Mill Paintings

For this weeks blog I have decided to write about several works of art by Francois Boucher. I wasn't able to find as much information as I had hoped to on these paintings, but there were no full text articles online about Boucher's landscapes.

Here are the paintings:

1. The Mill, 1751

http://www.art-prints-on-demand.com/kunst/francois_boucher/the_mill_1751_oil_on_canvas_hi.jpg

2. Landscape with Watermill and Temple, 1743. Oil on canvas

http://media.kunst-fuer-alle.de/img/36/m/36_153204~landscape-with-water-mill,-1743.jpg

3. Landscape with a Watermill, 1755. Oil on canvas, 57.2 x 73 cm.

http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/upload/img/boucher-landscape-watermill-NG6374-fm.jpg

References for these three paintings can be found here http://www.artres.com/C.aspx?VP3=ViewBox&VBID=2UN365IS6RB0&VBIDL=&SMLS=1&RW=1333&RH=581

And on Artstor when searching for Francois Boucher Watermill. I also found information on Landscape with a watermill here http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/francois-boucher-landscape-with-a-watermill

That last link was able to provide me with interesting information on why Boucher was so interested in these soft, idyllic landscapes in rural areas. All three of these paintings are of Boucher romanticizing about the “rural way of life” and rural landscapes in general. Which makes sense because Bocher was considered to be a Parisian Rococo painter, like Watteau.

Within each of these paintings the viewer can see how Boucher has created an all around beautiful and idyllic landscape with people living in/working in it. However the people are not the main focus of any of these paintings. Sure they are there and doing their daily work or relaxing, but the scenery and the mills take up most of the space in the paintings and dwarf the people inhabiting them.

Out of the three paintings I think that Landscape with Watermill and Temple accomplishes this romantic and idyllic feeling the best. The figures in this painting are smaller than in any of the others. And you get an immense feeling of deep space with the forest and sky behind the mill. The part that I think romanticizes it the most though is the Roman looking temple in the forest.

One thing that I find interesting about the other two mill paintings is how similar they both look to one another. I feel as if Boucher has a very set ideal for what a rural mill would look like, and he sticks to that throughout his paintings. Both of these paintings look so similar to me I feel as if the mills would be found near each other on the same stream.

Comparing all three of them though I can see a rather major shift. Landscape with Watermill and Temple was painting in 1743 and has very dramatic lighting and a sharpness to it, that is just not seen in the other two mill paintings that were painted 12 years later.

Bernini V.S Michelangelo

I've been waiting forever to write on a subject like this, and I promise that I'm going to keep it as far away from “Bernini is better than Michelangelo because...” as possible..... even though he is.

During the Baroque period in the 17^th century they incorporated ideals like naturalism, and a very small amount of idealism, into their work. While they also rejected humanism, because it wasn't the subject for art at the time due to the counter reformation.

In Bernini's “David” you can see that David is portrayed as a more naturalistic person, and not entirely idealized like Michelangelo's “David.” With Bernini you can see a lot of muscles on David's body, however you don't see all of them, and David is also much more mature looking. Unlike Michelangelo's where you see every muscle on young David's body in perfect definition.

Even though Bernini's David isn't idealized, it's still a depiction of a famous Classical character and it makes up for not being idealized with the amount of drama and energy that can be seen in it. Michelangelo's David is very static standing there in contrapposto, and just being the ideal person who accomplished something great (or is about to.) While with Bernini's David it's a lot harder to tell what David is doing, because the statue looks different from every angle.

From one angle it looks like he just got his sling into position to throw it, but from other angles it looks like he is building up the energy and power in his body to launch it at Goliath. From one angle in particular it looks like the exact second that he is going to throw it with all of his might. This illusionism was valued in Baroque art, and for David it really helps trick the viewer into to thinking that the statue is going to start moving.

Both of these statues where made of the same material and depict the same story, but because of Baroque art Bernini wanted to show a Classical David in action, while also using illusionism to involve the viewer with the story to make it seem as if part of it was happening right in front of them. To that end I believe that Baroque art added ideals that Renaissance art needed, and I'm glad that it was able to borrow from the Renaissance and improve upon it to make the great works of art that we can see today.

(p.s. Bernini made stone look like squishy skin!) http://maitaly.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/proserpina5.jpg

Albrect Dürer watercolor

In order to show Albrect Dürer's relationship with early northern European traditions, and the Italianate features in his artwork I have chosen two works of art.

