Friday, November 28, 2008

Baroque Art

like mannerism?
how about those intense religious experiences?
like the contorted pediments?
still think Gothic architecture is the bomb?

38 comments:

El Paco said...

I like the art itself - the paintings are very detailed and the artists seem to have mastered a lot of difficult techniques, but I still think it's a little boring. I mean, it's a little tedious to look at pretty much the same thing over and over again. I know they're not actually the same thing, but it all looks incredibly similar. It's a lot better than baroque music, though.

JP said...

I'm still not used to the deliberately exaggerated proportions of Mannerism art. After artists from other periods have spent so long trying to make their art as naturalistic as possible, the clumsy proportions still look like "mistakes" to me.

But I guess it's a good thing that Mannerism art finally takes the focus off of naturalism. Michelangelo's David is incredible in its life-like features, but art would be pretty boring if it were always created just to be as close to reality as possible.

Dean Elazab said...

I think that if art stayed naturalistic, then there would be no where else to progress, and that art would stop at photorealism.

stephen said...

I like the intensive usage of chiaroscuro, however, it seems to be a theme that is used too readily by various artists. I liked the Las Meninas painting in its creative perspective. I had never seen a painting in which you as the observer where in an optical illusion in which you were viewing the subjects of the painting as the people who were supposed to be painted.

ndepass said...

i think Carvaggio's (maybe spelled wrong) paintings are very cool, his detail is incredible. In his "doubting thomas" painting wear he is poking a finger into Jesus' wound almost looks like a photograph. the shading and shadows and details are amazing.

Aaron Nussdorf said...

I found the chiarosurro slightly taxing. However, the photorealism is incredible and awe-inspiring. Yet, for others like El Greco, one of his pieces seemed almost clumsy, though it might be more magnificent in reality.

bballinsupasta said...

i really like the chiaroscuro of the baroque artists. i feel that the subjects should be the most stressed objects in the painting. i do feel that the artists relied to readily on chiaroscuro and that they should attempt some backgrounds like in madonna on the rocks.

puddlewonderful said...

In some ways, I really like mannerism-- the realistic look of the painting, combined with the unnatural aspects taxes the mind and creates a different sort of illusion-- an illusion of believable alternate reality, with long people with long necks and disproportionate bodies. I like the revolutionary thought that motivated the movement, the defiance of the norm for the sake of something new, the pushing of old boundaries, the breaking of usual limits and reality.

Caravaggio is definitely my favorite paint of this unit so far. The chiaroscuro and intense photorealism give the paintings a sense of immediacy and really draw the viewer into the experience of the painting. Sometimes, though, if I extract myself from the compelling artwork, I find the chiaroscurro bothering because it doesn't fit the situation-- for example, how are Jesus and Thomas completely in the dark, and yet lit by such a bright light? But it's a very minor annoyance. But, as I said, the chiaroscurro and extreme realism (the accurate foreshortening and modeling and lighting), as well as the typical Baroque usage of a specific, intense moment, really involve the audience emotionally-- and I like that, I like being drawn into the situation and the art. It's even more Hellenistic than Renaissance art-- that's what's so attractive about it.

I however do not enjoy El Greco. I feel that the art is too sloppy, too stylized-- it's one thing to make realistic figures that have inaccurate proportions, or put them in strained positions, or unrealistic lighting. It's another thing to stylize them and make them sloppy... it just bothers me. It strays too far from classical/Renaissance values.

Dean Elazab said...

I think that the photorealism in these paintings show the height of the skill. El Greco might have tried to change this with his less realistic paintings, but the other artist did not catch on.

Caroline said...

I really liked the chiarroscuro in Caravaggio's paintings except sometimes it makes it hard to view because it's so dark. Also, I loved Las Meninas because of the complexity of the perspective.

Caroline said...

Also, how does one even go about painting himself painting a king and queen but actually painting a little princess and people of the court?

El Paco said...

Michelle said, "Blogger puddlewonderful said...

