CLAUDE MONET: Time, Light, and Space

In the second half of the 19th century, a group of artists in France began to rebel against the strict standards specified by the French Academy of Fine Arts as well as the well-known art exhibition, The Salon. These artists did not want to conform to these standards. Claude Monet, Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Berthe Morisot, Paul Cezanne, Edgar Degas and Alfred Sisley were among the artists who identified themselves as the ‘Independents.’ In 1874, they mounted their first exhibition which turned out to be unsuccessful, but it became a very important step in the history of art (Impressionism.org).

Critics had negative feelings towards this new style of painting. It wasn’t like anything they had seen before. French art critic Louis Leroy had strong opinions to work of Claude Money, titled Impression, Sunrise. He found this painting to be undefined and unfinished; he felt it was only an impression (Impressionism.org). This review was the first time the term Impressionism was used, which became the word used to describe this group of artists.

Instead of being immensely detailed, defined and polished, the characteristics of Impressionist painting were much different. A major characteristic of Impressionist painting is having an emphasis on light and its constant changing through the passage of time. Artists of this movement wanted to portray images as if they were mere glimpses of an event captured at that very moment. It was not necessary to capture the subject itself, rather to capture the artist’s perception of the subject. Very little detail is portrayed. Instead of a smooth and clean finish, Impressionist paintings include visible brush strokes that were done quickly. This conveys the movement and the changing nature of a fleeting moment and a spontaneous feel. Instead of portraying a historic or significant event, Impressionist painters chose to represent ordinary subject matter which included scenes from everyday life. The idea was to capture reality and truly depict what was seen at that given moment. The Impressionists broke the traditional rules referring to composition and began to experiment by looking at their subjects from unusual angles and often cropped or framed their work (Impressionism.org).

Another important aspect of most impressionistic paintings is that they are done “en plein air”, a term that is derived from the French term, ‘in open air.’ During the 19^th, century working in natural light in the outdoors was popular among many of the Impressionist artists. Often times they would sketch the compositions and a few studies out in the open air, and then would complete the final painting in their studio. This technique also made it easier if the artist was working on a series. Painting “en plein air” gives the illusion of a scene being flooded with sunlight, and focuses on how light falls on objects to affect the color in which we see.

Claude Monet is said to be founder of French Impressionism and an impact on the movement of expressing one’s perception of nature. It was his painting in which Louis Leroy first utilized the term ‘Impressionism.’  Monet was born in 1840 in Paris and moved to Le Harve, Normandy in 1845.  In around 1856,  he befriend landscape artist Eugéne Boudin who first launched him into an artistic circle. After his mother died in 1857, he spent a lot of time with his aunt, Marie-Jeanne Lecadre, who unlike his father, encouraged him in his artistic talents. Due to her support, Monet decided to spend a year in Paris in 1859. After serving in the military  in 1861, he had strong ambitions to become a painter of landscape. His aunt then again persuaded his father into allowing him to live in Paris to study painting under Charles Gleyre. He also befriended artists Pisarro, Renoir, Bazille, and Sisley (House,  5).

Monet is known for his spontaneity and vivacity of his painting technique. Among many other Impressionist painters, he paints a range of subject of matters with the ‘en plein air’ approach. This emphasizes on his true devotion to the close observation of nature. Different from previous masters who painted over a dark ground, Monet paints over a white or light beige toned ground which enhances the brilliance of colors. He would then lay in the main elements in the appropriate color in a loose underpainting, later working up areas in a range of broad contours in quick and visible brushstrokes (Potts, 7) His works depict true impressionism while presenting the natural world within a fleeting moment.

In the early 1890s, Monet stopped traveling as much as he previously had and spent most of his time at home in Giverny. His newest obsession was recording the changing effects of light precisely. This resulted in several series of paintings such as Haystacks, Poplar Trees, Lily Ponds, the River Thames and the Rouen Cathedral.  Each series portrayed the same subject matter again and again on every canvas. To some, this may be a boring approach by denying the right to experimentation, but to Monet, this was an opportunity to depict the true nature of light. (Anderson, 284).  Monet had an interest in gardens and painted the Botanic Garden in the city of Rouen, France (He even obtained some of his plants for his garden in Giverny from there). 

