Monday, March 8, 2010

Expressionists and Fauvists at the Marmottan museum

I went this weekend to see the exhibition on the Expressionists and the Fauvists at the Marmottan museum in Paris. The museum includes paintings by Claude Monet and some of his personnal effects such as his glasses or his paint palette. Other Impressionists like Berthe Morisot or Pierre Auguste Renoir are also represented. In addition, it also features some works from the Napolean Era. The museum itself is located in the old hotel of the Marmottan brothers in the XVIth arrondissement, it remains a nice place with its own garden and it is right in front of the Ranelagh park.


As for the exhibition, I was not impressed by the Expressionists and the Fauvists. It represented the collection from the Von der Heydt Museum in Wuppertal. The expressionists were mainly represented by the two German artistic schools: Die Brücke and NKVM (Munich New Artist's Association). The most notable artists  included in the collection were Otto Dix, Franz Marc and Wassily Kandinsky. According to Wikipedia (don’t hit me because of the source..), the Expressionism "refers to art that expresses intense emotion. It is arguable that all artists are expressive but there is a long line of art production in which heavy emphasis is placed on communication through emotion. Such art often occurs during time of social upheaval." Indeed, the colours that they employ plus the style was most of the time making, for most of the painters, some unhappy compositions. It is fair to recognise that the times were not the most joyful, especially during the first quarter of the century in Europe. 
I was not a big fan of them in general because of this feeling of misery that they tried to convey in most of the cases, I do not like painting that use a majority of brown and dark colours and the style is not harmonious; finally the expressionists often paint portraits, as expressions are best exhibited through portraits I assume, and I prefer landscapes. Notably Otto Dix and his portrait of the so-called Leonie, poor woman...On the other hand the work of Franz Marc is much more lively thank to the heavy use of bright colour in a balanced manner, especially with der Blaue Fuchs.

As for the Fauvists, a group of early 20th century modern artists whose works emphasized painterly qualities and strong colour over the representational or realistic values retained by Impressionism (Wikipedia again.. ). I do not like them either and notably the liberal use of the colours. I find it sometimes a bit flashy but I cannot generalize and I guess i would appreciate some of their work although I have never been eager to look for them.

In the end, and this may be derived from my “classic” education, I prefer the Impressionists or the others before them, notably Turner. I prefer the themes that they painted and their colours and also their style which I find to be a bit more realistic

-C

6 comments:

  1. You don't like the misery or emotion of the paintings? Isn't internal expression one of the fundamental pieces of art?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I guess it depends on how you appreciate arts.

    I dont like misery as a feeling because it doesnt make me cheery.

    In addition i tend to enjoy arts works for their esthetic side rather than what they mean or the message they carry.

    If you take a painting representing landscape, i m most likely to enjoy it a lot. It will also make me think about travels or remind me of a place i ve already been and that would be for me a good thing. It might also not remind me anything at all, but i would still find the landscape attracting for whatever reason.

    I talk a lot about landscape but any other paintings might touch me but generally the ones depicting misery with dark colours are not my favourite. Obviously there is always some exception.

    as for internal expression, i dont really know what you mean

    ReplyDelete
  3. Personal expression being internal expression...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Internal expression is fundamental in every pieces of art because it is what drives an individual (here the artists) to achieve their works.

    However I believe that I am, as a spectator, not required to understand anything about that in order to appreciate or not a piece of art. I tend to appreciate them mostly for esthetical reasons, therefore i dont really care about any message conveyed by the painting.

    I.E one of my favourite painting, wanderer above the sea of fog (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanderer_above_the_Sea_of_Fog) has been painted following a certain mindset from its author however, I appreciate it because of the balance of colour and the subject painted but also because the whole composition makes me think about travels which was not at all the goal of the painter.

    i still dont really know if it does answer your question hehe

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think this is a good explanation and supports your argument well. You did answer my question :)

    ReplyDelete
  6. just to annoy you..what about your artistic tendencies?

    ReplyDelete