Similar Paintings (Present and Past)

Andy Roddick

Quwatha Valentine (American)

2006-2007

Lawn Tennis

Constant Mayer (French)

1883

Similarities:

These two paintings are over 100 years apart, yet they have the same theme/topic; tennis. In both, we see people in the action of playing tennis. We see part (or all) of the tennis court, and we see players hitting in the action of hitting the tennis ball. Something very interesting is that both Andy Roddick and the woman who is hitting the ball in Lawn Tenns both have their knees in the same position. Their knees are bent at almost the same degree. Additionally, many of the people in Lawn Tennis have white hats similar to Andy Roddick's. Both authors use darks and lights to show perspective and dimension.

Differences:

In Andy Roddick (the first) the focus is on one player (Andy), while in Lawn Tennis (the second) the emphasis is mainly on the game of tennis itself. The mood is also different. In the first, there is a strong sense of concentration, focus, and intensity; while in the second, there is a "lighter" feeling, where tennis is like a get together, and a social event. There are many people just chatting, eating and drinking, watching, and relaxing.

Artists' Visions Similarities:

I believe that both of the artists are trying to make a statement about tennis, and are trying to depict certain aspects of the game. For example, Quwatha Valentine, illustrates the competitive game of tennis by illustrating one of the best players. However, in Lawn Tennis, Constant Mayer is depicting the game of tennis as a social, and fun even, where everyone can participate. 

The main aspect of these paintings that connects them is there theme of tennis.

Family

The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit

John Singer Sargent (American/Italian)

1882

This painting by John Singer sargent is not of an entire family, but of the four daughters of the family. This painting's depicts family in a strange way. All of the daughters are "isolated"; aloof from each other. However, at the same time, we (the viewer) have a strong sense of connection. Mr. Sargent may be trying to show that even if a family is not "together," they are still a family. In addition, it may be showing that each member of the family is not the "same," but  there is still a sense of unity.

John Singer Sargent uses many of the principles of design to communicate these points. He utilizes the principle of emphasis by using placement and grouping. The placement of the daughters makes each daughter stand-out "individually." Also by grouping the two daughters in the back does show some unity. Singer also uses contrast to make the daughters stand-out. In the back, the darkness makes the two girls stand out, and the darkness of the girl on the left makes the "difference" between the two girls. In addition, the contrasts of colors of the daughters' shirts shows their "differences" (in preferences).  There is also the principle of balance in this painting (asymmetry). The two daughters together are in the middle, and on each side of them, there is one other daughter. This balance creates the sense of family and unity because balance is a symbol that can represent family.

Although this painting does not depict a mother and father, there is a family within a family when the children are pictured, and they in fact may be a microcosm or representation of the "complete" family.

Nighthawks

Nighthawks

Edward Hopper (American)

1942

First Impressions:

When first observed this spectacular painting by Edward Hopper, what first caught my attention were the three customers inside the diner, especially the man seated alone. Then, I took notice of the empty street and the glass window that "surrounds" the diner. The window is very interesting because the glass is so expansive, it made me look through it and at the same time, try to find an end. Trying to find an end was "hard" because the glass "cleverly" curves "away." It is not the only thing that curves around that corner; the table, the benches (the light/bright green) the olive green outlining, the shadow and the sidewalk. I believe that this makes you "start over," or looking at a different part of the painting, because this aspect is "annoying" to the (or at least) my human brain. I want something to end but nothing does. Additionally, the table is a triangle and will also "never end." When I look at this picture, I feel as if there is an off balance of "stuff" in this painting. The right side is emphasized, because this part of the painting is "weighted" and also it is different than the peaceful, empty side of the left side of the painting. Because the right of the painting seems as if it is "cut off," I often find myself looking to the far right and wanting there to be "more" of this painting, maybe because I want it to balance it out, and have the center of the painting as the emphasis. Nighthawks was definitely made the way it was for a reason, and it is certainly a magnificent painting to explore.

What I Learned:

