Final Blog - Art Institute 'Final Exam'

"Step in closer, and take a look at the toenails", exclaims our fearless leader, on yesterday's tour of the Art Institute in Chicago.

 I am embarrassed to say that I have lived in the Chicago area for 20 years and this was my first time visiting this museum. It's almost as embarrassing to admit that one should be paying attention to details such as fingernails and toenails at a fine art museum.

 But it turns out Nathan Peck hit the nail (pun entirely intended) on the head with this one. The details, it seems, are worth taking a look at, and it was something I thoroughly enjoyed throughout the tour.







I found myself looking at things that I wouldn't normally have thought to look at, if it hadn't been for my instructor's encouragement.




The details in Seurat's "A Sunday on LaGrande Jatte" were awe-inspiring, & I admit, I had to go back and take a longer look at this one after the tour was complete. You can't really tell how much labor this work entailed until you've seen the brush strokes in person. And the painting was even more beautiful than I had imagined it would be. So much, so, that I couldn't resist purchasing a magnet of the painting on my way out of the museum.

Of course, I had to checkout Wood's "American Gothic" before I left. Like Seurat's impressive painting, it is one that has been mimicked and referenced so many times over, I just had to see what the original looked like.

 Smaller than I had imagined, but iconic, nonetheless.


I was pleased to have a little time to check out the Charles Ray sculptures as well. I haven't seen work like these before, and found it to be a thought provoking collection. This particular sculpture caught my eye, as it had a striking resemblance to my fiancé. Besides needing a haircut, the sculpture was pretty spot on.

  Most interestingly, I enjoyed the concept of adding to my knowledge base, or 'baggage' as peck so cleverly put it. This allowed me to decipher what I thought of Constantin Brancusi's sculpture entitled "Two Penguins".






 How could I not see toenails after all that I had seen that afternoon?

 

Thanks, Mr. Peck, for an informative and entertaining class, particularly the final exam. I loved the fact that our group tripled in size along the way (I hope that speaks to your teaching skills!). I also enjoy the prospect of returning to the museum (sooner than later), to give a tour of my own to my family.

Lesson 7 - Davis - BASQUIAT

For me, this assigned film on Jean-Michel Basquiat, was the most powerful video I have seen during   this course, and I wouldn't even call myself a big fan of his art.  I was moved by the story of the artist, the rise and fall of Basquiat.  But, I was most intrigued by the people (& places) that influenced the artist during that rise and fall.

First entering the Manhattan art scene at only 17 years old, Basquiat was essentially homeless.  His art expression began with a poetry style graffiti painted on various structures as his urban canvas.  He and a friend tagged themselves as "Samo" and decorated the city with poetic stanzas and multiple choice questions as their art.
                                                   


Although he was becoming more well known, the young graffiti artist was completely broke, with no job, and no home to call his own.  When interviewed by Becky Johnston,  he was quoted as saying "...you just end up surviving."  His survival at the time may have been based on the success he had in being accepted into Manhattan creative circles, such as the 'Downtown 500'. He was even cast in a film entitled "Downtown 81".

He was seen by many as very sophisticated for a child.  When he began to paint, the messages conveyed were deep and complex, yet he chose to use child-like techniques when holding the brush, creating an unusual style all his own, with an undeniable 'underground' feel.

His connections with the creative New York scene allowed him to sell his first painting, to none another than Deborah Harry.  His frequent clubbing also introduced him to celebrity friends such as Madonna and Keith Herring.  Through his work and his social life, he was achieving his dream of becoming famous.  Some might say 'too famous' for this 'Radiant Child'.

There were many people influential in the fame of Jean-Michel Basquiat.  One of these people was Annina Nosei, a New York gallery owner.  She recognized Basquiat's talents and opened up the basement of her gallery for him to use as a studio (and, it was assumed, a place to live as well).  She also helped him by giving him his first show, in which every painting sold, earning the artist $200,000.

