Throughout the quarter we have studied a number of different artistic styles and movements. This quarter also brought the largest variety and change between those movements. Starting with the realists and moving all the way up into the Abstract Expressionists, there were a number of radical and revolutionary changes happened to art and what is considered art. One artist that really helped jump start the Avant Garde movement was Edourad Manet. I very much enjoyed learning about Manet and his deliberate rejection of Academic and popular artistic values. His showing of Luncheon on the Grass caught a number of people off guard and was surrounded by controversy. The way that Manet embraced modernity and applied it to a new "modern nude" was his way of taking something common to to the Academy and presenting it in a way that they did no approve. He also chose to have his technique be much more painterly and not as attentive to perspective as Academic paintings. I also like how Manet himself continued to challenge himself as an artist throughout his career. In his later works like The Rue Mosnier With Flags you can see how he has changed and adopted some of the more radical painting techniques of the impressionists but also stays true to his Avant Garde roots and continues to push political and social messages in his art.
The second artist I really enjoyed learning about Gustave Caillebotte. Caillebotte's paintings are so gentle and visually engaging but also carry an element of something beneath the surface. He too very much embraced modern life and used it as much of the subject of his art. I like how he treats perspective, sometimes skewing the floor at dramatic angels to create a dynamic to his paintings, or by having strong angles like the bridge in Le Pont de l'Europe recede quickly into the distance. What really drew me to Caillebotte was learning a little more of his personal biography and what he went through. After learning how quickly close members of his family passed away in succession and what deep effects it had on him his art begins to reveal more. There was always a sub theme to his paintings, one of isolation and distance. It never really becomes the focus or distracts from the piece itself but like I mentioned before you pick up on something. Knowing how sad and alone Caillebotte felt and how he as an artist let those emotions subtly bleed into his art is impressive to me. None of his paintings are explicitly depressing or sad, just carry lingering emotion within them. To me, that is such a fine line to walk and one that Caillebotte walked very skillfully. And that, combined with his technical skill, is very impressive.
The third artist that stood out to me this quarter was Pablo Picasso. His name get thrown about in the conversation of art quite a bit but I learned some facts about him and his approach that really made me think and helped me understand him more as an artist. The first thing that shocked me about Picasso was to learn that he was Academically trained and to see some of his paintings done in that style. It really shed light on his true abilities as an artist and that all of his bizarre and radical paintings that he was known for came from choice and experimentation, not lack of technical skill. The second enlightenment I experienced in regards to Picasso was his idea of simultaneity. Basically Picasso attempted to paint things like faces as if the viewer was seeing them from two perspectives at once, which helps to explain the unique appearance to the way Picasso paints figures. This is interesting because it shows how far and experimental Picasso was in thinking about the craft of painting. To know that he has the ability to paint in a way we see the world but he wants to show us something in a way we could not experience in real life is incredible. He wants to take painting to a level only it can go.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Post #8 Late 20th Century Art
For today's post I have chosen to do my research on American artist Jackson Pollock and more specifically his piece titled Greyed Rainbow. This painting was created by Pollock in 1953 and is of his signature and radical painting style. He is known for his techniques of dripping, pouring, and freely flinging paint on his canvas. He also had a unique painting setup, where he would work with large scale canvas flat on the floor so the paint could fall on to it. Pollock would even have to step out onto his canvas to reach areas during the painting process. Greyed Rainbow measures 72 x 96 1/8 in. and, as the title implies, has a muted, grey scale color palate. Near the bottom half there are moments of yellow, blue and red that show through the grey majority. The painting is completely abstract and is only limited by the edges of the canvas. There is no illusionism to the piece, but one can get a sense of depth created by the overlapping and intertwining lines. The gestural quality of the sweeping lines come from the physical interaction between paint, Pollock and canvas. Pollock once said, " I want to express my feelings, not illustrate them", and express he does. There is such an energy and action communicated visually by the way that the lines move and form. Research into Pollock's painting process prove that what may appear to be chaos, chance or unconscious decision creating the forms of Greyed Rainbow, is not entirely the case. He had a very keen understanding of his materials and the paints he used, and how they behaved on the canvas. This knowledge of their interaction allowed him to paint as freely as he did and still have a good sense of what the result would be. Time magazine once described a Pollock painting as "chaotic", which led the artist to retort with "no chaos, dammit." Though his paintings were free of form, active and expressive, he did not want them deemed chaotic or random. He wanted to reinforce that there was indeed a process to his art. At a point in is career Pollock also got fed up with people searching for representational images in his artwork that were associated with or implied by titles. People approaching his art with these preconceived ideas lead Pollock to give up titling his paintings at all and he went to just numbering them.
