Beauty and Bocklin

This pic is linked to the Amazon book listing. It may be worth noting that she has quite a few classically styled nude photos of herself in the book. I think they’re lovely, but you may not be cool with that. I see she also has a book on flowers!!! Nice!!!

I was invited to create a piece for an upcoming show entitled “Beauty”. An idea that’s very open to personal interpretation of course, the only real guidance for our work beyond that is that it be uplifting. We’ve all come through (or will at some point) a shadow, a difficult path, and this collection of works is intended to be an encouragement to all who see it.

Beauty is such an immense concept to explore!

I was surprised to find how many emotions and opinions I already held on the subject without realizing it. My particular art identity (I guess you could call it) has always had a lot to do with beauty.

What are some words and feelings that instantly come to mind when you think of beauty?

To me, beauty is very much a formal, regal concept - full of grace and balance, it treads on Plato’s “realm of the forms” sacred grounds. It’s a glimpse of Heaven, an other-worldly sense of harmony that we cannot know here in our world where everything strong overtakes, even eats, the weak. (Sorry, got a bit serious there)

As humans we aren’t always in the mood for beauty, and that’s totally a valid state of mind. It doesn’t mean beauty is no more. I think Beauty meets us in our deepest moments… it folds us entirely, including our pain and want, in its gentle arms and rocks us back and forth as a loving mother might.

How is this similar or different from your idea of Beauty?

A book sprang instantly to mind, “An American in Provence" - Art, Life and Photography” by Jamie Beck. If the French countryside is your idea of the bella vita, do find it in your local bookstore and have a look. I bought a copy. Here’s mine.

Paintings by the artist Arnold Bocklin also popped into my head. I think I’m making a modified copy of one of his paintings for the exhibit, because there is one image in particular that has elements that just sing of perfection to me… “The Island of Life” (not shown here).

I have some special associations with the artist, too, which makes his work more personal for me.

First, I had never heard of him until my artist friend Clemens Fuchs (Austria) introduced me to him and pointed out Bockin’s work. I promptly bought a little Bocklin paperback book.

Secondly, Bocklin lived and worked in Florence. His very famous works on the “Island of the Dead” theme are based on the “beautiful” English Cemetery just north of the center of Florence (interestingly, he is buried in Florence, but on the Altrarno side out past the Boboli Gardens). I lived a few blocks from it (The English Cemetery) and passed it at least twice a day on foot or bicycle coming and going from town and the studio.

Island of the Dead (3rd version) by Bocklin

Finally, Bocklin died in Fiesole, just above Florence, after having lived there for many years. A place most enchanting! I have many happy memories of hours spent there, too, with my family. It’s a place truly magical, truly beautiful!

Here are some brief facts about Arnold Bocklin, followed by some images. He may be too strange for some of you- LOL! He also doesn’t show much diversity (being an old white guy), so take his work in the context of his time.

Arnold Böcklin was a Swiss painter born in Basel on October 16, 1827. He is considered one of the most important artists of Symbolism, a movement that sought to express through art the subjective and emotional aspects of the human experience. Böcklin's works were characterized by their dreamlike quality, the use of mythological motifs and a fascination with death and the afterlife.

Böcklin began his artistic training at the Düsseldorf Academy in Germany in 1845. He studied under the landscape painter Johann Wilhelm Schirmer and the history painter Karl Ferdinand Sohn. In 1853, he moved to Paris, where he studied with the history painter Franz Winterhalter. During this time, he was influenced by the Romanticism movement and the work of the French painter Eugène Delacroix.

Böcklin's work was also influenced by his travels to Italy and Greece, where he was inspired by classical mythology and the ancient ruins. He created a series of paintings called "Island of the Dead", which depicted a desolate island covered with mist and populated by ghostly figures. 

Böcklin's art was highly influential in the Symbolist movement, which emerged in the late 19th century. Symbolism sought to express the inner, emotional world of the individual through art, and Böcklin's work was a perfect fit for this philosophy. His paintings were filled with mysterious, dreamlike imagery that often included mythological figures and supernatural creatures.

Böcklin's influence extended beyond the Symbolist movement, and his work was also admired by the Surrealists and the Expressionists. His use of rich, dark colors and the intricate, detailed compositions were a source of inspiration for many artists in the 20th century.

Arnold Böcklin died on January 16, 1901, in Fiesole, Italy. His legacy continues to live on, as his work remains an important part of the Symbolist movement and continues to inspire artists around the world. His contributions to the world of art cannot be overstated, as he was one of the most innovative and influential painters of his time.

