Paint to Reality Part III

Schiele's decadence over time

Schiele, whose most well-known portraits resemble concentration camp victims, started off with conventional but very expressive portraits.

Also, almost all the portraits of his wife (those that don't include him or some young child) are the least disfigured.

I think time, and affection, cleansed some of the turmoil that he must have been feeling when he painted the majority of his work.

And ultimately, I have always thought that these German Expressionists, just after the First World War, and just before the Second, were full of self-pity and self-aggrandizement. Instead of finding solutions for their deteriorating Germany, they preferred to wallow in their victimhood.

No wonder Hitler found it so easy to manipulate them.


Portrait of Leopold Czihaczek, Schiele, 1907


Portrait of Edith, Schiele, 1915


Seated Woman, Schiele, 1918


Forest with Sunlit Clearing in the Background, Schiele, 1907

Although one of his earliest works, it looks like with Forest, Schiele was really trying to look beyond the dark forest (of the present) into the clearing of the future.

It is too bad that he never continued with this vision.

---

Paint to Reality Part II

Portraits from Arles, to Vienna, to Auschwitz


Self-Portrait, Vincent Van Gogh, 1889


Portrait of Mime Van Osen, Egon Schiele, 1910


Auschwitz Portrait, 1945

---

Paint to Reality Part I

From Arles, to Vienna, to Auschwitz

The Neue Gallerie in New York has an exhibition entitled: Van Gogh and Expressionism. German expressionism has always struck me as a narcissistic resignation to the evils of the world. And for all of Van Gogh's earnestness, he certainly showed a more restrained resignation that surely influenced the expressionists, who let it escape uninhibitedly.

I couldn't help but make these juxtapositions. Or better yet, the logical conclusion.


Van Gogh's Bedroom at Arles (detail), Vincent Van Gogh, 1889


Schiele's Room in Neulengbach (detail), Egon Schiele, 1911


Auschwitz Barracks

---

The Move Toward Individuality

Rennaissance painter Lippi's rendition of Mary


Madonna and Child with Angels,
(Fra.) Filippo Lippi, ca. 1457-1465
[Click image to view larger version]

Early renaissance painters such as Fra. Filipo Lippi, contemporary of Leonardo, are the precursors to self-expression.

I am analyzing the Lippi’s curious painting “Madonna and Child with Angels” to make this point across.

The painting is very beautiful in many ways:

- Mary’s delicate features
- The wispy veil around her head and neck (Lippi was Boticelli’s teacher)
- Her humble hands placed together in prayer
- That lovely translucent halo around her head (and Jesus' too)
- And even her simple, modest clothing.

But, there are also many strange elements:

- The puffed up, almost adult-looking Jesus with the strange expression (although many painters don't really depict Jesus as a true baby, since he is the Son of God), albeit wrapped up in wispy swaddling clothes
- The cropped head of what is presumably an angle, behind the baby Jesus, with only one eye showing
- Jesus being carried by these angel boys
- Mary, who is not looking at Jesus, nor really taking care of him
- The mischievous/devious look on the angel – who looks more like a little boy than an angel
- This same angel, looking out at us!
- The solid and cumbersome, almost straw-like wings, cropped off, on the angel boy, unlike the delicate wisps of halo and cloth around Mary and Jesus
- And the funny arm-rest, which looks like a snake's head

I always find that these great renaissance painters put in these strange elements in their paintings.

I think it is partly experimentation, to try something different.

And this was the time when religious art was being supplanted by non-religious art, and also other historical references (the ancient Greeks, for example – i.e. classicism)

Also, it is part of self-expression, to do things their own way, with their own meanings. To be independent and individual. It was after all during the renaissance that the artist started to become recognized individually as the one who did the painting. Before that, it was pretty much anonymous.

And self-expression can lead one into strange territories. Rather than tell the story (usually Biblical stories), the artist wants to tell his story. What does the angel's devious little face mean? What does the snake-arm rest mean? Why is Jesus' face so fleshy, and why is Mary’s face so slender (although you could argue that it was just a different in styles of painting). What is she praying about that she is not holding her Son?

I should add that Mary praying while disregarding her son is an unusual situation. Mary is almost always depicted as the Mother of God. In this instance, she is depicted as an independent person, different from the Mother of God role, and has acquired some sort of "freedom" from that role. This is a little disturbing, since we cannot really connect with this Mary - who is she, that she is leaving briefly this Biblical, eternal role?

Finally, as comparison, here is Boticelli's Mary, Jesus and adoring angel. The emotions and behaviors are more of what we would expect. The surprising thing, thought, is that Boticelli is Lippi's student. But, later on with his Primavera and The Birth of Venus, Boticelli resumes and expands on these themes of self-expression and experimentation that would remain part of Art's modus operandi to this day.

Madonna and Child with Adoring Angel, Botticelli, 1468

---