Grade 12 Visual Art
Wexford Collegiate School For The Arts
Impressionism: a quick summary for your notes
Instructor/writer: Peter Marsh, 2008
If you go to Sheppard and Warden in Toronto to Remezzo’s family dining restaurant, you will notice the “Moulin de la Galette” a copy of a famous Impressionist painting, painted on the wall. The truth is, you will see Impressionist images, repeated as decoration all around the world, and if you are lucky, you will see the original paintings in various famous art galleries. Or maybe not, as the case may be. In this past month $163 million worth were stolen from a museum in Switzerland, and this theft included four paintings by Cezanne, Degas, van Gogh and Monet. Many of these works are so coveted that some shortsighted rich people are willing to purchase them on the black market, so that they can keep them in their own cloisters for their own private viewing!
At the time the Impressionists were painting they provided a revolutionary new approach to the subject of painting. Whereas many previous painters in the preceding 500 years had approached the canvas wishing to express form as exactly drawn objects with colour applied as a skin over their surfaces, this new approach was a colour and light convention. It is sometimes hard to say why a new approach to painting suddenly emerges, and “Impressionism” might seem to be a non sequitur to “Social Realism”, however, consider the fact that painting had moved in a more painterly direction over the period since the "Neo-classicists", and additionally photography had seriously entered the field of the three-dimensional representation of an image on a two-dimensional surface. In this situation it’s not so hard to believe that artists would start thinking about the physics of light, new approaches to the two-dimensional surface, and to the application of paint.
Whereas, previously, landscapes and objects had been painted with due respect for aerial perspective and various aspects of reflection there had been little thought about how light actually works, its various daytime qualities, various daytime hues, refraction, reflection, and how the colour of an object is a composite of all the objects around it. The Impressionist, were the first set of artists to set their sights on the expression of colour and light.
Of course this is not to say that the artist in this time completely discarded social realism. Far from it, the Moulin de la Galette mentioned above was completely a contemporary painting and was for the most part painted on site. Paintings of myths and legends had long since disappeared from the mainstream and Impressionist painters not only discarded formal academic procedures, but also deliberately painted in the outdoors, and this was referred to as painting “en plein air”. One might also notice that the darker social venues of Gustave Courbet have been replaced by much happier surroundings. The subjects are enjoying a walk in the garden, a visit to the lake, or at a party at the ‘Bar at the Folies Bergères’ (by Edouard Manet ,1882). And also one might note that these artists are not striving to bring a didactic message, but instead are centering in on an analysis of painting itself. Their important work will lead to the cornerstones of 20th-century art. From their work will spring the “Fauves” movement and its “Expressionists” psychological colour, the “Cubists” with their analysis of form and composition, and the “Surrealists”, who will re-examine the meanings of reality. So although they are using everyday life as their subject matter, and examining light and color, they are actually building the foundation for vast new forms of thinking and expression.
Despite the foregoing stream of academic verbiage, the everyday bloke enjoys the paintings, because they are really joyous, colorful, and uplifting. They are full of sunshine and light and color, happy subjects, dancing brushstrokes, and delightful contemporary scenes, the likes of which had never been seen before. As a result, impressionist paintings have enjoyed unparalleled popularity and reproduction.
In the short span of a survey course it is difficult to cover adequately all the events that led to this modern movement. Suffice it to say that in the run-up we have skipped over some truly great artists like Ingres and Delacroix, Goya and Daumier, Millet and Corot, and a goodly number of other artists in other countries like Eakins, Turner, and Constable. We may see some of them in class presentations but you should also look them up for yourself, and see some of their impressive images, if you have the time.
Perhaps before moving on, we should realize that in any society a degree of acceptance has to be established for most forms of artwork. In French society in the 19th century, the highest test for any artist seeking public recognition was to attract the eye of the jurors for the annual national ‘Salon’ exhibition. Thousands of pieces were submitted for the judgment of these people. Unfortunately, as the Salon grew in popularity the requirements for acceptance grew into a sort of formula that constricted truly creative advancement. As a result by 1863 the numbers of those rejected had grown to a considerable size such that a decision was made by ‘the rejects’ to hold their own “Salon des Refusés”. Although the advisability of exhibiting with those who have been rejected is questionable, some artists were able to surmount that stigma and accrue some growing recognition for their work. One of the greats, whose ‘Le déjeuner sur l'herbe’ (Luncheon on the Grass) had been rejected by the official Salon, was Manet. This remarkable piece, which fitted the classical requirements of entry, depicted two female nude bathers, two male clothes figures, some still life objects, and somewhat idyllic scenery. But the scene was contemporary, and as such it was an affront to the moral standards of the times. This significant defiance pointed towards the abandonment of the Salon formulas, and the independence of the artist to pursue individual expression and creativity.
