The French Impressionists (1860 1900) written by Camille Mauclair
C >>
Camille Mauclair >> The French Impressionists (1860 1900)
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8
Steinlen has been enormously productive: he is specially remarkable for
his illustrations. Those which he has designed for Aristide Bruant's
volume of songs, _Dans la rue_, are masterpieces of their kind. They
contain treasures of bitter observation, quaintness and knowledge. The
soul of the lower classes is shown in them with intense truth, bitter
revolt and comprehensive philosophy. Steinlen has also designed some
beautiful posters, pleasing pastels, lithographs of incontestable
technical merit, and beautifully eloquent political drawings. It cannot
be said that he is an Impressionist in the strict sense of the word; he
applied his colour in flat tints, more like an engraver than a painter;
but in him too can be felt the stamp of Degas, and he is one of those
who best demonstrate that, without Impressionism, they could not have
been what they are.
The same may be said of Louis Legrand, a pupil of Felicien Rops, an
admirably skilful etcher, a draughtsman of keen vision, and a painter of
curious character, who has in many ways forestalled the artists of
to-day. Louis Legrand also shows to what extent the example of Manet and
Degas has revolutionised the art of illustration, in freeing the
painters from obsolete laws, and guiding them towards truth and frank
psychological study. Legrand is full of them, without resembling them.
We must not forget that, besides the technical innovation (division of
tones, study of complementary colours), Impressionism has brought us
novelty of composition, realism of character and great liberty in the
choice of subjects. From this point of view Rops himself, in spite of
his symbolist tendencies, could not be classed with any other group, if
it were not that any kind of classification in art is useless and
inaccurate. However that may be, Louis Legrand has signed some volumes
resplendent with the most seductive qualities.
Paul Renouard has devoted himself to newspaper illustration, but with
what surprising prodigality of spirit and knowledge! The readers of the
"Graphic" will know. This masterly virtuoso of the pencil might give
drawing-lessons to many members of the Institute! The feeling for the
life of crowds, psychology of types, spirited and rapid notation,
astonishing ease in overcoming difficulties--these are his undeniable
gifts. And again we must recognise in Renouard the example of Degas and
Manet. His exceptional fecundity only helps to give more authority to
his pencil. Renouard's drawings at the Exhibition of 1900 were, perhaps,
more beautiful than the rest of his work. There was notably a series of
studies made from the first platform of the Eiffel Tower, an
accumulation of wonders of perspectives framing scenes of such animation
and caprice as to take away one's breath.
Finally, Auguste Lepere appears as the Debucourt of our time. As
painter, pastellist and wood-engraver he has produced since 1870, and
has won for himself the first place among French engravers. It would be
difficult to recount the volumes, albums and covers on which the fancy
of his burin has played; but it is particularly in wood-engraving that
he stands without rival. Not only has he produced masterpieces of it,
but he has passionately devoted himself to raising this admirable art,
the glory of the beautiful books of olden days, and to give back to it
the lustre which had been eclipsed by mechanical processes. Lepere has
started some publications for this purpose; he has had pupils of great
merit, and he must be considered the master of the whole generation of
modern wood-engravers, just as Cheret is the undisputed master of the
poster. Lepere's ruling quality is strength. He seems to have
rediscovered the mediaeval limners' secrets of cutting the wood, giving
the necessary richness to the ink, creating a whole scale of half-tones,
and specially of adapting the design to typographic printing, and making
of it, so to say, an ornament and a decorative extension for the type.
Lepere is a wood-engraver with whom none of his contemporaries can be
compared; as regards his imagination, it is that of an altogether
curious artist. He excels in composing and expressing the life, the
animation, the soul of the streets and the picturesque side of the
populace. Herein he is much inspired by Manet and, if we go back to the
real tradition, by Guys, Debucourt, the younger Moreau and by Gabriel de
Saint-Aubin. He is decidedly a Realist of French lineage, who owes
nothing to the Academy and its formulas.
It would be evidently unreasonable to attach to Impressionism all that
is ante-academical, and between the two extremes there is room for a
crowd of interesting artists. We shall not succumb to the prejudice of
the School by declaring, in our turn, that there is no salvation outside
Impressionism, and we have been careful to state repeatedly that, if
Impressionism has a certain number of principles as kernel, its
applications and its influence have a radiation which it is difficult to
limit. What can be absolutely demonstrated is, that this movement has
had the greatest influence on modern illustration, sometimes through its
colouring, sometimes simply through the great freedom of its ideas. Some
have found in it a direct lesson, others an example to be followed.