Another influential person for Basquiat was Bruno Bischofberger, who became an exclusive dealer for the young artist.  He helped boost Basquiat to international fame as he helped him open exhibits around the world in places such as Switzerland, Italy and Japan.

The museums such as the Museum of Modern Art also had an impact on Basquiat.  Museums initially rejected his Neo-Expressionism paintings, and largely misunderstood the paintings of the young artists.  Ann Temkin, Chief Curator at the Museum of Modern Art remembers him, when she reveals, " Chances are, if it's really significant, it will be uncomfortable to somebody like myself, because I am so immersed in what painting, up until now, looked like.  And with Basquiat, many art professionals had skepticism about what he was doing, because the paintings didn't necessarily fit their idea of a museum painting.  And yet, of course, that's exactly what's necessary in order to create the art of the future."  This rejection and the depression it caused, may have contributed to the artist's use of heroin.

Basquiat's friendship with Andy Warhol also helped the artist become more recognizable.  Basquiat first met Warhol when he gave him some of postcards he created.  Basquiat was a big fan of the already famous artist, and created a painting for him, entitled "Dos Cabezas", soon after they met.

The two spent much of their time together in social circles and developed a close friendship.  The artists eventually collaborated together in a critically unsuccessful art venture.  This very public rejection affected their relationship and Basquiat somewhat severed ties with Warhol.  It was said that he was crushed at this choice when he learned that Warhol had died, and he hadn't had the chance to repair how he had left his friendship.

The journey from the streets to celebrity in just a few short years certainly took it's toll on the young artist.  His later work became dark, dealing with issues such as racial discrimination and even death. People who knew him say he eventually became paranoid, lonely and even more depressed.   His life was obviously reaching an intense level.

In the end, it was drugs that took the life of this young, creative soul.  I feel the film did an incredible job of revealing the short life of this rising (& falling star).  And before this film, I hadn't even heard of his work.  As I mentioned before, his style may not be one that I normally would enjoy, but it's the story behind the artist that influenced me the most. 

Lesson 7 - Lecture

I am definitely a 'Suburbanite'.  And because of that geographical title, I am afraid I have been a little sheltered when it comes to many of the graffiti style murals shown in the video, because I haven't seen any of them!  But even without seeing them in person, I am impressed with the scale and creativity involved in these paintings.

The Pilsen murals shown were the examples that most intrigued me, particularly Peck's description, "...that's what i really kind of like about the murals in this neighborhood... is that they're not just art for art's sake, but sort of art with a function, and that function of trying to show, sort of, the perfect world.

Many of the murals in this part of Chicago tell a story and represent what is important to the culture of the residents living here.  The examples in Wicker Park seemed to be more abstract examples of this graffiti style mural art.  

However, even in the sheltered south suburbs, there are examples worth checking out - especially along sections of the old Route 66.  So, if you get the chance, take a trip to Joliet to see some interesting examples there...

Lesson 6 - Painters Painting

Sometimes, movies from the early 1970's are masterpieces that should be left untouched. Some greats worth mentioning: “The Godfather”, “Jaws”, “The Exorcist”, “All the President's Men”, and, of course, “Blazing Saddles”. Then there are movies that leave a bit to be desired: “The Exorcist II”, “Attack of the Killer Tomatoes” & “Painters Painting”. My blog today will mainly critique this last film mentioned. Granted, Painters Painting is a documentary movie from the 70's and it is considered an 'art' film. But in general, I found the film hard to follow, and at times confusing.

First of all, It was difficult for me to keep track of everyone in the film, as not everyone in the film was identified with the traditional printed name on the screen. Some people were referred to in a conversation but, not clearly identified later on. Perhaps as I study more about art, these people would be more easily recognizable – but I felt there were a large number of people in this documentary. It was difficult to tell who was the critic, who was the artist and why Ellen Skull was worthy of a portrait session with Andy Warhol.

