Monday, September 29, 2008
Monet's Lilies Set New World Art Record
Submitted by Osborne
Recently a late period work by Claude Monet was bought at auction for over 80 million US dollars at Christie's in London. The painting, entitled 'Le Bassin aux Nympheas' set the record for a painting by Monet. The previous record for one of the impressionist master's works was 41 million dollars. This record selling price kicked off a week-long auction of major artistic works.
When the painting was unveiled, hands shot up all over the auction house. Six would-be buyers bid furiously for the piece, speaking with their clients on their phones. When the price reached 70 million, one of the auctioneers told a women in the front row to take as long as she likes. The woman, Tania Buckrell Pos of Arts and Management International, ultimately won the piece for her company.Formerly owned by J. Irwin and Xenia S. Miller, two collectors from Columbus, Indiana, the painting is one of the most important pieces of Monet's late period.
Monet signed and dated this and three other pieces from this time in his life, and put them up for sale himself. One of the other water lily garden pieces is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, while another is in a private collection. Sadly, the fourth painting in the series was cut in two shortly before World War II.
The painting was purchased in 1971 for US $320,000 and was kept in a private collection, away from public viewings. Mr. Miller died in 2004, and his wife died in February 2008, leaving their estate to their children. In their lifetimes, the Millers supported historic buildings in Columbus, turning the city into a showcase of modern architecture. The painting was likely auctioned off to help pay estate taxes.
Monet is considered to be the founder of the impressionist movement. In fact, the term impressionism comes from the title of one of his paintings, 'Impression, Sunrise'. A prominent art critic of the age coined the term as a derogatory statement, but impressionist painters gladly adopted the title.He developed his style while visiting the Louvre in Paris as a young man. He stayed at one of the local hotels in Paris France. Other artists had come to the Louvre in Paris in order to copy the works of the previous masters that covered the walls. Monet decided to sit by a window and create works based on what he saw outside. Thus, his impression of nature flowed onto his canvas.
Monet created his water garden as a method of rerouting a river. He chose a wide variety of water lilies in order to bring as many different colours to the garden. The decision to include so many different flowers implies that he purposefully made the garden for use in his work.
After Monet's death from lung cancer, his home and water lily garden was given to his heirs, who then donated the land to French Academy of Fine Arts in 1966. In 1980, the property was opened for public visits. Through the Fondation Claude Monet, the home was refurbished to represent the exact living situation of the artist at the time of his greatest work.
Recently a late period work by Claude Monet was bought at auction for over 80 million US dollars at Christie's in London. The painting, entitled 'Le Bassin aux Nympheas' set the record for a painting by Monet. The previous record for one of the impressionist master's works was 41 million dollars. This record selling price kicked off a week-long auction of major artistic works.
When the painting was unveiled, hands shot up all over the auction house. Six would-be buyers bid furiously for the piece, speaking with their clients on their phones. When the price reached 70 million, one of the auctioneers told a women in the front row to take as long as she likes. The woman, Tania Buckrell Pos of Arts and Management International, ultimately won the piece for her company.Formerly owned by J. Irwin and Xenia S. Miller, two collectors from Columbus, Indiana, the painting is one of the most important pieces of Monet's late period.
Monet signed and dated this and three other pieces from this time in his life, and put them up for sale himself. One of the other water lily garden pieces is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, while another is in a private collection. Sadly, the fourth painting in the series was cut in two shortly before World War II.
The painting was purchased in 1971 for US $320,000 and was kept in a private collection, away from public viewings. Mr. Miller died in 2004, and his wife died in February 2008, leaving their estate to their children. In their lifetimes, the Millers supported historic buildings in Columbus, turning the city into a showcase of modern architecture. The painting was likely auctioned off to help pay estate taxes.
Monet is considered to be the founder of the impressionist movement. In fact, the term impressionism comes from the title of one of his paintings, 'Impression, Sunrise'. A prominent art critic of the age coined the term as a derogatory statement, but impressionist painters gladly adopted the title.He developed his style while visiting the Louvre in Paris as a young man. He stayed at one of the local hotels in Paris France. Other artists had come to the Louvre in Paris in order to copy the works of the previous masters that covered the walls. Monet decided to sit by a window and create works based on what he saw outside. Thus, his impression of nature flowed onto his canvas.
