Reply to comment

When I saw this image I thought of Henry James's "Real Thing". 

In this case, the real thing, the pear, is not the most aesthetically pleasing, just as the Monarchs. It is true, that at first, the real thing my seem to be the best. Like the pear, the Monarchs were the real thing. They had not only the appearance of upper society, but were of the class those depicted were of. But why did they not work? Why is that an imitation can be better than the thing it is imitating?

"She was the real thing, but always the same thing?"

Like the pear which is always green, Mrs. Monarch was always a lady. She couldn't be dressed up to be anything else; she was static. It seems, that in our lives, as well as the need of the artists, we like variation, real or not. There is something that comes with variation, an element of surprise, that keeps things interesting or entertaining. The same old thing, time after time, is boring, and after a while, no matter how fond of it we have grown, it must be replaced with either something newer or better.

In this case, the real thing could not substitute the illusions that come with a fake. If it is real, there is no room to imagine, no room for artistic license. And what fun is that?