Nighthawks is inspired by a diner that was in Hopper's home neighborhood, in Greenwhich Village, Manhattan, New York. This painting is in many aspects related to the attack on Pearl Harbor, which occurred right before Edward Hopper created this painting. As noted by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nighthawks , there is the same feeling of gloominess in this painting as there was across America. As said by http://www.artic.edu/artaccess/AA_Modern/pages/MOD_7.shtml,"painting reveals three customers lost in their own private thoughts." Hopper states: "unconsciously, probably, I was painting the loneliness of a large city." In this painting there is no door (visable) and it seems as if: "The viewer, drawn to the light shining from the interior, is shut out from the scene by a seamless wedge of glass." (http://www.artic.edu/artaccess/AA_Modern/pages/MOD_7.shtml) As said by http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/patc/nighthawks/index.html, "no matter what the setting, Hopper painted from the outside looking in." When looking at this painting, you feel almost excluded, and everyone inside of the diner seems to be "in their own world," excluding the others around them. Better put is what is written by http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/patc/nighthawks/index.html: "Behind the windows, a busboy stoops behind the counter, while three patrons, a man with his back to the window, and a couple facing out, sit in apparent silence. No door is visible, so even if a passerby wanted to interrupt their solitude, it would be impossible. There's just enough detail -- and just enough hidden -- to give viewers the opportunity to create back-stories for the nighthawks on their own." This painting truly does reflect solitude, and it does make us want to know the true story behind and about this painting.

This painting is Oil on Canvas, and is 84.1 x 152.4 cm.

Add-on:

Hopper creates a sense of unity by having everything in the painting either complement something else in the painting, by having the "lines" in come back, and by giving us a focal point. In this painting, the compliments are contrasts. We have a diner with a few people in it (some movement) on the right side, and on the left side, there is no sign of human life or any movement (three-quarters of the painting is "empty"1). This contrastive unbalance, in a sense creates balance. The leading lines of this painting does not necessarily lead to any place particularly, but because they do not "end," they bring the viewer back and forth among them, therefor settling the eyes in the middle of them. The focal point in this painting is the cafe, and by using all of the ideas presented above, Hopper makes this the focal point. The contrast of life, the contrast and the bright light from inside the diner to the darkness outside. I personally think that the man with his back turned to the viewer is the main emphasis of this painting because he is the only one wearing completely dark clothes, and he is "singled-out" (grouping). Hopper intelligently pulls this painting together with these attributes of unity.

1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nighthawks

Reflection

The first term of art has been really incredible for me. I feel like I have been evolving in not only the way I think about art and create art, but also in my mind set about art. Gradually, I have been getting better and "letting go" and just "arting" (new word!). I have become less focused getting everything "perfect," and more on just focusing on the main task and I have become more focused when I do my art work. In better words, I have become more free with my art, and more "experimental" and trying new techniques and thinking in different ways. One of the main inspirations are Monday "Drop everything and Draw Days." When I first started, I was so intent on getting everything "exact,"that I was always behind and "disappointed." Gradually, I have started to be more "free" and even though the art work may not be as great, I feel better when I am creating it and I feel more relaxed and optimistically. Even though these final products are not Picasso's masterpieces or maybe not as great as before, they are really helping me in the other projects that we are doing. From being open, I have learned new techniques and also what not to do, which are all contributing to my better art work. I feel like this was a step back, and then two steps forward. Thomas Edison when inventing the lightbulb failed multitudinous times until he finally got it said, "I did not fail, I have just found two-thousand ways to not create a lightbulb." He also said, "I never failed once. It just happened to be a 2000-step process." That is how I feel about this first term of art. I feel that everything that I have done in art class so far, both "good" and "bad," are just a process of making me better. In tennis, one very important lesson is learning not to judge something as "good" or "bad," but what is important is observing, and learning from the "positives" and the "negatives." I believe that I am gradually starting to do this in art class, each time that I pick up a paintbrush, a pensil, charcoal, or any object in the class room. I really feel like if I keep this up, I can really accelerate in the next term, maybe a step a step forward each time, or maybe  by taking one step back, and then two steps forward.

If I could do any of the projects again, I would do the either the value drawing or the painting portrait another time. Even though the value drawing was not my favorite project to do, I really think that my drawing skills need a lot of improving. I would really like to continue learning (about) and working with value to show perspective, time, mood, temperature, etc. I find it fascinating that value can create and add so much to a drawing, painting, or any form of art. I believe that by working on this topic more, I can really improve other aspects of my art. My two favorite projects were the Collage and the Portrait. I would want to do the Portrait painting and color over again because I really like how color can symbolize so much and can add so much to any work of art. Carianne Mack taught me something very intreguing about color. I learned that there are 100 red somethings in your Iris, to about 36 yellow, to 5-10 blue pigments (or something) that makes you percieve the way that you perceive the colors the way you do. Red is strong and "stands out" and is bold (because you have so many red "things" in your eyes."  Yellow is the "medium color" that is bright, but not intense and that attract your eye in a "medium"sense. Blue, the lowest, calms you eye and your body, and is cool, peaceful, and commonly used as a background (sky) for this reason. It is not he color that is going to attract your eye strait away. I find this fascinating, because I can also apply color to my everyday life. From books, to paper, to cooking, to designing, and to almost any thing that has color you can apply what color "means."