Jackson Pollock was revolutionary in the art world. His techniques of "action painting" were original, unconventional, and exciting. He helped spearhead an art movement known as Abstract Expressionism and his influence and impact is immeasurable. Pollock was "also one of the first American painters to be recognized during his lifetime and after as a peer of 20th-century European masters of Modern Art" (Encyclopedia Britannica). I know for me, at first glance it can feel like anyone could fling paint onto a blank canvas and create something similar to a Pollock. Possible, but not probable. There is definitely something special to Jackson Pollock and his abilities. They way he can visualize what he wants but release such control over it. The more you look at one piece, the more you get sucked into the depth and simple complexity of it. The more you look at a collection of Pollocks, the more you can see the variety and change from piece to piece, all within the same signature style.
Image Location: http://bthumme.tripod.com/P5/abstract.jpg
Sources: http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/83642?search_id=1
http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/exhibitions/Modern/Greyed-Rainbow
http://www.moma.org/explore/conservation/pollock/interview1.html
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/468051/Jackson-Pollock
Jackson Pollock was revolutionary in the art world. His techniques of "action painting" were original, unconventional, and exciting. He helped spearhead an art movement known as Abstract Expressionism and his influence and impact is immeasurable. Pollock was "also one of the first American painters to be recognized during his lifetime and after as a peer of 20th-century European masters of Modern Art" (Encyclopedia Britannica). I know for me, at first glance it can feel like anyone could fling paint onto a blank canvas and create something similar to a Pollock. Possible, but not probable. There is definitely something special to Jackson Pollock and his abilities. They way he can visualize what he wants but release such control over it. The more you look at one piece, the more you get sucked into the depth and simple complexity of it. The more you look at a collection of Pollocks, the more you can see the variety and change from piece to piece, all within the same signature style.
Image Location: http://bthumme.tripod.com/P5/abstract.jpg
Sources: http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/83642?search_id=1
http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/exhibitions/Modern/Greyed-Rainbow
http://www.moma.org/explore/conservation/pollock/interview1.html
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/468051/Jackson-Pollock
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Post #7 The Effect of War on Art
The beginning of World War I in 1914 brought about change in thought about politics and society. The tension between nations boiled to the point of all out war and the world saw death and destruction on a scale and level that had never been seen before. All of this change, destruction and chaos also made its impact on art. The thoughts about what is art and how it is created were once again shifted in a radical way. The first being the Dada art movement, who wanted to challenge and critique art itself. The second movement, Surrealism, came later and was very interested in social, sexual and cultural revolution, as well as the subconscious and dreams. What both movements shared was a question and desire to challenge the artist's role in creating art.
When looking at pieces from the Dada art movement it would be easy to conclude that anything goes. The only "rule" might be to break all the rules that already exist. But art from the Dada movement is still contrived, making clear commentary about politics and society through art. The use of humor and meaninglessness in these pieces at such a time of war and turmoil is where Dada gets its hold. The ironies and conflicts between where the world stands and what is presented in Dada art makes it attention grabbing. One prominent Dada artist, Marcel Duchamp, challenged all things art, even to the core of what it means to be an artist. He went as far as to question whether it was required to touch, manipulate or create for one to consider themselves an artist. Duchamp would "create" his art by coming across ready made or found objects and submitting them as finished pieces with little or no alteration to them. One such piece is titled Fountain and is simply a urinal fountain with a name marked on it. This goes back to the earlier point of challenging the artist's role in creating art. Duchamp felt that as an artist he need not handle material to make art but could find his sculptures and was then responsible for presenting them as art. I personally think that Duchamp's ready made sculptures do exist as art. At the time he started to do these, no one had thought of art in this way. This change in thinking about art can contribute as much to art as a collection of physical pieces. You can see in history that Duchamp had a large influence on other artists using found objects within their own work such as photo montages and sculpture.
