Aaron Holland Fine Art

Winslow Homer
1836-1910
American

I have found that the more I study the paintings of Winslow Homer, and try to see the personality behind the pictures, the more I come to appreciate his work and his life. I see Winslow Homer as an artist of the highest caliber. Almost 150 years after he painted, his pictures still find their way into popular books, calenders, posters, and current retrospectives.

Winslow Homer lived near the ocean most of his life. He grew up in Boston, moved several times, and eventually settled in Maine. He traveled frequently, sketched incessantly, and hunted and fished as often. Homer started his career in a Lithographer’s studio, and eventually became a freelance illustrator. He served in the front lines as a War Artist during the Civil War, before seeking the solitude of Prout’s Neck- a small fishing village on the Atlantic.

Because he was rather solitary and intensely private in his personal life, there has been speculation and curiosity as to the nature of his character. Pre-conceived notions are usually a hindrance to the viewer when trying to understand great art. One needs only to look at paintings with an unbiased eye to see the artist’s personality.

When the artist communicates with the viewer it is to express what is important to them. Although it is usually in abstract concepts that they are able to communicate best, it must not be forgetten that this should be seen in the context of a whole body of work, and not based solely on one or two pictures. In an artist’s oeuvre over-arching themes begin to emerge, and patterns of personal preferences start to become visible. By what they paint, as well as what they choose NOT to paint, something of the artist is seen throughout.

In today’s day and age where the “norm” could sometimes be called obscene, Homer reminds me of simpler things.

I cannot be sure, but Winslow Homer appears to have been a “gentle-man” as well as a “man’s man”, based upon how he chose to portray people involved in everyday activities.

The men are strong and brave. Rugged and handsome, he shows men at home in the outdoors. He portrays men as hunters, fishers, and sailors in harmony with their environment. They are natural comrades and brothers-at-arms, as well as the the hero to the heroine. Winslow Homer is considered to have been one of the first “Sporting Artists”.

The women are respectable, fruitful and faithful counter-parts.

Winslow Homer painted women who were intelligent, affectionate, and attractive.

He painted them simply and becomingly.

There is also an insightful and charming way in which he portrays children. Homer painted children in play and in repose, focusing often on the lighter and more innocent side of life.



Winslow Homer was extremely prolific in his output, and produced hundreds of paintings. He came to watercolor late in his maturity as an artist, but stated publicly that it would be his defining medium. He was correct. This seemed to fit Homer’s approach to painting. Watercolor is a portable medium for those who like to travel and yields great results fairly quickly. He once mused that this was a medium being touted as a “beginner’s medium”, but was difficult even for the expert. He was drawn to the luminosity that can be achieved with watercolor, and liked the challenge of creating a pure light effect without muddying the colors.

Homer continued to exhibit regularly all of his life. He received a number of awards, notably a Gold medal at the Chicago World’s Fair, and a Gold Medal at the Paris Exposition of 1900.

Winsow Homer died quietly at his home in Maine at the age of 74. His legacy remains a testament to the spirit of the American people, and a continuing contribution to the art of painting.

Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones
1833 – 1898
English

“Excellence in painting demands refinement, richness of invention (invenzione), expressed through virtuoso technique (maniera), and wit and study that appeared in the finished work, all criteria that emphasized the artist’s intellect and the patron’s sensibility. The artist was now no longer just a craftsman member of a local Guild of St Luke. Now he took his place at court with scholars, poets, and humanists, in a climate that fostered an appreciation for elegance and complexity.”
-Wiki-quote [viz. Giorgio Vasari]

Edward burne Jones was a member of the group of artists known as Pre-Raphaelites. The Pre-Raphaelites were called thus because of their adherence to the artistic virtues of the painters who were active before Raphael. Essentially, they were distinguished for using a style known as “Mannerism”. They are also referred to as the “Aesthetic Movement” because of the decorative motifs and stylized designs.

“Mannerism” is about “ideals”. In other words, they sought to present a world not in terms of what it “IS” but in terms of what it could be. Their canvases were ordered, colorful, and decorative. The Pre-Raphaelites also were outspoken in their belief that they ought to present a worldview of sound morals, ethics, and values.

Mannerism, in contrast to some styles, advocates the use of prescribed methods. They felt, and stressed, that it was the decorative qualities that were important in fine art, rather than an adherence to natural law and visual effect. In Burne-Jones day (as well as ours) Mannerism was controversial. The Pre-Raphaelites embraced it nonetheless, unlike the majority of their contemporaries.

Symbolism was an important communicative device that was used by the Pre-Raphaelites. Through the use of symbolism, they were able to convey complex themes more clearly. They were also able to illustrate subtle meanings, and infuse more depth of meaning, into their work… a veritable visual vocabulary, so to speak, resplendent in syntax.

Burne-Jones was proficient in stained-glass as well as painting.

I do not believe true originality comes from an effort to be original, but rather from an effort to clearly express a heartfelt conviction. Thereby, is great art born. Although understated and influenced by many of his contemporaries, Burne-Jones remains one of the most unique painters I can think of.