Some have met in it technical methods which pleased them, others have
only taken some suggestions from it. That is the case, for instance,
with Legrand, with Steinlen, and with Renouard; and it is also the case
with the lithographer Odilon Redon, who applies the values of Manet and,
in his strange pastels, the harmonies of Degas and Renoir, placing them
at the service of dreams and hallucinations and of a symbolism which is
absolutely removed from the realism of these painters. It is, finally,
the case with the water-colour painter Henri Riviere, who is misjudged
as to his merit, and who is one of the most perfect of those who have
applied Impressionist ideas to decorative engraving. He has realised
images in colours destined to decorate inexpensively the rooms of the
people and recalling the grand aspects of landscapes with a broad
simplification which is derived, curiously enough, from Puvis de
Chavannes's large decorative landscapes and from the small and precise
colour prints of Japan. Riviere, who is a skilful and personal poetic
landscapist, is not exactly an Impressionist, in so far as he does not
divide the tones, but rather blends them in subtle mixtures in the
manner of the Japanese. Yet, seeing his work, one cannot help thinking
of all the surprise and freedom introduced into modern art by
Impressionism.
Everybody, even the ignorant, can perceive, on looking through an
illustrated paper or a modern volume, that thirty years ago this manner
of placing the figures, of noting familiar gestures, and of seizing
fugitive life with spirit and clearness was unknown. This mass of
engravings and of sketches resembles in no way what had been seen
formerly. They no longer have the solemn air of classic composition, by
which the drawings had been affected. A current of bold spontaneity has
passed through here. In modern English illustration, it can be stated
indisputably that nothing would be such as it can now be seen, if
Morris, Rossetti and Crane had not imposed their vision, and yet many
talented Englishmen resemble these initiators only very remotely. It is
exactly in this sense that we shall have credited Impressionism with the
talents who have drawn their inspiration less from its principles, than
from its vigorous protest against mechanical formulas, and who have
been able to find the energy, necessary for their success, in the
example it set by fighting during twenty years against the ideas of
routine which seemed indestructible. Even with the painters who are far
removed from the vision and the colouring of Manet and Degas, of Monet
and Renoir, one can find a very precise tendency: that of returning to
the subjects and the style of the real national tradition; and herein
lies one of the most serious benefits bestowed by Impressionism upon an
art which had stopped at the notion of a canonical beauty, until it had
almost become sterile in its timidity.
IX
NEO-IMPRESSIONISM--GAUGUIN, DENIS, THEO VAN RYSSELBERGHE--THE THEORY OF
POINTILLISM--SEURAT, SIGNAC AND THE THEORIES OF SCIENTIFIC
CHROMATISM--FAULTS AND QUALITIES OF THE IMPRESSIONIST MOVEMENT, WHAT WE
OWE TO IT, ITS PLACE IN THE HISTORY OF THE FRENCH SCHOOL--SOME WORDS ON
ITS INFLUENCE ABROAD
The beginnings of the movement designated under the name of
Neo-Impressionism can be traced back to about 1880. The movement is a
direct offshoot of the first Impressionism, originated by a group of
young painters who admired it and thought of pushing further still its
chromatic principles. The flourishing of Impressionism coincided, as a
matter of fact, with certain scientific labours concerning optics.
Helmholtz had just published his works on the perception of colours and
sounds by means of waves. Chevreul had continued on this path by
establishing his beautiful theories on the analysis of the solar
spectrum. M. Charles Henry, an original and remarkable spirit, occupied
himself in his turn with these delicate problems by applying them
directly to aesthetics, which Helmholtz and Chevreul had not thought of
doing. M. Charles Henry had the idea of creating relations between this
branch of science and the laws of painting. As a friend of several young
painters he had a real influence over them, showing them that the new
vision due to the instinct of Monet and of Manet might perhaps be
scientifically verified, and might establish fixed principles in a
sphere where hitherto the laws of colouring had been the effects of
individual conception. At that moment the criticism which resulted from
Taine's theories tried to effect a _rapprochement_ of the artistic and
scientific domains in criticism and in the psychologic novel. The
painters, too, gave way to this longing for precision which seems to
have been the great preoccupation of intellects from 1880 to about 1889.
