Vincent Van Gogh
Vincent was
often considered as an early symbolist due to the way he used colours to
reference feelings or places. The yellow and blues in a lot of his pieces were
supposed to symbolise ‘Heaven’, ‘infinity’ and ‘The eternal’. He liked to try
and represent the feeling of happiness through these spiritual colours in his
pieces. Vincent viewed yellow and blue as very spiritual happy colours, and
this feeling is conveyed very nicely in his paintings. If you look at the
painting below, there is a bright happy yellow resonating from the sky, glowing
on the crops in the painting. Along with this there’s a lot of light blue
shining on the plants/crops in the bottom half of the painting. Blue is a very
calming colour, and I think this is why Vincent combined the blue with the
crops, they could ordinarily brave been a golden brown colour.
The
painting above was from a collection Vincent created based on this sower. The
general meaning behind the collection was to “search for spiritual meaning in
every day existence”. All of these paintings in the collection (which are very
similar to the painting above, only a different composition and varying amounts
of yellow and blue in each) give off a very happy, tranquil feel about them.
Yes the person in the painting is obviously working hard to sow the crops in
the field, but you get the feeling of happiness almost as though the character
in the painting is quite content doing so, and this feeling is given off mainly
by the colours in the piece.
The
vibrant colours in the sky and obvious brush strokes of bright colour in the
foreground look almost 3D textural. This, I can only assume, would make the
bright colours stand out even more in person, giving off a resonating look of
happiness. The one thing I find strange is the way that the person in the
painting is so dark, and such a contrast to the bright sky. The sky is bright
yellows and blues, which symbolise happiness and heaven, yet the person is a
dark black colour. This could be just because the figure was silhouetted by
standing in front of the bright sun, or he wanted to contrast the figure and
the surroundings to emphasise the colour.
Paul Gauguin
Another way to
use symbolism in a piece is to have the actual figures and elements of the
piece meaning something, almost as though the figures themselves are telling a
story. Paul uses this method of using the figures to tell a story, instead of
having symbolic colours representing feelings.
The
piece above is one by Paul Guaguin called “Where do we come from? What are we?
Where are we going?” created in 1897. The painting was intended to be read from
left to right (like a book page), as each figure in the painting is doing
something very specific to the symbolic meaning of the piece. The woman with a
child in the painting is supposed to symbolise the joy in living, to me this
would also symbolise the way that new life brings joy into the world. There is
a man picking fruit from a tree in the centre of the painting, wearing only a
linen cloth. The tree is supposed to resemble the tree of knowledge, and I get
the feeling the man picking the fruit is supposed to resemble the thirst humans
have to know absolutely everything, and to have explanations behind everything;
this coincides with the title of the painting too, which questions much of the
things humans constantly question.
The idol in the painting represents
mans search for unknown. There are two kittens playing behind a child in the
bottom of the painting. This to me represents the playfulness and happiness of
the creatures, which do not get tied down with always questioning things. There is an old main in the painting, which
seems to be to symbolise the fact that everything will grow old, deteriorate and
die. It seems to me that this painting includes many of the stages of life, and
most of the things which humans question. It is said that Paul was struggling
with not knowing. He had a thirst for knowledge and he was using this painting
to represent all of the things, which he questions. The figures in the painting
tell a story of growth, happiness, inquisitiveness and death; and each element
if the painting symbolises a different part of this story.
Gustave Moreau
Gustave Moreau
created a painting called “Tattooed Salome” in 1876. Gustave focused mainly on
religious or mythical paintings. The painting on the next page is the tattooed
Salome painting. This “Salome” character appears in multiple of his pieces. The
meaning of the word “Salome” is a girl who agrees to perform the “Dance of the seven
veils” In return for John, the Baptists head on a silver platter; the meaning
comes from a biblical story. However the definition of the “Salome”, and all of
the modern day images and biblical images which relate to the “Salome” are not
sexual in any way, infact they could be described as ‘prude’; so I think that
Gustave was trying to convey a different message in this quite exotic painting.
