I like how Olympia looks realistic (with intense showdowing in some areas, like the hands)but flat and cartoonish at the same time. It almost looke anime-ish to me, with the prominent lines and solid looking colors. I also like how Burial at Ornans is depicting a pretty average funeral (there is no spiritual realm or heaven illustrated). This was an interesting depature from the Burial of Count Orgaz, where he was painted along with supernatural elements.
Good topic... I was about to start it myself. Sorry Ehren but I personally really don't like Olympia. Compared to Titian's Venus, I think that it looks like the skill level is going backward in time (I don't know if that's the right way to say it, but I'm sure you get my drift). Titian's is just so much softer, naturalistic, and more pleasant to look at in general. I think it is neat to see the shift in painted subject matter in Burial at Ornans as well.
I like the burial too, a plain funeral to cover such a huge area is amazing. i like how it isnt as busy as the burial of orgas and is much for realistic
I like the stylized depiction of The Stonebreakers because Courbet stylizes a very common setting in a way giving it significance. The subject is not religious or an ideealized god but ordinary people who now have significance.
i like titian's too. i like how it is more refined than the olympia one. even though i appreciate the skill of courbet's paintings like evidenced in the cliff one, i don't really think of them as pretty.
I would like to submit that Titian is a Renaissance artist for clarification. I think that the stylizing of the subject brings the art down to the level of the actual subjects. This is an innovative concept of moving art from the aristocratic lifestyle of the rich to the hardship of the Common Man. I really enjoy the Realism, even if the name appears oxymoronic.
The second I saw Eakin's "The Gross Clininc", I immediately thought of Rembrandt's "Anatomy Lesson" too (like we discussed in class). I really like the subject matter of both of those paintings. However, I like the greater light source of Rembrandt compared to Eakin. I really appreciate the "snapshot composition" technique of realism that we learned today. I think it makes the paintings much more interesting and "real". Also, I like how Manet manages to include his own painting, "Olympia" in the Zola painting (along with Velazquez).
I like the landscape painting we looked at. It's very aesthetically pleasing - certainly much more so that the other paintings we've seen in the realism period. I like the artists' willingness to expose the negative aspects of society, but I haven't made up my mind about the paintings yet, broseph.
I admire The Gross Clinic a great deal. What really strikes me is the chiaroscuro. The most prominent figure is Gross himself, a man of science and discovery. Light also illuminates his fellow doctors, the patient and the tools on the table. Everything is dark and vague except man, his blood and the instruments he created. The chiaroscuro seems to point a finger at man and say, "Look what he can do and how far he has come."
I agree that the chiaroscuro of the gross clinic enhances the centralized figure of doctor Gross and I liked the fact that the painting was a snapshot rather than everyone posing like in the old juxtaposition we looked at. A medical class also seems to be innovative in the way they were teaching medicine to a large class of students.
i liked the chiaroscuro aspect of the gross clinic...and i agree with brandon's comment about how the chiaroscuro showcases man's achievements...i thought it was funny how one of the women in the painting had to trun away from the scene.
I also like the subject matter in Courbet's "Stonebreakers". It provides the idea of the everyman which is a nice innovation to see in the paintings we study. The burden of the working class shown by this painting allows people to relate to it on a much deeper level, I believe. I also feel this way because of the way the men are not individualized.
You know realism can also refer to literature, such as Notes from the Underground.
I really like realism in literature. Realism means that you don't have to be a king, or write about a king, to have a story worthy of being called "literature." It allowed ordinary people with ordinary lives access to writing as a form of art - and anything that gives more people the opportunity to express themselves and to share their work with others, is a good thing.
I think that beyond the fact that simplicity is now considered beautiful, I enjoy the fact that the common man performing a mediocre job is recognized as important and significant which is realistic in our world's workforce.
I agree with Stephen in that I like how average jobs and people are considered beautiful in their everyday environment, and I like how everything is not as "posed" as in previous artwork we've studied ("The Gross Clinic" vs Rembrant). Also, although I am not a fan of Olympia, I like alot of Manet's artwork that we saw in the video.
i like the art of realism, because i like to see the "average man" as the subject of paintings because that makes them more relatable. Because not many people can relate with photos of a king of Jesus but if you see a photo of someone like you it makes it much more relatable and easier to understand.
I know we talked about this in class, but I really like the sarcastic tone in Baudelaire's poetry. Also, I like how he uses the song-like meter in "The Carcass" with the gross, and extremely realistic/ descriptive imagery.
