Gauguin and Primitivism - Option #1

            Gauguin’s painting The Yellow Christ can be considered avant-garde for several reasons. On can see that Griselda Pollock’s formula of reference, deference, and difference can be applied to this painting. Through The Yellow Christ Gauguin shows an awareness of what’s going on in the art world, gives reverence and respect to Impressionism, and shows his advancement in aesthetics by making The Yellow Christ a very modern and avant-garde piece.

            When looking at The Yellow Christ one can see that Gauguin is showing reference to what’s going on in the art world in terms of artistic traditions and conventions through the subject matter. First of all we are seeing that this is a landscape painting. Landscapes and outdoor scenes were common among the impressionists, however Gauguin represents his landscape in a much more avant-garde way. The hills, trees, houses, and road in the background are all extremely abstracted. Gauguin has reduced the landscape to shapes. In the foreground we can see that Christ on the cross is the focal point. Christ being depicted is a reference as well even further back than impressionism. Christ was often depicted in the artwork of the academy, in a much different way however. In this painting Gauguin has again simplified the body of Christ and doesn’t show much detail.

            In The Yellow Christ we can also see Gauguin’s use of deference. He gives reverence to impressionism especially in terms of technique. Gauguin shows interest in light, color, and loose brushstrokes. All of which were important to the Impressionists as well. Gauguin however uses extremely bright colors that don’t imitate the natural colors one would see in real world. For example, as stated in the title of this piece Christ is yellow, shadowed with blues and greens. The landscape is also much more vibrant with great emphasis on the yellow, red, and gold tones. These colors seem to be slightly exaggerated than what one would really being seeing in a landscape like this. Gauguin’s interest in light can be seen in the shadows shown on Christ’s body, and in the contrast of light on the woman in the foreground of the bottom left corner. Gauguin also uses loose brushstrokes, however they do not appear to be as loosely painted as some impressionist paintings.

            The Yellow Christ shows difference because it is modern and avant-garde, which helps the viewers see that Gauguin is making advancements on the current issues regarding aesthetics. Gauguin’s use of color is very different and avant-garde because not only are the colors extremely vibrant and blocked together, but he also has all the figures outlined in black. He is using these colors to evoke emotion and create a mood for the viewers, which is also avant-garde and different from the intentions of Impressionist artists. Gauguin has a deeper perception of feeling and emotions in comparison to the impressionists. We can also see that this painting is showing difference because though it is showing a landscape we are seeing women dressed modernly, which is different from a usual landscape painting. 

Modernity and Masculinity in 19th Century France - Option #2

            Gustave Caillebotte is often associated with the Impressionists. When looking at Caillebotte’s work one can see influences from the Impressionists, yet at the same time not all his stylistic characteristics fall into the impressionist category. Looking at Caillebotte’s A Rainy Day and Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s impressionist painting Moulin de la Galette one can see that they share several commonalities while at the same time slightly differ.

            Both paintings show an interest in light. Looking at Caillebotte’s A Rainy Day we can see that he took interest in how the light was hitting certain objects. For example we can see that Caillebotte played with the effects of light and color on the ground. With the combination of light and color he made the ground appear to be wet and shiny with water. We can also see light hitting the umbrellas of the people strolling around the streets. Caillebotte used lighter shades to show where the sun was hitting strongly and darker shades to show lack of light. Similarly, in Renoir’s Moulin de la Galette we see an interest in the use of light and color. We can see light shining through the trees above the scene causing the light to be more dappled on the people and on the ground. Renoir also used lighter colors in order to show where the sun was the most extreme and darker colors to show shadows. Both paintings are not only depicting outdoor scenes but they are depicting modern Paris as well. Caillebotte is showing a modern Paris street with people dressed in modern clothes. Renoir is also showing a modern Paris scene with people dancing and interacting at a modern dance hall in modern clothes.

            These paintings differ as well. Renoir used much looser brushstrokes in order to create Moulin de la Galette. Renoir’s painting has a very spontaneous and abbreviated feel to it due to the loose brushstrokes. It looks like he was capturing this fleeting moment in time as fast as he could so he could depict this exact moment. Caillebotte’s A Rainy Day however has a much more refined look. He achieved a refined look because it doesn’t have a sketch like quality. He also didn’t use as loose of brushstrokes as Renoir, which also gave the painting a refined appearance. Each of these paintings also give off different moods. Many impressionist paintings, due to their sketch like quality, give off a lively and energetic feel. However, A Rainy Day has a much more calm and isolated feel. It feels calm because Caillebotte didn’t use loose brushstrokes and also left a large amount of empty space in this scene. This empty space creates and isolated and lonely feel. It also appears to be lonely because none of the people walking in the street are interacting with one another but rather keeping to themselves. While Renoir’s artwork is extremely lively and has a large amount of movement. Not only is this because of his loose brushstrokes but also because he filled the canvas with people interacting with one another. 

