Posted on 05/25/2005 6:27:04 AM PDT by Republicanprofessor
Well, now that exams are over, grades are in, I’d like to bring some Art Appreciation ideas to Free Republic. Unfortunately, as artists have become more and more abstract, it really does take some study and/or education to understand what their ideas are. One doesn’t always need a snotty PhD art historian to do so, however. Once a person learns how to look at artworks, one can make one’s own decisions about form and content. (One can't just "appreciate" the blue in a painting to really understand what the painting is about.)
Form and content: that’s what I emphasize in all my classes. What is the artist trying to say and what forms (colors, lines, shapes, etc.) does he use to convey that message? Another fun thing about abstraction is that different people can have different interpretations, that the pieces can work on different levels. I’m hoping we can have some fun discussions here on FR about these works. (I didn’t “get” all this stuff right away; I’ve been studying it for decades.)
So, here goes.
The camera was invented in 1839. While I am not going to deal with the history of photography, what’s important is that at this point artists are freed to go beyond realism. The camera can take normal portraits and all kinds of realistic images. The artists can begin to explore abstraction.
In the late nineteenth century, Maurice Denis said this “A picture--before it is a a war horse, a female nude, or some anecdote, is essentially a flat surface covered with colors in a particular order.” Thus the artist is now free to do what he wants on the painting. Whistler won a court battle for this at the end of the nineteenth century.
So let’s begin with Eduoard Manet (1832-1883) Here is his Olympia 1863 in contrast to the older (more realistic) image of Titian’s Venus of Urbino from the early sixteenth century.
Can you see the differences between these? What has Manet done to update Titian? He’s made the lady flatter and bolder; she is definitely a prostitute, and a rather successful one at that (judging by the flowers from an admirer).
Manet is a part of the movement called Realism from about 1860-75 or so. This includes Courbet, but I’m going to spare you his more socialist works. This does not mean that the works look “realistic,” but that they are exploring a new, more modern and flattened style of realism. What is real in this world? That question is discussed in this famous work by Manet, Dejeuner sur l’Herbe (Luncheon on the Grass) which is another reworking of another Venetian Renaissance work, this time by Giorgione Pastoral Symphony.
Manet Dejeuner and Giorgione's Pastoral Symphony
Notice that, in the earlier painting, these ladies are not prostitutes. Notice also, in Giorgione’s work on the right, that those men are not even paying attention to these ladies. That’s because the women are muses. The large, golden size is inspiring to the men as they compose music; one woman dips into the well of inspiration, while the other plays a flute-like instrument. This is also one of the first luscious landscapes, with a beautiful golden sky typical of artists from Venice.
Manet’s work has often bothered me. Why the larger, dressed woman who is bathing in the background? She actually completes a compositional triangle that has been seen frequently in art history. The other woman is blatantly looking at you, and is not looking slyly to the side as in Giorgione’s nudes. She is also not dressed, in contrast to the dressed woman who is bathing. And again the men are not looking at her. Why? One idea that I subscribe to is that the men (who are artists themselves) are discussing how to portray a nude. And one says he would paint her flatly, as if in real light, and not with the veiled allusions of the past. He would paint her directly and “realistically,” and voila, there she is. Manet is also saying that he can do whatever he wants in a painting. That means he can play with our heads, just like he does here and at the Bar at the Folies-Bergere.
Now I want to end by looking at Winslow Homer (1836-1910) our great American painter from the end of the nineteenth century and a contemporary of Manet. Manet has a tremendous world-wide reputation, but Homer is seen more regionally. But what do you think? Who is better?
Homer’s The Gale and Fog Warning
Perhaps Homer just appeals to me because I’m a New Englander, and I love the ocean and think he captures that life and death struggle of the ocean very well. I also like the way the “stories” of his paintings are open-ended. Will her husband return from the sea? Will the fisherman make it back to his boat?
These works will always move me more than Manet. And both men have a wonderful way with the brush. Things look nicely detailed from a distance, but up close you see just a sweep of a brush here and there. That brushwork, what we call painterly, is even more important in Impressionism and thereafter.
A larger question would be: Can we see the beginning of European decadence and decline in their choice of subject matter? One notices that the American artists of the same period do not limit themselves to "nekkid ladies" and seldom do they seek to shock their audience.
