The First Picture Show: Cinematic Aspects of Cave Art

Edward Wachtel

Leonardo, Vol. 26, No. 2. (1993), pp. 135-140.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0024-094X%281993%2926%3A2%3C135%3ATFPSCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-V

Leonardo is currently published by The MIT Press.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/mitpress.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academicjournals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.orgSat Aug 11 23:08:22 2007

G E N E R A L A R T I C L E I The First Picture Show: Cinematic Aspects of Cave Art

Edward Wachtel

ver a thousand generations ago, equipped 0 with brushes, pigments, engraving tools and lamps, our ancestors went deep into the earth to paint. In the past cen- tury, the results of their work have been uncovered in a num- ber of locations in Europe, Africa and Asia. Some of the most beautiful and best preserved works are located in the caves of southern France and northern Spain.

Most of us are familiar with these works from pictures and drawings. However, I believe that the photographs and sketched reproductions of cave paintings have distorted the nature of these works and hidden the experience that was intended by the ancient cave painters and shared by their culture. It is an experience that I will call-for lack of a more accurate metaphor-"cinematic."

In 1934, Lewis Mumford said that film-with its moving camera, its cuts and superimpositions-displays time and motion in a unique way. Additionally, he linked film's display of time and space to what he called "the emergent world-view" of the twentieth century [I]. In this essay, I borrow Mumford's idea of the cinematic in my approach to cave painting.

First, I will argue that the etchings and paintings on the walls of Lascaux and Fontde-Gaume, La Mouthe and Les Combarelles display a relationship to time and motion that is more cinematic than pictorial. Second, just as Mumford claimed that film represents the world view of our culture, I will attempt to read, from the painted caves, certain aspects of the world view of Paleolithic culture.

Edward Wachtel (researcher, educator), Fordham University. Department of Comm~micauons, Bronx, NY 10458, U.S.A. Received 12 December 1990.

TIME AND MOTION IN PAINTING From Paleolithic times to the pre- sent, all painters have been chal- lenged by a fundamental problem: how to express the four dimen- sions of experience on a two- dimensional surface. Most of us have considered this problem with regard to the third dimension- depth. Less often do we attend to the struggle to represent the fourth dimension-time. All human experience involves a tem- poral dimension. The things we experience change and move. They have duration. We change

A B S T R A C T

W h e n our Magdalenian ancestors painted and etched the walls of caves ~n southern France and northern Spain, they were, the author proposes, making images that were essentially clnemat~c. Thelr creations have generally been pre- sented as still images--etchings, draw- ings, paintings-predecessors to photography. However, the tools and techniques they used, including brushes and blowguns, the Irregular cave sur- faces and lamps fueled by animal fat, conspired to create works and viewing conditions that made images that appeared to move, changed color, dissolved, cut, appeared and disappear- ed. In short, they made cinematic images-precursors to film and telev~sion.

and move: we shift focus, we walk - L around objects, we rotate them. We experience the world in time.

Painters have dealt with time, motion and change in a number of ways. One method is to exclude time completely from the image. The technique is called linear perspective, and it has dominated Western painting from the Renaissance to modem times [Z]. In a perspective painting, the illusion of depth is created by asking the viewer to make certain assump- tions about the world. We are asked to view the scene with one eye from a fixed point in space. Of greater importance, we are asked to view it from a fixed instant in time. Only when we permit no movement in the scene we paint, no movement in the beholder's eye-in short, only when we

Fig. 1. (left) La Mouthe, painted etching of a hut (or an animal trap). By a moving, flickering light source, the colors of the hut change and the animals around it appear and disappear. The sketch (right) covers a larger area and shows spaghetti engravings over various animals [12].

0 1993 ISAST LEONARDO. Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 135-140 135

Fie. 2. Lascaux, the

remove time from the composition- can we create this type of fixed space and form in painting.

In the latter half of the nineteenth century, the Impressionists experiment- ed with the play of light upon the world, making a shimmering kaleido- scope out of fixed color and solid sub stance. They realized that, even from a fixed viewpoint, if one allows time to enter into vision, movement will blur outlines, light will dance and colors will change.

More radical steps were taken in the early years of this century. The cubists and futurists attempted to give our experience of time and motion a more complete expression in painting. One method of showing time is displayed in Marcel Duchamp's Nude Descending a Staircase No. 2. Duchamp himself has described his picture as "an organiza- tion of kinetic elements, an expression of time and space through the abstract presentation of motion" [3].