The Surrealist art movement came about at the end of the first world war and latched onto Marxist and Freudian influence. Marxist in its strive for social revolution and Freudian in its interest in sexuality, subconscious and dreams. Surrealist artists wanted to convey their dreams through paint on canvas. To do this, many pieces maintain elements or realism and recognizable imagery but then radically distort them from how they exist in real life. Painter Salvador Dali and his piece titled Persistence are famous examples of Surrealist art. In the painting we see clocks with true to life colors, sheen, and appearance but are distorted to look melting, dripping or floppy as well. Blending elements of what we see in real life and how they may exist in a dream space is what Surrealist art is about. Surrealists also challenged the artist's role in creating art as well. They are interested in taking away some of the subjective control of creating art and to have more of their subconscious and dream existence come through.
When looking at pieces from the Dada art movement it would be easy to conclude that anything goes. The only "rule" might be to break all the rules that already exist. But art from the Dada movement is still contrived, making clear commentary about politics and society through art. The use of humor and meaninglessness in these pieces at such a time of war and turmoil is where Dada gets its hold. The ironies and conflicts between where the world stands and what is presented in Dada art makes it attention grabbing. One prominent Dada artist, Marcel Duchamp, challenged all things art, even to the core of what it means to be an artist. He went as far as to question whether it was required to touch, manipulate or create for one to consider themselves an artist. Duchamp would "create" his art by coming across ready made or found objects and submitting them as finished pieces with little or no alteration to them. One such piece is titled Fountain and is simply a urinal fountain with a name marked on it. This goes back to the earlier point of challenging the artist's role in creating art. Duchamp felt that as an artist he need not handle material to make art but could find his sculptures and was then responsible for presenting them as art. I personally think that Duchamp's ready made sculptures do exist as art. At the time he started to do these, no one had thought of art in this way. This change in thinking about art can contribute as much to art as a collection of physical pieces. You can see in history that Duchamp had a large influence on other artists using found objects within their own work such as photo montages and sculpture.
The Surrealist art movement came about at the end of the first world war and latched onto Marxist and Freudian influence. Marxist in its strive for social revolution and Freudian in its interest in sexuality, subconscious and dreams. Surrealist artists wanted to convey their dreams through paint on canvas. To do this, many pieces maintain elements or realism and recognizable imagery but then radically distort them from how they exist in real life. Painter Salvador Dali and his piece titled Persistence are famous examples of Surrealist art. In the painting we see clocks with true to life colors, sheen, and appearance but are distorted to look melting, dripping or floppy as well. Blending elements of what we see in real life and how they may exist in a dream space is what Surrealist art is about. Surrealists also challenged the artist's role in creating art as well. They are interested in taking away some of the subjective control of creating art and to have more of their subconscious and dream existence come through.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Post #6 Gauguin and Primitivism
For today's blog I am going to examine a piece by painter Henri Matisse titled Blue Nude: Souvenir at Biskra. The subject of this painting is very direct, a nude woman with a blue skin tone, lounging in nature. This representation of such a nude makes this painting Avant-Garde. This is a deliberate move away from the depiction of traditional classic nudes that were upheld by the Academy of Art. This particular woman does not show the modesty about her body that we have seen in nudes of the past, and the erotic connections are apparent as well. There is little attention to realism or naturalism in Matisse's painting, both in the human proportion and anatomy but most obviously in his choices of color. He painted his woman blue. Instead he breaks the human body down into much simpler geometric shapes that still form a recognizable human figure. I would like to argue that this is Matisse's attempt at an even more modern nude. When looking at the modern nude depicted in Manet's Olympia, we see a woman shown in modern fashion and surroundings painted in modern, flattened technique. But there are still elements of proportions and realism, especially in use of color, that are present. What Matisse has done in his piece to further modernize his nude is paint her in a new radical technique and style that comes from this idea of Primitivism.
At its core we could say that this piece is primitive just for its separation from western culture and its call back to the past. A woman, totally nude, surrounded by nothing but nature is anything but a depiction of modern time. Primitivism is a simplification. It is a simplification of life as an artist, whose work often shows a simple life from the past, but most importantly it is a simplification of artistic style, technique and appearance. Looking at Blue Nude, the woman is created using simple curved shapes with heavy outline. There is no real attempt at muscle definition or skin folds or fine detail of any kind. Her facial expression is hard to read and even her hair has been reduced to a circle shape on top of her head. All that is shown is enough to communicate a human figure, and more specifically a woman figure. Matisse simplifies his use of color as well, using it to fill space and give the impression of plant life but little more. He does not seem interested in using color to create detail or illusions of light and space. The colors seem to merge more than blend when transitioning from one to the next, making them look more like large shapes of color than shapes seen in nature. He uses the same heavy outline in some places to show what should be seen as ferns or flowers. When seeing this piece as a whole however, all the liberties Mattise took with color, style and technique look intentional and deliberate. The way the woman spans the entire canvas, and the slight angle she is set at bring interest and draw the eye across the whole painting. Even with all of its simplicities, it is very engaging and interesting piece.