One of the most magnificent churches of Notre-Dame in Rouen is one of the greatest Gothic Cathedrals in France, completed in the thirteenth century. It is embellished with bristling pinnacles, pediments, and stone-fretted windows. The Renaissance and Gothic styles represented all that was best in French history and culture. Monet was captivated by the breathtaking facade. He spent time observing the Cathedral and how light affected the shape and substance of the architecture during different times of the day and year. Monet decided to create a series of paintings on the facade of the Cathedral, yet discovering his greatest challenge (Anderson, 302).

The Rouen Cathedral was the first series of Monet’s in which he concentrated so exclusively on an architectural subject. Across the street from the West Facade, he rented a small apartment which he utilized as his studio. He would begin working at 6:00 a.m. when the shadows appeared to be a misty blue-grey.  He would continue to paint throughout the day until 6:30 p.m. when the sun sets beyond the building, leaving a vivid orange glow (Anderson, 304). Because the cathedral had no dominant color to dictate his palette, he was able to create a sequence of color variations. Smooth blues would depict morning, vivid ochres and golden hues represent a sunny day, and browns and grays would depict overcast. As quoted by Monet, “For me,  a landscape does not exist in it’s own light, since it’s appearance changes at any moment; but the surrounding atmosphere brings it to life, the air and the light, which vary continually... for me, it is only the surrounding atmosphere that gives subjects their true value” (Tucker, 8). The weather caused many frustrations for Monet. Some days he could not paint at all due to conditions such as snow or rain. Because the smallest change of lighting is crucial when continuing a previous painting, he had to wait until the weather and light was exactly the same as it was when he began the painting. This discouraged him throughout the process.

Over the course of a year, between 1892 and 1893, Monet painted over thirty views of the  Cathedral. Because of the ever-changing essence of light, he would work on several different canvases at a time and switch from one to another as the day progressed (Metmuseum). He would choose which one to work on depending on the time of day, the weather condition and the presence of light. Because he could only work on these paintings for so many hours a day, he would bring them to his studio in Giverny to carefully adjust them. Since Monet had the ability to paint a scene quickly, he was able to finish it using sketches combined with memory.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City houses one of the most magnificent collections of Impressionist Art. One of the twenty paintings of the Cathedral is in this collection. It is titled “Rouen Cathedral: Le portail (Soleil),”  completed in 1894, oil on canvas.

This painting depicts the facade of the west portal in sunlight. Monet paints the building with an absence of perspective and takes the approach of a much less traditional view. The viewer is thrust close to the building and the whole of the building cannot be seen. There is no other element in the painting other than a very small portion of the blue sky. 

Monet emphasizes the golden glow that represents a sunny day. The clear blues in the shadows contrast with the sunlit surfaces which are a light beige. There are rich schemes of reflected color added in the areas of deep shadow. The most contrasting element is the deep arches within the portal which is portrayed in a burnt umber. The blue from the small section of the sky is accented throughout the rest of the building to create depth. He creates a sense of volume and depth entirely through color relationships. There are no actual lines, only shapes and forms of color to depict the structure of the building. Detail is not used in this series of painting (along with any Impressionistic painting for that matter), as Monet does not dwell on architectural detail. He aims to capture the fleeting moment of light on the surface of the building. 

The dynamic light Monet uses gives life to something as inanimate as the facade of a cathedral. The facade is painted with highly textured brushstrokes that convey the aspect of sculpted stone and makes it palpable. The surfaces are built up from thick layers of paint which creates not only implied but an actual texture. The strokes that were laid early in the process of painting remain visible. Monet took a break for a year from painting the cathedral and even painted over sections in his studio. This creates an encrustation of paint which critics found to be reminiscent of the actual stonework of the building (Potts, 194). This technique allows Monet to emphasize the paradox between a permanent solid structure and the ever-changing essence of light.

