After
taking a quick glance at Gauguin’s painting, The Yellow Christ, a few different emotions and thoughts come to
mind. First off, this painting is not
exactly what you would consider the “Mona
Lisa” of all paintings for a few particular reasons. While this painting looks somewhat staggered
and colored like a coloring book, it was considered under graded and
incomplete. It didn’t contain all the
unique visual composition techniques that most paintings prior to this painting
had. Although it does include subject
matter that has been portrayed for hundreds of year’s worth of artwork, it
still stands out as “different” to
the normal being.
While
starting to take a sway into the social norm of painting standards, Gauguin’s
unique piece made him a true pursuer of avant-gardism. By relating Pollock’s theory of “reference,
deference, and difference”, we are able to relate all these characteristics to
this slightly unappreciated piece of work.
Focusing on the idea of difference is something I’ve already touched
upon, but for further examples, I’ll explain more. Since this painting stands out to me as
almost immature and not fully developed, almost as if it was drawn and painted
by a younger child. However, this was
Gauguin’s approach for reaching out for something different. It wasn’t everyday that a painting in this
composition was exposed to society, especially being well accepted. But negative criticism is one of the key
components that has established artists as avant-garde due to the fact that
although it maybe new and interesting, it isn’t what society is accustomed to
versus previous piece of work. From
being a unique new artist, this lumped artists like Gauguin as avant-garde or
even “radical” in some critics’ eyes, boycotting such artwork from the Salon.
Aside from
being different than most artists during this time, he emphasizes extreme
deference through this piece. Basically,
his work is straight to the point, it doesn’t leave audience thinking and
wondering what the hidden message that is trying to be portrayed is. Painting images of Jesus during his
crucifixion was a very popular trend, not only for this time, but also for
centuries before hand, making this painting not completely out of the ordinary
as far as subject matter is concerned. Although,
according to the text, this piece has more meaning than what is illustrated,
referencing the fact that it was a self-portrait that was facing the struggles
of a close-minded society.
Focusing on
certain aspects, such as the idea of “primitive” paintings make this piece
unfold even more. Since Paul Gauguin
adopted some of these values, he feels that painting contrasts with the earlier
life styles versus the newer modern day ones were under appreciated. This eventually molded both ideas of primitive
and modernism to collide into a newly found expression of art, giving birth to
the idea of innovation and simplicity through artwork. In my opinion, taking a stand to create such
a piece of work that will surely be criticized by the general public because it
seems to stray away from the norm, is the true courageousness of an avant-garde
artist.

I think it's interesting that you described this painting as looking "incomplete." Similar critiques were made of Impressionist paintings, which were seen as sketch-like and incomplete. I think you could make the argument that this "incomplete-ness" is a way that Gauguin is "deferring" to Impressionism. Gauguin is showing that he respects the latest developments in art (like Impressionism) with their incomplete quality and looser brushstrokes, but he is setting himself apart from this group (i.e. or his "difference") through his abstraction, use of line, and unnatural colors.
ReplyDelete-Prof. Bowen
Hi!
ReplyDeleteI think you made a good point in saying that the painting looked incomplete because it seems to be that avant-garde is not focused too much on making things look perfect as the artist from the Renaissance were obsessed with. What I find most interesting about this painting is that Gaugin made a serious scene look like it is not a big deal. I wonder how very religious people felt about this painting.
I think I have to disagree with you on the point where you said it appeared to be painted by a young child? the background's perspective is way too well done and illusionistic for a young child to have painted it. I think it may have been more to the point if you had said it seemed cartoonish, or extremely simplified and stylized. I do however Like how you said it seemed incomplete. This makes more sense when it comes to painting something that seems like it was simply and quickly painted.
ReplyDeleteI found your post rather interesting, though I disagree that Gauguin's painting appears like a coloring book. I think that the way he abstracted and used color to create emotion shows he is not a child. I feel that there are many hidden messages within his painting, one being the self-portrait which signifies male artist superiority.
ReplyDelete