John Singer Sargent | Wineglasses | NG6670 | National Gallery, London

View: John Singer Sargent, Wineglasses. Read about this painting, learn the key facts and zoom in to discover more.
— Read on www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/john-singer-sargent-wineglasses

I was introduced to this painting through a NG social media post which talks about how light is used to produce colour contrast. Sargent understands so well how the light diffusing onto the table cloth is reflected showing shades of the surroundings. He also uses negative space to accentuate the shape of the table and panels in the outdoor room.

Still life interiors

My insight into this genre has moved on from my understanding while studying this topic in Drawing 1 unit 2. Then I imagine that I ranked it

s importance as minimal – simply a study tool to practice technique. Now however I have come to agree with Sontgen (2007) in her assessment of it’s importance in recording art culture and history. Further She quotes the art commentator Hegel to describe how interiors painting is not a soft option. It lays bear someone’s home and gives a snapshot into their life and difficulties in a deeper way than a landscape work could. I might also add that if the artist allows it to it will expose them as a person and such vulnerability has added greatly to the work of modern artists like Van Gough. Reading letters to his brother alongside looking at his bedroom and living room interiors shows that he has put his circumstances and his passions into paintings. He describes aspects of furniture and what he wants to capture about it as colour shape or texture- all the better because he lives with it and knows it.

Other artists have used it as a tool. Pieter de Hooch uses windows and doors to frame parts of the picture and lead the eye, in the case of ‘ interior with Woman beside a linen chest’ out to the exterior world through the far off front door. ( from Songet again). It is a piece about so much more that a domestic chore:the clothing and contents show the status of a household at the time and give clues to the rest of the building. I wonder if it also suggests tensions perhaps between the adults working and the child wishing to play outdoors? Light an dark are used to creat beautiful contrast : window light at the front of the work falls onto the clothing and gives opportunity to show depth in the drapes of her dress while shadow in the mid-distance hi lights the open door at the back of the painting and pulls the viewer through the work.

Since being introduced toGwen John’s drawings I have long admired the simple beauty of her art and how she translates this into her painting.During her later life in Paris, her interior still lives reflects her need for solitude and simplicity of life at that time . It is often portrayed as the consequence of rejection by Rodin but it is refreshing to see McCabe (2020) argue that it was actually sstrength in her conviction to dedicate herself to art. Therefore she worked and reworked paintings showing corners of her studio and areas of a local religious order who interestingly held the same principles of uncluttered life! The result in Interior 1924 is a glorious feast of light. Only one small corner of one of the Nunnery rooms is shown. Walls, tablecloth and tea setting are all bathed in dappled shades of white with a single lightly glazed red tea pot popping out as a focal point. In the far ground lie the unmistakable clues to the room’s identity:a crucifix outlined in grey shadow against a high cell like an alcove arched window. The sole source of the room’s light comes from this window and a simple triangle shape shaft of the lightest grey glaze directs both the light and the viewer’s eye into the mid ground which is in deeper shadow as a second arch jutting into the room which must be a support for the building ( the inside of an external flying buttresses structure perhaps). have sat and marvelled at this simple work for a long time and my eye is repeatedly drawn back to what for me is a touch of genius.Whatever the mid ground structure is it is , John uses this light shaft as a tool to emphasise the feature and suggest depth in the work. She uses yellow glazing in divisionism style to suggest window light and shadow in the foreground on the tea set. This to me seems unusual as traditionally to conform to perspective laws foreground objects should appear the clearest. However this departure from ‘ rules’ worked very well here to suggest a haze ( as in Seurant’s Bathers painting). The teapot is again the only foreground exception- it is painted traditionally in a rich crimson (?) to suggest its simple curved form with white light patches to show light and depth.

Light areas in the room are glazed in white and the darker area of the floor is glazed in a warm pink which feels the right atmosphere as I believe that John is saying that the message is warmth and beauty in nature rather than the austerity of a hidden religious life?