In the 1890s France was undergoing a revival of catholicism which immediately made the series a well received subject among collectors and critics. In 1895, Monet successfully exhibited 20 from the series in the Durand-Ruel’s Gallery in Paris. It took him three years to reach exhibition (Potts ,194). Monet’s work has been an important element in the context of modernity in art since the beginning of his career. His painting, Impression, Sunrise; had become a turning factor in the group of Impressionists as it determined their identity. While critics believed their work was sketch-like and unfinished, many others admired it for portraying modern life. In Edmond Duranty’s La Nouvelle Peinture (The New Painting), he accepted their new subject matter as a revolution in painting. (Metmuseum). Today the work of the impressionists is known for its depiction of modern life and its absorption of new ideas and subject matter. The techniques that were adopted by the Impressionists are still in existence today among present-day artists. The style was soon accepted in the official Salon as the new way to describe modern life (Metmuseum).

Many artists focused on the Industrial Revolution, depicting railways, trains and factories. Monet in particular concentrated on this subject matter. During the time period of the Impressionists, the city of Paris was undergoing renovation under Emperor Napoleon III, which is another important aspect of modernity. Artists used this aspect in their paintings. The existence of Paris at this time seems to be as fleeting as the moments captured by the artists. The Rouen Cathedral series is considered to be modernism due to techniques Monet used to capture the effect of light, rather than the architectural detail. It is not a depiction of the subject, but a depiction of the changes the subject undergoes throughout time. Everything in life undergoes changes in some shape or form. This is modernity. 

Georges Clemenceau, a French statesman, argued to have the state buy the whole Rouen Cathedral Series. He was not successful in convincing them and thus the paintings were dispersed throughout different countries. As quotes by Clemenceau, “In front of Monet’s views of [Rouen Cathedral] one begins to realize that art, in setting out to express nature with ever-growing accuracy, teaches us to look, to perceive, to feel” (Anderson, 310). Monet’s series of The Rouen Cathedral was highly accepted for its excellence and beauty.

As well as Monet’s other works of art, the series truly depicts Impressionism as it gives the ‘spur-of-the-moment’ scene. As a painter of landscape, Monet stepped out of his boundaries and created a series of paintings of an architectural element. He justified the importance of light in the perception of a subject at a given time and place.  Light seems to be impossible to capture due to the fact it is every-changing, however Monet captured these changes in an extraordinary manner. Claude Monet was a master painter who has inspired many and will inspire many more to come. 

Works Cited

Anderson, Janice. Monet. Edison, NJ: Chartwell, 2006. Print.

"Impressionism." Impressionist Art & Paintings, What Is Impressionist Art? Introduction to Impressionism. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2012. <http://www.impressionism.org/>

"Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History." Claude Monet: Rouen Cathedral: The Portal (Sunlight) (30.95.250). N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. <http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/30.95.250>.

House, John. Monet, Nature into Art. New Haven: Yale UP, 1986. Print.

Joseph Baillio. Claude Monet, 1840-1926: Paris, Galeries Nationales, Grand Palais, September 22, 2010-January 24, 2011. Paris: Réunion Des Musées Nationaux, 2010. Print.

Paul Hayes Tucker, and Mary Anne Stevens. Monet in the 20th Century. London: Royal Academy of Arts, 1998. Print.

Potts, Vanessa. Essential Monet. Bath: Dempsey Parr, 1999. Print.