I teach Art and Music Appreciation at a local technical college. My first lecture is a paraphrase of the federal jurist's comments about pornography...you can't really define good art but you know it when you see it. I send my students to visit local galleries and art exhibits and write about what piece or pieces they liked. I have had many students who had never seriously visited an art gallery before come back and write how moved they were by a ceratin piece and were surprised how much they enjoyed seeing serious art for the first time.
Maurice Denis said this “A picture--before it is a a war horse, a female nude, or some anecdote, is essentially a flat surface covered with colors in a particular order.”Does the word "flat" have different meanings. I understand the first use of the word ("essentially a flat surface"), but I'm not sure I follow its usage through the rest of it.He’s made the lady flatter and bolder
more modern and flattened style of realism
And one says he would paint her flatly, as if in real light,
Other than the obvious, what does "flat" mean?
You might indicate that. However, at one time beginning hundreds of years earlier the artists thought there was a beauty to painting nudes. That did not go out of style. However, with these more modern day paintings of nudes in the park with fully clothed men, you might have a point.
Excellent post, could I be put on your ping list?
Personally, I like the older, more realistic style better. Particularly in the Titian example. It seems to me that the more realistic the viewer's overall impression is, the greater the artist's skill. I.e., Titian exhibits more artistic skill than Manet, Manet exhibits more skill than Van Gogh, Van Gogh exhibits more than Picasso, Picasso exhibits more than Jackson Pollack.
Caveat: I am basing this on my impressions of their works most familiar to me; it's entirely possible, for instance that Picasso had an artistic ability greater than any of the others, but (IMO) did not employ it much in his more famous pieces.
Also note that by 'realistic' I don't mean to disparage surreal works like Magritte's, just that whatever content there is looks better with realistic textures, shadows, perspective, etc.
Not sure about the pornographic issue.
Well, this may not be the "great discussion" you're looking for, but I'll say, "Art is cool!" :)
My Grandpa had "Fog Warning" on his wall for decades. He also liked Andrew Wyeth, and I inherited his print of "Groundhog Day," which I love.
I don't know much about art, but I'm looking forward to your views on the Impressionists, as I love that style of painting. I also like Sargent, so hopefully you can get to him, too?
I tend to like Homer better than Monet myself. There is a regionalism and reality to Homer's work that seems richer than Manet/s work. Manet's work, such as Olympia is indeed very important as it breaks certain taboos about representation.
Nudes prior to Olympia were either muses or portrayed as coy. In Olympia the woman is staring directly at the viewer. She is not shy at all, and is a prostitute.
Thank you! I feel like a learned a few things today.
Fabulous! Thanks for posting those.
I, myself, am taking classes in watercolor. If I could paint like that.....
He may be referring to how the lighting is idealized in the earlier works. Single source light, such as direct sun, flattens the shadows. To model a subject, multiple sources of light will backfill and bring definition. Usually, this is a "key light" of reflected light, coming from the side and rear.
Homer:
You're making this way too complicated. Plus, you don't even know how to spell "Manny". I think you did that on purpose, just for a highbrow excuse to post the naked chick pictures (even though most of them are kinda chunky). ;-)
I like Homer's energy and motion--- you can almost feel the waves and the whip of the wind.
Manet has a stark realism that comes off as a bit brutal in a way. Like you just walked up and caught someone unaware, and not in a good way, totally.
The older paintings have a soft blur to them that makes them seem dreamlike and sweet. Like you are peeking through guazey window sheers.
None of the paintings appear pornographic to me. I did get a bit of "Oh my! They all have my hips and tummy! WHO'S BEEN IN MY BATHROOM!" in my gut reaction. ;)
Ah, as for the first woman being a prostitute, she's wearing heels in bed. ;)
Makes sense. Thanks.
Yes, and a funny thing.
My son is enrolled in a Western Humanities online course for the summer semester.
He has all kinds of links to site in his course material, and the other day he was pulling up pictures of "Rubenesque" figures.
I glanced over at the screen and said, "Now those are my kind of women." He laughed.
We live not far from the Ringling Art Museum. They have a wonderful collection of Rubens.
Have a good day, and the very best to you and yours.
Semper Fi
Tommie
Cool post. Do you have a ping list for future lectures? I'd like to be on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.