August 24, 2003
Highlights: 12/14/02
Dargie asks me, "How is tenebrism substantially different from chiaroscuro?" A very good question. Let me see if I can explain. Chiaroscuro is the play of light and dark; great contrasts of light and dark. We see that in The Candle Light paintings below as well as Caravaggio's work. Tenebrism is more specifically the use of dark, regardless of how much light is in the painting. Each of the above examples qualifies under tenebrism as well. However, a painting of a daylight scene, with great contrasts of sunlight and shadow would qualify as chiaroscuro, while it would not qualify as tenebristic. Edward Hopper used chiaroscuro in his works quite often. The link is specifically for his work "Early Sunday Morning." Now, something like his "Nighthawks" could possibly qualify under both terms.
From the American Heritage Dictionary:
chiaroscuro: 1. The technique of using light and shade in pictorial representation. 2. The arrangement of light and dark elements in a pictorial work of art. [Ital: chiaro, light + oscuro, dark].
(tenebrism is one of those art historical jargon words, and therefore is not itself in the dictionary)
tenebrific: 1. Serving to obscure or darken. 2. Gloomy, dark [Latin: tenebrae, darkness]
Highlights: 12/11/02
The Candle Light Painters. This was not a movement, not a style, and it wasn't even a community of artists. Quite simply, the Candle Light Painters were artists who painted scenes in which a candle was the only source of illumination. They created wonderful effects of light and dark, dramatic scenes in which the candle light is a major player. Although Caravaggio was the initial inspiration for this type of tenebrism (working with darkness), he did not actually use artificial light in his works. It was his followers who started it. It may be that Gerrit Honthorst was the first of the Caravaggisti to create candle light paintings.
In this, one of the earliest candle light paintings, Honthorst creates a mood with the single candle. The light shines primarily on Christ, and only partially illuminates Pilate. The rest of the scene is in darkness, irrelevant to the story. Caravaggio was famous for his dramatic, stage-like images. This scene is also presented as though it is on stage, with the actors posed so that the candle creates the greatest effect.
This image is probably the inspiration for the painting of St. Irene by Georges de La Tour (below). We see the same use of the candle light for dramatic effect. The light shines brightest on Delilah’s face, as she is the center of attention. It only marginally illuminates the servant and the sleeping form of Samson.
While obviously inspired by the above painting, it is still very different. The viewer is presented with a still-life tableau, captured in dramatic detail by the torchlight. The players in the scene stand posed like statues. In his later works like this one, La Tour tended to erase small details in his paintings, like buttons, folds, creases and character lines on faces and skin. The smooth skin shines in the torchlight, allowing for the light to play on broad, smooth planes.
This is one of the most tender images created by any of the Candle Light Painters. The image is called the Newborn, but it has also been refered to as “Mary, Christ and St. Anne”. It is thought that the La Tour painted his daughter, wife and grandchild. The baby is remarkably lifelike, with the face of a real newborn and not an older child or small adult. The candle serves to focus the light on the baby, who is center stage. La Tour was fond of having his models shield the candle with their hands so as to direct and focus the light.
Two other painters who came much later are Godfried Schalcken and Richard Wright of Derby. I present one image by each of them below.
I just wanted to show that this particular painting phenomenon continued in smaller circles for many years. These 4 artists are by no means the only painters of this genre, but they are fine examples of it.
August 14, 2003
Highlights: 12/04/02
I wrote an article a couple of weeks back about Wonder Woman for SoloHQ. As far as I can tell, no one read it. That's ok, it wasn't that good. Anyway, I scanned and uploaded a couple of images for that article that were never included. They deserve to be seen and discussed. (You can also go to the article to see what I said about them there.)
For those who aren't up on comic books, let me begin by saying that the artwork has improved phenominally over the years. Many comic book artists are true geniuses, like Todd McFarlane who created Spawn, and Alex Ross who is one of DC's finest. Wonder Woman has benefited greatly from this groundswell of talent. This is probably due to the fact that she is a woman, and most artists revel in drawing the female form. One can certainly see that in Wonder Woman. Another reason may be that DC editors have seen a need to spice up her image. She is not the most popular of DC's 3 major icons, just the only female one. So, her covers have been painted in lucious detail while the interior artwork suffers because the great artists are not the ones working on it - too busy doing Batman, you know. The image below is one of many covers by the brilliant artist Adam Hughs. He has done some stunning covers fror WW over the last year or so, well worth framing.
I just love his stuff.
Recently, DC published an oversized graphic novel Wonder Woman:Spirit of Truth in which the amazon princess questions her roll as a superhero. She goes to an unnamed middle eastern country in order to help the populace, but they merely stone her as a foreign, half-nude temptress of Satan. She has similar reactions in other countries (though not as extreme) and decides to visit her buddy Clark Kent and ask how he deals with the issue of being "other". His answer: blend in. Take a secret identity. She tries it, likes it, and returns to this unnamed middle eastern country, this time covered from head to foot in order to blend in. This can't last, though, and in a very dramatic scene she drops her abbaya and steps forth as the shining godess she is.