MoMA's 'Inventing Abstraction : A Critical Responce

Vasily Kandinsky, French, born Russia. 1866–1944 

Untitled 

1913 

Watercolor, India ink, and pencil on paper mounted on board 

19 1/2 x 25 1/2" (49.6 x 64.8 cm) 

Musée national d'art moderne/ Centre de création industrielle, Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris. Gift of Mme Nina Kandinsky 

image source: http://pavlinachakarova.com/blog/?p=926 

         Towards the end of the 19th century artists were abandoning traditional ways of art making. These artists were opposed to the mainstream cultural values of society and sought to go beyond the ideas and techniques that were culturally accepted. They  deliberately isolated themselves and went from seeking acceptance to what is considered the “norm”, to broaden society’s perspective of what can be considered art. They expected the response from critics and the general public to be one of outrage. “Avant-garde” is the term used to describe this group of artists that sought to challenge traditional art and acceptance in society. Avant-garde artists pushed the possibilities of ‘what is art’ to the point where eventually it became the new ‘norm’. Avant-garde art reached its potential when the original goal to challenge society was fulfilled. Society grew to accept the innovating and shocking work that these artists introduced to the world.

The Museum of Modern Art in New York City is home to one of the most magnificent collections of modern art. From December 23, 2012 to April 15, 2013 the museum is presenting a selection of works including paintings, drawings, sculptures, books, films, photographs, atonal music and non-narrative dance to demonstrate the beginning of modernism’s greatest innovation: abstraction.

Inventing Abstraction, 1910-1925 is an exhilarating exhibition with works carefully chosen by curator Leah Dickerman. Her intentions for this exhibition were to display works of modern art in which recognizable subject matter was absent. The works chosen represent pure abstraction. Before entering the exhibition, you will notice a diagram which networks the artists who played a large role in the development of the new language of modern art. These artists are linked together to those they have a documented acquaintance with. This graph designated the idea that abstraction was not the development of one individual, rather it is a combination of brilliant minds in which empowered the movement to occur.  Dickerman quotes, “Our primary thesis of the show is that abstraction is about relationships. It is a product of a whole vast group of people pushing each other to evermore radical positions. It’s as big a re-writing of the rules of cultural production as we’ve seen since the Renaissance.” Abstraction didn’t happen over night. It was a continuous notion that artists explored throughout time. Upon entering this exhibition I was excited to see such a large collection of abstract art shown together to tell the story of abstraction. Abstract art had such a strong impact on modern art as well as the art we create today. If it weren’t for the so called ‘rebel’ artists that challenged the traditional concepts of art which were accepted by society, artists today would still be making the same work we have seen for centuries. 

This exhibition was a rewind-to-the-past, as it gave the public a visualization of art in the early 20th century. Museum goers were given the same thrill that was stimulated by these works of art during the time they were completed.   My criticism wouldn’t be on the show itself, rather it is on the title of the exhibition, “Inventing Abstraction, 1910-1925” which describes the overall supposition of the show. It is hard to argue that abstraction was invented from 1910-1925. I would consider this to be the time abstraction was at the height of its development. This is the period abstraction emerged. It was thrilling, adventurous, as well as questionable to those who came to appreciate art and much of this was captured in this show.  However, I would argue that abstraction began long before the 20th century.

       From the mid-late 19th century the Impressionists were one of the first to step outside the comfort-zone in art making by painting ‘mere impressions’ of the natural world. They allow light and color to be the most important factor in their work. In 1877, George Abbot Mcneil Whistler completes his well known, Nocturne: Black and Gold- The Falling Rocket. This painting depicts complete abstraction, yet it is not considered abstract. Whistler explores the relationship of music and painting, similar to that of other painters included in this exhibition.  In 1883, Claude Monet began his series paintings, which he is so well known for. Over several decades his imagery transforms from impressionist depictions of the world to broken strokes of color which resembles abstracted forms. In the 1880s, Paul Gauguin and Vincent van Gogh experiment with flat planes of color with little to no detail. This is where strict depictions of the subject is disregarded and it steered the way to the advancement of abstraction. Paul Cézanne’s simplified and dissected landscapes influence Picasso and Braque in developing Cubism. The Fauves experiment with unnatural uses of color to depict their subjects. (ISM). Claimed by Jed Perl, art critic of The New Republic, “abstraction, which arguably originated with the symbolist impulse in late-nineteenth-century art, was always less a matter of banishing reality than it was a matter of creating new realities, each of which had its own relationship with what the painters who in the nineteenth century set up their easels out of doors referred to as reality” (Perl).  All in all, I don’t believe abstraction was invented from 1910-1925, it was then that it was at the height of its development. 

