Modern Art Heralds Sexism in Society

John Wayne once said, "Women have a right to work wherever they want - as long as they have dinner ready when you get home." Though this sentiment may have been widely agreed upon in the early and mid 1900’s, is that opinion still floating around the United States? To find an answer, you could ponder modern art. As women struggle to be a voice heard and not just a body seen, the art world has not turned a deaf ear. In Ad Reinhardt’s Yellow Painting, the artists employs shapes, color, and varying proportion to depict how sexism, cowering to a male dominated society, overpowers women.

I was intrigued by both the lines of shapes and the blending of shapes in Reinhardt’s work. The lines represent harsh angles more often than curvatures. The harsher the line, the more visible and dominate its shape is on the canvas. In the upper left hand side, an open triangle is traced with a bold line and shadowed a dark auburn. A curved line can be seen when the viewer relaxes the eye, allowing it to fall over the navy blue curve the left of the canvas. The curve is reminiscent of a woman’s hourglass figure. Comparing these two lines, both harsh and soft, the viewer can begin to realize that this exemplifies an established pattern throughout the piece. Harsh lines are bold, thick, and often repeated while the curved lines are not so boldly drawn though they are in a darker color. The bold male lines in the piece wildly overpower the curved female lines, making this touch of femininity almost unnoticeable. I encourage you to study the painting for just a moment, concentrating on shapes. You may see, as I have, that Reinhardt also employed the use of blended shapes along with lines to depict sexism in American culture. Whenever you may notice a glimmer of femininity in the painting, that image is interrupted by a masculine stoke. One example can be found in the upper center of the image. Look slightly to the right, and you may see the bust of a woman with flowing hair. However, the image is interrupted on its left side by the bust of a smiling man. Looking even closer, you may see that same man wearing a hat. With the technique of blending shapes together, Reinhardt forces viewers to look for whatever they seek to find in the piece.

Reinhardt also uses color to express an opinion of sexism in society. The artist used warm colors alongside cold interjections in this piece. The general palate of the piece is warm. Reinhardt uses golden yellows, and a nearly terracotta red or burnt orange. However, there are injections of colder colors like navy blue and gray to the left side of the piece. The difference in warm versus cool palates can also be distinguished by comparing the whites used on the left and right sides of the canvas. On the left, where the navy blue curvature is, the whites are cooler and almost a fair shade of gray. Now look to the right side of the canvas. These whites are warmer, almost the color of a natural fiber. If one considers the theory that Reinhardt is using this piece to make a statement on sexism in society, it is interesting to point out that the color palate is gender neutral. Common knowledge would tell you that red is associated with women while blue is associated with men. However, yellow is a neutral color. Could Reinhardt be posing a new question for consideration: is a male centered world masked in gender neutrality? What a thought, eh mates?

Another element that you can look at to see how Reinhardt uses this piece to raise discussion about sexism in society is prominence compared to proportion. Proportionately, the masculine shapes are smaller than the curving lines, but the masculine lines are more prominent throughout the piece in number. In contrast, the feminine lines and shapes are the larger in proportion in the piece, but fewer in number. Allow me to cite an example. If you look to the bottom right of the piece, you can see various and multiple shapes with hard lines (these are the shapes which I refer to as male). Now look to the left side of the frame where the curving lines are most evident. These curvy shapes are less prominent in the piece, though they are proportionately larger than the straight lines and shapes. Comparing these two shapes in their respective sections on the canvas, you can see that the male shapes are smaller than the female shapes, but they are indeed more numerous overall.

After elaborating on my interpretation of the work, I realize that some critics and fellow art enthusiasts may say, “Hello. What’s this nonsense about sexism in society? The painting is merely a painting.” To this response, or any other counter thought, I can only say that my opposition may be right. Then again, I beg you to consider that my logic, too, is correct. This, mates, is the true joy of art. There isn’t a right or wrong answer, no matter what a text book tells you. It isn’t a true or false examination. Art is the exercise of free thought, free will, free emotion—all elements of the human nature that we should celebrate. So if you think I’m wrong—say it! Let me hear from you! Let’s start a discussion. Let’s learn from each other!

The Masks We Wear

We wear the mask that grins and lies,It hides our cheeks and shades our eyes,--This debt we pay to human guile;With torn and bleeding hearts we smile,And mouth with myriad subtleties.

The above is the first stanza of a poem titled We Wear the Masks by the African American poet Paul Laurence Dunbar. The poem is a reminder that there are many people who wear masks which in turns allows for them to be defined socially, emotionally, as well as culturally. Perhaps it was the poem that may have inspired the artist who created the African mask on display in the Ackland Museum. Although masks may have been intended to exaggerate costumes, or animate characters, and even for religious purposes, one way or another they have come to serve an alternate purpose. Today, the ultimate purpose masks have come to serve is providing false identities and characterizations.

Upon first glance at the mask displayed in the museum, it is easily seen that it is rather grotesque and the facial features are extremely distorted. However such features may be due to the mask representing African art. The mouth, nose, and eyes are the most prominent as well as the most disfigured facial features. The mask is adorned with real human hair that includes strands of gray. Attached are tacks that serve as eyebrows and accents for the forehead. The bottom of the mask has several bells attached to it perhaps representing a beard of some sort.

The artist behind the mask obviously had quite a few interrelated messages for the audience, as most works of art do. The mask is not only a representation of African culture but also of how people of African descent have been historically portrayed. For thousands of years it has been thought of as unattractive to have big lips and noses. Slit like eyes were perhaps uncommon but yet another feature that was not widely accepted by most cultures. In fact it is because of society’s disapproval of such features that rhinoplasty, lip and eye surgeries have become wildly popular throughout the world. Needless to mention that pop icon Michael Jackson was so incredibly obsessed with his image that he had endured several rhinoplasties to the extent that his nose is almost unrecognizable. How attractive is that?

The mask is elegantly yet subtly portraying beauty within a particular culture. The leathery material of which the mask was created represents old age as well as the strands of gray in the real human hair used. The bells which seem to be reminiscent of a beard are so elaborately placed, as well as the tusk that serves as a piercing in the nose. Incorporation of such features is yet another reminder that beauty, as it is often said is held within the eye of the beholder. With that in mind, it comes as no surprise that one particular culture or society may find the mask extremely beautiful whereas another may think of it as despicable.

The tacks which adorn the mask would represent acne in our culture. Despite acne being natural and part of the maturing process, it has labeled young youth as being unattractive if they have bad acne. Therefore the artist is undoubtedly trying to intertwine yet another message into his artwork. The artist is perhaps trying to convey the message that as a world with many different cultures, the definitions of beauty as well as the barriers formed need to be broken. People should not have to conform to a society’s idea of beauty, but rather society needs to accept people as they are. The artist exemplifies such by creating an uneven skin tone as well as incorporating various dots throughout. These dots, which could potentially serve as freckles symbolizes society’s disapproval for such imperfections of the skin. For this particular reason, is perhaps why many people feel as though they must wear both physical masks such as make-up for women, and beards for men.

It has become socially acceptable for people to mask themselves, and I think that not only the creator of the mask is trying to convince its audience that thinking in such a manner is incorrect but can become in conflict with diversity, which is something that should be valued by all. There is a reason why people look different, have different skin tones, and speak different languages which goes far beyond any scientific theory perhaps. Therefore it should be unacceptable for any society to try to alter that. Unfortunately, it isn’t, which is perhaps why the artist of the mask is trying to get people to become comfortable with their self-mage and break out of the shell that society has molded for them. The artist successfully illustrates his or her idea of breaking from the mold by making the mask with a nose piercing with is often gawked at within most modern day societies as being socially undesirable.

