The Beginnings of Dada

The Dada and Surrealism art movements that began in the early 1920's challenged the concept and idea of art at the time. The Dada movement represented itself through pieces such as 'readymades' or performances as well as standard art mediums. This movement rejected any logic and rationality within it's expression, and instead stood for nonsense. Primarily a visual art movement, Dada-ism stood for anti-war and was against alot of norms of society in general. Actually Dada ideas mainly revolved around this anti-art image and idea of challenging what is art and what it is contrived of. 

Where as previous art movements were concerned with aesthetics based of off traditional art works and previous movements, Dada sought to dismiss this whole conception. For example, one of the first pieces considered "Dada" was Hugo Ball Reciting the Sound Poem, from 1916. This piece consisted of Hugo dressing up in cardboard and reciting sounds, noises of gibberish to an audience at the Cabaret Voltaire. The ideas behind these Dada influenced pieces were revolutionary at the time, and made a mark within art history. However items like readymades and these performances were and still are considered as controversial within the aspect of art.

I think, when looking at modern art during the time period, that the Dada movement was more of a relief to artists. Taking readymades, items that had already been produced for a certain use, and turning them into art shocked the art world and left artists to ponder the idea of art. Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain, a porcelain urinal, is a great example of a readymade and revolutionary Dada piece. He took this plumbing fixture and wrote in permanent marker “R. Mutt 1417”, which is considered as gibberish itself. This piece was exhibited in a museum and seen as offensive and absolutely non-art.

I would say that items like this readymade, can be considered art in a certain aspect. Not within a purely visual aspect, but more behind the idea of art and what it is. This readymade can be considered art, within the idea of it itself. This is the Dada idea of challenging the art world, a characteristic of the avant-garde.  People involved in this Dad movement, would not even consider it an art movement, and therefore perhaps their pieces are not art at all. They challenge the public to make these decisions of what is or is not art, of what is displayed in an exhibition or not.

Though some pieces of Dada are not visually appealing, they do not stand for aesthetics. This movement, different from any other within art, depicts nonsense and dismisses any logic especially within art forms based off of historical art movements.  The modern art world was witness to pieces that could be verbal nonsense, items from every day life, or anything in general. Artists like Ball and Duchamp were revolutionary within their art pieces, and challenged the art world with an avant-garde quality to it.

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

http://pmahoneyphotography.blogspot.com/

Paul Gauguin's The Yellow Christ

I will be focusing on Postimpressionist artist Paul Gauguin's The Yellow Christ, painted in 1889. This painting is considered an "avant-garde" work and I will prove so using Griselda Pollock's formula presented in The Challenge of the Avant-Garde. Pollock explains for an artist to be considered avant-garde, their work had to display reference, deference, and difference. I will go for in-depth to explaining these aspects and how they describe avant-garde works, such as Gaugion's. The first thing the viewer notices when looking at Gauguin's piece, is his color palette of mostly yellow's, oranges, and red's. He has seemingly rejected the notion of actual color and uses these colors to illustrate emotion, a vibrant and happy color palette. However doing so, he has created this bright and emotional palette on top of a more somber and perhaps morbid scene. He depicts a central character on a cross with a completely yellow skin tone, and particular bold outline. The other character's below this one on the cross, are also outlined in a more bold outline, which is pertinent to Gauguin's postimpressionist style. This character on the cross highly resembles Jesus Christ, but has been known to actually contain more similar facial features to the artist himself. Gauguin perhaps do this deliberately to compare Christ's sufferings with the ones of himself as an artist in society. The character resembling the artist is an elongated form, and contributes to Gaguin's abstract style. In depicting this scene resembling Christ on the Cross, however doing so in Brittany in 1889, Gauguin has touched upon Pollock's first point of reference (showing an awareness of what was already going on). Gauguin has chosen a scene that most people are familiar with and can refer too, and has obviously added some quarks to it. Adding different notions of color to play with the viewer's emotion, and depicting facial features similar to himself, Gauguin has radically developed and created a deference into his work. His abstract use of elongating the body, specifically arms of the character on the cross depicts the subject in an odd form. The usage of a solid yellow color with little to no shading for the character's skin color, also aids this notion of deference. With no shading, except a slight use of a blotchy green color, Gauguin has stepped out of the box here. We also see three subjects faces depicted below the central character, and however knelt and purposely there, they show little emotion through facial expression. This also adds to the abnormal feeling that a viewer may get, when noticing what this scene is depicting. This abstract style of Gauguin’s illustrates the last of Pollock’s aspects of the avant-garde, difference. Gauguin’s style and composition’s were very different from what the world was seeing in Impressionism and even the onset of Postimpressionism. His works were unsurely viewed by people at the time, and had a different mode about them then other artists of Postimpressionism. Pollock describes her definition of difference as; to be both legible in terms of current aesthetics and criticism, and a definitive advance on the current position. This absolutely illustrates Paul Gauguin and his style of art within the period of Postimpressionism.

