Comparative Study: Labor in Artwork

Char Dakhal by S.M. Sultan, Detroit Industry North Wall by Diego Rivera, The
Gleaners by Jean Francois Millet

IB Candidate Number: gcj265

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ http://healdsburgshed.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/gleaners1.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/

File:SM_Sultan_Char_Dakhal_(1976).jpg Rivera_detroit_industry_north.jpg
Introduction to Theme
For my comparative study, I chose to investigate artworks relating to the theme of Labor, and how they correspond to the
attributes of power, classism, and individual significance. I chose to analyze Sheikh Mohammed Sultan’s Char Dakhal on
part of its raw, unique depiction of the pride and strength that laborers can carry, which depicts from typical illustrations of
working class individuals, which tend to depict such a group of people in a more negative light. Furthermore, I found
Sultan’s works to be of interest to me as I have seen them hanging on the walls of Grandparents’ home since I was of a
rather young age. My grandparents notably had a personal relationship and history with the artist, from which I would hope
to find out more information about him and his work. The second work I selected for my study, The Gleaners, by Jean
Francois Millet, is one of, if not arguably, the most important artworks on the topic of the lifestyle and characterization of
laborers. Additionally, Millet’s oil painting has a well defined portrayal of laborers in context of giving importance to the
negative aspects of their being, and the harsher components of their character. Finally, I chose to include Diego Rivera’s
Detroit Industry, North Wall because of its distinctive composition and unique display of labor. The topic of the controversy
surrounding the underlying and driving Marxist concepts of the work was also intriguing, especially when considering the
fact that the piece was produced for and in the United States (“Diego Rivera Biography, Art, and Analysis of Works”). I
would aim to find similarities and differences between each of the three works that would allow an individual to gain a
greater understanding of the deeper meaning of each piece, and how they are both alike and dissimilar to one another.
 S.M. Sultan: Char Dakhal [Description]
Paint on Canvas, 1976
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SM_Sultan_Char_Dakhal_(1976).jpg
Sheik Mohammed Sultan was a Bangladeshi Contemporary artist that specialized in
painting. He was known to be well travelled, spending time in numerous countries in
Europe, Asia, and the Americas. It was characteristic of Sultan to illustrate rural
peoples and laborers in positive contexts, making it a point to emphasize their
energy, vibrancy, and vigor (“Sultan, SM”). Char Dakhal is a painting composed on
an almost square shaped canvas, with the vertical ends holding a slightly larger
expanse. The piece consists of lightly faded, nebulous tones of yellow, red, green,
brown, white, and black. The painting depicts a scene in what can be presumed to
be a prairie-like farmland, with a bulk of the painting consisting of long, yellow-green
grass that is curved in a manner that suggests a the presence of a breeze. In the
foreground, there stand a number of well built men carrying tools, weapons, farm
equipment, wheelbarrows, and similar entities. Aside from some headwear, hair
bands, and loose undergarments they are barely clothed. A line of such individuals
continues in an “S”-like shape, with each muscularly defined body appearing
smaller and more blurred in the distance. In the very back of the painting, one can
see the wavy grass fade into a number of trees and bushes, which mildly cover a
layer of yellow-brown clouds. Each of the figures is formed by a number of narrowly
curved lines, which places great emphasis on their outlines and detailed features,
adding to the realism of the work.
 S.M. Sultan: Char Dakhal [Analysis]
Char Dakhal places emphasis on certain aspects of the laborers it depicts that
conveys a sense of strength, unity, and dynamism. The manner by which each
individual is painted and essentially “stacked” upon the other creates a strong sense
of unification amongst the depicted workers. The snake-like form the line of workers
takes, as well as the direction towards which they are positioned, makes it almost
seem as if they exist as a single entity, perhaps suggesting that the whole is greater
than the sum of its individual parts; when the pieces come together, the result is
more significant than each of the individual components alone. The faded colors
used to depict both the nature-based and human-based constituents of the work too
produces a certain harmony between the people and the land, almost making it