In some ways, I really like mannerism-- the realistic look of the painting, combined with the unnatural aspects taxes the mind and creates a different sort of illusion-- an illusion of believable alternate reality, with long people with long necks and disproportionate bodies. I like the revolutionary thought that motivated the movement, the defiance of the norm for the sake of something new, the pushing of old boundaries, the breaking of usual limits and reality.

Caravaggio is definitely my favorite paint of this unit so far. The chiaroscuro and intense photorealism give the paintings a sense of immediacy and really draw the viewer into the experience of the painting. Sometimes, though, if I extract myself from the compelling artwork, I find the chiaroscurro bothering because it doesn't fit the situation-- for example, how are Jesus and Thomas completely in the dark, and yet lit by such a bright light? But it's a very minor annoyance. But, as I said, the chiaroscurro and extreme realism (the accurate foreshortening and modeling and lighting), as well as the typical Baroque usage of a specific, intense moment, really involve the audience emotionally-- and I like that, I like being drawn into the situation and the art. It's even more Hellenistic than Renaissance art-- that's what's so attractive about it.

I however do not enjoy El Greco. I feel that the art is too sloppy, too stylized-- it's one thing to make realistic figures that have inaccurate proportions, or put them in strained positions, or unrealistic lighting. It's another thing to stylize them and make them sloppy... it just bothers me. It strays too far from classical/Renaissance values."

I strongly (dis)agree

tmichals said...

Today in class I was realizing that we no longer really have to comment often on great disproportion or the artist's lack of realism. The artwork has greatly improved and become highly innovative up to this time. From the use of light to the naturalism in the people, Baroque art shows this great transformation.

Mr. Plainview said...

Personally, I like The Burial of Count Orgaz. In the upper area of the painting, Orgaz resides in Heaven. The cloth stands out in three prominent places around his figure. It forms a triangle around him--one piece below him and one on either side. It's almost like a cone raising him into the clouds.

bballinsupasta said...

i really like photo realism sometimes, but i also find it unnecessary other times. sure, it takes great skill to paint that way, but i like paintings to look like paintings.

Dean Elazab said...

I agree with caroline, how does a painter get commissioned to paint the king and queen, paint his odd perspective painting, and then explain to them "im trying to move art into a new form, believe me everyone will love this when it catches on"

tmichals said...

I think that Versailles is so pretty and intricate. I like how the garden Facade includes the classical ideas of arches and statues to show that each time period is building upon one another. Also, the Hall of Mirrors contains the barrel vaults of the Romanesque period. I think the way the mirrors are used to create symmetry is so unique as well.

ndepass said...

I have to say i think its pretty terrible how the palaces kept around midgets for entertainment and painted them like they were some crazy thing, that is pretty bad. I find that some what cruel even though the paintings were good. I must say (dont destroy me) i like the super rococo painting of the swinging fairy or some kind of lady!

Ehren said...

Has nobody mentioned St. Teresa in Ecstasy? I feel like we should discuss this...

I like how St. Teresa was framed by the gold emanating from above and the niche that surrounded her. The gold really draws the eye to St. Teresa's heavenly bliss below.

bballinsupasta said...

i think that the woman artist that studied under caravaggio was indeed an artist. sure, she imitated his style, but she also was innovative in her own right. for instance, she chose an uncommon subject.

Mr. Plainview said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stephen said...

I like that the Baroque art is supposed to bring about a religious experience. This seems to be a true Renaissance category of artwork in that it relates back to medieval art that was supposed to bring about a religious experience but in those cases it was mostly directed towards scaring people.

JP said...

On the topic of St. Teresa in Ecstasy... could that sculpture have been seen as a work of heresy?

The only person in the Bible ever to get... "visited" by a supernatural entity, was the Virgin Mary. Wouldn't St. Teresa's claim about the angel, and thus this sculpture, be viewed by the Catholic Church as blasphemous? Or was St. Teresa a Mary figure maybe?