Purer forms of cubism, such as Picasso's Violin and Grapes, use a some- what different method. In this paint- ing, we see different views of the violin: the sound holes from the front, the scroll from a side view, and so on. Each form is represented from the angle

k a l Gallery. The caves are not architecture. Even unpainted surfaces seem to change and move in flickering lamp light [l3].

that best presents it. The time that is included here is the time it takes to see a violin from these viewpoints. That is, we must rotate the violin to see it from a front view, rotate it again to see a side view, etc. Our visual experience of a vio- lin-+~ of any object-always includes the time it takes to scan it, to rotate it, to move around it.

I have discussed a number of ways that Western artists have dealt with time and motion in their works. In Paleolithic times, other methods were used.

A JOURNEY THROUGH THE CAVES On the train from Paris to Les Eyzies- the "Capitol of Pre-history" according to its chamber of commerce-one ques- tion occupied my mind: why did prehis- toric people go deep into the dark, limestone intestines of the earth to paint and etch their finest works? The caves are inhospitable and dangerous, yet Magdalenian painters sought the darkest, least accessible places. Why?

The traditional explanation is that the caves were chosen for magic and ritual purposes. Access could be easily limited. Their secret and sacred character could remain untouched by the uninitiated

and the profane. While this explanation is plausible, it seemed inadequate.

This "magic-purpose" hypothesis could explain why the paintings were well hidden. However, it does not explain why the ancient artists felt obliged to do their work in cramped, barely accessible places that were lit by crude, flickering lamps. Cave painters were quite capable of creating their works on bark, wood, animal skins or stone. They could have painted under natural light-with all its apparent advantages-and carried their creations into the grottos. But they did not. I felt that these painters had chosen to work in the caves for a purpose and that their purpose had to do with the nature of the light source and the visual environment of the caves. They must have worked for some specific effect-an effect that I hoped would still be accessible to mod- em eyes.

The works of Sigfried Giedion had giv- en me a clue. Giedion had suggested that prehistoric humans had a unique vision of time and space. He spoke of these early humans as having a more flu- id eye than modem people have-an eye that had no need for a vertical and hori- zontal orientation; an eye free enough to find no conflict in images superimposed one upon the other; an eye that could find a horse's leg in a stalactite or a bison's hump in a rock protrusion [4].

When I arrived in Les Eyzies, I hoped that my vision would be adequate to experience the conspiracy of the unpre- dictable architecture of the caves, the painted surfaces and the trembling fire- light. However, my first experience was one of disappointment.

The first cave I explored was Les Combarelles. The works in this cave con- sist mainly of engravings rather than paintings. They begin about 300 yards from the entrance. At first, I was con- fused by what I saw. Under the electric lights installed in the cave, I had difficul- ty separating individual creatures from the webs of engraved lines (aptly referred to as "spaghetti" engravings) that were superimposed over them. Only when our guide traced the outlines and pointed out la tite, la bouche, 17x21, le vis- age, etc., could I begin to make sense of the etchings.

As we continued through the cave, my ability to differentiate improved. Nevertheless, I could not understand why the prehistoric artists chose to bury their works in a tangle of lines and other images. It was clear that they took care not to obliterate prior work. Yet, they

136 Wrrrlrte-1, The First Pictitre Show

could have used blank space elsewhere in the cave (there was no shortage of unused wall space) to set off one crea- ture from another, making each image more easily seen. I was to discover the magic and purpose of superimposition only when I visited the next cave on my itinerary.

La Mouthe was next. Because it is smaller than the major caves, its images fewer and less well preserved, La Mouthe has not received the same care and maintenance from the French authorities. The road to La Mouthe is poorly marked. The guide was not a uni- formed civil servant, but a farmer-M. L a p e y r ~ n whose land La Mouthe is located.

When I knocked at the door of his farmhouse, I was informed that M. Lapeyre was eating lunch. In a little while, he emerged from his house, carry ing a gas-fired lantern. As he led me down the dirt path to the cave entrance, I realized that La Mouthe, unlike most of the caves, has no electricity, no fixed lights. He would show me the images by the moving light of a lantern. When M. Lapeyre unlocked the door and lit his lamp, we began to see the etchings and paintings that, in 1902, confirmed the authenticity of cave art. More than 80 years later, I began to understand the purpose of the cave painters and the magic of their art.

UNDERGROUND CINEMA The most striking image is located deep in the cave. It is a roughly rectangular shape about 3 ft high. It is etched and painted in red, brown and black and is superimposed over spaghetti engravings (Fig. 1). The Abbe Breuil thought that this tectiform represented a hut. Other writers have considered it to be an ani- mal trap [5 ] . I am less concerned with what this image represents than with its behavior under the light.