Gustave Caillebotte's Floorscrapers

I will be discussing the concept of modernity in Gustave Caillebotte’s work, specifically analyzing his piece, Floorscrapers (1875). This is a great piece that highlights the Impressionist style of Caillebotte, which at first seemed unconventional within the Impressionism style. However, his use of light, loose brush strokes, and values is highly typical of an Impressionist artist. Floorscrapers was seen as a representation of gender roles within different workspaces, although this piece expresses a lot more. Caillebotte’s study and application of light across the floor and bodies of the workers is magnificent, and obviously the focus aspect of this piece. The light which comes through the upper left region of the painting where the window is located, floods across the room initially and falls across the three workers. It highlight’s their own bodies, with Caillebotte putting influence on the bone structure and slight muscle of the working men. The floor space seems to follow back into the rear in the piece, abruptly stopping at the wall line, which borders the background of the piece, except for the open window. Although Caillebotte was never considered an Impressionist artists and rather one border the lines of Impressionism and academism, the Impressionist style is completely apparent in his works. This piece reminds me of the differences between Claude Monet’s and Edouard Manet’s separate renderings of the Festival of 30 June 1878. I would rather compare Caillebotte’s piece to Manet’s rendering, The Rue Mosnier, rather then Monet’s because of the image of a working man. Caillebotte has illustrated an Impressionist scene, with great lighting and detail, but the scene is that of a hard working, lower class job. This is also where I can see the implications of gender roles within this piece, however it wouldn’t be one of the main aspects I would think of when first viewing this piece. However, the space in which these three men are working does seem like it could be a female dominated place, perhaps a dance floor or gallery of sorts. We also see to the direct right of the third figure, a distinct bottle of wine and full glass, which could also be a device to represent the idea of female and male gender roles in a space. Caillebotte often chose to depict men over women though, which we can also see in his pieces, Man at His Bath (1884) and Floorscrapers (‘side-on’ version) (1876). As previously stated, I don’t necessarily think this idea of gender roles is an important aspect. Although I can see how at the time, it was an noticeable aspect in this piece. Caillebotte’s usage of light and subject, is typical of an Impressionist artist, even though he himself was never considered as one. Although we do see modernity within most of his works, the most successful were those that depicted bourgeois scenes. Even though these scenes challenged traditional gender roles within the spaces they were depicted, Caillebotte did this on purpose. Personally, I enjoy Caillebotte’s Impressionist style, especially in this pieces that depict gender roles.

Claude Monet and Edouard Manet

This is a formal analysis of two works; Claude Monet’s The Rue Montorgueil and Edouard Manet’s The Rue Mosnier with Flags. Both of these works depict the Festival of 30 June 1878, which took place in Paris, France. Both of these avant-garde artists have rendered two different pieces of the same event, implying different meanings through style and depiction. Being Impressionists they created works that described feeling and emotion over detail, as a sort of opposition to Realism. Monet’s piece boasts a blazing color and high use of repetition to create this street as a space of high activity, implying celebration in this working class area. However Manet has depicted the scene as a more somber and tense one. He brings a more advanced side of avant-gardism to the table, successfully doing so through the tension he leaves the viewer within.

Manet doesn’t purposely try to leave the viewer tense though, he wants the viewer to create their own answers to what’s going on in the scene before them. This is where we see the more advanced side of avant-gardism, as compared to with Monet. Monet has shown the Rue Montogueil in a colorful pallet of mostly blues, reds, and whites. The flags that are hanging off the buildings seem to blend in a sea of color, and travel back into the vantage point of the painting as a blur. The next thing the viewer notices is the people in the street, mostly wearing dark blue with a few wearing white. Dark blue was the color of the working class clothing, which we also see in the subject of Edouard Manet’s piece. This piece expresses happiness and celebration of this street, with the viewer looking down onto this street. He was more concerned with expressing the happiness and vitality within this scene, rather then Manet’s portrayal of a more desolate but perhaps interesting scene.

