In class on May 1st, we began by wrapping up our discussion of Surrealism. We looked at the work by Frida Kahlo, The Two Fridas, taking time to discuss how this work was a reflection of her own identity, as well as sources of inspiration. I had not known that Frida Kahlo was a Surrealist (though she would deny this classification – as her paintings reflect her own reality), so it was interesting to learn about a female Surrealist artist! In discussing her sources of inspiration we covered the impact of folk art in her artistic process, which strays from the traditional impact of high art.

We then moved on to considering the further plunge into abstraction, with works such as De Stijl’s Composition en Rouge Blue et Jaune (Composition with red, blue, and yellow). Abstract works like this one use reduction to achieve their artistic goals. After looking at works from Europe, we shifted to American art – looking at works by American Abstract Expressionists.

Today in class we talked about post-modernism. I had the feeling that this class presented an intersection between itself and the 411 seminar course. It was interesting to talk about post-modernism and deconstruction in a different setting. We discussed how we don’t subscribe to this eternal idea of “progress” that has haunted art history for so long, not really. Deconstruction played a huge role in this because it introduces the revolutionary idea that immutable meaning simply no longer exists. Things are always changing as well as cannons.

We talked about Judy Chicago’s “Dinner Party” and how it introduces feminist art unto the “big leagues”. I think the way the course is taught, successfully attempts to reintroduce important female artists to the conversation all the way from the Renaissance to the contemporary era. So today, when we discussed how women have been under-appreciated in art history, my immediate reaction was slight confusion. This mistake of hindsight is very telling. At the end of the day, it is artworks like Chicago’s “Dinner Party” that allow me to perceive art history as heterogenous.

Today in class we covered art between the wars. The first thing I want to talk about is architectural innovation. We started our discussion with the revolutionary designs of Gerrit Rietveld, whose Schroeder House epitomized the concept of architectural reduction. The seamless integration of colored areas with lines of joints in his iconic chair epitomized Rietveld’s mastery of form and function, showcasing a bold departure from traditional design principles. Similarly, the ethos of utilitarianism embodied by Walter Gropius and the Bauhaus school resonated deeply with me. The workshop-like environment fostered a holistic approach to art and technology, exemplified by the innovative use of materials such as glass and metal infrastructure. Gropius’s emphasis on the socle underscored the fusion of aesthetics and functionality, heralding a new era in architectural design.

Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye stood out as a paragon of Purism, with its simplified forms and reduced ornamentation embodying the essence of modernity. The incorporation of pilotis and absence of decoration underscored Le Corbusier’s vision of architecture as a machine for living, while the use of machine-age materials in furniture further reinforced the influence of industrialization on design aesthetics.

Transitioning to postwar art, the shift of the art world’s capital from Paris to America became palpable as we delved into Abstract Expressionism. Arshile Gorky’s “The Lover is the Cock’s Comb” and Jackson Pollock’s “Male and Female” and “Autumn Rhythm” exemplified the movement’s emphasis on gestural abstraction and action painting. Pollock is one of my personal favorites, and I liked the mention of the Primitivist Pollock we have in the museum as I did write a paper on it a couple semesters ago!

Today we started class by delving into Expressionism, particularly the works of Pablo Picasso and George Braque. Picasso’s “Les Demoiselles d’Avignon” was particularly striking, as it challenged the very essence of representational art, eliciting shock from viewers with its bold departure from reality. The intentional manipulation of line, plane, color, mass, and void underscored the rejection of mimetic constraints, paving the way for the emergence of cubism.

As we delved deeper into the evolution of cubism, from its nascent stages in analytic cubism to its full realization in synthetic cubism, I was fascinated by the collaboration between Picasso and Braque. Their partnership in Paris exemplified the intellectual ferment of the time, as they dissected form and reduced color to earth tones, echoing the influence of Cézanne. The meticulous deconstruction of recognizable objects into facets and shapes was something I found interesting, as it blurred the boundaries between perception and reality, a theme underscored by Henri Bergson’s philosophy on the ever-changing nature of experience.

The incorporation of words, such as in Picasso’s “Guitar, Sheet Music, and Glass,” added another layer of meaning, emphasizing the interplay between idea and reality. As we explored synthetic cubism and the technique of “papier collé,” I was struck by the transformative power of perception, as disparate elements were assembled to create wholly new compositions, challenging conventional notions of representation.

Today I did not attend class because I was feeling sick, however I did do the reading so I will make this post about that.

I want to talk about the notion of Avant-Guarde. I think it is interesting that instead of referring to a particular movement (which is how most people tend to interpret it in my experience) it is a term that emerges almost through the necessity of describing how art movements operated in the late 19th Century moving forward. While reading about it, and about the revolutionary implication of Avant-Guarde, it occurred to me that this too, was a complete turning point in the way art was produced. As we know, before Neo-Classicism we spoke of art periods, widely scholastic and in their own way, pretty homogenous. It has always been so that a new period begins through a departure from the previous, but Avant-Guarde is something else, provocative is part of the definition. It is an intentional, instead of a gradual step forward.

