Art in Time and Place – The Western World- Part III

The Renaissance

Cimabue's Santa Trinita Madonna & Giotto's Ognissanti Madonna Links to an external site.Watch this video in order to get a sense for the new formal qualities that made their way into art during the transitional phase between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

Smarthistory.org: "Florence in the Early Renaissance"

The Renaissance really gets going in the early years of 15th century in Florence. In this period, which we call the Early Renaissance, Florence is not a city in the unified country of Italy, as it is now. Instead, Italy was divided into many city-states (Florence, Milan, Venice etc.), each with their own form of government.

Now, we normally think of a Republic as a government where everyone votes for representatives who will represent their interests to the government (remember the pledge of allegiance: "and to the republic for which it stands..."). However, Florence was a Republic in the sense that there was a constitution which limited the power of the nobility (as well as laborers) and ensured that no one person or group could have complete political control (so it was far from our ideal of everyone voting, in fact a very small percentage of the population had the vote). Political power resided in the hands of middleclass merchants, a few wealthy families (such as the Medici, important art patrons who would later rule Florence) and the powerful guilds.

So, why did the extraordinary rebirth of the Renaissance begin in Florence?

There are several answers to that question: Extraordinary wealth accumulated in Florence during this period among a growing middle and upper class of merchants and bankers. With the accumulation of wealth often comes a desire to use it to enjoy the pleasures of life -- and not an exclusive focus on the hereafter.

Florence saw itself as the ideal city state, a place where the freedom of the individual was guaranteed, and where many citizens had the right to participate in the government (this must have been very different than living in the Duchy of Milan, for example, which was ruled by a succession of Dukes with absolute power) In 1400 Florence was engaged in a struggle with the Duke of Milan. The Florentine people feared the loss of liberty and respect for individuals that was the pride of their Republic.

Luckily for Florence, the Duke of Milan caught the plague and died in 1402. Then, between 1408 and 1414 Florence was threatened once again, this time by the King of Naples, who also died before he could successfully conquer Florence. And in 1423 the Florentine people prepared for war against the son of the Duke of Milan who had threatened them earlier. Again, luckily for Florence, the Duke was defeated in 1425. The Florentine citizens interpreted these military "victories" as signs of God's favor and protection. They imagined themselves as the "New Rome" -- in other words, as the heirs to the Ancient Roman Republic, prepared to sacrifice for the cause of freedom and liberty.

Important! The Florentine people were very proud of their form of government in the early 15th century (as we are of our democracy). A republic is, after all, a place that respects the opinions of individuals, and we know that individualism was a very important part of the Humanism that thrived in Florence in the 15th century.

 

Smarthistory.org: "Masaccio's Holy Trinity"

Masaccio was the first painter in the Renaissance to incorporate Brunelleschi's discovery in his art. He did this in his fresco called the Holy Trinity, in Santa Maria Novella, in Florence.

Masaccio, Holy Trinity, 1425-28. Santa Maria Novella, Florence

Have a close look at the painting and at this perspective diagram. You see the orthogonals in the lines that form the coffers in the ceiling of the barrel vault (look for diagonal lines that appear to recede into the distance). Because Masaccio painted from a low viewpoint, as though we were looking up at Christ, we see the orthogonals in the ceiling, and if we traced all of the orthogonals the vanishing point would be below the base of the cross.

Perspective diagram of Masaccio's Holy Trinity

My favorite part of this fresco is God's feet. Actually, you can only really see one of them. 

Think about this for a moment. God is standing in this painting. Doesn't that strike you as odd just a little bit? This may not strike you all that much when you first think about it because our idea of God, our picture of God in our minds eye—as an old man with a beard—is very much based on Renaissance images of God. So, here Masaccio imagines God as a man. Not a force or a power, or something abstract, but as a man. A man who stands -- his feet are foreshortened, and he weighs something and is capable of walking! In medieval art, God was often represented by a hand, just a hand, as though God was an abstract force or power in our lives, but here he seems so much like a flesh and blood man. This is a good indication of Humanism in the Renaissance.

Masaccio's contemporaries were struck by the palpable realism of this fresco, as was Vasari who lived over one hundred years later. Vasari wrote that "the most beautiful thing, apart from the figures, is the barrel-vaulted ceiling drawn in perspective and divided into square compartments containing rosettes foreshortened and made to recede so skilfully that the surface looks as if it is indented."

The Architecture

One of the other amazing things about this painting is the use of classical architecture (from ancient Greece and Rome). Masaccio borrowed much of what we see from ancient Romanarchitecture, and may have been helped by Brunelleschi. Study the diagram below and make sure you can identify the different architectural elements.

Coffers- the indented squares that decorate the ceiling

Column- a round, supporting element in architecture. In this painting we see an attached column.

Pilasters- a shallow, flattened out columns attached to a wall -- it is only decorative, and has no supporting function

Barrel Vault- vault means ceiling, and a barrel vault is a ceiling in the shape of a round arch

Iconic and Corinthian Capitals- a capital is the decorated top of a column or pilaster. An ionic capital has a scroll shape (like the ones on the attached columns in the painting), and a Corinthian capital has leaf shapes.

Fluting- the vertical, idented lines or grooves that decorated the pilasters in the painting. Fluting could also be used on a column

Elements of ancient architecture in Masaccio's Holy Trinity

Masaccio, Holy Trinity, c. 1427 Links to an external site.
This video will reinforce the concepts in the reading about Masaccio's Holy Trinity above.

 

Flanders
Now we need to move up to Northern Europe in the early 1400s (the same time that Masaccio and Donatello and Brunelleschi are in Florence). So far, we have been exclusively in Florence, Italy. But up in northern Europe, in an area called Flanders (which is primarily Belgium today, but also a part of what is today Holland) there was also a Renaissance.

Flanders was controlled by the Dukes of Burgundy (in France) during this time period, and we call the art and culture of this area Flemish. Like Florence, Flanders encompassed an area with rich industrial and banking cities that allowed a large middle class population to flourish. It was this rising middle class that often commissioned the new, realistic images of the Northern Renaissance.

