Waiting in the Wings

If you’ve ever been backstage for a production, you know that it is an entirely different world than what one would find in the entrance and or house of an auditorium. The mood is chaotic yet organized, stressful yet soothing, and (most vividly for the performers) nerve-racking yet exciting. Truly, there is nothing else like it.

With that in mind, it is understandable as to why an artist like Edgar Degas spent countless hours in the dressing rooms and other backstage areas in order to capture these images on his canvases. Marcus Verhagen wrote of this in All the World’s Backstage where he described Degas’ intent for such subjects in his masterpieces. The use of the rise in popularity of stage performances during Degas’ time and Emile Zola’s story of a courtesan to depict Degas’ backstage interest emanates that everyone can see what happens on the stage – but very few get to witness what goes on behind the curtain, in the wings, and in the dressing and rehearsal rooms. Verhagen uses this truth of Degas’ paintings to show not only Degas’ enjoyment of backstage, but also the scenes painted to define what was deemed important to those backstage, be it the costumes and or the intensity of their focus. Through his paintings, Degas uncovers the truth of the times with the scenes of his dancers, yet leaves some of the works open to individual interpretation.

From Zola’s novel Nana, the backstage area called the coulisses is where Verhagen draws all of his reasoning for Degas to have had desire to paint scenes of dancers in the wings, onstage, and in rehearsal. Zola felt that the coulisses were a “place of demystification” (Verhagen 74). Because modern theatre and stage performances had gained popularity at the time, understanding and seeing the backstage happenings was new, different, and intriguing. No one usually got to see the coulisses, so it became a place to find new stories and scenes – a place of new realism in the art era of impressionism. Degas could use his talents to show reflections of backstage, yet his impressionistic strokes left much of the scenes to be left in the imagination of the viewer.

In this work, the dancer in the foreground appears more distinct than those stretching in the background. Her gaze is focused, on what we don’t know, but notice those dancers in the background. Yes, they just seem splotched in there to fill in space – but there is one dancer in the back who appears to be looking out of the painting into the eyes of the viewer. Her face isn’t distinguished, but one can get the impression that she is deep in thought (maybe about choreography). Also, the others in the background are stretching showing their focus on their work ethic as dancers.


Verhagen makes good points, but he has to use a novel by Zola to further what he wants to say. But along with this idea of impressionism giving a scene some details but having loose strokes to leave indistinct areas where the viewer could fill in his or her own ideas, the art blog “Arts and Mind” discussed Degas’ ability to do this. Objects in the background were painted with such quick and slack brush strokes that the objects are only left as impressions; therefore they don’t seem as important to the entirety of the painting. This leaves the viewer open to weave in more personal details. However, the blogger states that even in the foreground details are left missing with fuzzy strokes giving the viewer this same ability to imagine.


Degas’ impressionism in this painting of “Dancers in Pink” gives the viewer distinct dancers against a blurry background. But even their faces are a little blurry when given proper time to examine this painting. In keeping with the idea that this leaves us the possibility of filling in our own images with Degas’ works, perhaps we can put faces on the dancers and more detail into the background. One very important thing to notice about all of Degas’ pieces of dancers is that they seem intently focused on their work, be it technique in their movements or appeal of their costumes. This adds to the air of being backstage, drawing the viewer away from the idea of the subjects being staged models.

Degas is my favorite artist not only because I like impressionist art the most, but also because of his love of dancers as subjects. Leaving the faces and backgrounds less distinct, I feel like I can have a more personal connection with his works. Verhagen is correct too about backstage being so exciting. There is no wonder in my mind why Degas would paint such scenes – not many get to see it, and that’s a shame. Verhagen does however mention the possibility of Degas’ focus of these dancers as sexual desire, which I don’t necessarily agree with. Zola seems more accurate in this sense because being backstage was new and different, especially with the rise of theatre in Degas’ lifetime. It is ironic though how a blogger seems to be more credible in their analysis of Degas’ work than a scholarly article author…