Notes for Dave Hickey's essay, "Enter the
Dragon: On the Vernacular of Beauty"
“vernacular” is spoken, plain, language – as
opposed to the language of the academy. Hickey’s title might have
been “…on the plain language of beauty,” or something
like that. He’s tipping his hand that he intends to address “beauty”
at a street level rather than how it is discussed in ivory towers.
Some of the Artists and paintings mentioned by Hickey:
Giovanni Bellini (1430-1516)
WebMuseum, Paris
Jean Siméon Chardin (1699 -1779) (an Enlightenment
painter):
Biography and
images
"The Jar of Apricots"
"Pipes
and Pitcher"
"The
Silver Goblet"
"The
Silver Tureen"
The art critic Robert Hughes sums up Chardin this way (from Nothing
if not Critical):
By general consent, Jean Siméon Chardin was one of the supreme
artists of the eighteenth century and probably the greatest master of
still life in the history of painting. ...
To see Chardin's work en masse, in the midst of a period stuffed with
every kind of jerky innovation, narcissistic blurting and trashy "relevance,"
is to be reminded that lucidity, deliberation, probity and calm are
still the chief virtues of the art of painting. Chardin has long been
a painter's painter, studied and when his work was cheap, coIlected
by other artists. He deeply affected at least three of the founders
of modern art, Cezanne, Matisse and Braque .Van Gogh compared his depth
to Rembrandt 's. What seized them in his work was not the humility of
his subject matter so much as its ambition as pure painting. The mediation
between the eye and the world that Chardin's canvases propose is inexhaustible.
Were he judged merely as a social recorder, he would not have a special
place in art history. One does not need to be a historian to know how
narrow his field of social vision was. He ignored the public ostentation
of his time, as well as the private misery. Most of his paintings are
condensed sonnets in praise of the middle path, idealizing the sober
life of the Parisian petite bourgeoisie as embodied in his own household.
He is said to have had a chirpy sense of humor, and there is certainly
a sly irony in his singeries , or monkey paintings, in which hairy little
parodies of man play at being painters and connoisseurs.
But of social criticism there is no trace. The nurse in Meal for a Convalescent
, who stands opening a boiled egg in a kind of reverential silence like
a secular descendant of Georges de La Tour 's saints, is not a representative
of the class war; the efforts of some historians to see Chardin's servants
as emblems of an oppressed proletariat on the eve of the French Revolution
are simply beside the point. A sense of social precariousness is the
last thing one could expect to meet in a Chardin. Indeed, one can hardly
imagine him working without the conviction that his way of life was
immutable - that there would always be nurses to make beef tea, scullions
to bargain for chickens, and governesses to scold the children; that
the kitchen skimmers and casseroles and spice pots that he so often
painted were in some important sense as durable as the Maison Carrée
or the Colosseum.
He did not travel for nourishment. Apart from trips to Versailles, Chardin
may not have left Paris once in his life. He was entirely a metropolitan
man, and this fact seems oddly at variance with his paintings, since,
as Pierre Rosenberg remarks, "one would like to imagine Chardin
a solitary individual, a provincial."
Chardin's prolonged meditation on brown crockery and the matted fur
of dead hares took place in the midst of an efflorescence of luxury
art - pink bodies, swirling fronds of gold ornament, rinsed allegorical
skies: the Rococo style in all its Gallic glory. It pervaded his milieu,
and he did not despise it, but it was quite alien to his temperament.
What he craved was neither luxury nor the high rhetoric of history painting,
but apprehensible truth, visible, familiar, open to touch and repetition.
The truth about an onion could be tested again and again. The truth
about a Versailles shepherdess was, to put it mildly, more labile.
His love of truth and nature endeared him to advanced thinkers in France,
the encyclopédistes in Denis Diderot's circle. Detecting a moral
value in Chardin that was lacking in Boucher, Diderot became his chief
intellectual supporter. "It is the business of art," he argued
in 1765, "to touch and to move, and to do this by getting close
to nature." Chardin epitomized that ambition at work: "Welcome
back, great magician, with your mute compositions! How eloquently they
speak to the artist! How much they tell him about the representation
of Nature, the science of color and harmony! How freely the air flows
around these objects!"
Few painters have ever had such a press as the one that, interrupted
by a few decades of posthumous neglect, greeted Chardin from Diderot,
the Goncourt brothers, Gide, Proust and dozens of others. And what is
rarer, their praise was deserved. Chardin had two remarkable gifts.
The first was his ability to absorb himself in the visual to the point
of selfeffacement. Now and again, as in his Basket of Wild Strawberries
- a glowing red cone, compressing the effulgence of a volcano onto the
kitchen table, balanced by two white carnations and the cold, silvery
transparencies of a water glass - the sense of rapture is delivered
almost before the painting is grasped.
