Pierre-Auguste Renoir was born in 1841 in Limoges, France, but his family soon moved to Paris, the center of the late-nineteenth century art world (Pach, 1983). Born into the working class, at the age of thirteen he began working as a painter of ceramics; once he saved up enough money, he attended the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, where he made friends with Claude Monet, Frederic Bazille and Alfred Sisley. Over the next few years, the four former students of the Ecole de Beaux-Arts were joined by Edourd Manet, Edgar Degas, Paul Cezanne, and Camille Pissarro. These forward-thinking artists discussed their dissatisfaction with the Salon’s stubborn preference for mythological themes in painting. The Impressionists felt that they should be painting scenes from everyday life on the Parisian streets. Some also felt that more painting should be done outside, because it was difficult to portray natural sunlight in the studio.
Perhaps Renoir’s own reasons for wanting to abandon classical Roman themes for daily life sprang from his working class background. In my opinion he wanted to convey the beauty he saw in common people and nature through his artwork, not just beauty that had been officially sanctioned as “high art.”
Although he and his friends were rejecting the establishment, the object of their rebellion was simply to create what they considered better art. For Renoir, that simply meant art that was more beautiful; he never tried to put meanings into his paintings. In fact, he deliberately avoided painting narrative pictures or allegories. His paintings are all instantaneous and vivid, hiding no subtext or symbolism. Additionally, he did not paint scenes of gloom, despair or pain of any kind. He freely altered the bodies and faces of his subjects to be more pleasing, and he often edited out the dirt and grime of everyday Paris living. When writing about the purpose of painting, Renoir said that he believed that paintings were meant to be pretty; that was their purpose as decorations.
This desire to paint what was beautiful was what inspired Renoir to develop and adopt Impressionism. His paintings that I most enjoy are those he painted when he was most involved with the Impressionists. For example, the painting of the Ball at the Moulin de la Galette, in 1876, is one of my favorites. Throughout the composition, Renoir successfully conveys the air of congeniality and festivity of the place, while also infusing a strong sense of movement and activity. In its entirety, the painting is enjoyable to look at and aesthetically pleasing. My other favorite from this period is the Luncheon of the Boating Party. Once again, Renoir achieved what he aimed for: a joyous, beautiful picture.
Renoir’s radical style was began to gain some acceptance, at long last. However, towards the 1880s, he began to experience some doubts about where he was going with Impressionism. He took a vacation in Italy and it was there that he saw the works of the classical masters, and became convinced that he had been going about painting all wrong.
The ensuing few years became known as his “sour” period. He decided to imitate Raphael and the great masters, and return to line and modeling instead of patches of color and light. From 1881 to 1888, he experimented with this concept, and in 1886 he unveiled his new style, displayed in his large Bathers picture. It was met with distress and criticism.
After the initial experiment, he eventually integrated his new respect for shading and line with his fantastic eye for color and his flowing Impressionist brushstrokes. Simply look at the painting Gathering flowers, from 1890. The country landscape, in tones of autumn gold and green, flows subtly towards the village ahead, and recalls Renoir’s earlier work. Meanwhile, the two girls have a solidity and roundness that comes directly from his handling of shading and form, and it seems like you could reach out and touch them. In fact, this effect is exactly what Renoir hoped for in his paintings. “I like a painting which makes me want to stroll in it, if it is a landscape,” he once said, “or to stroke a breast or a back, if it is a figure.”
His style continued to evolve, but it never regressed; he was always moving forward. Unfortunately, at the age of sixty, he began to have attacks of arthritis that eventually confined him to a wheelchair, but he never stopped painting until his death in 1919. When he could no longer hold a brush in his rheumatic fingers, he had a brush tied to his hand. He is quoted as having said the day before he died, “I am still making progress.” His love of art and beauty is evident in all his works, and his legacy lives on today.
Prompts
1. Do you agree with Renoir that art should be beautiful for beauty’s sake, or do you think that art should have deeper meaning? Explain.
