Tag: art history

Peter Paul Rubens! (and HER)

Peter Paul Rubens was born on June 28, 1577 in Seigen, Westphalia. His father was a lawyer from Antwerp that was “banished” for having an affair with the wife of a powerful man, forcing the family to leave. When Rubens was 10, his father died and his mother took the family back to Antwerp.

I had no idea where Seigen was, so here’s a map. It’s in Germany.

His first job was as court page to a countess when he was 13. He didn’t enjoy the work, but the experience at court probably helped him later in his duties as a diplomat. After this he started on his path to become an artist, apprenticing under other artists until in 1598 he was admitted to the Antwerp Saint Luke’s Guild as a master.

Rubens’ Early Career

Like many artists, Rubens found inspiration in Italy. He traveled there in 1600 where he was influenced by masters like Titian, Tintoretto, Veronese, and Michelangelo. He soon found work under the Duke of Mantua, Vincenzo I Gonzaga, who paid both for his artwork and his travels. Rubens also had access to the Gonzaga collection, where he would have seen work like Andrea Mantegna’s frescoes and drawings by Raphael.

As the Duke sent him to places like the Dutch Republic, Genoa, and Spain, Rubens demonstrated a gift for both business and art. His work as an artist included commissions from churches and elite private clients. On a visit to Rome in 1602, he painted three pieces for the Church of Santa Croce. In 1603, Rubens began an eight-month visit at the Spanish, during which time he painted an equestrian portrait for the Duke of Lerma.

Equestrian Portrait of the Duke of Lerma. 1603.

Vincenzo I commissioned three paintings of the Holy Trinity for the Jesuit Church in Mantua in 1604, which Rubens worked on through 1605. The commissions continued to roll in and Rubens’ professional relationships soon came to include other masters like Jan Brueghel the Elder and Jacob Jordaens. He also met Anthony van Dyck, who would become his most famous student.

Back to Antwerp (Again)

Rubens returned to Antwerp in 1609. He was appointed court painter to Archduke Albert and Archduchess Isabella who governed Southern Netherlands on behalf of Spain. Their patronage contributed to his growing popularity and wealth, allowing him purchase a grand estate and establish his own studio, full of assistants and students. He started his own collection of art, sculpture, gems, coins, curiosities, and more – even including a gallery for his collection in the plans when he remodeled his house.
That same year he married Isabella Brandt and he was as dedicated to her as he was to his work.

Portrait of Isabella Brandt. c. 1620-1625.

The Medici Cycle

My first degree is in Art History. Whenever the name Peter Paul Rubens came up (and it did a lot), so did Marie de Medici. Every time. By the time I was done with school, I was done with her. But let’s face it – drama queens stand the test of time and she was a queen with all the drama.

Marie de Medici was the Italian widow of King Henry IV of France and mother to King Louis XIII. She ordered the Luxembourg Palace in Paris to be built in 1615. As it was to be her home, she made every effort to decorate it with the nostalgia of her Florentine past. Consistently self-indulgent, she decided to fill two large galleries with paintings depicting the lives of her and the late king.

Luxembourg Palace in Paris.

In 1622, Rubens accepted this commission from the Queen and every bit of diplomacy he had learned up to this point would be required to get the job done. He agreed to complete the first set of paintings (Marie’s life) in four years. He finished in 1625 with a cycle comprised of 21 paintings, each one over 13 feet (4m) tall, along with three portraits of the Queen and her parents. Oh, and he did all that alone while dealing with the soap opera that was Marie de Medici’s life.

When Marie commissioned the paintings she had just returned from exile, which imposed by her son when she refused to relinquish power after serving as regent until he came of age. They did eventually patch things up and Marie used the paintings to tell her side of the story and justify her position of power.

The Felicity of the Regency of Marie de’ Medici. This painting replaced the one he did showing Marie getting exiled.

Rubens also had to be aware of how he portrayed King Henry IV . Each painting both politicized and idealized key moments of Marie’s life, often contrasting with historical fact. Presentation of the Portrait is a perfect example where Henry and Marie’s betrothal is represented as “a union ordained by the gods.” It was actually the result of two years of negotiation between France and Italy. That’s perfectly normal for royal unions of the time, but what this painting also leaves out is the fact that Henry was more interested in his mistress who he had promised to marry. This was also pretty normal for royal unions of the time.