But the fervor of this image, almost literally a contrast of fire and
ice, is comparatively rare in Chardin's output. Generally his still
lifes declare themselves more slowly. One needs to savor his Jar of
Apricots , for instance, before discovering its resonances, which are
not only visual but tactile: how the tambour lid of the round box accords
with the oval shape of the canvas itself and is echoed by the drumlike
tightness of the paper tied over the apricot jar; how the horizontal
axis of the table is played upon by the stuttering line of red wineglass,
fruit, painted fruit on the coffee cups; how the slab of bread repeats
the rectangular form of the packet on the right, with its cunningly
placed strings; and how all these rhymes of shape and format are reinforced
by the subtle interchange of color and reflection among the objects,
the warm paste of Chardin's paint holding an infinite series of correspondences.
It is as though Chardin extended his ideal of the family to include
groups of objects as well as people. The props of his still lifes, which
were also the normal appurtenances of his home life, become like familiar
faces: the patriarchal mass of his copper water urn, raised on a squat
tripod; a white teapot with a rakish finial; the painted china that
signified his growing prosperity; and so on down to the last stoneware
daubiére, all signifying a world into which the eye could move
without alienation or strain.
This patient construction, this sense of the intrinsic worth of seeing,
combines with Chardin's second gift: his feeling for the poetic moments
of human gesture (rather than the didactic ones, as in Greuze). It permeates
his genre scenes and portraits, especially the portraits of children;
the gentle muteness Diderot perceived turns into a noble ineloquence,
as though Piero della Francesca were visiting the house. Chardin's absorption
in the act of painting paralleled the absorption of children in their
games, which he painted. One has only to look at the figure in his portrait
Little Girl with Shuttlecock - the expressionless face and white shoulders
sitting on the stiff bodice like ice cream on its cone; the sequence
of forms pinned together by accents of blue on her cap, her dress, her
scissors ribbon and the feathers of her shuttlecock - to realize the
truth of Rosenberg's insight: "The world that Chardin imposes on
his figures is a closed world, a stopped world ... a world at rest,
a world of 'infinite duration.'" Rarely, in painting after Chardin,
would one find this blend of intimacy and decorum.
Caravaggio (c.1571-1610)
"The
Madonna of the Rosary"
Caravaggio was a revolutionary in his turbulent and violent life
as well as in his art. In intentional opposition to bygone epochs, he
used the overwhelming presence of the personae in his paintings to achieve
the requisite (during the Counter-Reformation) intense effect on the
viewer. His particular artistic devices were vehement chiaroscuro contrasts,
providing figures and objects with a sharp physical presence never seen
before and a rendering of the observed that approached veracity. This
realism, as trivial as it may have seemed to Caravaggios critics, is
actually derived from the spiritualism of a subtle understanding of
art. The enthroned Madonna advises St. Dominic to distribute rosaries
among the people, who are crowded about the saint. Taking part in this
supernatural-natural event are not just those found within the picture
itself. The observer is drawn into the action as well, through the directional
gesture of St. Peter Martyr on the right and through the invitation
of the donor on the left, to take cover under the protective mantel
of St. Dominic. While the (painted) worshippers see only the saint,
the faithful viewer standing in front of this painting experiences within
earthly reality the tangible results of supernatural grace. He is drawn
towards Christ the Redeemer standing exactly in the pictures central
axis and the interceding Mary and Dominic. Exact details of the provenance
of the painting, the donor and its first intended location are still
unknown. The picture was probably executed in Naples, only to be given
to the Dominican Church in Antwerp by a group of artists, including
Rubens and Jan Bruegel, around 1620. It was acquired by Emperor Joseph
II in 1781.
"David
and Goliath"(the head is a self-portrait)
"Narcissus"
(study the knee)
For more pictures
Baroque art and the period in general
An overview
[You'll note that our friend Rene Descartes (1596-1650), with his
emphasis on logic, rationality and clarity sits right in the middle
of this picture. Also Johannes Vermeer (1632-1675). Maybe this is just
an example of Blake's slogan "To generalize is to be an idiot."
Maybe it's a sample of the "stylistically complex, even contradictory
nature of the period" (which if your skeptical, might strike you
as just a fancy art historian's attempt to cover up Blake's point. Or,
it might give you a new slant on Descartes, since the whole presentation
of the Meditations is stagey and theatrical - Descartes writes it to
ask you to visualize him step by step as he makes the whole perceived
world including your body disappear into the realm of unknowability
- mere hallucination or dream or non-existence - and then brings it
back again step by step as really known thanks to his new methods of
proof. You might think about this as doing philosophy in a "baroque"
style, as a fantastic conjuring act where the perceived world vanishes
and then is made to reappear.]
Robert Mapplethorpe (1946-1987)
Biography
One of the artists at the center of a controversy over the funding
by the National Endowment for the Arts of work that many Americans thought
was disgusting and immoral - in particular Mapplethorpe's Portfolio
X show, which centered on nudes posed in male sado-masochistic sex,
and photographed in the fashion photography style of his other work.
Samples
of what the pictures looked like, though not the Portfolio X pictures
themselves (flower pictures and nudes, in particular).
Francis Bacon (1909-1992)
Biography and Image Gallery
Joel-Peter Witkin
Biography
and examples of work
Andres Serrano (b. 1950)
"Piss
Christ"
|