Edouard Manet was more concerned with the deeper notions of why the people were celebrating, and therefore depicted a different street and scene on that same day. Rather then showing a large mass of people as Claude Monet had, Manet rendered only a few human subjects, with a main subject in the left foreground. This is portrayed perhaps as a, amputee war veteran, clad in dark blue, and using crutches to walk into this bleak street. This street, brightest right in the middle ground of the piece, has few people on it but dominates the space of this environment. This adds to the bleak emptiness of this piece, leaving the viewer wondering about a synopsis or perhaps situation of what is going on. Manet has seemingly depicted this street at the same high eye level as Claude Monet did in his piece.

Although both these artists had similar ideas, their depictions differ highly between happiness and somberness. As Claude Monet’s piece boasts celebration and exuberant happiness, whereas Edouard Manet has shown a more inauspicious scene. Both these Impressionist artists have specifically tried to express these different feelings through their work, with Manet using a more complex aspect of the avant-garde.

Formal Analysis of Gustave Courbet

This is a formal analysis of French painter, Gustave Courbet’s The Stonebreakers, completed in 1850. This piece is a work of Social Realism, which Courbet was known for depicting, and gave emergence to the term avant garde. Courbet’s subject matter at the time was highly offensive to the bourgeoisie, while his works moved away from Romanticism and towards Realism. The Stonebreakers is a great example of these new works, which illustrated truthful, unbiased, and genuine scenes mostly of the lower or working class. Courbet stood for this avant agarde aspect of pushing the boundaries or changing the status quo, even before it was a common movement. He is therefore considered one of the first avant garde artists of the time.

Stonebreakers moves away from depicting items of ‘importance’, which usually consisted of foods, pristine landscapes or architecture, and other components of the upper class. Instead, Courbet has rendered a large piece (over five feet wide and eight feet long) showing a man and young boy working along a roadside in the country. We see the older man in mid swing taking a hammer to the rocks along the roadside. The boy behind him is in midstep of holding a small woven basket of these rocks, giving the viewer a notion that this is a routine action for the two men in their job.

Beyond the foreground of the road, we see the men have a just a few items, consisting of another basket and some tools. At the far right there seems to be a pot and small bag and utensil, perhaps a meal of sorts. The background of the piece is illustrated by a slight hill, of a darker value (suggesting that the men are perhaps in a valley or area affected by sunlight and clouds) that opens up in the extreme upper right of the painting. Courbet has put what looks to be a small rock outcrop, or perhaps a vague representation of trees or shrubbery. This detail is conducted with an abrupt swatch of light brown/ tan value, with a light blue sky completing the space.

The lighting in this piece is beautifully crafted, with great value and spots of luminosity. The large shadow in the background of darker value suggests that maybe these men are working below a large tree or hill blocking the sun. However, the placement of the older mans ‘country style’ hat indicates the sun is still shining upon them. Courbet has rendered the older man’s face with two different values, creating this effect. Once looking at the lighter part of the values, towards the lower part of the man’s facial, the viewer’s eye is then directed towards the brighter part of the man’s hand; an intended highlight. This brings awareness to the texture and of the working mans hand, detailed with dirt and hard linear lines. This device adds to the element of depicting a working class person, in what was considered at the time on of the lowest and laborious jobs in society. Courbet has effectively illustrated these characters as highlighted heroes, through this lighting scheme, which is typical for his work. It is obvious that he has found beauty in this situation in which he actually viewed at one time. After viewing these two men working, he later brought them into his studio to complete this painting. The studio aspect is apparent in this piece, contributing to the great portrayal of ‘natural’ lighting, specifically in the foreground.

Thus, this painting was highly offensive to the upper or bourgeoisie class, whom didn’t care to see situations that didn’t involve any Romantic or Neoclassical elements, specifically including historical or religious references. Upon finish Stonebreakers was (knowingly of Courbet) attacked by critics, whom failed to accept this new and revolutionary style of art. However, with the state of Paris at the time, new artwork styles and techniques depicting scenes and context irrelevant to the bourgeoisie were on the rise. Along with the firm rigidity being taught within the academics of art, more artists began to emerge and create works moving away from the Romanticism, which had dominated French literature and art. These depictions of peasants, working class, and generally middle to lower class subjects became increasingly popular and gave way for the emergence of Realism.