The Presentation of Her Portrait to Henry IV. He looks so in love!

Marie was considered awkward and fickle and her personality certainly didn’t make Rubens’ job any easier. To make matters worse, she didn’t pay him on time and she didn’t pay him the full amount they agreed upon. The King’s cycle of paintings was never completed.

Unfortunately for Marie, she tended to overplay her hand and her son exiled her again in 1630. If you want to read more about the Marie de Medici cycle itself and learn about the details of the paintings, I highly recommend this article.

Rubens’ Later Years

Rubens’ wife Isabella died in 1626, possibly from the plague. Her death was very difficult for him and he dealt with the grief by working. He traveled for years, using his time in Spain and England as a diplomat to continue his art. After his return to Antwerp in 1630 he married Helena Fourment, the 16 year old daughter of a merchant. He painted her portrait and included her image in various mythological paintings.

Rubens also began to paint more landscapes toward the end of his life. These paintings were more for himself than anyone else. Sadly, he suffered from gout for years until it left him unable to paint. He died soon after on May 30, 1640.

We’re halfway through our Artists of the Month for 2022! Did you see last month’s?

References:

https://www.biography.com/artist/peter-paul-rub ens

https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/artists/peter-paul-rub ens

https://www.nga.gov/collection/artist-info.1847.html

https://peterpaulrubens.org

https://smarthistory.org/rubens-the-presentation-of-the-portrait-of-marie-de-medici/

https://www.louvre.fr/en/explore/the-palace/to-the-glory-of-a-queen-of-france

June 17, 2022
June Artist of the Month

I’m talking thicc boat this month, people. We’re exploring the life and art of none other than Peter Paul Rubens. Maybe you know his art for his Rubenesque women or maybe even the drama-filled Marie de Medici cycle. Did you know he was also a successful diplomat that spoke several languages and painted for some of the most powerful people of his time?

Word on the street is he was really handsome too.

We’ll also dig up what we can about how he painted. For all the times we’ve talked about the techniques of the old master, we’ve never discussed what that actually is! Rubens was certainly well acquainted with these techniques and ran his own studio full of students and assistants.

Marie de Medici’s attitude is the reason her own set of paintings was never completed. 1622.

For the project, we pretty much have to draw some Rubenesque women. What I haven’t figured out yet is what kind of spin to put on it. Should we go nerd? Try adding some allegory? Would traditional painting techniques work in digital? What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!

If you want to see the project as it’s made, pop in to my stream and witness the magic! 😀

We’ve been doing this all year, so don’t forget to check out our previous artist of the month!

June 1, 2022
Art Deco Prompts

Art. Deco. Prompts. When the idea hit me I thought it was brilliant! Then I asked myself what kind of masochist I really am… but that’s how it is with prompts. My poor little brain rides a rollercoaster every single time. In the end it was the perfect solution to the lack of a project I had for Art Deco month.

What is Art Deco?

I don’t think I touched on what Art Deco is enough when I wrote about Tamara de Lempicka earlier this month. She was an Art Deco painter, but Art Deco was mainly an architectural and decorative movement, and here we are making digital Art Deco. For the sake of making sure there’s a real definition this time, here’s a blurb from Britannica:

“Art Deco is a popular design style of the 1920s and ’30s characterized especially by sleek geometric or stylized forms and by the use of man-made materials.”

The Britannica link there has a good overview of the style. Now let’s move on to the thing I did…

What Are Prompts?

If you haven’t seen one of my streams where we do prompts, I have a handy little command that grabs a random adjective, noun, and verb and posts it to chat. Whatever comes up, I have to draw. Sometimes the verb requires another prompt, like grabbing. What is the subject of the prompt grabbing? So we run the command again and things start getting weird(er).

Usually I don’t keep track of the prompts after they’re done. It’s fun to see what viewers think they are and to go back to the old ones and try to remember what I was supposed to draw. There are some that I really have no idea what they were supposed to be!

This prompt is different because it has a record. But this is the only time and place I’m going to put what it was.

skinny clown thinking, strong house mowing

At least I’m pretty sure that’s what it was…

The Project

I knew I wanted to work with black and gold lines for the background. If you do an image search for Art Deco you’ll see gold with either black or dark blue quite a bit. So after a quick sketch I started laying down lines, starting with a diamond in the center to frame the prompts that would be put on top. From there it was all intuitive – I just kept placing gold lines where I thought they looked good. It was sooooo relaxing. Seriously, try it. It’s so zen!

