Henri Matisse's The Dessert - Essay Example

? Henri Matisse's The Dessert: Harmony in Red, also called The Red Room by Russian critics, is a Fauvist painting from the early 20th Century that has some elements in common with Impressionist works. Matisse painted the piece to fill an order, but his inspiration came from his own preferences of style and expression. Matisse sought to create a painting that focused more on impression than on specific detail, and hence wanted to offer a scene that was different from what might be captured in a photograph. His style also called for the use of flatter shapes to emphasize the use of the canvas, rather than creating three dimensions and offering a window into the scene. To further develop this flat and expressionist theme, he used organic and floral symbols, such as those seen on the table cloth. The chair, at bottom left, has a flatness to it as well—all of this showing that Matisse hoped to achieve independence from realism and his own expression in this painting. Matisse also had some indecision about the color—the painting was first green, then later he changed it and repainted things blue. Finally, before the piece was sent off to a Russian art collector, Matisse painted over the blue to make the painting red. Thus, it is apparent that colors were very important to the artist, and the emotions that colors inspired influenced him in deciding which color was appropriate. Overall, Matisse's inspiration for the painting was a desire to show what was within his own head, rather than to depict reality—he therefore used his own preference in color, light, and shape, and also avoided creating a focal point in the painting. Instead, he made a sort of scene with multiple subjects in it, and left nowhere for the eye to be drawn to as a center—a sort of protest against older styles that tried to be as precise in color, detail, shape, and scale as photographs may be while trying to draw the eye to a center point using proportions and invisible lines. What I like most about this piece is that it makes a point of using non-traditional methods of expression and illustration. The Impressionist approach to painting creates a painting that offers a look into the artist's mind, and hence we see a far more unique scene or subject than would be possible if the artist was trying to depict the scene realistically. I also like how the scene uses a dominant color. The use of red as a sort of template color allows the addition of other colors to be more magnified, and thus the contrast against red becomes sharper and more impressive. The way the paint is mixed, the colors also appear very soft and simple, without any sort of gradient or overwhelming vividness. The painting also uses shape in a way that pleases my eye. The organic shapes on the table cloth are the obvious ones. If red is the defining color in the painting, then the curves of the vegetation are the defining shape. I also like how the patterns in blue are echoed in the shapes of the fruit, flowers, and also in the plants on the painting on the wall—the shapes all seem to be juxtaposed with little forcing, yet fit together harmoniously. This makes the painting very easy to look at, rather than a harsh clashing of hard, competing lines. The painting on the wall is another element that I like, as it creates a sort of surreal feeling in the paint—the irony of a painting within a painting. The painting is enclosed within a gold frame, and it thus has an obvious separation from the main scene, yet it still relates to the main scene both directly and indirectly. The indirect relation to the main scene is that the painting on the wall offers a pleasing contrast in color, in a way that really complements the entire color scheme. On the other hand, it also seems to be part of a larger set of colors across the whole painting that includes some of the fruits as a residual part of the concentration of green in the wall painting, while the red house and blue sky in the wall painting have the same relation to the larger scene. The final part about the painting that I like is how it lacks a focal point. This feature is something the artist did completely on purpose, as a decision to avoid the traditional approach toward art of making all parts of the scene tie into one center whether obvious or subtle. Many viewers will look at this painting in an attempt to find the center, but the fact that it is not there will leave them guessing, while forcing them to inspect every element of the painting in detail while wondering if each part is important and central. I enjoy this aspect overall because it makes the painting unique and gives it a sort of rebellious, nonconformist attitude that attempts to change the way the artist approaches art as well as the way the audience views it. Change is exciting, and a new take on painting makes this painting stand out to me from others that don't challenge the norm. What I don't like about this painting begins with the subject matter. I am unimpressed with how the subject matter is something that is rather mundane and does not engage the viewer with any specific message of its own. While I realize that the subject matter can offer serve as a distraction from the artist's style, and therefore perhaps the main message the artist hope to convey, I believe that there are more interesting or exotic scenes that could be used for greater experimentation in the realm of color, scale, shapes, lines, and texture. I also do not particularly enjoy the way in which Matisse attempts to avoid traditional three dimensional illusion, as he also strays too far away from making something that is very two dimension and emphasizes the flat surface of the painting. What Matisse does, it seems to me, is present a lack of proportion and jumbled perspective that is somewhere in between perfect and imperfect. I would prefer that the artist take a more extreme approach to dimensionality, in the way that other, later styles would do. I believe he was trying to stray far from three dimensionality, but he should have gone further to express this idea of flat painting even more clearly. Finally, the painting lacked lines and shadows. I found the very few lines to be too vague and faint to really add definition to specific objects, and hence objects tended to blend together in a way that was very unappealing. An example of this is the tablecloth blending into the wall. I would find it more suitable to use blurry lines that are thick and colorful rather than thin and dark to make a more organic division between objects. Shadows as well would have added more depth and color to the painting, and their lacking only highlights the attempt Matisse makes at two dimensionality and its awkwardness. Overall, the lines that do exist in the painting are too crisp, and I would like if they were all softer, another example being the lines that illustrate the chair at bottom left. This painting had a definite influence on art that came afterward, as it was one of the first paintings in the early wave of modern art. The idea of refusing to have a focal point in the painting would be extremely influential in the general attitude of modern art that sought to defy the usual methods and conventions, and shrug off the traits that made fine art so refined. In addition, Matisse's attempt at two dimensionality also was one of the forerunners of a revolution to come, especially in Cubism. The approach toward painting that wanted to emphasize the flatness of the canvas would follow similar methods as Matisse does in this painting, and would go even further in skewing proportions and rejecting depth. Modern art would also be influenced by the use of color as the artist sees fit, rather than as reality dictates. Matisse's manipulation of shapes and form also would be carried on to modern art, as artists later would begin to use form and shape to further their expression and draw the viewer's eye to different parts of the painting. Overall, this painting was inspired by Matisse's own internal vision of common scenery, and hence he gave an artist's impression. It was also inspired by his interest in using all the elements of the painting as tools to express emotion and ideas, hence he manipulated things as he saw fit. The painting has many pleasing qualities, and some that also, understandably, would not find agreement in many contemporary critics as well as modern viewers such as myself. The painting definitely was of interest and controversy in its time, and went on to set a new standard for modern art and ideas. Read More