So by 1874, when the Impressionist formed their own society the groundwork had been laid for some truly significant new directions. Official names on the society list to be remembered for the advancement they made, include Renoir and Pissarro, Dégas, Sisley, Monet and Cezanne. The fact that Manet is not included in this group of names is truly amazing. Although he pursued the Holy Grail of the salon, his work actually made great strides in new expressions of reality using stark contrasts, visible brushstrokes, contemporary subject matter, and blatant engagement of the observer.
Monet’s “Impression Sunrise”, is one of those seminal pieces that not only gives a name to this complete movement but also marks out the characteristics of a whole lifetime of work. Those same characteristics could be listed for all the members of the group and might read as follows:
Bright and cheerful colors.
Visible dashing brushstrokes.
Contemporary subject matter.
Open-air painting.
Analysis of light effects.
Awareness of optical color mixing.
Analysis of reflections and refraction.
Emphasis on colour rather than form
Intimate scenes of everyday life
And one should also add, characteristics of 'Japanese Prints',
those being: angular viewpoints, flatness, familiar views, and stylized rendering
Monet, who is famous for his water lillies, is also known to have painted over 40 renditions of “Rouen Cathedral”, and 15 paintings of a haystack in a field: all this to study the change in quality of light on any given subject and how it might be rendered on a canvas.
Dégas, who is the draftsman of the group is famous for his paintings of figures in the ballet studio, a great portrait of the “Belleli Family”, female nude studies, and also some great renderings from the horse races.
Renoir is marked as a great colorist. Personally, I remember being stopped in my tracks by his painting “The Swing”. It is a truly scintillating combination of brushstroke and color that conjures up the dappled light falling on some figures on a beautiful sunny day. This same impression must be true of his already mentioned “Moulin de la Galette” of 1876, and his “Luncheon of the Boating Party” of 1881. Consider that none of these artists live in a vacuum, and few of them have work that stays the same for the whole of their career. Their peers and their history, push them into constantly new directions. Such is the case for Renoir, who, as he moves towards his full 78 years, creates growing abstraction with his color and brushstroke and moves away from the specific to the more monumental expression of the human form.
To these names must also be added Toulouse Lautrec and Marie Cassatt if we are not to forget them in their un-bracketed personal expression. Although allied to the characteristics of impressionist works they pursued their own directions along with a number of other artists who are not mentioned here. Toulouse Lautrec is of course the character who hung out at the Moulin Rouge and other notorious brothel-like clubs and drew and painted the dancers and others who frequented those establishments with their fancy outfits, top hats, and long gowns. These people appeared in paintings and lithographic posters on a regular basis. Marie Cassatt is about as far in the other direction as one could get, born of a wealthy American family, having transported herself to Europe for her art studies, she became famous for her intimate studies of family life and her wonderful pastel drawings.
For me personally Sisley and Pissarro are honest adjuncts to the greater names I've already mentioned. Their work on cityscapes and landscapes displays many of the aforementioned characteristics of dancing brushstrokes, dots of color, optical color mixing, everyday scenery, and devotion to the study of light. And also who could leave out Seurat with his monumental attack on the dot as a mode of expression for the vagaries of light effects (see Sunday Afternoon on the island of La Grande Jatte". Considering the nature of his work I am not surprised that he died at the age of 33!
Personally, and perhaps for many other students of art history, Paul Cézanne is possibly the most substantial of them all. Over his long and individualistic painting career, Cézanne moves progressively towards abstraction, but not to the level approached by the likes of Picasso, Dali, and Matisse. Although he paints still life's and landscapes with the occasional inclusion of houses and people, his objectivity is focused in on the two-dimensional nature of the canvas. There are so many thoughts that run through an artist’s mind while he or she is working on a piece, it is almost certain that advancements that are attributed to his work were deliberate and sequential.
His first landscapes, fitted into the traditional bracket, however, his constant and increasing forays into the disintegration of form, the distortion of form to create balance, analysis of composition, and the abstract expression of both brushstroke and color, are no accident. Through the genius of his work he set a path that led in many directions and prepared the way for the giants of modern art who came after him.
The shattering of brushstroke and abstraction of colour led to work by Matisse and the Fauves. His struggles with composition were seeds for the likes of Picasso, Braque (Cubism) and Mondrian. And the dreamlike quality of his later figurative works are a springboard for the Expressionists and Surrealists minds.
With all of the above in mind it is easy to see why the impressionists hold such an important place in art history. They are the marking point that completes a 500 year development that regards the canvas as a sort of window on the world, (and a three-dimensional representational window at that). Following their work, future artists examine the canvas as a two-dimensional surface that might be approached in a more honest fashion. That is not to say that realism is abandoned, rather they work with the realization that what is depicted on the canvas is a production of the mind rather than an illusion of reality.
