1. Van Gogh is an artist who starts with a perception of Nature. But Pollock says, “I am Nature.” He is a conceptual artist. What “Nature” are the two artist painting in their art? What are the different “landscapes” that they are painting? What is the different Nature that they are expressing in their art?
The nature that these two artist are painting in their art is not an actual physical concept of being in nature. In terms of the artist Van Gogh who actually painted images of Nature, he painted what he saw and the way it makes him feel. Whereas with Pollock, is actually one with nature, he also works outdoors but rather he does not actually paint nature. He is the nature, rather the nature of painting, of being an artist.
There landscapes are different, from the movie that we saw in class Pollock does not really paint much landscape. His drip techniques are his landscape, his ability to use the brush as an application tool. Then there is the fact that Van Gogh actually made physical landscapes on his canvas. He drew what he saw and how much emotions that were captured in each image.
The nature that these two artist are expressing is not pretty much relative to each other. Conceptual art involves the work of an artistic idea that takes precedence over traditional artistic and material concerns.
2. In Lust for Life and Pollock, you “see” both
…show more content…
Other than being Jackson Pollock’s wife, she was also his backbone. She was there to provide the inspirations, reassurance and support through a time that neither one of them was very well valued as an artist. Personally, their daily interactions with each other stimulated them as an artist. Both Pollock and Krasner fought the greatest battle that takes place in being an artist, finding some type of legitimacy, showing some spontaneity and even more finding their individuality through their
During Vincent Van Gogh’s childhood years, and even before he was born, impressionism was the most common form of art. Impressionism was a very limiting type of art, with certain colors and scenes one must paint with. A few artists had grown tired of impressionism, however, and wanted to create their own genre of art. These artists, including Paul Gaugin, Vincent Van Gogh, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, and Paul Cezanne, hoped to better express themselves by painting ...
Berry explains how art honors nature by depicting it and using it as a starting
Painters paint what they feel. Whether it is at that very moment, or how they have felt for the past five years - an artist’s work is always about how they feel. That is why anyone can tell all there is to know about Krasner and Pollock’s relationship just by viewing their artwork. One reason why I chose them is because I heard a joke about Jackson Pollock in my favorite TV show, Archer. Another reason is that one of his paintings, “One: Number 31,” looks to me like the Vatican’s “Thrown of Satan.” The foremost reason why I chose this couple is that their mutual attractiveness matches, making for a pleasant picture. Although Jackson and Lee’s relationship was charming on the surface, it was volatile. The nature of this might have helped Pollock’s work elevate, but it definitely affected Krasner’s work negatively.
Throughout history art has played a major role in society. It started out with paintings and went to photography and eventually to films. Artistic interpretation depended on whom the artist was and what he or she wanted to present to the audience. When it came to portraiture, whether it was paintings or photography, the idea of mimesis was very important. However important this may have been, the portraits were mostly products of the media and fashions during that time period. Whatever was popular during the time was used such as columns or curtains in the background. The face was the main focus in the painting and there was little focus on the body. Later on during photography the body was focused on more. Even though photography was used much later after paintings were used, it allowed the artist even more artistic interpretation because of the ability to play a different role and not having to be ones self. The artists that will be focused on are Frida Kahlo and Cindy Sherman. They lived during different periods and their artistic intentions varied because of that. They also had similarities in that they thought outside of the conventional roles. These women were both self-portraiture artists and although they were considered that their interpretations did not always make their portraits self-portraits. Traditionally the artist was an outsider, but when it came to self-portraiture they became the subject and the audience became the outsider. The similarities and differences of Frida Kahlo and Cindy Sherman’s art were tied into the strength and also vulnerability they had because of their roles as women. They wanted the audience to see a background story to the portraits and not just an image of a beautiful face.
The tone of voice that Pollock use in her article is a formal yet strong persuasive voice. For much of her writing, she takes on a quote from her source and counter-argues against it, which some readers may question who is correct. She also consistently refers back to Van Gogh as well as points she previously made to try to get point across. Pollock refers back to her previous points possibly to try to emphasis the point she is trying to make as well as emphasis their important to art
Landscape paintings became of interest to artists as a way to depict nature, a man?s spiritual place in the world, and his relation to God (Pohl, 2012). The paintings of nature became a way for artists to express themselves visually and spiritually while also expanding what people could see, read, and feel (Pohl, 2012). Landscape paintings helped to grow communities and expand the western movement (Pohl, 2012). There was an issue between tearing down and using the resources of nature to build communities and to increase material wealth (Pohl, 2012).
…Painting is a science, and should be pursued as an inquiry into the laws of nature. Why, then, may not landscape be considered as a branch of natural philosophy, of which pictures are but experiments?
