237 - Post #1

            Avant-garde, to me, in regards to artwork means going against the norm or doing the unexpected. It means being innovative and creating something that hasn’t been seen or done before. There are both positive and negative associations that I make with the word avant-garde. I think it is very interesting, thought provoking, and allow us to look at artwork in a new way. Yet, at the same time avant-garde can be hard to comprehend, strange, and challenging.

            Manet’s painting, Luncheon on the Grass, is a great example of using the avant-garde idea in artwork. This artwork challenges the viewer because the scene that is depicted isn’t something that is easily understandable. People generally like narratives, and artwork that clearly has a message. Manet’s painting however is not clear-cut like one would prefer. This challenges the viewer the think about what is happening in the painting and why it was created rather than having the story spoon fed to them. This also challenges the viewers because it is artistically like nothing they have ever seen before. During this time period precision within the artwork was greatly prized, however in Luncheon on the Grass we are seeing very visible brushstrokes making it look as if it is unfinished. This was the first time people were seeing art about art and this challenged them to view and think about art differently. The viewers at the time were used to seeing perfection within artwork and here they are seeing a scene that doesn’t add up. The woman in the background is out of proportion for where she is positioned in the scene, the fruit that was brought for the lunch wouldn’t all be in season at the same time, and none of the figures in the foreground are making eye contact or interacting with one another. This painting includes the viewer and challenges them to understand.

            In Luncheon on the Grass Manet did several things that can be considered avant-garde. For the time this painting was shocking. It was very in your face and was like nothing anyone had ever seen before. The scene of the painting was confusing and lacked understanding by the viewers. Due to the paintings confusing layout and subject matter people viewed this as a very strange and outrageous painting. It went against all the rules of art that people of the time were following. For example, Manet’s painting has thick blocks of color clearly showing the viewer how he went about applying the paint. While what was valued at the time was having invisible brushstrokes making it hard to trace the work of the artist. This painting was not only revolutionary for its time but it was innovative, thought provoking, and hard to comprehend. All of which are characteristics of an avant-garde artwork. Not only did Luncheon on the Grass challenge the viewers of the time to think and view art differently but it changed the rules of art forever.

Final Post

            Looking back at the artwork we have studied during this quarter I have a hard time determining what types are my favorite. I thoroughly enjoyed learning about all the different time periods and gaining a greater appreciation for the artwork produced. However, two types of art that I would have to say are my favorite from this quarter would be art from the Northern Renaissance and Romanticism art from the 18th and 19th centuries.

            My favorite artist from the Northern Renaissance would have to be Jan van Eyck. I think what attracts me to his style and the style of the Northern Renaissance would have to be the extreme attention to detail, interest in naturalism, use of symbols and luminous colors. In all of Jan van Eyck’s artwork we can see the use of extreme detail, but I feel that The Arnolfini Portrait is the perfect example of Jan van Eyck’s talents. The reason I feel so drawn to this piece of art is because there are a number of symbols with hidden meanings, which is very intriguing to me. For example, the chandelier with only one lit candle, the dog, the fruit, and the figure of St. Margaret carved into the back of the chair by the bed. The use of naturalism is also something that draws me to the Northern Renaissance because the people being depicted seem to be identifiable rather than idealized figures that one would never see in real life. I also like that oil paint during this time period is the preferred medium. The oil paint allows for luminous colors and a beautiful depiction of all different types of textures.

            I also am very drawn to the Romanticism style. I am in particular a fan of Francisco Goya. I find the sublime idea in artwork really fascinating. Goya’s artwork does a great job at evoking both the feeling of being terrified and the feeling of being in awe. I’m really drawn to The Third of May in particular because I love the emotion that is depicted. I love the Romanticism period because when looking at the artwork produced during this time I find that I have an emotional response to the work and it really intrigues and engages me. In the Third of May I really like the intense lighting that highlights the main figure that is in his last moments of life. I think it was smart to paint him in a white shirt showing his innocence. He is also in a Christ like pose with his arms out adding to the man’s innocence. The way the soldiers with the guns are turned away from the viewer gives us the sense that they aren’t individuals but rather these nameless monsters that are killing innocent people because they are told to.

            Overall I enjoyed all the time periods that we covered and I have learned to have a great appreciation for all the artists and artwork we have discussed. Though I am drawn to artwork that has a large amount of emotion and an attention to detail I like learning about all different types.