From figures to landscapes (and back again?)

From time to time I receive wonderful messages from students who have chosen my work as a focus for their school projects. Here is a recent message I received. My answer follows: I wanted to ask if you could tell me about yourself and your paintings. I am studying A-levels and I am doing a critical study on you. Could you please let me know how you got into drawing landscapes. I would appreciate it.

Thank you so much for your interest in my artwork! As to your question: In college and for some time thereafter I was developing a body of work that focused on the human figure. These paintings were heavily influenced by a number of sources in art history-- Frida Kahlo, Gustav Klimt, and the early renaissance paintings I had seen in Italy and the Netherlands:

One of my favorites from this period "Faith", Oil on Canvas (sold)

So how did I go from that to landscape? Well, in college I held a double major of study in both painting and art history, so I was a lover of art of many different styles and from many different periods in history. I loved the impressionists and the post impressionists but impressionist landscape paintings were not much favored with my professors at the time. Professors at my school were much more attuned to paintings of either a nonobjective nature, or figurative paintings with deep psychological impact. So I developed the figurative paintings as my "serious body of work" and only dabbled in landscapes every now and then.   But eventually I found myself struggling more and more with the figure paintings. They were very large and some of them were filled with a lot of angst. One painting took weeks to complete. Emotionally they were often quite draining and my inspiration was slowing down. When my father died of pancreatic cancer all of the work I had been doing on those  paintings came to a complete halt. I began to question a lot of things, including whether I would ever do another painting. My heart just wasn't in it.   My husband naturally knew of my struggles and, knowing how much I had loved the landscapes of Monet, Sisley and many other impressionist painters, he bought me my very first outdoor easel. He also signed me up for a painting class so I could learn to paint on location outdoors. I loved it from the moment I tried it. I began painting again, and I finally allowed myself to follow my bliss and paint the landscape. After the death of my father I really wanted to do things that were more life affirming, that filled me with joy. I realized life is indeed so very short and I wanted to celebrate it in a way that had meaning for ME, without worrying about whether others found it artistically "important".   Painting the landscape was one of the ways I could honor that desire, and I have been painting them ever since. Nowadays I also enjoy experimenting with other kinds of painting, including abstraction, and sometimes even the human figure again. I believe that an artist has the right to explore it all, if that is her desire.   I hope this helps you with your project!

Art Books

I have begun to compile a list of Art Books that I have enjoyed or gotten a lot out of. I went to art school, but landscape painting was NOT the focus there. So after I started painting landscapes I went about furthering my own education, primarily through art books and experimentation. I also took a workshop here and there as I got more involved, but books have always been an important componenet in my art studio. Follow this link to see my art library. I only just begun, but will be adding more to this as time allows. Tags: art painting landscape painting art books plein air 

Varnishing

There has been much debate over whether artists should varnish their oil painitngs, and I think the word is still out, depending on who you ask.  A varnish is a resin applied to the surface layer of an oil painting. It adds sheen and can protect the painting from dust and pollutants. The varnish can be removed by conservators for cleaning without removing the paint layers underneath. But varnish also has yellowing properties and can turn quite dark over time. It can also crack the paint beneath it if it is applied when the painting isn't completely dry through and through. I have also seen paintings ruined by varnish that was applied too thickly or unevenly, so you have to be careful with it. 

In earlier times, varnish could protect from the dirt particles put out by burning coal, etc. But the Impressionists did not varnish their paintings because they wanted to avoid the yellowing properties perhaps, but mainly because they preferred a matte look to their paintings (if you go into a museum today you may see varnish on the surfaces of many of these paintings, but likely they were not put there by the painters themselves. Interestingly, Monet in particular preferred a very matte look and white, plain frames for his paintings; not the heavy ornate gold ones you see in the museums.)

Today varnish seems to be purely a optional decision, and mainly an aesthetic one. The Gamblin website has some good info on the topic of varnishing here. If an artist likes the look of a varnish, she can apply one, but only after the painting is completely dry. Oil paintings that have any thickness at all generally take about 6 months to dry through and through. If not, serious cracking can occur because the top layer of varnish will dry faster than the layers beneath.