I suppose the answer might be that it doesn't matter, as the Catholic Church gets increasingly irrelevant to art as we progress through these artistic periods. Still, the thought entered my mind.

puddle-wonderful said...

If anything was heresy, John, it would have St. Teresa's description of her "visitation." If it took away from Mary's significance/specialness, I would think that the Catholic Church would be all over that.

However, I really love that such a statue is in a church. I bet it caused more than a few venial sins, if you know what I mean. Lonely, starved teenage boys, bored during mass, staring at the detailed expression of St. Teresa... ("Forgive me, father, for I have sinned... and during church, too... I couldn't help it, it's Bernini's fault!")

El Paco said...

John - I don't think she'd be a saint if it was heresy

Mr. Plainview said...

I like Dr. Tulp's Anatomy Lesson. Sure, some things may seem awkward--like, for example, the height of the dead man's chest--but I think Rembrandt does a fine job with chiaroscuro. There is a light source from the left, but the dead body itself seems illuminated.

Dean Elazab said...

I think carvaggio made amazing paintings that were incredibly realistic. The incredulity of Saint thomas is one of my favorites because of how realistic everyone appears.

El Paco said...

"I agree with caroline, how does a painter get commissioned to paint the king and queen, paint his odd perspective painting, and then explain to them 'im trying to move art into a new form, believe me everyone will love this when it catches on.' - Dean - I love that. I love that a lot.

bballinsupasta said...

i think that velazquez was probably commissioned to paint the princess and not the king and queen. i think he just added the king and queen in the mirror as lagniappe.

Stephen said...

I think that the usage of a mirror and reflection is an interesting usage of an optical allusion. Most otical allusions we have studied have been architectural like the dome with the forshortened designs or the Dome of the parthenon with its foreshortened coffers. The new usage of reflection is an interesting new way to display objects that will probably occur more frequently in our future studies.

Dean Elazab said...

Caravaggio was my favorite Baroque painter, his use of chiaroscuro was amazing and it created some of the most photo realistic painting i have ever seen.

Dean Elazab said...

Caravaggio was my favorite Baroque painter, his use of chiaroscuro was amazing and it created some of the most photo realistic painting i have ever seen.

JP said...

Did artists painting portraits generally get everyone to pose for their pictures back in Velazquez's time? Because it's pretty impossible for him to pose for his own picture.

I wonder if he just got everyone else to pose for the pic, and then painted himself in off the top of his head? Or maybe nobody posed at all and he just it all from his head?

Regardless of how it was done, that's pretty revolutionary to draw himself painting the portrait, in the same portrait. That's revolutionary not just in artistic technique, but in how people think about painting - which I'm guessing is why it was such a big deal.

bballinsupasta said...

i agree with john's point that velazquez painting himself was revolutionary. i think that he might have painted a generic male body and then placed a mirror next to his canvas so that he could paint his face easily.

ndepass said...

i agree Caravaggios paintings were incredible he was by far my favorite baroque painter and possibly my favorite painter all year. His paintings look like actual photographs.

Stephen said...

I do not think that Valezquez was revoloutionary in his painting style but he was innovative in his choice of subjecets for his paintings. He uses alot of chiaroscuro like Caravaggio did earlier, but his inclinaion to paint ordinary people represents a shift in perspective.

Manal said...

As almost everyone else, I too did like Caravaggio's paintings. And his life history just made his paintings alot more interesting. Especially painting himself as Goliath. But i also liked El Greco's paintings with the inclusion of the two dimensions in his paintings. His colors seemed alot more varied and vibrant to me. I agree with Brandon(I think), his Count Orgaz painting was cool along with the dead body under neath it.

Manal said...

Mannerism was interesting.The two paintings we studied were different because of the lak of naturalism however I personally did not like the elongated figures. Those paintings for some reason just reminded me of a circus. The way the paintings made it difficult to figure out whose head belonged to which neck and every other body parts made the paintings confusing but also intersting and innovative. Nonetheless, the Baroque paintings following this time period seemed better to me.