In the sphere of art making, the concept of ‘world’ refers to the realm of experience as well as the imagination, fantasy and even the subconscious existence while audience may be thought of as the collective viewers who interpret the meaning and value of art in relation to personal associations that may be made. The way in which artists represent aspects of their world to their audiences falls largely under the conceptual framework that closely ties the four main agencies of artists, artwork, word and audience together. Separately and unified, they play a vital role in the critical analysis and sharing of art. In the context of competing community interests and issues, certain artists selectively use their platform of art making to convey relevant issue in their surrounding community and wider society. They push certain ideas and moral judgements outwards in order to provide audiences a strong message that they can take and interpret however they see fit. This historical practice has been occurring for centuries of artistic record, over eras when voices that have been quelled and opinions that have been cast aside later sought platforms for expression, however two particular artists come to mind. Pablo Picasso and Edouard Manet both used the conventions of art practice in a number of their works to convey characteristics of their setting and environment to their audiences. Everything from the use of controversial subject matter to the breaking of social conventions mirrored through the works. Manet’s work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ (1863) was one of a number of impressionist works that broke away from the classical view that art should obey established conventions and seek to achieve timelessness, while Picasso’s later work ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’ (1907) marks a radical break from traditional composition and perspective in painting with the use of techniques that would be significant in Picasso’s subsequent development of Cubism during the period.
Since Manet’s 1863 work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ was rejected by the jury of the 1863 Paris Salon, and later premiered in the Salon des Refusés (Salon of rejected works), the painting has been a principal attraction in the art world, generating both laughter, criticism and scandal. It was thought that the combination of one female nude with three clothed figures lacking in interaction and the naked woman’s stark engagement would provoke offense, but it was largely seen as laughable. Thoré described the nude at the Salon as an ugly and risqué subject matter, while the male on the right as one “who doesn’t even have the idea to take off his horrible hat outdoors… such an antipathetic animal contrasting the character of a pastoral scene is shocking.” Laughter represses the sexual tension and makes the scene rather unthreatening to the viewer, but it is non the less heavily criticised. The oil painting measures just over two meters by two meters and this large scale serves to highlight the colourful energy and uneven brush strokes so keenly observed by Paul & Louvet during the Salon showcase.
In terms of the world at the time, this work attempts to break as many rules as possible in regards to form, structure, composition and subject.
Manet borrowed his subject from the Concert champêtre – a painting by Titian found in the Louvre and took close inspiration for composition of the central group from Marcantonio Raimondi engraving after Raphael's Judgement of Paris.
Manet's style and treatment were considered as shocking as the subject itself as he made no gradient between light and dark elements of the picture, abandoning subtle nuances in favour of brutal contrasts. The work has been said to “invite” destruction through loose, velocious paint application, the collapsing of space and the deliberate exclusion of depth and perspective.
In this way, Manet’s work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ effectively dismantled expectations of art at that moment as it was a plain pastiche of previous cultural and art making, without respecting conventions of composition or depth perception with its shallow pictorial space and modernist approach that showed audiences a new way of considering the human form and our interpretation of it.
What Manet did was move away from the pre-modern nude and using Victorine Meurend (Manet’s muse) adapted the study of the nude in a modernist fashion. Victorine can be found gazing at the audience, baring her flaws shamelessly. She does not give opportunity for audiences to gaze upon her with coyness, in contradiction of art world conventions at the time her eyes instead confront us directly. The men are preoccupied and do not seem to notice her or the viewers at all. Her form isn’t idealised, however, her naked presence next to the two clothed men is justified neither by mythological nor allegorical instances. In fact, the idea of ‘the modern woman’ of modesty and poise is heavily contradicted by the knowledge that her clothes lie in a discarded pile within arms reach. Victorine is not nude, she is naked and there is a very particular difference. The world of the time frowned upon the subject so severely, a modern woman who could expose herself in such a state of vulnerability and freedom, that was previously unheard of, and yet here Manet was expressing just that. This, coupled with the modern style of dress, makes the strange and almost unreal scene appear obscene and laughable in the eyes of public of the day. The entire painting is a disjunction of both painting conventions and behavioural conventions of 19th and 20th century France.
The problem in regards to the relationships between world and audience in ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ however, is that the painting does not have a classical or religious landscape to excuse the contained forms – it is set in Modern France.
The work is a reflection of world as it provides an honest testimony to Manet's refusal to conform to convention and his initiation of new freedom from traditional subjects and modes of representation – in this way, perhaps ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ can be considered, in regards to the ‘world’, a departure point for Modern Art itself.
