The Last Supper
The Arnolfini Marriage
After doing all of this reading about Impressionism, I have come to appreciate it more. However, there are some pieces in which I have a difficult time trying to figure out what I’m suppose to be feeling when I look at them, such as Edgar Degas’s The Singer in Green and John Singer Sargent’s Madame X, I think they are very interesting to look at, but I’m never really sure what the painters trying to get across to me. So although I have some problems trying to figure out what some of the Impressionist paintings are trying to say, overall I find Impressionist style nice to look at and usually drawn in because I can question the pieces.
I think it is also very interesting how great the pieces end up looking considering some of the restraints to the Impressionist style. Looking at one of the more famous pieces of the Impressionist style,Claude Monet’s Rue Montorgueil, Paris, Festival of June 30, 1878. Looking at it you can see the brush strokes, that are characteristic of the Impressionist style, the lack of color mixing, another characteristic of Impressionist style, and finally the subject matter is a festival, which is something that the middle or upper classes might enjoy yet another characteristic of Impressionism. There is also a lot of light and weather work and usually focusing on more pleasant moments. Also looking at the subject matter it was much different than many of the previous era’s subjects. Instead of religious pieces, pieces with famous people, or historic pieces, the Impressionist era’s subject matter is much more nontraditional.
Compared to the styles before Impressionism, I don’t think the painter asked the audience to truly look at their paintings. Looking at pieces such as Leonardo’s The Last Supper, comparing it to Monet’s, Rue Montorgueil, Paris, Festival of June 30, 1878, first off you know exactly what is going on in The Last Supper, while looking at Monet’s painting it is much more difficult to decipher what is going on. Lack of details in my mind is the best part of the Impressionist style. The lack of detail lets the audience come up with the faces or buildings for paintings like Rue Montorgueil, Paris, Festival of June 30, 1878 in my mind making this particular era’s pieces some of the best, because the Impressionist paintings look different to everyone in the audience. Then pieces in the Northern Renaissance like Jan van Eyck’s The Arnolfini Marriage, focused specifically on details, which made incredible pieces. At the same time Eyck’s piece didn’t make me look as deep or as much as in Monet’s pieces.
October 28, 2009 at 5:33 am
I agree that it is not as obvious what the Impressionist artist is trying to convey in their work. You mentioned the lack of color mixing. If you mean that there is a contrast in the colors then I agree. However, it looks to me that it in quite a few Impressionism paintings, there is a great deal of color mixing or maybe blending.
We have differing opinions on the amount of detail. Some paintings from the Impression era had a noticeable amount of detail. You said that your favorite part of Impressionism is the fact that the audience has the freedom to think about what the painting means. I appreciate that about them as well. However, I personally think that Impressionism is one of my least favorite styles. I do enjoy it, but I love details. Thanks for sharing.
October 28, 2009 at 6:13 am
Where you talked about how the audience had their own opinion on the paintings for the impressionism style is interesting. It is definitely how most of the audience feels and how I feel as well. When I look at a painting, other than the detail, I look for hidden meanings as well as just what it’s trying to say. I have seen some detailed work with the impressionism style but overall they stick to the way they want the audience to feel about the painting more than just detail.
Your way of talking about how the colors differ with others is well done and gets me to think what goes through the artist’s mind when they try new things with the abstract colors, etc.