Welcome viewers.
Welcome you to MOOC’s online course on Introduction
to Modern Western Art.
Today is the fourth module of the first week
this module and the forthcoming module that
is the last module of this week 5th module,
in both these modules we will be looking at
the beginnings of modern art, hence this module
is titled as ‘Beginnings of modern art 1’
followed by the 5th module will be titled
as beginnings of modern art 2 and we have
already discussed that why we call or we use
the phrase ‘beginnings’ of modern art
not beginning as there are several beginnings
of modern art not one.
So, one of those beginnings have been identified
in mid 19th century around two very significant
art movements called romanticism and realism.
Now before we discuss the characteristic features
of romanticism or realism, let us begin by
looking at one particular painting here.
This is a painting painted by a very famous
Spanish painter called Francisco Goya.
He painted this work in 1814 and look at the
title of this work called 3rd of May 1808.
Now, this is very interesting.
He is painting this work in 1814 and the titled
suggests some events, something, that at happened
this few years back that is in 1808.
Now what was that event?
And what this painting is all about?
Obviously, this painting is painted as an
immediate reaction to the horrific incident
that took place in Madrid on 2nd and 3rd of
1808, of May in 1808 and when hundreds of
Spanish freedom fighters were brutally killed,
massacred by the French army.
And Goya in this painting is not exactly depicting
the incident the way a history painter would
be doing it.
He is basically evoking certain emotions.
He is expressing his anguish his anger and
he is obviously sympathizing with the freedom
fighters.
Painting of this kind is something very new
in the history of western art and therefore,
this painting has been considered by many
as the first modern painting in the world
art history.
Now, let us look at another painting by another
painter, a French painter this time called
the Delacroix, a painting that he painted
in 1830 having a title called ‘Liberty leading
the people’.
Once again the title immediately suggests
or refers to the French revolution and this
painting was made in response to the political
upheaval that would result in the overthrow
of the reigning monarch of Charles 10th.
Like the previous work by Goya this work by
the Delacroix two is based on contemporary
reality with direct reference to an event
which is very close to their time in fact
which happened during that time.
Now this kind of approach to paint or a work
of art where the subject matter is not something
that you have borrowed from the past or legend
or mythology or religion a subject matter
which is also not very personal or individual
a social subject, matter a political subject
matter, a political incident or invent shared
by many people and here you find to painters
painting works based on not only these events
but also based on their response to these
events, now that makes these paintings very
unique.
So, both these paintings indicate in that
sense a very clear break from the tradition
and historically they have been connected
to the movement called romanticism.
In fact, in a letter written by the Delacroix,
he writes that I have undertaken a modern
subject a barricade so that if I did not win
for my country, I will at least be painting
for it.
So, you see for the first time an artist is
using the term modern to describe the nature
of his subject matter of work, but then; what
is romanticism and what were the objectives
of this art movement which took place in mid
19th century.
Now, generally speaking romanticism kind of
unfolded itself at the dawn of the nineteenth
century when the struggle to impose a new
democratic, political and social order was
in the process, people grew anxious in response
to ongoing political turmoil and uncertainty.
So, clearly there was a political context,
the social context.
Now, if you look at the art produced under
the cytology called romanticism, mostly paintings,
the same to be characterized by this following
points - number one imagination, most of the
romantic painters emphasized imagination over
reason and in that sense this over emphasis
on the element of imagination seems to be
a backlash against the rationalism characterized
by the preceding period called neo-classical
period.
Secondly intuition, art not only try to evoke
emotion, but the painters also followed their
own intuitive feeling, intuitive drive very
sincerely.
And thirdly, inspiration the romantic artist
was an inspired creator rather than a technical
master.
So, following this logic this is very clear
that from romanticism art movement onwards
most of the painters are clearly giving more
in emphasis and more importance to this inspiration,
emotion rather than the mere technical skill.
For what this means is going with the moment
or being spontaneous rather than getting it
precise.
So, if you go back to that painting by Goya,
in spite of the fact that Goya was a very
skilled painter academically trained painter,
in this painting he is not so much bothered
about the accuracy of the form or the clarity
of the colour, or neatness of the composition,
because in this painting and many other paintings
done by him, he was more concerned with the
evocative power of the painting.
He was more interested to achieve the expression
through his painting rather than accuracy
of anatomy, proportion, perspective and all
these things.
And of course, romanticism gives birth to
once again after renaissance period individuality.
So, romanticism is an idea that was certainly
shared by many artists some painters of that
time, but at the same time it celebrated the
individual.
In fact, governments and movements should
not sacrifice individual, but it should raise
him or her that was the idea shared by many
of this people, artists, painters, poets.
Now, one of the very very important painters
from this romantic movement was Turner and
certainly Turner emerged as not only England’s
most dramatic romantic painter, but of the
entire Europe.
