Claude Monet's Painting Vetheuil in Summer - Essay Example

Research Essay Thesis ment This essay researches the history, general and artistic, behind Claude Monet’s painting Vetheuil in Summer, and consequently uses the painting’s contextual setting to disprove the concept of notions of progress assertion that advances in science, technology and industry should improve human living conditions. The paper intends to prove that the notions are misguided as art is a highly subjective form of expression. The Object: Vetheuil in Summer Figure 1: Photograph of Vetheuil in Summer, 1879 Oil on Canvas by Claude Monet1 Claude Monet’s ‘Vetheuil in Summer’ is one of the painter’s series of 1880s paintings in which he captures the same scene several times in order to record light changes at various times of days, the passing of seasons and its effect on the subject. This painting illustrates Monet’s career long aim of open air painting and search for novel ways of expression in terms of colour and shapes; and veering away from then traditional scenes and objects. To achieve this, the painter used bright colours and juxtaposition, shunned academic or orthodox painting norms and with scientific precision, recorded passage of time through light, mist and rain effects on landscape paintings of a subject. Monet is the father of French Impressionism, a term coined after his painting ‘Impressions, Sunrise’ submitted to the premier impressionist exhibition held in France by avant garde artists disaffected by the contemporary art world’s rejection of their works. Moffett observes that Vetheuil in Summer was painted from opposite the Vetheuil town across the river Seine with defined sensations of colour and light that create abstractness2. This landscape was painted after the fifth impressionist exhibition, was submitted and accepted by the Salon’s jury which actually changed selection criteria to accept impressionist works. History According to Kalitina and Brodskaya, Monet was living in Napoleon II’s second empire, a French political regime backed by the elite class. His works shows that he had no interest in the political or socio-economic problems of the time, but was detached from societal expectations as evidenced by his courtship and marriage of a poor woman with a lower social standing despite his father’s disapproval3. Initially, Monet’s painting career conformed to the industry rules and practice, through as seen through various works, trends towards experimentations and study of various elements effects can be identified in his pre-impressionist works. Ignoring the national struggle, he focused instead on promoting the intimate and everyday life situations, interaction of the elements with open spaces, deemphasized humans and put them as elements in his landscapes. Despite his detachment the painter could not escape the events of his time such as war and economic trends. After the interruption of the Franco-Prussian war, he wholly shifted towards impressionism, a change associated with his move to 1871 move to Argenteuil and association with like-minded young artists. In the painter’s time, the only way for an artiste to get recognition of his works and earn a living from his profession was by having works accepted by the Paris Salon’s and thereby exhibited1. Kalitina and Brodskaya explain that the Salon, whose name was derived from the Louvre’s Salon Carre, was established during the seventeenth century reign of King Louis XIV by Prime Minister Jean Baptiste Colbert. Its exhibitions were held every two years in different locations around France, and by the time Monet was painting, it had already been in existence and entrenched in the French art world for a century. The Salon had a jury made up of teachers from the Ecole des Beaux-Arts who selected paintings worth being exhibited. The Salon jury mostly favoured its former students’ works, and had rigid requirements based on traditionally accepted genres such as Greek mythology, biblical expression, fashionable individual scenes, portraits and ideal landscapes composed by painters. Admission of paintings to the Salon was difficult for a newcomer to the industry. In addition to genre specification, a painting had to adhere to strict technical requirements of professionalism such as smoothness and blended-in brush strokes, and these rules allowed no room for deviance or creativity. Faced with this rigidity, works rejection, financial strain, and criticism from contemporary artist Gustave Coubert, Monet gave up on the establishment, and wholly turned to painting impressionist landscapes and still life works characterized by light and reflections in water1. In conjunction with other painters, Monet spearheaded the formation of an exhibition society in agitation for the right to showcase works and driven by the need to earn some income to pay off debts and support his family. In the society’s first exhibition, he submitted a painting which he named ‘Impression, Sunrise’. However, Monet quit the society after the fourth exhibition in 1878, and moved to Vetheuil on the Seine he painted views of the town at all seasons, flowers and still life. It was in Vetheuil that Monet completed Vetheuil in Summer painting. A university of Michigan bulletin2 observes that Monet’s three years at Vetheuil were turbulent and trouble ridden due to his wife’s ill health leading to death in 1879, isolation from friends and family as well as the vibrant arts centre at Paris and persistent financial problems. In addition, the painter was also encountering criticism of his paintings, which may have contributed to his depression and a shift from impressionism to a technique more in line with the salon’s specifications. Another painting from this rough time expressing his sentiments, La Debacle,3 shows Monet’s spontaneity, free spirited nature, fleeting touch, incisive perception, inquiring nature and talent. In 1883 Monet moved to Givenchy, and his works at last appealed to collectors, whose interest gave Monet professional as well as financial freedom. Monet’s works are important to today dues to their visual sensitiveness and strength as well as trademark use of space and light4. Sterling and Salinger state that5 the painting features the dominant Romanesque church, with discernible brush strokes creating reflections on water. Vetheuil in Summer is similar to his other paintings focusing on Vetheuil such as Vetheuil in the Fog, Vetheuil in the Winter, A Path in the Ile Saint-Martin, The Seine at Vetheuil and Ile Aux Fleurs1. These works study the town in different seasons or at different times of the day and painted in Monet’s characteristic manner, thoughtfully uses light and colour to show the effect of weather on the town’s appearance. Notions of progress Parker and Deregowski2 opine that notions of progress is an ambiguous concept revolving around the idea that changes in science, technology and industry should produce improvements in the quality of humans life through application of skill and reason. Since skill and reason evolve over time, so should artistic standards, to be flexible and accepting of changes and innovation. Gay3 notes that modern artists find industry conventions and rules constricting and hence rebel to make novel works. This impatience with artistic limitations is expressed in new styles or approaches such as distortions, deformation, admixture and unorthodox content. Modern artists, like Monet in Vetheuil in Summer, embrace their personality and world view by disregarding convention and accepted styles. This approach is disrespected by the mainstream industry; or in Monet’s case, the Salon Jury, as poor or bad paintings, and referred to as in terms such as eccentric or being in bad taste. Vetheuil in Summer illustrates that art is highly subjective mode of expression that can be expressed in various ways, and fails the notion of progress concept since it may or may not benefit humanity. Bibliography Bulletin - Museums of Art and Archaeology. Vol. 1 - 4. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1978. Kalitina, N. and Brodskaya, N. Claude Monet: Parkstone, 2012. Parker, D. M., and Derêgowski, J.B. Perception and Artistic Style. Amsterdam: North-Holland: 1991. Sterling, C. and Salinger, M. M. French Paintings: A Catalogue of the Collection of the Metropolitan Museum. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1967. Moffett, C. S. Impressionist and Post-impressionist Paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art: 1985. Gay, V. P. Progress and Values in the Humanities: Comparing Culture and Science. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010. Read More