Peter Marsh February 18, 2008
Wexford Collegiate School For The Arts
Impressionism: a quick summary for your notes
Instructor/writer: Peter Marsh, 2008
If you go to Sheppard and Warden in Toronto to Remezzo’s family dining restaurant, you will notice the “Moulin de la Galette” a copy of a famous Impressionist painting, painted on the wall. The truth is, you will see Impressionist images, repeated as decoration all around the world, and if you are lucky, you will see the original paintings in various famous art galleries. Or maybe not, as the case may be. In this past month $163 million worth were stolen from a museum in Switzerland, and this theft included four paintings by Cezanne, Degas, van Gogh and Monet. Many of these works are so coveted that some shortsighted rich people are willing to purchase them on the black market, so that they can keep them in their own cloisters for their own private viewing!
At the time the Impressionists were painting they provided a revolutionary new approach to the subject of painting. Whereas many previous painters in the preceding 500 years had approached the canvas wishing to express form as exactly drawn objects with colour applied as a skin over their surfaces, this new approach was a colour and light convention. It is sometimes hard to say why a new approach to painting suddenly emerges, and “Impressionism” might seem to be a non sequitur to “Social Realism”, however, consider the fact that painting had moved in a more painterly direction over the period since the "Neo-classicists", and additionally photography had seriously entered the field of the three-dimensional representation of an image on a two-dimensional surface. In this situation it’s not so hard to believe that artists would start thinking about the physics of light, new approaches to the two-dimensional surface, and to the application of paint.
Whereas, previously, landscapes and objects had been painted with due respect for aerial perspective and various aspects of reflection there had been little thought about how light actually works, its various daytime qualities, various daytime hues, refraction, reflection, and how the colour of an object is a composite of all the objects around it. The Impressionist, were the first set of artists to set their sights on the expression of colour and light.
Of course this is not to say that the artist in this time completely discarded social realism. Far from it, the Moulin de la Galette mentioned above was completely a contemporary painting and was for the most part painted on site. Paintings of myths and legends had long since disappeared from the mainstream and Impressionist painters not only discarded formal academic procedures, but also deliberately painted in the outdoors, and this was referred to as painting “en plein air”. One might also notice that the darker social venues of Gustave Courbet have been replaced by much happier surroundings. The subjects are enjoying a walk in the garden, a visit to the lake, or at a party at the ‘Bar at the Folies Bergères’ (by Edouard Manet ,1882). And also one might note that these artists are not striving to bring a didactic message, but instead are centering in on an analysis of painting itself. Their important work will lead to the cornerstones of 20th-century art. From their work will spring the “Fauves” movement and its “Expressionists” psychological colour, the “Cubists” with their analysis of form and composition, and the “Surrealists”, who will re-examine the meanings of reality. So although they are using everyday life as their subject matter, and examining light and color, they are actually building the foundation for vast new forms of thinking and expression.
Despite the foregoing stream of academic verbiage, the everyday bloke enjoys the paintings, because they are really joyous, colorful, and uplifting. They are full of sunshine and light and color, happy subjects, dancing brushstrokes, and delightful contemporary scenes, the likes of which had never been seen before. As a result, impressionist paintings have enjoyed unparalleled popularity and reproduction.
In the short span of a survey course it is difficult to cover adequately all the events that led to this modern movement. Suffice it to say that in the run-up we have skipped over some truly great artists like Ingres and Delacroix, Goya and Daumier, Millet and Corot, and a goodly number of other artists in other countries like Eakins, Turner, and Constable. We may see some of them in class presentations but you should also look them up for yourself, and see some of their impressive images, if you have the time.
Perhaps before moving on, we should realize that in any society a degree of acceptance has to be established for most forms of artwork. In French society in the 19th century, the highest test for any artist seeking public recognition was to attract the eye of the jurors for the annual national ‘Salon’ exhibition. Thousands of pieces were submitted for the judgment of these people. Unfortunately, as the Salon grew in popularity the requirements for acceptance grew into a sort of formula that constricted truly creative advancement. As a result by 1863 the numbers of those rejected had grown to a considerable size such that a decision was made by ‘the rejects’ to hold their own “Salon des Refusés”. Although the advisability of exhibiting with those who have been rejected is questionable, some artists were able to surmount that stigma and accrue some growing recognition for their work. One of the greats, whose ‘Le déjeuner sur l'herbe’ (Luncheon on the Grass) had been rejected by the official Salon, was Manet. This remarkable piece, which fitted the classical requirements of entry, depicted two female nude bathers, two male clothes figures, some still life objects, and somewhat idyllic scenery. But the scene was contemporary, and as such it was an affront to the moral standards of the times. This significant defiance pointed towards the abandonment of the Salon formulas, and the independence of the artist to pursue individual expression and creativity.