The last aspect of Primitivism I would like to mention in regards to this piece is the idea of women shown in nature and the connotations that are associated with them. There are primitive connections to women, especially nude, and the creation of life. Sexuality, fertility and the ability to create new life have been associated with the depiction of women forever. It is simply fact that it is exclusive to the female gender to be able to produce offspring. That particular fact and all the feelings connected to it are almost as primitive and primal as humans get. Depictions of women carry those associations and emit them one way or another, though the artist can subdue or amplify this effect. I would say Gauguin's Manao Tupapau or Manet's Olympia are much more sexually charged than Blue Nude, but Blue Nude is not sexuality free.
At its core we could say that this piece is primitive just for its separation from western culture and its call back to the past. A woman, totally nude, surrounded by nothing but nature is anything but a depiction of modern time. Primitivism is a simplification. It is a simplification of life as an artist, whose work often shows a simple life from the past, but most importantly it is a simplification of artistic style, technique and appearance. Looking at Blue Nude, the woman is created using simple curved shapes with heavy outline. There is no real attempt at muscle definition or skin folds or fine detail of any kind. Her facial expression is hard to read and even her hair has been reduced to a circle shape on top of her head. All that is shown is enough to communicate a human figure, and more specifically a woman figure. Matisse simplifies his use of color as well, using it to fill space and give the impression of plant life but little more. He does not seem interested in using color to create detail or illusions of light and space. The colors seem to merge more than blend when transitioning from one to the next, making them look more like large shapes of color than shapes seen in nature. He uses the same heavy outline in some places to show what should be seen as ferns or flowers. When seeing this piece as a whole however, all the liberties Mattise took with color, style and technique look intentional and deliberate. The way the woman spans the entire canvas, and the slight angle she is set at bring interest and draw the eye across the whole painting. Even with all of its simplicities, it is very engaging and interesting piece.
The last aspect of Primitivism I would like to mention in regards to this piece is the idea of women shown in nature and the connotations that are associated with them. There are primitive connections to women, especially nude, and the creation of life. Sexuality, fertility and the ability to create new life have been associated with the depiction of women forever. It is simply fact that it is exclusive to the female gender to be able to produce offspring. That particular fact and all the feelings connected to it are almost as primitive and primal as humans get. Depictions of women carry those associations and emit them one way or another, though the artist can subdue or amplify this effect. I would say Gauguin's Manao Tupapau or Manet's Olympia are much more sexually charged than Blue Nude, but Blue Nude is not sexuality free.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Post #5 Modernity and Masculinity in 19th Century France
Gustave Caillebott was a 19th century French painter of the post impressionist movement. Caillebott was very interested in the renovation and modernization of France, especially in the changes Haussmann was making, and the city is often the subject of his paintings. Scenes of city streets, modern bridges and updated buildings, populated by people of the modern time are seen all throughout Caillebott's work. He uses a looser and more painterly brush stroke than seen in academic painting but does not adapt the extreme of the impressionists. His plays with perspective, something he was criticized for, give his paintings a unique appearance stylistically, but also emit various emotions and feelings, often melancholy. His use of illusionism and creating depth in his paintings also separates him from what was popular with the impressionists. Caillebott will often have a strong man made receding element, such as a street, bridge or bannister that gives his work a realistic space.