Gustave Courbet and Realism

When looking at Gustave Courbet’s paintings, specifically, The Stonebreakers and A Burial at Orans, the expression of the lower class through Realism is highly relevant. During this time in France, especially Paris, there was much social unrest and division between the bourgeoisie and lower class. Along with the firm rigidity that was being taught within academic training, the avant garde seemingly emerged. These new artists, such as Courbet, moved in a direction of Realism and away from Romanticism, which dominated French artwork and literature. These works which boasted unbiased, truthful scenes, mostly depicted characters of the lower to middle class. Therefore these pieces were highly offensive to the bourgeoisie, and led way for the avant garde to proceed.

Gustave Courbet, born in 1819, painted landscapes, and still lifes that depicted social issues, often displaying characters of the middle to lower class. At the time these subjects were considered to be offensive when portrayed in artwork because of the previous influence of Romanticism and the bourgeoisie class. He often depicted subjects that were poor, peasants, and other working class people affected by the Industrial Revolution.

Courbet, who supported the Revolution, was one of the first artists to consider himself avant garde and led the Realism movement. In The Stone Breakers, we see a young man and an older man crushing rock a long a roadway in a rural area. This painting depicts one of the “lowliest” and most laborious jobs that existed at the time. Such beauty of situations like this was something that Realism stood for and is considered one of the first “socialist” paintings to ever have emerged. Not only was this piece was offensive to the bourgeoisie because it did not depict a Romantic or Neoclassical scene depict any historical, but it also rejects any historical or religious influence. However, Courbet seems to illustrate his subjects as some sort of heroes, or at least person worthy of mention. He found beauty in these situations and thus became one of the leading artists of the Realism movement.

In his piece, A Burial at Ornans, he more obviously illustrated the division and difference between classes. In this piece, which is an impressing ten by twenty one feet, the viewer sees a graveside service in which the figures to the left (considered the clergy) have completely different expressions then the figures to the right. The subjects to the right, “Courbet’s heroes of modern life”, express emotion, with some covering their faces or openly weeping. However even the altar boy and gravedigger, which happen to be more to the left, see to solely express boredom or nothing at all.

This painting was therefore attacked by critics, whom failed to accept this new style and technique of art. The bourgeoisie or upper class dismissed Courbet’s piece and many other Realism works, with the idea that is would digress artistic standards. At first, Realism was seen as the opposite of art, being called socialistic and unpleasant. With the rise of the Industrial Revolution and the current state of modern Paris, these Realism works were vital and increasingly prominent throughout art.

The Avant Garde and Edouard Manet

The term ‘avant-garde’ in a basic definition, describes artists that have moved their work towards a more radical and different representation. Moving towards a more modernistic influence, avant-garde artists of the 19th century depicted different subjects and styles of paintings. For myself I seem to associate this term with the idea of art for arts sake, and moving from Realism towards Impressionism. French painter Edouard Manet, played a vital role in bridging this transition. Works like Luncheon on the Grass, are currently considered as the beginning of modern art.

Manet is a great example of the classic avant-garde, but I do feel as though the term itself in modern times carries different implications then it did in the 19th century. This is where most negative associations can arise from the word, but when looking at the onset of Impressionism, I have found little if none negative aspects. This is because avant-garde is a relatively prominent term that once, during the 19th century marked artists going against the norm and pushing boundaries within art, a highly pivotal time. Within post-modernisim some of these aspects are relevant, just on a different level then the classic avant-garde artists.

Luncheon on the Grass is a great piece that represents this classic avant-garde influence of the early 19th century. This painting was highly controversial and was rejected from multiple salons when Manet first tried to exhibit it. In this piece we see two middle or upper class men sitting in a picnic like setting with a completely nude women. Depicting prostitution within the middle and upper class in painting, was highly controversial and sparked public notoriety. The way the nude women in this piece is staring at the viewer, challenges you viewer into understanding what is going on. This is also the case, somewhat, in Manet’s Olympia, where a nude women stares at the viewer.

Another aspect that seems to challenge the viewer is the use of lighting throughout this piece. Obviously in an outdoor setting, certain things such as the picnic food and the background seem to be highlighted unnaturally. It seems as though this scene could almost have been shot in a studio with the way the light falls across the scene.

