Fauvism (Contextual Studies)
One of the shorter art movements we've looked at, Fauvism was only around for a few years, between 1904 and 1910. Spearheaded by two French artists; Fauvism would push the ideals of Impressionism and Post Impressionism to their limits. With a strong focus on colour, Fauvism would result in many vibrant and striking works. These artists, known as the Fauves (French for "Wild Beasts") sought to express themselves through painterly technique, above naturalistic and realistic themes. Though a number of artists would attempt Fauvism, few would stick with it, many moving on to different themes and styles. Most notably Georges Braque, would soon join Picasso to work on Cubism.
Along with the vibrant and unnaturalistic colours, Fauvism focused heavily on painterly methods and techniques. Vivid and expressive brushstrokes started the movement, though many working under it's banner would take on George Seurat's Pointillism, pushing the boundaries further and further, almost to the point of divisionism.
Henri Matisse is the first of the two main artists most consider responsible for Fauvism. Born in France 1869, Matisse worked on a great deal of subjects. His early work comprises mostly of still life art before moving onto portraiture and landscapes. His later work would become more focused on the human body and how it moves. This painting, Woman with a Hat from 1905 is one of the best examples of early Fauvism. The colours used are not representative of his subject, but seem to almost parody them. Overly saturated and vibrant, they bring the image a high level of intensity, yet still clearly convey the shape and form of the subject.
Less toits de Collioure which is also from 1905 is another of Matisse's paintings. Whilst maintaining the vibrant and unnatural colour choice, Matisse's almost pointillism approach is more apparent in this image. His brushstrokes are more systematic, opting to use light repeating strokes to create texture on certain parts of the landscape. The lack of form creates a surprising level of depth and texture to the image.
%2C_oil_on_canvas%2C_82_x_101_cm%2C_Pushkin_Museum%2C_Moscow._Exhibited_at_the_1905_Salon_d'Automne.jpg)
Andre Derain was the other main driving force of Fauvism, along with Matisse. The two artists shared a very similar approach to the subject, opting for the same colour palette in a lot of instances. Non-naturalistic colours often ones that complimented and contrasted with each other. Blues and oranges were a common choice in a lot of their work. The Drying Sails from 1905 utilises this same colour choice, most all colours able to be broken down to either a blue or an orange. Unlike Matisse, Derain's colours seem a lot more saturated in places. More so than Matisse, Derain's experiments with pointillisim are noticeably more pronounced, really pushing the divide between strokes to create tones and light.
During his travels, Derain spent some time in London, painting several landmarks and iconic scenery. The above, Charing Cross Bridge, London, is one of these images. Painted in 1906, Derain experiments with a more varied and more saturated palette. Greens and yellows are added. He continues to use the fractured dvisionism techniques to create certain effects, mostly light and ripples on the water. Derain manages to really capture the mood of a location with his landscapes, despite the clearly diverse and inaccurate colour choices. They seem to amplify the tone of a location rather than subtract from it. It's a very interesting look into colours and how they work to change an audiences perception.
Fauvism is not what I personally consider to be a major stop on the route of art history, but it is a notable one. The colour choices are almost abstract, and go further into the exploitation of Impressionist ideals than Post Impressionism dared to. I would liked to have seen some more, deeper experiments into the movement, but at the same time, I feel like it hit it's limitations fairly quickly. Most painters who dabbled in Fauvism only did it for a short while, before continuing on to a new method of working. I feel like there are a lot of similarities with Fauvism and some of Van Gogh's work, but although Fauvism is more vibrant and striking, it lacks the same emotional response.
Along with the vibrant and unnaturalistic colours, Fauvism focused heavily on painterly methods and techniques. Vivid and expressive brushstrokes started the movement, though many working under it's banner would take on George Seurat's Pointillism, pushing the boundaries further and further, almost to the point of divisionism.
Henri Matisse is the first of the two main artists most consider responsible for Fauvism. Born in France 1869, Matisse worked on a great deal of subjects. His early work comprises mostly of still life art before moving onto portraiture and landscapes. His later work would become more focused on the human body and how it moves. This painting, Woman with a Hat from 1905 is one of the best examples of early Fauvism. The colours used are not representative of his subject, but seem to almost parody them. Overly saturated and vibrant, they bring the image a high level of intensity, yet still clearly convey the shape and form of the subject.
Less toits de Collioure which is also from 1905 is another of Matisse's paintings. Whilst maintaining the vibrant and unnatural colour choice, Matisse's almost pointillism approach is more apparent in this image. His brushstrokes are more systematic, opting to use light repeating strokes to create texture on certain parts of the landscape. The lack of form creates a surprising level of depth and texture to the image.
Andre Derain was the other main driving force of Fauvism, along with Matisse. The two artists shared a very similar approach to the subject, opting for the same colour palette in a lot of instances. Non-naturalistic colours often ones that complimented and contrasted with each other. Blues and oranges were a common choice in a lot of their work. The Drying Sails from 1905 utilises this same colour choice, most all colours able to be broken down to either a blue or an orange. Unlike Matisse, Derain's colours seem a lot more saturated in places. More so than Matisse, Derain's experiments with pointillisim are noticeably more pronounced, really pushing the divide between strokes to create tones and light.
During his travels, Derain spent some time in London, painting several landmarks and iconic scenery. The above, Charing Cross Bridge, London, is one of these images. Painted in 1906, Derain experiments with a more varied and more saturated palette. Greens and yellows are added. He continues to use the fractured dvisionism techniques to create certain effects, mostly light and ripples on the water. Derain manages to really capture the mood of a location with his landscapes, despite the clearly diverse and inaccurate colour choices. They seem to amplify the tone of a location rather than subtract from it. It's a very interesting look into colours and how they work to change an audiences perception.
Fauvism is not what I personally consider to be a major stop on the route of art history, but it is a notable one. The colour choices are almost abstract, and go further into the exploitation of Impressionist ideals than Post Impressionism dared to. I would liked to have seen some more, deeper experiments into the movement, but at the same time, I feel like it hit it's limitations fairly quickly. Most painters who dabbled in Fauvism only did it for a short while, before continuing on to a new method of working. I feel like there are a lot of similarities with Fauvism and some of Van Gogh's work, but although Fauvism is more vibrant and striking, it lacks the same emotional response.
Practical Work
I didn't want to spend too much time with Fauvism. I feel the techniques and styles used are very similar in ideology and methods to Post Impressionism. The colour choices are extreme and effective, but they didn't encourage an enthusiastic response from me. As such, I coped a small segment of Derain's The Pool of London from 1906.
Please not that the image does not show the true colours, the reds and oranges are much more vibrant in person. I'm still not too used to painting, and my application is not great. Regardless, seeing such vibrant and contrasting colours that bump into each other like this creates a very striking style. I definitely appreciate the colours a lot more for having worked on them. I can't help but feel I'd have a greater appreciation for Fauvism if I'd seen some of these works in person.
Comments
Post a Comment