This hundred year old building was Seattle’s first skyscraper as well as the tallest building on the West side of the Mississippi for decades.
This was part of an Art installation with various Safari animals decorated by Non-profits and Local organizations. this was taken in the spring of 2013.
Just posting this for fun…
I’ve often wondered about the moment where someone paused, paintbrush in the air and decided that copying reality, adding to it only a dash of idealism, metaphor and allegory was tedious. Who was the first to pause and ask why they should be copying endless paintings from the great masters, plethora of drapes and fruits, dissecting hidden symbols in a twisted quest for meaning? Who jump started the creative process, opening the way for new art and a new way of expression? I think that singling a lone artist at a precise time and place would be almost impossible. The Idea seemed to come to several around the same era and in different locations. How can we reinvent artistic expression? In this class, we studied the transition of art into something new and exciting. It was intriguing to see all the different stages and styles, with artists struggling to push art forward. I think we shouldn’t down play the impact of photography in this process. Besides, the time frames coincide nicely, the first photographs appeared the 1800s and becoming popular in the second half of the 19th century, just as the first impressionists were questioning the artistic status quo. I always thought that photography was the trigger. Suddenly there is a way to make an exact copy of an instant in time. A perfect copy, that takes a few hours at best, instead of the months it would take a painter to struggle and duplicate that same image. I believe those first Avant -Guard artists saw the potential in photography and also might have seen the end of an artistic area. Not wanting to be left behind, they had to create something new, and find a new path for an artistic expression that photography could not offer. There is something more intimate and emotional in a painting, something about the time and energy, thought and technique used in painting and drawing that transcends photography. Which is probably why the fine arts realm snubbed it for a while. I think the artists felt threatened by this new technique, and refused to give it the artistic acknowledgement it deserves. It’s a tricky process to compose a good artistic shot. It takes a lot of knowledge and manipulation, you have to have a good subject, the adequate lighting, and proper processing technique. There is a lot of skill and creativity involved in artistic photography. It took some time for the higher end artistic circles to realize this. Despite their hidden uses of photography for their own work. Indeed Photography and Painting have a long history of co-dependence. Here is a fascinating article on the subject, discussing just how painting and photography are linked.
It talks about how artists rapidly came to use photographs, as snapshots of a subject and duplicate, or at least use the image as a reference in their own work. (artists today do this routinely, Modern artist at work ) The funny part was the denial of the painters themselves, still considering photography as simplistic, unworthy of the “fine arts” title. According to the article, Critic Ernest Lacan described those painters’ relationship to photography as “like a mistress whom one cherishes but hides.” And visa versa, photographers have dived into the vast archives of paintings in search for subject matter and composition inspiration. (the two images at the beginning of the article were particularly striking) Here are a few examples In our own highly multimedia world, photos have taken over. We are constantly taking pictures on phones, tablets and cameras, sharing them in some hopes that they will perpetuate the memory of an instant, becoming pseudo artists ourselves in an attempt to communicate something visually. It’s an interesting development for our society, this urge to share our personal perspective and vision in an overwhelmingly quantitative way. The anthropologists of the next century will have literal tons of images to go through, hopefully helping them decipher our intricate modern society. A down side of this photo craze, is the absence of ACTUAL memories. A new study came out this week, showing that the distraction of taking a picture, hinders the process of creating a detailed memory. By taking rapid snap shots, you are more likely to forget the details and locations of items and specifics of events. This article here talks about it.
I feel like this wouldn’t be a problem for an artist reproducing that item or that instant in time. They have to carefully study and observe before recreating (in what every style, composition or technique) what they have seen. There is something to the creative process that demands careful consideration, experimentation and precise execution. It’s interesting to see that off handed, careless photo taking is damaging our own abilities. Perhaps we have grown too comfortable and too reliant on our technology, expecting it to remember and create in our place without pouring in the essence that is Art.
In 1622, Marie of Medici was crown Queen of France and commissioned 24 painting from the painter Rubens to decorate her new palace. Its a series of big oil paintings, representing different important scenes from the queen’s life. Each is elaborate and very detailed, with allegorical and mythological additions. The aim is to glorify the Queen and her rule, but each piece reflects the golden age of classicism.
Here is a good example of what I meant. We can clearly see the queen at the center of the piece as the main focal point, in light clothing to contrast with the other characters. But surrounding the queen are figures from Greek and Roman mythology, such as Naiads and sea nymphs, but also cherubs and angels. The renaissance period was a revival of all the old myths. The ancients also provided artistic instruction as artists copied and studied their works, compositions and anatomical studies. I also found it interesting that the pagan characters are always naked or very little dressed, whereas the proper ladies of society are shown in full regalia. It certainly makes for an interesting contrast.
Again, portraits of ladies and noble women are all dressed in fine garbs with jewels and accessories This shows Rubens wife and son painted around 1640, showing the elegance and refinement of their status.
We have a portrait of an Italian Noble woman, painted by Antoon Van Dyck around the same period. I loved the attire and complicated gown. I think this models the saying “One of the best ways that status can is conveyed is through impracticality.”
The Classical artists were fascinated with myths, collecting them and digging through to seek out the raw materials of creation. The female forms here are voluptuous and round, miles away from the ideal of beauty in our generation, of stick thin skeletal models. But at the same time, the dressed women of this same period are wearing corsets and dresses that curve their forms to the extreme to have narrow waists. (Rembrandt, 1654 Bathsheba holding David’s letter)
This contrast is fascinating to me. The differences between the ideal of the naked women and the ideal of the “clothed” women. (A mortal catching a glimpse of sleeping Venus)
The classical artists were also fascinated by allegories and personifications. Something probably inspired from the Romans. The female body becomes a means, not only is it an object of beauty but it represents something more than that. The game of symbolism hunting is quite fun also, trying to understand why the artists picked certain objects or creatures as metaphor and symbols. (Religion destroying Heresy, Jean Hardy 1653)
Union of Painting and Sculpture, Jacques Burette,1677
Allegory of Spring, Pierre LeGros 1629. I love these allegories, showing how the artist would envision how the person incarnating Spring would look. It’s part of a series of four (obviously) each woman holding attributes of each season.
This sculpture was interesting, portraying an actual person dressed as the goddess Juno. It’s like a reversed allegory. An actual person representing a concept, an immaterial goddess. (Marie Leaszczuncka as Juno, Guillaume Coustou 1677)
This photo might seem a little strange. But I visited the “Conciergerie”, the prison where Marie-Antoinette spent the last few months of her life before being executed by the new regime. This photo is a restoration of her cell (with added mannequins). And I felt like this was an interesting perspective on the theme of this project. Here is the place where one of the most famous, frivolous women in world history spent her last few days, in austere conditions, having lost everything.
What an adventure the past few months have been. I did in fact return from my trip to Paris. It was a lot of fun. Unfortunately my grand plans of massive blogging fell to the wayside once I realized that I had no internet access and too much socializing to do. Returning was a difficult process on its own, since I was very very ill for my flight back and had to stay in bed for a while to recover. One thing leading to another and here we are several months later and still no Parisy posts from me.
Deepest apologies, I will try and upload a few tips I found useful and share with you some of the beautiful art I saw. Things might not be posted in the order they happened, but hopefully you will find some of this information to be of interest. Or at least enjoy the pictures…