Monet created his water garden as a method of rerouting a river. He chose a wide variety of water lilies in order to bring as many different colours to the garden. The decision to include so many different flowers implies that he purposefully made the garden for use in his work.
After Monet's death from lung cancer, his home and water lily garden was given to his heirs, who then donated the land to French Academy of Fine Arts in 1966. In 1980, the property was opened for public visits. Through the Fondation Claude Monet, the home was refurbished to represent the exact living situation of the artist at the time of his greatest work.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Ansel Adams Photography
Buy artwork by Ansel Adams at Art.com
"Ansel Adams," wrote John Szarkowski, of the N.Y. Museum of Modern Art, "attuned himself more precisely than any photographer before him to a visual understanding of the specific quality of the light that fell on a specific place at a specific moment.
For Adams the natural landscape is not a fixed and solid sculpture but an insubstantial image, as transient as the light that continually redifines it. This sensibility to the specificity of light was the motive that forced Adams to develop his legendary photographic technique." His lasting legacy includes helping to elevate photography to an art comparable with painting and music, and equally capable of expressing emotion and beauty. As he reminded his students, “It is easy to take a photograph, but it is harder to make a masterpiece in photography than in any other art medium”. Adams's photograph The Tetons and the Snake River - Grand Tetons National Park has the distinction of being one of the 115 images recorded on the Voyager Golden Record aboard the Voyager spacecraft. These images were selected to convey information about humans, plants and animals, and geological features of the Earth to a possible alien civilization.
These photographs eloquently mirror his favorite saying, a Gaelic mantra, which states “I know that I am one with beauty and that my comrades are one. Let our souls be mountains, Let our spirits be stars, Let our hearts be worlds.” Realistic about development and the subsequent loss of habitat, Adams advocated for balanced growth, but was pained by the ravages of “progress”. He stated, “We all know the tragedy of the dustbowls, the cruel unforgivable erosions of the soil, the depletion of fish or game, and the shrinking of the noble forests. And we know that such catastrophes shrivel the spirit of the people…The wilderness is pushed back, man is everywhere.
Solitude, so vital to the individual man, is almost nowhere.”
View Ansel Adams Photography Posters at viewposters.com.
"Ansel Adams," wrote John Szarkowski, of the N.Y. Museum of Modern Art, "attuned himself more precisely than any photographer before him to a visual understanding of the specific quality of the light that fell on a specific place at a specific moment.
For Adams the natural landscape is not a fixed and solid sculpture but an insubstantial image, as transient as the light that continually redifines it. This sensibility to the specificity of light was the motive that forced Adams to develop his legendary photographic technique." His lasting legacy includes helping to elevate photography to an art comparable with painting and music, and equally capable of expressing emotion and beauty. As he reminded his students, “It is easy to take a photograph, but it is harder to make a masterpiece in photography than in any other art medium”. Adams's photograph The Tetons and the Snake River - Grand Tetons National Park has the distinction of being one of the 115 images recorded on the Voyager Golden Record aboard the Voyager spacecraft. These images were selected to convey information about humans, plants and animals, and geological features of the Earth to a possible alien civilization.
These photographs eloquently mirror his favorite saying, a Gaelic mantra, which states “I know that I am one with beauty and that my comrades are one. Let our souls be mountains, Let our spirits be stars, Let our hearts be worlds.” Realistic about development and the subsequent loss of habitat, Adams advocated for balanced growth, but was pained by the ravages of “progress”. He stated, “We all know the tragedy of the dustbowls, the cruel unforgivable erosions of the soil, the depletion of fish or game, and the shrinking of the noble forests. And we know that such catastrophes shrivel the spirit of the people…The wilderness is pushed back, man is everywhere.
Solitude, so vital to the individual man, is almost nowhere.”