During this term, I/we have definitely researched and investigated many artists and their works. They are all "different" and so is their art work. My favorite is Andy Goldsworthy. I really like how he uses simple objects from nature to create such enchanting works of art. He also really uses everything to his advantage, and "thinks outside the box." For example, his work Knotweed Stalks (see previous post) uses the reflection of the stalks in the water to create the rest of the sculpture with incredible precision. Another one of his works, Rowan Leaves and Hole (click here for this painting and many of his others) is an extremely enticing, colorful, alluring,  and beautiful masterpiece of art by just using leaves from a Rowan Tree. I am captivated by how he uses the colors of nature to create such spectacular works.

Thanks so much for a great first term!

Kristopher.

Knotweed Stalks

Knotweed Stalks
Andy Goldsworthy (British)
1988

First Impressions:
This is a really cool sculpture. To me it reminds me of a window or a hole. The scene looks really spectacular and the background compliments the sculpture. This sculpure looks like it is sticking into the ground out of the water. When I first looked at it, I thought it was an "impossible" sculpure. I could not seem to figure out hiw Goldsworthy had made it. Then after looking at the discription (my bad) I found out that the bottom part was really the reflection of the stalks above the water. This three-dimensional object truly amazes me as the thought of using the reflection of the water to create symetry was truly brilliant and inspirational. It is also really cool how the whole makes the sculpture look as if it concaves in, towards the hole. The hole draws an incredible amount of attraction (to the eye). I am inspired by this sculpture and the way the Andy Goldsworthy used nature to create such a magnificent masterpiece.

What I Have Learned:
As mentioned above, it is really neat how Andy Goldsworthy used the reflection of the water to "complete" the sculpture. Andy is an artist that uses and "collaborates" with nature to create his creations. He features his art work as "momentary" or "ephemeral"1. He photographs his creations as soon as they are finished. As said by morning-earth.com, "His goal is to understand nature by directly participating in nature as intimately as he can." Andy will use whatever he has (nature wise) to create his amazing and beautiful works of art.

Here are some of his words about his art work:
"I enjoy the freedom of just using my hands and "found" tools--a sharp stone, the quill of a feather, thorns. I take the opportunities each day offers: if it is snowing, I work with snow, at leaf-fall it will be with leaves; a blown-over tree becomes a source of twigs and branches. I stop at a place or pick up a material because I feel that there is something to be discovered. Here is where I can learn. "

"Looking, touching, material, place and form are all inseparable from the resulting work. It is difficult to say where one stops and another begins. The energy and space around a material are as important as the energy and space within. The weather--rain, sun, snow, hail, mist, calm--is that external space made visible. When I touch a rock, I am touching and working the space around it. It is not independent of its surroundings, and the way it sits tells how it came to be there."

"I want to get under the surface. When I work with a leaf, rock, stick, it is not just that material in itself, it is an opening into the processes of life within and around it. When I leave it, these processes continue."


"I enjoy the freedom of just using my hands and "found" tools--a sharp stone, the quill of a feather, thorns. I take the opportunities each day offers: if it is snowing, I work with snow, at leaf-fall it will be with leaves; a blown-over tree becomes a source of twigs and branches. I stop at a place or pick up a material because I feel that there is something to be discovered. Here is where I can learn. "

"Looking, touching, material, place and form are all inseparable from the resulting work. It is difficult to say where one stops and another begins. The energy and space around a material are as important as the energy and space within. The weather--rain, sun, snow, hail, mist, calm--is that external space made visible. When I touch a rock, I am touching and working the space around it. It is not independent of its surroundings, and the way it sits tells how it came to be there."

"I want to get under the surface. When I work with a leaf, rock, stick, it is not just that material in itself, it is an opening into the processes of life within and around it. When I leave it, these processes continue."

"Movement, change, light, growth and decay are the lifeblood of nature, the energies that I try to tap through my work. I need the shock of touch, the resistance of place, materials and weather, the earth as my source. Nature is in a state of change and that change is the key to understanding. I want my art to be sensitive and alert to changes in material, season and weather. Each work grows, stays, decays. Process and decay are implicit. Transience in my work reflects what I find in nature."

"The underlying tension of a lot of my art is to try and look through the surface appearance of things. Inevitably, one way of getting beneath the surface is to introduce a hole, a window into what lies below."

Sources: http://www.morning-earth.org/ARTISTNATURALISTS/AN_Goldsworthy.html
Picture: http://prettisculpture.typepad.com/photos/other_artists_3/goldsworthy2.html

Portrait of Chess Players

Portrait of Chess Players

Marcel Duchamp (American, Born in France)

1911.