This brings us to the point of Postmodernism, Pablo Picasso being a strong advocate for its progression. Picasso stands as a key example of an artist able to effectively represent aspects of the surrounding world to his audiences of both past and future generations, particularly through his 1097 work ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’ and an artist capable of evolving the emerging subculture of conceptual art in order to contradict some aspects of modernism and those that developed in its aftermath. The painting depicts five naked prostitutes in a brothel; two of them pushing curtain aside to show the three other women striking erotic poses. Contradictory to the majority of conventional art making at the time, the figures in the composition are composed of flat, splintered shapes that appear disjointed and at ends with each other. We see an entirely different gaze to the one shown in Manet’s painting of Victorine displaying inquisition and confrontation directly at the audience, instead, the lopsided and asymmetrical eyes stare forebodingly. It’s almost as if there eyes are hiding much deeper thoughts and accusations but there lips are sealed as they perform their duty to both the canvas and their choice of employment.
Instead of the space receding with necessary depth behind the curtains, in intrudes in jagged pieces, much like the still life melon in the foreground that has often been compared to a scythe by modern art critics. The masks that the two right figures have instead of faces, while frightening and solicitous on first confrontation, are in fact the result of Picasso taking inspiration from Iberian sculpture and African masks during the period. Picasso assumed the original masks had functioned as magical protectors against dangerous spirits he said that this work was his “first exorcism painting”. There is a strong connotation of “sexual anxiety” clear through the work. The savagery Picasso perceived through African culture was interpreted as a source of vitality and renewal that he wanted to incorporate for both himself and other European painters. All things considered, this work is heavily tied to the cultural atmosphere of Paris at the time and conveys very specific ideas to audiences. A specific threat Picasso would have had in mind was the life-threatening sexual disease circling Paris at the time, this work being an attempt to link sexual pleasure mortality. In its brutal treatment of the body and disjointed colour amalgamation, the work marks both a societal break for normative ideals and a deep-seated art world break from set composition and perspective.
To conclude, the hacking and impetuous brush-strokes of Pablo Picasso in his 1097 work ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’ acted as an unexpected turning point remarked upon in every history of modern and transitory post-modern art. Picasso at the time felt as if his whole understanding of painting itself was revised and remodelled during the production of the work as he conveyed ideas of “sexual anxiety”, prostitution and sexual disease in the Paris landscape of the time. The work is both a historical and artistic tribute to the world of the time. From the same strand, Manet’s work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ (1863) was one of a number of impressionist works that broke away from the classical view that art should obey established conventions and seek to achieve timelessness. Its destruction or collapsing of space techniques combined with loose velocious paint application dismantled both expectations of art at that moment, and expectations of modern women through the heavily debated subject of Victorine Meurend (Manet’s muse) who adapted the modernist study of the nude through her confronting gaze and debateable state of intentional undress.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Déjeuner_sur_l’herbe#Critique_and_controversys
- http://www.musee-orsay.fr/index.php?id=851&L=1&tx_commentaire_pi1%5BshowUid%5D=7123
In the sphere of art making, the concept of ‘world’ refers to the realm of experience as well as the imagination, fantasy and even the subconscious existence while audience may be thought of as the collective viewers who interpret the meaning and value of art in relation to personal associations that may be made. The way in which artists represent aspects of their world to their audiences falls largely under the conceptual framework that closely ties the four main agencies of artists, artwork, word and audience together. Separately and unified, they play a vital role in the critical analysis and sharing of art. In the context of competing community interests and issues, certain artists selectively use their platform of art making to convey relevant issue in their surrounding community and wider society. They push certain ideas and moral judgements outwards in order to provide audiences a strong message that they can take and interpret however they see fit. This historical practice has been occurring for centuries of artistic record, over eras when voices that have been quelled and opinions that have been cast aside later sought platforms for expression, however two particular artists come to mind. Pablo Picasso and Edouard Manet both used the conventions of art practice in a number of their works to convey characteristics of their setting and environment to their audiences. Everything from the use of controversial subject matter to the breaking of social conventions mirrored through the works. Manet’s work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ (1863) was one of a number of impressionist works that broke away from the classical view that art should obey established conventions and seek to achieve timelessness, while Picasso’s later work ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’ (1907) marks a radical break from traditional composition and perspective in painting with the use of techniques that would be significant in Picasso’s subsequent development of Cubism during the period.
Since Manet’s 1863 work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ was rejected by the jury of the 1863 Paris Salon, and later premiered in the Salon des Refusés (Salon of rejected works), the painting has been a principal attraction in the art world, generating both laughter, criticism and scandal. It was thought that the combination of one female nude with three clothed figures lacking in interaction and the naked woman’s stark engagement would provoke offense, but it was largely seen as laughable. Thoré described the nude at the Salon as an ugly and risqué subject matter, while the male on the right as one “who doesn’t even have the idea to take off his horrible hat outdoors… such an antipathetic animal contrasting the character of a pastoral scene is shocking.” Laughter represses the sexual tension and makes the scene rather unthreatening to the viewer, but it is non the less heavily criticised. The oil painting measures just over two meters by two meters and this large scale serves to highlight the colourful energy and uneven brush strokes so keenly observed by Paul & Louvet during the Salon showcase.
In terms of the world at the time, this work attempts to break as many rules as possible in regards to form, structure, composition and subject.
Manet borrowed his subject from the Concert champêtre – a painting by Titian found in the Louvre and took close inspiration for composition of the central group from Marcantonio Raimondi engraving after Raphael's Judgement of Paris.