Then came the clown, house, and mowers. At first I wasn’t going to shade them, but they really needed it. If you look at vintage Art Deco advertisements, the figures generally are lightly shaded, so that’s what I did. It was very love-hate toward the end there, but looking at it now I’m really happy with how it turned out! What do you think?

May 24, 2022
Tamara de Lempicka – There is Only What You Make

Let me start by saying the Tamara de Lempicka is a LOT. She has a riches to rags and back to riches story that took her from Poland to Paris to the United States; she went around the world several times and eventually ended up in – a volcano? Seriously, she did.

She was controversial from start to finish, did whatever the hell she wanted to, and she sure didn’t care what anyone thought. It was everything a modern woman of the 1920s could aspire to be! I’ll do my best to capture all the twists and turns, but first…

Early Life

Born on May 16, 1898 in Warsaw, Poland. Her father was a Jewish lawyer and her mother was a wealthy Polish aristocrat. Her parents later divorced, but Tamara’s grandmother spoiled her and she enjoyed frequent travel around Europe. This included six months in Italy in 1911 at age 13 where she was first exposed to the influence of Italian art. In 1912 she spent the summer with her wealthy aunt in St. Petersburg, where she later met her future husband.

In was in 1915 when she met Tadeusz Lempicki, a prominent, but indigent attorney. They were married the following year, with Tadeusz receiving a large dowry from Tamara’s uncle. What’s interesting here is that you will read in many articles that Tamara was 16 when she got married. However if she did get married in 1916, she would have been 18. Some articles include both of these “facts” without pointing out (or perhaps not noticing) the discrepancy.

If you decide read up on Tamara de Lempicka, know that she herself tended to stretch the truth when talking about her own life – making herself younger and sometimes older to suit her narrative. She had a flair for embellishing stories about her lifestyle and her many escapades. This is one of many things that made her a controversial figure, attracting both admiration and criticism.

How She Really Got Tadeusz Out of Prison

When the Russian Revolution began in 1917, Tamara’s family fled while she stayed behind with her husband. Bolsheviks raided their home in the middle of the night, “ransacking” the place and arresting Tadeusz.

Let’s stop here and point some things out (again). This is the part where Tamara gets her husband out of prison and I almost did what most other articles do and glaze over the facts of how she did that. Most of the time when you read about this part it’s a sentence or two about how she worked the system or talked him out of there. Then I came across this article. They do an excellent job of pointing out how other authors have described what really happened.

The point is, Tamara had to have sex with some people to get this done. If you think about it, what else did she really have at her disposal? What power would this young woman in need have had against men in positions of authority? Of the articles I’ve read, it was described as “securing his release”, “using her good looks to charm favors”, “braving the Russian Revolution”, “insistent urging”, and “giving her favors”.

She was taken advantage of by officials in the Swedish Consul. Period.

The Flight to Paris

Tamara and Tadeusz fled to Copenhagen, then London, and finally settled in Paris. They had no money and Tadeusz was depressed and would not find work. After she had her daughter Kizette, Tamara sold all of her jewels and started painting to bring in money at the suggestion of her sister.

Tamara painting Tadeusz. They look so happy together! 1928.

Despite criticisms of her as an artist – first for being a poor woman working for rich clients and later as “frivolous” after she found success – Tamara threw herself into her art. It’s said she painted for up to twelve hours per day until she was able to build her wealth. Tamara soon became known for her distinct Art Deco style portraits.

Paris

Once her income was stable she had more time to spend painting for herself. She also had the time for a busy and exciting social life. This included parties with the elite and affairs with both men and women. By this time Tamara was a known bisexual and made no effort to hide her affairs from her husband. She also began to explore her personal preferences and her view of strong, independent women through her art. The figures were not typical ideals of beauty. They were powerful in their varied body shapes and expressive compositions. She did not shy away from queer representation in her work, adding to the list of scandalous rumors about her.