Flora, Scattering Flowers by Bocklin

Vita Somnium Breve (The brevity of life) by Bocklin

“Summer Day” by Arnold Bocklin (public domain)

Die Lebensinsel- Isle of Life by Arnold Bocklin

Thoughts on the Cezanne Exhibit (Chicago 2022)

Bay of Marsaille from L’Esaque by Cezanne

I don't count Cezanne amongst my top favorite painters, but I saw a landscape-focused show in Florence, Italy years ago and was surprisingly moved by it. The memory of that exhibit made me determinded to get to this show in Chicago of a wider range of his works, including his bathers and still lifes. After attending two, I can say that the viewing experience in Italy may have added to my pleasure. It was not very busy the day I was there. I could get really close to the art and was able to really feel the lightness. I remember being moved to tears. It was wonderful that didn’t feel the breath of someone queued behind me in a hurry for their one minute maximum turn with a painting. As someone who feels guilty inconveniencing others, I felt very rushed in Chicago.

The Opening Piece of the Cezanne Rooms at the Art Institute of Chicago! I like his landscapes best of all so this I felt was a stunning beginning. This show was very busy!

Unless an artist violates all my sensibilities, it's hard for me not to delight in seeing a body of work together. It gives me kind of a shivery sense of another artist’s visual perceptions, their favorite places and their contemporaries. Sometimes I boldly wonder how my work would look in a show with art as well lit and as well framed as these top calibre exhibitions…. Lighting can really upgrade art! Just saying…

https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/paul-cezanne-bathers-les-grandes-baigneuses

As a painter myself, I watch scholarly reviews with a somewhat skeptical eye. I feel like some art historians like to look at artist's work as though everything, even technical misteps, were intentional and I don't think that's true. I watched an excellent YouTube on Cezanne's (big blue) Bathers on loan to the show from The National Gallery in London, and I find it interesting at how far experts will go in reading into pieces, suggesting it took years for Cezanne to paint it because his emotions, trail-blazing skills, and high concepts were so…. profound (pronouce in a breathy whisper, please), and not because he struggled with getting his concept to be passably pleasing. I also sort of roll my eyes at the Cezanne quote about how he felt so deeply. I would hazard a guess that most creatives feel this way. It doesn’t mean that his art come from deeper in his heart than did others’. Not trying to be mean or tout my ignorance here, it’s just that as much as I enjoy the art as human, sometimes naive, sometimes brilliant, we’re not dealing with gods, here (or are we?).

My blunt opinion is that Cezanne struggled for grace in his figures. His academic figures were laboured and stiff and as a student of a rigorous French Academic tradtion myself, I know that he would have worked on those student pieces for many hours and would have had critiques and corrections suggested. They still weren’t anything to write home about. To me, his only figure with true musicality to it, true grace in the forms is this one, “Scipio” which was in Claude Monet’s collection.

Scipio by Cezanne from my onw photo 2022 Chicago- This is by far my favorite portrait or figure of his.

It didn’t escape my notice that when Cezanne needed money, his art dealer suggested he make and sell prints of some nude male bathers. They sold well and may have encouraged him to keep going with the bathing series. Ya know, struggling artist and all that.

image of male bathers framed painting by Paul Cezanne

Bathers by Cezanne

I’ll be making a video on composition and style and I’ll talk about Cezanne’s work there, but for now let me say that after seeing the range of his work, I still prefer his landcapes to all other subjects. My second favorite of his would be the still lifes. Maybe not too shocking of a revelation.

stoneware pitcher by cezanne photo by thimgan hayden chicago

Stoneware Pitcher by Cezanne

I enjoy the drama of his still life works. To me, it looks like he knew he was master of space and atmosphere when he approached his interior set ups, very much like a competent stage director. His use of blues and deep yellows, common in all his work, really shines in these subjects. Don’t let it pass you by that the two colors he seemed to use most were warm cyan blues, grays, yellow ochres and rosey rusts. These exact colors are widely used in movie color palettes. More on the color theories later (in the coming video).

screenshot from: https://digitalsynopsis.com/design/cinema-palettes-famous-movie-colors/

All in all, I think that Cezanne was at his best with space and atmosphere (composition), and if he was sore that his realism and sense of mass never reached the level that he might have originally hoped, he was likely pleased with the degree of fame and appreciation he earned in his lifetime. HIs work was collected by other artists (like Claude Monet) whose approval meant something as the new art, Impressionism established a path for a broader appreciation of what was meant by “good art”.

And now his work I like best…. the landscapes. His landscapes have a relaxed, airiness to them. They feel less laboured than his other pieces. As a painter always trying to loosen up, I love it when I feel the mellow calm of the artist just playing around in the colors, as it were. Maybe that is not at all how he was while painting landscapes, but that’s how I feel when I look at them. I feel like they’re a nice balance between stylization and cheerful observation. I also enjoy the fact that many are what we might call unfinished. I like to think he got to that point and didn’t have any guilt put on him by other artists or academy saying, “Make that paint thicker” and “aren’t you going to finish that corner?”

three landscapes by cezanne from my photo at chicago art institute

Thanks for reading! I’m sure I missed getting some nuance just right in this post. It’s hard to explain that I do really like his paintings, yet have misgivings in attributing him with the same kind of godlike technique accolades that some give him.


watercolor by Paul Cezanne pic taken at Chicago Institute of Art

Man in a Blue Smock by Paul Cezanne

The artist’s father, reading. Hanging in the Art Institute of Chicago.