I also felt that there was an enormous amount of 'name dropping' in this film. This film had too many players on the field. There were critics, museum curators, painters, news reporters, collectors – how am I supposed to figure out who the main characters are? I was thankful for a few recognizable names, such as Leo Castelli, Warhol & Pollack, but I only knew of them because of my recent studies. I stopped writing down the names that were referenced when my counting reached in the teens.

Another negative aspect to the film was the background noise. I was distracted by a train going by Jasper Johns' apartment, as well as people talking and phones ringing while Robert Skull was trying to explain his role in the art scene. I feel that some well placed music would have better suited this documentary style film, rather than the distractions of life.

On the other hand, I appreciated the technique the filmmakers used by showing much of the film, including the interviews, in black & white. Many Hollywood films were continued to be presented in black & white, even after the technicolor process was invented in the 1930's & 1940's. It provided a more dramatic, serious effect on the screen. Perhaps, the filmmakers here were trying to portray the 'pop artists' in a more serious light. In contrast, when the actual works by the artists were presented in color, the paintings were incredibly vibrant on the screen.

Obviously, this was not my favorite film from those assigned, however, it certainly was not the worst, as I did learn many new facts and was introduced to several examples from artists I had just recently heard of such as Frank Stella,

Jules Olitski,

Larry Poons,

and finally, Barnett Newman. His quote was my favorite, and I am sure the filmmakers felt the same as they used it both in the beginning of the film and the end, “...in the end, size doesn't count, it's scale that counts... it's human scale that counts and the only way you can achieve human scale is by the content”.

Lesson 6 - Hughes - Shock

As promised in a previous blog, I have chosen to  voluntarily opt out of creating a blog based on this assigned video of Hughes, as his monotone presentation will surely put me to sleep.

Lesson 6 - PBS - Warhol

While walking to lunch yesterday, my 14 year old, soon-to-be stepdaughter inquired as to which artist I was learning about this week.  When I revealed who it was, she proclaimed that she hadn't heard of him before, but I assured her that she has seen some of his work, if not some art that was influenced by him.  I then described the grid, silk-screen paintings of Marilyn Monroe and she immediately knew to whom I was referring to.

 It's obvious that Andy Warhol's influence has spread throughout many generations.

It was fascinating to discover where some of Warhol's inspiration came from.  It was mentioned, in this week's video, that every Saturday and Sunday, Warhol (then known as Andrew Warhola) and his mother would walk several miles to church services.  In that church near his Slovak ghetto home in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were examples of artwork that were only revealed during communion.  These images were arranged in a grid-like pattern and showed 2-dimensional versions of several Saints.  It is a likely conclusion that this image of 'a collage of saints' stayed with him for many years after his church experiences.

Another unlikely source of inspiration was that of working in the advertising business.  When he first came to New York City, he landed a job with Glamour magazine sketching drawings of women's shoes.

His unique artistic style with blotted lines had somewhat of a 'printed' look and captured the attention of others in the commercial world.  After selling himself to various companies (sometimes with his portfolio presented in a brown paper bag), he eventually created works for record companies, art dealers and a number of magazines.  It was unusual to discover that his first printing with Glamour magazine contained a typo when he was credited by name for the drawings.  Warhola never bothered to correct the fact that the last 'a' was omitted from his name, and continued as Andy Warhol from that point on.  But as much as he succeeded in the world of advertising, it wasn't enough.  The artist longed form fame, as was evident when he stated, "I was well known as a commercial artist... but if you wanted to be a serious artist, you weren't supposed to have anything to do with commercial art".  He later proved that he could become famous doing exactly that.  From coke bottles, to Brillo pads to Campbell's Soup cans, Warhol revealed a completely new form of creating in his Pop-Art.

Andy Warhol was also inspired by his mother, a constant supporter in his  life.  Julia Warhola was talented in drawing, as well as singing, and always pushed her youngest son to pursue his creative talents.  During his childhood, he was very ill and spent a lot of time at home, rather than school.  His mother used that time to encourage further creations, often rewarding his fine work with chocolate bars.  Julia was so supportive of her son's creativity that she enrolled him in free art classes at the Carnegie Museum of Art, where he spent endless hours learning about artists of the past.  She eventually came to stay with her son in New York, intentionally for a short amount of time.  However, his mother continued to live as his roommate for more than 20 years.