seem as if each, similarly to the grass, has sprouted from the ground. Furthermore,
the heavily curved outlines of each worker generates an active and potent image,
with each individual carrying a unique sense of life and vitality. The lack of any
empty space gives the work an additional sense of coherence and solidarity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SM_Sultan_Char_Dakhal_(1976).jpg
 S.M. Sultan: Char Dakhal [Interpretation and Cultural Context]
It is typical of work by S.M. Sultan to illustrate peasants and
others of similar social class with exaggerated muscles and
strong figures that would lay upon one another (Sultan,
SM). Such a representation may parallel his well known
admiration for the “working man,” believing him to have a
certain superiority or advantage in terms of the strength
and physical proficiency he gains through base interaction
with their surroundings. The means by which humans seem
to fit into their environment like pieces of a puzzle that is
typical of Sultan’s work further promotes a concept of
symbiotic relationship between man and nature, which may
be seen to be exclusive to laborers on part of the kinetic
and traditional nature of their lifestyles. His endorsement of
a people as such may also stem from the fact that the
Bangladeshi Liberation War, a conflict that took place only
years prior to the production of this piece, had involved
Bangladeshi laborers and similar individuals taking up
significant roles on part of the smaller South Asian nation
(“Many Laborers Participated in Liberation War”). It should
also be noted that S.M. Sultan made it a point to avoid use
of modern technology to produce artwork, believing it to be
a foreign element that did not belong, further evidencing
such a sentiment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SM_Sultan_Char_Dakhal_(1976).jpg
http://www.departmag.com/uploads/source/issue_02/p61----03.jpg
 Jean Francois Millet: The Gleaners [Description]
http://healdsburgshed.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/gleaners1.jpg
Oil Paint on Canvas, 1875
Jean Francois Millet is a French artist of humble origins, being born
into a peasant family and eventually pursuing a career in art,
beginning as a portrait painter and later expanding into oil paint based
works associated with realism (“Jean Millet”). The Gleaners is an Oil
Painting that in its darkened foreground depicts three workers, all of
whom, based on the faded long skirts and feminine facial features, are
female laborers arduously searching a flat farmground for crop. They
each appear to be of a colored race. Two of the women are bent over,
so as to hide their faces, whereas the third woman has a straight
enough posture so as to allow a segment of her face can be seen,
carrying something of a grimace. The background of the painting
includes an abundance of bare, beige grass, haystacks, carts, and
what appear to be the tops of buildings. Each of the women have filthy
clothing, and appear fairly worn out. A certain wet glean on the hand
of one of the two women that are more obviously bent over suggests
that she is drenched in sweat. The entirety of the land seems to be
bare and empty, yet the women seem to be desperately struggling to
seek out even a shred of crop. In the very backdrop, one can see a
grey-white-blue blend that produces a fantastical cloud that appears to
oversee the scene.
 Jean Francois Millet: The Gleaners [Analysis]
The Gleaners is rich with contrast that works to emphasize a
certain exhaust of the figures of the laborers. Each of them are
darkly colored, with certain patches of black-brown, and other
shining glimmer and wet textures of sweat that evidence a filth
and tiredness that conveys feelings of debilitation and fatigue
to the viewer. The faces of two of the women are hidden by
their posture and shadows, decreasing their respective human
significance and perhaps creating a character for them similar
to that of a tool or an animal. All of the women, including the
third on the rightmost of the painting, carry a bent, broken
stance that produces an essence of weakness. The bland yet
clean beauty of the land and scenery upon which the dirty
laborers are juxtaposed further places emphasis on their
foulness. The vastness of the space of the land around the
women creates a sense of unimportance that diminishes the
significance of the laborers as people. The emptiness of the
land in the foreground combined with the tired, yet desperate http://healdsburgshed.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/gleaners1.jpg
appearances of the women in searching for crop emits a sense
of futility.
 Jean Francois Millet: The Gleaners [Interpretation and
Cultural Context]

