The Animals in Edouard Manet’s Olympia and Titian’s Venus of Urbino
By Serena Weil
Both Titian’s Venus of Urbino (1538) and Edouard Manet’s variation of it titled Olympia (1863) feature a small, but not insignificant, animal on the right side of the image. Placed at the foot of the bed beside the titular characters of their respective paintings, they are highly symbolic. The wealthy, traditionally beautiful Venus of Urbino lounges with an objectively cute, small dog. Meanwhile, Olympia sits upright with a stretching, perhaps disturbed, black cat. These symbolic and intentional characterizations of the four-legged companion speak loudly, calling for critique of the cultural attitudes surrounding nudity.
Titian was a painter during the Italian Renaissance best known for his collection of Venuses. Venus of Urbino is yet another reclining nude of another beautiful woman for him. Titian’s background thus allows her to look comfortable yet shine with perfectly drawn proportions, the “ideal” female body during the Renaissance, and a lush background connoting wealth. Her gaze is accentuated with the sensual elements of the flowers in her hand and the plush bed. She is blind to the representation of servitude in the ornate background. Her dog, too, is undisturbed, sleeping comfortably. The scene is peaceful, allowing Titian to redirect the viewer to the fact that Venus is beautiful.
Meanwhile, in the case of Edouard Manet’s Olympia, viewers are quicker to note that she looks utterly ill. She is pale, sickly and green, frail, her neck unsupported and uncomfortable. The dark background is suggestive of a small space, perhaps hidden away in one of Paris’s chambre de bonnes, or maids’ rooms. In the moment of the painting, Olympia is being attended to, bringing the theme of servitude to the front and center in the form of a second character. The attendant is giving Olympia flowers, presumably from a male suitor, since the ribbon on her neck signifies that she is a prostitute. This practice was common in Paris at the time of painting. Moreover, the bed looks stiff rather than plush, so the black cat needs to stretch. The cat glares, perhaps disturbed by all of the action.
When Edouard Manet placed Olympia in front of the Paris salons, the piece was not considered groundbreaking but instead far too ahead of its time. Any controversy of displaying a sex worker in the space of the salons was hypocritical, as around 40% of men in Paris were employing prostitutes at the time. Manet’s clever use of the black cat provides a reflection on this aspect of Parisian society during the mid-1800s. Cats, and black cats in particular, have a negative, unwanted connotation, especially when compared to dogs. In Olympia, the scene is dark and everyone is of low social status, including the black cat. People avoid black cats as they are unlucky, just as many men in Paris avoided discussion of their relationships with prostitutes. Manet calls out these social issues, pointing out the hypocrisy of men. Creating an image almost identical to Venus of Urbino but with modern social connotations allowed Manet to bring into question when nudity is glorified, versus frowned upon.
Meanwhile, with man’s best friend at her side, Venus of Urbino is high art and highly respectable. She is both wealthy and traditionally beautiful. The dog is familiar, and more importantly, desirable. With the friendly notion of the adorable and unassuming puppy, men can proudly look at Venus of Urbino. It is important to note that this is man’s best friend, not woman’s best friend, and not human’s best friend. Part of the painting already belongs to him. While Venus is unattainable, the privacy of the other figures looking away and the welcoming slumber of the dog makes men feel that they can have this beautiful thing. Comfortable with objectifying women, once the familiar and overly attainable Olympia appears and stares them in the face, her power returns. Men were not ready for a humanized nude. Thus through the simple addition of a black cat, Manet was able to remind the Paris salons that painted women are real people, and that painting must humanize rather than objectify.