By now the 1920s were in full swing. The popularity of Art Deco was increasing as quickly as the consumers’ hunger for luxury and hedonism. Marked by modern, industrial lines and bold geometry, Art Deco represented a look toward the future – technology, pleasure, and social progress. Color schemes featured a selection precious metal hues and expensive jewel tones supported by muted accents such as creams and beiges or bold backgrounds of black or navy. You’ll notice in Tamara’s work that she tended to pick a jewel to be the star of the palette used softer skin tones and cream colors with a pop of complementary color. Paired with her unique style, it made her subjects look relaxed, but expensive.

Kizette on the Balcony. 1927.

Tamara de Lempicka’s Style

So how did she develop the style that brought her so much sucess? Tamara most certainly had exposure to many art styles during her travels through out Europe as a girl. Later she liked to say she was self-taught, but she did pursue an education while she was in Paris. Enrolled at the Académie de la Grande Chaumière, she was able to delve further into the works of masters such as Bronzino.

Portrait of Eleanor of Toledo. Agnolo Bronzino. 1543.

This is where her work took on a notable Mannerist influence, where style is more important than realistic representation. It’s no wonder she incorporated Mannerism into her painting as it was the perfect complement to the Art Deco movement.

Tamara also studied at the Saint Petersburg Academy of Arts. It’s unclear who she studied under at each academy because every source is telling this part different. What’s consistent is that she studied under Maurice Denis and André Lhote. Denis was primarily a decorative painter “who instilled the sense of discipline and structure in her work.” Lhote was a cubist with a softer style, from whom she adopted a slight geometry in her figurative work.

The Musician (Blue Woman with a Guitar), 1929

She blended these influences with her flair and sense of style effortlessly. The figures are strong, yet supple. Her compositions are an amalgamation techniques past and present, with a keen eye on the future. One painting in particular, Women Bathing, is a perfect example of this. Described as “the Left Bank lesbian version of Ingres’s luscious harem composition The Turkish Bath”, she applied her own disregard for societal norms to her own painting style that appealed to the bourgeoisie. It certainly invited yet more rumors and scandal, but any exposure is good exposure – especially in the art world.

Women Bathing, 1929

Famous Tamara de Lempicka Works

When I first sat down to write about Tamara de Lempicka, her work felt familiar. I just couldn’t place it! It seems like she has a fair number of works out there that many people have seen that perhaps don’t know who the artist was.

The first one that often gets pointed out as her most famous is Autoportrait (Tamara in the Green Bugatti). This 1929 self-portrait was commissioned for the cover of Die Dame, a German fashion magazine. Tamara depicted herself driving a Bugatti, a “blonde curl edging out of the head-hugging Hermès helmet”. She wears long leather driving gloves and a long gray scarf that whips behind her. Her pouty red lips against her pale skin make her icy stare alluring, but inaccessible.

The soft hues of her clothing contrasting with the cold metallic surface of the car suggest the speed and luxuriousness of this drive. That she is a woman driving at a time when not many did demonstrates her independence. She looks straight at you, as if issuing a dare you would be foolish to take.

Self-Portrait in the Green Bugatti. 1929.

If Autoportrait didn’t give you a little déjà vu, perhaps you caught a glimpse of her work in a music video! Tamara’s paintings were featured in two of Madonna’s music videos and many more Madonna videos make reference to the artist. Madonna is a big fan of her painting and even has her own collection of the Tamara’s work.

In the very beginning of Open Your Heart you see Tamara’s paintings adorning the outside of a theater. And did you see the paintings on easels in the beginning of Vogue? Those are Tamara de Lempicka’s too!

The United States

Art Deco peaked around 1925 and began to wane in the late 1920s. It was round this time that Tamara de Lempicka’s popularity peaked. By the 1930s, interest in the style gave way to a desire for art that represented the harsh realities of the Great Depression.

In 1928, Tamara and Tadeusz separated due to her numerous and very public affairs. In 1933 she married Baron Raoul Kuffner, a nobleman with a portfolio of estates and businesses. Once Tamara became the Baroness Kuffner, she began to lose her way. The art style that brought her so much success was no longer viable. She tried to turn to new subject matter – reserved religious figures and dowdy old men in place of beautiful lesbians and the wealthy elite – but it was poorly received.