During his childhood, Warhol was painfully shy, and possibly even autistic.  These characteristics led to some painful struggles in his personal life which he fought to overcome.  He reflected on those times when he said. " ... sometimes, people let the same problems make them miserable for years, and they just say 'so,what?'  That's one of my favorite things to say - 'so,what?'  I don't know how I made it, through all the years before I learned to do that trick."  Perhaps his survival had something to do with the close relationship he had with his mother.

The darkest influence on the creations by Andy Warhol, would certainly be the topic of death.  For instance, his Marilyn paintings were began immediately after the announcement of her suicide.  His fans were also greatly moved by the images he captured of Jacqueline Kennedy as he created compilations of her expressions just before and just after JFK's assassination.

And then there were the paintings known as 'The Death and Disaster Pictures'.  Warhol created powerful images of car crashes and other tragedies.

Whatever Andy Warhol's inspirations were, his creations left a huge impact and influenced countless artists.  He art has affected so many people, some of them, like my future step-daughter, not even realizing who the artist is - but definitely recognizing that silk screened, blotted line style. I was even inspired, myself, when in my scrap-booking days, I created this 'Warhol-esque' page of a favorite picture of my son (circa 2003).

Lesson 6 - Lecture

I have been looking forward to learning more about the era of Modern Art, and it appears, according to this most recent video lecture, that I am in for a certain treat of the senses.  The video provided teasers of a variety of contemporary styles and artists that are about to explored.

Of all the names dropped in this lecture video (& there were certainly quite a few names of people  influential in the Minimalist & Pop Culture movements), I was most intrigued by the mention of Leo Castelli.

Castelli was a gallery curator who was pro-active in seeking out art, even guiding art, in a sense.  Even though he wasn't a painter or sculptor, I think it's fair to say that he was an artist in his own right, by creating exhibitions of new talent.  Whether it was abstract expressionism, pop art or surrealism, Castelli was responsible for getting a number or artists noticed and helped nurture the start of numerous successful career such as Jasper Johns, Roy Lichenstein and Andy Warhol.

I would also like to comment that it is refreshing to hear that my instructor, Nathan peck is not afraid to publicly admit to disliking particular artists.  Such an admission further reinforces my enjoyment of classes like this, which allow for free thinking, educated opinions and open ended-questions.  For instance, of all the films about paintings revealed so far, I found myself developing a strong dislike for artists such as Caravaggio & Dali.  I realize now that this class is not just about recognizing certain styles or paintings, but, rather, developing an appreciation (as well a personal opinion) about art on a higher level.

I was also happy to hear the professor reveal, "not all art is designed necessarily for you to enjoy it - visually or conceptually".  

Bring on the Modern Art!

Lesson 5 - Smithsonian - Pollock

This, for me, is art.

Jackson Pollock's style and technique has always appealed to me.  In the early 1980's, my father took me to the Metropolitan Museum of Art where I first witnessed an image created by this artist.  I believe the piece was "Number 28" (but to be honest, I was very young, so it may have been another painting). 

From what my father tells me, he said he remembered that I liked Pollock's art because it made me feel at home, as the painting resembled my messy room.

Whatever the case, I have always enjoyed this style of Modern Art.

This lesson's film was equally enjoyable (even though the film itself was a bit dated).  I enjoyed the facts told about his life, as well as the sound bytes from an original radio interview.  I also enjoyed the information provided by those who knew him well, both personally and professionally.  And I couldn't help but notice that just about everyone in the film, including Pollock himself, smoked like a chimney!

It was refreshing to hear that Pollock had been influenced by such a wide variety of artists styles and locations.  From Native American Sand Art, to the paintings of Cezanne, from the views of the Grand Canyon while his father conducted surveys of its rim, to the Mexican Muralists, Pollock had a wide range of inspiration.  Most importantly, Jackson Pollock was inspired by his subconscious.