21 comments:
I like how Olympia looks realistic (with intense showdowing in some areas, like the hands)but flat and cartoonish at the same time. It almost looke anime-ish to me, with the prominent lines and solid looking colors. I also like how Burial at Ornans is depicting a pretty average funeral (there is no spiritual realm or heaven illustrated). This was an interesting depature from the Burial of Count Orgaz, where he was painted along with supernatural elements.
I think realism is really real.
Good topic... I was about to start it myself. Sorry Ehren but I personally really don't like Olympia. Compared to Titian's Venus, I think that it looks like the skill level is going backward in time (I don't know if that's the right way to say it, but I'm sure you get my drift). Titian's is just so much softer, naturalistic, and more pleasant to look at in general. I think it is neat to see the shift in painted subject matter in Burial at Ornans as well.
I like the burial too, a plain funeral to cover such a huge area is amazing. i like how it isnt as busy as the burial of orgas and is much for realistic
I like the stylized depiction of The Stonebreakers because Courbet stylizes a very common setting in a way giving it significance. The subject is not religious or an ideealized god but ordinary people who now have significance.
i like titian's too. i like how it is more refined than the olympia one. even though i appreciate the skill of courbet's paintings like evidenced in the cliff one, i don't really think of them as pretty.
I would like to submit that Titian is a Renaissance artist for clarification.
I think that the stylizing of the subject brings the art down to the level of the actual subjects. This is an innovative concept of moving art from the aristocratic lifestyle of the rich to the hardship of the Common Man. I really enjoy the Realism, even if the name appears oxymoronic.
The second I saw Eakin's "The Gross Clininc", I immediately thought of Rembrandt's "Anatomy Lesson" too (like we discussed in class). I really like the subject matter of both of those paintings. However, I like the greater light source of Rembrandt compared to Eakin. I really appreciate the "snapshot composition" technique of realism that we learned today. I think it makes the paintings much more interesting and "real". Also, I like how Manet manages to include his own painting, "Olympia" in the Zola painting (along with Velazquez).
I like the landscape painting we looked at. It's very aesthetically pleasing - certainly much more so that the other paintings we've seen in the realism period. I like the artists' willingness to expose the negative aspects of society, but I haven't made up my mind about the paintings yet, broseph.
I admire The Gross Clinic a great deal. What really strikes me is the chiaroscuro. The most prominent figure is Gross himself, a man of science and discovery. Light also illuminates his fellow doctors, the patient and the tools on the table. Everything is dark and vague except man, his blood and the instruments he created. The chiaroscuro seems to point a finger at man and say, "Look what he can do and how far he has come."
I agree that the chiaroscuro of the gross clinic enhances the centralized figure of doctor Gross and I liked the fact that the painting was a snapshot rather than everyone posing like in the old juxtaposition we looked at. A medical class also seems to be innovative in the way they were teaching medicine to a large class of students.
i liked the chiaroscuro aspect of the gross clinic...and i agree with brandon's comment about how the chiaroscuro showcases man's achievements...i thought it was funny how one of the women in the painting had to trun away from the scene.
The gross clinic, in my opinion, is much better than the previous painting of the anatomy lesson. I think it shows a lot of improvements of art.
I also like the subject matter in Courbet's "Stonebreakers". It provides the idea of the everyman which is a nice innovation to see in the paintings we study. The burden of the working class shown by this painting allows people to relate to it on a much deeper level, I believe. I also feel this way because of the way the men are not individualized.
You know realism can also refer to literature, such as Notes from the Underground.
I really like realism in literature. Realism means that you don't have to be a king, or write about a king, to have a story worthy of being called "literature." It allowed ordinary people with ordinary lives access to writing as a form of art - and anything that gives more people the opportunity to express themselves and to share their work with others, is a good thing.
Realism is a great movement because it shows that even what is considered plain can be beautiful.
I think that beyond the fact that simplicity is now considered beautiful, I enjoy the fact that the common man performing a mediocre job is recognized as important and significant which is realistic in our world's workforce.
I agree with Stephen in that I like how average jobs and people are considered beautiful in their everyday environment, and I like how everything is not as "posed" as in previous artwork we've studied ("The Gross Clinic" vs Rembrant). Also, although I am not a fan of Olympia, I like alot of Manet's artwork that we saw in the video.
I know Taylor is a big fan of The Origin of the World.
i like the art of realism, because i like to see the "average man" as the subject of paintings because that makes them more relatable. Because not many people can relate with photos of a king of Jesus but if you see a photo of someone like you it makes it much more relatable and easier to understand.
I know we talked about this in class, but I really like the sarcastic tone in Baudelaire's poetry. Also, I like how he uses the song-like meter in "The Carcass" with the gross, and extremely realistic/ descriptive imagery.
Post a Comment