The red colouring in the background of
the piece is instantly associated with something bad, evil or tragic, however
the blue draped across the woman (as was mentioned earlier in the Van Gogh
symbolism), generally symbolises peace, happiness or something heavenly. This
almost makes me think that because of her confident body language, the fact
that she’s wearing quite provocative gear and surrounded by an evil colour,
she’s probably both evil and innocent, as though she could be both as and when
she pleases to get what she wants/needs.
The
“Salome” figure trades her performance for something she wants, something you
can see happening here. I get the feeling the character in the painting is very
manipulative, almost as though she knows exactly how to use her attractive
figure and innocent-ness to get what she wants, almost as though she uses her
innocent and attractiveness to hypnotise her viewers into doing what she wants.
The body art and jewellery she is wearing matches the shawl she is carrying and
her surroundings; it is all very exotic and intricately patterned, this to me
symbolises that she is a woman of culture and richness. She is wearing a very
fancy, expensive looking crown, which instantly makes you assume she is a woman
of wealth. The statue like thing in the background means that she is most
likely in a very expensive place, which many wonderful treasures, making you
think that she was probably a very important woman back in her day.
The
story behind her enticing men to follow her every command is from a biblical
story, but called a ‘paradox’. A paradox is a story which contradicts itself,
but might also be true. I am not sure I believe the story, as most people tend
to be selfish and would want more in return for killing a man and serving his
head on a platter than a dance. There are so many mixed messages in this
painting, the pale innocent figure of the lady draped in an exquisite beautiful
cloth surrounded by the negative message she portrays and the evil colouring of
the room she is in is a very strange and contradictive message.
Jan Thorn Prikker
Jan thorn
Prikker is an artist who worked with Christian symbols. He produced his art
piece (image below) as a stain glass window, which is now in a gallery display,
but was originally produced for a church/cathedral window. The piece of art was
obviously supposed to symbolise meanings to do with Christianity, as it was to
be displayed in a Christian church.
The white ish
figure in the centre of the stain glass is the bride to be. The white flowers
which are growing and surrounding her have the symbolic meaning of purity and
innocence. The bride would have been a virgin, as Christians ‘save’ themselves
for their marriage, and so on her wedding day she is being conveyed as a pure
and innocent being (as she would still be a virgin). I think this would have
been something important for the Christian church to convey. They want to
portray thee beauty and freshness of a virgin, therefore encouraging people to
save themselves, reminding them that it is a good thing to do. However this
element is contrasted by the Phallic symbols in the piece. The bride herself is
a phallic symbol, so it seems strange to me that these pure flowers surround
it. I think this is perhaps to show the fact that the male is also a pure
being, not just the female. The figure in the middle is therefore a symbolic
combination of both the male and female joining themselves at marriage, both of
them at that point are pure and innocent virgins becoming one.
The
piece is very abstract, flat and linear in its approach. I also noticed the
fact that the main two colours in the piece were white, which resembles purity
and innocence. And green, which symbolises harmony, safeness and fertility;
three of the things, which play a very strong part in the life of a Christian,
especially at the point they get married.
Jean Delville
The colours in
the pieces all have individual symbolic meanings. The yellow symbolises the
sun, joy and happiness, something that is essential in a healthy relationship
which is obvious when you see the people in the painting. The orange elements
in the painting symbolises attraction, physically and mentally. The people In
this painting are not looking at each other, but are still physically
connected. This makes me think that the orange in the painting is supposed to
resemble the spiritual attraction between the two of them. Blue is the colour
of loyalty, and purple is the colour of dignity. I think these colours
surrounding the couple are supposed to resemble the things which are essential
to them, and that makes the relationship work. The main colour in the painting
is purple, which is strongly associated with romantic feelings, as it’s the mix
of red (passion), and blue (softness).
The way that the couple are holding
hands is a very simple gesture, but it shows that they are together and one
even though they are leaning away from each other, and facing different
directions.