Their researches had a special bearing on the theory of complementary
colours and on the means of establishing some laws concerning the
reaction of tones in such manner as to draw up a kind of tabula. Georges
Seurat and Paul Signac were the promoters of this research. Seurat died
very young, and one cannot but regret this death of an artist who would
have been very interesting and capable of beautiful works. Those which
he has left us bear witness to a spirit very receptive to theories, and
leaving nothing to chance. The silhouettes are reduced to almost
rigorously geometrical principles, the tones are decomposed
systematically. These canvases are more reasoned examples than works of
intuition and spontaneous vision. They show Seurat's curious desire to
give a scientific and classic basis to Impressionism. The same idea
rules in all the work of Paul Signac, who has painted some portraits and
numerous landscapes. To these two painters is due the method of
_Pointillism_, _i.e._ the division of tones, not only by touches, as in
Monet's pictures, but by very small touches of equal size, causing the
spheric shape to act equally upon the retina. The accumulation of these
luminous points is carried out over the entire surface of the canvas
without thick daubs of paint, and with regularity, whilst with Manet the
paint is more or less dense. The theory of complementary colours is
systematically applied. On a sketch, made from nature, the painter notes
the principal relations of tones, then systematises them on his picture
and connects them by different shades which should be their logical
result. Neo-Impressionism believes in obtaining thus a greater exactness
than that which results from the individual temperament of the painter
who simply relies on his own perception. And it is true, in theory, that
such a conception is more exact. But it reduces the picture to a kind of
theorem, which excludes all that constitutes the value and charm of an
art, that is to say: caprice, fancy, and the spontaneity of personal
inspiration. The works of Seurat, Signac, and of the few men who have
strictly followed the rules of Pointillism are lacking in life, in
surprise, and make a somewhat tiring impression upon one's eyes. The
uniformity of the points does not succeed in giving an impression of
cohesion, and even less a suggestion of different textures, even if the
values are correct. Manet seems to have attained perfection in using the
method which consists in directing the touches in accordance with each
of the planes, and this is evidently the most natural method. Scientific
Chromatism constitutes an _ensemble_ of propositions, of which art will
be able to make use, though indirectly, as information useful for a
better understanding of the laws of light in presence of nature. What
Pointillism has been able to give us, is a method which would be very
appreciable for decorative paintings seen from a great distance--friezes
or ceilings in spacious buildings. It would in this case return to the
principle of mosaic, which is the principle _par excellence_ of mural
art.
The Pointillists have to-day almost abandoned this transitional theory
which, in spite of the undeniable talent of its adepts, has only
produced indifferent results as regards easel pictures. Besides Seurat
and Signac, mention should be made of Maurice Denis, Henri-Edmond Cross,
Angrand, and Theo Van Rysselberghe. But this last-named and Maurice
Denis have arrived at great talent by very different merits. M. Maurice
Denis has abandoned Pointillism a few years ago, in favour of returning
to a very strange conception which dates back to the Primitives, and
even to Giotto. He simplifies his drawing archaically, suppresses all
but the indispensable detail, and draws inspiration from Gothic stained
glass and carvings, in order to create decorative figures with clearly
marked outlines which are filled with broad, flat tints. He generally
treats mystic subjects, for which this special manner is suitable. One
cannot love the _parti pris_ of these works, but one cannot deny M.
Denis a great charm of naivete, an intense feeling for decorative
arrangements and colouring of a certain originality. He is almost a
French pre-Raphaelite, and his profound catholic faith inspires him
nobly.