You may or may not agree with the interpretation of this challenging artwork. One thing is clear however, which is despite being an African mask it is a tribute for all cultures across the world, and a challenge to all who wear masks. To that end, I would like to personally extend a challenge to all mask wearers, asking that they remove them and reveal their true beauty, and see others in the world as they really are, rather than viewing them through a tainted mask.

Reinhardt's Simple "Yellow Painting"

Desmond, as a frequenter and patron of your restaurant I have come to value your thoughts ideas. However, I have a different approach to the interpretation you put forward.

My interest in visual art began during a tour of abstractionist art in a Sydney gallery four or five years ago. At this art show there were many paintings that didn’t seem to “make sense” in a conventional symbolic or referential way. Instead the art seemed to be completely open to interpretation as it seemed many of the works’ artists had no agenda when creating them. As I walked through the tour I began to realize that my stereotype for analyzing art in a symbolic nature was completely outdated and very narrow-minded. What really interested me was that I could understand, appreciate, and enjoy art as an intellectual without having to force myself to enjoy anything more than the aesthetics of the painting itself. This specific painting by Reinhardt is simply titled “Yellow Painting.” In this painting Reinhardt attempts to convey the fundamental appealing aspects of visual art, specifically through the use of the color yellow.

(Image courtesy of Ackland.org)

One of the most striking characteristics of this painting is that it was painted primarily with a single color. Aside from a few spots of blue, all of the colors are just different shades and combinations of the color yellow (sometimes complimented by a minor second color, like red to attain a more orange tone). Reinhardt also uses a very large variation of shades of yellow in the painting and does not focus on a certain tone.

Reinhardt’s color choice tries to convey the idea that using a multitude of colors is not a definitely appealing color usage. Instead it is how the artist manipulates each individual color (as we can see the yellow used in a variety of ways) that is an attractive use of color. Reinhardt could also be explaining that a widely ranged and contrasting use of a particular color is the essence of visual appeal. The artist’s use of a secondary color (specifically blue here) also has a substantial purpose. By including just a little blue it can be used in conjunction with the yellow to create a distinct color (green). Generally speaking, an artist can use merely a hint of a second color to help manipulate a painting’s diversity, without having to sacrifice appeal with the addition of discrete, extraneous, and complicating colors.

Another unique feature of this painting is the artist’s use of abstract shapes. The different geometrical figures Reinhardt includes do not have strict boundaries and do not resemble any realistic figures. While there does seem to be some vertical placement pattern of the objects, there is basically no symbolic reason for their placement.

The reason for the artist’s use of meaningless shapes allows him to reveal another appealing characteristic of visual art. Reinhardt is trying to make the point that visual art is not appealing because of discernable, distinct figures an artists adds that make the art attractive (such as people or furniture), it is instead the artist’s utilization of geometrical shapes in an interesting fashion. In “Yellow Painting” he weaves different shapes together to make a sort of interesting rhythm or harmony of the shapes: these include triangles, rectangles, arcs, circles, and even a shape that looks like a character from the Japanese language. While Reinhardt uses these shapes in an interesting way, they make no distinguishable figure and don’t seem to symbolize anything apart from themselves; but Reinhardt is still able to create an attractive and interesting image without those features.

Similarly, Reinhardt’s use of depth reveals what his painting stands for. None of the objects or the ground in “Yellow Painting” have any correlation to depth as Reinhardt has excluded it in order to make a completely two dimensional image. Reinhardt is again explaining that “real” objects in the world are not what are appealing in art, as he has removed a vital part of these realistic objects: a third dimension.

Reinhardt’s use of lines in the painting also seems to make a similar statement concerning visual art. The placement of lines seems to be random in certain places and none of the lines seem to be placed in a way to create continuity or depict direction, except when they function to outline shapes. Instead the lines in the painting seem to be used break continuity. The lines seem to increase appeal by creating more textural definition rather than just having all of the colors run together; they also server to help define objects from their surroundings.

Sometimes the artist’s choice of medium is almost arbitrary (it may just be his or her preference) but Reinhardt uses canvas specifically for its blending qualities. His use of medium also seems to convey a message that is concurrent with the rest of the work. Reinhardt created his “Yellow Painting” with oil paint on a canvas base which allows him to create a harmony, a softer transition than is usually afforded by paper and most other common mediums where transitions seem to be more bold and noticeable. Harmony is the last aspect of appealing art that Reinhardt is explaining through his use of canvas and oil.

This specific painting by Reinhardt seems to explain a lot about his artistic style and from where he receives inspiration on how to paint his images. “Yellow Painting” has done this by outlining most of the fundamental aspects of appeal in visual art. This painting has really changed my view of painting as a whole, where I used to judge all art as overbearing and symbolic but now know that I can appreciate art under much simpler circumstances.

Slow Down Freight Train

Monday nights I allow the Synical Factions to meet at the bar and discuss art. They observe and analyze old art pieces from various museums and archives. They have gained access to numerous knockoffs and photocopied paintings. A few locals call the group the artsy bootleggers, but I however enjoy their company. I even encourage the avid art critics to hang interesting pictures and paintings. Monday night, as I performed my nightly bar stroll after close, one painting caught my attention.

The painting possessed a depressing tone; something different than the other bar’s paintings. The other pictures and paintings consist of ocean waves and pleasant landscapes. People tend to hang paintings and pictures that have a pleasant tone to liven up their moods. Excessive alcohol consumption tends to leave sadden drunks at the bar pouring their hearts out. I have found that maintaining an aesthetic atmosphere greatly decreases this occurrence. As I looked closer, the painting acquired the caption that the majority of art museums post at the painting’s right.

According to the paragraph, Rose Piper’s oil painting Slow Down Freight Train reveals her cubism and modernism interest. The painting’s cubic shapes and simple lines contribute to the painter’s aesthetic goal of simplicity. However, the painting immaculately portrays a hopeful yet forlorn African American aboard a freight train.

The distressed, painted man mournfully watches as the distance between him and his homeland drastically increases. He leaves behind beloved friends, family members, and familiarity. The painter attempts to elicit the same emotions through her painting as a detailed photograph. Like my ma says, “there are deeper meanings to the simple things in life.” The simplicity of Piper’s oil techniques enhances her overall aesthetic goal, to convey a sense of hopefulness yet loneliness.

Slow Down Freight Train surfaced during Trixie Smith’s recording, "Freight Train Blues". This composition illustrated the emotions of African Americans during the Great Migration. Many artists used the blues to convey their feelings and popularize important issues. The Great Migration, the time period between 1913 and 1946, occurred when black men, and sometimes women, moved from the Rural South to the Urban North. The majority traveling were men searching for better and higher paying employment. Once these men earned enough money for accommodations and travel, they would send for their eagerly awaiting families. These transitions proved difficult for both the migrant workers and their families.

The painting utilizes very few colors, mainly yellow, white, black, green and red. The darker colors establish the gloomy, dark aspect of their journey. There was not much room to travel and many feared being caught. Many travelers illegally boarded trains because they did not have money for a ticket. As the man travels alone he is reminded that his family’s future success depends on him. This type of pressure can make anyone nervous and nauseous.

