Socialism at the Horse Fair

Post Two:  Realism and the Early Avant-Garde

 

Marie-Camille de G. wanted art to depict social oppression in order to bring it to the attention of those in a position to do something about it.  The Horse Fair (1853-55) by Rosa Bonheur does show the lower class at work but in such a pretty, idealized way that Marie-Camille de G. might have been somewhat ambivalent about it.  She might have hoped that since the work was painted by a woman it could have gone farther to promote the cause of gender parity- but no- Rosa Bonheur found her place as a female artist (and therefore an outsider) using a traditional Academic style.   There are no figures identifiable as obviously female in the work.  Of course Marie-Camille had no real objection to the Academic style, she did, after all pick Martyrdom  of Saint Symphorian by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres as her favorite, or at least the least objectionable, painting of the Salon of 1834.  The work of Ingres shows how a human becomes a Saint by transcending suffering, oppression and death itself and Marie-Camille believed that the best subject matter came from a passionate, religious viewpoint.  Passion and emotion can move the viewer to action like no intellectual approach ever will.  The sheer size of the canvas and the beautiful subjects of The Horse Fair may create a sense of awe in the viewer but that is unlikely to bring about social change.

The Horse Fair is an idealized scene from a real event.  The horses are beautiful and the grooms and horse-handlers are handsome, strong men putting on a show for those with enough money to buy new horses for their farms, to pull their carriages and to ride to the hunt.  The painting reflects the horses as all are beautiful things up for sale.  Marie-Camille might have liked that men of the lower class are being shown as having control of the great power represented by the horses.   A slight change of subject matter such as including a couple of female figures in the painting as horse handlers or even spectators might have created more controversy than the artist wanted but could have made a feminist statement.

 Instead of actually changing the subject matter of the painting we might merely shift our viewpoint.   The men in the painting are being depicted in an idealized way but they might also be said to be living in a utopian world of the future.  In a socialistic utopia the horses likely would belong to a communal farm and be useful for the work that they do.  No individual would own these horses, as they belong to the collective.  The men circle the horses for a bit of training and exercise in the early spring before the busy seasons of plowing and harvesting and not to show them off as objects for sale.   Indeed, the artist who painted The Horse Fair, Rosa Bonheur, was raised by Saint-Simonian, radical utopian parents who subscribed to some of the same tenets as Marie-Camille de G.  They believed in equality of the sexes and in a female messiah who appears in the future.  Ms. Bonheur often dressed in men’s clothing to work since trousers restricted her movements among animals on farms and in stockyards much less than skirts.  Some say she painted herself dressed in her work outfit as one of the riders in the work.  Though there is no concrete reference to sexual equality- other than the gender of the artist- in this painting it is possible, with her background, that Rosa Bonheur is actually revealing a religious vision of some future socialist, utopian society.  She could be using Academic style and non-threatening subject matter as a cover to get this message seen by the masses.  Bonheur may have made a painting that meets with the approval of Marie-Camille de G. after all.

Impressions of the Avant-Garde

Art 237 Impressionism through Postmodernism

I’ve lived quite a long happy time without considering the avant-garde at all since I tend to be quite a traditionalist.  I’ve heard the word, of course, and associated it with those individuals on the edge of society- not just art but society itself.  Those who don’t actually produce art may be hangers on and associate themselves with artists as drug dealers, models or those who simply like the artist and any attendant drama, controversy, social events or excitement that may ensue.

The following description seems to take care of the stereotypes about avant-garde type(s) that I can think of offhand:  The avant-garde artist usually isn’t very social in spite of (above) hangers-on.  A more recent American type avant-garde artist can be male or female (is traditionally male), is rebellious in the sense that he/she doesn’t fit or conform to traditional ideals, lives in a bad neighborhood, chain smokes, uses alcohol or some other drug habitually, is young, looks older, often forgets to bathe (especially when in the grip of some artistic inspiration/project), may have lots of tattoos and piercings and isn’t usually fun to be around.  Yet… the quality that makes this person an Avant-garde artist is that he/she has noticed something about the world that others have missed and is attempting or has figured out a way to represent this thing or idea in visual or other media. 