M. Lapeyre finished his story and wanted to move on. I encouraged him to remain and to slowly swing his lantern back and forth a few feet from the cave wall. As he moved the light, I saw the col- ors of the tectiform begin to shift. When the lamp arced to the left, the blacks fad- ed, the browns became red and the red intensified. When the light moved to the right, the pattern reversed, creating a shifting color scheme.

Moreover, the engraved lines under and around the tectiform became ani- mated. Suddenly, the head of one crea- ture stood out clearly. It lived for a

second, then faded as another appeared. The spaghetti lines were no longer a confused two-dimensional pat- tern. Rather, they became a forest or a bramble patch that concealed and then revealed the animals within.

By firelight, a secret of the cave painters was exposed. In the space of a few moments, I saw cuts and dissolves, change and movement. Forms appeared and disappeared. Colors shifted and changed. In short, I was watching a movie.

The components of these effects are the irregular surfaces of the cave, a light source that moves and flickers, and a moving eye. The images were painted and etched under these circumstances so that they are visible from some view- points and not from others.

As Giedion has emphasized, the caves are not architecture (Fig. 2) [6]. The walls may curve gently or abruptly in every possible direction. High vaults alternate with low, barely accessible pas- sages. The spaces are never regular or predictable. Under a moving, flickering lamp, even the bare, irregular surfaces seem to come and go, to change and move (Fig. 3).

MODERN PARALLELS We can sometimes see this effect in car- pentered spaces, by the light of a fire- place or a candle. Yet, the regular and predictable surfaces of our rooms per- mit mature eyes to see the wall as stable and the light as moving. For children this is not always the case. For example, when my daughter was two or three, she began to have trouble sleeping. I would tuck her in, turn off the overhead light, and in a few moments she would begin to cry that there were "bees" in her room. I would go in, turn on the light and try to soothe what I assumed was a child with an active imagination. After about a week of this, I happened to

Fig. 3. Reproduction of a lamp used at i 1 Lascaux. (Le Musee t k! National de la Prehiitoire des

enter her room at night without turn- ing on the light. There on the ceiling were dancing light patterns caused by a streetlight shining through tree branch- es and diffracted by her window. Pulling the window shade put an end to the "bees."

When surfaces are irregular and unpredictable, and when the cave painter has intentionally used these sur- faces as part of the work, even the trained and restricted eyes of modem humans can be fooled and delighted under the proper conditions.

A contemporary painter, Richard Hambleton, has utilized many of the same elements to create works that have much in common with cave paint- ings. In the early 1980s, Hambleton combined the shadowy, irregular light of the urban night, the dark corners and doorways of New York City streets, and a can of black spray paint to create images that surprised and frightened. Hambleton called the pieces Nightlife (Fig. 4). To a pedestrian on a dark street, the figures seemed to appear suddenly. Out of the comer of a mov- ing eye, they seemed to jump or hide in doorways. At night the effect was delightfully scary. In the constant light of day (and in photographic reproduc- tion), the figures were merely rough sil- houettes [7].

Cave artists may have used a tech- nique that could be considered a pre- cursor to spray painting. It has been suggested that they used a hollow tube or bone to blow pigments onto the cave walls [8]. The softer, "de-focused" lines created by this technique assist the illu- sion of movement on the cave walls as well as on the urban walls spray-painted by Hambleton. (There is a further par- allel with the illusion of motion in the cinema. The individual frames of a film are blurred by movement. When they are projected, the blurred outlines are transformed into smooth motion.)

Eyzies.) The "projection bulb" of prehistory. The con- cave end was filled with animal fat. Either moss or fur was used as a wick.

W+rIitrl, The First Picture Show 137

Fig. 4. Richard Hambleton, detail of Nightlife on Houston Street, New York City, c. 1982. Hambleton spray- painted figures such as this one on walls and buildings throughout lower Manhattan in the early 1980s. He placed the figures so that urban ~ g h t light (e.g. moving car headlights, streetlights behind waving tree branches) played upon them. To a passing pedestrian, they seemed to jump, move and, in one case, climb the building on which it was painted.

Fig. 5. Peche Merle, clay drawing of a stag "hidden" under lines, with sketch [ 141. (Illustration by Nancy Ventwa)

UNDERSTANDING CAVE ART: SOME SPECULATIONS Viewing cave painting as cinema offers new answers to some of the problems that confront archaeologists, art histori- ans and other students of Paleolithic culture.