For the time, Flanders was relatively far from Italy. This may not seem a great distance to us today, but imagine crossing the Alps on a mule to get from Italy to Flanders. It wasn't easy! As a result, the Renaissance in Florence in the 1400s developed separately from the Renaissance in Flanders in Northern Europe. There were some business contacts, some travel back and forth, and some artistic exchange, but not a great deal.

Classical Antiquity?

The fact that we are far from Italy tells us something about the character of the Northern Renaissance. Remember that in Italy we said that the Renaissance was a rebirth of the art and culture of Ancient Greece and Rome? Well, in Northern Europe we're pretty far from the important centers of Ancient Greek and Roman culture, and so the Renaissance in the North is not a rebirth of Ancient Greek and Roman culture the way it was in Florence.

Oil Paint

Here's another important difference: the artists of the North invented oil paint! They use oil paint fifty years or more before they use it in Italy (where they use tempera until then). Think about what oil paint can do that fresco and tempera can not do! Keep this in mind as you look at the first Northern Renaissance painting we're going to discuss, the Merode Altarpiece. The Renaissance in Northern Europe is very different from the Renaissance in Italy, as we will soon see.

Campin, Merode Altarpiece, 1425-28 Links to an external site.Watch this video in order to get a sense for how the ideas and ideals of the Renaissance started taking shape in Northern art.

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker's "High Renaissance"

When you think of the Renaissance, the names that come to mind are probably the artists of this period (the High Renaissance): Leonardo and Michelangelo, for instance. And when you think of the greatest work of art in the western world, Michelangelo's Sistine Ceiling might come to mind. This is a period of big, ambitious projects.

How is the High Renaissance different from the Early Renaissance?

 

Fra. Filippo Lippi, Madonna and Child with Two Angels, tempera on wood, ca. 1455 - 1466. Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence

As the Humanism of the Early Renaissance develops, a problem arises. Have a look at Fra. Filippo Lippi's Madonna and Child with Angels. We see a Madonna and Christ Child that have become so real—the figures appear so human—that in some ways we can hardly tell that these are divine figures (except perhaps for the faint outline of a halo, and Mary's sorrowful expression and hands clasped in prayer). On the other hand, in the Middle Ages, the need to create transcendent spiritual figures, meant a move toward abstraction—toward flatness and elongation.

In the Early Renaissance then, a tension arises. To create spiritual figures, your image can't look very real, and if you want your image to appear real, then you sacrifice some spirituality. In the late 15th century though, Leonardo da Vinci creates figures who are physical and real (just as real as Lippi's or Masaccio's figures) and yet they have an undeniable and intense spirituality. We could say that Leonardo unites the real and spiritual, or soul and substance.

Andrea del Verrocchio (with Leonardo), Baptism of Christ, 1470-75, oil and tempera on panel, 70 3/4" x 59 3/4" or 180 x 152 cm. Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence

The best way to see this is in this painting by Verrocchio—an important Early Renaissance artist who Leonardo was apprenticed to when he was young. Verocchio asked Leonardo to paint one of the angels in his painting of the Baptism of Christ.

Can you tell which angel is Leonardo's? One angel should look more like a boy—that's the Early Renaissance angel (the one painted by Verrocchio) and the other angel should look like truly divine, sent by God from heaven (that's Leonardo's angel).

The angel on the left is Leonardo's.

Leonardo's angel is ideally beautiful and moves in a graceful and complex way, twisting her upper body to the left but raising her head up and to the right. Figures that move elegantly and that are ideally beautiful are typical of the High Renaissance.

 

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker's "Raphael's School of Athens"

The School of Athens represents all the greatest mathematicians, philosophers and scientists from classical antiquity gathered together sharing their ideas and learning from each other. These figures all lived at different times, but here they are gathered together under one roof.

 

Raphael, School of Athens, fresco, 1509-11, Apostolic Palace, Vatican City

The two thinkers in the very center, Aristotle (on the right) and Plato (on the left, pointing up) have been enormously important to Western thinking generally, and in different ways, their different philosophies were incoporated into Christianity. Plato holds his book called The Timaeus.

Plato points up because in his philosophy the changing world that we see around us is just a shadow of a higher, truer reality that is eternal and unchanging (and include things like goodness and beauty). For Plato, this otherworldly reality is the ultimate reality, and the seat of all truth, beauty, justice, and wisdom.

Aristotle holds his hand down, because in his philosophy, the only reality is the reality that we can see and experience by sight and touch (exactly the reality dismissed by Plato). Aristotle's Ethics (the book that he holds) "emphasized the relationships, justice, friendship, and government of the human world and the need to study it."

Pythagoras (lower left) believed that the world (including the movement of the planets and stars) operated according to mathematical laws. These mathematical laws were related to ideas of musical and cosmic harmony, and thus (for the Christians who interpreted him in the Renaissance) to God. Pythagoras taught that each of the planets produced a note as it moved, based on its distance from the earth. Together, the movement of all the planets was perfect harmony -- "the harmony of the spheres."

Ptolemy (he has his back to us on the lower right), holds a sphere of the earth, next to him is Zaroaster who holds a celestial sphere. Ptolemy tried to mathematically explain the movements of the planets (which was not easy since some of them appear to move backwards!). His theory of how they all moved around the earth remained the authority until Copernicus and Kepler figured out (in the late 1500s) that the earth was not at the center of the universe, and that the planets moved in orbits the shape of ellipses not in circles.

Raphael, School of Athens, detail (Raphael), fresco, 1509-11, Apostolic Palace, Vatican City

Raphael included a self-portrait of himself, standing next to Ptolemy. He looks right out at us.

Leonardo, Last Supper, 1495-98 Links to an external site.

Read the text below and watch this video, which discusses Leonardo Da Vinci's The Last Supper, an artwork often considered exemplary in terms of its expression of High Renaissance values.