The two men seem to be engaged in conversation, almost ignoring the nude female figure as she sits there somewhat comfortably. When this piece arose in 1863, there was much disdain felt by the general public towards it.However, a beatufiul piece, the ‘avant-garde’ aspect is highly emphasized. What also challenges the viewer in this piece is the painting style in which Manet was known for, a more sketched out and scratchy style, moving away from Realism in a more impressionist technique.

Recent Camp Shots

Recent Camp Night Shots

Mannerism in Art History

One of my favorite types of art we have looked at in Art History 236 has been art depicted through Mannerism. Before this class, I had seen pieces that are made within the Mannerism style, but what highly interested me this quarter was discovering the stylistic concepts and historical context behind this period of art. Mannerism was influenced by naturalistic styles of artists like Raphael, Michelangelo, and da Vinci but seems to encompass a more artificial, however exceedingly sophisticated quality. Artists like Parmigianino, Pontormo, Bronzino, and Fiorentino have all produced pieces of art within this time, and these similarities can be found throughout their work. Pontormo, specifically, seems to express this graceful notion that Mannerism is known for.
Jacopo Carcucci, or Pontormo , was an Italian artist during the onset and early years of Mannerism. His paintings depict a different perspective then previous High Renaissance artists, with figures elegantly floating in the air, a characteristic of Mannerism. Pontormo uses bright colors to depict a group of people in a grieving manner, supporting Jesus and encompassing the space around him. These figures seem to be struggling, implying that help is needed to sustain the weight of Jesus. The man holding him on the bottom seems to be peering back towards the viewer with an empathically look of fret. The rest of the figures seem to carry the same look about them, floating in this bleak space. Even the man on the bottom seems to be barely grounded, but still seems to be holding an immense weight.
The landscape of this oil painting consists of a dark flattened space, with solid ground and a single cloud in the sky. This is another aspect that is specific to Mannerism, and I find highly interesting. It is also very interesting that no cross is visible in this painting, and perhaps the only item relevant to the “natural world” in this piece consists of the clothing worn by these figures. This is highly evolved from earlier artists that would depict space and perspective with high detail, rather open spaces or flat backgrounds. Pontormo leaves the viewer with a quite ambiguous composition in this sense, and rather implies a more “visionary” painting. The way he has expressed these figures as more elongated and stretched out, is typical of the Mannerism style. Rather then being influenced by nature, artists began looking more at past works and sculptures. It is for this reason that Mannerism has been called as “anti-classical”.
Learning about this different aspects and qualities that define a period like Mannerism has been one of the most interesting and fun things for me to learn in this class. Although sometimes it can be frustrating to hear of so many different historians interpretations, it’s important to illustrate the complexity behind pieces of art. I also think the influence of naturalism but not overall depiction of the style, aids to my fondness of Mannerism. I have really enjoyed learning about this style and period with Art.

Clodion's Poetry and Music

Claude Michel, also known as Clodion was a sculptor of the Rococo style. He had many works illustrated within this fanciful and newly refined methodology. One of his most well known pieces, Poetry and Music (1774-1778), expresses this intimate and more personal style. Meant to be viewed at close range, Rococo sculptures like Michel’s were often referred to as “miniature Baroque” (http://www.all-art.org). This piece was commissioned by Louis XV’s finance minister and crafted in expensive Carrara marble. Although Michel or Clodion had also prepared a terracotta model as well, a medium he often worked within. Rococo seemed to be a more playful and elegant approach to Baroque art. Artists were concerned with depicting a more graceful and soft approach to Baroque art and architecture. As art in the early eighteenth century shifted it’s production from individual patrons to more industrially rich and middle class people, this style began to develop.

Once the French court changed locations from Versailles to Paris, the movement began to spread across the entire country and Rococo salons emerged. In these salons were not only great pieces of art, but the walls and ceilings themselves were sculpted and decorated within the Rococo technique. Rococo artists used soft creamy pastel-like colors, emulated curves within forms, and often used gold (especially within decoration). Chandeliers, decorated furniture and tabletop sculptures were very common within these salons that exploded across Europe.

Designed for his residence in Paris, Poetry and Music, was commissioned by Abbe Terray, a minister of Louis XV (www.nga.gov). The piece represents an overall interest of the minister within the arts and sciences, and depicts two young boys immersed within music. Standing up and with longer hair, the boy to the left seems to be older then the smaller one to the right. The smaller boy seems to be concentrated on the other while he plays an instrument. The boy on the right has a scroll in his hand and with his stern glance at the older boy, seems to be trying to learn or study. There is also a trumpet below the younger boy, suggesting that perhaps they are learning multiple instruments.