View Ansel Adams Photography Posters at viewposters.com.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Art since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism
Who among those of us assigned to teach the survey of art history has not struggled with the very concept of the comprehensive overview? In many colleges and universities, a foundational survey nevertheless remains the bread and butter of the art history program, the centerpiece of a disciplinary practice that Henri Zerner described two dozen years ago as "an uninspired professional routine feeding a busy academic machine."
(1) The survey text has been the indispensable corollary to this deeply entrenched yet problematic curricular offering. According to Mitchell Schwarzer in 1995, "The survey text is art history at its most grandiose, promising to reveal the complex truths of humanity through art. It is also," he continued, "art history at its most political, reducing cultural and individual differences to questionable hierarchies and generalities."
(2) When, five years earlier, Bradford Collins had addressed the challenge posed by the survey text, he, like Schwarzer, was writing about books that seek to present works of art in relation to the vast sweep of world history, and he noted, "The writing of a completely acceptable overview of art's history, impossible under any circumstance, has been rendered even more absurd by the growing pluralism within our field, which is why I think it may be time to rethink the entire introductory enterprise."
(3) The solution that Collins proposed, "a collection of separate, lengthy and in-depth analyses of major monuments, a book that would leave the issues of continuity to the individual instructor," introduces the possibility of an intellectually rigorous alternative to the dominant evolutionary paradigm, one that could be adapted to the most general of surveys or to a particular field within the history of art. "I can imagine, too," Collins wrote, "that such a book might include essays that offer competing points of view on a given work or monument.... Perhaps what we need in this area, given the methodological diversity within our field, is a range of quite different options."
(4) Some years later, Mark Miller Graham argued for a radical deconstruction of the traditional survey, which he condemned for its ties to "the authority of the panoptic gaze and the privileged perspective."
(5) First on his list of remedies is this advice: "Stop using the present generation of survey textbooks.... Those who teach the course must get hold of its agenda." Graham's list continues with calls to "stop fetishizing completeness"; "eject the canon and thematize the content"; "embody and engender the discipline of art history"; and, finally, "teach the conflicts ... the actual debate and disagreement that constitute the scholarly process."
(6) The authors of Art since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism have produced a survey text that responds surprisingly closely to many (but not all) of these prescriptions, establishing an ambitious new paradigm that solves some of the most egregious problems of the survey genre by challenging the reader to become actively engaged with the critical debates that are highlighted in the book. (Although the publication is available in a single volume, it can also be purchased as two separate volumes, the first of which deals with the period to 1944, while the second begins with 1945. My remarks here are prompted by volume 1, though many would be applicable to volume 2 as well.) That an actively engaged reader is being called forth becomes immediately apparent in the instructions--"How to use this book"--with which the book opens (pp. 10-11). Here, two text pages are reproduced with additional graphic signs pointing out features of the layout and organization that are intended to help the reader "follow the development of art through the twentieth century and up to the present day." As this wording would suggest, the presentation appears rigorously chronological, insofar as the material is organized into individual entries, each approximately five pages in length and keyed to a given year. The chronological organization is further articulated by the grouping of entries into decades, although a countermanding arbitrary quality emerges from the fact that some years have multiple entries while others are omitted altogether. In fact, as the "Preface: A Reader's Guide" (pp. 12-13) makes clear, chronology is just one of the book's organizing principles; its numerous cross-references encourage the reader to construct alternative paths to destabilize the sense of an unfolding narrative, establishing links across time to reveal the histories of, for example, national schools, particular media, stylistic developments, or thematic concerns.
Many cros-references call attention to the authors' introductory discussions of the theoretical methods that inform the entries, and these too, like the entries, are stand-alone essays by individual authors (pp. 14-48): "Psychoanalysis in Modernism and as Method," by Hal Foster; "The Social History of Art: Models and Concepts," by Benjamin H. D. Buchloh; "Formalism and Structuralism," by Yve-Alain Bois; and "Poststructuralism and Deconstruction," by Rosalind Krauss. Not only does this framework encourage the reader to focus on conceptual issues raised by, or in relation to, salient objects and events in the history of art, it also allows the authors to provide numerous compelling demonstrations of how theory and method can be applied in practice to structure interpretation.