Baroque and Rococo Art

Watch this video, which discusses and compares artworks from Protestant Holland and Catholic Flanders. Reflect and take notes upon how the differing religious contexts of these two regions affected the form and content of their art.

How to recognize Baroque art Links to an external site.

Smarthistory.org: "Baroque Art in Italy"

Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pluto and Proserpina, marble, 1621-22. Galleria Borghese, Rome

Baroque art is the style of the late 1500s and 1600s. The important thing to keep in mind now is that the Baroque style in Italy is the direct result of the Counter-Reformation. The Church needs a powerful style of art to use in the fight against Martin Luther—and that's exactly what the Baroque style is—it is powerful, dramatic, muscular, sometimes frightening, and it really gets to you! Bernini, one of the greatest artists of the Baroque period, worked in Rome, often for the papacy like Michelangelo before him. To get an idea of what a great sculptor he is, and how he can make marble seem like human flesh, look at his sculpture Pluto and Proserpina. What about this sculpture is different than anything we've seen before? Look at her hair, how it is flying back behind her as she turns her head, and remains in mid-air.

Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pluto and Proserpina, detail, marble, 1621-22. Galleria Borghese, Rome

Watch this video to get a sense for the distinctive classicizing style of French art in the 17th century.

Poussin, Landscape with St. John, 1640 Links to an external site.

 

18th Century Art 

Rococo is characterized by a light, erotic, exuberant style, which emerged in 18th century France.

 

Fragonard, The Swing, 1767 Links to an external site.

The Beginnings of Rococo

In the early years of the 1700s, at the end of the reign of Louis XIV (who dies in 1715), there was a shift away from the classicism and "Grand Manner" (based on the art of Poussin) that had governed the art of the preceding 50 years, toward a new style that we call Rococo.Versailles was abandoned by the aristocracy, who once again took up residence in Paris. A shift away from the monarchy, toward the aristocracy characterizes this period.

What kind of lifestyle did the aristocracy lead during this period? Remember that the aristocracy had enormous political power as well as enormous wealth. Many chose leisure as a pursuit and became involved themselves in romantic intrigues. Indeed, they created a culture of luxury and excess that formed a stark contrast to the lives of most people in France. The aristocracy, only a small percentage of the population of France, owned over 90% of its wealth. A small, but growing middle class does not sit still with this for long (remember the French Revolution of 1789).

 

Fragonard's The Swing

 

Jean-Honoré Fragonard, The Swing, oil on canvas, 1767. Wallace Collection, London

As with most Rococo paintings, the subject of Fragonard's The Swing is not very complicated! Two lovers have conspired to get this older fellow to push the youg lady in the swing while her lover hides in the bushes. Their idea is that as she goes up in the swing, she can part her legs, and he can get a perfect view up her skirt.

They are surrounded by a lush, over grown garden. A sculptured figure to the left puts his fingers to his mouth, as though saying "hush," while another sculpture in the background has two cupid figures cuddled together. The colors are pastel -- pale pinks and greens, and although we have a sense of movement and a prominent diagonal line -- the painting lacks all of the seriousness of a baroque painting.

Jean-Honoré Fragonard, The Swing, detail, oil on canvas, 1767. Wallace Collection, London

If you look really closely you can see the loose brushstrokes in the pink silk dress, and as she opens her legs, we get a glimpse of her garter belt. It was precisely this kind of painting that the philosophers of the Enlightenment were soon to condemn. They demanded a new style of art, one that showed an example of moral behavior, of human beings at their most noble.

In contrast to Rococo, Neoclassical art is stark, classicizing, and idealistic.

 

Smarthistory.org: Beth Gersh-Nesic's "Neo-Classicism"

Nicolas Poussin, Et in Arcadia Ego, 1637-38, oil on canvas, 185 cm × 121 cm (72.8 in × 47.6 in). Louvre, Paris

In opposition to the frivolous sensuality of Rococo painters like Jean-Honoré Fragonard and François Boucher, the Neo-classicists looked to Nicolas Poussin for their inspiration. The decision to promote Poussiniste painting became an ethical consideration. They believed that strong drawing was rational, therefore morally better. They believed that art should be cerebral, not sensual.

Jacques-Louis David, Oath of the Horatii, oil on canvas, 1784. Louvre, Paris

The Neo-classicists, such as Jacques-Louis David (pronounced Da-VEED), preferred the well-delineated form—clear drawing and modeling (shading). Drawing was considered more important than painting. The Neo-classical surface had to look perfectly smooth—no evidence of brush-strokes should be discernable to the naked eye.

France was on the brink of its first revolution in 1789, and the Neo-classicists wanted to express rationality and sobriety that was fitting for their times. Artists like David supported the rebels through an art that asked for clear-headed thinking, self-sacrifice to the State (as in Oath of the Horatii) and an austerity reminiscent of Republican Rome.

Neo-classicism was a child of the Age of Reason (the Enlightenment), when philosophers believed that we would be able to control our destinies by learning from and following the Laws of Nature (the United States was founded on Enlightenment philosophy). Scientific inquiry attracted more attention. Therefore, Neo-classicism continued the connection to the Classical tradition because it signified moderation and rational thinking but in a new and more politically-charged spirit (“neo” means “new,” or in the case of art, an existing style reiterated with a new twist.)

Neo-classicism is characterized by: clarity of form; sober colors; shallow space; strong horizontal and verticals that render that subject matter timeless, instead of temporal as in the dynamic Baroque works; and, Classical subject matter—or classicizing contemporary subject matter.

Romanticism

Watch this video for a discussion of the Romantic style as it emerged in 19th-century Europe. Take note of the distinction between the Romantic style and the Neoclassical style.

John Constable, View on the Stour near Dedham Links to an external site.

 

Modern Art 

This video discusses various art styles associated with the rapidly changing European societies of the second half of the 19th century. Take note of the innovations associated with Realist, Impressionist, and Post-Impressionist art.