This sculpture expresses the smooth and graceful curves that the Rococo style was known for, specifically within sculpture. A soft piece that expresses a common interest within arts and sciences, this piece would have functioned in a Rococo style salon. Playful and intimate, Claude Michel’s Poetry and Music is a great sculpture coming out of the Rococo style of the eighteenth century.

Elk up Lion Rock

This big ol guy was at least 14 points, biggest I've ever seen.

Albrecht Durer's Self Portrait

For this week’s analysis, I will be looking at Albrecht Durer’s Self Portrait, also known as Self-Portrait at Twenty-Eight Wearing a Coat with Fur Collar. German Renaissance artist Durer painted this iconic piece on wood panel early around 1500. It is most well known for resembling Jesus Christ using religious devices such as symmetry, dark tones and the body language of the subject. Durer was the first known artist to accomplish many different styles of self-portraiture. This half-length portrait is frontal and highly symmetrical, with the figures right hand raised to his chest as if praying. His self portrait idealizes Christ, using a symmetrical and frontal view, rather then a pose where the head is at an angle. There was a large influence of Christ and the portrayal of Christ in portraits that went into Durer’s self-portrait.

Although the painting is directed at the viewer, it is also directed inward toward “the self”. The dark and bare background seems to suggest that Durer did not intend for this figure to be in any sort of environment. His use of the brown tones create a somber appearance and compliment the dark background. The use of the lighting in this portrait is also very interesting. The highlights fall unevenly across Durer and influence this portrait with a mellow notion of realism. Durer has also seemed to have mimicked the facial expressions of earlier depictions of Christ, and does it exceptionally well. Albrecht, who had started drawing at a very young age, was viewed as very bold for painting this frontal portrait, which at the time was very rare. He viewed himself as a fairly innovative and well-rounded artist, and perhaps he is suggesting in this portrait that his gift is God-given.

One of the most important figures of the Northern Renaissance, Durer was known for working within exact proportions. However it is debated that this piece is not of exact proportions, with art historians saying his hair is uneven. Durer put incredible detail into the hair of this figure, and it is one of the most highlighted aspects of this whole piece. Another stylistic choice Durer has made is the choice of clothing for his figure, a coat with a fur jacket. This is typical of the Northern Renaissance and similar fur jackets can be found depicted in the works of Jan Van Eyck. Durer not only excelled in painting, but also in making wood cuts and engravings. This piece is his third of his painted self-portraits and is considered his most personal. The way the viewer interacts with this frontal image is very effective and at the time was very innovative. When looking at Durer’s previous works, especially his self-portraits, this one is his absolute most successful.

Comparative Analysis

For the following comparative analysis I will be comparing two works; Pontormo’s “Entombment” and Bronzino’s “Allegory with Venus and Cupid”. Both these works were achieved during the High Italian Renaissance around 1520 and both incorporate the style of Mannerism. Jacopo Carcucci, or Pontormo as he was known, was an Italian artist during the onset and early years of Mannerism. His paintings depict a different perspective then High Renaissance artists, and his figures seem to elegantly float in the air, a characteristic of Mannerism. Pontormo uses bright colors to depict a group of people in a grieving manner, supporting Jesus and encompassing the space around him.

These figures seem to be almost struggling, perhaps implying that help is needed to sustain the weight of Jesus. The man holding him on the bottom seems to be peering back towards the viewer with an empathically look of fret. The rest of the figures seem to carry the same look about them, floating in this bleak space. Even the man on the bottom seems to be barely grounded, however holding an immense weight.

The landscape of this oil painting consists of a dark flattened space, with solid ground and a single cloud in the sky. It is very interesting that no cross is visible in this painting, and perhaps the only item relevant to the “natural world” in this piece consists of the clothing worn by these figures. The figure in the front right, facing completely backwards, seems to be suggesting to the viewer that she is following along with the rest of the figures and perhaps there are more people following that are not depicted in the painting. Pontormo leaves the viewer with a quite ambiguous composition in this sense, and rather implies a more “visionary” painting. The way he has expressed these figures as more elongated and stretched out, is typical of the Mannerism style. Rather then being influenced by nature, artists began looking more at past works and sculptures. It is for this reason that Mannerism has been called as “anti-classical”.