First Impressions:

At first glance this painting looks very confusing with many shapes all crowded together. After studying it for a little while, I started to see outlines of familiar shapes and figures. These were "subtle" in a way because they are not obviously shown. This reminds me of cubism. In this painting, I believe that there are a few optical illusions. The head of the guy on the left seems to be either facing his opponent (the other person), but it can alo appears to be facing the viewer (you). It is also very cool that the further you move back, the painting changes in a way. In the background, there seems to be various chess pieces. I can perceive the figures of a pawn, a bishop and a kind. To me the darker pieces appear to be playing out the role of a chess game. (zoom feature). There seems to be hidden objects in this painting and shapes that make up many figures. This painting is very interesting because of the way that it is made. Every time that I look at this painting, I can perceive a new, hidden object.

What I Have Learned (About the Author):

Chess was a great passion of Marcel Duchamp. He incorporated it into many of his works of art. He even said: "I have come to the personal conclusion that while all artists are not chess players, all chess players are artists."1  In this painting, "each head is made up of many overlapping successive planes, with chess pieces floating in the indefinite spaces that surround them. This painting is in fact influenced by Duchamp's interest in cubism. Marcel Duchamp was born in 1887 in Northwest France.  He was a painter and a mixed media artist.2 He was associated and influenced with Cubism, Dadaism, and Surrealism.3 "Duchamp's work is characterized by its humor, the variety and unconventionality of its media, and its incessant probing of the boundaries of art."4 All of the four oldest brothers in his family became artists. A short synopsis of The Chess Players is given to us by www.understandingduchamp.com. "In The Chess Players Duchamp explored the possibilities of Cubism. It shows two chess players at a table, in multiple views. In the center of the painting are a few shapes like chess pieces.

The players are shown in different positions, suggesting the passage of time. Duchamp gave Cubism an idiosyncratic twist by introducing duration.

The players are weighing their options. One potential outcome results in the capture, by the player on the left, of an opposing piece, held in his hand near the bottom of the painting. A picture of minds engaged in the calculus of chess, this is an early exercise in another continuing interest in Duchamp’s art: depicting the intangible."www.understandingduchamp.com

In the 1968, Marcel Duchamp unfortunately died. Understandingduchamp.com did an excelent "summarization" of Marcel Duchamps' life. 

Marcel Duchamp showed the way to a new kind of art. Compared with the varieties of visual expression that came before, this new art seeks to to engage the imagination and the intellect instead of just the eyes, embraces humor as a valid aesthetic component, and strives to portray invisible worlds instead of just visible ones.

Some of the most fruitful influences in modern art, from Surrealism to Abstraction to Pop to pure Conceptualism, have a common forefather in Marcel Duchamp.

---

Duchamp died peacefully in 1968. His ashes were interred with other family members in the Cimetière Monumental in Rouen. He wrote his own epitaph:

D’ailleurs, c'est toujours les autres qui meurent

Anyway, it’s always the other guy who dies.

Sources: http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/51446.html

Quotes: 1. http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/51446.html

2-4. http://www.understandingduchamp.com/text.html

Zoom Painting: http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/51446.html

Lady Agnew of Lochnaw

Lady Agnew of Lochnaw

John Singer Sargent (American)

1892-1893

First Impressions:

To me, this girl looks like she is from a prominent family. The cloths that she is wearing are very fashionable and expensive. Her facial expressions are happy and jovial. She seems to be a happy person and a delicate girl. She looks  focused and maybe in her twenties, she is definitely young. Her skin is smooth meaning that she takes care of herself. The painting is done in great detail and very carefully done, symbolizing that the family paid a lot of money for the painting.

What I Have Learned:

Lady Agnew is a vert prominent lady and "The painting was done in a "high key" and carefully finished. "It is a careful portrait, free of any fine frenzy, sedately handled, and rather lacking in the force and fire  of his daring technique" ((Charteris, P136),http://jssgallery.org/Paintings/Lady_Agnew.htm) It was considered a masterpiece by everyone. The times said "A masterpiece... not only a triumph of technique but the finest example of portraiture in the literal sense of the word, that has been seen here in a long while. (The Times, 1893). "Carter Ratcliff described it this way in his book on Sargent: 

Lady Agnew's personality engages in endless elusive play against her social type. Sargent has made her face almost schematic, yet within the regularity there is slight departures, nuances whose faintness blends nicely with the sitters languid pose. Lady Agnew's face seems all possibility, and consciously so. The moment of the right side of her lips look slightly drawn back, as if in doubt or weariness, the left side seems almost to smile. And, as if to insist on her control of this ambivalence, her eyes are oddly calm."
(Ratcliff)

This Portrait gives the viewer a clear look at Lady Agnew.

Sources: http://jssgallery.org/Paintings/Lady_Agnew.htm