His use of unusual formats, brilliant compositions, and a command of numerous forms of painting makes his artwork stand out amongst a crowd. I think it is worth mentioning, that although he adopted many of the forms of his predecessors, and in fact conscientiously strove to line up with them, his work shows an individuality of voice that is still discernable.

Édouard Manet
1832 – 1883
French

There was a time when Paris was the art capital of the world. For whatever else that meant, it meant also that if you were an artist you should go to Paris. Paintings like Édouard Manet ‘s were the reason I went into art, and went to Paris.

I expected to see old world cafés, people walking slowly over ornate bridges, and romantic couples kissing in the Luxembourg while a horse and cart rolled past. I was greeted with a very different impression. I was a young man standing on a sidewalk trying not to get bowled over by the bustling crowds, cars and capers moving briskly in all directions around the sprawling mix of new and old architecture.

When I think about Manet my thoughts unconsciously race back to that point in my life. As a result I will forever have fond feelings for Manet; I will have trouble seeing his work objectively. It will always be clouded with the thoughts and feelings of the Paris I know and the Paris he knew. That’s what art can do, I guess…

Manet was a Parisian socialite in his day. He knew and loved the city he dwelt in and he wanted to paint what he knew and loved. He created fresh, emotive paintings that showed what modern day scenes might look like to the average person.

Manet spent six years in Couture‘s Studio learning his methods. It was a source of consistent debate between Manet and his teacher as to the purposes and meanings of art. His sharpened abilities continued to acknowledge his teacher, but he gradually shifted away from what he learned there. While classical painters concentrated on scenes of Greek mythology, Manet was painting citizens of France. His contribution to the art world is more subtle than many of his paintings, but just as effective.

The Impressionists at the same time painted pictures of modern day landscapes. Manet was (and is) considered an Impressionist, but in many ways he defies the description. For starters, he rarely painted the landscape. People were Manet’s primary interest.

The Impressionists invented a lot of techniques that are still in use today. Broken color is one example of an Impressionist technique: The artist uses a series of “dabs or strokes“ of paint that visually blend the colors and thus create the effect. Manet, on the other hand simplified nature into planes of local color and patterns of value.

The Impressionist wanted to capture the effect of reflected light on objects. Manet seemed more concerned with simplifying light and shadow.

Vibrant color and bravura technique seem to be the unifying factor between Manet and the Impressionists.
No doubt he had a method, and could apply it to whatever he chose to paint.
Yet, the success of his paintings seemed to be less determined by technique, than by how inspired he was.

Willard Leroy Metcalf
American
1858 – 1925

“Poet Laureate of the New England hills.”

Sometimes a work of art speaks to a person, and it is difficult to say why. Other times, spelling out what is appreciated seems to come up short, no matter how descriptive…

“I just like it” will not suffice, unless one has no need of sounding credible. Yet, sometimes it is the truth, and let no amount of persuasion convince us otherwise.

There are several tools at the disposal of the artist, to be used to convey his or her convictions to the viewer.
The use of color and value, for example.

Color: is it a bright or muted palette (primary or earthy)? One color next to another can either sing or scream. Was the artist’s choice of color tasteful?

value: do they choose to paint in high contrasting values for dramatic effect, or do they keep the values closer together to create mood?

How well does the artist know how to draw? Is that important? Please qualify you answer.

Metcalf worked as an illustrator for almost twenty years to support himself. Although his early influences were traditional, he became increasingly more interested in the new Impressionistic movement. This “new movement” ultimately directed his perception of color and light. He moved to Paris and joined the leaders of the Impressionist movement in Giverny, before relocating again to New England.

It wasn’t until Metcalf began to paint the New England countryside that he truly found his own form of expression. He joined a group of 10 like-minded painters, known simply as “The Ten”. This core group of artists defined American Impressionism as we know it.

If you had to guess, what expressions would you say are conveyed through Metcalf’s work in general?
What do you think he was trying to communicate in and through his work? Was he successful?

Thomas Moran
American
1837-1926

There are two categories in which to place an artist when considering their background: “Trained” or “Self -Taught”. Moran was self-taught. He firmly held the conviction that art could not be taught, but that knowing how to see nature was the important thing. He stated that: you either “had it” or you didn’t.

There are essentially two types of landscape artists: the Studio Artist (who generally paints from photos and/or sketches) and the Plein-Air Artist (who paints exclusively outside and on location). Moran was both. He painted small, colorful sketches while traveling, and also took photos to refer to when back in the studio. He is considered by most to have been a studio painter. As an artist, Moran was well-rounded, and prolific in his output. In other words, while the plein-air artists tend to be purists in their approach to painting (and consider painting from photos as cheating), and studio artists might be more concerned with the end result than how they get there, Moran took some of the admirable qualities of both approaches and applied them to his art.

“I place no value upon literal transcriptions from Nature. My general scope is not realistic; All my tendencies are toward idealization. A place as a place has no value in itself for the artist. While I desire to tell truly of Nature, I do not wish to realize the scene literally but to convey its true impression.”
This is a revealing quote from Moran, and is helpful in understanding him better. He probably had no problem moving trees around in a picture, adding mountains where they needed to go, adjusting the sunlight and clouds, and if necessary placing a river in the scene to spice it all up. It sounds piece-meal no doubt, but almost all of his paintings hold together as if they were an actual location.