For him the depiction of light and atmosphere
was the most important part of the painting.
He portrayed nature at its most violent situation.
This is interesting because in the preceding
age, era, in the previous period we have seen
that painters mostly looked at nature as something
through which they could show the serene quality
of nature the peaceful quality of nature the
tranquility of nature, but when you look at
Turner’s paintings it is something absolutely
different.
There is hardly any serenity, forget about
peaceful quality in his paintings and in order
to achieve that, he is kind of giving up any
approach to any attitude to going for precise
detail, but he is rather using very loose
and violent brushworks applying bright colors
and also he is not bothered about sharp on
two lines and all that.
Hence, when you look at his paintings for
example, this one what you see, is a painting
or a image which is to use a more contemporary
term out of focus.
This is because he is not bothered about precise
contour lines, he is more interested in the
overall visual effect of the scene that he
is depicting.
Look at this one.
This particular painting called ‘The Fighting
Temeraire’ is also about a situation where
you see fire, you see a violent and a restless
sky, and you see ships you see elements which
are not static at all.
In fact, this particular painting very famous
painting painted in 1844 and called ‘Rain,
Steam and Speed’ is a classic example of
Turner’s art, what Turner stood for, in
fact, a classical painter of the preceding
period in the western art history would have
outrightly rejected this kind of painting.
But in this case, for us it is an absolutely
fantastic work because they so called visual
ambiguity, this visual confusion, if I may
use this term, is what we enjoy, what we admire
instead of going for precision Turner is going
for visual effect.
And in order to achieve that Turner is using
absolutely unique kind of brushwork, technical
application which was hitherto unseen, nobody
had done that before.
Hence Turner happens to be an eye opener in
the history of modern art.
He is a kind of pioneer in liberating the
painterly skills from the conventional rules
and regulations.
In fact, he is also painting subject matters
which are also not very peaceful, not very
clam.
He is deliberately and selectively going for
subject matters which are violent.
So, this also goes to show how his mind must
have been working in terms of not only painting
or painting technique, but also in terms of
subject matters that he is choosing.
Now, look at this comparison between one neoclassical
painting by David and romantic painting by
Turner.
Clearly, the neoclassical painting reveals
all kinds of concerns with precision, accuracy
and a clarity of forms, distance, perspective,
caresco, light in shade whereas, look at Turner’s
paintings he simply rejects all this classical
and academic norms and innovates a new method
of painting, and new approach to painting
all together.
Now, Caspar David Friedrich should be considered
as another very important painter from the
romantic movement though he was not from England,
he was from Germany and he contributed a lot
to the development of the romantic art movement.
In Caspar David Friedrich’s painting, you
may not find the kind of violent brush strokes
and surface treatment you see in Turner’s
paintings.
Maybe comparatively,
Caspar David Friedrich’s paintings have
a lot of clarity yet, if you look at his paintings
very carefully, you will feel sense of loss,
sense of mystery, and also repeatedly throughout
his career Caspar David in his paintings try
to express the formidable presence of nature
and how a human being feels absolutely insignificant,
powerless and helpless in front of that formidable
nature.
So, nature not necessarily in terms of its
violent character, but nature as it is may
also appear to be something that is immensely
powerful and therefore, formidable for human
being to negotiate.
So, this is what Caspar David Friedrich as
a romantic painter continuously has been exploring
in his paintings.
So, the common romantic elements would be
no hint of idealization in depicting the different
attributes of nature, individualistic approach
personal interpretation in execution and thought
process of course, spontaneous expressions
then rebellion against the existing conventions.
They made it very clear most of the romantic
painters that they were not going to follow
the conventional rules, rather they would
create their own rules.
In that sense, these romantic painters were
very very innovative and an excitement that
they felt from the different scenes of the
country side and the various phenomenon of
the nature had constantly been the inspiring
element and that formed the chief subject
for painting in the landscapes of these painters.
So, it was not necessary for the romantic
painters to look for a subject that has to
be something grand, something, something that
already have some mythological, historical
bearing, they could choose any subject matter
for that matter, any piece of nature, any
corner of nature and can work on that to create
a sensation that they might have felt.
So, to focus on subjects and scenes which
are apparently very common place, but once
they get painted by very innovative painters,
even a very common place subject matter can
achieve or assume dignity that was hitherto
unknown, this is what romantic or the art
works can during the romantic movement show
and this is what we shall find happening in
the following art movement that is realism.
So, same thing will be happening over there
too.
Another very well known painter from the Romantic
Movement who hailed from England was John
Constable.
Now John Constable’s paintings are relatively
calm, compared to Turner or even Caspar David
Friedrich.