It was also enlightening to discover that Pollock had so many women in his life.  It was mentioned that he was rather dependent on these women, which included his sister-in-law, Elizabeth Pollock.  While Pollock had lived with his brother and his wife, Elizabeth, she developed an interesting opinion of him.  She apparently found him selfish, arrogant and lazy - not a confession I was expecting to hear!

A relationship with Peggy Guggenheim likely benefited Pollock, as she surely had connections for him to exhibit his artwork.  And a marriage to fellow artist, Lee Krasner,  may have worked (for a time at least) because only another artist could understand what it truly meant for him to create.

And finally, there was the mistress, Ruth Kligman.  His mistress was actually with him when he died in a terrible alcohol infused car accident.  Ruth offered a unique insight when she told the filmmakers, "The art market was created out of Jackson Pollock's tragedy."

I had honestly never even considered this information before the film.  After Pollock's death, his widow had managed to hold on to several paintings purely to make them more desirable, and thus, more expensive.  Of course, Pollock's sudden, violent death helped push the prices up as well.  Collectors and exhibitors wanted a piece of the artist's work, since he was no longer around to create anything further.  Nowadays, it's almost always the case that an artist's paintings are worth more after their death.  It's an interesting bit of trivia to know where this 'practice' originated.

So, even though Pollock was a drunk (then again, so were the majority of the Abstract Expressionists), and a bit of a womanizer (and yes, I feel he has to be considered a womanizer if he was able to keep a wife and a mistress), the works created by this artist were full of energy, created with groundbreaking techniques, and most of all, expressive.  As Pollock himself said, "I want to express my feelings, rather than illustrate them".  I look forward to learning more about the artist on my own.

Lesson 5 - Dali - Dali

This self portrait film of the Surrealist artist (& I use the term 'artist' lightly), Salvador Dali was a complete waste of my time.

This potentially acid-induced, psychedelic, 1970's trip into the mind of S. Dali (produced by his wife) was a ridiculous, confusing, observation of a man who egotistically spoke of himself in the 3rd person, in barely intelligible English, intertwined with sexually charged snippets of so-called 'performance art', which left me with a visual heartburn.

I felt like the paintings, performances and photographs assaulted me.  I do not think I need to feel the trauma that Dali experienced through thoughts of war or travels in the birth canal.  It did not help me better understand the messages he was trying to convey.

Early on in the film, Dali exclaims, "Dali is not crazy at all".

I beg to differ.

Lesson 5 - Scorsese - Picasso/Braque

While viewing this week's film, impressively produced by Martin Scorsese, it quickly became apparent that the video was about relationships, rather than influence in art.  Last night, I was dealing with the trials and tribulations of my own relationship - the daily love/hate scenario between my Wi-Fi and I.
You see, my Wi-Fi is incredibly moody.  When it gets in these moods, it is rather difficult to watch one of the assigned films on my laptop.  The constant buffering is excruciatingly annoying, as well as time consuming, and seriously affects my 'creative flow'.  Art and technology, it seems, can be frustrating at times.
                                                   

In the film, there was several references to the relationship between films and paintings.  Thanks to the innovation of the Lumiere brothers (on Thomas Edison's invention), motion pictures were finally view-able to the masses.  Movement was able to be captured, unlike any painting had done before.  Pablo Picasso was a big fan of going to the cinema, and what he witnessed became the foundation for much of his art.  Art Historian, Natasha Staller, described, " ... Picasso was intoxicated with all forms of popular culture around him.  This was a lifelong obsession, a lifelong love."

The Spaniard experimented with capturing movement in a unique way on his canvases.  From fans, to dancers, Picasso was able to portray the relationship between still life and motion in his restructured, collage-like representations. 