2. Do you favor Renoir’s Impressionist style or his later, more classical style? Why?
3. Was there anything about Renoir that intrigued you, or that you wanted to know more about?
4. Write about whether or not you think Renoir achieved his quest of finding “true painting.” Explain your reasons.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Of all the painters that have been presented in this class, I believe that Renoir is my favorite. I love the impressionist style and appreciate the beauty and joyfulness that Renoir paints into his works. It is difficult to respond to the question “should art be beautiful for beauty’s sake or should it have deeper meaning” because I believe that art may serve a variety of purposes. For centuries, art has served as a means of communicating ideas and beliefs. Art has the ability to make a statement or to influence people’s thinking. However, I do not believe that it is necessary for all art to have some sort of “deeper meaning.” Art can exist simply for art’s state. It can even be argued that that was the original purpose of art: to create beautiful things for aesthetic pleasure. Sometimes critics delve too far into the meaning behind a painting, when perhaps its only purpose is to please people. I do not think that all art should be for beauty’s sake; however, with all the darkness and horror that exists in our world there is no doubt that the addition of a bit of beauty by an artist is not at all out of place. If this was Renoir’s aim, I have no problem with his perhaps false representations of beautiful places, people, and the joy and happiness surrounding them.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me that an artist can be so broad in skill and style. I loved Renoir’s early, very impressionistic work in which not all details are in focus. It pertains to the almost unreal feelings that he exhibits in his work. There is something that is just softer, and more pleasing to look at in these impressionist paintings. This is why I love Monet’s work so much. The soft blending of details and enhanced color is beautiful, and honestly that is what I love to see in art. It is the kind of work that I would display on my wall. Skipping over Renoir’s “sour period,” which was indeed sour, I also appreciate his later more classical style. While I prefer the impressionist work, his blending of reality and impressionism resulted in beautiful paintings that I would like to see more of. The combination of styles was very unique and expressive of an artist’s flexibility.
While Renoir claimed that he sought truth in his paintings, I believe that this statement contradicts some of his ideology. His modeled social situations, while pleasant and beautiful, are not necessarily true representations of reality. Not all people really are that beautiful. Later on in his life, he did paint more realistic looking people; however, Renoir still paints a certain amount of decorum into his work that contradicts the representation of truth.
Despite all of this, the lack of negativity and despair in Renoir’s work, while perhaps not the “truth” of society, serves his purpose well. He paints beautiful people in lovely situations for the purpose of decoration. While some may say that this is not legitimate art, Renoir painted in this manner for decades and is one of the most well-known artists out there. His art IS pleasing to the eye, and therefore deserves, in my opinion, far more recognition then a lot of the dark paintings that have hidden meaning that are rampant in the history of art.
There are two distinct sides of the world. There is a side that reflects sin, hate, and disease; however, there is also a side of beauty, reflecting love, nature, and serenity. Many artists, like Fernando Botero, portray the dark side of the world, revealing to the viewer a deeper meaning or even an inconvenient truth. On the other hand, artists like Renoir have a philosophy to paint for the purpose of capturing beauty. We see enough of the ugliness of the world on a daily basis; art can be a relief from this bombardment of the depressing side of the world. Art, like Renoir’s, is more tempting to have hanging on a wall in your home (I can’t imagine hanging one of Botero’s Abu Ghraib in my home). As a viewer of art, I appreciate artists who capture serenity, love, and peace, but at the same time I appreciate the substance artists portray in their works.
ReplyDeleteI find it conflicting to ask if I agree with Renoir that art should be beautiful for beauty’s sake, or if I think that art should have deeper meaning. When looking at Renoir’s art I see both beauty and a deeper meaning. He did not just capture a pretty and eye-pleasing image. For example, in Luncheon of the Boating Party, 1881, the painting shows the joy and serenity of enjoying and relaxing in the moment. The painting shows how one needs to take time to reflect in the beauty of nature, animals, and the people that surround you. This is a deeper meaning that speaks to the viewer, especially in this day and age where we are constantly working, stressing, and not taking time for ourselves. Maybe I can see the deeper meaning because I often fall victim of not enjoying the moment but rather stressing about deadlines and the future. For this reason I appreciate Renoir’s art, not only for its beauty, but also for its deeper meaning.
Renoir’s Impressionist style is very captivating. I love looking at the images from a distance and then close up and see how all the strokes come together to make a work of art. Although Impressionism was criticized for not actually being art and not taking much skill, I have a different view. Looking at details of Renoir’s Impressionist work a viewer can see all the effort and creative planning it took to create such captivating images—personally these are some of my favorite.