There is a quality of serenity, but his contribution
to the genre of landscape painting was to
or rather not to wait for some grand event
to happen in nature, anything from nature
in his landscape around the village he lived
could be a subject matter.
Now, romanticism was followed by the next
significant art movement called realism.
Realism attempts to create a truthful and
accurate depiction of the models that nature
and contemporary life offer to the artists.
So, there is this element of reality there,
but unlike the previous classical reality,
which was based on a preconceived model, in
this art movement of mid 19 century called
realism artists are looking at how a particular
figure or object appears right now.
So, the artificiality of both the classicism
and romanticism in the academic art was unanimously
rejected by the realist painters.
New idea was that ordinary people and everybody
everyday activities are worthy subjects for
art.
This is also very interesting, anything anybody
any common person, any ordinary person could
be a subject matter for your art.
Artists, the realists attempted to portray
the lives, appearances, the problems the customs,
the social situation and most of the middle
and lower classes of the unexceptional, unassuming,
the ordinary, the humble the unadorned and
this is what you will see happening in the
paintings done by very famous painters from
the realist movement or realism movement called
Gustave Courbet or Millet and others.
For example, look at this painting by Courbet
called ‘The Stone Breakers’ who are these
two people?
They are hardworking people and they don’t
have any social dignity in the traditional
and classical hierarchy of the society, yet
for Courbet they are the ideal subject matters
for a painting.
In a sense, by doing some paintings based
on the life of the people coming from the
hardworking, the society where they are in
a sense exploited to a great extent he is
Courbet is defiantly glorifying not the way
the live, but their self dignity.
Millet, look at this painting by millet call
‘The Gleaners’ three woman gleaning crops
after the harvest.
This is such a common place an ordinary subject
matter that throughout the history of art
until Millet painted this kind of subject
matters have always been over looked, but
Millet does not, he does not overlook, Millet
picks it up a makes it makes it fantastic
painting out of the subject matter.
Again in this case, this particular painting
by Millet or if you look at the previous painting
by Courbet, both these paintings the individual
figures remain rather anonymous because perhaps
here individual persons are not what Millet
or Courbet were concerned about, they were
perhaps more concerned with the social identity,
the class identity of this people.
Another painter from the same time and belonging
to the same movement call Daumier was also
doing paintings like this ‘The third class
carriage’.
The third class carriage were people, the
travelers they come from the lowest class
of the society and they are the most hardworking
and economically deprived class and they become
the subject matters for these artists like
Daumier.
In fact, Daumier goes to the extent of doing
a piece of drawing in lithograph about a person
who is not only poor or deprived, but completely,
it could be a drunk could be somebody who
does not have any place, any dignity, any
respect in the society and these kind of people
become the subject matters for them.
In fact, look at this wonderful sketch by
Courbet where he draws a young lad in sleeping
posture, I mean apart from the fact that this
is a very accurate and perfect drawing what
one feels and can respond by looking at this
work is the empathy.
The feeling, how Courbet is able to not only
see the structural form of the boy, but how
Courbet is also able to feel the existence
of the boy, feel that moment of that boy when
he is sleeping with his hands kept on open
book, a very interesting drawing.
And then again Courbet does this wonderful
oil on canvas and the subject is again very
strange if you look at it from the point of
view of the classical art or the traditional
western art.
It is a, the title is ‘A wounded man’
and the subject of the painting is exactly
that.
A man who is lying and he is wounded he can
also see a blood spot on his chest.
Not that he was somebody very famous or a
very well known soldier or somebody like that
could be a very ordinary person, but right
know he is wounded and Courbet feels empathy
towards him and he makes a painting.
So, in other words when you look at the various
examples of paintings done by Millet or Courbet
or Daumier or anybody else from romantic movement
and realism movement, you see the that that
like what you see here once again, that individual
facial features is something that is absent
here, you do not get to actually very clearly
see how this people look like.
But you can very clearly see and feel and
get some information about the social class
this people belong to.
So, this is very interesting that repeatedly
in spite of their ability, the painters ability
to depict all the details accurately, the
painters are makings certain selections that
as far as Courbet and Millet are concerned
in most of their paintings they are not showing
the faces of these people very clearly, but
they are showing the identity of this people
without any ambiguity.
So, the figures in terms of the drawing, the
colour, and the tonality they appear very
simple and plain, the figures are firmly modeled
with some dignity and their simply emphasized
in terms of a strong and solid build and the
figures assume a dignity more natural and
more convincing, because if you look at their
gesture, posture the way they are walking,
talking or sitting or working like the one
that you had seen in the first image where
Courbet does a painting on the stone breakers
there.
They are so engaged with their work they engage
with their life that these characters in the
painting are hardly aware of the presence
of the painter.
These are not posed figures or figures with
very specific postures they are there in their
own life and here is the painter who is painting
them.
Thank you.