 

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Parme Giuntini's "Becoming Modern"

Édouard Manet, A Bar at the Folies-Bergère, oil on canvas, 1882. Courtauld Gallery, London

People use the term “modern” in a variety of ways, often very loosely, with a lot of implied associations of new, contemporary, up-to-date, and technological. We know the difference between a modern country and a third world country and it usually has less to do with art and more to do with technology and industrial progress, things like indoor plumbing, easy access to consumer goods, freedom of expression, and voting rights. In the 19th century, however, modernity and its connection with art had certain specific associations that people began recognizing and using as barometers to distinguish themselves and their culture from earlier nineteenth century ways and attitudes.

Chronologically, Modernism refers to the period from 1850 to 1960. It begins with the Realist Movement and ends with Abstract Expressionism. That’s just a little over one hundred years. During that period the western world experienced some significant changes that transformed Europe and the United States from traditional societies that were agriculturally based into modern ones with cities and factories and mass transportation. Here are some important features that all modern societies share.

1. Capitalism replaced landed fortunes and became the economic system of modernity in which people exchanged labor for a fixed wage and used their wages to buy ever more consumer items rather than produce such items themselves. This economic change dramatically affected class relations because it offered opportunities for great wealth through individual initiative, industrialization and technology—somewhat like the technological and dot.com explosion of the late 20th and early 21st century. The industrial revolution which began in England in the late 18th century and rapidly swept across Europe (hit the U.S. immediately following the Civil War) transformed economic and social relationships, offered an ever increasing number of cheaper consumer goods, and changed notions of education. Who needed the classics when a commercial/technically oriented education was the key to financial success? The industrial revolution also fostered a sense of competition and progress that continues to influence us today.

2. Urban culture replaced agrarian culture as industrialization and cities grew. Cities were the sites of new wealth and opportunity with their factories and manufacturing potential. People moving from small farms, towns to large cities helped to breakdown traditional culture and values. There were also new complications such as growing urban crime, prostitution, alienation, and depersonalization. In a small town you probably knew the cobbler who made your shoes and such a personal relationship often expanded into everyday economics—you might be able to barter food or labor for a new pair of shoes or delay payments. These kinds of accommodations that formed a substructure to agrarian life were swept away with urbanization. City dwellers bought shoes that were manufactured, transported by railroads, displayed in shop windows, and purchased only for cash. Assembly lines, anonymous labor, and advertising created more consumer items but also a growing sense of depersonalization. The gap between the “haves” and the “have nots” increased and were more visible in the city.

3. Technological advances such as industrialization, railroads, gas lighting, streetcars, factory systems, indoor plumbing, appliances, and scientific advances were rapidly made and these changes dramatically affected the way people lived and thought about themselves. One consequence was that people in industrialized areas thought of themselves as progressive and modern and considered undeveloped cultures in undeveloped countries as primitive and backward.

4. Modernity is characterized by increasing secularism and diminished religious authority. People did not abandon religion but they paid less attention to it. Organized religions were increasingly less able to dictate standards, values, and subject matter. Fine art moved from representing human experience and its relationship to God's creation, to a focus on personal emotions and individual spiritual experiences that were not based in any organized and institutionalized religion.

5. The modern world was extremely optimistic—people saw these changes as positive. They welcomed innovation and championed progress. Change became a signifier of modernity. Anything that was traditional and static signaled outmoded, old-fashioned, conservative and was to be avoided by the new modern public. Modern Europe and the U.S. internalized these positions and used modernity as a way of determining and validating their superiority. The nineteenth century was also a period of tremendous colonial growth and expansion, in the name of progress and social benefit and all of these activities were spearheaded by newly industrialized western countries.

Many artists closely identified with modernity and embraced the new techniques and innovations, the spirit of progress, invention, discovery, creativity and change. They wanted to participate in creating the modern world and they were anxious to try out new ideas rather than following the more conservative guidelines of Academic art. This is not to say that these mid-nineteenth century artists were the first to challenge an older generation or set of ideas. Many academic artists had argued over formal issues, styles and subject matter but this was much like a good natured agreement within a club; everyone in the group agreed to disagree.

By the mid-1850’s polite academic disagreements were being taken out of the Academy and onto the street. Artists were looking increasingly to the private sector for patronage, tapping into that growing group of bourgeois or middle class collectors with money to spend and houses to fill with paintings. This new middle class audience that made its money through industrialization and manufacturing had lots of “disposable income”, and they wanted pictures that they could understand, that were easy to look at, fit into their homes, addressed subjects they liked. Not for them the historical cycles of gods, saints and heroes with their complex intellectual associations and references; instead, they wanted landscapes, genre scenes, and still life. They were not less educated than earlier buyers, but educated with a different focus and set of priorities. Reality was here and now, progress was inevitable, and the new hero of modern life was the modern man.

Modernity is then a composite of contexts: a time, a space, and an attitude. What makes a place or an object “modern” depends on these conditions.

The Avant-Garde

Throughout the 19th century there were artists who produced pictures that we do not label “modern art” generally because the techniques or subjects were associated with the conservative academic styles, techniques and approaches. On the other hand, modern artists were often called the “avant garde.” This was originally a military term that described the point man (the first soldier out)—the one to take the most risk. The French socialist Henri de Saint-Simon first used the term in the early 1820’s to describe an artist whose work would serve the needs of the people, of a socialist society rather than the ruling classes. The avant garde is also used to identify artists whose painting subjects and techniques were radical, marking them off from the more traditional or academic styles, but not with any particular political ideology in mind. Avant garde became a kind of generic term for a number of art movements centered on the idea of artistic autonomy and independence. In some cases the avant garde was closely associated with political activism, especially socialist or communist movements; in other cases, the avant garde was pointedly removed from politics and focused primarily on aesthetics. The avant garde was never a cohesive group of artists and what was avant garde in one nation was not necessarily the same in others.