If one looks at Art as a vast 3-D mosaic of works and ideas the avant-garde is that placing of tiles on the outside edges of the whole; it builds on what has gone before.  Any part of this mosaic can be seen by shifting the viewer’s perspective but the mosaic never can be viewed in its entirety from one point in time or space.   The older work can be hidden or highlighted by the new additions and anything new is destined to be built over in turn with the passage of time and the formation of new ideas.  Even terms such as avant-garde and Modernism change over time or can mean different things to different people at their inception.  The idea that a given artist or work is avant-garde can have a limited shelf life.  As time goes on this work is either forgotten or incorporated into the mainstream as society accustoms itself to the mew mode.  Sooner or later another idea will occur to some creative person and their work will gain the avant-garde title.

In Manet’s Luncheon on the Grass the 19^th Century viewer  is challenged by the painting’s size, lack of narrative in subject matter, modern nudity that doesn’t hide behind Mythological convention, bold, visible brush strokes, blocks of color and the direct, immodest stare of the nude female figure.  Manet introduced the concept of avant-garde before the name was coined by representing the idea that a painting need be only a painting and represent itself as such.  The size of the painting (7’ x 8’8”) announces it as an important work despite the convention that only historical, Biblical or Mythological subjects should merit such a large area of canvas.  Think of The Swing by Fragonard; it measures only 2’8 5/8” x2’2” and this might have been considered an appropriate size for Luncheon on the Grass.  The lack of a narrative is also new and makes one ask questions like:  is this an event that really happened?  Is this meant to be a portrait of real people?  Why is a nude woman with clothed men (and being ignored)?  What is the woman in the background doing?  Making people question the painter’s motivation is also an avant-garde concept.  The viewer must make an effort to find meaning or decide there is none.  This work also flouts the convention that female nudes should be soft, round goddesses lit with flattering illumination.  This woman looks -well- starkly naked because of the way she is lit.  She has shown herself to be modern by the clothing that she has discarded; she is no goddess from myth.  Manet also uses a non-Academic style of visible brush strokes, removal of some of the conventions about perspective and bold blocks of color instead of smooth blending because he wants us never to lose sight of the fact that this is a painting and not a window into heaven, history or reality.  That’s why this painting is considered one of the first avant-garde works.

It's Got to be Baroque

Week 10 Blog 9 for Art History 236

Baroque paintings have always appealed to me.  They have the attention to accurate anatomical detail in human and animal figures lots and of little details like recognizable plants: all the things I love to look at.  They also usually display considerable tenebrism and that dramatic contrast between light and dark along with the rich colors and the emotions and dramatic compositions make work done in this style particularly appealing.  The first people who saw the paintings done by Caravaggio must have been quite amazed and many critics rejected this style as too realistic.  Even today there is an argument that if something is depicted too realistically it somehow isn’t artistic or creative enough to be called art.  In the seventeenth century portraying a saint as a drunk with dirt on his face (even before conversion) was often seen as crude and undignified.

Nonetheless, Caravaggio’s style was greatly admired and copied (and sometimes still is) by other artists including two of my favorites, Artemisia Gentileschi and Diego Velazquez.  Artemisia’s Self Portrait as the Allegory of Painting isn’t the most dramatic painting of this era but it does show how Artemisia seems totally unafraid of the truth of her appearance.  She depicts herself, in her middle thirties at this point, as a heavy, somewhat plain though richly dressed woman that might be passed in the street on any day without comment.  Her other works also show a realistic approach, possessing true Baroque drama and yet seeming non-idealized in the sense that the characters in the narrative of the painting seem to be displaying real, natural reactions to their story.  If I were to be tasked with depriving Holofernes of his head I might do it with about the same methods and emotions as Judith in the painting.  Her female perspective of life makes her work easy for me to identify with even from my vantage of several hundred years later.