(1) The survey text has been the indispensable corollary to this deeply entrenched yet problematic curricular offering. According to Mitchell Schwarzer in 1995, "The survey text is art history at its most grandiose, promising to reveal the complex truths of humanity through art. It is also," he continued, "art history at its most political, reducing cultural and individual differences to questionable hierarchies and generalities."
(2) When, five years earlier, Bradford Collins had addressed the challenge posed by the survey text, he, like Schwarzer, was writing about books that seek to present works of art in relation to the vast sweep of world history, and he noted, "The writing of a completely acceptable overview of art's history, impossible under any circumstance, has been rendered even more absurd by the growing pluralism within our field, which is why I think it may be time to rethink the entire introductory enterprise."
(3) The solution that Collins proposed, "a collection of separate, lengthy and in-depth analyses of major monuments, a book that would leave the issues of continuity to the individual instructor," introduces the possibility of an intellectually rigorous alternative to the dominant evolutionary paradigm, one that could be adapted to the most general of surveys or to a particular field within the history of art. "I can imagine, too," Collins wrote, "that such a book might include essays that offer competing points of view on a given work or monument.... Perhaps what we need in this area, given the methodological diversity within our field, is a range of quite different options."
(4) Some years later, Mark Miller Graham argued for a radical deconstruction of the traditional survey, which he condemned for its ties to "the authority of the panoptic gaze and the privileged perspective."
(5) First on his list of remedies is this advice: "Stop using the present generation of survey textbooks.... Those who teach the course must get hold of its agenda." Graham's list continues with calls to "stop fetishizing completeness"; "eject the canon and thematize the content"; "embody and engender the discipline of art history"; and, finally, "teach the conflicts ... the actual debate and disagreement that constitute the scholarly process."
(6) The authors of Art since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism have produced a survey text that responds surprisingly closely to many (but not all) of these prescriptions, establishing an ambitious new paradigm that solves some of the most egregious problems of the survey genre by challenging the reader to become actively engaged with the critical debates that are highlighted in the book. (Although the publication is available in a single volume, it can also be purchased as two separate volumes, the first of which deals with the period to 1944, while the second begins with 1945. My remarks here are prompted by volume 1, though many would be applicable to volume 2 as well.) That an actively engaged reader is being called forth becomes immediately apparent in the instructions--"How to use this book"--with which the book opens (pp. 10-11). Here, two text pages are reproduced with additional graphic signs pointing out features of the layout and organization that are intended to help the reader "follow the development of art through the twentieth century and up to the present day." As this wording would suggest, the presentation appears rigorously chronological, insofar as the material is organized into individual entries, each approximately five pages in length and keyed to a given year. The chronological organization is further articulated by the grouping of entries into decades, although a countermanding arbitrary quality emerges from the fact that some years have multiple entries while others are omitted altogether. In fact, as the "Preface: A Reader's Guide" (pp. 12-13) makes clear, chronology is just one of the book's organizing principles; its numerous cross-references encourage the reader to construct alternative paths to destabilize the sense of an unfolding narrative, establishing links across time to reveal the histories of, for example, national schools, particular media, stylistic developments, or thematic concerns.
Many cros-references call attention to the authors' introductory discussions of the theoretical methods that inform the entries, and these too, like the entries, are stand-alone essays by individual authors (pp. 14-48): "Psychoanalysis in Modernism and as Method," by Hal Foster; "The Social History of Art: Models and Concepts," by Benjamin H. D. Buchloh; "Formalism and Structuralism," by Yve-Alain Bois; and "Poststructuralism and Deconstruction," by Rosalind Krauss. Not only does this framework encourage the reader to focus on conceptual issues raised by, or in relation to, salient objects and events in the history of art, it also allows the authors to provide numerous compelling demonstrations of how theory and method can be applied in practice to structure interpretation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