The fact that Moran painted unwaveringly in one style (realism- or rather “idealization”) for his entire career, could account at least in part, for his success. Moran’s technique and style became recognizable to many. He was also not shy about painting subjects that appealed to the buying public. This was a solid business move, but I wonder what he could have accomplished if he had been focused on more personal inclinations and inspirations. At any rate, he completely represented the United States in that effect, and became known as the foremost Landscape Artist in America (note- there was at least one other contender for that title at the time).

Thomas Moran enjoyed health as well as old age, and painted ceaselessly until his demise. The scope and range of paintings he amassed over a lifetime is vast. Yet, for all this variety of scenery throughout his work, there are essentially five types of landscapes that comprise Moran‘s body of work as a whole.
They are:

1. Interiors, Glens, and Woodland Dales: usually with a river running through them, and often during summer or fall. These pictures often portray idealized landscapes near Kensington, PA., the home of the artist.

2. The Western Landscape and Mountain Ranges: This is the type of painting that made Moran famous. The Yellowstone Mountains were first painted for a public audience by Thomas Moran. His paintings, researched on a government funded expedition, helped to make Yellowstone the first National Park. If it were not for this combination of luck, timing, and genius we probably would never have heard of Thomas Moran.

The American Congress eventually purchased two of Moran’s paintings for $10, 000 each, which had the effect of catapulting Moran into a worldwide marketplace. Copies of his Western pictures were in demand for the rest of his life, and he could have survived solely on those if he had chosen to.

Aside from painting Yellowstone, some of his other popular Western scenes often depict the Colorado Rockies, The Green River series, The Grand Canyon, and The Tetons, to name just a few.

3. Distant Locations: being an extensive traveler, Moran was constantly traveling and making sketches and paintings from many of his visits. Including such locations as Scotland, Mexico, Cuba & Venice; Moran also visited numerous states throughout the U.S.. Years later he would use some of his sketches to complete large finished paintings of the scene, so complete were his notes and sketches.

4. The Historical Drama:
These paintings mix allegorical or historical events and themes. Moran would place characters in an outdoor setting, (making them seem dramatically less significant than the landscape), but attempting nonetheless to create the grandeur of a monumental moment. His preoccupation remained to: portray the idealized landscape, lush with atmosphere and life.

5. Watercolors:
When Moran traveled he did not bring oils, but rather opted for the lighter, faster watercolor sketch. Althoughe did not consider them finished works in themselves, they are unusually detailed, and brightly colored gems. Also, they are most commonly done en plein air (or on location). They captured a spontaneous feeling in technique that is often absent or eliminated in his more polished oil paintings.

Johannes Vermeer
Dutch
1632-1675.

Vermeer’s beauty lies not in his originality, for he was noted as being one of the least original painters of the Dutch Golden Age in terms of technique or presentation, but rather in his embrace of the common Dutch morals and values of the people of Delft.

The theatre of life was played out for Vermeer in the confines of a small but efficient one-window studio. This should be an encouragement to all of us who are painting in small studios- it is not how fancy the studio, but what you do in it that matters. Can you tell that all of the paintings are from the same place, and show that same brightly-lit leaded window? How beautiful are the edges and transitions of light and halftone. Vermeer’s reinvention of the space gives the viewer a clue as to what his studio and working methods would have been like.

Delft had acquired a reputation in its day as being the cleanest city in the Netherlands, in what was known as the cleanest country in all of Europe. This was an important consideration for a country that produced both cheese and milk. A visitor once remarked:
“I was amazed to find there a neatness (in whitewashed walls and other examples of Dutch cleanliness) to which my eyes had almost grown accustomed, for I had been a long time abroad.”
This statement, which affirms the cleanliness of Delft, can perhaps be seen in the in the arrangements and background of Vermeer’s work.

By today’s standards Vermeer would have been viewed as a regional painter- as he surely was in his won day. Johannes Vermeer was not even known outside of his hometown of Delft (population 15, 000). He was kept busy by steady commissions from only a few local patrons. He was painstakingly careful in execution and therefore produced only two or three paintings a year. His studio was kept private, nor were his paintings on display for prospective buyers, so he had little opportunity to garner new clients and expand his reputation.

Supporting eleven children must have been a difficult task by any means. A crushing economic calamity, followed by severe worry and anguish choked out Vermeer’s life when he was only 43. When he died, he left behind less than forty known works by which to judge his life’s efforts. Sadly, he also left his wife and eleven children with the burden of a large debt. Vermeer’s faithful wife pleaded with debt collectors in an effort to keep her husband’s paintings- especially her favorite “The Art of Painting” .

When Vermeer died his reputation as an artist was smoothed over, and then overlooked- overlooked. His work slipped into a relative obscurity for the next 200 or so years. Why was he relegated to a footnote in history for 200 years and then only recently claimed as one of art history’s greats? Was he always great or only recently?