Another relationship detailed in the film was the competitive friendship between Picasso and French artist, Georges Braque.  The two painters were introduced to each other in Paris in 1907, but a mutual acquaintance, who happened to be a poet  (interestingly, the film also touched briefly on the relationship between poets and painters and noted that they often challenged each other to create something new). Braque was described as somewhat of an introvert, while Picasso was much more social, however, their bond became quite close and they often relied on each other.  It was stated that they would not complete most of their paintings until the other had seen it.

artist, Coosje van Bruggen quoted Braque in the film, " ... [we] spoke with each other nearly in code... if you listen to our talks, you wouldn't understand it.  It was only understandable for the two of us.  And in retrospect, we have nothing to say - it all went into our paintings."

Braque and Picasso both had a similar style in the era of Cubism.  The images were essentially flat, but were able to tell the story of a simple concept and an incredibly complex format.

Perhaps most importantly, was the relationship between technology and art.  Motion pictures became their own art form during the early 1900's.  Instead of just recording images and events, they were manipulated through variances in speed and position, even tinting (before colorized film was possible).  Once the technology became easier to use,  films were developed into stories for pure, visual entertainment, much like the paintings of the past.  There was a contrast between some paintings by Picasso & Braque vs. film.  Where films were viewed as popular, detailed records, the Cubism paintings of the time were often seen as 'unpleasant' and even though they appeared to be unstructured, this film pointed out that the style showed the history of art completely restructured.

As for my relationship with Wi-Fi, I continue to resent it.  I suppose it's my own fault for becoming so dependent on it, but 3 hours to watch a constantly buffering, 1 hour film is a bit absurd.  But, I am not afraid of commitment.  I will just have to work harder on my skills of patience, I suppose.

I wonder if there is a support group for those in similar technological relationships...

Lesson 5 - Lecture

Dear Mr. Peck,

I just wanted to say "I hear ya!"  When it comes to learning history vs. learning art, I, too find myself wanting to delve deeper into one of the studies -  often propelled by a discovery in the other.

Watching your lecture yesterday, I was quite intrigued with the story you provided about the Nazis invading Paris, only to find the majority of the artwork in Louvre had been removed.  I found myself 'Googling' the event and literally getting lost in the Internet Vortex.   According to articles that I read,  many of the paintings were transported into hiding in the French countryside.  More than 3,600  pieces (including the Mona Lisa) were hastily evacuated!  Only those too large to move (such as heavy sculptures) didn't make it onto the convoy of trucks for removal.

The Jeu de Paume Museum nearby was not as prepared.  The Nazis stole all of the artwork within that museum, many pieces going to Nazi's officials for their private collections.  Luckily, a museum curator (who apparently served as a double agent) was able to later retrieve much of the art after the war ended.  The Germans did put art back into the Louvre during the occupation of France,  most of it stolen from wealthy Jewish families.  The events that occurred just strengthen the fact that these works of arts were priceless treasures.

I am afraid this 'need to learn more' takes place more often than I'd like to admit.  I am a huge fan of the history channel, particularly the show "Pawn Stars".  Whenever the owners get a painting or sketch in the store, I find myself on 'Google', once again,  trying to find out more of the back story of the featured artist.  I have been known to get lost in the aforementioned Internet Vortex for hours, well after I should have gone to bed for a good night's sleep for work the next morning.

For the next few weeks, I need to curb my enthusiasm a bit, as my schoolwork beckons.  I am pleased that part of my work requires me to contemplate such statements you recently made in the lecture, such as,  "What is art?", "What isn't art?", and "Why is it that art is always being impacted by revolution?"

"I hear ya", Mr. Peck and I appreciate the opportunity to learn new things such as these every day.

Sincerely,

- Kristie

Lesson 4 - Bugler - Seurat

Admittedly, I was a bit surprised to discover this film was essentially about just one painting.  More surprising was that Seurat's  masterpiece is hanging in the Art Institute of Chicago.  I can't wait for the 'final exam' trip!