Beggar with Mandolin, 1935

To make matters worse, World War II was on the horizon. Out of concern the safety of her family and its assets, Tamara urged her husband to liquidate his assets in Hungary so they could move to America. In 1939, they made the move to Los Angeles. Tamara showed her work at several prominent galleries, but the outcome was not what she had hoped.

Kizette arrived in LA separately after fleeing France through Lisbon. She married a Texan and left to live with him while her mother moved to New York City. Although her commissions dwindled, Tamara still found work. She also spent her time maintaining her busy social life.

Tamara would go on to try different styles over the decades, sometimes changing older paintings, but ultimately she kept repainting the same compositions that brought her success. Autoportrait was repainted twice. She repainted her depiction of St. Anthony three times, the final version being the last painting she ever did.

The 1960s Resurgence of Art Deco

After the Baron died in 1962, Tamara took THREE trips around the world before moving to Houston to be closer to her daughter. She started painting with only a palette knife because it was trendy way to paint at the time. Again, her new art didn’t do well, but she continued to paint anyway.

Venice, 1960

In 1966, the Musee des Arts Decoratifs held a commemorative exhibition in Paris, launching a renewed interest in Art Deco. This lead other galleries around the world to do the same, bring Tamara de Lempicka back into the spotlight. She enjoyed a new interest in her work, but missed out an an exhibition opportunity thanks to her own arrogance. Her painting still made a come back and continues to be popular with Art Deco enthusiasts.

Mexico

In the 1970s, Tamara de Lempicka moved to Cuernavaca, Mexico. Kizette also moved to Mexico after her husband died to take care of her mother. After a few years of declining health, Tamara de Lempicka passed away in her sleep. Per her last wishes, she was cremated and her ashes were spread at the top of the Popocatepetl volcano.

Tamara de Lempicka’s final resting place. Seriously.

Conclusion

I’m going to end with a quote that stood out to me while researching this post. It speaks to the tenacity with which Tamara worked for her career. She put every part of herself into everything that she did. She lost everything, got it all back, and made it her own. We are all a combination of luck and effort, leaving us each to strike our balance in seeking opportunity and overcoming adversity:

“There are no miracles. There is only what you make.”

–Tamara de Lempicka, 1923

References

https://www.makingqueerhistory.com/articles/2016/12/25/tamara-de-lempickas-life

https://www.dazeddigital.com/art-photography/article/47636/1/tamara-de-lempicka-a-radical-bohemian-bisexual-artist-loved-by-madonna

https://artincontext.org/tamara-de-lempicka/

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2004/may/15/art

https://www.delempicka.org

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-tamara-de-lempickas-glamorous-portraits-transfix-contemporary-audiences

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-art-decos-streamlined-designs-envisioned-glamorous-future

May 21, 2022
May Artist of the Month – Tamara de Lempicka

The May Artist of the Month is Tamara de Lempicka – a Polish artist that painted in the Art Deco style. I don’t know much about her or Art Deco, but I feel like I’ve seen her work before. After a few quick reads it was clear that she led a fascinating life that I think will be fun to explore.

She married at 16, rescued her imprisoned husband during the Russian Revolution, and fled to Paris. They eventually moved to the United States where she painted portraits of celebrities. De Lempicka retired to Mexico where she died, her ashes scattered across a volcano.

Get ready – this one is going to be a fun ride!

May 4, 2022
Does Op Art Need Shading?

So far this month we’ve explored the work of Op Art painter Bridget Riley. She spent decades exploring perception and the viewer’s gaze. Is that something I could even begin to touch in this quick project?

I decided to keep it simple and do a project I remember from middle school. Only this time I used Clip Studio Paint instead of a ruler and colored pencils. By the time I was done, I realized it would have been faster in pencil, but that’s probably because I’ve never tried to do anything so precise in digital.

Check out this first one:

If it looks familiar, you might have done something like this in school as well. You start with straight lines converging in the center like in a spider web. Then in each section draw the curves, alternating the direction as you go around. You end up with a wobbly, web-like pattern. Now color in every other sections and voilà – Op Art!

I took it a step further and added shading and highlights. Then I wondered – does it need that? I looked through other Op Art images and saw that it’s the use of shape, line, and color that makes the piece. You think I’d have known that already since I just wrote about that exact thing, but I learn better by doing. 🙂

What do you think? Shading or no shading? Do we have to be purists about it? Of course not – it’s art!