When looking at a collection of paintings by Gustave Caillebott, there is a delicate balance maintained between celebration and criticism of the France that he depicts. It seems he favors the celebration slightly because he consistently returns to it as the subjects of his paintings and in those paintings it is the buildings and city structure that create the beauty and compositional interest. Even in Paris Street in Rainy Weather, the weather is bad, but it does not read as a critique. Instead as an emotion given to the city, with its still beautiful shiny stone street. It is with the modern society, the changes in people's behavior, that the side of criticism begins to come through. There is a talked about sub-theme to Caillebott's paintings, feelings and depictions of isolation. Looking through his work, you notice that when he depicts figures, rarely, if ever are they interacting with one another. Often he will have a central figure with his back to either the viewer or the other figures in the piece. Like in PontdeL'Europe-Geneva, the man is gazing off in the distance or the far right edge of the piece, back turned. In other pieces like Portraits à la campagne or the floor scrapers(side version), he puts groups of people in social situations, at close proximity, but clearly shows no eye contact or interaction. Just isolation and introversion. This could be a result of modern life distancing people from one another due to occupations, daily schedule or mass production and machinery. But could also be a reflection of Caillebott's own feelings of isolation and sadness.
It is the mixture of all of these feelings and emotions that give Caillebott's paintings their melancholy flavor, because the majority of his work is neither outright sad, nor overjoyed. I feel like he saw genuine beauty and inspiration in France but was also a very sad individual and saw changes in the modern life that he did not approve of. It makes his paintings very real in the sense that life is a mix of celebration and critique, beauty and sadness and credit to him as an artist that he can make all of those show through in some way.
When looking at a collection of paintings by Gustave Caillebott, there is a delicate balance maintained between celebration and criticism of the France that he depicts. It seems he favors the celebration slightly because he consistently returns to it as the subjects of his paintings and in those paintings it is the buildings and city structure that create the beauty and compositional interest. Even in Paris Street in Rainy Weather, the weather is bad, but it does not read as a critique. Instead as an emotion given to the city, with its still beautiful shiny stone street. It is with the modern society, the changes in people's behavior, that the side of criticism begins to come through. There is a talked about sub-theme to Caillebott's paintings, feelings and depictions of isolation. Looking through his work, you notice that when he depicts figures, rarely, if ever are they interacting with one another. Often he will have a central figure with his back to either the viewer or the other figures in the piece. Like in PontdeL'Europe-Geneva, the man is gazing off in the distance or the far right edge of the piece, back turned. In other pieces like Portraits à la campagne or the floor scrapers(side version), he puts groups of people in social situations, at close proximity, but clearly shows no eye contact or interaction. Just isolation and introversion. This could be a result of modern life distancing people from one another due to occupations, daily schedule or mass production and machinery. But could also be a reflection of Caillebott's own feelings of isolation and sadness.
It is the mixture of all of these feelings and emotions that give Caillebott's paintings their melancholy flavor, because the majority of his work is neither outright sad, nor overjoyed. I feel like he saw genuine beauty and inspiration in France but was also a very sad individual and saw changes in the modern life that he did not approve of. It makes his paintings very real in the sense that life is a mix of celebration and critique, beauty and sadness and credit to him as an artist that he can make all of those show through in some way.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Post #4 The Political Side of Impressionism
The French government declared June 30, 1878 a national holiday. The day was a celebration of peace and a marker of France's recovery from the Fanco-Prussian war. For others it was also a reminder of the violent and bloody Paris commune that followed. Artistically, the interest in this particular day is that two prominent artists painted the festivities as they saw them. Both Claude Monet and Edouard Manet created pieces of the same holiday but each with different perspective,style, subject and tone to them. As a viewer it is interesting to see what each artist chooses to incorporate, leave out or put emphasis on, knowing that they are depicting the same moment in time.
Looking at The Rue Montorgueil painted by Claude Monet, the first thing that jumps out to me is the gathering masses. Monet takes a vantage point high above the streets and we see the gathering of people in the street but more in your face is the gathering of French flags waving all throughout the painting. There is an energy to the piece, created by the swift brush strokes and the contrasting colors of the red, white and blue flags against the more earthy tones of the town and its people. Monet and his impressionist style of liberal paint application and loose, but sufficient detail help this effect. There is an uplifting, celebratory tone to the piece that comes from the energy of the paint but also from the subject that is shown being all things France. The number of flags that are being flown and the mobs of people filling the streets give the sense that there is large pride in France. That they people are proud of France, to be in France and are celebrating France's survival and cheering its future. This makes sense because Claude Monet is an impressionist artist and impressionism has been known as a "forgetful" art form. This is associated to all the chaos, war and pain that helped give rise to the impressionist movement, but the artists attempting to forget those times and not explicitly portray it in their artwork. Instead they strongly focus on the present, modern day, and look fondly toward the future. This particular painting is a great example of capturing that impressionist sentiment.