https://www.wikiart.org/en/jean-francois-millet/the-angelus-1859? http://healdsburgshed.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/gleaners1.jpg
utm_source=returned&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=referral

A number of Jean Francois Millet’s artworks deal with the subject matter of peasants, or loosely skilled laborers, in a negative context that highlights the marginalization,
insignificance, and misery that they face on a daily basis. It is quite possible that Millet derived experiences from his time under peasant-like conditions and incorporated this
history into his works (“Jean Millet”). At the time of this work’s production, not long after the decline of French Feudalism, there seemed to be a class divide amongst the French
populace, in which it was likely extremely difficult for those of the lower brackets of society to move up; it is likely that the insignificance, impotence, and misery that is a
common element of Jean’s illustration of laborers has been used for the purpose of illustrating the peril of those who are on the lower end of the French Social System (“France
in the Long Nineteenth Century”). It is quite possible that the buildings and light colored sky in the distance represent the unattainable upper social classes. The immense
space between the workers and the background may be a symbol of the imaginal distance between a laborers and a higher ranked member of French Society.
Diego Rivera: Detroit Industry, North Wall [Description]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/Rivera_detroit_industry_north.jpg
Mural, 1932
Diego Rivera was a muralist of Mexican origin that was
known to incorporate the political and cultural conditions of
the world around him into his work (“Diego Rivera Biography,
Art, and Analysis of Works”). Detroit Industry, North Wall
consists of three rectangular segments stacked upon one
another. The bottom is the largest and most sophisticated,
illustrating crowds of multi colored laborers in a factory
working in unison. The workers don various colorful shirts,
blue overalls, and yellow hats and helmets. The men’s faces
seem to carry emotions of either neutrality or satisfaction.
They are surrounded by grey-blue tubes and machinery upon
which a number of other workers are coated, almost as if they
are acting as a single being. The middle layer, atop the
factory-like scene, illustrates a number of red and greyed
rocks encompassed in a lava-like wave towards its left half
and a dark black wave masking the outline of dark trees and
a light colored crystalline structures towards its right. The
topmost layers illustrates two well shaded human-like figures
lying at rest on both the left and right edges, with a mountain
counting sprouting fists finding foundation in the centre of the
work. In the very middle of the mountain, there is a grilled
chimney-like, framed rectangular structure.
 Diego Rivera: Detroit Industry, North Wall [Analysis]
The bottommost layer of Diego Rivera’s Detroit Industry,
North Wall, seems to be both the most detailed and the most
significant, with the workers scattered along the machinery in
a manner and pattern that almost suggests that they exist as
a layer of clothing atop the entity of the equipment, inducing
feelings of unity, collaboration, and agreement. They seem
to almost be parts of the machinery itself, producing a large
structure built upon the coalescence of smaller, yet still
significant figures. The lack of space in the bottom layer, as
well as the fact that the other two are stacked atop it,
suggest that the bottom layer of the factory and its workers
provide the foundation for the remainder of the work. The
mineral-like structures, combined with the wave-like lines in
the middle layer produce a natural, organic form, perhaps
signifying a reaction of some sort, or giving significance to
the innate characteristic of collaboration . The upward
orientation of the hands and humanoid figures of the topmost https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/Rivera_detroit_industry_north.jpg

layer may symbolize human potential, ability, and possibility.

