Posted in Art and Artists, Coursework, Part 2, Research & Reflection

Research Point: Still life genre

Researching still life as a genre is a very wide brief, and so I started with a very wide net. I search for the term on wikiart, at the Tate Modern and V&A. The breadth of the collection of resultant images can be considered by comparing the featured image by CARAVAGGIO with one by Mondarian.

Still Life with Gingerpot 2, by Piet Mondrian
Still Life with Gingerpot 2, by Piet Mondrian, from https://www.wikiart.org/en/piet-mondrian/still-life-with-gingerpot-2-1912

This only gets all the more interesting if you add Picasso and Morandi into the list.

Still Life by Giorgio Morandi
Still Life by Giorgio Morandi, from https://www.wikiart.org/en/giorgio-morandi/still-life-1919
Pablo Picasso, Nature Morte (Still Life), 1960
Pablo Picasso, Nature Morte (Still Life), 1960, from https://www.masterworksfineart.com/artists/pablo-picasso/aquatint/nature-morte-still-life-1960/id/W-5396

So how should all this be considered? There are many similarities between these pieces of work, but they have completely different looks and feel. (c.f. Visual Language.) My next step was a visit to wikipedia to see how it structures its view of the genre. This provides a time-based view of the genre, discussing a series of periods in the depiction of still life artwork. I’m not going to try to reproduce that discussion in these notes, as there seems little value in doing so. It is better covered elsewhere than I could ever hope to do here.

What struck me are that there are different dimensions, or lenses, to consider this work on:

  • How realistic or stylised is it and why?
  • Why did the artist create the work?
  • Who was it created for, and what is there interest in it?

 

Realism

Still life, pitcher and fruit Paul Cezanne
Still life, pitcher and fruit, Paul Cezanne from https://www.wikiart.org/en/paul-cezanne/still-life-pitcher-and-fruit-1894

Caravaggio, and to a degree Morandi, might both be described as creating realistic works. They used a different approach and focus, but both has believable three dimensional forms. The work of Caravaggio is highly realistic, and realism seems to have dominated the still life genre from the middle ages through to the 19th Century. It is clear however, that Roman art also included a selection of still life work that can be described as realistic – as illustrated by the painting from Pompeii on Wikipedia. This work may be laced with deep symbolism, but the items in the images are clearly recognisable and (presumably) are painted to look as closely as possible to the real thing – or better.  By the time of the Academies this approach had become highly regimented and controlled.

In modern and contemporary work, however, this changes.  The Impressionists started to diverge from the Academies and presented a much more personalised style. This was followed by a series of styles and approaches which valued stylised impressions over realistic ones.  Morandi’s work looks realistic, for example, but it’s incorrect to assume that this is because he is following the realistic practices of the Academies.  The work of Mondrian and Picasso borders on the Abstract.

Artistic motivation

Glass bowl of fruit and vases. Roman wall painting in Pompeii (around 70 AD), Naples National Archaeological Museum, Naples, Italy
Glass bowl of fruit and vases. Roman wall painting in Pompeii (around 70 AD), Naples National Archaeological Museum, Naples, Italy from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Still_life#/media/File:Pompejanischer_Maler_um_70_001.jpg

Highly realistic paintings have been popular since Greek and Roman times. This, many painters are fuelled by a ready market for their works whatever the school or tradition they are working in. In this car the content and influences on the work would follow the styles and tastes of the time – that is follow what the Market demands. In observing this I’m not denigrating the work, just recognising that there is a Commercial element to much artwork.

The drivers behind less realistic still life works may still be Commercially driven, but the modern works are often much less accessible and so don’t fit the ready market of the realistic works. I have previously speculated  that this more away from highly realistic images might be driven by the relative ease of creating realism with the advent of photography. Whatever the reason more interpretive work started to take the ascendance over time. A still life is, by definition, representational but that doesn’t limit the range of work very much. The artist is now trying to create something other than the most realistic make that they can.

So what are these artists trying to do? The answer varies significantly by school and artist, but key answers Includes:

Audience

Hans Memling (1430–1494), Vase of Flowers (1480)
Hans Memling (1430–1494), Vase of Flowers (1480), from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Still_life#/media/File:Hans_Memling_076.jpg

It has already been mentioned that still life paintings have been popular subjects for artists since antiquity because of a ready market. This naturally leads to consideration of who this market actually was. The early artworks were mostly purchased by, or artists had patrons of, major figures of the state or church. The third major category in history and has gained ascendance more recently  are the commercial /capitalist figures. The different figures of money and power were trying to decorate their homes and palaces in ways to show their wealth, status, power and tastes. The still life genre has been particularly good for this over time – as it can show opulence, plenty and exotic images very powerfully and accessibly. The selection of items and placement can also be rich with religious and social symbolism.

The Perfect Hostess Rebecca Scott, 2006
The Perfect Hostess, Rebecca Scott, 2006 from https://www.theguardian.com/culture/gallery/2013/oct/19/10-best-contemporary-still-lifes

In contemporary art the audience is often the general public, as the age of mass production and consumerism makes the work of artists much more accessible. This has had negative as well as inspirational influences on art, as the ability to share and find images of art works could be argued to destroy the value of unique art. As artists harness this for their own benefit, however, it provides a new audience for still life artwork. This is evident in a recent Guardian article on the best in contemporary still life art. (https://www.theguardian.com/culture/gallery/2013/oct/19/10-best-contemporary-still-lifes) Many of these show the products of mass market consumerism, but their audience is also a particular segmented demographic within the general public. The audience may be much larger in terms of numbers of people than previously, but in many ways the interests of that audience are the same – to decorate their homes (or their social presence), show their tastes and obtain a slice of the exotic.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s