The couple seem very aware of each
other; they’re very aware of themselves and are pulling non-offensive positions
which are actually very complimentary to their figures. The colours which
surround them almost look as though the couple are in a dream like reflective
state, which implies there is a metaphor in the painting about the human
condition. The way that people are hovering in mid-air almost and surrounded by
nothing which actually looks real makes it look like a fantasy painting, as
though the two of them are in their own little world happily relaxing in each
others company.
Odilon Redon
Another artist
who creates dream like paintings is one called Odilon (image below). The
flowers in the paintings play a large feature of the painting, yet they’re
almost unrecognisable to a specific species. Many of the paintings by Odilon
were created based on Shakespearian novels, mainly Hamlet.
The
face in the painting isn’t making direct eye contact with the viewer; infact
the subject has her eyes closed. She is almost in a bubble in the painting,
surrounded by flowers to a certain point, and then it becomes darker and less
vibrant. The figure has a very pale face, which gives her a very oriental look.
The style of the work looks a lot like the Japanese art too, the blue in the
background mixed with the bright yellow which contrasts the pale face and black
hair.
The way that she is enclosed in a
bubble of brightness makes me think that she is surrounded in her own
happiness, quite content in staying within her unusual world.
Gustav Klimt
The photograph
below is an image of the painting Gustav Klimt called ‘Danae’, created in 1907.
This painting was created as an example of symbolism, the artist worked on
symbolism in much of his work. Danae, the lady in the painting, was a popular
subject for paintings in the early 1900’s. she was used as a symbol for divine
love and transcendence. Gustav uses an interesting combination of realistic
parts of the painting, some quite textural areas, smooth areas and some
abstract shapes and patterns around the edge of the figure.
The subject of
the painting was supposedly imprisoned by her father. She was visited by Zeus,
which is symbolised here by the flowing rain of gold between her legs. The lady
in the painting is supposed to be portrayed as being aroused by this, seen by
the look on her face. In this piece she is curled up in a royal purple veil.
This royal purple colour was supposed to represent her wealth and importance.
Some time after this visitation from Zeus she gave birth to a son called
Peruses, who was very significant to the Greek mythology. The paintings of this
lady, Danae are usually very erotic, and usually are only based on her herself.
She had a very interesting story, from birth, marriage, sex and death she led a
very extraordinary life. She looks very eye catching here. The picture above
does not show it so well by the original painting featured a girl with flaming red
hair.
Dada
About Dada
Dada was an art
movement in Europe in the early 20th century. It began in
Switzerland but spread to Berlin shortly after. Dada classes itself mainly as
anti-war art. The roots of Dada are a little bit of Cubism and the development
of collage, theoretical writing and abstraction. Apparently all of these inputs
helped bring the art away from conventional things and the restraints of
realistic things. The writings from French poets and German expressionists
liberated Dada from the tight correlation of words and meanings.
Dada was essentially a group of artists
who worked together to portray messages in their artwork and inspire people to
take certain actions. The Dada activities included gatherings, demonstrations,
art, journals that passionately cover art. Politics and culture are something
often discussed in different ways including art, poems, writings and displays
of movement.
Dada was used to protest and express
their feelings about things, which at that time Dad was a movement which worked
against the Bourgeois nationalist and colonialist interest, which many Dadaists
believed was the route cause of war, which they try to prevent. Dada calls
itself ‘anti-art’. Although it is an art movement it claims not to be art,
instead it’s called a “state of mind”.
The artists which participated in Dada
mainly are; Max Ernst, who was a sculptor, painter, graphic artist and poet,
his work looks as though it is mainly collage work where he will mix completely
un-related photographs together to produce a piece of work which looks almost
random and strange. Francis Picabia was another artist; his main focus was on
impressionism, pointillism and cubism, he was later associated with surrealism
but soon after turned his back on the whole art establishment. Man Ray was
another, Man was very well known around the art scene for his photography, his
relationship with the art movement Dad was considered ‘informal’. Raoul
Hausmann was another, known for his photomontages and collages. Marcel Duchamps
was a painter. Jean Arp was a sculptor. Kurt Schwitters worked in all elements
of art; sculpture, painting, poetry, movement etc. And finally Hannah Hoch, who
was also a photomontage artist.