The questions that accompany Seurat's "A Sunday on LaGrande Jatte, 1884" have apparently have kept art historians on their toes for the past century.  As narrator Samuel West offers, "the closer you look, the more mysterious it becomes".  From the pointillism style Seurat created with millions of tiny dots and brush strokes to the possible meanings behind the subjects on the canvas, this painting certainly deserved the exclusivity of the entire film to ponder it's mystery.

I found it considerably entertaining that many people have found an overwhelming amount of sexual connotations within the enormous 11 x 7' framed work.  From the location's history of prostitution activity, to the significance of the monkey (as the word was used as 19th century french slang to describe the world's oldest profession), to the woman with the fishing pole, possibly 'fishing' for business.  Without a doubt, sex sells.  So, once someone had discovered this symbolism (whether intentional or not), it surely got people talking.

Perhaps most interesting was the fact that pop culture has, and continues to imitate Seurat's painting.  Being that imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, I am sure that those who have recreated the image do so with great affection.  The film provided several examples, which encouraged me to delve a little deeper.  There are more than a thousand images on google
to be found when I performed a search for these parodies.

And people continue to contemplate the painting's mystery because of it's irony.  West couldn't have put it better when he said, " 'A Sunday on LaGrande Jatte' is a picture of paradoxes.  It depicts leisure, yet it's creation was months of hard work.  It documents a particular moment in time, but strives for classical permanence.  It's extremely familiar to us today, yet it's meaning remains elusive."

I truly look forward to drawing my own conclusions when I see the painting for myself.

Lesson 4 - Schama - Van Gogh

Vincent Van Gogh is surely the epitome of a tortured artist.  His paintings of sunflowers, stars and fields of wheat were not only a way to capture a physical landscape, but a way of expressing the landscape of his own mind.  A mind which was worn from epileptic fits, depression, anxiety, and frustration - but also with intelligent theories, creative visions and a quest for religious salvation.  Was he crazy?  Or was his mind just zealously full?

I found it quite interesting that Van Gogh didn't begin painting until he was 30 years old.  Even without formal training, he was able to convey strong emotions in his impressionist style works.  I also found it interesting that 

I also liked the way the story was told by Schama, using the actor to portay Van Gogh, and delivering his message through the words of the actual letters he wrote to his younger brother, Theo.  This was a unique take on film making, and a good introduction into the wild mind of the artist.

Theo financially supported his brother through the years, as he traveled from his homeland of Holland, to London, Belgium and France.  In return, he would send his brother, who was an art dealer, paintings to be sold.  Unfortunately,  no one found his paintings appealing enough to purchase in the beginning. 

 His early works, such as 'The Potato Eaters', were indeed 'murky' in their colors and thick brush strokes, but they still represented strong feelings.  The dark, thick colors may have dissuaded art collectors, who were looking to display classic beauty, rather than realistic, peasant filled scenes.

When Van Gogh made his way to France, he discovered (and became addicted to) color.  Perhaps it was the journey, or the new location itself, but as Schama described, "like the sunflowers, Vincent turns his face into the nourishing light".  After eventually learning the trade of impressionist painting, but managing to maintain his own style, Van Gogh played with opposite colors in a way that made them complement each other.  Blues and yellows began to boldly make his works became alive and aggressive, while reds and greens played against each other to portray contrasts in art versus contrasts in life.

I was a bit confused in regards to Van Gogh's relationship with artist Paul Gogan, but then again, Van Gogh was a bit of a confused fellow, as well,   From what I gathered, Van Gogh had wanted Gogan to join him when he resided in Provence to create an artist retreat.  This creative commune would allow them a chance to combine forces to create magnificent works of art from both of their styles fused together.  However, the relationship did not work out as either had hoped.  Although Van Gogh created numerous new paintings (often daily!), it didn't seem that Gogan took him or his work seriously.  Their philosophies on art were just too different.

I imagine it was difficult to take Van Gogh seriously when he did things like slice off a piece of his earlobe and present it to a prostitute as a gift (I suppose sunflowers would have certainly been less memorable).  But I also can only imagine what was going in his own mind, as he struggled to create paintings to ward off his insanity.