First, there is the problem of super- imposition. It has long been recognized that the superimposition of pictures was done with a certain care-rarely is an image destroyed by what was painted over it. Yet, the visual confusion that results from overpainting is not well explained. Why did cave painters regu- larly overpaint existing images, rather than use blank wall space? It has been suggested that certain places in the caves had magical properties and, con- sequently, generations of painters tried to use these sacred spaces.

It is more likely that the superimposi- tions themselves help to create the magic. To a moving eye under the appropriate conditions there is little superimposition. Rather, we see the cinematic magic of cuts and dissolves as one animal and then another appears. To the best of my knowl- edge, this effect is formally recognized in only one place.

In the main hall of Font-de-Gaume, near the lateral gallery, is a space that can be lit by three lights. The guide turned on the first, and voila, we saw a hind painted in black and red. When the second light was turned on, the hind dis appeared and was replaced by a black bison. When the lights were changed a third time, the bison was magically trans- formed into a mammoth [9].

In addition to superimposing distinct animals, cave painters regularly engraved curled and straight lines over their crea- tures (Fig. 5). When we view these images pictorially, it is hard to under- stand the reason. Often, the outline of the image is virtually obliterated by the confused engravings. However, under a moving, flickering lamp we can see the confused tangle of lines obscure, and then reveal, the creature.

In a number of caves, there are crea- tures engraved or painted with "extra" body parts. For example, in Pair-non- pair there is an animal-probably an ibex-with two heads (Fig. 6). In Les Combarelles there is a mammoth with two or perhaps three trunks (Fig. 7). Under appropriate conditions, we will not see multiple still images, but instead, a moving and changing image. The ibex will lift and drop its head; the mammoth will swing its trunk.

138 Wnrhlrl, The First Picture Show

Fig. 6. Pair-non-Pair, an ibex with two heads, with sketch. In flickering lamp light, the ibex will appear to shift from a grazing position (head down) to a vigilant stance (head up) [15]. (Illustration by Nancy Ventura)

These effects may help to explain how the caves were used by our Paleolithic ancestors. We should keep in mind that the cave painters were, first of all, hunters. In the wild, even the largest animals are difficult to see. Hidden only by a few twigs or a small bush, animals are often invisible until the flick of a tail or a small movement betrays their presence. The hunter's experience of discovering his prey is usually one of sudden surprise, as this tangled visual world abruptly reveals the outline of his quarry. In a sense, the superimposed spaghetti engravings help to create a visual effect that is simi-

lar to the hunter's experience. For example, compare Fig. 5 with Fig. 8.

I suggest, based on these observa- tions, that the caves may have been used for ritual hunts. Perhaps, as part of initiation rites, the young hunters were led through the caves by a leader who carried the lamp [lo]. In tribal societies, hunting tactics differ with the type of prey. The initiates may have been required to act out or speak out the appropriate actions as soon as they recognized an animal. Their ability to recognize and respond quickly to game in the wild could be "testedn and rewarded [ll]. This activity could have

reinforced the values of teamwork, quick response, etc.

TIME IN CAVE PAINTING I would like to offer one additional speculation that concerns the mind of the Paleolithic human. It is a standard archaeological practice to read from the contents of painted images the con- tents of the human mind. Simply put, we may assume, from the predomi- nance of painted animals in the caves, that prehistoric people were concerned with these creatures as sources of food, clothing and, sometimes, danger.

Fig. 7. Les Combarelles, a mammoth with two or three hunks, with sketch. Under the correct viewing conditions, the mammoth will swing its trunk [16]. (Nustration by Nancy Ventura)

Wnrhlrl, The First Picture Show 139

3. Trewin Copplestone, Modern Art Movemrnts (London: Spring Books. 1962) p. 33.

However, I believe more can be read from the structure of the paintings than from their contents.

Earlier in this article, I described how time and motion can be represent- ed in the structure of a painting. In cave painting, time is not so much we- sented as it is included in the viewing experience. The time it takes to move and see the images from different per- spectives and the time it takes for a lamp to move and flicker are required parts of the experience. This integra- tion of time into the viewing experi- ence is more radical than in any other form of painting. It approximates the cinematic experience.

If we keep in mind that time is not some external "thing," but, rather, a mental construct for understanding the world, then the form given to time in a painting may represent, in a sense, the mental "picture" of time that is com- mon to a culture.

For example, in perspective painting, time and space are completely separat- ed. Space is pictured as a threedimen- sional box and time becomes a single, continuous line that can be sliced into instants. This is the conception of space and time that has been common to the West since the Renaisance. It is the view of space and time that was codified by Isaac Newton in the seventeenth centu- ry. It represents the structure of the Western worldview that makes notions of causality and linear history sensible.