Finally, although modern artists were working throughout many countries in Europe and the United States, most 19th art and much 20th century modern art is centered in France and produced by French artists. Unlike England which was politically stable in the 19th century, France went through a variety of governments and insurrections all of which provided a unique political and cultural environment that fostered what we know as modern art.

Realism versus Academic Art

Read this blog post Links to an external site. by two of the experts you have heard from in previous units. Understanding the artistic background of academic art will subsequently help you comprehend the break that modern artistic movements, such as realism, achieved.

 

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Beth Gersh-Nesic's "Realism"
Realism and the Painting of Modern Life

Charles Albert d'Arnoux Bertall, in Le Journal Amusant, no. 595, May 25, 1867. The Research Library, The Getty Research Institute

The Royal Academy supported the age-old belief that art should be instructive, morally uplifting, refined, inspired by the Classical tradition, a good reflection of the national culture, and, above all, about beauty.

But trying to keep young nineteenth-century artists’ eyes on the past became an issue!

The world was changing rapidly and some artists wanted their work to be about their contemporary environment—about themselves and their own perceptions of life. In short, they believed that the modern era deserved to have a modern art.

The Modern Era begins with the Industrial Revolution in the late eighteenth century. Clothing, food, heat, light and sanitation are a few of the basic areas that “modernized” the nineteenth century. Transportation was faster, getting things done got easier, shopping in the new department stores became an adventure, and people developed a sense of “leisure time”—thus the entertainment businesses grew.

In Paris, the city was transformed from a medieval warren of streets to a grand urban center with wide boulevards, parks, shopping districts and multi-class dwellings (so that the division of class might be from floor to floor—the rich on the lower floors and the poor on the upper floors in one building—instead by neighborhood).

Therefore, modern life was about social mixing, social mobility, frequent journeys from the city to the country and back, and a generally faster pace which has accelerated ever since.

How could paintings and sculptures about Classical gods and biblical stories relate to a population enchanted with this progress?

In the middle of the nineteenth century, the young artists decided that it couldn’t and shouldn’t. In 1863 the poet and art critic Charles Baudelaire published an essay entitled “The Painter of Modern Life Links to an external site.,” which declared that the artist must be of his/her own time.

Gustave Courbet, a young fellow from the Franche-Comté, a province outside of Paris, came to the "big city" with a large ego and a sense of mission. He met Baudelaire and other progressive thinkers within the first years of making Paris his home. Then, he set himself up as the leader for a new art: Realism—“history painting” about real life. He believed that if he could not see something, he should not paint it. He also decided that his art should have a social consciousness that would awaken the self-involved Parisian to contemporary concerns: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Watch this video on an important Realist work by Courbet.

Courbet, A Burial at Ornans, 1850 Links to an external site.

 

Smarthistory.org: "The Stonebreakers"

Gustave Courbet, The Stonebreakers, 1849, oil on canvas, 165 x 257 cm. Gemäldegalerie, Dresden (destroyed)

 

If we look closely at Courbet's painting The Stonebreakers of 1849 (painted only one year after Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote their influential pamphlet, The Communist Manifesto) the artist'sconcern for the plight of the poor is evident. Here, two figures labor to break and remove stone from a road that is being built. In our age of powerful jackhammers and bulldozers, such work is reserved as punishment for chain-gangs.

 

Jean-François Millet, The Gleaners, 1857. Musée d'Orsay, Paris

Unlike Millet, who was known for depicting idealized, hale and hearty rural folk, Courbet depicts figures who wear ripped and tattered clothing. None of Millet's mythologized farm workers appear here. Courbet wants to show what is "real," and so he has depicted a man that seems far too old and a boy that seems still too young for such back-breaking labors.

But this is not meant to be heroic: it is meant to be an accurate account of the abuse and deprivation that was a common feature of mid-century French rural life. And as with so many great works of art, there is a close affiliation between the narrative (story)and the formal choices made by the painter, meaning elements such as brushwork, composition, line, and color.

The two stone breakers in Courbet's painting are set against a low hill of the sort common in the rural French town of Ornan, where the artist had been raised and continued to spend a much of his time. The hill reaches to the top of the canvas everywhere but the upper right corner, where a tiny patch of bright blue sky appears. The effect is to isolate these laborers, and to suggest that they are physically and socio-economically trapped by their work.

Like the stones themselves, Courbet's brushwork is rough—more so than might be expected during the mid-nineteenth century. This suggests that the way the artist painted his canvas was in part a conscious rejection of the highly polished, refined Neoclassicist style that still dominated French art in 1848.

Perhaps most characteristic of Courbet's style is his refusal to focus on the parts of the image that would usually receive the most attention. Traditionally, an artist would spent the most time on the hands, faces, and foregrounds. Not Courbet. If you lookcarefully, you will notice that he attempts to be even-handed, attending to faces and rock equally. So what, then, is Courbet's Realism?

After Courbet, Manet is historically the most significant Realist painter. Watch this video about one of his works.

Manet, A Bar at the Folies-Bergère Links to an external site. 

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Beth Harris, Dr. Steven Zucker, and Dr. Beth Gersh-Nesic's "Édouard Manet's Olympia"

Édouard Manet brought to Realism his curiosity about social mores. However, he was not interested in mirroring polite parlor conversations and middle class promenades in the Bois de Boulogne (Paris’ Central Park). Rather, Manet invented subjects that set the Parisians’ teeth.

Édouard Manet, 'Olympia', oil on canvas, 1863. Musée d'Orsay, Paris

In 1865, Manet submitted his risqué painting of a courtesan greeting her client (in this case, you), Olympia, of 1863, to the French Salon. The jury for the 1865 Salon accepted this painting despite their disapproval of the subject matter, because two years earlier, Manet’s 'Luncheon on the Grass' created such a stir when it was rejected from the Salon. (It was instead exhibited in Emperor Napoleon III’s conciliatory exhibition—the Salon des Réfusés, or the Exhibition of the Refused. Crowds came to the Salon des Réfusés specifically to laugh and jeer at what they considered Manet’s folly.)