So by 1874, when the Impressionist formed their own society the groundwork had been laid for some truly significant new directions. Official names on the society list to be remembered for the advancement they made, include Renoir and Pissarro, Dégas, Sisley, Monet and Cezanne. The fact that Manet is not included in this group of names is truly amazing. Although he pursued the Holy Grail of the salon, his work actually made great strides in new expressions of reality using stark contrasts, visible brushstrokes, contemporary subject matter, and blatant engagement of the observer.
Monet’s “Impression Sunrise”, is one of those seminal pieces that not only gives a name to this complete movement but also marks out the characteristics of a whole lifetime of work. Those same characteristics could be listed for all the members of the group and might read as follows:
Bright and cheerful colors.
Visible dashing brushstrokes.
Contemporary subject matter.
Open-air painting.
Analysis of light effects.
Awareness of optical color mixing.
Analysis of reflections and refraction.
Emphasis on colour rather than form
Intimate scenes of everyday life
And one should also add, characteristics of 'Japanese Prints',
those being: angular viewpoints, flatness, familiar views, and stylized rendering
Monet, who is famous for his water lillies, is also known to have painted over 40 renditions of “Rouen Cathedral”, and 15 paintings of a haystack in a field: all this to study the change in quality of light on any given subject and how it might be rendered on a canvas.
Dégas, who is the draftsman of the group is famous for his paintings of figures in the ballet studio, a great portrait of the “Belleli Family”, female nude studies, and also some great renderings from the horse races.
Renoir is marked as a great colorist. Personally, I remember being stopped in my tracks by his painting “The Swing”. It is a truly scintillating combination of brushstroke and color that conjures up the dappled light falling on some figures on a beautiful sunny day. This same impression must be true of his already mentioned “Moulin de la Galette” of 1876, and his “Luncheon of the Boating Party” of 1881. Consider that none of these artists live in a vacuum, and few of them have work that stays the same for the whole of their career. Their peers and their history, push them into constantly new directions. Such is the case for Renoir, who, as he moves towards his full 78 years, creates growing abstraction with his color and brushstroke and moves away from the specific to the more monumental expression of the human form.
To these names must also be added Toulouse Lautrec and Marie Cassatt if we are not to forget them in their un-bracketed personal expression. Although allied to the characteristics of impressionist works they pursued their own directions along with a number of other artists who are not mentioned here. Toulouse Lautrec is of course the character who hung out at the Moulin Rouge and other notorious brothel-like clubs and drew and painted the dancers and others who frequented those establishments with their fancy outfits, top hats, and long gowns. These people appeared in paintings and lithographic posters on a regular basis. Marie Cassatt is about as far in the other direction as one could get, born of a wealthy American family, having transported herself to Europe for her art studies, she became famous for her intimate studies of family life and her wonderful pastel drawings.
For me personally Sisley and Pissarro are honest adjuncts to the greater names I've already mentioned. Their work on cityscapes and landscapes displays many of the aforementioned characteristics of dancing brushstrokes, dots of color, optical color mixing, everyday scenery, and devotion to the study of light. And also who could leave out Seurat with his monumental attack on the dot as a mode of expression for the vagaries of light effects (see Sunday Afternoon on the island of La Grande Jatte". Considering the nature of his work I am not surprised that he died at the age of 33!
Personally, and perhaps for many other students of art history, Paul Cézanne is possibly the most substantial of them all. Over his long and individualistic painting career, Cézanne moves progressively towards abstraction, but not to the level approached by the likes of Picasso, Dali, and Matisse. Although he paints still life's and landscapes with the occasional inclusion of houses and people, his objectivity is focused in on the two-dimensional nature of the canvas. There are so many thoughts that run through an artist’s mind while he or she is working on a piece, it is almost certain that advancements that are attributed to his work were deliberate and sequential.
His first landscapes, fitted into the traditional bracket, however, his constant and increasing forays into the disintegration of form, the distortion of form to create balance, analysis of composition, and the abstract expression of both brushstroke and color, are no accident. Through the genius of his work he set a path that led in many directions and prepared the way for the giants of modern art who came after him.
The shattering of brushstroke and abstraction of colour led to work by Matisse and the Fauves. His struggles with composition were seeds for the likes of Picasso, Braque (Cubism) and Mondrian. And the dreamlike quality of his later figurative works are a springboard for the Expressionists and Surrealists minds.
With all of the above in mind it is easy to see why the impressionists hold such an important place in art history. They are the marking point that completes a 500 year development that regards the canvas as a sort of window on the world, (and a three-dimensional representational window at that). Following their work, future artists examine the canvas as a two-dimensional surface that might be approached in a more honest fashion. That is not to say that realism is abandoned, rather they work with the realization that what is depicted on the canvas is a production of the mind rather than an illusion of reality.
Peter Marsh February 18, 2008