Fig. 8. Photograph of a deer hidden in tall grass. Compare with Fig. 5. A move- ment of its ear or tail would betray the deer's presence to a hunter.

In cave painting, no such separation of time and space exists. They appear inextricably connected. The structure of the Paleolithic worldview would not easily support ideas of cause and effect or notions of past, present and future as we think of them. Perhaps their ideas of existence were arranged in more mythic terms, with causes and effects more unified; with their past, present and future more compressed into a never-ceasing now.

Perhaps I should leave further specu- lation for another time rather than test the limits of the reader's patience. I have suggested an approach to cave painting that offers a useful perspective on the problems that confront students of Paleolithic art and culture. I have tried to show that Paleolithic artists had the tools of a painter but the eyes and mind of a cinematographer. Deep in the earth they made images that appeared to move, images that cut or dissolved into each other, images that could fade into and out of existence. In short, they made underground cinema.

References and Notes 1. Lewis Mumford, Trrhnirs and (.'ivilizntion (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1934) p. 342.

2. For related discussions of vision, space concep tion and perspective, see Edward Wachtel, "The Infli~ence of the Window on Western Art and Vision." Thr Sfmrfurist, No. 17/18, pp. 4-10 (1978) and Edward Wachtel. Technological Cubism: The Presentation of Space and Time in Molti Image." Et Cdrm 35, No. 4,376-.W2 (1978).

4. Sigfried Giedion, "Space Conception in Prehistoric Art," in E. Carpenter and M. McLuhan. eds., Explorations in Communiration (Boston: Beacon Press, 1960). See also Giedion's Thr Eternal h t : The Beginnings of Art (New York: Pantheon Books, 1962).

5. Henri Breuil, Four Hundred Cmlurirs of Cuve Art, M.* Boyle, trans. (Montignac, France: Center d'Etudes et d e Documentation Prehistoriques, 1952).

6. Giedion [4].

7. See Joseph Dolce, "Shadows: The Enigmatic Wall Paintings of Richard Hambleton," Daily Naus, section M. p. 1 (4 January 1983) for a more com- plete description of Hambleton's work. Other artists, both ancient and contemporary, have experimented with cinematic effects. For example, Yaacov Agam, a pioneer of the kinetic movement. often paints on corrugated surfaces to create works that present unique images as the viewer changes viewpoint. I recently came upon another, older example at Chichen Itza, a Mayan archaeological site in Mexico. The central temple, or rastillo, is designed so that, at sunset on equinoctial days, the play of light and shadow creates the appearance of a serpent's body wriggling down the northern stair- way until its body meets the reptilian head carved at the base of the stairs.

8. Research reported by Andre Leroi-Gourhan cast some doubt o n the "blow-gun" hypothesis. However, Michel Lorblanchet has recreated the spotted-horse panel at Peche Merle by blowing charcoal and red ochre through a leather screen. See Andre Leroi-Gourhan, The Dawn of European Art (Cambridge. England: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1982) p. 12; and Mario Ruspoli. Thr Cave of Lasmux: The Final Photopphs (New York: Harry Abrams, 1987) p. 170. For a report of Lorblan- chet's work, see his "Spitting Images: Replicating the Spotted Horses at Peche Merle," Arrharology (Nov./Dec. 1991) pp. 24-31. Whatever method the cave painters used, the illusion of motion is assisted by the soft lines.

9. For the identity of the third creature. 1 have had to rely on my memory rather than my notes. The third image may be incorrectly identified here.

10. Leroi-Gourhan claims that "practically all known footprints were made by young people." His findings support the thesis that the caves were used for initiation rites. See Ruspoli [8] p. 83.

11. Experienced hunters/shamans may also have dressed in animal skins as part of the fun, turning the initiation ceremony into a "mixed-media" event. In fact, a number of caves display images of half-man/half-animal creatures (such as "the sor- cerer" in Les Trois Freres), which may represent this function.

12. Reprinted from Henri Breuil. Four Hundrrd Yrrqrs of Cave Art (Montignac, France: Centre D'Etudes et de Documentation Prehistoriques, 1952). Every effort has been made to trace the copyright holders.

13. Reprinted from Fernand Windels, Thr h r a u x Cavr Paintings (London: Faber and Faber. 1949). Every effort has been made to trace the copyright holders.

14. Reprinted from S. Giedion, Thr Etrrnal Bi-sent: Thr Bqinningr of Art (New York: Pantheon Books, 1962).

15. Giedion [l4].

16. Giedion [l4].

140 Warlrfel, The First Picture Show