Agnolo Bronzino’s Allegory with Venus and Cupid (also called An Allegory of Venus and Cupid and A triumph of Venus, is another great piece characteristic of the Mannerism style. Displaying elongated and obscured figures, while expressing grace and ambivalence, it is similar to Pontormo’s Entombment. However this piece, which was done maybe twenty years or so after Entombment does seem to incorporate a variety of depictions within figures. It also expresses a much more crowded space, and a well-defined foreground. The different characters within Bronzino’s piece are still presented in a manneristic style of exaggerated graceful forms, but with each figure having different expressions; varying from Pontormo’s figures.
As Stokstad states, this composition does carry with it the complex allegoric ambiguity relevant from this time period, but could imply a rather disturbing difference then Pontormo’s work. The erotic imagery, which appealed to mid-sixteenth century courts, suggests emotions of lust and jealousy. Mannerism is made up of several approaches and ideals defining its style. Rather then the humanistic approach of life like figures, Mannerism, is more concerned with grace and elegance. It was very much influenced by the more naturalistic works of artists like da Vinci and Raphael.

Formal Analysis of an Early Italian Renaissance Art Piece

The Italian Renaissance marked a period of great cultural change and bridged the transition from Medieval art to Early Modern in Europe. Artists that emerged during this time period had a lot of medieval influence and it wasn’t until the end of the fourteenth century that new styles started to develop. Paolo Uccello was an emerging artist that broke ground with the pioneering use of perspective within paintings. An apprentice to sculptor Lorenzo Ghiberti at an early age, Uccello was greatly influenced by his narrative style. Paolo was also close friends with artist and sculptor Donatello, who also influenced his style specifically within visual perspective.
Uccello was born in Pratovecchio Italy in 1397 and was a great Italian painter and mathematician. He is well known for his use of visual perspective, used to create a feeling of depth within his works. The Battle of San Romano is one of his best known works and is actually a panel of three separate paintings. While other artists during this time were depicting images that represented classical realism within their works, Paolo Uccello’s work did not and definitely stood out. Paolo does depict images in his paintings through the use of Realism, but emphasizes different points within his works, such as color and texture. The Battle of San Romano is considered by most art historians as one of the leading works in the development of linear perspective.
When looking at detail of Paolo Uccello’s The Battle of San Romano, there are many different aspects that are quite interesting. To understand the formal elements of this piece, the historical context behind it is highly relevant. This Battle took place between the Sienese and Florentine people in the year of fourteen thirty-two. It is said that these three panels were most likely commissioned by Lionardo Bartolini Salimbeni who; “ led the Florentine governing Council of Ten during the war against Lucca and Siena” (Cothren & Stokstad, 593). Royal patronage was a major factor in the Italian Renassiance, and because of this a lot of paintings were not only influenced before they were completed by also after. It is said that they were commissioned at the time of Salimbeni’s wedding, suggested by fertility symbols incorporated into the piece and consisting of bushes of oranges, roses, and pomegranates seen in the first panel, Niccolo Mauruzi da Tolentino at the Battle of San Romano.
In the first panel of this triptych, modernly sometimes called the London painting because of its current location, the viewer focuses centrally on Niccolo da Tolentino. Tolentino is shown in a large hat patterned with both gold and red coloring, mostly red. This is significant in the previously mentioned style of Uccello, to incorporate rich and sometimes unpredictable colors and texture. The viewer also sees in the foreground to the right of Tolentino, a dead soldier and a couple of broken lances. These lances and solider are said to be very carefully aligned in order to create a certain visual perspective that Paolo Uccello was known for constructing. The broken lances seem to point towards the vanishing point of this certain panel, something which Uccello was extremely concerned with. It was said by previous mentors and artists that sometimes he would stay up all night trying to depict this device carefully.
Also seen here, the central soldier that supposedly depicts Tolentino, has few protective gear on him and evokes a more festive and almost playful image. The young boy located behind Niccolo Tolentino also doesn’t wear a helmet or anything and in fact what is detailed is his long boyish hair. Paolo Uccello has depicted a scene here that is suggestive of a carnival like moment. Also complementary to this idea is the enormous white horse that Tolentino sits atop, which looks more similar to a show horse then one you would take into battle. Paolo Uccello seems to depict a triptych series that expresses more playful and bulbous features of a battle. Between these aspects and that of the visual perspective that Uccello has created within this series, shows the different formal elements that this artist was known for. However, despite having a small following of initial support, Uccello was a pioneering artist in this sense.

