork to help create this level of influence and intrigue. By his use of painting tiny little dots to create an image, it had provided a different element to the story by having the viewer become a participant rather than just an onlooker like the small crowd in the painting. I believe Seurat wanted to challenge his audience with his work, to have it perceived in a whole new way. With his use of Pointillism, it makes the eye focus on certain parts of the painting like the man in the middle or the details behind him, creating this very specific rhythm or dance between the small gathering and the man in the middle. Strategically, I believe this choice in technique had also added to the feel of the painting as well, giving it almost a hazy feeling or fuzzy texture. Like a blurry thought or memory. Being that in actuality, Seurat had painted this to depict Paris’s first night of entertainment. Celebrating the annual gingerbread fair, in spring 1887. (Met Museum.org) in knowing some context behind Seurat’s painting, we can establish that his intention or depiction, was to portray a night of entertainment. Therefore, when exploring the means of technique and colors that Seurat had decided to use to convey this time in history, Seurat had still chosen to use muted and dark colors. Emphasizing the feeling that he wanted to convey through his painting, quite possibly being his own interpretation of that night or how he might’ve also been feeling that day. Seurat had left us with thoughts, questions, and a new way of doing things. His innovative technique, such as pointillism, impacted the history of art to come. I believe there is always something you can learn from every artist, and I believe something that I’ve learned from Seurat was to not be afraid, to challenge
yourself and to explore within your own medium, to find something new. That is how we can grow, evolve and create work that engages our viewer, to ask more questions and observe just a little bit closer throughout our time to come.
