The French impressionists

I have never understood the word ‘impressionist’ in art whether it is French, Italian or British impressionist. They all make a complicated picture in my mind. When my art teacher introduced the ‘impressionist’, all I thought was of an artist who made an impression which boils down to any artist who would naturally make an impression, good or bad. I may be right or wrong but the word has not left my mind ever since I threw away my brush.

French Impressionists are the most imposing among the lot because their clang consists of the Masters such as Degas, Pissarro, Renoir, Manet, Monet, Sisley etc. and they all painted admirable impressionist pictures; but the question remains. What else had they in common? (Can my colleague Tissa Hewavitharana answer that?)

However, they discovered an essentially a passionate delight in rediscovering paganism which had fired their imagination.

Rubbish; I think they lacked the technique consistency of the Italians but the French went beyond their inspiration. They never went into history nor mythology like the Italians. The French Impressionists were hardly sentimental about religious painting and at times sounded dreadful. Even on a flying visit to Paris Louvre some years back, I did not change my mind. Parisian pictures are purely impressionist in technique and spirit.

So much so, for the French masters.

Sisley born to English parents is probably the least admired though he was an exquisite French painter. When he was in London with Monet and together they discovered Turner and Constable, one would imagine that they were a part in the formation of the Impressionism. But by 1877 Cezanne was dreaming of making impressionism true.

Prior to that no critic recognised the works of Cezanne even though in Paris with his benevolent acquaintance with Pissaro. To begin with when the doctrine and technique were being elaborated, these masters had already given proof talent in good painting. I have never seen a scientifically impressionist painting by Cezanne though many art critics claim he did.

I never saw such paintings at the Louvre. As I keep discovering these unholy pictures (I never liked the impressionists) I find that Degas is not one of them though he is listed in this category. Even Renoir was hardly an impressionist but he was a genius among the lot. So, why call him an Impressionist? Degas paintings have been attributed to the study of instantaneous photography.

So what? If a painter cannot store in his mind what he had seen and wished to paint the subject, the best bet is photography. I know of a very talented artist in Sri Lanka who use this method. I have seen an artist exhibiting a painting very similar to the ‘Liberty leading the people’ at the Lionel Wendt. This magnificent masterpiece by Delacroix was inspired by ‘The French Revolution’. I saw it at the Paris Louvre.

Most impressionists favoured the theme of passion and figures, especially women and nude. They approached the subjects with startling boldness. Some were exciting and inspired by poetry.

As colour became the prime importance, they would use pastels for developing the drawings and later move on to oils, but the use of colour and light were purely individualistic.

The spirit of impressionism bound them together and none deviated from its objective. They were obsessed with their own sensual experiences and less preoccupied.

Renoir’s ability to achieve almost photographic realism in his painting gave him the impetus to build his reputation that was challenging to the rest of the Impressionists. It all rested on his ability to create phenomenal drawing to execute the vigorous emphatic medium - the oils.

His paintings were creative by far and large and the ability to capture a likeness very quickly. His compositions became simple as he worked upon painted surface wit meticulous accuracy.

Renoir was a figurative artist like most of this colleagues who found it difficult to break away from tradition and locked upon within its boundaries. How unlike the case of Pissarro who had a strong inquisitive mind that made him a born explorer. Unlike the rest, he was not an Impressionist every day. He broke the rules of the old school with his taste for experiment.

..................................

<< Artscope Main Page