All three have their own technique and style. Nicolas Poussin was one of the leading practitioners of the classical landscape and painted “rigorously ordered and highly idealized Classical landscapes with figures” (Cothren). Jean-Baptiste-Camille Carrot “landscape paintings take more a romantic and less political approach to depicting rural life” (Cothren). Paul Cezanne “created highly structured paintings through a methodical application of color that merged drawings and modeling into a single process” (Cothren). “Corrot built his landscapes on solid geometric forms. His light-drenched palette of colors, his choice of scenes with luminous atmospheres, and his signature brushwork at first bold and solid then maturing into a feathery, light touch, were all seen as new and innovative and not always immediately grasped.” (Larson)With the Nicolas Poussin paintings, they are clear and crisp and you can understand what is happening and the details are clear to what you are looking at. Jean-Baptiste-Camille Carrot paintings have more of a muted color about them with green, blues and browns. Paul Cezanne paintings tend to lean to more of an abstract look. These artist painting all in oil on canvas start with Baroque, Realism, and Post Impressionism. Nicolas Poussin studied art in studios in Paris, Jean-Baptiste-Camille Carrot travels
In the mid 1800’s realism was developed as a style of painting to replicate the world as it was seen in a traditional artistic style. This allowed for a new style of art to be created that was based of a real moment or scene but to forget the traditional artistic laws such as distinct lines and forms. Approaching art from this impressionistic view Monet’s painted “Impression, Sunrise” bringing to life a natural scene of a hazy harbor using quick, short brush strokes and defining uses of color and natural light. Van Gough’s “Starry Night” uses similar impressionistic styles to paint a natural scene using vibrant contrasting colors, yet he embellishes the scene to create art that in not merely a landscape but a piece of self expression and shifted
Abstract art in comparison to realism, can be described as two art forms on opposite ends of the art style spectrum. Picasso and Pollock both had a massive impact on the outcome of modern art through their ability to challenge viewers as they interpret art, not for what the painting shows, but instead what the idea of it came from. Picasso’s painting is now an iconic symbol for an anti-war message, and Pollock’s painting now represent a form of freedom of speech and expression throughout America. Ultimately the reason artists moved from realism to abstract came from the invention of the camera, giving artist a reason to branch to new and edgy art forms, which will later create the modern art
Art is a very important part of humanity’s history, and it can be found anywhere from the walls of caves to the halls of museums. The artists that created these works of art were influenced by a multitude of factors including personal issues, politics, and other art movements. Frida Kahlo and Vincent van Gogh, two wildly popular artists, have left behind artwork, that to this day, influences and fascinates people around the world. Their painting styles and personal lives are vastly different, but both artists managed to capture the emotions that they were feeling and used them to create artwork.
I have chosen to critique the art masterpiece, Autumn Rhythm. Autumn Rhythm is oil on canvas, 8' 9" x 17' 3." It is my opinion, before you can critique Autumn Rhythm; you must try to understand the artist and his/her background. Artist Jackson Pollock was from a working class family who lived and worked in Wyoming, Arizona, and southern California. He studied at two different art schools; Manual Arts High School in Los Angeles and the Art Student's League in New York, he also studied with several other great artists during his time. However the artist experienced some dark days in his life. The artist fought the demon of alcoholism, and came face to face with his addiction. Stepping forward into the unknown, Pollock allowed his parents to place him in Jungian therapy. "Jungian therapy is centered on its helpful, hopeful and unique ways of experiencing the human mind. With due consideration of religion and the spirit of individuals, it also embraces the collective history of humanity. With its emphasis on individuation, wholeness and centering, there is a focus on the healthy elements of the human mind and soul and a search for balance. Pollock did not want to converse with his therapist about his problems and addictions, so his therapist suggested that he paint a piece of art that expressed his unspoken thoughts and feelings, (psychology of Carl G. Jung)." When the therapist would ask questions, Jackson would not reply, so the therapist devised a plan to help Jackson to get his feeling out in the open. He would have Jackson to create with paints on canvas how he was feeling on the inside then the Jungian therapist would analyze the artwork that Pollock brought to h...
In conclusion, Van Gogh used the elements above to create a man by himself in a field. He used color to represent feeling rather than represent realism of an event. The cool colors represent the field and happiness in his work. The warm colors represent the harshness of the day and could be a metaphor for life. He used scale and proportion to emphasis the overbearing sun. He also used proportion and scale to represent literally and figuratively how far away home was. The linear perspective was only evident to me after I really studied the used of lines. I followed the lines to the horizon and left side of the painting.
Vincent van Gogh’s development in stylized representations of nature, created by the application of dark colors, bold lines, and thick paint all show an expressionistic view of the natural world as seen through the eyes of the artist. While we will never find a definite answer for whether or not Vincent van Gogh intended for Wheat Fields with Crows to be any indication of his suicide, we continue to draw on conclusions of what this painting really meant. Even though we can say with certainty that this was not Vincent van Gogh’s last painting, the subject matter and formal elements suggest that it probably was - intended or not - some indication of van Gogh’s unhappiness.
Like many of Van Gogh’s paintings, Olive Trees commences as a landscape and expands into a complex work, disclosing influences from other times and places. Using the color theory and separated brushstrokes of the Impressionists, the movement and vivid colors of the Romantics, and lighting and composition inspired by Millet, Van Gogh achieves the potency and significance that characterizes his work. Van Gogh’s paintings can’t possibly be mistaken for those of another artist of his time because, despite the fact that all of his means have criterion, his end results do not.