Manet's style and treatment were considered as shocking as the subject itself as he made no gradient between light and dark elements of the picture, abandoning subtle nuances in favour of brutal contrasts. The work has been said to “invite” destruction through loose, velocious paint application, the collapsing of space and the deliberate exclusion of depth and perspective.
In this way, Manet’s work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ effectively dismantled expectations of art at that moment as it was a plain pastiche of previous cultural and art making, without respecting conventions of composition or depth perception with its shallow pictorial space and modernist approach that showed audiences a new way of considering the human form and our interpretation of it.
What Manet did was move away from the pre-modern nude and using Victorine Meurend (Manet’s muse) adapted the study of the nude in a modernist fashion. Victorine can be found gazing at the audience, baring her flaws shamelessly. She does not give opportunity for audiences to gaze upon her with coyness, in contradiction of art world conventions at the time her eyes instead confront us directly. The men are preoccupied and do not seem to notice her or the viewers at all. Her form isn’t idealised, however, her naked presence next to the two clothed men is justified neither by mythological nor allegorical instances. In fact, the idea of ‘the modern woman’ of modesty and poise is heavily contradicted by the knowledge that her clothes lie in a discarded pile within arms reach. Victorine is not nude, she is naked and there is a very particular difference. The world of the time frowned upon the subject so severely, a modern woman who could expose herself in such a state of vulnerability and freedom, that was previously unheard of, and yet here Manet was expressing just that. This, coupled with the modern style of dress, makes the strange and almost unreal scene appear obscene and laughable in the eyes of public of the day. The entire painting is a disjunction of both painting conventions and behavioural conventions of 19th and 20th century France.
The problem in regards to the relationships between world and audience in ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ however, is that the painting does not have a classical or religious landscape to excuse the contained forms – it is set in Modern France.
The work is a reflection of world as it provides an honest testimony to Manet's refusal to conform to convention and his initiation of new freedom from traditional subjects and modes of representation – in this way, perhaps ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ can be considered, in regards to the ‘world’, a departure point for Modern Art itself.
This brings us to the point of Postmodernism, Pablo Picasso being a strong advocate for its progression. Picasso stands as a key example of an artist able to effectively represent aspects of the surrounding world to his audiences of both past and future generations, particularly through his 1097 work ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’ and an artist capable of evolving the emerging subculture of conceptual art in order to contradict some aspects of modernism and those that developed in its aftermath. The painting depicts five naked prostitutes in a brothel; two of them pushing curtain aside to show the three other women striking erotic poses. Contradictory to the majority of conventional art making at the time, the figures in the composition are composed of flat, splintered shapes that appear disjointed and at ends with each other. We see an entirely different gaze to the one shown in Manet’s painting of Victorine displaying inquisition and confrontation directly at the audience, instead, the lopsided and asymmetrical eyes stare forebodingly. It’s almost as if there eyes are hiding much deeper thoughts and accusations but there lips are sealed as they perform their duty to both the canvas and their choice of employment.
Instead of the space receding with necessary depth behind the curtains, in intrudes in jagged pieces, much like the still life melon in the foreground that has often been compared to a scythe by modern art critics. The masks that the two right figures have instead of faces, while frightening and solicitous on first confrontation, are in fact the result of Picasso taking inspiration from Iberian sculpture and African masks during the period. Picasso assumed the original masks had functioned as magical protectors against dangerous spirits he said that this work was his “first exorcism painting”. There is a strong connotation of “sexual anxiety” clear through the work. The savagery Picasso perceived through African culture was interpreted as a source of vitality and renewal that he wanted to incorporate for both himself and other European painters. All things considered, this work is heavily tied to the cultural atmosphere of Paris at the time and conveys very specific ideas to audiences. A specific threat Picasso would have had in mind was the life-threatening sexual disease circling Paris at the time, this work being an attempt to link sexual pleasure mortality. In its brutal treatment of the body and disjointed colour amalgamation, the work marks both a societal break for normative ideals and a deep-seated art world break from set composition and perspective.
To conclude, the hacking and impetuous brush-strokes of Pablo Picasso in his 1097 work ‘Les Demoiselles d’Avignon’ acted as an unexpected turning point remarked upon in every history of modern and transitory post-modern art. Picasso at the time felt as if his whole understanding of painting itself was revised and remodelled during the production of the work as he conveyed ideas of “sexual anxiety”, prostitution and sexual disease in the Paris landscape of the time. The work is both a historical and artistic tribute to the world of the time. From the same strand, Manet’s work ‘Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe’ (1863) was one of a number of impressionist works that broke away from the classical view that art should obey established conventions and seek to achieve timelessness. Its destruction or collapsing of space techniques combined with loose velocious paint application dismantled both expectations of art at that moment, and expectations of modern women through the heavily debated subject of Victorine Meurend (Manet’s muse) who adapted the modernist study of the nude through her confronting gaze and debateable state of intentional undress.