Art History: Modern Art

The section of art history which encompasses modern art, spans from 1860-1970. It includes movements such as Impressionism, Expressionism, Cubism, Dadaism, Surrealism, Futurism, Abstraction, and Pop art. Modern art was really (at least in my mind) all about breaking the rules, breaking away from traditions of the past in favor for exploration, expression, and experimentation. Artists of this time, for the most part, even ditched the traditional, softer colors and opted for bright, vibrant colors straight from the tube. Again, this post isn’t meant to be a lesson in art history, but a glimpse into my take on things.

It was during this period that artists really pushed the boundaries. Impressionism was a study in light and its continuously changing qualities. Also typical of Impressionism was the small, thin brush strokes, which the artists left so that they were visible. Of course, the conventional French art community thought this very unrefined and unfinished, as if the artist hurriedly and haphazardly slapped paint onto the canvas. The name Impressionism was coined after one of Claude Monet’s paintings, Impression, Soleil Levant.

Claude Monet, Impression, Soleil Levant

Now, I can appreciate some of the work during the Impressionism movement. Renoir’s Dance at Le Moulin de la Galette always struck me as a snapshot of a fancy affair at a park. Perhaps a wedding party. And in this case, I disagree with the French art community. It’s a lovely painting by an obviously talented man. Degas’ ballerina series is also a body of work that I like. As seen in The Dance Class, it’s light, airy, and full of calm, disciplined movement.

I always thought Manet’s Luncheon on the Grass was a nice painting, although a bit odd that there is a randomly nude female in it. There is another female in the back, but she is clothed. Is this his attempt to have the conventional nude in an Impressionist painting? Why is she sitting nude with two clothed males? Is she a prostitute? Is she suffering from severe hot flashes?

Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Le Moulin de la Galette

Edgar Degas, The Dance Class

Edouard Manet – Luncheon on the Grass

As Post-Impressionism moves in, we start seeing the likes of Seurat, Gauguin, Van Gogh, and Cezanne to name a few. I can still appreciate some of this work. Seurat’s A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte is another lovely snapshot type painting of a day in the park on a typical afternoon. Light and how it plays on form is equally important here and he makes it a point of having some figures in the shade of a tree and others out in direct sunlight. And in fact, he draws attention to the play of light and shadows even more by painting in a system of dots, or pointillism. This eliminated any possibility of getting too detailed, or even creating a single solid line. This painting is better viewed from a distance so that the carefully placed dots of color optically blend.

Georges Seurat, A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte

Cezanne was a fan of still life paintings. His Still Life with a Curtain is a popular example. Aside from the subject matter itself, he was concerned with light and geometric shapes and the tension created between objects. He also painted landscapes, bathers, and portraits. Van Gogh is probably best known for Starry Night. His early work was much more subdued. It is speculated that the bright colors and frenzy of dashes, which made up his more famous paintings, are an indicator of the progression of his mental illness.

In what is speculated to be the aftermath of an altercation with Paul Gaugin, Van Gogh removed his own left ear with a razor. And then at 37 years old, he committed suicide. Gauguin’s Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going? is probably his most well-known work. He too, used bright colors and wasn’t too concerned with realism. His work reminds me of a child’s coloring book. I think I was more interested in the work done during the time he spent in Tahiti. If you know me at all, I happen to love most things Polynesian.

Paul Cezanne, Still Life with a Curtain

Vincent Van Gogh, Starry Night

Paul Gauguin, Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?

Fauvist artist, Matisse started off with still life painting in his early career, but is probably most known for The Dance. Again, for me this is reminiscent of a child’s coloring book (despite the naked dancing people dancing, which I’m certain are in no child’s coloring book). It’s happy and playful. It’s not concerned with realism, but rather bright colors and painterly qualities. It was almost as if the importance of the piece was the fun in creating it, not necessarily how nice it looked.

Henri Mastisse, La Danse

Cubism was a movement that became concerned with geometric shapes, as the name would imply. Both people and objects were broken down into their simplest shapes. It’s at this point where you lose me almost entirely. The most well-known artist of this movement, without a doubt, is Pablo Picasso. Picasso’s early work was actually quite nice. His portraits were actually rather realistic. Things get strange when he gets the idea to paint all sides of the model’s face…even the side you couldn’t see. So, if he painted a woman in profile, as in the one on this postage stamp, you see the front of her body and her face both in profile and frontal views.

