The Meaning of El Greco’s Laocoôn
“-for to refuse to arrest meaning is finally to refuse God and his hypostases, reason, science, the law.” Roland Barthes’ Death of the Author, pg. 5
The story of Laocoon is depicted in various ancient writings with variations in detail, but the core story is the same: Laocoon is a Trojan priest, either of Apollo or Poseidon, who attempts to warn his people of the danger of the Greeks’ gift: a giant wooden horse. To stop him, either Athena or Apollo dispatch snakes, openly killing Laocoon and his sons. The horse is later welcomed into the city, hiding the Greek soldiers that burn Troy to the ground.
Laocoôn is El Greco’s only painting depicting a Classical subject, done late in his career and likely unfinished, as he died in 1614. The painting includes many of El Greco’s trademarks: pale, stretched out bodies; a stark contrast in color; and an overall sense of surrealism. These striking details were a large reason for El Greco’s unpopularity during his lifetime, his connection to the court of Philip II quickly severed after his second painting was rejected by the king himself.
El Greco’s Laocoôn defies the original story and continues to confuse critics who attempt to assign meaning to the painting. The city in the foreground isn’t ancient Troy, it’s Toledo at the time El Greco lived there. The horse, which is warmer and brighter than any other figure in the painting, appears to be a living creature rather than a wooden contraption. And yet it’s the two figures to the right, identities unknown, that fuel the most debate amongst art historians.
Critics tie their theorized meanings to the popular social issues of El Greco’s time, ranging from Laocoon as a stand-in for conservative Catholics during the Counter-Reformation to a representation of the dangers of breaking the priestly vow of chastity. These theories hinge on their identification of the figures: e.g. Paris and Helen, Apollo and Venus. But I believe there can be no certainty as to what El Greco intended.
And so I argue that it would be much more effective to apply Roland Barthes’ theory in Death of the Author. Though Barthes writes about writing and authorship, the principles are the same. “To give an Author to a text is to impose upon that text a stop clause.” By hunting for a set meaning in Laocoôn, critics are attempting to finish an unfinished work. They ignore striking details, such as the seemingly live horse descending upon Toledo, in favor of speculation based on factors outside of the painting. As El Greco liberated himself from the conventions of reality and focused on surrealism, we should liberate ourselves from attempting to find, in Barthes’ words, the “ultimate meaning” of Laocoôn.