The Political Side of Impressionism - Option #1

            Both The Rue Montorgueil by Calude Monet and The Rue Monsnier with Flags by Edouard Manet are depictions of the French festival of June 30th, 1878. Though both are paintings of the same day and same celebration and share many similarities, we can see that each artist chose to depict the scene in their own distinct ways.

            The Rue Montorgeil and The Rue Monsnier with Flags differ greatly. When looking at The Rue Montorgeil by Calude Monet we get a sense of both energy and movement. There is a mass amount of flags that are hanging off the sides of the buildings and look as if they are waving furiously in the wind. The flags are very sketch like making them not clearly defined which also gives them a sense of movement. We can see flags start close to us in the foreground with them continuing all the way as far as the eye can see down the road. Looking at The Rue Monsnier with Flags there are not as many flags and they are spread sporadically down the road. We aren’t seeing any flags really close to us in the foreground; they look as if they start about midway down the road. The flags are much more spread out allowing the viewer the identify individual flags, while in The Rue Montorgeil we are getting the sense that all the flags and the colors of the flags just blur together. In The Rue Montorgeil we are getting an aerial view of the extremely crowded narrow street. Not one person is clearly defined making it look as if these huge crowds of people are all in movement and celebrating. Having so many people on the road gives the painting a very busy energetic feel. It is as if the crowd is in a frenzy of excitement and happiness.  In contrast, we are seeing The Rue Monsnier with Flags in a more straight on point of view and it only has several people strolling the streets and none seem to be in a frenzy or in great celebration. The focus of this painting seems to be the crippled veteran at the left of the canvas. Having the focus be on one man rather than a large crowd of people gives the painting a calm feel. There is no real hustle, just a few people here and there and the old man making his way down the street. This scene looks as if it could be before or after the big rush of people celebrating. The colors Monet used are much darker and vibrant than the colors Manet chose to use. Manet had a much lighter palette with some individuals outlined in a darker color as well as some shadowing. While both are depictions of roads, The Rue Montorgueil seems to have a lot of emphasis on the vertical lines of the tall buildings, while The Rue Monsnier with Flags seems to put more emphasis on the lines of the road rather than the buildings surrounding it.

Both The Rue Montorgueil and The Rue Mosnier with Flags are avant- garde paintings. However, they are both avant-garde in their own ways. Monet’s painting is avant-garde because it is artistically radical. He is using loose brushstrokes, observing light and color, it is an outdoor scene, and looks very sketch like as if done very quickly and spontaneously. Manet’s painting however is both artistically and politically radical. We can see that he too used similar artistic techniques as Monet. At the same time though, Manet’s painting is politically charged. The old man on the left side of the canvas appears to be someone who fought in the war. This veteran who has lost a leg in war is a way for Manet to remind the viewers that he has not forgotten the war.

The Rue Montorgueil and The Rue Monsnier with Flags are also similar in several ways. Each are depicting the same French festival. Both paintings put importance on the flag showing the countries pride and emphasizing the celebration that is taking place. Both also share similar Impressionist artistic techniques such as loose brushstrokes, outdoor scenes, spontaneity, observation of light and color, as well as depicting a modern setting. 

Impressionism - Post #3

            Moulin de la Galette by Pierre-Auguste Renoir was created during the height of the impressionist movement. The scene depicted in this painting is that of modern Parisian life. We are seeing the outdoor courtyard of an old-fashioned dance hall full of jovial people. This painting was created on a fairly large scale of 4 feet 3.5 inches by 5 feet nine inches. Moulin de la Galette depicts a scene that is both spontaneous and lively.

            Renoirs impressionist style gave Moulin de la Galette a spontaneous feel. Renoir created Moulin de la Galette with loose brushstrokes. These loose brushstrokes give us the viewers a sense of speed, abbreviation, sketch, and most importantly spontaneity. His thick application of paint or impasto also gives the painting a very spontaneous feel. It looks as if Renoir very quickly captured this moment in time making the scene seem very natural and real. The dancers also give the painting a spontaneous feel. They are captured in mid movement as if caught in a fleeting moment in time.

Moulin de la Galette also seems to be very natural and spur of the moment because we are seeing modern life depicted. The clothing, light fixtures, and entertainment are all modern. Showing modern life gives the viewers the idea that it was taking a snap shot of what life was like at that very moment. The clothes being worn are traditional to the time period. The type of clothing depicted is appropriate to the time period showing that the painting was trying to accurately show modern life. We can also see that there are lighting fixtures painted all throughout the background of the painting. These light fixtures were new at the time, again showing us modern life.