 Diego Rivera: Detroit Industry, North Wall [Cultural Significance and Interpretation]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/
wikipedia/en/c/c1/
Rivera_detroit_industry_nort
h.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/
wikipedia/en/1/1e/
Rivera_detroit_industry_south.jpg
Diego Rivera’s murals, including Detroit Industry, North Wall and
Detroit Industry, South Wall illustrate complex concepts that question
political and cultural concepts. They are mentioned discussed together
given that they seem to have been essentially produced to be looked
at together. At the time, the scene of workers of different races working
so closely together was quite controversial, to the point that people
labelled the work to be almost blasphemous. Additionally, the nudity of
the humanoid figures on the top layer was thought by some to be
inherently pornographic (Gonyea, Don). Diego Rivera was a supporter
of Marxist theory and practice, that promotes a socialist approach to
life that involves heavily unified, equal, and uniform characteristics of
the population. It is quite possible that by illustrating individuals of
different races working in unison as such, seeming almost as if they
are acting as one single being or machine made up of smaller cells
and components, Rivera is speaking to the idea that in order for the
machine of “society” to function properly, the accord and derivative of
unity present in Marxism is essential. Such beliefs are what have led to
many individuals, even in recent times, reprimanding the work for its
supposed Marxist and Communist values (Hodges, Michael H.).
 Comparison and Contrast of Formal Qualities
S.M. Sultan - Char Dakhal Jean Francois Millet - The Diego Rivera - Detroit
(1976) Gleaners (1875) Industry, North Wall
(1932)
Both Char Dakhal and The Gleaners made use of faded light colors, dominantly yellow, Diego Rivera’s work makes use of bright,
Color/Value grey, and green, in order create a bland, yet solid, almost monochromatic, backdrop of distinct, and varied colors ir to create
Farmland upon which the lightly colored laborers work away. Such coloring conveys a something of a melting pot of different
sense of naturality; makes it seem as if each of the components depicted in the work is shades and tones, and in doing so, gives
shown in its most innate, pure form. In case of Char Dakhal, it the colors work to make it the work a more active sense of
seem as if the characteristics of strength, robustness, and might displayed in the work are movement, and a more dynamic, almost
intrinsic to class of laborers. Contrastingly in case of The Gleaners, such acts to make it machine-like appearance. Such does not
seem that pain, suffering, and maltreatment are, instead, the defining traits of laborers. make the labor look as natural as much as
it does make it appear mechanical.

All three works are two dimensional pieces that aim to illustrate laborers, peasants, and workers of similar social class in unique lights. They differ
Form/Shape in the sense that the workers in Char Dakhal have curved and well defined forms so as the emphasize a sense of strength and vigour. In The
Gleaners, the form of the workers can be found in the bent, fragmented posture of the workers, producing feelings of weakness and frailty. The
workers in Detroit Industry, North Wall, all bear straight, yet strained forms, which carry a connotation of purpose and activity. The use of form is
perhaps the aspect of each of the artworks that best communicates the differing means by which each of the artists wanted to depict labor.

Char Dakhal uses minimal space between
Space each of the individual figures depicted to
make it appear as if they have a certain
wholeness and thus greater significance
when together.
The figures in The Gleaners have a certain
space between and around them that makes
their entities appear miniscule insignificant,
depicting the weak, unimportant societal
status of laborers according to Millet.
The components, especially in the layer including
the workers in Detroit Industry, North Wall have
minimal space between themselves, so as to make it
seem as if the entire work depicts a single massive
structure that operates with greater significance that
its individual parts.