Somehow they were afraid another rejection would seem like a personal attack on Manet himself. The reasoning was odd, but the result was the same—Olympia became infamous and the painting had to be hung very high to protect it from physical attacks.

Manet was a Realist, but sometimes his “real” situations shocked and rocked the Parisian art world to its foundations. His later work was much tamer.

 

Impressionism

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Beth Gersh-Nesic's "Impressionism"
Establishing their Own Exhibitions - Apart from the Salon

Claude Monet, Impression Sunrise, 1872. Exhibited at the first Impressionist exhibition in 1874

The group of artists who became known as the Impressionists did something ground-breaking, in addition to their sketchy, light-filled paintings. They esetablished their own exhibition - apart from the annual salon. At that time, the salon was really the only way to exhibit your work (the work was chosen by a jury). Claude Monet Links to an external site., August Renoir, Edgar Degas Links to an external site., Berthe Morisot Links to an external site., Alfred Sisley, and several other artists could not afford to wait for France to accept their work. They all had experienced rejection by the Salon jury in recent years and knew waiting a whole year in between each exhibition was no longer tenable. They needed to show their work and they wanted to sell it.

So, in an attempt to get recognized outside of the official channel of the salon, these artists banded together and held their own exhibition. They pooled their money, rented a studio that belonged to the famous photographer Nadar and set a date for their first exhibition together. They called themselves the Anonymous Society of Painters, Sculptors, and Printmakers. The show opened at about the same time as the annual Salon, May 1874. The Impressionists held eight exhibitions from 1874 through 1886.

The decision was based on their frustration and their ambition to show the world their new, light-filled images.

The impressionists regarded Manet Links to an external site. as their inspiration and leader in their spirit of revolution, but Manet had no desire to join their cooperative venture into independent exhibitions. Manet had set up his own pavilion during the 1867 World’s Fair, but he was not interested in giving up on the Salon jury. He wanted Paris to come to him and accept him—even if he had to endure their ridicule in the process.

Monet, Renoir, Degas, and Sisley had met through classes. Berthe Morisot was a friend of both Degas and Manet (she would marry Édouard Manet’s brother Eugène by the end of 1874). She had been accepted to the Salon, but her work had become more experimental since then. Degas invited Berthe to join their risky effort. The first exhibition did not repay them monetarily but it drew the critics who decided their art was abominable. It wasn’t finished. They called it “just impressions.” (And not in a complimentary way.)

The Lack of "Finish"

Remember that the look of a J.A.D. Ingres or even a surly Delacroix had a “finished” surface. These younger artists’ completed works looked like sketches. And not even detailed sketches but the fast, preliminary “impressions” that artists would dash off to preserve an idea of what to paint later. Normally, an artist’s “impressions” were not meant to be sold, but were meant to be aids for the memory—to take these ideas back to the studio for the masterpiece on canvas. The critics thought it was insane to sell paintings that looked like slap-dash impressions and consider these paintings works “finished.”

Landscape and Contemporary Life (not History Painting!)

Also—Courbet, Manet and the Impressionists challenged the Academy’s category codes. The Academy deemed that only “history painting” was great painting. These young Realists and Impressionists opened the door to dismantling this hierarchy of subject matter. They believed that landscapes and genres scenes were worthy and important.

Color

In their landscapes and genre scenes of contemporary life, the Impressionist artists tried to arrest a moment in their fast-paced lives by pinpointing specific atmospheric conditions—light flickering on water, moving clouds, a burst of rain. Their technique tried to capture what they saw. They painted small commas of pure color one next to another. The viewer would stand at a reasonable distance so that the eye would mix the individual marks, thus blending the colors together optically. This method created more vibrant colors than those colors mixed on a palette. Becoming a team dedicated to this new, non-Academic painting gave them the courage to pursue the independent exhibition format—a revolutionary idea of its own.

Light

An important aspect of the Impressionist painting was the appearance of quickly shifting light on the surface. This sense of moving rapidly or quickly changing atmospheric conditions or living in a world that moves faster was also part of the Impressionist’s criteria. They wanted to create an art that seemed modern: about contemporary life, about the fast pace of contemporary life, and about the sensation of seeing light change incessantly in the landscape. They painted outdoors (en plein air) to capture the appearance of the light as it really flickered and faded while they worked.

Mary Cassatt was an American who met Edgar Degas and was invited to join the group as they continued to mount independent exhibitions. By the 1880s, the Impressionist accepted the name the critics gave them. The American Mary Cassatt began to exhibition with the Impressionists in 1877.

For a very long time, the French refused to find the work worthy of praise. The Americans and other non-French collectors did. For this reason, the US and other foreign collections own most of the Impressionist art. (The Metropolitan Museum of Art owns a good portion of the Havermayer Collection. Louisine Havermayer knew Mary Cassatt, who advised Louisine when she visited Paris.)

Watch this video, which discusses a series of paintings, done by artist Claude Monet, that are good representatives of the Impressionist movement as a whole.

 

Monet, Rouen Cathedral series Links to an external site.

Watch this video about the significant Renoir painting. A still image of Moulin de la Galette has been provided so that you may study the points made in the video more closely.

Renoir, Moulin de la Galette, 1876 Links to an external site.

Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Moulin de la Galette, 1876, oil on canvas, 51 1/2 x 68 7/8 inches (131 x 175 cm). Musée d'Orsay, Paris

Post-Impressionism

Watch this video, which discusses an artwork by Georges Seurat. What characteristics of A Sunday on La Grande Jatte - 1884 can be considered reactions to Impressionism?

Georges Seurat, A Sunday on La Grande Jatte - 1884, 1884-86 Links to an external site.

View this painting up close in the Google Art Project. Links to an external site.

Take note of the discussion of structure and color in Van Gogh's Portrait of Joseph Roulin.

Van Gogh, Portrait of Joseph Roulin, 1889 Links to an external site.