[Illustration: THEO VAN RYSSELBERGHE
PORTRAITS OF MADAME VAN RYSSELBERGHE AND HER DAUGHTER]
M. Theo Van Rysselberghe continues to employ the Pointillist method. But
he is so strongly gifted, that one might almost say he succeeds in
revealing himself as a painter of great merit in spite of this dry and
charmless method. All his works are supported by broad and learned
drawing and his colour is naturally brilliant. M. Van Rysselberghe, a
prolific and varied worker, has painted nudes, large portraits,
landscapes with figures, seascapes, interiors and still-life, and in all
this he evinces faculties of the first order. He is a lover of light and
understands how to make it vibrate over flesh and fabrics. He is an
artist who has the sense of style. He has signed a certain number of
portraits, whose beautiful carriage and serious psychology would suffice
to make him be considered as the most significant of the
Neo-Impressionists. It is really in him that one has to see the young
and worthy heir of Monet, of Sisley, and of Degas, and that is why we
have insisted on adding here to the works of these masters the
reproduction of one of his. M. Van Rysselberghe is also a very delicate
etcher who has signed some fine works in this method, and his seascapes,
whether they revel in the pale greys of the German Ocean or in the warm
sapphire and gold harmonies of the Mediterranean, count among the finest
of the time; they are windows opened upon joyous brightness.
To these painters who have never taken part at the Salons, and are only
to be seen at the exhibitions of the _Independants_ (except M. Denis),
must be added M. Pierre Bonnard, who has given proof to his charm and
fervour in numerous small canvases of Japanese taste; and M. Edouard
Vuillard, who is a painter of intimate scenes of rare delicacy. This
artist, who stands apart and produces very little, has signed some
interiors of melancholic distinction and of a colouring which revels in
low tones. He has the precision and skill of a master. There is in him,
one might say, a reflection of Chardin's soul. Unfortunately his works
are confined to a few collections and have not become known to the
public. To the same group belong M. Ranson, who has devoted himself to
purely decorative art, tapestry, wall papers and embroideries; M.
Georges de Feure, a strange, symbolist water-colour painter, who has
become one of the best designers of the New Art in France; M. Felix
Vallotton, painter and lithographer, who is somewhat heavy, but gifted
with serious qualities. It is true that M. de Feure is Dutch, M.
Vallotton Swiss, and M. Van Rysselberghe Belgian; but they have settled
down in France, and are sufficiently closely allied to the
Neo-Impressionist movement so that the question of nationality need not
prevent us from mentioning them here. Finally it is impossible not to
say a few words about two pupils of Gustave Moreau's, who have both
become noteworthy followers of Impressionism of very personal
individuality. M. Eugene Martel bids fair to be one of the best painters
of interiors of his generation. He has the feeling of mystical life and
paints the peasantry with astonishing psychologic power. His vigorous
colouring links him to Monticelli, and his drawing to Degas. As to M.
Simon Bussy who, following Alphonse Legros's example, is about to make
an enviable position for himself in England, he is an artist of pure
blood. His landscapes and his figures have the distinction and rare tone
of M. Whistler, besides the characteristic acuteness of Degas. His
harmonies are subtle, his vision novel, and he will certainly develop
into an important painter. Together with Henri le Sidaner and Jacques
Blanche, Simon Bussy is decidedly the most personal of that young
generation of "Intimists" who seem to have retained the best principles
of the Impressionist masters to employ them for the expression of a
psychologic ideal which is very different from Realism.
Outside this group there are still a few isolated painters who are
difficult to classify. The very young artists Laprade and Charles Guerin
have shown for the last three years, at the exhibition of the
_Independants_, some works which are the worthy result of Manet's and
Renoir's influence. They, too, justify great expectations. The
landscapists Paul Vogler and Maxime Maufra, more advanced in years, have
made themselves known by some solid series of vigorously presented
landscapes. To them must be added M. Henry Moret, M. Albert Andre and M.
Georges d'Espagnet, who equally deserve the success which has commenced
to be their share. But there are some older ones. It is only his due,
that place should be given to a painter who committed suicide after an
unhappy life, and who evinced splendid gifts. Vincent Van Gogh, a
Dutchman, who, however, had always worked in France, has left to the
world some violent and strange works, in which Impressionism appears to
have reached the limits of its audacity. Their value lies in their naive
frankness and in the undauntable determination which tried to fix
without trickery the sincerest feelings. Amidst many faulty and clumsy
works, Van Gogh has also left some really beautiful canvases. There is a
deep affinity between him and Cezanne. A very real affinity exists, too,
between Paul Gauguin, who was a friend and to a certain extent the
master of Van Gogh, and Cezanne and Renoir. Paul Gauguin's robust talent
found its first motives in Breton landscapes, in which the method of
colour-spots can be found employed with delicacy and placed at the
service of a rather heavy, but very interesting harmony. Then the artist
spent a long time in Tahiti, whence he returned with a completely
transformed manner. He has brought back from these regions some
landscapes with figures treated in intentionally clumsy and almost wild
fashion. The figures are outlined in firm strokes and painted in broad,
flat tints on canvas which has the texture almost of tapestry. Many of
these works are made repulsive by their aspect of multi-coloured, crude
and barbarous imagery. Yet one cannot but acknowledge the fundamental
qualities, the beautiful values, the ornamental taste, and the
impression of primitive animalism. On the whole, Paul Gauguin has a
beautiful, artistic temperament which, in its aversion to virtuosoship,
has perhaps not sufficiently understood that the fear of formulas, if
exaggerated, may lead to other formulas, to a false ignorance which is
as dangerous as false knowledge. Gauguin's symbolical intentions, like
those of his pupil Emile Bernard, are sincere, but are badly served by
minds which do not agree with their technical qualities, and both
Gauguin and Emile Bernard are most happily inspired when they are
painters pure and simple.
