Exoticism in Art: Picasso and Gauguin

Primitivism’s Promise: Picasso, Gauguin, and the Allure of Difference. Examine the allure of non-Western cultures in Picasso’s and Gauguin’s work, questioning how their visions of vitality reflected or distorted the realities of Africa and Tahiti.

Pablo Picasso and Paul Gauguin were captivated by the allure of non-Western cultures, a fascination often labeled as “exoticism.” This essay explores what the “exotic” meant to these two artists—why it drew them in and how they wove it into their art to breathe vitality, vibrancy, and vividness into their work. Both artists imagined the exotic as a gateway to something raw and untamed, a stark contrast to the stifling norms of Western society. But what did this obsession reveal about their perspectives—and their limitations? By examining their approaches side by side, we can uncover shared threads of curiosity and ignorance about non-Western cultures, as well as distinct differences in how their visions unfolded and intersected with their anarchist leanings.

Exoticism, at its core, is the seduction of the “other”—a culture distinct from the artist’s own, sparking fascination with its aesthetics and a longing for difference. For Picasso and Gauguin, this difference offered an escape from the rigid academic traditions and colonial myths that dominated Western art. Shaped by a Eurocentric lens—filtered through mass media, travelers’ tales, and colonial rhetoric—they saw the exotic as both a rebellion and a fantasy. The term “exotic” itself traces back to 19th-century France’s imagining of the “Orient”—a construct that positioned the East as the West’s weaker, mysterious counterpart. But how much of their exoticism was genuine exploration, and how much was a projection of Western desires?

Picasso, who never set foot in Africa, absorbed its influence through artifacts, photographs, and Parisian encounters, crafting what could be called “armchair exoticism.” Gauguin, by contrast, immersed himself in Tahiti, seeking to live the myth he’d built in his mind. Both artists drew from a well of colonial stereotypes, yet their works—like Picasso’s Les Demoiselles d’Avignon (1907) and Gauguin’s The Spirit of the Dead Watching (1892)—reveal unique takes on this shared impulse. Picasso’s African-inspired forms erupted during his so-called “African Period” (1907–1909), sparked by encounters with masks and sculptures, while Gauguin’s Polynesian phase began with his 1891 arrival in Tahiti. Their art reflects not just a lust for the exotic but a critique—however flawed—of the Western world they sought to escape. Did their reliance on colonial myths ultimately undermine their revolutionary aims?

This essay unfolds in three parts. Chapter 1 dives into the “lure of the exotic,” exploring why Picasso and Gauguin were so enchanted by difference and how colonial narratives shaped their visions. Chapter 2 examines their fascination with sexually “exotic” women, questioning how these depictions reinforced or challenged European norms. Finally, Chapter 3 reflects on whether their work truly captured the vitality they sought—and whether it reflected the “true” nature of the cultures they portrayed.

---

Chapter 1: The Lure of the Exotic

The exotic held an irresistible pull for Picasso and Gauguin, a cycle where familiarity only deepened their craving for greater difference. The more they learned about non-Western cultures, the more these worlds infiltrated their canvases, offering a fresh language of expression amid Europe’s colonial sprawl. But what fueled this hunger? Was it a genuine appreciation, or a romanticized rebellion against their own society’s constraints?

For Gauguin, Tahiti was a dream made real—a place to shed the “artificial” trappings of French civilization. “Civilization is leaving me little by little,” he wrote soon after arriving in 1891. “I have all the pleasures of a free, animal, and human life. I escape into nature.” His The Spirit of the Dead Watching captures this plunge into the exotic: a nude Tahitian girl lies prone on a bed, her back to us, surrounded by lush, tropical hues of green, pink-violet, and orange. A spectral figure looms in the background, hinting at a mystical, “primitive” world. Yet Gauguin’s paradise was partly fiction. He relied heavily on traveler accounts—like those of Jacques-Antoine Moerenhout, whose detailed histories of Polynesia shaped his imagery. The painting’s temple and rising smoke evoke a lost Tahiti, one Gauguin never saw firsthand, as colonial forces had long erased such sacred sites. Why, then, did he cling to this myth? Did it serve his art—or his audience’s expectations?

Picasso, meanwhile, never left Europe, yet Africa pulsed through his work. His Les Demoiselles d’Avignon—five angular, mask-like women staring boldly at the viewer—marks his plunge into exoticism. Inspired by African sculptures he encountered at Paris’s Musée du Trocadéro in 1907, Picasso reimagined the female form with jagged lines and distorted faces, a radical break from Western ideals. Friends like Max Jacob recalled his obsession: “fascinated by the black idols, he had been working all night.” But Picasso famously dodged the African label, snapping, “L’art nègre? Connais pas!” (“African art? Don’t know it!”). Was this denial a rejection of influence—or a sly nod to his anarchist streak, using Africa to upend European norms without claiming its authenticity?