The brighter colors, such as yellow, symbolize hope and success. The window is painted yellow which could be an indicator of a brighter tomorrow. The grass is painted a lush green with shadows of dark power lines towering over the ground. Since the man is headed to the Urban North, land becomes infested by industry and pollution. Pollution has given the sky its darker, murky tent.

Piper also accomplishes her motives by making the black man’s grasp one of the main focuses in the painting. The man has a strong grasp on the freight train which conveys a sense of fear, while one of his legs is the position that would enable him to jump. This aspect of the painting contributes to the painter’s aesthetic goal. The viewer senses the fear and reluctance of the traveler. The travel seems to contemplate rather this is the right decisions for him and his loved ones.

The title of this painting, Slow Down Freight Train, supports this conclusion by illustrating that more time is requested. The man is obviously torn between two decisions and wanting the train to slow down is not an option. He leaves behind everything that is familiar. However, as hard as it might be, he continues to be confined in the freight train by his earnest grasp.

The African American in the painting also looks towards the heaven as he embraces the outdoors. It is likely that he is seeking guidance and help from a heavenly being. His mouth is open which would imply that he is singing. He could be singing a song that reminds him of home or just a tune for entertainment. During this time period blues was extremely popular. These train rides would last for countless hours and some had to travel secretly by themselves with cargo. Since there are no one people in the painting, this could be the case for this particular man.

As in every painting, there are numerous other valid interpretations. The man in the painting could be excited about this new stepping stone in his life. This train ride could serve as a new beginning and opportunity. The look on his face could be a look of awe and wonder. His mouth could be open in disbelief that he has finally reached the land of opportunity, the Urban North. He very well could be leaving a life of turmoil and disappointments.

Reply and let me know what you think! I enjoy reading your comments.

Design by Death

“Design by Death” (originally “Charlie Parker’s Favorite Painting”), oil on massonette, Gertrude Abercrombie (1946)

Good day mates. We will never know whether Gertrude Abercrombie was trying to portray a dark episode of her life or whether it was just a thought. We do know however, that “Design by Death” (1946), is a battle between the cowardly death and the brave continuity to live. This painting portrays that no matter how sad, dark and tragic life has been, there is still a way to save ourselves. It represents a reminder of our greatest asset; free will. To me mates, this piece of art exhibited by the Ackland Museum of Art is a dream the author had one night in which she had the chance of taking her life away because of the sadness she had within, or choosing to continue to live.

This “oil on massonette” uses low key dark colors, suggesting darkness, sadness, tragedy or even evil. The desertion portrays loneliness, and the clear sky and full moon gives a perception that something or someone is watching you. The powerful brightness of the moon certainly illuminates the night, and the low-level cloud gives a perception that this must be the top of a mountain or a hill.

The range of colors are in the white and black scale, except for the objects such as the ladder, book, socks, and box which are painted with strong colors to emphasize their importance to the painting’s situation. The horizon line between the ground and the sky is very clear, and the absence of any sort of foreshortening makes the painting pretty straight forward.

Its simplicity in art and color actually makes the painting more intriguing and interesting, since it allows for the analysis of the philosophical and moral encounter the author is trying to show rather than having to get tangled in trying to understand and interpret the art techniques used by Abercrombie.

At a first impression, the painting might seem like it is designed for someone to kill himself, and in fact it is. It is important to understand though, and this is strongly hinted by the painting’s name, that this design was not made by the person about to commit suicide but was rather a situation already set up by the time she got there. The painting is called “Design by Death”, not “Design for Death”, meaning that the author of this scheme is something or someone representing death.

Looking at the painting, one can notice several things. There is a rope hanging from a tree, a ladder, and a box. It would seem like the person would climb the ladder, tighten the rope around his neck and then kill himself. However, this is not the case. This design by death allows also for a way of salvation and choice; let’s analyze this.

If there is a ladder, then why is there a box? And vice versa. There is no need for a box if you can climb the ladder and attach the rope to your neck. Likewise, there wouldn’t be any need for the ladder if you could just step onto the box, put the rope on your neck and then kick the box away. Yes it is true that somehow the rope had to be tied to the tree, but once it was tied; there is no reason for the ladder to still be standing if you already have the box to step onto. Obviously one of the two objects is not part of “death’s design” and is in fact a way of salvation; this object is the ladder.

The box by itself is an easy way for the person to kill himself, but the ladder however, if looked upon from a straight angle (as if one is right in front it), is pretty much aligned with the full moon. This suggests that the ladder is actually a way out of this design for death. This may sound too imaginary, but that is in fact the whole idea the author is trying to put through.

It seems like you could jump from the ladder to the moon, which might represent god, heaven, or just a way out of the painting. Had Abercrombie not wanted to put so much importance onto the moon, she would have made it less bright and perhaps a little darker. Let’s remember mates that when one is trying to glorify the meaning of something good, it is usually done with bright colors such as white, while the emphasis on evil is created with colors such as red and black.

Other important objects are the socks. It seems like the person was taking off her socks prior to climbing onto the box. Why would anyone do this? Does being barefoot as opposed to wearing socks make a difference if she was about to commit suicide? The action of taking off the socks represents the indecision and fear about what to do. One sock is next to the box, and the other one is on the ladder. What made the person ultimately climb the ladder?

The green book. This book made the person change his or her mind about suicide. The person came in from the right side of the picture wearing her socks. She was almost determined to end her life with the “design by death” but was very nervous and still had some doubt going through her mind. Before climbing onto the box, she decided to take off her socks. However before she could fully take the second one off, she saw a book on top of the box. This book was perhaps the bible, letters from her family, a prayer from god, or something that completely changed her mind and gave her a spark of hope to continue living.

She decided to climb up the ladder, and as she was doing so, her remaining sock that was half on fell off as she climbed the ladder. She jumped into the moon and woke up in her bed with a new outlook on her life and feeling good that she was able to escape death’s design.

I understand that many of you out there might not fully agree with my interpretation of the painting, and may actually strongly disagree with it. However, when one wants to analyze art and the message that the author is trying to send out, one must do it with an open mind and much imagination. We all look at things in a different way, and when a piece of art is subject to many distinct interpretations, it can be considered a brilliant painting because it allows for the human mind to dig into its deepest thoughts. I hope you have enjoyed my posts this last couple of months; this is not a good bye but a see you later mates!

http://www.ackland.org/tours/classes/abercrombie.html

L’Enseigne de Gersaint

Hiya mates, how’s everything been? What fine weather we’ve been having down under, I hope all is well where you are. So just the other day, a friend of mine from France came to visit. Her name is Kate and she is a rather lovely lady. In any event she is a curator for a local museum and somehow or another we ended up talking about art. Now I know absolutely nothing about art, but she kept talking about an article that she had read recently. Kate persisted that the author had absolutely no idea what he was talking about, so I had to check it out for myself. After reviewing the article, I decided to write my own art analysis. Please check out what I wrote below and as always let me know what you think:

L’Enseigne de Gersaint is without doubt a beautiful portrait as expressed by Kenneth Clark, however the extent to which Clark analyzes the artwork must be challenged. Clark, a renowned art critic states in his book that the painting is reminiscent of the aesthetic movement when critics had previously debated the meaning of the term ‘pure poetry’ and that there is no doubt that the painting has the quality of ‘pure painting’. It is undeniable that the painting is one of high quality, however stating that it is a ‘pure painting’ is a bit drastic, and comparing it to the painting Queen of Sheba is perhaps extravagant.