Vincent van Gogh, Portrait of Joseph Roulin, early 1889. Museum of Modern Art, New York

Watch this video and read the accompanying text, both of which discuss an artwork by the Post-Impressionist painter Paul Cézanne. Take note of Cézanne's relationship to older artistic traditions, how he at once reflected on visual traditions (including Impressionism) and innovated through form.

Cézanne, Still Life with Apples, 1895-98 (MoMA) Links to an external site.

Catagorizing the style of Paul Cézanne's (Say-zahn) artwork is problematic. As a young man he left his home in Provence in the south of France in order to join with the avant-garde in Paris. He was successful, too. He fell in with the circle of young painters that surrounded Manet, he had been a childhood friend of the novelist, Emile Zola, who championed Manet, and he even showed at the 1st Impressionist exhibition, held at Nadar's studio in 1874.

However, Cézanne didn't quite fit in with the group. Whereas many other painters of this circle were concerned primarily with the effects of light and reflected color ("To hell with form!" might have been their cry), Cézanne remained deeply committed to form. Feeling out of place in Paris, he left after a relatively short period and returned to his home in Aix-en-Provence. He would remain in his native Provence for most of the rest of his life. He worked in the semi-isolation afforded by the country, but was never really out of touch with the breakthroughs of the avant-garde.

Like the Impressionists, he often worked outdoors directly before his subjects. But unlike the Impressionists, Cézanne used color, not as an end in itself, but rather like line, as a tool with which to construct form. Ironically, it is the Parisian avant-garde that would eventually seek him out. In the first years of the 20th century, just at the end of Cézanne's life, young artists would make a pilgrimage to Aix, to see the man who would change painting.

Paul Cézanne is often considered to be the most influential painter of the late 19th century. Pablo Picasso, who rarely praised anyone besides himself, readily admitted his great debt to the elder master. Similarly, Henri Matisse once called Cézanne, "...the father of us all." The Museum of Modern Art in New York has historically organized its collection so as to begin with an entire room devoted to Cézanne's painting. The Metropolitan Museum of Art also gives over an entire large room to him. Clearly, many artists and curators consider him enormously important. The problem is, when you actually stop and look carefully at his paintings, it is not at all clear that he actually knows how to draw!

Watch this video, which discusses artwork by Post-Impressionist painter Paul Gauguin. According to Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker, how is Gauguin's use of color innovative?

Paul Gauguin, Vision after the Sermon, or Jacob Wrestling with the Angel, 1888 Links to an external site.

 

The Early 20th Century

Watch this video as an overview of the subject of art in the 20th century.

1907-1960: Age of Global Conflict Links to an external site.

Works discussed:

Pablo Picasso, Three Women at the Spring, oil on canvas, 1921. Museum of Modern Art, New York

René Magritte, The Human Condition, oil on canvas, 1933. Private collection

Piet Mondrian, Broadway Boogie-Woogie, oil on canvas, 1943-44. Museum of Modern Art, New York

Please begin with Dr. Spivey's article on Fauvism Links to an external site. and then navigate through the site to read and/or watch the following material:

• Watch the video on Kirchner's Dresden street-scene: "Kirchner, Street, Dresden"
• Read the article "Kirchner, Self-Portrait as a Soldier"
• Read the article "Inventing Cubism" and look at several of works by Picasso

Please begin with Emily Casden's article Links to an external site. on Futurism in Italy, then navigate to the video on Dada titled, "Art as a Concept: Duchamp, In advance of the Broken Arm." Then, be sure to check out several of the other articles and videos about Futurism and Dadaism in the context of World War I.

On this page Links to an external site., please read and/or watch all the materials related to Surrealism, Latin American Modernism, and American Art to World War II.

Read this article about the influence of Nazi Germany on the art historical record.

 

World War II and Beyond

Smarthistory.org: Dr. Nausikaä El-Mecky's "Art in Nazi Germany"
Nazi art policy

How do you destroy an artwork? You can hide it, scratch it, tear it, put a slogan over it, burn it, or, as the Nazis did in 1937, simply show it to millions of people.

If you visited Munich in the summer of that year, you could see two spectacular exhibitions that were held only a few hundred meters apart. One was the Great Exhibition of German Art, showcasing recent leading examples of ‘Aryan’ art. The other was the Entartete Kunst (Degenerate Art) Exhibition, which offered a tour through the art that the National Socialist Party had rejected on ideological grounds. It was made up of art that was not considered ‘Aryan’ and offered a last glimpse before these works of art disappeared.

Great Exhibition of German Art catalogue cover, 1937 (left) and Entartete Kunst (Degenerate Art) exhibition, catalogue cover, 1937 (right)

The Entartete Kunst (Degenerate Art) Exhibition cleverly manipulated visitors to loathe and ridicule the art on exhibit, in part by erasing their original meaning. Until shortly before the exhibition, these paintings and sculptures had been displayed at the nation's greatest museums, but now they were the principal performers in a freak show. The shock-value was enhanced by only allowing over-18s into the exhibition. The lines for the Degenerate Art Exhibition went around the block. Inside, many pictures had been taken out of their frames, and were attached to walls that were emblazoned with outraged slogans. Rather than whispering respectfully, people pointed and snickered. The paintings and sculptures had lost their status as artworks, and were now reduced to dangerous and outrageous rubbish.

Opening of the Entartete Kunst exhibition at the Schulausstellungsgebaude, Hamburg, 1938

Visual symbolism was important to the Nazis, and Hitler himself had been a painter, so it is not surprising that they dedicated significant resources promoting their ideals through art. So how was the decision made? How were ‘degenerate’ and ‘Aryan’ artworks selected? If you look at the works of art that were glorified and compare them to those that were attacked by the Nazis, the differences usually seem clear enough; experimental, personal, non-representational art was rejected, whilst conventionally ‘beautiful,’ stereotypically heroic art was revered. This seems like an obvious line to be taken by a totalitarian regime: everyone will find these artworks beautiful, and everyone will feel and think the same thing about them, without the risk of unwanted, random, personal, or unclear interpretations.