Raoul
Hausmann
Raoul began
experimenting with a type of art called Photomontage, which is a lot like
collage. This style of art, influenced originally by cubism involves taking
elements of text or imagery from different places and combining them into one
image.
The image above is one called ‘Tatlin at
Home’. The image is supposed to show the way that the human mind is being
controlled now by the rational unemotional. Hausmann believed that the European
war was caused greatly by the result of society that made too much decisions
based on emotions. The image was supposed to be part of the anti war movement,
it’s supposed to draw attention to the fact that the popularity is now
controlled by machine minds.
He was an early
collage artist, one of the first to do anything like this, so he was very
popular at this time. To me I think this image is very poignant, it’s something
we see in society today, people think too much in the way we are taught to
think, we follow strict guidelines and rules that dim our self expression,
almost as though we are intended to also have machine brains. He is trying to
draw attention to the fact that the society these days are too controlled and
too generic, falling into patterns which cause war too easily.
Duchamps
Duchamps art is
very strange. I have seen multiple pieces of his work which are all literally
urinals (like the image below). This was part of the art work which claims to
not be art (anti-art). This art work is so strange, it’s not really art, but it
IS art because the artist ‘says so’.
Hannah Hoch
Hannah Hoch is a
collage and photomontage artist, but her art work is much less aggressive than
other collage artists, such as Hausmann. Hannah tended to focus on the feminist
issues in her work. While other artists in Dada focused on war issues, and
anti-art movements, Hannah raised awareness of the issues faced by women in
those days.
Schwitters
Schwitters
worked primarily on ‘found’ pieces of materials and texts. He says that they
are ‘merzbaum’ pictures, which is an invented word. Schwitters is another
example of an anti-art artist. Although these pieces are beautiful and very
creative, they possibly touch on the importance of re-cycling materials and
shows the use of how you can use ‘found’ materials to produce something new,
yet his work really had no purpose. Similarly to the artist which previously
took a picture of a urinal, it’s only art because the artist says it is.
Max Ernest
There was a piece created by
the artist Max Ernest called ‘Massacre of the Innocents”, which is a very grim
title, so you would expect an exceptionally grim piece of work. However the
work isn’t gruesome at all, if it wasn’t for the crime scene style body shapes
you wouldn’t even guess there was an indication of crime or murder implied by
the picture.
The piece is
created with collage pieces cut from 19th centaury science journals,
then it was painted and drawn over the top of to create a ‘fantasy’ element to
the otherwise scientific image. Max liked the way that if you gave the image
such a dramatic title the viewer instantly amylases it much more, and looks for
even more of a meaning in the piece than there may have seemed before.
Man Ray
Man ray used
some interesting media and techniques in his works. For example his piece
called ‘coat stand’ (image below) used multiple different medias and processes
which hadn’t been used together before.
He photographed
a nude woman behind the cardboard cut out of a dummies face on a pedestal foot.
For me personally I feel like this set of images is very strange, I feel as
though man ray has tried to trick the viewer into thinking it was a collage
piece, when infact he almost created the collage in real life and took one
photograph as the end result. This is something I have never seen an artist do
before and so I can tell why Man Ray was so well known for his interesting use
of mixing techniques.
I feel like the photograph is supposed
to resemble the unrealistic standards imposed on women. They need to be skinny,
curvy and have a face like a doll. I feel this is why the model has large hips,
but a small waist, and the top of her torso up is a dummy, as she feels her
face needs to be so stereotypically perfect.
The way that Man ray had the woman wear
black socks, and stand against a black background was a clever way to trick the
viewer into believing the model had been
cut from the legs down. The socks blended into the background making
them invisible almost, therefore tricking the viewer into associating this
image with a collage piece.
No comments:
Post a Comment