In all honesty many of my paintings don't hang around in my studio for 6 months. What I usually do is to apply a retouch varnish once my paintings are dry to the touch on the surface. A retouch varnish is so lightweight that it becomes part of the top paint layer, so you don't risk the cracking that a heavier varnish can do. A retouch varnish can also even out the surface of the painting, bringing out darker areas that may have "sunken" to a more lustruous appearance. The effect is to provide a lusterous protective sheen to the painting, which I prefer to a super shiny surface.

Tags: art painting landscape painting artist

Thoughts on Cezanne in Provence

This week I took an out of town trip up to Washington D.C. with a friend to catch the Cezanne landscape exhibit. It was the last week that the show was on view and I am SO glad I had a chance to see it! It was a magnificent representation of his work, with galleries that seemed to go on and on. The show was devoted primarily to his landscapes but also included portraits, some still life, and his Bather series. Having seen (and been in awe of) his many still life paintings in previous exhibitions, the landscapes are what held my attention the most. I must say that no photo reproduction I've see does justice to his work. It was exciting to see the transition his paintings made when he began painting outside. His landscapes seemed completley transformed; going from heavy tonalist works to paintings full of light and color. But what was most striking to me was the incredible structure most of his paintings had. Many of his paintings were done from odd and unique perspectives, and his subject matter and compositional choices were not always typical of what the landscape painter might choose. And yet he had a way for line and composition that made the structure of his paintings feel almost sculputural.

Cezanne was interested in the formal elements of painting, and not really concerned with painting beautiful scenes, per se. For instance his paintings of the coast of L'Estaque did not depict an idealized harbor. Instead he chose to include an industrialized view of the smokestacks along the coast. He also did a number of paintings of the red rock quarries, which to me felt especially exploratory, as this subject lent itself very well to exploring his near cubist abstractions.

And yet there were so many paintings in that show that I found to be incredibly beautiful, both in the the choice of the subject and the handling of it. In particular the paintings of the countryside close to his home near Aix were so lovely. In addition to the well-known Mt. Saint Victoire series, there were many paintings of the rocky hillside villages and crumbling old farmhouses. In any event, I got the sense that he was always experimenting, exploring; perhaps sometimes frustrated (?), but never bored.

Cezanne had a light, feathery touch, and many of his oils were handled in a way that to me felt almost like watercolors. He had a masterful knowledge of color, though he used it in a subtle way. His greens were some of the richest I've seen, and within their shadows were hints of rose, blue, violet and lavender.

There was also an entire room devoted to his watercolors and drawings. These were light, sketchy things, but within them I could see the seeds of Modernism and the inspiration for the Cubists still to come.

It was our intention that day to catch the Cezanne show and then head over to the Phillips Collection in Dupont Circle to see the Degas and the Renior show. But we both agreed that we wanted some time to just absorb all of the great Cezannes we had just taken in. It's kind of like eating a meal. If it is a great one, you want time to just sit with the delicious experience before you move on to desert. And if it truly is great, maybe you don't even need desert at all!

To see my own paintings of Provence, click here.

Tags: art painting landscape painting artist plein air Cezanne

Two more reasons to go to DC

The other day I mentioned a Cezanne exhibit nearing its close at the National Gallery in Washington D.C. Now, here are two more wonderful exhibits that appear to overlap this show: Degas, Sickert and Toulouse-Lautrec: London and Paris, 1870–1910. This show focuses on the creative dialogue between the French and British artist and their contemporaries during the turn of the century. According to the Phillips Collection website the show arrived "directly from Tate Britain in London, the exhibition includes over 100 works—many never before on public view." The show closes on May 18th, 2006.

The Renoir Returns: A Celebration of Masterworks at The Phillips Collection April 15–July 30, 2006. "The Renoir" they are referring to is one of my all-time favorite Renoirs, "The Luncheon of the Boating Party". In celebration of its return from an extended loan, the Phillps is putting on a special exhibition from its collection that features this painting but also includes Bonnard, Cézanne, Degas, Gauguin, Gogh, Kandinsky, Matisse, Monet, Picasso and others.

I wonder if I can see them all in one road trip? Or is that overkill? My head just might explode or something.

Oh, and upcoming shows at the Phillips seem equally enthralling to me, including one on Paul Klee this year, the Society Anonyme in '07, and Impressionists by the Sea in '08. (Woo-hoo!)

Tags: art painting landscape painting Cezanne artist Provence Degas Renoir Impressionists impressionism