Before I could properly assess Clark’s claims, I had to find out what exactly what ‘pure poetry’ meant. After conducting a little research I found that ‘pure poetry’ as defined by Google is poetry that is written without a specific message or purpose for the audience and focuses solely on pleasing the reader through the use of imagery or musical flow. With that in mind, pure painting can be defined as painting without a specific message or purpose and focuses on appealing to the audience by way of imagery, which in this particular case would be portrayed by used of color, texture, as well as tone. Now that the definition ‘pure painting’ is somewhat refined, the painting L’Enseigne can be analyzed more effectively.

Upon first glance of L’Enseigne, one would agree that it is quite an extravagant piece of art. The painting successfully depicts a shop in which the nobility have come to purchase various portraits and paintings of scenes. The extraordinary detail in which Wattue put into his work is absolutely phenomenal and almost unbelievable. The meticulous detail of all the portraits looming in the background of the painting is amazing. The texture of the painting is very refined to the extent that just by looking at the picture, one might say that the lady wearing the lavender dress on the right is made of silk. The colors used in the painting are so contrasting that it creates distance within the painting, that wouldn’t necessarily be seen in moderate paintings.

In Clark’s analysis of L’Enseigne he compares it to another painting called the Queen of Sheba. Some may argue that the textures of both paintings are somewhat similar. That may be so, but despite similarities, the colors in Queen Sheba which Clark uses in his comparison are almost non-comparable in that respect. The colors used in the L’Enseigne are subtle yet bold whereas the colors used in the Queen of Sheba are bright, and bold. The colors used in the Queen of Sheba painting provides a wonderful rich texture throughout the painting whereas in L’Enseigne de Gersaint, the texture can only be seen in the lady’s dress on the right, and the lady’s dress on the left. Therefore, L’Enseigne is a far cry from the Queen of Sheba.

Within Clark’s analysis of L’Enseigne he states that it is pure painting. However, it is not indeed a pure painting because there is indeed a meaning behind it. In fact, Clark gives actually contradicts himself and gives the reader the meaning behind the painting. According to Clark, the painting is vindictive of a stage and the portraits are like walls boxing the stage in and the people sitting within the shop are the actors. That alone, is enough to refute Clark’s interpretation of L’Enseigne as a pure painting because it conflicts with the restrictions of a pure painting.

To that end, Clark’s analysis of the L’Enseigne should be viewed somewhat lightly because of his misunderstanding a pure painting and misinterpretations of how the Queen of Sheba and the L’Enseigne are similar in color as well as texture. It is due to these misconceptions that destroy Clark’s credibility as an art critic. But hey, you can be the judge. Below I have provided links to both paintings. Feel free to leave comments! Until next time, that’s all mates!

To veiw L'Enseigne click here:http://www.artchive.com/artchive/W/watteau/gersaint.jpg.html

To veiw Queen Sheba click here: http://www.artchive.com/artchive/P/piero/sheba.jpg.html

SOURCES

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/W/watteau/gersaint.jpg.html

www.google.com definition of "pure painting"

Whistler's "Nocturne: Blue and Gold"

Being so involved in the outdoors, I can really appreciate beauty on a visual level. Modern art seems to shy away from this obvious beauty as it isn’t quite as thought provoking or intellectual oriented. However, older artists such as James Whistler created art mainly for art’s sake.

James Whistler was a 19^th century artist whose primary craft was painting. One of his most popular pieces, “Nocturne: Blue and Gold,” is a part of his Nocturne series that focuses (content wise) on night time images of various landscapes. This particular image is of London surrounding the Thames River (Power).

Rachel Power in her Princeton Blog gives her interpretation of the painting’s meaning and Whistlers motivation for doing so. Her belief is that the main idea involving this painting is “bridging the gap between East and West” (Power) and unifying. This view, in my opinion, is a good educated deduction that contains a few imperfections.

Firstly Power begins by describing Whistler’s style of painting. She describes this painting as having a strong resemblance to the Japanese artist Heroshige’s woodblock prints. This similar oil on canvas style of painting leads Power to believe that Whistler intended the work to show and make a connection between western (English) and eastern (Japanese) cultures.

In comparison to Heroshige (one of his similar works given below) it is very apparent that both artists used the same medium for their paintings, a canvas with a strong grain (Shaolin Legacy).

As Power points out in their similarities, these artists also use similar colors. These are colors that don’t seem to clash but instead show harmony – a trait Whistler is trying to express between the two cultures. Similar also is both painting’s way for pulling attention away from objects (the bridge and the trees respectively) and drawing towards the "ground” that is between the faded objects. This also seems to follow the concept of unity as attention is not given to a certain part of the painting but the scene as a whole. Similar to the French artistic style of “nocturne” Whistler is attempting to show beauty plainly through harmonious composition.

One objective I do have to this reasoning concerns Whistler’s background as an artist. Whistler developed a very idealistic stance of creating “art for art’s sake;” meaning one just creates art for nothing besides its aesthetically pleasing function (not for religious/political/idealistic statements). This information seems to contradict what reasons Whistler may have made and what meaning (if an at all) he intended to bestow upon the painting. However, Whistler didn’t necessarily have to follow this policy rigorously and since the painting involves not just cultures but the beauty of each of them (painting styles/dwellings specifically); so Whistler is still fulfilling his role for appreciating art at its face, visual value (Wikipedia).

Power’s main argument is strongly supported by the painting’s composition, but I feel for her argument to be completely sound she needs to include at least some reference to Whistler’s idealistic beliefs on the aesthetics of painting.

Power, Rachel. “Bridging the Culture Gap: Retitling Whistler’s ‘Nocturnes.’” Impressionism & the Making of Modern Art. http://blogs.princeton.edu/wri152-3/rpower/

“Shaolin Legacy.” The Shaolin Society. http://www.shaolin-society.co.uk/shaolin_legacy/images/hiroshige.jpg

“James McNeill Whistler.” Wikipedia. 14 April 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_McNeill_Whistler

The Potato Eaters: A physical distortion or an artistic perfection?

Good day mates! I am back, and this time its more Van Gogh. I hope you enjoyed my last post because I am sure you will enjoy this one even more. After talking to you last time, I decided to look for a Van Gogh painting that reflected his artistic characteristics of his early years. As I searched websites online, I came across his first famous painting, “The Potato Eaters”.

This oil on canvas consists of what seems to be a family of five peasants in their residence eating at their dinner table. The room is dark but with an oil light lamp which allows us to analyze the painting. It dates back to 1885 and it is known today as his first masterpiece. Here is a picture of the painting:

After seeing this painting, I looked for an article relating to it and actually found one rather interesting. This article by an unidentified student from Princeton, who discusses the structure of the painting, the physical characteristics of the characters painted by Van Gogh, and the reasons why this painting was not accepted as a masterpiece in the early years of its creation.

According to the author, The Potato Eaters is an impressive work of art that today is rendered as one of Van Gogh’s masterpieces. However, back in 1885, critics saw the painting as too stiff and unrealistic, containing awkward looking people with deformed extremities. Again, the author’s main point is to explain why the critics in 1885 did not appreciate the painting and the reasons Van Gogh used the techniques he used.

At the time of its creation , people argued that the painting was too superficial. One critic was highly skeptical of the painting. “Why haven’t you studied their movement? They look so posed. That genteel hand of the woman in the back is completely unrealistic!”, he said. Many people argued that Van Gogh’s figured were not pretty; there was something off about them. They had strange, gawky features and looked awkward- not the type of people a potential buyer would want hung on his wall.

