An analysis of contrasting mythological representations of the characters of Shulamith and Lilith in Anselm Kiefer’s paintings (2015)
Anselm Kiefer’s work references German and Jewish mythology as part of his process of analysing and questioning Germany’s post-Nazi collective psychology, namely that of guilt, shame and denial. Mythology is a key reference in my own working practice and I have recently become particularly interested in the myths around the character of Lilith, the first wife of Adam in Jewish texts. In focussing on both German and Jewish mythological themes, Kiefer has created a series of works during the 1980s and 1990s surrounding the female characters of Shulamith and Margarete, each respectively representing the Synagogue and the Church, as featured in the Death Fugue poem by Paul Celan. Around the same period Kiefer also began to create his Lilith paintings, and there are comparisons that can be drawn between the characters of Lilith and Shulamith, as with their corresponding mythological character foils Eve and Margarete.
Born in 1945, the same year as Hitler’s death, Kiefer would have been a member of the first generation that inherited the German shame and guilt without having witnessed the events of the Third Reich. German mythology had become taboo as a result of its association with Nationalism and the Nazis. Kiefer viewed this avoidance of certain topics as counterproductive to dealing with the events of the Nazi regime and so he used reference to these and other taboos as a challenge to Germany society as well as for a personal cathartic process.
Shulamith and Margarete
Kiefer was greatly influenced by Paul Celan, a Jewish poet and Holocaust survivor. Celan, much like Kiefer, was grappling with his post-Holocaust identity, although from a different perspective, and much like Kiefer he confronted the realities of Nazi Germany head-on. He uses discomforting and trauma-laden imagery in Death Fugue “He whistles his Jews out and has them dig for a grave”, “as smoke you will rise into air/ then a grave you will have in the clouds” (Fig. 1). It is therefore unsurprising that Kiefer looks to Celan for another perspective on Jewish and German identity and relations in the aftermath of the Holocaust.
Kiefer’s Margarete and Shulamith series was largely based on Celan’s poem entitled Death Fugue (Lauterwein, 2007, p90). The two characters of Shulamith, also known as Shulamite, and Margarete have a complex historical relationship. They began as fairly similar characters. Shulamite appears only once in Biblical texts (Lauterwein, 2007, p90), but also is the subject of the Song of Songs attributed to King Solomon (Lauterwein, 2007, p92) and is praised as the purple haired love interest of the narrator. Similarly, Margarete bares similarities to the character of Margaret (Gretchen) of Goethe’s Faust “who became the cliché of the submissive woman” (Lauterwein, 2007, p91). These two characters, as idealised spouses, can be traced therefore back to the Old and New Testaments, as Shulamite and Mary (Lauterwein, 2007, p91). Lauterwein extrapolates these characters to represent extensions of the Synagogue and the Church respectively(2007, p91). Historically the personified characters of “Synaogogue” and “Church” were depicted together as “conjoined twins”(Lauterwein, 2007, p92) in medieval religious art in such a way as to denounce Judaism and demonstrate the Church’s “moral superiority” (Lauterwein, 2007, p91). The Church was typically depicted as pious, gazing skyward and wearing a crown, whereas the Synagogue has no crown and a downcast gaze, in some cases tearing at her clothing (Lauterwein, 2007, p100). Lauterwein theorises that this dynamic can be “viewed as a kind of seismograph, recording the history of relations between Christians and Jews”(Lauterwein, 2007, p91). In this light it is possible to understand Celan’s use of these characters in trying to negotiate his post-Holocaust relationship to his country as a Jew as well as the new relationship of his country to all Jews. By extension we can understand Kiefer’s appropriation of these characters as a German non-Jew.
In Kiefer’s paintings he focuses on the final two lines (Lauterwein, 2007, p 0) of the Death Fugue “your golden hair Margarete/ your ashen hair Shulamith” (fig. 1). Although they are paired together here, Kiefer never allows the pair to appear together within a painting. They are instead each “haunted” by the absence of the other, since a painting entitled with either name will immediately evoke to German viewers memory of the poem and their missing partner (Lauterwein, 2007, p95). This raises the question of whether the works can be effective without the context of Celan or whether they are dependent on their context and that of the poem for their poignancy. It is only through this context that they are able to fulfil Kiefer’s political agenda of a challenge German society’s memory of the Holocaust. The hair of the characters is a main theme in the paintings, Margerete’s often represented by straw applied to the painting (Fig. 2), and Shulamith often with dark hair applied to the painting. He eventually abandons Margarete to devote his attention entirely to Shulamith, the final word of the poem, whom he puts through a series of transformations in the various paintings (Lauterwein, 2007, p95).