Jerry Saltz, senior art critic for New York Magazine claimed the exhibition raises problems for the general public. Those who are ‘outsiders’ in the world of art look upon this work with uncertainty and dismay . The well known phrases such as “This is art?” or “Oh, I could do that!” can be heard more than once. He claims, “It can take a lifetime to understand not only why Kazimir Malevich’s white square on a white ground- still fissuring, still emitting aesthetic ideas today- is great art by why it’s a painting at all. That’s the philosophical sundering going on in some of this work, the thrill built into abstraction” (Saltz). Malevich’s Supremist Composition: White on White may be one of most controversial works the exhibition holds. 

I am sure many have stared blankly at the white canvas containing a white square slightly off center. Many may have commented, ‘Really?’ Myself guilty of this reaction. I turned to a friend of mine who accompanied me on my trip to MoMA, “Now come on.” This was before I actually learned about Malevich and his simplistic works of art. I am ashamed I questioned it without knowing ‘why’ it was done. Malevich pushed the limits of abstraction to see what he could get away with, what was considered art anymore. He thought he could open the door to a new society with his newfound freedom. We need to forget everything about the past and abandon everything we know. He wanted to create a new visual vocabulary, a new meaning of art. This he certainly accomplished. Malevich’s White on White was one of the most radical paintings of it’s time, and it still receives the same criticism as it did then. 

The exhibition’s curator, Leah Dickerman, tells the story of abstraction as it must have nothing to do with recognizable subject matter. She is wrong in the sense that all recognizable subject matter must be abandoned in order to be abstract. Argued by Jed Perl, art critic of The New Republic, claims that “the trouble with the way Dickerman tells this story... She emphasizes the nobility of artists who were either on the verge of entirely banishing recognizable subject matter or had already done so.... In order to maintain the scheme of “Inventing Abstraction.” it sometimes seems that Dickerman is forced to willfully ignore the evidence before her eyes... If “recognizable subject matter” has been banished, how is it that so many of the works in the exhibition contain letters or numbers, which are recognizable to any child? ” (Perl). I agree with Perl’s point in which ‘recognizable subject matter’ is banned, yet there are works within this show that do have recognizable subject matter. The very first work in the show, Picasso’s Femme á la Mandoline may be controversial in this idea. Saltz claims that it is “an intriguing, dusky-colored 1910 work with cubistic compartments, shapes and slants. Apart from a curve that could be from a mandolin or a hint of a hip, there are almost no defining real-world featuers. This is Picasso coming this close to abstraction. Then he blinks. “There is no abstract art,” he stated. “You must always start with something...” (Saltz). This is true, there must always be a starting point, something that drives the idea to create an abstract work. 

Overall I found MoMA’s Inventing Abstraction, 1910-1925 to be very intriguing. It is almost overwhelming with the amount of works that are included, but it gives We are given a revival of the thrill that was once startled society when this ‘new art’ came into place. The artists’ intent to challenge traditional art and outrage the public was successful. To this day, artists strive to challenge themselves to push their potentials to make a mark on art’s history. The artists in this exhibition clearly have done so. 

 ISM "Timeline of Abstract Art." Timeline. Illinois State Museum, n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2013. <http://www.museum.state.il.us/ismdepts/art/Abstract/htmls/timeline.html>.

Perl, Jed. "The New Republic." The New Republic. The New Republic, 19 Jan. 2013. Web. 05 Mar. 2013. <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/art/111990/moma-inventing-abstraction-exhilirating-challenging-and-completely-wrong>.

Saltz, Jerry. "Saltz: MoMA's Inventing Abstraction Is Illuminating-Although It Shines That Light Mighty Selectively." Vulture. New York Media LLC, 6 Jan. 2013. Web. 05 Mar. 2013. <http://www.vulture.com/2013/01/saltz-on-inventing-abstraction-at-the-moma.html>.