To debacle this argument, the author explains that Van Gogh purposely painted the work this way to portray the hardship and survival this family had to go through every day. Had he painted them correctly positioned and comfortable, this message could not have gone through. He conveyed the physical and mental wear and tear on the peasants in his paintings through slightly contorted anatomy: their strangely bent over bodies show the work load that was pressed upon them and thus weighed down their lives literally and figuratively.

I think the article does a wonderful job analyzing the physical aspects of the characters and refuting the statements made by the critics one hundred years ago. It clearly explains the reasons Van Gogh portrayed the characters the way he did. However, it fails to analyze the surroundings of the characters and the expressions of the characters themselves, which is something I would like to talk about.

To start off, even though the characters are awkward looking and this is purposely done to portray a sense of poverty and hard work, the expression on their faces are extremely vivid and allows the viewer to delve inside the characters minds. One can see the hardship and the sadness in these characters expressions.

Another important aspect is that this painting was created way before Van Gogh began extensive use of impressionism and other painting techniques, but the mixture of dark and lightness in the painting make it unique and adds to the sentiment of hardship and survival.

Something that the author fails to talk about is the array of detail in the surrounding areas of the painting and in the dinner table. Some of these include:

-The rafter boards in the back of the piece.

- The lines forming a window in the darkness.

- The picture frame hung on the wall.

- The large plate of potatoes, and the fingers stretched out to obtain them.

- The woman pouring something that looks like coffee.

- The torn and worn down edges of the table.

Now that I have explained to you some of the things that were absent in the author’s article, I think that you can gain a full understanding and appreciation of the painting “The Potato Eaters”. Hope you enjoyed the post, good day mates!

SOURCES

http://www.vangoghgallery.com/painting/potatoindex.html

http://blogs.princeton.edu/wri152-3/f05/michalak/conclusion.html

Is Analyzing Art Superfluous? What About the Painting The Last Supper?

Some people believe that avidly criticizing art is unnecessary. Those people may find themselves embracing other aesthetic forms, such as music or dance. However, I find it offensive and irreverent for someone to criticize someone else for possessing a different passion or interest. Analyzing art is an individual process and people should not be disparaged for being “nit-picky,” as Shelley Esaak refers to it as. Shelley Esaak’s satirical blog addresses the controversy over Leonardo Da Vinci’s The Last Supper.

The blog sarcastically attempts to explain why the controversial figure in Leonardo’s, The Last Supper is not Mary Magdalene, but a male disciple. She does not even address why some people would consider the figure to Jesus’ right a female, even though the figure has female qualities. Instead, Esaak attacks those people that may look more into a painting that what is transcribed in a paragraph to the right of the painting. A critique can effectively state their opinion without offending or judging other people.

Shelley Esaak references the Biblical account of Mary Magdalene at the last supper. She explains that Mary was the only person there to wipe the disciples’ feet, which she refers to as a minor task. This is no minor task! Wiping and washing feet symbolized much more in Biblical times than it would today. However, as I scanned through the bible, I could not find concrete evidence that Magdalene attended the last supper. Instead, I read that Jesus was the one who washed his fellow disciples’ feet.

If Mary was truly at the last supper, I believe it is completely relevant for people to question if Leonardo painted a questionable figure to resemble her. Even if he painted such a figure, that does not mean that he thought she was at the table. He could have painted the figure to spark interest and controversy. The best art is controversial.

Esaak admits that Leonardo was been known for “stirring the pot” every now and then, but “was not stupid.” The fact that Da Vinci painted a questionable figure with feminine traits does not question stupidity at all. It is clearly evident that the figure resembles a female.

For one, the questionable figure possesses a lighter complexion than the other disciples, which is referred to as high key. The other disciples possess defined and dark facial ascents. The painter accomplished this look by using a method called hatching. To address color, the questionable figure wears bears a pink toga while the remaining disciples wear more masculine attire. The disciple’s hand placement on the figure sparks curiosity. Leonardo does a great job of making the hand seem to lightly graze on the figure’s shoulder. The figure’s face direction towards the touch appears feminine. Jesus obtains the other disciples’ attention, except for the figure to his right, the figure possessing the feminine qualities. The fact that the figure chooses not to look towards Jesus may symbolize that the figure at the table is unlike the other disciples.

I think it is very debatable that Leonardo painted this figure to resemble Mary Magdalene. I am not even addressing whether Mary sat at the table or not. I just find it a bit absurd that Shelley Esaak would dismiss the theory altogether. Analyzing art is interesting and thought provoking but Esaak feels otherwise.

The support that Shelley Esaak uses is weak. One of her main points is that Leonardo is known for painting and drawing effeminate-looking males. If this is so, why did he not paint all of them all feminine or a few? Why one? Just because he gave the figure painted in Angel in the Flesh feminine qualities does not mean he randomly makes men look like females.

Shelley Esaak. “Is that John or mary Magdalene in the Last Super? About: Art History. http://arthistory.about.com/cs/last_supper/f/john_v_mary.htm

Equally Artistic and Then Some

G’day reader! Back for more opinions, eh? Glad to hear it—because I sure have them! My stacks of old magazines are endless mates and I keep finding old articles to tell you about! This time I found an article reviewing the work of John William Waterhouse. Waterhouse is one of my favorite artists. I am sad to say, this review of his work really didn’t capture a very positive feeling towards his work though. There was one point in the argument that really tangled my seaweed, while I agreed with another whole heartedly! Let me tell you a bit about those points. Then I can share my reasoning behind why I think Waterhouse earned a bad rap from the article.

First, it is important to note that Dorment did not tear Waterhouse’s work to shreds—he just scratched at it. Everyone is entitled to an opinion—after all, that is why I have a blog, right? Right. So, with that preamble out of the way, let’s dive in a bit here. Dorment’s thesis states: “Without for a moment denying that his work is both accomplished and appealing, the visitor emerges from the exhibition with a feeling that most of his pictures teeter on the edge of the sweetly derivative” (p. 868). Dorment gave reason for his differing opinions of Waterhouse by addressing two variations of Waterhouse’s work, heroines and storytelling art.

In the way of heroines, Dorment commended Waterhouse’s Isabella and the Pot of Basil, but said it lacks. “Waterhouse’s combination of perfect technique applied to certifiably interesting subjects seems rarely to have resulted in paintings that breathe, live, and fascinate” (869). To prove his opinion, Dorment compared Waterhouse’s work to other artists addressing emotion, but did not comment further on other elements comprising the paintings. “… heroines… of an earlier generation of Victorian artists, reappear here as teenage models dressed and posed like their mature predecessors, perfectly drawn and beautifully painted, but bleached of frustration, lust, and despair that made Hunt or Millais want to paint them in the first place” (869).

For his second round of criticism, Dorment elaborates on Waterhouse’s storytelling art. In a somewhat condescending compliment, Dorment wrote, “I found the picture haunting and even, rare for Waterhouse, moving…” in reference to Nymphs Finding the Head of Orpheus (869). Without truly analyzing either piece, Dorment again compared Waterhouse to other painters who painted the same scenario. Despite his compliment, Dorment did reflect on Waterhouse’s achievement in storytelling not achieved by other artists. “[I] also found in it no question of a seriousness deeper than the simple narrative details reveal, such as we instinctively feel in Gustave Moreau's or Odilon Redon's Symbolist versions of the same subject” (869).

I believe that Waterhouse’s work is merely a contrasting and equally artistic interpretation of the stories he chose to tell in his work. As a rebuttal, and unlike Dorment’s analysis, I will compare Waterhouse to the artists referenced by Dorment to support my opinion.