Edouard Manet painted his piece and titled it Rue Mosnier with Flags. Manet chooses a a lower to the street perspective for his painting and after looking at the one by Monet, a far less busy street as well. There are still a number of French flags waving all down the distance, but they appear much more subdued and less energetic. Instead, the eye is drawn to the foreground, to the man with his back to the viewer. It takes no more than a glance to see that the man has lost a leg and is using crutches to get around. While this is later in his career, and his style appears closer to those of the impressionists, Manet still maintains a political aspect to his Avant-Garde art. This man is a grim reminder of what came before this celebration. What people lost and sacrificed for France to embrace this holiday. Though I am not sure if it was intentional or if connected, the figures across the street appear very ghostlike and transparent, especially in comparison to the man near the buggy at the same distance. The figures appear to be a family, and may serve as another reminder of all those families that were lost, broken up and devastated throughout both the war and Commune. The way that the details get much looser and blurred in the distance, it is pretty clear that Manet puts his message and emphasis on what is happening in the foreground. Where Monet chooses to try and depict feeling and emotion to communicate through his work, Manet is much more direct and explicit about what he wants the viewer to recall.
Looking at The Rue Montorgueil painted by Claude Monet, the first thing that jumps out to me is the gathering masses. Monet takes a vantage point high above the streets and we see the gathering of people in the street but more in your face is the gathering of French flags waving all throughout the painting. There is an energy to the piece, created by the swift brush strokes and the contrasting colors of the red, white and blue flags against the more earthy tones of the town and its people. Monet and his impressionist style of liberal paint application and loose, but sufficient detail help this effect. There is an uplifting, celebratory tone to the piece that comes from the energy of the paint but also from the subject that is shown being all things France. The number of flags that are being flown and the mobs of people filling the streets give the sense that there is large pride in France. That they people are proud of France, to be in France and are celebrating France's survival and cheering its future. This makes sense because Claude Monet is an impressionist artist and impressionism has been known as a "forgetful" art form. This is associated to all the chaos, war and pain that helped give rise to the impressionist movement, but the artists attempting to forget those times and not explicitly portray it in their artwork. Instead they strongly focus on the present, modern day, and look fondly toward the future. This particular painting is a great example of capturing that impressionist sentiment.
Edouard Manet painted his piece and titled it Rue Mosnier with Flags. Manet chooses a a lower to the street perspective for his painting and after looking at the one by Monet, a far less busy street as well. There are still a number of French flags waving all down the distance, but they appear much more subdued and less energetic. Instead, the eye is drawn to the foreground, to the man with his back to the viewer. It takes no more than a glance to see that the man has lost a leg and is using crutches to get around. While this is later in his career, and his style appears closer to those of the impressionists, Manet still maintains a political aspect to his Avant-Garde art. This man is a grim reminder of what came before this celebration. What people lost and sacrificed for France to embrace this holiday. Though I am not sure if it was intentional or if connected, the figures across the street appear very ghostlike and transparent, especially in comparison to the man near the buggy at the same distance. The figures appear to be a family, and may serve as another reminder of all those families that were lost, broken up and devastated throughout both the war and Commune. The way that the details get much looser and blurred in the distance, it is pretty clear that Manet puts his message and emphasis on what is happening in the foreground. Where Monet chooses to try and depict feeling and emotion to communicate through his work, Manet is much more direct and explicit about what he wants the viewer to recall.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Formal Ananlysis: Impressionist Painting
The piece I have chosen for this formal analysis is titled On the Bank of the Seine, Bennecourt by French painter and father of Impressionist painting, Claude Monet. The overall feeling I get from this painting is a peaceful calm. The colors are very cool and subtle. Monet uses colors that you would see in nature if you were actually sitting next to the lady at the shore of the water. The way he employs the darker shades on the side of the water closest to the viewer and the lighter ones on the opposite side really gives the sense of light and where the sun is at. The slight change between the dark and light also clues the viewer into the sun being low, just rising in the morning. The early morning feeling created by the effects of the color choices also gives a sense of freshness as though the entire painting is waking up. A large part of impressionism was an extreme Realism where the artist attempts to capture a split second in time and Monet does a good job of capturing the appearance and the feelings of waking up to a new morning.