            The impressionist style to me always seems to be very lively. Moulin de la Galette in particular shows a very active scene that is full of both life and energy. The loose brushstrokes gives the painting a lot of energy and movement that creates a very dynamic scene. The composition of this painting is very interesting and adds to the liveliness. Renoir chose to completely fill the canvas from top to bottom with people interacting with one another. Some people are out on the dance floor dancing, some are engaged in conversation, and others are sitting enjoying refreshments. Renoir chose to cut off figures in the scene giving the viewers the idea that the scene continued outside of the painting similar to that of a photograph. No matter where one looks at this painting there is energy and movement.

            Another key feature of this painting that creates liveliness and energy is the way the Renoir chose to capture the light. The light looks to be very dappled, as if it is coming through the trees. On the dance floor we can see where there are distinct shadows and where the sun is actually hitting the floor. The sunlight also can be seen hitting the clothing of the figures. We can see sunlight on the back of the man seated at the front right table facing away from us. We can see that there are highlighted spots on the man’s back and head where the sun is shining through the trees. The use of light adds interest and energy throughout the painting. The sunlight shining down on the figures makes the scene seem even more happy and joyful because it is a nice day allowing for this outdoors event.

            Renoir’s use of color helps create a very active and lively scene. He uses soft patches of color on brighter colored figures to show the dappled light shining through the trees above head. Renoir created the patches of light with soft pinks, purples, and white. While for the figures clothing he uses more bold and noticeable shades of color such as green, blue, and brown.

            Renoir’s use of loose brushstrokes, thick application of paint, scientific observation of light and color, modern depiction of Parisian life, and split second depiction of a moment all create both spontaneity and liveliness within this painting. This impressionist painting captures the true spirit of modern day Paris and gives the viewers the ability to see an exact moment in time. 

Post #2 Realism and the Early Avant-Garde - Option #1

            Gustave Courbet is known for his socialist ideals and his use of realism within his artwork. While his paintings today are highly regarded and often referred to as “avant-garde”, they were at one time considered to be extremely offensive to the bourgeoisie. In his paintings The Stonebreakers and A burial at Ornans we are seeing social, political, and artistic statements being made. These paintings created much controversy due to his intentional challenge to the academic style and his intention to provoke the bourgeoisie.

            In the painting The Stonebreakers we are seeing a large amount of political radicalism. Courbet chose to show two men, one old and one young, breaking rocks to be used for gravel. We are seeing the men doing backbreaking work that only people of the lower classes would perform. We can see the difficulty of the work as the young man strains to lift the crushed rocks while the old man kneels as he breaks the stones. The men are depicted in ragged clothes that are torn to shreds by their daily labor. One can tell that the paint was roughly applied and that there is somewhat of a disinterest in perspective and depth.

The Stonebreakers was quite controversial at the time due to the political, social, and artistic issues of mid-century France. We are seeing political radicalism within the painting because Courbet is glorifying the working class. He chose to put the two lower class men in the foreground of the painting, filling the canvas. He is showing the inequality between the classes by depicting the oppression of the poor. The two men are also facing away from the viewer. Rather than making them individuals these two men are representing all of the oppressed. We can also see political radicalism because Courbet is creating empathy for their oppressed state. He is showing the men performing their strenuous job and exerting enormous physical effort. Artistically this painting goes against the ideal of the academy. Courbet roughly applied the paint, the figures are turned away from the viewer, there is a disinterest in perspective and depth, and he used this very large canvas to show peasants working rather than showing a historical, biblical, or mythological scene. This painting greatly offended the bourgeoisie because not only did it go against the artistic standards of the academy but Courbet was showing the tension and turmoil between the classes.

In A Burial at Ornans Courbet depicts a burial in life size. This is a scene that could actually be witnessed in modern life, which is why it is considered to be a realist painting. Looking through the crowd of people we can see a mix of emotions, which are all commonly seen at an actual funeral. Several people appear to be bored, some are weeping, and others seem to be distracted. This painting was denounced by the Salon due to Courbet’s disregard to the academy style and lack or creating a traditional history painting. The Salon was also displeased by Courbet’s lack of suggestion to the afterlife.

In both The Stonebreakers and A Burial at Ornans we can see the use of realism. Courbet is showing scenes that were actually happening in modern life. While Courbet’s paintings were denounced by the Salon due to their political and artistic radicalism they are now considered to be both innovative and revolutionary. 

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.