I believe that Renoir did achieve his goal of true painting. He is an artist that is remembered and studied in current times. His pivotal and distinct role in art history has led to artists admiring and respecting his work. Although Renoir made it clear that he never reached his goal of true painting, by saying “I am still making progress” the day before he died, I beg to differ. His art captures the need to appreciate beauty and serenity in the world we live in. By doing this, I believe Renoir achieved his goal, even though he was still on a constant quest to find true painting.
I think that Renoir is right that art should be beautiful for beauty’s sake, but I also believe that it is important for some works of art to carry a deeper meaning. For example, his artwork of the female body, shown outright with no hidden details, is created to be something beautiful and just that. As a contrasting example, the way the Vietnam Memorial Wall was created as a work of art is certainly beautiful, but is also meant to channel that beauty in order to bring attention to the men who served honorably during the Vietnam War. The situation that the art is created in has a great influence of whether there should be a deeper meaning or should be created just for the image. I feel that many times when people analyze artwork, they concentrate too deeply on finding the hidden message instead of just looking at the beautiful image that is in front of their eyes.
ReplyDeleteRenoir produced some of my favorite “normal” (non-Hieronymus Bosch) paintings that were presented in this class. I favor Renoir’s Impressionist style over his classical style because the images are so filled with color and warmth. Another reason that I enjoy Renoir’s work is that when looking at the images, you do not have to try to find the hidden meaning in the art because almost the entirety of his paintings do not have a hidden meaning to try and find and are painted for the simple act of showing beauty. Simple is nice sometimes.
Something that intrigued me about Renoir is his excessive attention to women and bathing. I understand why he would be interested in the female body as a model for his work because of his work with the Impressionist movement, but I do not see why he obsessed with bathing scenes and titled them all very closely with one another. Most artists would at least choose to vary the titles of the works somewhat differently from one another, but Renoir decided that a generic title was suitable for all of the pieces. Perhaps the simplicity of the titles, labeling exactly what the images in the paintings are, is a reminder of how he painted to show beauty and not a complex message.
I do think that Renoir achieved his quest of finding “true painting” because he had such a passion for his work. He did not paint for the money, for the fame, or for trying to impress his ideas onto others through his work; he sought appreciate things that he found beautiful in life by preserving their figure on everlasting canvas. From age sixty and onward, far past the age where his rheumatic fingers would cause him great suffering to try to continue painting, Renoir still continued to passionately depict the images he loved, and even if he distorted the images from how they appeared in actuality, he still painted them without any traces of negative emotion.
I think that a painting should be beautiful in some cases but it could also be more meaningful if it had an implication. Overall I believe it depends on what the painter wants the painting to represent. In Renoir’s case, he had a great appreciation for the beauty he perceived in a scene and that was what he wanted to portray in his paintings. I think that is part of his personality and it works in his pieces, making him a unique and special painter. I love that his paintings are so joyous and colorful. I think that the beauty he strived for in his paintings represents the beauty in life such as happiness and love. Although I feel that beauty is important in Renoir’s paintings, it isn’t necessarily what art should portray. I don’t know if there is a single thing that art should always portray, that seems constricting to the artist and the viewer’s interpretation of the painting. Art has had so many different purposes and meanings throughout history that I don’t believe it could be narrowed down to a single one. Also, any given individual has his or her own interpretation of a piece of art and what its purpose is.
ReplyDeleteI personally prefer Renoir’s more impressionistic style but I am impressed by the variety and evolution of his work. It amazes me that one person can have such a range of talent and skill, but perhaps this is due to my lack of artistic ability. I love the softness and color of Renoir’s impressionism. It is easy on the eyes and I find it pleasing to look at, sort of a relaxing and pleasant feeling. I also like the pastel colors he uses, they add to the appeal of the paintings for me.
In my opinion Renoir reached the publics perception of true painting. Although he may not have reached true painting in his own eyes, he is still remembered and held in high esteem decades later. He also played a pivotal role in the evolution of Impressionism, along with his three friends from Ecole des Beaux-Arts. I understand that he held true painting in such high regard that he never felt he was capable of producing it, but he obviously had extreme talent that was superior to that of other painters. I think that it is important for an artist to be confident in their work as well, however, I feel as if Renoir simply felt that he was always improving, not that he was ever not a talented artist. This is evident by his dying words, “I am still making progress.” All in all, in my eyes Renoir was definitely capable of true painting.