
Thursday, 26 April 2007
Modern Art Heralds Sexism in Society

The Masks We Wear

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"
My interest in visual art began during a tour of abstractionist art in a
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.
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

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.
Wednesday, 25 April 2007
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
Tuesday, 17 April 2007
L’Enseigne de Gersaint
SOURCES
Whistler's "Nocturne: Blue and Gold"
James Whistler was a 19th 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
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
Saturday, 14 April 2007
Is Analyzing Art Superfluous? What About the Painting 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
Wednesday, 11 April 2007
Equally Artistic and Then Some

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.


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 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
Tuesday, 10 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
However, in the article “Confronting Postwar Shame in
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
Michelangelo's Influences
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 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.
Inspired-- but by what?





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">
Monday, 9 April 2007
Physiological & Psychological Perspectives
“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.