Both artists leaned on colonial fantasies peddled by the French press—illustrated papers like Le Petit Journal and L’Illustration spun tales of savagery and sensuality from Africa and Polynesia. For Picasso, postcards like Edmund Frontier’s “Femme Malinke” (1906)—showing a tribal woman with raised arms—directly fed into Les Demoiselles. He abstracted her curves and features into a cubist riddle, her lozenge-shaped eyes echoing African masks. Gauguin, too, drew from Moerenhout’s moon-goddess tales to craft The Spirit of the Dead Watching’s eerie backdrop. Yet neither artist fully grasped the cultures they borrowed from. Recent scholars like Natasha Staller argue that Picasso’s Africanism was less about Africa itself and more about “mediating other needs”—a tool to shatter modernity’s chains (Staller, 2001). Gauguin, per Sally Price, expanded Tahiti’s myth to “fulfill the expectations of his French audience” (Price, 2007). How much of their “exotic” was a mirror of Western prejudice?

Their anarchist leanings amplified this lure. Picasso’s friend Michel Leiris, in his 1930s essay “L’Oeil de l’ethnographe,” critiqued Europe’s “negrophilia” as a mix of fascination and fantasy, never fully untangling the real from the imagined. Picasso’s African forms—crude, aggressive—implicitly jabbed at colonialism’s hypocrisy, while Gauguin cast himself as both “savage” and “conqueror,” reflecting the era’s imperial debates. Both saw the exotic as a utopian escape—a “primitive socialism” lost to capitalism’s grind. But did their reliance on stereotypes dilute this critique, turning rebellion into a new form of domination?

---

Chapter 2: The Desire for a Sexually “Exotic” Culture

Picasso and Gauguin’s exoticism wasn’t just aesthetic—it was deeply sexual, entwining desire with difference. They fixated on non-Western women as embodiments of a raw, untamed allure, projecting fantasies of white masculinity onto bodies they saw as both enticing and submissive. But how did this fascination shape their art—and what tensions did it expose?

In Les Demoiselles d’Avignon, Picasso’s five prostitutes confront us with a primal intensity. Their fractured, mask-like faces and jagged poses—two with arms raised, echoing African carvings—radiate a sexual directness that’s both seductive and menacing. Art historian William Rubin calls them “mesmerizing, even terrifying,” a “transgressive confrontation” that jolts civilized norms (Rubin, 1994). Gauguin’s The Spirit of the Dead Watching offers a softer yet no less charged vision: Teha’amana, his young Tahitian muse, lies face-down, her nude body framed by tropical flowers, a ghostly figure watching over her. Gauguin wrote, “In this position, almost anything might make her look indecent, yet it is in this way I want her.” Both paintings position women as objects of male gaze, but their tones diverge—Picasso’s women dominate, Gauguin’s submit. What drove this contrast?

For Picasso, the sexually “exotic” was a weapon. His Demoiselles—inspired by brothel scenes and African masks—thrusts female power into a male viewer’s face, only to undercut it with their status as prostitutes. Scholar Leo Steinberg notes the “guilty thrill” of their exposure, a mix of desire and moral unease (Steinberg, 1972). Gauguin, too, craved the exotic woman’s allure, but his lens was gentler, almost possessive. In texts like Noa Noa, he described Tahitian women as savage yet yielding: “She asks to be raped… indifferent to any consideration.” The Spirit of the Dead Watching reflects this duality—Teha’amana’s pose invites violation, yet her wide-eyed fear hints at vulnerability. Did Gauguin romanticize submission to soothe his own insecurities, as feminist scholar Griselda Pollock suggests (Pollock, 1992)?

Both artists grappled with a crisis of masculinity. Picasso’s aggressive distortions—born of cubism’s break with tradition—asserted control over the “primitive” female, aligning with colonial tropes of white dominance. Gauguin, often seen as effeminate by peers, flipped the script: his “boyish” Teha’amana (noted by friend Charles Maurice) blurs gender lines, challenging European sexual norms. Contemporary scholar Hal Foster argues that such works “undercut the paradigm of sexuality upon which European masculinism depends” (Foster, 2004). Yet their reliance on stereotypes—Picasso’s grotesque masks, Gauguin’s prostitutes posing like Egyptian friezes—raises a question: Were they subverting power or reinforcing it?

Their paintings also toy with purity and perversion. Picasso’s Demoiselles offers no innocent maidens—its women are raw, transactional, their sexuality a blunt force. Gauguin, though, painted Tahitian women as both Virgins and whores—his mother as an “exotic Eve,” Teha’amana as a tropical Olympia. This duality mirrors what scholar Abigail Solomon-Godeau calls the “double bind” of exoticism: desire and dread entwined (Solomon-Godeau, 1991). Did their art liberate these women—or cage them in Western fantasies?