For Cinematography we have an assignment to go to the Museum of Fine Arts, select a painting with a landscape orientation (so similar to how our cameras shoot) and then do a 1 page write up about what you see that's interesting and why you picked it - a clinical look and a personal look.
I found it entertaining to wander around the MFA this morning for homework. I had a really hard time picking though. I managed to only take pictures of 7 paintings (we have to have a copy of the painting along with the write up). And now I've narrowed it down to 2.
The first is a Monet. It makes me feel cold, and it reminds me of the sky and the snow that we had yesterday. Even though it is not a realistic image at all it still captures a very real moment in time that 150 years later still feels like now.
The second is a Degas, which is much more interesting compositionally, but doesn't make me feel as much as the Monet does. The old woman on the right follows the traditional compositional rules. Her body is on the right third line, her eyes are on the top third line. The mass of her black dress is balanced out by the light wall that fills the negative space. She is formal and old school, even in the detail of the face. Her daughters on the other hand are practically falling out of the frame. There is a movement and energy to them that reflects their youth. They break all the rules compositionally.
Yeah, I guess I'll do the Degas.
Oh, found these quotes that wikipedia attributes to Degas. That just makes me like him even more.
Quotations
"Everyone has talent at twenty-five. The difficulty is to have it at fifty." (Auden & Kronenberger 1966)
"In painting you must give the idea of the true by means of the false." (Auden & Kronenberger 1966)
other than compositionally ... the Degas has much more of a 'story' around it. If i were to hang one in my living room i'd probably pick the monet, but for impact the degas has more behind it ... but on second thought ... i think i'd prefer the degas in my living room ... would spark conversation. ~k2
ReplyDeletebut that Monet is very cool (cold!)
ReplyDelete~k2 again
I love that Monet, but the Degas made for a better report.
ReplyDeleteClearly I'm behind, but I would pick the Degas also. The Monet is pretty, but ordinary.
ReplyDeleteHere's what I wrote about it:
ReplyDeleteThe painting I picked is Edgar Degas’s Duchessa di Montejasi with Her Daughters, Elena and Camilla. It is interesting because of the dichotomy between the duchess, Degas’s aunt, and her daughters. It is almost like having a double exposure on the negative. Each subject – the woman, and the girls – could be her own painting. The old woman follows all of the traditional rules of composition. Her body is on the right third line, her eyes are on the upper third line. The mass of her black dress balances out against the light color of the wall and window in the negative space. Her pose is stiff and formal and her face is captured very realistically. By herself you would barely be able to tell that Degas was an Impressionist.
The girls on the other hand break all the rules. They are practically falling out of the canvas. They have no nose room at all, even with the one in back looking out at the artist. There is a movement and dynamism suggested in their lack of a formal pose and in the softer and more Impressionistic style of their faces and features.
When Degas made the painting he was in his early 40s, clearly older than his cousins and presumably noticeably younger than his aunt. In his composition he manages to comment on both age and youth. I look at the duchess and feel like I know everything I need to about her: stuffy old lady. But I look at the girls and wonder about them. What are they doing there at the edge of the frame? Playing the piano maybe, but it could be anything. Do they get along with each other or do they fight? Do they fight with each other, but get along when they need to combine forces to cause mischief to their mother? By putting them close together and breaking the compositional rules Degas doesn’t just introduce the unknown, but also a desire to know. If he had shown the piano (or whatever it is they’re doing) the girls would suddenly be much less interesting. We would know about them and there would be nothing left to learn.