In Your Ashen Hair Shulamith, 1981 (fig. 3) the character of Shulamith has been personified as a nude woman. Lauterwein writes that the “symbol” of Shulamith “has been projected into a collective body- that of the poetic Jewish soul”(2007, p99), by which we can link the blood and wounds in the painting to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Lauterwein also acknowledges the problems within this painting, however, as the character has unquestionably been over-sexualised and “the first impression made by these portraits is erotic”(2007, p100). More than the issues of nudity or the idealised female form that Lauterwein speaks of (2007, p99), it is the obscuring of the face and sexualised pose that causes the figure to be objectified and dehumanised. While this significantly damages the effectiveness of the image, it maintains Shulamith’s position as a victim. Shulamith, 1990 (fig. 4), which shows only dark clumps of hair and ashes, evokes a sense of absence or death, is comparatively more effective in communicating the loss and trauma of the Holocaust. Here the character of Shulamith remains abstract and is therefore arguably more able to encompass the Jewish victims as a whole. However, this is reliant on contextual knowledge and not communicated by visual imagery as in the case of nude figure (fig. 3).
Lilith
Kiefer’s Lilith series began in the late 1980s and early 90s with the books Lilith and Lilith’s Daughters, and also some paintings that have distinct differences from the books. The paintings feature empty clothes, representing Lilith and her daughters, against the non-figurative backdrop, whereas in the books the background was often an aerial photograph depicting distinctly modern cityscape. This theme was retained for a series of paintings after 1995, featuring both painted and photographic modern cities often with a haunting dark figure hovering over them. The character of Lilith in these works is distinctly different from those of Shulamith, and this is in line with Lilith’s character in mythology. It is therefore necessary to analyse these myths.
The myths surrounding Lilith are complex as they metamorphosed over time, particularly after the 9th Century “Alphabet of Ben Sira” (Grenn, 2007, p37). In his analysis of the Lilith paintings, Arasse references commonly known myths, citing her as “a female demon who seduces men and attacks pregnant women and new-born babies”(2001, p284). In the “Alphabet of Ben Sira” which is the “most commonly-told version of the tale”(Grenn, 2007, p40), Lilith is made from the same earth as Adam and refuses to submit sexually on the grounds that they are equals. When Adam insists she flees to the Red Sea and God sends two angels after her, threatening to kill some of her children for every day she does not return. She refuses, sacrificing her children and saying that she has control over male infants until eight days and over females until twenty days after their birth. She eventually agrees not to harm any child wearing an amulet on which she sees her own name or likeness. According to some myths, Lilith even took vengeance by sacrificing the unborn and the infants of Adam and Eve (Roouseau, 2005, p96).
However, as Grenn writes (2007, p 0), older myths place Lilith as a spirit who helped women during childbirth, supported by artefacts such as a 7th Century BCE tablet on which a prayer is inscribed to be chanted by Assyrian women giving birth and on which Lilith appears as a “winged-sphinx”. Given this over-sight on the part of Arasse, it is impossible to be sure which version of the Lilith myths Kiefer would have worked from. Regardless, within a modern context of 20th century shifts in gender norms, Kiefer is more likely to make an interpretation of Lilith as a rebellious female character, “transforming the entirely negative demon of Jewish tradition into a darkly positive one”(Arasse, 2001, p292). Similarly to Shulamith, Kiefer often represents Lilith with dark hair attached to the painting. However, she is undoubtedly an empowered figure in all Kiefer’s related works, contrasting with the victim-like portrayal of Shulamith. In Barren Landscapes, one of Kiefer’s earliest books from 1969, photographic landscapes are shown with contraceptive coils glued onto them, which Arasse links to the later Lilith series, attributing the connection to the “Talmudic interpretation of Lilith as a demon preying on pregnant women and new-born babies”(2001, p291). Here Arasse makes somewhat of a leap from preventative birthcontrol to feticide or infanticide. If the connection between these works and Lilith is genuine, it is far more likely that Kiefer is using the symbolism of contraception to reference an ancient female character who took control of her own body, sexuality, and reproduction.
Given that Lilith is a character mainly attributed to Jewish mythology, and since the clothes used in some of the Lilith’s Children (fig. 6) works are sourced from concentration camps (New York Times, 1990), we can assume that the Lilith of Kiefer’s paintings is certainly a Jewish character. He is potentially referencing the character’s children as representing Jewish victims of the Holocaust. This would hold a strong reference to the mythology where God killed Lilith’s children as punishment for her disobedience. Although Lilith sacrificed her children for her freedom, she was also vengeful. Are we then to view the Kiefer’s version of Lilith as an avenger? The Lilith cityscapes as seen in fig. 5 show the ominous scene of a modern city with the floating figure of Lilith made from dark hair hovering over it and seeming to communicate a threat.