References

Sontgen, B. (2007). Inner Visions, London :Tate . available at https://www.tate.org.uk/tate-etc/issue-10-summer-2007/inner-visions# [accessed 17/94/20]

McCabe, K. (2020) Art UK London: Public CatalogueFoundation. Available at solitude#https://www.artuk.org/discover/stories/what-gwen-johns-portraits-can-teach-us-about-solitude# [ accessed on 19/04/20]

Gale Academic OneFile – Document – Art of the Everyday: Dutch Painting and the Realist Novel

Gale Academic OneFile – Document – Art of the Everyday: Dutch Painting and the Realist Novel
— Read on go-gale-com.ucreative.idm.oclc.org/ps/i.do

Although the above reference is a Journal article comparing Dutch 17C Realism art 19 C realist Novels , it notes that the reviewed author , Ruth Yeazell, has a good understanding of this genre of art. Yeazell believes as others do, that this form of genre art specialises in small scale every day subjects lit spectacularly by light . However she also feels that it’s proponents place figures against uninteresting backgrounds or “fractionalises’ them Agassi a large plain landscape to achieve the moral Protestant message of the times by depicting anonymous middle and working class people.
commentators such as Hegel (1) argue that artists such as Vermeer tried to simplify and control what the viewer looked at . It’s subjects ‘verging on boredom’ were only looked at as their technical portrayal of light and therefore we’re capable of ‘eliminating thought’ . I don’t agree with this as anyone from any era can interpret art as formulaic symbolism or as a creative spurt ways according to the way their brain picks up information and their previous experiences of the world around them. Despite the chastity of thought required by the age history shows that in science and art some did break through the mould and produced new and innovative ideas.

ref

1 Angela Vanhaelen in Art History

Volume35, Issue5

Special Issue: The Erotics of Looking: Materiality, Solicitation and Netherlandish Visual Culture. Edited by Angela Vanhaelen and Bronwen Wilson

November 2012

Pages 1004-1023

quotes the Cri

looking at specific examples:

Jan Vermeer- girl at a window

Typical to the genre in subject and style- anonymous girl captured in a domestic and ordinary scene. The most striking part of the painting is the bright sunlight from the window and how this reflects off the girl’s forehead. Skin tones on the face and In the mirror show very detailed tonal difference giving depth to the skin. The simple hi miler hues in the dress and wall suggest that the attention is only in the light from the window. However similar light tones do not look as flat as colour theory might suggest. However the compliment between light and dark areas in the dress is very distinct.

Gabriel Metu’s painting ‘ man writing a letter’ shows a male figure seated at a desk with light shining from a side window. The light reflects on a fold in the table cloth and this gives most of the detail in the work in some respects the man’ s plain black and white outfit blends into the background.

Salman Toor’s Intimate Paintings Are a Salve for Our Isolated Times – Artsy

Advertisement
— Read on www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-salman-toors-intimate-paintings-salve-isolated-times

I am intrigued by Salman’s unique use of colour and mark making.

Colour

He is unusual in that his paintings are works of limited pallet but he achieves amazing interaction not through complimentary hues but by using 3-4 tones from the same area in the colour wheel. By the laws of colour theory theses should make each other more dull , however they don’t. This may be because of the subtle use of light and dark. It may also be due to his particular form of mark making.

Brush work- mark making

Salman intentionally leaves brush marks in his work and blocks of colour are expertly broken by his trademark style of movement marks. Walls take on shadow achieved through choice of tones; cloth appears to shimmer with a few crucially placed squiggles in a contrast colour and a spectacular pink wool jerkin has all the texture of a real jacket through shading.

Personal thought journey from Impressionism to pointillism

I have been reflecting on the way that artistic education moves every creative who indulges in it from naive use of colour theory to conscious exploration of the science of optical mixing.

