Luminosity vs. Impressionism

Painting and article by Jason L.

Using the wherry as an example, and the artistic movements of Luminosity and Impressionism, how can I show to what extent art reflects reality?

Through out all of history there have been thinkers and dreamers. We have come to know them as philosophers. These people have pondered the world around them and the mysteries it holds. But certain questions remain unanswered. For instance what is reality? This is a very controversial question. Artists are also looking to answer this same question. The abstract way of thinking and the different way of looking at the world all contribute to the ideas of philosophy. Art is just one way of reproducing reality.

Unfortunately art can reflect reality only to a certain extent because the artist's perceptions are subjective. Does this mean that they are perceiving reality differently? Are they expressing individuality? Does it have to be one or the other? Can it be both? For example an artist takes a paintbrush loaded with green paint and splatters it across a canvas and said he was illustrating yellow. Is he wrong? That is his individuality shinning through. That was his way of illustrating yellow and only his. Yet at the same time that is his reality. Someone could do it totally different but no less correct. For there isn1t one more accurate way than the other.

One art style called Luminosity was an art form that started around the early 1800's in Europe and North America. Luminosity was usually painted on huge canvases. They were studio paintings, meaning that they were painted indoors with no way to see nature except for sketches that they had made. This was common practice during the time. The painting was always of nature, comparing the great vastness of nature to the insignificance of man. But the most interesting aspect of luminosity is the effect that the light has on its surroundings. The light has a soft glow, a warmth to it. Like the kind of glow given off by a sunrise or sunset. When enough artist realized that there were others that shared similar views and ideas The Hudson River School was started. This was not a school at all, but a group of artists loosely held together by similar views.

On the other hand there was Impressionism. This was started in the late 1800's, around the tail end of Luminosity. The main factor of the coming about of Impressionism was a reaction to the Salon. The Salon was another organization similar to the Hudson River School. It had very high standard and it was an honor to be accepted, much like Harvard is today. The group had very strict rules as far as painting goes. The whole art movement of Impressionism was brought about because of the Salon. The Impressionists thought that the two dimensional world had reached its maximum, that art had been perfected. Painting looked as real as it was going to get. This road was a dead end according to the Impressionists because painting wasn1t getting any better and it was redundant to continue. Impressionism didn1t concentrate on the image but rather the effect of light. How the light reflected around. It captured the energy from within the light. Unlike luminosity where the light is an important aspect but it doesn1t have the energy behind it. Also it was important to capture the realness of the objects. In impressionism the light energy was created with quick short brush strokes. They would also paint straight from life as opposed to a studio painting.

With the invention of tube paints, they could paint outside on the go. Because of changing conditions (weather, temperature, time of day) they had to paint quickly. Also the camera had a great impact on the art style. The Impressionists liked the fact that objects were being cut off at the edge of pictures. They incorporated this into their paintings. It gave the illusion of stopping time as in a photograph, they loved the random chaos of it. Why continue on this path if there was no room for progress? This is how the Impressionists felt. They were bored with same thing. They needed a change. A rebellion started against the Salon. Even in their rebellion, they kept some of the old style painting techniques. For instance they changed the looks of the light but the focus of the painting was still around the effects of light.

Light is very symbolic. It reveals the truth, almost as if it were reveling the truth of reality. Even though the kept the concept of light they changed a lot of other things. The Impressionists didn1t incorporate the vastness of nature to man. They would paint anything at all that caught their eye. That is the beauty of Impressionism it didn1t need to be of one particular thing. Objects were half in the painting which was something found only in this style. That1s a concept that probably never occurred to a Luminosity painter because it only came about with the invention of the camera. The place where the painting was created also changed. Most likely out of necessity. Luminosity painters painted indoors in the shelter of a home so they could take long amounts of time to finish a painting. They had no way to transport paints. They were restricted to the studio and didn1t have the choice to view nature as they painted. Impressionists had the opportunity to paint outdoor due to the invention of tube paints. Since they were outside they had to paint quickly because of weather and time of day.

One more way Impressionists distance themselves from the flat world painting is to add a third dimension to the painting. The painting had texture. The paint was applied very thickly adding bumps and crevices. Is it individuality or reality that draws the line to define art? Take for instance George Bingham, a realistic painter. He painted a painting called Fur Traders Floating Down the Missouri River. This is a painting of two people canoeing down a river. It1s very realistic. That1s how he perceives it. He wanted to paint it as realistically as he could. On the other hand Mary Cassett, an Impressionist painter, also painted a painting of a boat. It is a rowboat but it has a sail. We all know that a rowboat doesn1t have a sail. Mary wasn1t going for the realistic approach but rather visually pleasing approach. The sail off set the painting to balance it.

Why would one chose realistic and the other choose visually pleasing? Do we exist in different realities? Because of the two art styles you can see that they might or might not see the same thing. Because of individuality and the different rules of painting two artists are never going to come out with the same thing. As for reality, I can1t solve whether we perceive different realities in one simple paper. Due to rebellions, different art styles, and different standards artists are going to differ as much as flavors of ice-cream, "thirty two flavors and then some". Art doesn't accurately reflect reality but that doesn't exclude the idea of whether we live in different realities. Art is only created to please the artist and others enjoyment of art is merely a bonus. There are many extremes to which reality is reflected in art. From the realness of Luminosity to the abstractness of Impressionism and even to modern day art. Individuality is reality but reality isn't necessarily individuality. Just because an artist chooses to express his individuality it doesn't necessarily mean that it his reality.

The author and his mentor.


Note: The artwork shown in this article is an original oil painting done by the author.