I think that some of the most enjoyable works of Diego Velazquez were done early in his career.  He painted common people going about their daily lives in the Caravaggesque style such as the work Water Carrier of Seville.  Maybe these lives didn’t contain much drama in reality but it’s provided with his style of lighting and possible iconographic or allegorical meanings.  His fascination with surface textures render the glass and jugs of the water carrier as more real than the figures of the boy, man in the background or the water carrier himself.  He was probably Catholic but didn’t emphasize religious art which also appeals to me.  As a fairly long-lived and prolific artist Velazquez painted many types of subjects from patriotic (The Surrender at Breda [The Lances]) to portraiture to mass portraiture and including himself in Las Meninas (The Maids of Honor).  This painting is so multi-layered.  It seems at first to be a portrait of the princess- and indeed much of the light centers on her- but her maids, parents, pets and portraitist are all included.  Velazquez upholds the time-honored tradition of the artist showing him or herself as an equal member of the court circle by putting himself in a portrait with the noble class.  One other interesting element of the painting is the giant space of the rich, dark background.  The well-lit figures in the foreground dominate the work and don’t seem lost in it and yet the occasional details that emerge from the background space add mystery and drama to the piece in typical Baroque style.  As the Spanish court portraitist Velazquez was kept busy with projects involving the royal family but also found time to travel and illustrate mythological subjects like the Tapestry Weavers, or the Tale of Arachne (which I did a paper on for another class).  He seemed to like to return to his roots of painting common people whenever he could though they were likely to be placed in a much grander setting in his later works.

Hogarth: The Failed Artist Finds Sucess

 

Early Eighteenth Century Art: Post # 8

I decided to do my research on William Hogarth the prolific British satirist and the first of his narrative cycles, The Harlot’s Progress, particularly the first scenes.

William Hogarth (1697-1764) started his career as an artist trying to work his way into portraiture of the English aristocracy.  He failed at this and never gained their favor though some of his portrait work still exists and he shows no lack of skills and talents.  He did some historical works and designed silverware patterns with a high class market in mind.   It seems even early on his associations with printmakers and artists of a satirical bent hurt his chances.  He tended to show up at the wrong places and say the wrong things and he was too obviously trying to promote himself in ways which came across as exploitive and probably were.   He illustrated John Gay’s A Beggar’s Opera in about 1728 which satirized all classes, particularly the aristocrats and began his own moralistic narrative cycle The Harlot’s Progress in about 1731.  This series was still aimed at a higher class patron as it doesn’t overtly ridicule the aristocracy; Hogarth still had hope of gaining a patron of this class at this point.

Hogarth may have fallen into visual narratives by accident; The Harlot’s Progress is said to have started with Scene III, The Arrest of the Harlot by Sir Johnson.  This scene originally depicted a woman getting out of her bed at about noon, as shown by her pocket watch, while her maid poured the tea.  This composition was a stand-alone piece which moralized about temperance and the lack thereof.  A woman pouring liquid from one vessel to another has been a temperance symbol since ancient times and the late riser, symbolizing luxury, is its opposite.  The gentlemen coming in through the door were a later modification to the piece to pair it with part II.  It was suggested that Hogarth make a companion piece for scene III, so he did and that piece became Scene II, The Harlot Deceiving her Jewish Protector.   In this scene the Harlot is having her maid sneak her young lover out past her protector.  In the background of this scene are lavish furnishings and painted masterworks as opposed to Scene III where the background is more tawdry.  The Harlot has fallen in the world.  Scene II and Scene III are now a pair of before/after vignettes of vice and its consequences.  Scene I shows the arrival of the Harlot as an innocent country girl coming to the city.  The other three scenes present the Harlot's redemption, death and funeral.

Since these engravings showed every indication of becoming popular Hogarth hit upon the money-making idea of selling subscriptions to this series of prints and made the prints himself because he couldn’t find a printer willing to take on the project because they would have to deal with him.   This ended up to be in his favor since he didn’t have to share the profits.   The narrative format works something like a soap opera or a play, the subscriber gets to follow the story as new episodes or acts come out and to find out how it will end they have to buy the whole series.  The Harlot’s Progress has six parts in its final form and was very popular.  Hogarth produced The Rake’s Progress series as a Male counterpart of the Harlot a few years later (1735), the series Marriage a la Mode in 1743-1745 and other moralist series as well.  Besides making prints of his moral narratives he also usually did one or more painted versions  to sell to wealthier customers.  Note I call them customers and not patrons, he became so popular with the middle class that he found that he didn’t need  patronage from the aristocracy.  Of course, he still painted the occasional portrait until about 1745 but since his prints and associated paintings sold well he didn’t need any particular patron.  Like Dürer in the sixteenth century he had effectively found a was to put himself outside the regular system of Artistic hierarchy by finding his own niche.  Of  course, he likely enjoyed satirizing those who had rejected him in the past.