In short, Anselm Kiefer gives contrasting portrayals of the characters of Shulamith and Lilith in their separate but comparable series of works. While Lilith’s character had the potential of being drawn from myth, Shulamith’s was more open to development. Celan’s writing had used the name but never expanded on the character, and the Song of Songs refers simply to a beautiful love interest. Kiefer’s reasons for being drawn to Lilith lie in her own character and rebelliousness, whereas Shulamith began only as a reference to Celan’s poem and the relationship between Christians and Jews. As Kiefer’s expanded his works of Shulamith, he was able to direct the character towards his purpose. As she became a symbol of Jewish loss her character exuded submissive and victim-like characteristics: bleeding, sexually objectified, and holding references to death and mourning with hair and ashes. In conjunction with Lilith, we can correspond Shulamith’s representation of Jewish victims to that of Lilith’s children, and expand Shulamith to in this case be synonymous with Lilith’s children. Lilith by contrast is a powerful figure, imposing a threat on modern cities in revenge. The key difference between the characters is therefore displayed in the power dynamics within the paintings. When simplified, Shulamith is the victim, while Lilith seemingly has the role of her avenger.
Bibliography
- Lauterwein, A. (2007) Anselm Kiefer/ Paul Celan London: Thames & Hudson ltd
- Arasse, D. (2001) Anselm Kiefer 2014 Edition, London: Thames & Hudson ltd
- Grenn, D.J. (2007) Lilith’s Fire: Examining Original Sources of Power, Re-defining Sacred Texts as Transformative Theological Practice Los Angeles: SAGE Publications
- Rousseau, V. (2005) Eve and Lilith: Two Female Types of Procreation London: SAGE Publications
- Kimmelman, M. (1990) ‘Review/Art; Anselm Kiefer explores and confronts the past’ New York Times Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/11/arts/review-art-anselm-kiefer-explores-and-confronts-the-past.html (Accessed: 10/06/2015)
- Hamburger, M. (1972) Poems of Paul Celan, Translated by Michael Hamburger, New York: Persea Books, Inc
Appendix
Fig. 1
Death Fugue
by Paul Celan (1945)
Black milk of daybreak we drink it at sundown
we drink it at noon in the morning we drink it at night
we drink and we drink it
we dig a grave in the breezes there one lies unconfined
A man lives in the house he plays with the serpents he writes
he writes when dusk falls to Germany your golden hair Margarete
he writes it and steps out of doors and the stars are flashing he whistles his pack out
he whistles his Jews out in earth has them dig for a grave
he commands us strike up for the dance
Black milk of daybreak we drink you at night
we drink in the morning at noon we drink you at sundown
we drink and we drink you
A man lives in the house he plays with the serpents he writes
he writes when dusk falls to Germany your golden hair Margarete
your ashen hair Shulamith we dig a grave in the breezes there one lies unconfined
He calls out jab deeper into the earth you lot you others sing now and play
he grabs at the iron in his belt he waves it his eyes are blue
jab deeper you lot with your spades you others play on for the dance
Black milk of daybreak we drink you at night
we drink you at noon in the morning we drink you at sundown
we drink and we drink you
a man lives in the house your golden hair Margarete
your ashen hair Shulamith he plays with the serpents
He calls out more sweetly play death death is a master from Germany
he calls out more darkly now stroke your strings then as smoke you will rise into air
then a grave you will have in the there one lies unconfined
Black milk of daybreak we drink you at night
we drink you at noon death is a master from Germany
we drink you at sundown and in the morning we drink and we drink you
death is a master from Germany his eyes are blue
he strikes you with leaden bullets his aim is true
a man lives in the house your golden hair Margarete
he sets his pack on to us he grants us a grave in the air
he plays with serpents and daydreams death is a master from Germany
your golden hair Margarete
your ashen hair Shulamith
Fig. 2
Anselm Kiefer (1981) Margarette [oil, emulsion and straw on canvas] Available at: http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/kiefer/margarete.jpg (Accessed: 10/06/2015)
Fig. 3
Anselm Kiefer (1981) Your Ashen Hair Shulamith [oil, acrylic, and emulsion on canvas] Available at: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ResBoxfZ-H0/S7z7ilg-96I/AAAAAAAAAHo/v8AM-KCre7U/s1600/KieferDeinAshenes1981.jpg (Accessed: 10/06/2015)
Fig. 4
Anselm Kiefer (1990) Shulamith [Book made from soldered lead, hair and ashes] Available at: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ResBoxfZ-H0/S7z-kY59CxI/AAAAAAAAAIA/hRFz_nFhWlw/s1600/KieferSulamith3.jpg (Accessed: 10/06/2015)
Fig. 5
Anselm Kiefer (1987-1990) Lilith [oil, emulsion, shellac, plumb, poppy, hair, clay on canvas] Available at: http://www.arttattler.com/archivekiefer.html (Accessed: 10/06/2015)
Fig. 6
Anselm Kiefer (1990) Lilith’s Daughters [fabric, hair skin, snakeskin, lead on canvas] Available at: http://year12visualartssja.weebly.com/uploads/1/8/5/4/18545058/8854285.jpg?434 (Accessed: 10/06/2015)