Ultimately taking his own life, it seems Van Gogh lost his battle with his own mind.  But he has succeeded in his quest to touch people deeply with his messages.  And because we understand it on such a soulful level, I guess that means we're all a little crazy, too. 

Lesson 4 - Collings - Impressionism

Imagine if you will, a 19th century Chili Cook-Off in the French countryside, with four contributors that will change the way chili is portrayed for centuries to come.  Now, for the story's sake, let's say the French have always enjoyed "classic" chili, with predictable, familiar ingredients at an establishment we'll call, the Salon Bistro.

Four creative chefs from the surrounding areas have attempted to submit their recipes for the public to enjoy at the Salon Bistro.  However, the establishment continues to reject the new chefs' submissions year after year.

So, the chefs, Monsieurs Courbet, Manet, Monet and Cezanne, decide to create their own cook-off to show the people that another type of chili can exist.  And the feelings that the new chili conveys are sensual and mouth watering, even if they are only composed of simple ingredients.

Monsieur Courbet was a chef who created recipes with what he knew.  From first glance, his chili appeared fairly ordinary.  The edges around the pot he cooked in were often overcooked and rough appearing, but this only added to the taste.  His variety of earthy spices, natural beans and meat left a sensual taste on the tongue.  Unfortunately, his addition of alcohol to the chili increased quite excessively as his cooking progressed.  Matthew Collings reported that critics of Courbet's chili expressed, "the audience at the time thought it was terrible and obscure, and just a bloated homage to himself.  But to history, it's like a sign saying 'This Way, Moderns".

Monsieur Manet brought color in as the main focus of his chili.  He knew that this time in Paris during the Industrial Revolution was one of consumerism, and that the people who were to try his chili wanted to be entertained.  Although the colors of his creation were appealing and took center stage, some of his ingredients looked deliberately disconnected.  Not to mention, Manet's main consumers were prostitutes and he wasn't shy about letting people know that these business woman were big fans of his cooking.  The public had a difficult time swallowing his food, because, as Collings said, "...you don't mention prostitution, you cover it up with prudity".

And then there was Monsieur Monet, who began by created a more formal chili for the people.  His aesthetically pleasing, artistic chili concoctions had classic ingredients, but sometimes surprised people with a pop of color, often from poppy flowers.  "Formal in art context doesn't mean being polite or wearing smart clothes.  It means visual power, visual noticability", reports Collings.  The final product was more watery than his fellow chefs, but the way he captured light on the reflection of the soupy chili could definitely catch your eye.  He did all of his cooking almost exclusively outdoors, inspired by nature, as well as Monsieurs Corbet and Manet.  Sadly, the French did not immediately care for Monet's meals.  Ironically, it was the American audience that first found Monet's chili so appealing.  So much so, that they requested several vats be created just for certain American billionaires.  Monet was lucky to be very well paid for his light and fluid chili creations.

Finally, Monsieur Cezanne created submissions for the big Chili Cook-Off.  He was a shy fellow with a difficult personality.  Cezanne's chili conveyed a unique taste because of it's carefully ordered contents.  With his tomatoes and his spices, he was able to show that chili could be both a solid meal and a fluid soup of a starter.  However, some recipients of his chili complained because the chili was always served on angled plates, distorting the view of the food and creating thick contours to the chili.  Luckily the impressions his chili left "liberated him from his own inner storms.  In art, he could control his emotions - in life, he couldn't", states Collings.

All of the chefs took big risks with their 'impressionist' chili creations.  And although the flavors didn't catch on right away,  the chili that these four 'artists' created inspired many others, and is, perhaps, the most recognizable style of cooking chili in these modern times.  Of course, people took their time in fully appreciating what the chili had to offer.  At first, the spoonfuls may create some digestive upset.  But in the end, the vision created leaves one feeling warm and fulfilled.