In the first case of heroines, let’s compare Waterhouse and Hunt’s work, both titled Isabella and the Pot of Basil. In Hunt’s piece, the artist’s talent is undeniable.

Hunt’s use of warm colors creates an inviting tone to the piece. The background differentiates from the foreground, creating a soft but recognizable dimension. The use of light appears high key in the bottom left of the painting and fading to a lower key lighting as the eye wander to the upper right corner. This creates in the viewer’s mind a source of light without being obtrusive. The subject is set to the right of the canvas with her eye line down and right. I agree with Dorment that this painting fascinates, but I do not feel that it breathes or lives. In fact, I do not perceive continued or unfolding action.

In Waterhouse’s version of the same painting, the colors are cool, and in fact a bit cold to the point that tone reflects disparity. Dimension is focused in the foreground of the painting, and Waterhouse allows for a softer line of dimension in the background. With this approach, the viewer focuses on the figure rather than background because the foreground is what is more intriguing. The source of light appears to be coming from behind the viewer in a sense as it washes over the subject and foreground and dissipates in the background. The subject is set to the left of the frame with an eye line drifting up and in front of the subject, though she does not open her eyes. After considering the different elements of these two paintings, it is clear that both artists have a different image of the same Isabella. I personally find Waterhouse’s interpretation more intriguing. I feel that his Isabella reflects a different emotion, but that emotion is just as clear and intriguing as the emotion conveyed in Hunt’s depiction. Therefore, I disagree with Dorment’s critique that Waterhouse’s heroine, in comparison to Hunt’s, lacks emotion.

Onto the story-telling art. In particular, I will focus on Odilon Redon’s Orpheus and Waterhouse’s Nymphs Finding the Head of Orpheus. Dorment stated that Waterhouse delves further into the seriousness of the story he told in his work while other artists, as Redon, tend to float on the surface of the narrative. First, let’s look at Redon’s work.

In this piece, Redon used warm colors with an apparent soft tactile element. Looking at the painting, one may be inclined to believe it feels like velvet because there is not an implied second dimension to the piece. There is low key lighting, reflecting a somber mood. The placement of the subject is in the left of the frame, and the nymph hold an instrument off some type, upon which the head is mounted. The head itself looks peaceful and slightly feminine.

In Waterhouse’s depiction of the same tale (Nymphs Finding the Head of Orpheus), there differences are obvious. Waterhouse used cool colors and again evokes a cold tone in this piece. This tone forces the audience to consider the piece as not a reflective snapshot but a more in depth survey of the story, encompassing the shock, horror, and dismay the nymphs felt as they watch the head of Orpheus float. The lighting is remarkable. I would characterize the lighting as high key, attributing the darkness of the painting to the color scheme rather than lighting. If you look closely, you may see that the skin on the right nymph’s back is bright and nearly glowing from a light seemingly positioned above the scene. The nymphs are placed to the right and center of the frame and the head floats slightly left of the center, indicative of it drifting away. The head itself looks more masculine than in Redon’s piece. The armor floating around the head also presents the warrior legend of the deceased.

In the element of storytelling as referenced by Dorment, I agree that Redon’s piece captures a moment rather than the story as does Waterhouse. I also agree with Dorment on the point that Waterhouse’s painting is haunting and moving indeed.

In conclusion, I hope that you, my mates, will take a look at some of the art displayed here and that is whets your appetite for further exploration. In the mean time, I am off to buy a Waterhouse print for the bar to add a touch of class.

Dorment, Richard. “The J.W. Waterhouse Exhibition: Sheffield and Wolverhampton.” The Burlington Magazine 120.909 (December 1978): p. 866, 869, 871. JSTOR. Wilson Library, Chapel Hill. 2 April, 2007

Van Gogh: His depression and his art

Well Hello again mates! Today and for the rest of this month I will be talking to you about the beautiful world of art. I have been painting since I was a youngster, and the walls surrounding my bars are covered by an overwhelming collection of paintings. Late last night as I was surfing the web, I came across an interesting article about my favorite painter, Vincent Van Gogh.

Van Gogh was a painter that lived during the 1800’s and is recognized as one of the world’s most fascinating artists, portraying his talent through the oil on canvas painting method. After reading the first article however, I came across another article which happened to basically contradict everything the first one said and left me thinking about the whole issue for a while. Anyways, lets analyze both of the articles.
The first article is by Art Review and it is titled “Van Gogh: The last painting”. The author acknowledges Van Gogh’s fabulous artistic ability and his high degree of intelligence throughout the article. The main argument however, is that he never wished to portray his depression and sadness through his artwork because he deeply cared about his family, and had no intention of letting anyone know about his feelings. The author has several sources of evidence to demonstrate this.

First, his self-portraits do not clearly show a man in depression or in sadness so it would be wrong to say that he was in fact trying to show something. In fact, in one of his self-portraits in 1889, he painted himself from his right side so that he could hide the left side of his face that was missing an ear he had cut off a few weeks earlier. Many of his paintings are live and full color, and if he had wished to portray his depression he would have certainly painted with darker colors.

Second, his letters to his mother before his death shows that “he deeply loved and admired her” and that in no way did he want her to see his sadness and melancholy. The author argues that through his writings one could tell that he was an emotional and intelligent human being. So basically mates, this author admires Van Gogh a lot and thinks that he should be admired for his artwork rather than the psychological problems he had, because these were not being portrayed through his paintings.

The second article, by Laura Miller is titled “Van Gogh on Prozac”. Here the author argues that the only reason Van Gogh’s paintings are so praised and admired to this day is because of the fact that he was crazy, and if Prozac had been available to him a hundred years ago, his artwork would never even have been known to exist. She states that his depression, epilepsy and suicide largely contributed to his success as an artist.

This author provides very little evidence throughout her article and bases her arguments or statements on personal belief. That is the reason mates that I do not agree with any of her arguments.

The first one, is that Van Gogh was in a state of deep depression and enjoyed showing this through his paintings; hence all of the personal portraits he did during the two years prior to his death. Her second argument, based on the fact that the first one is correct, is that people loved his paintings because everyone tends to have a natural tendency of liking art because of the artist’s personality, especially if he is crazy and unstable.

The second argument, or well I do not really think I can call this argument, is that “had Prozac been available back then, no one would have wanted him to take it” because he would of stopped painting such incredible art. This basically means that people like to see others suffer because they receive a benefit from it (a good painting). This statement is totally outrageous and portrays normal people as some sort of monsters. I have to say that I strongly disagree with this author and believe that her comments are completely out of line.
Well mates I hope you enjoyed this, ill see you all soon!

"Van Gogh:The last self-portrait". The Art Review. London, England. 2006

Miller, Laura. "Van Gogh on Prozac".
http://dir.salon.com/story/books/review/2005/05/23/kramer/index.html

The Work of Otto Dix

Being a free thinker, I sometimes look at many types of art. One that is particularly striking is expressionism, which aims to convey certain emotions visually in art.

The expressionist movement in the visual arts became mainly popular in the early 1900’s, partially as a result of the first and second world wars. One of the most prominent, and the one who happens to be my favorite expressionist, is the German artist Otto Dix.

Firstly you need to have a little bit of background information on the life of Dix in order to understand the intentions of his work. Otto Dix was born and raised in Germany. The most significant part of his life (in relationship to his art) was his service in World War I. Dix continued to reflect on his experience in the first Great War and the tragedy of living during the Second World War, using this to infuse his work. Being an expressionist, much of his war related paintings and drawings (seem to) deal with negative feelings and emotions.