This is demonstrated by my reaction today to a Tate virtual exhibition of Andy Warhol’s work. It has always fascinated and attracted me without knowing why. Now one look at his pop art and especially the series ‘ ladies and gentlemen ‘ show how clearly he understood and applied contrast and optical mixing.

In one work in the latter series the model’s skin is depicted in orange with red gloves on a yellow background. Thus the figure melts into the background ( detail and shadow are provided by single lines of complimentary blue). The most striking part is the model’s head scarf. Black and white swirled lines suggest movement.

https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-modern/exhibition/andy-warhol/exhibition-guide?

…. incidentally I also now recognise that the iconic Tate insignia is a nod to Bridget Riley!

Mastering the Art & Science of Optical Mixing

During the Impressionist era, the public had to learn how to recognize the value of the Impressionist technique. Initially they were unaware of the uniqueness
— Read on www.dmitriwrightworkshops.com/single-post/2016/07/25/Mastering-the-Art-and-Science-of-Optical-Mixing

This article gives a more illuminating explanation of Impressionism than I have previously read. Impressionists used complimentary lines of colour to produce beautifully expressive depictions of light. While paintings look disjointed up close the mind joins up the suggested picture when viewed from a distance. This is why sunsets look especially realistic, because the natural behaviour of light is shown through aspects of simultaneous and successive contrast.

While the consensus is that Impressionists used this theory intuitively, it is agreed that new Impressionists and in particular the Pointillist movement started by the french artist Seurat and his colleague Signac used colour theory intentionally to enhance their painting. Their work was the first example of mixing colour by perspective the brain rather than add mixing on the pallet. This is of course of increasing importance as digital art becomes more prevalent and explains some of the anomalies to colour theory seen in printing and online .

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/seni/hd_seni.htm shows various examples of Seurant’s work. I especially like ‘ calm evening’- a beautiful suggestion of the shadowed light of early evening is suggested through interspersed use of blue and orange carefully arranged to depict may more subtle tones to the viewer.
There is a definable time line, traceable from Chevreul’ s colour theory influencing many movements through to today. Pointillism and indeed Signac’s continuation of Seurant’s work through Divisionism in turn influenced Cubism, Furturism and later the Op artistic movement.https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/glossary-terms/op-art explains how British stylist Bridget Riley made mainly black and white illusion all works in the 1960’s. She was aware of what is called Seurant’s’ heat haze’ – a shimmering effect in his bathers painting. It was influential in he experimentation with line and colour and how the human brain perceives the edges of colour blocks to interpret movement where there is actually none https://www.nationalgalleries.org/art-and-artists/glossary-terms/op-art explains this.
Riley’s work is clever and provocative, however this and fellow Op artists using colour make me feel rather nauseous and I find it difficult to study. I also see successive contrast effects in Riley’s work and again this is too harsh for me.

Thinking what I would wish to use from 19th-20th C optical mixing techniques :

Adding depth to hue by placing complimentary colours next to each other
consciously employing impressionistic strokes and divisionism to contrasting colours could assist the effects that I want to achieve in my work

Flemish still life

Still life painting originates from the Flemish lowlands

…in the 16 th and 17 t centuries.

For the first time it gave the wealthy a chance to express themselves in subjects other than traditional Religious depictions and portraiture. It began as displays of flowers and ladened tables of food to reflect the prosperity of Dutch traders . Soon though symbolism became a significant part of still life scenes : skulls, clocks, fruit and insects inhabiting the flowers represented the transience of life and death itself while books suggested art and science. The style became known as Vanitas. https://www.britannica.com/art/vanitas-art

Looking at images , I can see evidence of colour theory in the rich lustrous reds and yellows of flowers against light reflected in silver and neutrals of vases and fabrics.

The influence of Vanitas can be seen in the centuaries since ; famously through post impressionist work right to today where visual and digital artists still throw back references to it https://wsimag.com/art/20372-contemporary-vanitas