Next to Gauguin, among the seniors of the present generation and the
successors of Impressionism, should be placed the landscapist Armand
Guillaumin who, without possessing Sisley's delicate qualities, has
painted some canvases worthy of notice; and we must, finally, terminate
this far too summary enumeration by referring to one of the most gifted
painters of the French School of the day, M. Louis Anquetin. His is a
most varied talent whose power is unquestionable. He made his _debut_
among the Neo-Impressionists and revealed the influence upon him of the
Japanese and of Degas. It may be seen that these two influences
predominate in the whole group. Then M. Anquetin became fascinated by
the breadth and superb freedom of Manet's works, and signed a series of
portraits and sketches, some of which are not far below so great a
master's. They are works which will surprise the critics, when our
contemporary painting will be examined with calm impartiality. After
these works, M. Anquetin gave way to his impetuous nature which led him
to decorative painting, and he became influenced by Rubens, Jordaens,
and the Fontainebleau School. He painted theatre curtains and
mythological scenes, in which he gave free rein to his sensual
imagination. In spite of some admirable qualities, it seems as though
the artist had strayed from his true path in painting these brilliant,
but somewhat declamatory works, and he has since returned to a more
modern and more direct painting. In all his changed conditions Anquetin
has shown a considerable talent, pleasing in its fine vigour,
impetuosity, brilliancy and sincerity. His inequality is perhaps the
cause of his relative want of success; it has put the public off, but
nevertheless in certain of this brave and serious painter's canvases can
be seen the happy influence of Manet.
It seems to us only right to sum up our impartial opinion of
Neo-Impressionism by saying that it has lacked cohesion, that
Pointillism in particular has led painting into an aimless path. It has
been wrong to see in Impressionism too exclusive a pretext for technical
researches, and a happy reaction has set in, which leads us back to-day,
after diverse tentative efforts (amongst others some unfortunate
attempts at symbolist painting), to the fine, recent school of the
"Intimists" and to the novel conception which a great and glorious
painter, Besnard, imposes upon the Salons, where the elect draw
inspiration from him. We can here only indicate with a few words the
considerable part played by Besnard: his clever work has proved that the
scientific colour principles of Impressionism may be applied, not to
realism, but to the highest thoughts, to ideologic painting most nobly
inspired by the modern intellectual preoccupations. He is the
transition between Impressionism and the art of to-morrow. Of pure
French lineage by his portraits and his nudes, which descend directly
from Largilliere and Ingres, he might have restricted himself to being
placed among the most learned Impressionists. His studies of reflections
and of complementary colours speak for this. But he has passed this
phase and has, with his decorations, returned to the psychical domain of
his strangely beautiful art. The "Intimists," C. Cottet, Simon, Blanche,
Menard, Bussy, Lobre, Le Sidaner, Wery, Prinet, and Ernest Laurent, have
proved that they have profited by Impressionism, but have proceeded in
quite a different direction in trying to translate their real
perceptions. Some isolated artists, like the decorative painter Henri
Martin, who has enormous talent, have applied the Impressionist
technique to the expression of grand allegories, rather in the manner of
Puvis de Chavannes. The effort at getting away from mere cleverness and
escaping a too exclusive preoccupation with technique, and at the same
time acquiring serious knowledge, betrays itself in the whole position
of the young French School; and this will furnish us with a perfectly
natural conclusion, of which the following are the principal points:--
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8