Next I used my random color picker to add different color combinations. For all of them I was cringing as the second color came up. But after the fact I sort of love all of them!

I didn’t adjust the shading for each one and it shows. For these, I think the unshaded versions are way better.

I made one other piece, but this time I started with a single wavy line. Then I copied it and shifted it slightly over and over again until the canvas was full.

I liked it just black and white, but tried out a few different colors with the color picker anyway. A little shading and highlight (this time it needed it!) and here’s the result:

This was a really fun project. You should try it too! I’d love to see what you make!

April 30, 2022
Bridget Riley: It’s Not Art Without the Viewer

Bridget Riley is our artist this month. She made major contributions to the Op Art movement in the 1960s. It’s a style that we all recognize, but what is it really?

What is Op Art?

Op Art is short for optical art. Considered an abstract style of art, it became popular in the 1960s. There’s no mistaking an Op Art piece – trippy patterns, geometric shapes, and contrasting colors were often used to influence the visual perception of the viewer. An Op Art design might appear to move, draw the gaze deep into the piece, or create the illusion of an object. Black and white patterns are perhaps the best known part of this style, but the manipulation of perception and the creation of illusion were central to Op Art.

Blaze 4. Bridget Riley. 1964.

Seen as the successor to geometric abstraction, “its stress on illusion and perception” suggest deeper influence from the old masters who practiced trompe l’oeil (fool the eye). However, artists across the centuries have expressed interest in visual trickery through many different styles and Op Art simply another way of doing so. Bridget Riley herself is an example of a classically trained artist that used her skill to stand at the forefront of an instantly recognizable art style.

Bridget Riley’s Early Life

Riley was born on April 24, 1931 in Norwood, London. She studied at Goldsmiths College and the Royal College of Art and began teaching in 1957.

Ever since childhood, she spent time looking at nature and the world around her. She had a natural talent for art that she demonstrated in her early work, comprised mainly of portraits and still lifes. She grew up in a time where “good” art was representational and so her creative studies began with a more classical training. This meant accurately representing life and copying works of the old masters.

Part of accurately depicting life is being able to create depth on a two-dimensional surface. Riley found this aspect very interesting well before she began her Op Art journey.

Her work eventually took on a somewhat Impressionist style, but in the late 1950s she began painting landscapes in the Pointillist style. Pointillism (painting lots of tiny dots to form an image), particularly the work of Georges Seurat, set Riley on the path to exploring the different ways she could use paint to play with perception. She not only studied it as its own form of optical illusion, but learned how to use color to create various optical effects.

Pink Landscape. Bridget Riley. 1960.

Style

Although Op Art is considered a form of Abstract art, Bridget Riley didn’t consider herself an abstract artist. First and foremost she considered herself a painter. Her goal is to include the viewer as a part of her work because it’s the audience that completes the work. There needs to be that interaction between the viewer and the piece in order for it to be considered art. She wants the audience feel like they are a part of the art – a direct attempt at breaking down the “elitist” impression of the art world and making art more accessible to everyone.

Because the focus is on the visual experience, the viewer is reminded that things are not always as they appear. Riley is “known for exploring optical experiences in her paintings.” She is inspired by her perception of the world she observed so intently throughout her life. All of these concepts are what support the geometric forms, high contrast, “dizzying optical illusions”, black and white shapes, and vibrant colors of her art.

Paintings

Riley painted her first Op Art piece in 1960. She began to play with geometric shapes and patterns, black and white lines, and other abstract forms. These are probably the most recognizable Op Art Pieces and what is most associated with the style.

Arrest 3. Bridget Riley. 1965.

During this time Riley grew to dislike the commercial side of art. There were no copyright protections for artists back then and she opposed the way many artists’ work (including her own) was stolen and exploited for profit. Ironically, she worked for an advertising agency in the early sixties. She gave this up along with teaching by 1964.

Riley started using color in 1967. Geometric forms were sometimes replaced by curved lines “which created a wavelike movement”. This was due in part for her disdain toward the commercial entities that stole her art. Her paintings held the same intensity, but with more nuanced treatment of “alternating color”.

Cataract 3. Bridget Riley. 1967.

Riley continued to paint through the decades, well into her 80s. You may even recognize one of her pieces from the 2012 Olympic Games poster.