This image gave me chills. She is so beautifully rendered, tall and statuesque. And she steps out looking almost nude among the black-shrouded native women. She could be the erotic daydream for a man or a woman.
Well, my advice is that if you haven't looked at comic books in many years, check them out. You might be pleasantly surprised.
August 10, 2003
Highlights: 11/30/02
My inaugural painting study will be the Beheading of St.John the Baptist by Caravaggio.
The subject in itself is rather common, but the way that Caravaggio portrayed it is unique, even shocking. Traditionally, the head of St.John the Baptist rests on a platter held by the lovely Salome. In the background may lie the decapitated body of the saint. There is usually very little violence involved in this scene in paintings up until this time. But Caravaggio has given us a brutal scene, with St.John thrown to the ground with his hands tied behind his back.
Instead of a hefty axe, the executioner pulls a knife from his belt. He holds John down with his other hand and prepares to decapitate the saint with his knife. A knife! One would think that this would be the hardest, most savage way to cut off someone's head. To add to the violence inherent in this scene, the saint's red cloak draped over his body reminds us of the blood that will soon be pouring from his neck.
In keeping with the brutality of this scene, an older woman, perhaps Salome's maid, stands horrified by the scene. A woman, presumably Salome, stands ready to receive the bloodied trophy on her platter. Another man, possibly a prison warden of some kind, directs the operations.
This painting with its violence and emotion is highly representative of Baroque art. The scene is presented as if it were on a stage, with the prison walls as the proscenium. Two prisoners look out from their cell, spectators in this grisly play. The painting must have been quite shocking, though many people did like it. Still, it was placed in a position of relative obscurity behind the altar, where it could never be seen in its entirety.
One might consider Caravaggio to be the first modernist painter, in that he liked to shock his audience. This is not the first time he has done this. He painted the Death of The Virgin using the corpse of a prostitute that had been pulled from the river as his model. He painted Saint Jerome with dirty feet, unheard of at a time when saints were revered for their purity and and piety. Caravaggio liked the attention and the commotion his paintings caused, even if they made it harder for him to get commissions. There was always someone out there who admired him enough to hire him.
Caravaggio painted this work for the Cathedral of St.John in La Valletta on the island of Malta about 1608. The church belonged to the Knights of St.John, also known as the Hospitallers and the town was named after one of their greatest generals. Caravaggio was in Malta in 1608-1609 because he had to flee Rome after killing a man in a brawl. The Grand Master of the Order, Alof de Wignacourt, wanted Caravaggio to do his portrait. He then did the Beheading picture for the church. I like to think that the reason the Knights accepted Caravaggio's work is because their order was steeped in violence and bloodshed. They were one of the first groups of "fighting monks" formed during the crusades to recapture Jerusalem, and they were the last Christian defense against the Turks, remaining on the island of Malta until the late 18th century. Perhaps this brutal image of Saint John struck a chord with them. Whatever the case, the painting has remained in the church since its installation, although it is now worse for wear through neglect.
UPDATE: I've been looking at my large detail of the Beheading and saw something that I had not seen before. There is a sword lying by the Saint's head, and I believe a trickle of blood by his neck. It occurs to me that the executioner has already done the hard part, and is merely finishing the job with his knife. This doesn't change the nature of the painting, except that the executioner isn't actually using the knife to behead St. John, and is therefore not quite as hard core as I had imagined. It's still a violent painting, wether the saint is already dead or not.
August 03, 2003
Highlights: 11/15/02
The idea of examining Sickert's psyche (last post, below) through his paintings reminds me of something I read years ago in an early art history course. John Berger's Ways of Seeing is a book used in good Art Intro courses. On page 27 he shows a Van Gogh landscape (I will not link to it directly because it did weird things to my browser). The text says:
This is a landscape of a cornfield with birds flying out of it. Look at it a moment, then turn the page.When you turn the page, you see the same image, but written underneath it says:
This is the last picture that Van Gogh painted before he killed himself.. It is hard to define exactly how the words have changed the image but undoubtedly they have.
Indeed they have. The picture suddenly takes on ominous overtones that were not there before. I think you already see where I'm going with this. If we look at Sickert's work with innocent eyes, do we see the same thing as when we look with knowing eyes? I'll never know, because I was not really acquainted with his work before reading Cornwell's book. When I look at a Sickert, I can only see a painting that might be the work of a deranged psycopath, and I will always be looking for those little hints. So will Ms.Cornwell.
BTW, I highly recommend Ways of Seeing - if it's still in print - for anyone teaching a basic intro to art course, or someone who is just interested in learning a bit more. It is rather outdated in some of its imagery (the 70's) but the ideas expressed will always be valid.