Sunday, 7 July 2013

Expressive Landscape


Expressive landscapes can probably best be described as a personal vision of the subject - an emotional or imaginative view of the world around us.  This type of expressive painting began in the last years of the 19th century with artists such as Van Gogh and Cezanne but really came into its own in the first half of the 20th century.  So many art movements were happening at this time, along with massive social change and two world wars, all of which inspired change to this most traditional of genres.
The Fauves (Wild Beasts) were so named after an exhibition in Paris in 1905, where their work was described as primitive because of its “… strident colours, rough handling and distorted, anti-naturalistic drawing[1].
Andre Derain and Henri Matisse are the most famous of the group (two works of each are shown below).  Matisse originally expanded on pointillism – using dashes of paint separated by areas of white canvas, rather than Seurat’s small dots (as in Luxe, Calme and Volupte, 1904/5 ) - before moving towards his most famous style – large blocks of bright, primary colour with flattened perspective and stylised forms.
Derain painting a number of paintings in London, most of the views from the River Thames itself.  According to the Tate “He had been sent to London by his dealer, Vollard. The idea was to update, in Fauve style, the popular Thames views painted by Claude Monet a few years earlier. Strongly-coloured and freely-handled, this painting (referring to the Pool of London) is characteristic of Fauvism in creating vivid effects through bold contrasts of colour[2].
Collioure:Le Port de Peche, 1905 - Andre Derain
Matisse – Jardin du Luxembourg 1901 
Matisse – Jardin du Luxembourg 1904 
Although this movement was short lived, the Fauves’ impact was high: “By freeing colour from its traditional descriptive role in representation, the Fauves led the way to its use as an expressive end in itself[3]
Vienna Secession / Symbolist: Gustav Klimt.  While Klimt was more known for his large paintings of women with highly decorative clothing covered in abstract motifs and gold (both leaf and dust), he also painted a number of landscapes, many showing his fascination with pattern and detail.
Gustav Klimt, the Swamp 1900 - In this painting of a swampy pond, you can see his attention to detail and pattern in the water.  Although I was unable to zoom this image, you can see the multitude of colours used and the complex patterning used to describe the shadows, water plants and algae floating on the water.
Kammer Castle on Lake Attersee II, 1909 - In this image, Klimt’s obsession with pattern is evident.  The only solid colour is the white and cream paint on the walls of the building.  Everything else – the roofs, grass and trees is comprised of multiple colours applied in small strokes, patches and dots.  This technique makes it difficult for the viewer to take in the image as a whole, you have to move round the painting, concentrating on each individual element in order for your brain to process it before moving on.
The First World War, more than others, appears to have been described to us both by its poets and artists.  Even though photography and early film had been invented (and we do have these images), it is through words and paint that we understand the true horror of this war, with its immense loss of life fought in the trenches of France and Belgium.  Even now, certain images spring to mind immediately – barbed wire, trenches, “going over the top”, gas attacks, the poppies blooming in disturbed ground.
The war artists Paul Nash and Christopher Nevinson embodied the style of the time in their paintings by using cubist and futurist imagery to bring home the horror of war.
Nash’s painting “The Menin Road” typifies the destruction of modern warfare.  The title itself says it all – there is no road there, everything has been destroyed.  The green fields and trees are gone to be replaced by sombre, dark and dull colours.  The soft edges of plants displaced by the hard edges of war.  All this is seen in the picture below – all the edges are hard and angular. In the middle are two small figures, trying to find their way round all the shell holes and destruction.
From the Imperial War Museum website:
Nash received the commission for this work, which was originally to have been called 'A Flanders Battlefield', from the Ministry of Information in April 1918. It was to feature in a Hall of Remembrance devoted to ‘fighting subjects, home subjects and the war at sea and in the air’. The centre of the scheme was to be a coherent series of paintings based on the dimensions of Uccello’s ‘Battle of San Romano’ in the National Gallery (72 x 125 inches), this size being considered suitable for a commemorative battle painting. While the commissions included some of the most avant-garde British artists of the time, the British War Memorials Committee advisors saw the scheme as firmly within the tradition of European art commissioning, looking to models from the Renaissance. It was intended that both the art and the setting would celebrate national ideals of heroism and sacrifice. However, the Hall of Remembrance was never built and the work was given to the Imperial War Museum. Nash worked on the painting from June 1918 to February 1919. Nash suggested the following inscription for the painting. 'The picture shows a tract of country near Gheluvelt village in the sinister district of 'Tower Hamlets', perhaps the most dreaded and disastrous locality of any area in any of the theatres of War.'  Two soldiers try to follow the line of a road that has been mutilated, almost beyond recognition. In fact, the whole landscape has been re-arranged, with the giant concrete blocks epitomising this harsh new order: the bursts of sunlight have become gun barrels; the reflections of trees, steel structures.”[4]
Christopher Nevinson - In theTrenches, 1917 
Nevinson’s work here concentrates more on the human scale of war – three soldiers picking their way through tangled barbed wire defences.  The same devices have been used as in Nash’s work – the hard angles and diagonals, the sombre colours and the traditional landscape supplanted by a strange, lunar-like cratered surface.
Salvador Dali is probably the best known Surrealist – his works are hyper-realistic in their painting style but that is the only realism that could be applied to Dali.  He was motivated by the works on psychoanalysis by Freud and used his art to explore his imagination.  Freud published a work “The Interpretation of Dreams” in 1900 and believed that unconscious thoughts and dream could be analysed and brought into consciousness, thus exploring unfulfilled or repressed wishes and desires.  His painting style was very traditional, building up layers of oil using fine brushes to achieve a high level of detail, often applying his dream-like images on top of actual or imagined landscapes to achieve a great sense to scale and depth, often in fairly small paintings.
One of Dali’s great paintings is “Soft Construction with Boiled Beans: Premonition of Civil War” (1936) which was completed 6 months before Spain did fall into civil war.  It depicts a huge, very distorted body, trying to pull itself apart, set in an apocalyptic, desert like landscape, with a handful of beans on the ground. 
Max Ernst was involved with the Dada movement before moving to Paris and becoming a key figure in the Surrealist movement.  Ernst developed a number of unusual painting techniques frequently involving the discovery of images within patterned surfaces.  This interest can be seen in the painting above – the paint has a very unusual texture, as if it has been peeled or scraped off to reveal underlayers.
The Cypress Trees, 1939 (Max Ernst) 
Renee Magritte – The Empire of Lights 1952 
Renee Magritte’s surrealism is more “ordinary” than many other artists, the dreamlike fantasy worlds are replaced by more ordinary, mundane subjects – but always with a twist.  The painting The Empire of Lights at first appears a fairly normal image until you look closer: the bright blue sky with clouds tells us it is daytime, but the dark, silhouette of the buildings seems to tell us it is dusk.  Moving down the painting is a streetlight, the glow showing us the detail of the building and telling us it is dark.


[1] Honour, Hugh and Fleming, John: “A World History of Art”, Laurence King Publishing Ltd, 2005, p774
[3] Honour, Hugh and Fleming, John: “A World History of Art”, Laurence King Publishing Ltd, 2005, p775
[4] Imperial War Museum: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/20087, viewed 7 July 2013

No comments:

Post a Comment