Rose Rose. Bridget Riley. 2012.

Her use of color and form has varied over the years, but there is no mistaking a Bridget Riley painting.

Fold. Bridget Riley. 2004.

Have you checked the other Artists of the Month? There’s a project for each one too!

References

https://www.tate.org.uk/art/artists/bridget-riley-1845

https://www.artsy.net/artist/bridget-riley

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/dec/10/bridget-riley-at-90-a-master-who-can-leave-you-feeling-elated-liberated-and-even-seasick

https://www.thecollector.com/bridget-riley-op-art-optical-illusions/

https://www.theartstory.org/movement/op-art/

April 20, 2022
Op Art April

Have you been wondering when we’ll talk about an artist that’s still alive? Then April is your month! We’ll be taking a look at the life and art of Bridget Riley. She was a prominent artist in the Op Art movement of the 1960s, first exploring geometric patterns in black and white and then moving to color combinations to influence the eye.

Riley’s work spans seven decades, so there’s plenty to explore. For the project this month, I’ll be playing with patterns and colors to see what kind of fun effects emerge. Let’s get ready to take our eyes on a wild ride through Op Art!

If you haven’t seen the other Artists of the Month, this is a great place to start!

April 3, 2022
Androgyny for the Gods

Instead of doing a biography, we’re talking androgyny today. Documentation on Michelangelo Buonarroti’s life and work is plentiful (seriously good reading), so we’re going to look at one of my favorite topics: Why do his women look so masculine?

Three Examples of Michelangelo’s Women

Night

Michelangelo was commissioned to create sculptures for the Medici Chapel, which included Night. Night is often referenced as being very manly. The body is muscular with odd-shaped breasts, but a soft, feminine face. It does seem to be a strange representation, but were the design choices intentional? Some historians have pointed to this particular sculpture as evidence that Michelangelo didn’t know how to portray a the female body. The sculpture has even been called outright bad!

Night

Dawn

Dawn is another sculpture in the Medici Chapel with a muscular body and feminine features, although she is a bit softer than Night.

Dawn

Sistine Ceiling Sybils

Sibyls are female oracles from ancient mythology. There are five of them on the Sistine Ceiling, said to have foretold the birth of Christ. They all have imposing physiques, despite being mostly covered in robes. But in the case of the Libyan Sibyl, her twisted pose puts her broad back and muscular form on full display.

Libyan_Sibyl

Were the Manly Women Intentional?

Once upon a time in art history class, I remember learning about how Michelangelo only sketched from male models and that’s why his women looked like men. Case closed, next topic. Still, I found it interesting and tried it myself, gender swapping references here and there and enjoying the androgyny it often created. It seems that the end results will be more feminine if I draw from a female model and more masculine if I draw from a male model, but switching them always lands me somewhere in between. It’s a fun mix of intent with unintentional results.

So how much of Michelangelo’s androgyny was intentional? There are three general arguments you’ll find on the subject.

Michelangelo Didn’t Like Women

Some art historians have argued that Michelangelo’s sexual preferences played a role in how he portrayed women. He’s been described both as having an aversion to the female form and an “inclination” toward the male form due his homosexuality.

Others argue that he wasn’t gay because he had a lover. He wrote poetry for his lover Vittoria Colonna. While it’s unclear whether they had a physical relationship, there was likely a romance there. It’s also said that Michelangelo was close to his mother, so why would he hate women? (That’s a rabbit hole for another time…)

Regardless of Michelangelo’s sexual orientation, it’s unlikely that he had any aversion toward women. It’s also incredibly short-sighted to assume that this is the reason his women are rendered the way they are. I find the whole “his women look manly because he liked men” argument to be the weakest and I’m happy to toss this one aside first!

There Were Only Male Models

Did Michelangelo even know how to draw women?

I’ve already mentioned the point that female models weren’t readily available (it was considered inappropriate for women) and so artists would draw from the male form and use that for their female figures. There are surviving sketches that prove Michelangelo drew the Libyan Sibyl from a male model, but this isn’t the whole story.

There are two issues with this. First, to say that women didn’t pose because of cultural norms is only half the story. Those norms, largely an application of the upper class, would just as easily have been disregarded by a woman willing to pose nude in return for payment or favors. Even today you can make a few quick bucks posing for art classes.