Response to “Northern Renaissance: The Supreme Art.”

Joseph Leo Koerner argues that the Renaissance in Northern Europe laid foundations for modern art, calling the Italian influence during this time a "counterpart". Although both regions had significant influence within the emerging Renaissance, artists in Northern Europe tended to focus on a slightly different artistic style. Artists of the North were interested in the natural world and their works depicted plant and animal life with great detail. Focusing on details of light and shadow, pieces expressed an authentic feeling of three dimensionality within them. Other devices also used by artists in fifteenth century Northern Europe were intuitive perspective and aerial perspective.

Intuitive perspective was achieved by scaling certain aspects within a work of art, creating extremely accurate spatial representations. Aerial perspective was used by these artists as well, and specifically so in landscape portrayals. These artists were known to have highly developed this perspective, also called an atmospheric perpective, which reappears throughout many works of fifteenth century Northern Europe. Portrait artists of this time led the style into a new direction never before seen, developing a highly realistic style of portraiture.

For example, German painter Albrecht Durer would “lavish extreme attention” within his self-portraits, mostly concentrating on hair quality. So much so that when Koerner looks at Durer’s preserved hair, he claims right away how he recognizes the color from Durer’s works. Koerner also goes on to explain why Durer’s self portrait idealizes Christ, using a symmetrical and frontal view, rather then a pose where the head is at an angle. Although the painting is directed at the viewer, it is also directed inward toward “the self”. There was a large influence of Christ and the portrayal of Christ in portraits that went into Durer’s self-portrait.

Durer was the first known artist to accomplish many different styles of self-portraiture. He was also the first to publish and illustrate his own book, “ the definitive portrayal of the end of the world and a new beginning for art”. In which he is most famously known for, these drawings depict such exact detail and imaginative imagery. He also made woodcut prints, and was also the first artist to do so in this medium. Albrecht Durer was just one of many great artists of the fifteenth century Renaissance in Northern Europe. Jan Van Eyck and Hieronymus Bosch were other great artists that emerged from this time period.

Art 236 Blog Introduction Post #1

Hello All! My name is Patrick Mahoney and I am a Studio Art major here at Central. I enjoy outdoors, sports, and the occasional Call of Duty session. Often you can find my roommates and I riding a mini ramp we built in our garage this past summer. I am also a member of the CWU Wake Team which is currently ranked 16th in the Nation! Recently a group of us just started up the CWU Ski and Snowboard Club and already have had a solid turnout of members for our first few meetings. I like doing new things and figure out different ways to create, especially within artistic mediums. I myself enjoy shooting photographs and using media such as video and music to create pieces of art. I guess you could say I am a fan of the general notion of progressiveness, and within art there has been so much development throughout different mediums in recent centuries. However, the Renaissance period of the 15th and 16th centuries paved the way for this progressiveness and variation throughout art. With the progression of art and art mediums, nowadays you can go into a museum and an empty shoebox could be the main exhibit. Works of paintings and sculptures of Renaissance artists have set a core basis for art guidelines and although those guidelines have evolved immensely, it was classic pieces from artists like Michelangelo and Raphael that more or less defined this notion of real art. I think a huge reason why our culture focuses on “big name” artists is because people are aware of this notion of modern art losing it’s artistic aesthetic. When anything could be considered art these days, classic works from the 15th and 16th century hold a static foundational status within the Art World. Also people tend to focus on those works because we always have, the Renaissance Period was a pivotal time in the World where new ideas of not only physical art works but philosophy, sciences, literature and music emerged. These ideas have developed into many of the modern processes we use today, and still continue to influence new ones. Relating back to progressiveness, the 15th and 16th centuries emerged with advancements within mathematics, type printing, and new ideals such as the emergence of a humanist philosophy. Also this time period sparked an interest in past artists, and works like that of sculptor Donatello and thus further influenced artistic works. This was a period where for the first time different works influenced each other, between architecture, and paintings, and sculptures; many works of this Renaissance period were influenced by artists developing broad mediums of art. Although I am an advocate of progression and overall development of new trends throughout art mediums, I still find it critically important as an artist to at least be aware of these works. In a world with so many different cultures and ideas emerging, it’s a scary thought to think that emerging artists these days may not be aware of this history of art.