Adolf Hitler and Adolf Ziegler inspect the installation by Willrich and Hansen of the Degenerate Art Exhibition in Munich, 1937 

A Simple Decision

And the Nazis presented it as a simple decision, any true German would immediately be able to tell the difference. But in reality, a four-year battle was fought all the way to the top echelons of the Nazi hierarchy over what ‘Aryan’ art was supposed to be, exactly. The opinions on this could not have been more contradictory, and top Nazi officials such as Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels and Alfred Rosenberg championed the art they each preferred.

Surprisingly, before 1937, Goebbels–and many other Nazis–collected modern art. Goebbels had works of modern art in his study, his living room and was a fan of many artists that eventually ended up in the Degenerate Art Exhibition. Heinrich Himmler was interested in mystical, Germanic art that harked back to a tribal past. Another influential Nazi, Alfred Rosenberg, liked the pastoral, romantic style that depicted humble farmers, rural landscapes and blond maidens.

Hitler would have none of it. He loathed Expressionism and modern art whilst pastoral idylls were not serious enough. Goebbels reversed himself and became one of the driving forces behind the Degenerate Art Exhibition, prosecuting the same artworks he had once enjoyed. Rosenberg also let go, albeit reluctantly, whilst Himmler changed tack and stole artworks by the wagonload behind Hitler’s back throughout the war.

How was “Aryan” art defined?

In a sense, the concept of "Aryan" art was defined by what it was not: anything that was ideologically problematic (that did not fit with the extremist beliefs of the regime) was removed until there little left but an academic style that celebrated youth, optimism, power and eternal triumph. Nevertheless, it remained difficult for even the most influential Nazis to understand the selection criteria for art sanctioned by the state.

Hitler and Ziegler judging the Great German Art Exhibition, 1937

 

Take for example Adolf Ziegler, who had been in charge of selecting the artwork to be exhibited in the Great Exhibition of German Art. Just before the show opened, Hitler visited in order to inspect the artwork chosen to represent the eternal future of Nazi Germany. He was not pleased with the selection his most loyal followers had made. On the 5th of June, 1937, Goebbels wrote in his diary that the Führer was “wild with rage” and subsequently issued a statement declaring “I will not tolerate unfinished paintings,” meaning that the exhibition had to be reconceived at the last minute.

Even opportunistic “hard-liners” like Adolf Ziegler, an artist favored by Hitler, were not quite able to fulfill their patron's vision. However, it would not be right to conclude that the criteria for art that represented the ‘Aryan’ state appears to have been based principally on the eye of Adolf Hitler rather than a set of delineated characteristics. Even Hitler’s taste was not the ultimate indicator of ‘Aryan’ art: whilst planning what great artworks he would take from the conquered museums of Europe for his never-realized Führer-Museum, he was convinced by his newly appointed museum director that his taste was not up to standard for the world-class museum he envisaged. Rather than firing the man, Hitler deferred to this Dr. Hans Posse, despite the fact that he had recently been fired from his post as museum director in Dresden for endorsing "degenerate art."

What was actually on display in the two exhibitions?

 

Ernst Barlach, The Reunion (Das Wiedersehen), 1926, mahogany, 90 x 38 x 25 cm. Ernst Barlach Haus, Hamburg. Photo: Rufus46

The Degenerate Art Exhibition mostly exhibited Expressionism, New Objectivism and some abstract art. Strangely, very few works came from Jewish artists, and a lot of artworks had until recently been favorites of many Nazis. Renowned works by artists such as Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Karl Schmidt-Rotluff and Ernst Barlach now hung on walls marked with graffiti. The works ranged from quiet and traditional looking, such as Ernst Barlach’s The Reunion (Das Wiedersehen), 1926 which showed two poised, realistically carved wooden figures holding each other, to more grotesquely painted works, such as Otto Dix’ War Cripples (Kriegskrüppel), 1920. This work shows a procession of cartoonesque yet morbid war veterans, painfully moving forward with the aid of pushchairs, prosthetic legs and crutches, smoking cheerfully, though one soldier’s face is half eaten away, revealing a rictus grin of clenched teeth.

Otto Dix, War Cripples (45% Fit for Service), 1920, oil on canvas, lost work

In contrast, the Great Exhibition of German Art showed art with the hallmarks of classical tradition, large sculptures of tall and muscular bodies and paintings of heroic soldiers by artists such as Josef Thorak and Arno Breker. Prominent position was given to Breker’s Decathlete (‘Zehnkämpfer’) and Victory (‘Siegerin’), both made in 1936, showing two bronze figures over three metres high, their impersonal facial expressions and perfectly proportioned bodies almost archetypical examples of the classical style.

Arno Breker, Decathlon Athlete (Zehnkämpfer), 1936, bronze

However, in later editions of the Great Exhibition of German Art, works that did not fit the ideals of beauty, youth and optimism crept back in. Realistically painted works depicting soldiers despairing in the trenches by Albert Heinrich and sad, emaciated figures like the bust Der Walzmeister by Fritz Koelle began to share the space with oversized muscular bronze men and paintings of serene nude women.

The random nature of Nazi art policy continued after these exhibitions closed. Breker and Thorak, superstars of the Nazi regime, actually had some works branded as degenerate (though this was quickly covered up), whereas the artist Emil Nolde, who joined the Nazi party and was an early and enthusiastic supporter, had been issued a so-called Malverbot forbidding him to paint even in the privacy of his own home. He received regular visits from the Gestapo, the secret police, who came to touch his brushes to ensure that they had not been used. Nolde became a water-color painter. The brushes dried a lot faster than with oil paint.

 

View of sculpture exhibited at the Haus of German Art, n.d.

Please read and watch the resources on this page Links to an external site. about Abstract Expressionism and the New York School.

Read and watch all the material in this section Links to an external site., which covers architecture after World War II.

 

"Arth101: Art Appreciation and Techniques" Links to an external site. is licensed under CC BY 3.0 Links to an external site.