The laborers and workers in Char Dakhal fit
Unity/Harmony into each other’s forms with ease, and also
coalesce with their natural surroundings,
allowing them to attain a certain importance
as a single being.
There is a lack of unity amongst the figures
present in The Gleaners created by the
disagreement in their positioning that
produces a discord that establishes a sense
of dissonance.
The manner by which each of the
components, workers, or units of machinery
come together and fall into one another
establishes a strong sense of significance and
strength for the combined structure.
 Comparison of Conceptual and Cultural Significance
Similarities
●  All three artworks aim to illustrate laborers, or perhaps the working
class in general, with connection to specific contexts based on the
personal history of the artist.
●  Each of the works provides the audience with a distinctive
perspective on labor based on differences and characteristics of
each respective cultural context.
●  Both Char Dakhal and Detroit Industry, North Wall endorse the
working class of laborers, promoting their lifestyle by offering the
audience a positive depiction of the potential results of collaboration
and effort amongst a group of people as such; both works imply that
benefit arise given the members of the working class collaborate
and work with each other.
●  Both Char Dakhal and The Gleaners illustrate laborers working in
distinctly rural environments. They do so, however, to achieve
distinctly differing outcomes. Sultan’s work seems to aim to show
the strength and vigor that he attributes the a class of people as
such, perhaps characteristics earned or garnered on the basis of a
hardworking, dedicated lifestyle. Contrastingly, Millet instead
appears to choose to offer a censure of such a lifestyle, depicting it
by placing emphasis on the exhaust, misery, and perhaps even the
oppression experienced by laborers at his time. The manner by
which these two depictions of similar concepts and entities achieve
differing results is evidence of the unique, yet differing cultural
contexts in which they were produced, as well as the degree of their
influence.
Differences
●  The Gleaners depicts the weakness and frailness of laborers, Illustrating the
workers as isolated, poorly postured individuals, whereas Detroit Industry,
North Wall and Char Dakhal portray a grouped strength of the workers by
depicting the laborers acting almost as if they were components of a larger
cohesive unit.
●  The cultural contexts that influence the works differ from one another
significantly. For instance, in context of The Gleaners, Millet’s time was not
long after the decline of Feudalism, and hence it can be considered very
possible that the some aspects of Feudalism, especially those that involve
the oppression and mistreatment of laborers, had likely remained, and
perhaps influenced Millet to depict the horrors of such practices in his
painting (“France in the Long Nineteenth Century”). Such may be the
reasoning behind the gloomy, sombre characteristics of Millet’s illustration
of laborers. Contrastingly, at the time of Char Dakhal's creation,
Bangladesh, the mother nation of SM Sultan, had very recently won its
independence in the 1971 war of liberation (“Many Laborers Participated in
Liberation War”). It is a common sentiment amongst the populace that the
working class was a driving force behind the Bangladeshi victory, and
hence it can be inferred that such was the influence that drew SM Sultan to
produce a work that depicts the strength and significance of laborers in
collaboration. Finally, Detroit Industry, North Wall, was produced by Diego
Rivera, a notable avid Marxist and supporter of communist policy at the time
(“Diego Rivera Biography, Art, and Analysis of Works”). Thus, it makes
sense that Rivera would want to depict labor as a strong, powerful, almost
mechanical combination and coalescence of effort between any different
individuals, given his propensity towards a system that is considered by
many to promote itself on the basis of giving power to the people as a single
cohesive unit, as opposed to as individuals.
Comparison of Conceptual and Cultural Significance (continued)
Each of the aforementioned pieces makes reference to the same topic; Labor. The discussion of a subject as such brings about a multitude of areas of
discussion, ranging from critiques of the mistreatment of manual laborers according to an almost feudal system of classism, to praise of the vigor and
discipline associated with such workers. Sultan’s Char Dakhal depicted its laborers with large, bulky, rounded forms, in order to convey to the viewer a
sense of robustness. At the same time, Sultan also oriented each of his laborers in a manner that utilized direction in order to make it appear as if all
the workers were parts of a single being or force. Furthermore, his use of the organic colors of faded yellow and green produced something of an
illusion of monochromatism that made it seem that the earlier mentioned characteristics of power and strength were natural for laborers. Such also
made it seem that the workers were perhaps even symbiotic with their environment. The likely reasoning behind Sultan’s portrayal of workers in such a
manner would be the important role of such individuals during Bangladesh’s war of liberation, which took place only a few years prior to the date of this
piece’s creation (“Many Laborers Participated in Liberation War”). Jean Francois Millet utilized techniques to those of Sultan in The Gleaners in order
do illustrate his laborers in an entirely contrasting manner. He positioned his laborers so as to have broken, tired forms, and made use of open space
around his workers to add to a certain sense of insignificance. The ambiance of his painting was one of great misery and sorrow; such is likely what
Millet had intended to convey to his audience given his background. Jean, when growing up was raised in a farming family and exposed to a France
that seemed to be only recently parting ways with the system of Feudalism, a construct that was notorious for its oppression of the lower ranked
working classes (“Jean Millet”. Finally, Diego Rivera’s Detroit Industry, North Wall, similarly to Sultan’s work, made use of a stacked, fitted orientation of
workers, that made them appear to each be pieces of a whole, almost like parts of an assembly line, or the wheels of a train. It also contained a number
of hands with presumably symbolic significance, perhaps of human utility and ability. Such could be the case given Rivera’s endorsement of
Communism and Marxism, both being systems that promote the concept of reaping benefit from labor and work as absolute equals (“The Communist
Manifesto by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels). An exploration as such clearly demonstrates the many ways that artworks can be extremely similar in
certain aspects, yet take entirely different approaches to others, whether they be formal or conceptual qualities.