Pablo Picasso, Postage stamp portrait of Jacqueline

Abstract art became a thing during this time as well. Artists like Kandinsky, Pollock, and Mondrian were wildly popular. I won’t go into detail here since I recently wrote a post entirely on abstract art, which you can read here. The long and the short of it is…I just don’t understand.

Another abstract movement in Russia, known as Suprematism, is also mindboggling to me. Actually, maybe mindboggling is the wrong word. That at least indicates some grey matter activity. With this movement my brain absolutely flat lines. Suprematism is focused on basic geometric forms and limited colors. Rather than directing attention to actual people, objects, or landscapes, they tried to convey “the supremacy of pure artistic feeling”. The Black Square by Kazimir Malevich, is apparently a popular example. I’m sorry. I got nothin’ here…

Kazimir Malevich, The Black Square

Dadaism wasn’t so much a movement in my opinion, as it was a protest. It was anti-everything. Anti-war (WWI), anti-art (rejecting prior definitions of art), and anti-bourgeois. This movement actually included more than just art. It involved public gatherings, journals, and demonstrations. But it became most known for everyday objects that were “repurposed” and labeled “art.” The best known of these is Marcel Duchamp’s The Fountain. It was everything that art was not. If art was meant to appeal to the senses, Dada was meant to shock and offend. In my opinion, it worked.

Marcel Duchamp, The Fountain

Pop art, like Dadaism, re-purposes objects. But in this case, the re-purposed objects are advertisements, comic books, and other popular printed media. It was meant to ironic, kitschy, tongue-in-cheek. I really don’t have an opinion one way or the other with this movement. It is what it is. It’s fine in the museums in which they’re housed. I wouldn’t want it in my house. But I don’t find them offensive, good, bad, or boring. You’ve probably even seen some and not known that they were part of an art movement (maybe you did, if you have an art background). What Picasso was to Cubism, Andy Warhol was to pop art. Probably his most famous works involve Marilyn Monroe or Campbell Soup cans.

Andy Warhol, Marilyn Diptych

And with the last modern art movements that I’ll talk about here today, my interest piques again with Surrealism. It is exactly as its name implies…surreal. It’s strange. It’s dreamlike. Strange creatures and everyday objects distorted. Probably the top two (at least in my opinion) surrealists are Max Ernst and Salvador Dali, with Dali in the number one spot. They’re bizarre enough that the imagination of the viewer is stirred up, making them wonder if the image has some deep, profound meaning or is it just the byproduct of an intense pipe dream.

Salvador Dali, The Persistence of Memory

Max Ernst, L’Ange du Foyeur ou le Triomphe du Surrealisme

So those are my feelings on this section of art history. As an artist, I’m all for exploration and experimentation…even though it makes me uncomfortable. I’m comfy with what I can do and how I do things. I like comfy. HOWEVER…I also know that if you are not the slightest bit uncomfortable, you are not growing, your skills are not being challenged, and you are therefore stagnating. So, I try to challenge myself by picking subject matter that would challenge my abilities. Generally, there’s an animal involved.

But one project I have in mind is of a tiger on black background with a giant spray of water. This one will be in color (challenge #1…color intimidates me). And then there’s the spray of water (challenge #2…making water look realistic is tough!). Other challenges for me would be drawing people as competently as my animals, drawing digitally, drawing landscapes and environments, and writing and illustrating a graphic novel.

What I found difficult to understand throughout all of art history, and perhaps especially modern art, was how there were so many movements. One artist began experimenting, trying out a new style and then they all did. And that style became a movement. The second thing I found hard to understand was, why? I guess it’s like a friend of mine surmised…at those particular times in art history, if you didn’t conform, you weren’t accepted or respected as an artist. You would’ve been ostracized and that meant no income.

Today however, there are no movements. Everyone’s looking for their own unique style, the next new thing. Individuality is encouraged. Like abstract art, I don’t always “get” everything I see these days either, but I appreciate the artist’s willingness to be different and maybe not have everyone get it or appreciate it. Perhaps that in itself is the movement. Individualism. If so, I hope it’s here to stay.