Second, if turning drawings of men into finished artworks of women were an issue for Renaissance artists, we wouldn’t only be talking about Michelangelo right now. There would be many other artists to reference, but his contemporaries painted their women soft and feminine just the same.

Third, Michelangelo knew the human anatomy very well. His sketches number in the hundreds. He even went as far as participating in human dissections to study the musculature of the body. Given his ability to represent the human anatomy with such accuracy and beauty, it seems ridiculous to suggest that he was incapable of doing the same for the female body.

In fact, it’s been suggested that Michelangelo’s ability to render anatomy was so good that he represented Night with breast cancer. Her left breast has features of cancer that are recognizable by modern doctors and it was a disease that would have been known at the time the statue was carved. These abnormalities are not present in the right breast or in Dawn. If he intentionally included a recognizable illness, it adds not only symbolism to sculptures representing life and death, but lends further credibility to the idea that his androgynous depictions of women were deliberate.

While there may not have been sketches of women from Michelangelo, there are plenty from other artists. There’s no reason to believe that he didn’t know what a woman’s body looks like or that he wasn’t able to render one.

Renaissance Beauty Standards

During the Renaissance, it was believed that the female form was an inferior version of the male form. A woman’s body was seen as an “inverted” man’s body, and therefore men were superior. Further support of this belief came from the Bible, where man was created by God, but woman was created from a man’s rib, and therefore the male form was closer to God.

However, that didn’t mean that men were seen as more beautiful. Androgyny was seen as beautiful during the Renaissance. You will often see depictions of effeminate males and masculine females in art from this period as these were the most “attractive states for both men and women.”

Not only was androgyny the beauty standard, it was considered godly. According to some interpretations of the book of Matthew, there is no gender or sexuality in Heaven. Also, the concept of God being androgynous was popular in the intellectual circles of the Renaissance that Michelangelo was a part of.

Now we know that women ~~are~~were seen as inferior, but a mix of male and female traits was considered beautiful and godly. Since women of the Renaissance were not supposed to perform strenuous activities, a muscular woman like the Libyan Sibyl should not make sense as a representation of a woman.

BUT, the Sibyl is not just a representation of a woman, she is a divine being. Because of this, she was depicted with more masculine traits to reflect her godly powers. Therefore, thanks to his deep studies of anatomy and his participation in scholarly circles, the Michelangelo’s masculine depictions of women are most certainly intentional and meant to add to the symbolism of his works.

Sources:

https://artsexualityren.wordpress.com/2018/01/13/first-blog-post/

https://www.romaexperience.com/post/women-of-the-sistine-chapel-divine-androgyny-and-god-s-right-hand-woman

https://medium.com/counterarts/why-michelangelos-women-were-so-manly-e65cc309c8b1

https://renresearch.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/men-with-breasts-or-why-are-michelangelos-women-so-muscular-part-1/

March 19, 2022
March Artist of the Month – Changed!

Originally I was going to write about Francisco Goya for the March Artist of the Month, but there was one problem (at least to me). We’ve spent the last two months in the late 19th and early 20th century and Goya’s work is only slightly earlier than that. We need to break at least a few centuries away!

Francisco de Goya, Saturno devorando a su hijo (1819-1823)

The idea for who to write about instead jumped out at me so fast I pretty much HAVE to do it! It’s Michelangelo! I know, I said I was going to choose artists that weren’t “too well-known” and I’m going back on that. There are more resources than most people will ever need on Michelangelo. But rather than focus on the artist himself, I want to focus on his process and why his (and other artists’) work looks the way it does.

And then there is the March project. This time it was an easy choice. We’re going to choose a reference photo of a man and sketch it three times – once as a man, once as a woman, and once as nonbinary. Then I’m going to do the same with a reference photo of a woman. The idea is to explore the way gender is translated based on the original reference versus the intended result.

Oh my, that sounded kind of dry, didn’t it? Here’s a better description – I’m going to sketch a bunch of nekkid people because it’s educational on a whole bunch of levels and it’s still something talk about even if you just show up for the nekkid drawings.

That particular stream will most likely be on YouTube since there’s no point in trying to do this type of stream on Twitch. See you there!

P.S. We will definitely be revisiting Goya in the future. 🙂

March 1, 2022