My favorite example of this is of course, Duchamp. So ahead of his time that he is still a controversial topic of discussion. With my knowledge of post-modernism, I think I can say that the introduction of conceptual art would be crucial to the unraveling of art in the 20th and 21st Century.

Today in class we discussed post-Impressionism. We began our discussion by exploring the works of Paul Cézanne, which emerge as a fascinating departure from the Impressionist style. Cézanne’s dedication to capturing the essence of his native landscape, exemplified by his depictions of Mont Sainte-Victoire, resonates deeply with me. His meticulous attention to different light effects and his use of regular straight lines demonstrate a deliberate departure from the spontaneous brushwork of his Impressionist predecessors. I was particularly intrigued by Cézanne’s method of copying from Poussin, as evidenced in his scene from Bibemus Quarry, which he revisited a decade later with a markedly abstract approach, characterized by boxy forms and darker, thicker outlines.

Cézanne’s famous dictum, “Treat nature by the cylinder, the sphere, and the cone,” encapsulates his philosophy of reduction and simplification in art, which was evident not only in his landscapes but also in his still lifes. His still life compositions, such as “Basket of Apples,” “Peppermint Bottle,” and “Apples in a Bowl,” reveal a mastery of form and color. I was struck by how Cézanne effortlessly manipulated space and perspective, creating distinct areas of warm and cool colors to delineate objects on a horizontal surface. The way common elements like tablecloths and fabrics seem to spill out from the table underscores his keen sense of observation and meticulous attention to detail.

During yesterday’s class we discussed Impressionsim, which is probably one of the period’s I am most familiar with. However as it usually goes, I am struck by the profound influence of light and visible brushstrokes on the movement’s style. The goal of capturing the transitory feel of modern life, as a continuation of a form of realism, resonates deeply with me. Édouard Manet’s pivotal role as a hinge between Realism and Impressionism became evident as we delved into his works. “Flâneur” stands out as a portrayal of the modern city dweller, embodying intelligence and sophistication while navigating urban life.

In examining Manet’s paintings such as “Luncheon on the Grass” and “Olympia,” I couldn’t help but admire his bold departure from traditional conventions. The deliberate absence of depth in “Luncheon on the Grass,” coupled with its focus on the foreground, modernizes classical themes in a way that challenges viewers to reconsider their perspectives. Similarly, “Olympia” confronts societal norms with its portrayal of a Parisian prostitute, engaging viewers directly and presenting a stark contrast to traditional depictions of women in art. Manet’s commitment to supporting modern art through his rejection of conventional standards and embrace of visible brushwork and irregularities is both admirable and inspiring.

In stark contrast to last week’s lecture we have Realism. Goya is one of my all-time favorite artists. I think that the realists get something particularly right about the way they decide to show what the real world looks like, and I have always liked that realism does not mean the same thing as naturalism. And the fact that when all of these artists decided they needed tos how the state of affairs as accurately to life as possible, their instinct was not to go towards the most life-like or illusionistic depiction of what the world looks like, but the most accurate synthesis of what it is to live in the real world.

Form takes precedence from color (again, opposite to romanticism) which is why these artists decided that light was particularly important, as it helped show the true form of things. Profe Plesch talked about this one Corot that she thinks the book miscategorizes as a romantic painting while it in fact is a great example of a realistic landscape. I think that honestly, from discussing wether this painting belonged to one period or the other I learnt a lot about what a realistic landscape is supposed to look like.

I have to admit Romanticism is one of my favorite period of western art history. I think there is something compelling about a movement that recenters in favour of nature and the grandeur of nature. We talked a little while ago in my seminar class about Wolfflin’s categories for Baroque and Renaissance art, and frankly while listening to this lecture I kept thinking that Wolfflin’s categories work well while comparing romanticism to neoclassicism. Romanticism favors color over form, and it is as painterly as can get. It is emotional and dramatic, there is no containment of figures and the composition cannot be clear cut between the represented figures. It also stirs away from human’s as the center of the arts, and I tend to incline towards this sort of depictions.

I am not so much a fan of Lord Byron as a person, but I do have to admit that “Death of Sardanapalus” by Delacroix is one of my favorite paintings inspired by literature.

Neoclassicism is the beginning of what we call art movements. A group of artists who make the conscious decision to do a certain thing when it comes to the arts. After professor Plesch pointed out that our study abroad is the heir of the grand tour, I could not help but think of the artists driven by their love for antiquity and classical order, and see my personal college experience in this school of thought. They were all young and driven by the same ideas, particularly the love for philosophy struck me.

We talked about Parnassus by Raphael Mengs. I found it funny that his main influence for this work is also someone called Raphael… I digress. The work had such a stark contrast to the stuff we were looking at Monday that it almost appeared plain to me. I don’t think this is a negative quality at all though, it is magnificent and straight-edged, clean. It remains sort of escapist in my opinion, there seems to seep the influence of Rococo in the light-heartedness of the subject, they still exist in a world beyond worries.