Corpsey

bandz ahoy
I'm sharing the wealth. Maximum one a day. Can I keep it up? Who knows?

July 5th 2019

main-image


An Arctic Summer: Boring Through the Pack in Melville Bay,1871
William Bradford American


In 1861 the marine painter William Bradford made the first of his eight expeditions to the Arctic. This painting, based on photographs and sketches produced during his final trip, in 1869, shows the artist’s steamer, Panther, plying its way through the summer ice along the northern coast of Greenland. Panther was one of numerous vessels engaged in the search for the Northwest Passage between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. According to Bradford’s journal, the ship’s crew had decided to hunt the polar bear seen in the foreground, “anxious to possess so fine a skin,” but the bear made a parting glance over its shoulder before heading for the water, managing to escape its pursuers.
 
Last edited:

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
July 6th/7th

DP-416-001.jpg


Marie Joséphine Charlotte du Val d'Ognes (1786–1868),1801
Marie Denise Villers French


Once ascribed to Jacques Louis David, this engaging image of a young woman artist in a white dress is attributed to Marie Denise Villers. Although she is little known today, Villers was a gifted pupil of Anne Louis Girodet-Trioson (1767–1824), and, if the present portrait is by her, it was exhibited in the Paris Salon of 1801.

Some interesting extra material around its shifting critical fortunes (when it was discovered that it wasn't by the great JLDavid but probably by an obscure FEMALE painter...

The work depicts a woman drawing in front of a broken window. Behind the woman, a couple stand on a parapet.[2] In the Concise Dictionary of Women Artists (2001), Valerie Mainz describes the broken window as a "tour de force of the painter's art distinguishing, in its trompe-l'oeil effect, the view of the scene outside as to be seen as only partly through glass."[5] The room depicted in the painting is actually a gallery of the Louvre, as discovered by art historian, Anne Higonnet.[7][8]

During the time when the picture was presumed to be David's, it was assumed that the woman in the painting was his student, drawing him as he painted her.[9] Andre Maurois said that it was "a perfect picture, unforgettable."[2] Critical response to the work prior to attributing the work to Charpentier was often positive.[10][11]

After Sterling admitted the picture may not be David's, he called it a "merciless portrait of an intelligent, homely woman."[2] He also felt that the anatomy of the portrait was incorrect.[5] Other critics suddenly found faults in the portrait, now that it was no longer considered a David and ascribed to Charpentier instead.[10][8] James Laver wrote of the painting in 1964, "Although the painting is extremely attractive as a period piece, there are certain weaknesses of which a painter of David's calibre would not have been guilty."[11]

In a more modern take, Germaine Greer wrote that the picture "does not seek to charm, nor does it seek to portray the sexual vitality of its sitter" and felt that it was a feminist painting in nature.[2] Other feminist critics began to ascribe a feminine aspect to the painting.[12]
 
Last edited:

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
July 9th

sf24-144-7s1.jpg


Miraculous Draught of Fishes,early 20th century (original dated early 6th century)
Byzantine


Frustrating that they don't give the backstory on this - a skilled fake?

Good though, innit, surely even Luke won't hate this one
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Bit of a shit day today, sorry my adoring fans!

restricted


Headdress (Mpaan)
KUBA PEOPLES, Democractic Republic of the Congo, 19th-20th Century
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Good one today - GOD BLESS (SOUTH) AMERICA!

July 11th

DT78.jpg


Heart of the Andes,1859
Frederic Edwin Church American


This picture was inspired by Church's second trip to South America in the spring of 1857. Church sketched prolifically throughout his nine weeks travel in Ecuador, and many extant watercolors and drawings contain elements found in this work. The picture was publicly unveiled in New York at Lyrique Hall, 756 Broadway, on April 27, 1859. Subsequently moved to the gallery of the Tenth Street Studio Building, it was lit by gas jets concealed behind silver reflectors in a darkened chamber. The work caused a sensation, and twelve to thirteen thousand people paid twenty-five cents apiece to file by it each month. The picture was also shown in London, where it was greatly admired as well.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
Good one today - GOD BLESS (SOUTH) AMERICA!

July 11th

DT78.jpg


Heart of the Andes,1859
Frederic Edwin Church American


This picture was inspired by Church's second trip to South America in the spring of 1857. Church sketched prolifically throughout his nine weeks travel in Ecuador, and many extant watercolors and drawings contain elements found in this work. The picture was publicly unveiled in New York at Lyrique Hall, 756 Broadway, on April 27, 1859. Subsequently moved to the gallery of the Tenth Street Studio Building, it was lit by gas jets concealed behind silver reflectors in a darkened chamber. The work caused a sensation, and twelve to thirteen thousand people paid twenty-five cents apiece to file by it each month. The picture was also shown in London, where it was greatly admired as well.

I went to an exhibition of the American Landscape painters at the Tate in 2002 and it was (obviously) full of stuff like this, with some of Church's most famous paintings. They were impressive but also kitsch; a lot of the landscapes weren't actually real, they were composites or exaggerations of the vast habitats they were encountering. They thought they'd found paradise and wanted to render that impression.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
What do you mean by kitsch? Do you mean you were put off by the artificiality you could see? (The lighting on those trunks in the foreground, e.g. - and the SIZE of them!)

Staring at this one has got me wanting to play Red Dead Redemption again.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
What the foreground reminds me of is pre-raphaelite painting - presumably some advancement in brush technology (lol) meant that they could paint in this microscopically detailed way that made photorealism (more like hyperrealism) possible. And actually that leads to a sort of overdose of detail, and a sort of unreality.
 

luka

Well-known member
What do you mean by kitsch? Do you mean you were put off by the artificiality you could see? (The lighting on those trunks in the foreground, e.g. - and the SIZE of them!)

Staring at this one has got me wanting to play Red Dead Redemption again.

You've got a blind spot corpse. A lot of people here share it. You can't recognise kitsch, particularly in the visual arts. Craner has a taste for kitsch but he knows it's kitsch, in the way you might have a taste for junk food knowing full well it's junk.
 

craner

Beast of Burden
They are kitsch because they are essentially tasteless, garish, grandiose, overstuffed fantasy landscapes; this is not to say they aren't impressive, because the best of them are. They are not far from Turner in some essentials but are in others, and they are certainly a lot better than the ghastly Pre-Raphaelites.
 
Top