Wing of a Roller, 1512, watercolor and gouache on vellum,

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFHwkjs8OfQWRJT5D7FoursfNfJWZB40h9A42FhXT_mc3-5QUK0zE1DppK9NORD8dU0EYDgBNyvqIC2MCqGuQY0trutGkKwz6ug0EEXbzDkf8CGkAWmp4uRxCC8AeukTD4PGKa-fx8qn0/s1600/DurerCranesWing.gif

Cupid the Honey Thief, 1514, Pen and ink and watercolor on paper.

http://nbba.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/cupidthehoneythief.jpg

I chose Wing of a Roller because the amount of fine details in it reminded me of earlier works by Jan van Eyck. In Dürer's watercolor study of this bird's wing he brings out an enormous amount of realism and naturalism in the painting. When looking at the bird's wing you can see where every feather starts and stops, and how it overlaps the next one beneath it. By looking at it you can also feel the textures associated with each of the feathers. From the soft fuzzy ones where the wing used to meet the body, to the soft, fragile, and small ones in the middle of the wing, and to the stiffer long ones that make up the lower half of the wing. Though my favorite detail for the wing has to be how he took note of how some of the feathers are shiny and have light roll across them, while how others are just muted and softer in the light.

When looking at this painting I just want to stick my hand out and mess up the feathers, because it feels as if there should be more underneath of what we are seeing. His use of color is also beautiful, and when looking at a real picture of a Roller you can definitely see what he saw while creating this work of art.

While the other work I chose, Cupid the Honey Thief, reminded me of an Italianate style. The woman in the painting is in a contrapposto pose, with almost all of her weight going onto her right foot. Her body is very natural, and though she is not entirely nude, you can see almost all of the curves on her body, and the painting does seem to be celebrating the nude figure. There are also a lot of fine details throughout her whole body. And I've just now realized that this figure looks a lot like Dürer's Eve, from his Adam and Eve engraving. They both have the same forehead, nose, hair, and body shape.

Her arm is also foreshortened, a long with Cupids leg as he's trying to get away from the bees swarming him. It almost looks as if she is scolding him for stealing the honey. One thing that also struck me about that ugly cupid is how he has wings on his back. It's a strange mix considering all of the other humanism/naturalist qualities in the painting, and I also find it kind of strange that his wings are one of the only areas of color in the painting.

In all honesty though, the main reason why I chose these works is because I saw it as an opportunity to be able to write about watercolor in this class. I wish that there were more opportunities for it though, because of how beautiful some of these paintings can be. I wanted to write about more Dürer watercolors that I found, that showed some beautiful atmospheric perspective, but I don't have the time to write about them all day. So to whoever reads this I'd like for you to check out the 2^nd link that Professor Bowen posted and look for the two Dürer watercolor galleries.

Mannerism........¿¿¿

Abraham Janssens, The Origin of the Cornucopia can fit within the realm of Mannerism for a few reasons. The first being how the figures within the painting are twisted and positioned in ways that make them seem out of balance. For a lot of the figures I feel as if they are either going to fall forward onto their faces, or fall sideways, as if they are drunken and unstable. The second reason being how out of proportion each of the figures are. This is especially noticeable in the figure on the right side of the foreground, her thigh/leg is utterly massive, however most of the figures in the painting have out of proportion limbs.

The Origin of the Cornucopia reminds me a lot of the Allegory with Venus and Cupid on page 663. In both of the paintings all of the figures seem rather pudgy with well toned muscles. It's kind of a strange mix that seems to come from this Mannerist style. The more I look around Cornucopia the stranger the things I see. Especially in that one woman in the right foreground. I've just now realized how big her shoulder is, it's just as big, if not bigger than her entire head. Both of these paintings are also very busy, with each figure doing something, such as pointing one way but looking another. It's all rather confusing and I'm not sure what the focus of the paintings should be.

Vincent Sellaer, Leda and the Swan and Her Children reminds me a lot of Pontormo’s Entombment on page 661. The lighting, and the way the figures are painted, are quite different in each painting. However they are similar in how the figures seem to be floating in space and not resting on everything. They seem stacked and you can't tell what their bodies are resting on.

In Leda and the Swan what I really want to know is what she is leaning her body on. You can see that under the cloth that he leg is laying on something, and that her right arm is resting on the swans neck, but she feels horribly off balance and as a painter it bothers me to be honest...

The weightlessness, and the lack of balance that each figure has ties the painting to Mannerism. There is some elongation with the figures as well, but it isn't quite as apparent. I can really only see it in the woman's left arm, and with the standing child in the background. I feel as if the child should be a lot shorter then that, but then I'm also not sure where his feet are supposed to be..

However I will say that I think that the swan was a good choice for this mannerist painting, because they already have elongated necks. (Hah.. bad joke)