However, in the article “Confronting Postwar Shame in Weimar Germany: Trauma, Heroism and the War Art of Otto Dix” Paul Fox makes the case that Dix’s motivations and intentions can be easily misinterpreted by anyone who doesn’t have insight into Dix’s life.

Overall Fox feel completely certain that Dix’s work is void of any pro or anti war claims and focuses solely on personal emotional experiences rather than generalized tragedy.

Fox begins by explaining a commonly held theory in war related art, fashioned most notably by Linda McGreevy. This theory is that an artist will choose his or her war related material by prescribing to either the reactionary or pacifist camps. McGreevy specifically describes Dix’s intentions as pacifistic. A deeper analysis of Dix’s work, believes Fox, shows that this view shallow and that Dix’s meaning my have been incorrectly determined.

Being a veteran of the military Otto Dix has had lasting emotional imprint placed on his mind during his service. In light of this and of various drawings and writings he has created Fox believes it is apparent that Dix’s work on war revolves almost solely around the psychology and emotions of the soldiers during the war.

Fox gives evidence from “The Trench” a peer reviewed article that examines war related art, especially Dix’s. The article explains how Dix addresses his intended audiences, that is the veterans of war and the witnesses (militants that did not reach the front lines). Most of Dix’s expression seems to be accounting for the trauma of the veterans rather than make a statement or movement against war all together.

While it may seem that these experiences such as fear and tremendous pain (such as seen in some of his gory drawings) he also includes (some) images of better characteristics such as resilience. Dix only includes graphic images of war in ways that show how the soldiers saw or were affected by these stimuli.

Rather than making a point against war, as McGreevy describes, Dix instead is using his appeal and talent to highlight veterans issues, mainly those of (what we call now) post-traumatic stress disorder and the strength required by the soldiers to mentally survive what they have been presented with.

Fox, Paul. “Confronting Postwar Shame in Weimar Germany: Trauma, Heroism and the War Art of Otto Dix.” Oxford Art Journal. 2006. http://oaj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/29/2/247

Michelangelo's Influences

Well hiya mates! It’s been quite a while since you were here; guess you were out enjoying the snow that spring has brought to some parts of the world. Even though we never get snow down here, I really thought that winter was over. In any case I didn’t get up here to discuss the weather; I actually wanted to talk about one of my favorite artists. I’m going to let you guess, this artist was responsible for a colossal sculpture known as the David, as well as the magnificent ceiling painting in the Sistine Chapel. If you guessed Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, you are correct. Michelangelo was phenomenal Italian painter, sculptor, architect, poet, and engineer of his time. Today, Michelangelo is recognized world wide as being one of the founders of what is known as the High Renaissance.

It is no secret that every good artist must have inspirations. However great artists such as Michelangelo must be inspired as well as have outside influences. As of late, there has been much adieu as to what influenced Michelangelo to create such masterpieces. One particular article entitled On How to Listen to High Renaissance Art written by John Onians claimed that the works of individuals such as Michelangelo brought about the recognition of such arts as painting, sculpture, and architecture that cause the surpassing of previously recognized arts such as music and poetry. Furthermore Onians goes on to state that Michelangelo as well as other founding artists of the renaissance were influenced from written works that focused particularly on each artist’s area of interest.

Despite having a rather interesting thesis, John Onians was not able to provide nearly as much evidence for Michelangelo that would have supported his theory as he did for the other artists. In fact it seemed as thought Onians was some what unsure about Michelangelo. Onians was able to conclude however that Micheangelo was influenced by poetry because of his contact with Pohitian. However that one piece of evidence was not convincing enough support his original thesis stating that it was music and poetry that Michelangelo used as inspiration for his artwork.

Interestingly enough another article had an entirely different take on what influenced Michelangelo. The Influence of Neo-Platonism on Michelangelo written by Dr. Deborah Vess is smothered with evidence in order to support her thesis. Dr. Vess maintained that Neo-Platonism had a great influence on the Renaissance and that it was the very thing that influenced Michelangelo as well. Neo-Platonism is a term coined for schools that thrive based on religious and mystical philosophy. Such schools first appeared around the 3rd Century AD.

Dr. Vess was able to support her theory with evidence from several sources in which most were direct quotes that were said by Michelangelo himself. Dr. Vess stated that the artist in Michelangelo’s eyes was like God, which no doubt comes from neoplatonism. Dr. Vess also provides interpretations of his artworks in a rather vivid manner that again supports her thesis. Art historians are aware of Michelangelo’s obsession with the body, but Dr. Vess takes the opportunity to explain the reason for such was that Michelangelo felt as though the human body was “a reflection of the beauty of the soul.” Thus it provides not only an explanation for Michelangelo’s obsession with the human body but also links it directly to Neo-Platonism.
Dr. Vess concluded her article with the following, “only divine inspiration could have created the David and the Sistine Chapel ceiling, and it was to the divine that Michelangelo wished to appeal.” There is no doubt that the divine mentioned are the ideas, beliefs, and values that were instilled in neoplationism during that time period.

To that end there is no doubt as to which author provided the better article. Clearly it was Dr. Vess, because unlike Onians, she actually took the time to do some detailed research on Michelangelo whereas Onians only had two or three short paragraphs on one of the greatest artists of all time.

Inspired-- but by what?

‘ello everyone! So glad you stopped in for another piece of my mind. My focus has shifted to art mates. I had a buddy stop in the other day, rattling off on how she saw an exhibit of Matisse and Picasso at MoMA. One, ahem, beverage after the other just propelled her through this rant on how Matisse was inspired by fabric. Now, how can a painter be inspired by fabric, you may ask. I wondered the same thing. As I looked at some of Matisse’s art, I began to see fluidity and reasoned that this must be what critics are talking about. Then I found these two articles. One says the Matisse was solely influenced by fabrics while another says that the fabric argument is only the surface—his true inspiration was modernity. Interesting theories—so I looked a little deeper. Here is what I found.

