The painting, “A Clinical Lesson at the Salpêtrière”,

 is an interesting art piece created by Andre Bouillet. The art depicts a room full of post-graduate students and before them, giving a lecture, is Charcot a neurologist. On the left side of Charcot is a woman presumed to be one of his patients, in what seems to be an unconscious state. A nurse is in a motion suggesting she is going to help the patient, as another young male holds the patient up. There are a few things that make me inquisitive and bring forth many emotions from viewing the painting. Initially, I did not know what to think about the art, the longer I looked at and analyzed it the more feelings arose about the details; the painting evoked emotions of confusion, anger, disturbance, and interest. Many aspects of the painting were confusing, one of the main reasons is because of the position of the woman in distress. The patient is thrown back in the arms of a young male while everyone else seems to be calm and casual about the situation, this confuses me in terms of the desensitization that these men have towards seeing something like this. The nurse seems as if she is going to help and looks to be the only one that is concerned for the well-being of the woman due to the worried facial expression. The position of the woman is also confusing and interests me because if she was unconscious, as she appears to be, why would her arm be flexed upward? If someone is unconscious they would not be able to flex their arm, their body would be completely limp. Another, reason why I am confused is why there is a stretcher/bed and they don’t lay the woman down to perform the demonstration, it is clear she is unable to stand on her own. The painting evoked feelings of interest because it made me wonder why the woman looked so faint. The woman’s arm, as mentioned previously, is flexed upward so she still had some sort of consciousness and wasn’t fully helpless. This still inflicts an uncomfortable feeling as well as interest onto me as a viewer due to not knowing what state of consciousness the patient is in. Another, question that arose was why the men in the room were so calm as if they have no concern for the patient, sure she is being used as an example, but all of the men have a straight face of inquiry rather than concern. It intrigues me to know more about why these men were so desensitized to seeing a woman in this helpless state. Lastly, the piece evokes a feeling of interest in me as a viewer due to the coincidence of the the painting on the wall, the patient is in a similar position; both of their backs are arched, does this have any significance? Another, feeling I developed the longer I viewed this art was disturbance due to Charcot and all of the other men in the room just viewing the female patient in what seems to be an unconscious state and carrying on with the lecture as if nothing is happening. The lady is in a state of hysteria and doesn’t seem like she is being tended to too well. She seems to be there only as a demonstration, if someone is in distress or in a helpless state as she is she should be laying down and resting until she is in her right mind. This part of the painting makes me feel disturbed primarily because the woman depicted I feel is being neglected and not cared for. The woman isn’t seen as a concern to anyone other than the nurse that is attempting to help her. The painting just seems to have her there as an example to help demonstrate something to the post-grads. It is disturbing to see a single woman in such a vulnerable state in front of a group of men, the woman is basically helpless in a room of strangers. The painting also causes feelings of anger in me not only because of the negligence of concern but the fact that there are no women in the lecture room other than the woman and the nurse. The painting captures that it was a mainly patriarchal society and men were the main ones who were able to be scholars and obtain an education, while women stayed home and looked after the house. The only women you see in the photo are the nurse and the patient and neither are acknowledged by any of the men. I can come to this conclusion because, Charcot has his back turned towards the lady in distress and nobody acknowledges that the nurse is there to help. Neither, of the women depicted in the picture seem to hold importance in the room just to serve their purpose. The lady to serve the purpose of demonstration and the nurse to come help the lady if she becomes ill. Not knowing more context of what was going on in the painting, not knowing the purpose and meaning behind this painting is frustrating. Possibly, knowing more of what is going on, why the woman is how she is, and why no one is reacting All in its entirety, the painting, “A Clinical Lesson at the

 Salpêtrière”, is an

 interesting oil painting that

 encapsulates the lecture on treating hysteria. Many aspects of the painting make me wonder why certain details, like the painting on the left side, were added. The painting evoked emotions of confusion, anger, disturbance, and interest in me the longer I viewed it. At first glance, I did not know what to think about the piece, but when having to write about it, describe it, and how I feel about it the piece made me realize much more.