Impressionism is most famously known for its loose brush strokes and the very painterly appearance to the final painting. This all relates to the capture of that quick moment in time and painters painting as quickly as they can. On the Bank is a good example of impressionist style qualities. The way this painting changes depending on the distance the viewer sees it is incredible. From far away the eye blends the colors and smooths the stroke so the details really come out. Closer viewing does not make these details disappear but reveals how they were created. The brush strokes that make up the grass and trees next to the woman on the bank, when looked at close, look so inexact and like nothing more than paint on canvas. When viewed as a whole painting however, you see that those brown streaks of paint create highlights on the tree trunk and make the whole piece more lifelike and harmonious. If we were to see this painting on display, they way that the paint is left and built up in spots would leave a distinctive physical texture that the viewer could pick up on visually, adding to the illusion of naturalism. There are two areas where the strokes look like nothing more than paint regardless of the view and they are the light green patch directly behind the woman, and in the mountains behind the houses on the right. These areas do not detract from the overall piece however, and are probably the result of the fast pace that the painting was made.The woman's gaze is directed toward the water and really draws the viewer's eye there as well. It looks as though Monet intentionally smoothed up his brushstrokes and the blend of colors in the water. The water is not choppy and rough, it feels so peaceful and serene and because he chose to have the water be in the middle of his format, those calm feelings bleed into the whole painting.
The level of depth that Monet is able to achieve in this painting is impressive as well. There are very defined foreground, middle and background areas. Because painting outdoors was important to impressionist painters, being able to capture the depth and distance of what they were viewing really helps make the piece successful. He accomplishes this depth in a couple of different ways and by combining them all. The most effective one is the way he scales the figures and structures in the background compared to the woman in the very front. The size of the figures across the lake really help the viewer to understand how far it is to the other side of this lake and how big the buildings in the town are. Another way he helps add depth is through his use of detail. Though impressionist paintings are not particularly known for their high attention to detail, Monet gives enough to the clothing of the woman and structure of the boat in the foreground that the viewer can pick up on the dulling of detail in things like the figures and buildings in the distance. There re no recognizable clothing details on the people across the water and things like shingles do not appear on the roofs of the buildings. This is the way that details would fade and blur in the distance in real life, or as Monet was seeing it.
Impressionism is most famously known for its loose brush strokes and the very painterly appearance to the final painting. This all relates to the capture of that quick moment in time and painters painting as quickly as they can. On the Bank is a good example of impressionist style qualities. The way this painting changes depending on the distance the viewer sees it is incredible. From far away the eye blends the colors and smooths the stroke so the details really come out. Closer viewing does not make these details disappear but reveals how they were created. The brush strokes that make up the grass and trees next to the woman on the bank, when looked at close, look so inexact and like nothing more than paint on canvas. When viewed as a whole painting however, you see that those brown streaks of paint create highlights on the tree trunk and make the whole piece more lifelike and harmonious. If we were to see this painting on display, they way that the paint is left and built up in spots would leave a distinctive physical texture that the viewer could pick up on visually, adding to the illusion of naturalism. There are two areas where the strokes look like nothing more than paint regardless of the view and they are the light green patch directly behind the woman, and in the mountains behind the houses on the right. These areas do not detract from the overall piece however, and are probably the result of the fast pace that the painting was made.The woman's gaze is directed toward the water and really draws the viewer's eye there as well. It looks as though Monet intentionally smoothed up his brushstrokes and the blend of colors in the water. The water is not choppy and rough, it feels so peaceful and serene and because he chose to have the water be in the middle of his format, those calm feelings bleed into the whole painting.
The level of depth that Monet is able to achieve in this painting is impressive as well. There are very defined foreground, middle and background areas. Because painting outdoors was important to impressionist painters, being able to capture the depth and distance of what they were viewing really helps make the piece successful. He accomplishes this depth in a couple of different ways and by combining them all. The most effective one is the way he scales the figures and structures in the background compared to the woman in the very front. The size of the figures across the lake really help the viewer to understand how far it is to the other side of this lake and how big the buildings in the town are. Another way he helps add depth is through his use of detail. Though impressionist paintings are not particularly known for their high attention to detail, Monet gives enough to the clothing of the woman and structure of the boat in the foreground that the viewer can pick up on the dulling of detail in things like the figures and buildings in the distance. There re no recognizable clothing details on the people across the water and things like shingles do not appear on the roofs of the buildings. This is the way that details would fade and blur in the distance in real life, or as Monet was seeing it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)