A professor of philosophy and aesthetics, Maureen Egan makes the argument that Matisse drew his inspiration from fabric alone in her article titled Matisse: Fabric of Dreams. In her article, the author’s thesis is ““Throughout his life, as Spurling notes, Matisse felt the strong influence of textiles and incorporated them into his paintings, often in radical new ways” (Egan p.3) Egan embellishes her argument with references to Matisse’s biographical information and his four stages as exhibited in the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) exhibit in 2003. Egan’s mention of Matisse’s biographical information is limited to location where he grew up and briefly explains the significance of this town. “A descendent of four generations of weavers from French Flanders, Matisse (1869-1954) spent his childhood in Bohain- en-Vernandois, an area famous for handwoven luxury fabrics…” (Egan p. 1) Egan delves further into details as she discusses the four stages of Matisse’s art. According to Egan, stage one “opens with artifacts from his beginnings in Bohain and his time as a young art student in Paris, then moves on to the period before World War l.” (Egan p. 2) During stage two, “one particular piece of flowered cotton toile de Jouy became a powerful inspiration to him and began to appear prominently in his paintings” (Egan p. 2). As Matisse continued his career, stage three manifested changes made to Matisse’s creative environment—changes sure to impact his work. “Matisse's move to Nice in 1918… His studio came to resemble a small theater replete with backdrops, carpets, screens, props, and a variety of ethnic costumes.” (Egan p. 2) Fourthly, and finally, Matisse’s fourth stage took a cultural turn, perhaps another step towards the ethnicity he sought in the transformation of his space in stage three. “African fabrics that captivated Matisse and a set of religious vestments that he designed for the Chapelle du Rosaire in Venice, France, to represent the fourth period” (Egan p. 2). In summary, Egan supports her argument that Matisse was strongly inspired by fabric by making reference to his upbringing and the four stages of his work as exhibited at MoMA. In Alan Powers’ article, Pattern and Painting, the author argues that though Matisse was inspired by fabrics, but that fabric was just an element of an entire cultural movement that was the true stem of inspiration. Without the existing conditions, the fabric would not be important. Powers’ thesis states, ““The textile 'story' in Matisse's life is there for anyone to see… This affinity was not merely a biographical accident, however. It was a symptom of a wider cultural movement within Modernism, one whose significance has still to be fully acknowledged” (Powers p. 1). To support his argument, Powers draws his evidence from Matisse’s biographical information, as did Egan. However, Powers does not stop at mentioning that the young artist grew up in a fashion town. According to Powers, Matisse grew up in a “town whose economy of textiles soon went into an overdrive of productivity to feed the fashions of a Paris recovering from the bitter aftermath of the Franco-Prussian war” (Powers p.1). With this evidence, Powers says that the people of Paris turned to modernity to relieve themselves of grief caused by war. He continues along this track saying, “…the young artist's principal visual stimulus in an otherwise grim upbringing would have been these extraordinary untutored flowers of the industrial wilderness” (Powers p. 1). Translation to more digestible terms: if Matisse hadn’t been in this town, perhaps his talent would not have been cultivated. In essence, Powers’ article argues that the influence of fabric in Matisse’s art is merely a tip of the iceberg. Though he was influenced by fabrics, Powers states that the influx of modernity in the local culture surrounding Matisse as he grew up was the true seed from which his art stemmed.
Egan & Powers agree that Matisse was inspired by fabric and that he was exposed to fabric as a child. However, Egan says that Matisse was inspired by fabric. Powers makes the argument that fabric was just a product of Matisse’s true inspiration: modernism. In my opinion, I believe that if these two opinions were fused together, the product would be a more all-encompassing argument. At first glance, the texts seem to feud over Matisse’s source of inspiration—was it fabric or modern culture? Both arguments provide factual information drawn from the artist’s biographical history while also examining his art. One author chooses to focus on the art (Egan) while another focuses on biographical history (Powers). I do not believe either is wrong. I believe both are correct in their theories. In my view the opinions do no necessarily counter one another. Matisse is critically acclaimed for having been inspired by fabric, as exhibited in his four stages. History also tells us that not only Parisian culture, but worldwide, after the tragedy of war, citizens look for something new to embrace. For Parisians in the time of Matisse, that new, fresh hope was modernity.
The work of Matisse is truly fascinating. I encourage you to ponder some of his work to draw your own conclusions. Was he truly inspired by fabric? Modernity? Perhaps he was inspired by a tasty, tropical indulgence? I am off to attempt inspiration with a pina colada. Cheers, mates!

Egan, Maureen. “Matisse: Fabric of Dreams.” Fiberarts vol. 32 no. 1 (Summer 2005): pages 8-9. WilsonWeb Art Full Text. UNC Libraries, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 2 April 2007. < _requestid="4263">

Henri Matisse and the Fauves. 2007. The National Gallery of Art. 9 April 2007.

MoMA The Museum of Modern Art. 2007. The Museum of Modern Art. 9 April 2007

Powers, Alan. “Patterns and Painting.” Crafts (London/England) no. 193 (March/April; 2005): pages 26-31. Wilson Web Art Full Text. UNC Libraries, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 2 April 2007. < _requestid="4406">

Physiological & Psychological Perspectives

As I was reading the Australian Pipeline yesterday morning, I came across an advertisement for an exhibition. This exhibition has been sweeping the country and leaving art followers in awe. The exhibition is entitled, George Lambert Retrospective: Heroes and Icons. George Lambert is one of Australia’s most brilliant and influential artists. He was a versatile artist and possessed a broader scope than anyone of his time. His paintings are controversial and can be found in numerous Australian museums. The exhibition will feature 110 works during a course of fifty years and will consist of,

“his Australian bush subjects to his Edwardian portraits and figure groups, from his sparkling oil sketches to his major battle paintings and large sculpture” (34).

George Lambert is truly a master of the pencil, pen, and paint. He is noted for his easygoingness and sensitive nature. However, his wife remembers him a little bit differently. She considers his flamboyant personality as a mask to cover up his sadness. One painting, according to Anne Gray, that portrays this disguise is Chesham Street which was painted in 1910.

This painting, as the title of this post portrays, has both a physiological and psychological perspective. Anne Gray, the author of George Lambert retrospective: heroes and icons, describes the psychological perspective. While Thomas A Faunce, author of Nurturing Personal and Professional Conscience in an Age of Corporate Globalisation: Bill Viola’s The Passions, attributes the painting to the medical humanities via the physiological perspective.

The man in the painting with his chest exposed is George Lambert himself. I have seen this painting numerous times, but I never knew it was Lambert! Gray believes the man himself, George Lambert, is an enigma. She explains that the painting “invites us to provide our own interpretation” (34). However, Thomas Faunce believes otherwise. He believes that this painting can be used strictly for medical students as they evaluate the human body. As Gray makes an analysis, she draws attention to the completely exposed torso while his face is aimed upwards. The man in the painting appears to have nothing to hide which is drawn from the fact that he is literally and metaphorically baring his chest. By exposing his chest he is opening his heart and soul to the world. However, many objected to his flamboyant appeal, believing he struggled more than he led people to think.

Thomas A. Faunce presents another perspective in his article pertaining to medical humanities. The majority of his article “explores the ‘norms’ or principles of bioethics, health law and international human rights is central to personal and professional development courses of contemporary medical schools.” The Australian National University Medical School takes a unique approach when administrating to their students. The university encourages its students to use consistent and practical application throughout a medical career, despite personal, collegial and institutional obstacles. One example of this approach is the requirement that students must study fine art.

“In addition to using selected online resources and nominated experts, the students are required to incorporate in their presentations imaginative insights and arousals of conscience gained from examples of fine art, including visiting a nominated work of art at the National Gallery of Australia.”

George Lambert’s Chesham Street is one of the pieces used for interpretation. However, the interpretation greatly differs from Anne Gray’s. This physiological perspective deals with Lambert’s torso as a functioning part of anatomy. This painting, in the perspective of medical students, can be compared to Leonardo Da Vinci’s drawings of the human body. In addition, the man in the front could be a doctor evaluating Lambert’s physical health. The doctor is more interested in his physical state rather than his mental state.

I believe both of these perspectives are well supported. However, I find the first perspective more interesting. George Lambert’s wife, Amy, agreed that Lambert’s “theatricality and love of laughter” was a mask behind which he hid his sadness. The second perspective has a more literal meaning, but is still a possible explanation. I just find it hard to believe that George Lambert, being the genius that he is, would use himself in a painting to portray a doctor visit.

Gray, A. George Lambert retrospective: heroes and icons. Artonview no. 49 (Autumn 2007) p. 34-5

Faunce, Thomas. Nurturing personal and professional conscience in an age of corporate globalisation: Bill Viola’s The Passions. Medical Education – Personal Perspective. MJA. Volume 183 Number 11/12. 5/19 December 2005 pp 599-601.