Works Cited

Godby, Michael. “The First Steps of Hogarth’s Harlot’s Progress.” Art History 10 (1987): 23-37.

Stokstad M and Cothrin M.  Art History: Eighteenth toTwenty-First Century Art (Portable Edition).  Boston:  Prentice Hall, 2011: 920-921.

  If you have an appetite for antique satire many of Hogarth’s works and the Harlot series can be seen on ArtStor at: (http://library.artstor.org.ezp.lib.cwu.edu/library#3│search│6│All20collections3A20Hogarth) 

A Tale of Two Davids

Post 7: Baroque Art- Comparison of Michelangelo’s and Bernini’s David

Michelangelo was obviously echoing Classical sculpture in his representation of David (1501-1504) and following the Renaissance ideal of humanism in that his human potential is realized in his heroism.  David is so close to the Classical model that he could have represented a Roman god if he was made in ancient times.  His David stands contrapposto with the natural weight shift of a human body standing at rest on one leg, the other knee bent and one shoulder slightly higher than the other.  David wears the inwardly focused expression of one contemplating a great deed, perhaps a feat beyond his strength, and yet one he is determined to perform.  He is not emotionless but he is reserved and composed. The figure shows the idealized form of a young man yet David’s proportions are realistically sculpted except for his overlarge hands as this sculpture was meant to be seen from a greater distance than the close quarters where it ended up being displayed.  The balanced figure shows the ideal visual harmony valued both in the Renaissance and in classical times.   This sculpture was so beloved by the Florentines that they couldn’t stand to put it atop the pediment of the cathedral that it had been intended to grace and was kept at a street level for better viewing.

Bernini’s David shows all the drama that makes the Baroque era a favorite with art lovers.  His David’s stance is twisted- caught in mid aim and stepping forward into the space of the viewer.  It might be said he is in a very exaggerated contrapposto stance.  The Renaissance and Classical proportions are still there in the naturalism, and the humanism is evident in a subject who will be victorious in spite of overwhelming odds.  The visual harmony of this piece is in the twisted composition that makes the viewer want to proceed around the piece instead of looking at it from a strictly frontal view.  (It could be said that the drama is in conflict with the visual harmony of the piece, or that the drama adds to it, as a matter of opinion.)  The figure is caught in motion and makes the viewer want to move as well.  Bernini’s David displays the determined expression of one aiming at a target, lips compressed as if he’s biting them.  He appears to be a mature male with a less than ideal pose and expression which adds to the realism while it lessens the idealism portrayed.  The sculpture as a whole shows the balanced tension of a weapon aimed and about to let fly.

It’s interesting to compare these two directly.  Michelangelo’s David was considered to show the emotion of a young man who was preparing for battle and these feelings do show when compared to Medieval and Early Renaissance works- yet in comparison to Bernini’s David he seems emotionless and reserved.  The beautiful, ideal male body is more on display in Michelangelo’s piece; in Bernini’s work the body is somewhat obscured by the “chance” loincloth, the strap and bag for the sling stones and the twisted pose which also hides the body.   Of course the most striking difference is the Renaissance/Classical reserve compared the drama of the Baroque.  Here we have an argument of drama versus Classical composure in the comparison of these works- as later on the Rubenistes and Poussinistes will debate color and composition.  Both approaches have appeal and it isn’t really possible to deem the one as more important than the other.   Bernini’s sculpture is more complex and invites a longer, and even second and third view to appreciate the details. This David commands attention no matter where he’s placed.    Michelangelo’s work seems simpler and quieter and may be better to contemplate when we’re in a serene mood or want to reach serenity- a better companion in a quiet place.