A visual art and literary art feast to demystify an elusive art form (thirty-five-year compilation): Be ready for your notions about art to change.
It’s as if distinguished British art historian and art critic Martin Gayford wrote How Painting Happens (and why it matters) as an encyclopedic reply to Paul Delaroche, a French artist who declared “painting was dead!” in 1839 after he saw Louis Daguerre’s photography invention. No, Gayford says, “Painting is difficult” if you’re aiming for something new and influential, offering a vast array of visual influences and literary insight to prove painting never died. It did, though, change, showing us painting has “an infinite well.”
Thames & Hudson has done it again with an eye-pleasing book that grabs our attention (see also: Why We Photograph Animals, Spring Cannot Be Cancelled: David Hockney in Normandy, and Anna Spiro: A Life in Pattern). Weighing nearly three pounds, its 400 high-quality pages printed in Italy are filled with 176 jump-off-the-page color reproductions, including many abstract expressionist works that may have you questioning: What defines a painting? Art?
Whether you like what you see or don’t isn’t the answer to these questions. Because “it is possible for someone to like or dislike just about anything in art,” Gayford says. Start, instead, with the premise that it’s the emotions a painting elicits that provide answers.
Emotions that stand the test of time. Emotions words may be unable to express as powerfully, or “freeing,” or feeling “opened and held” in a spiritual sense. Emotions, then, don’t necessarily equate to a specific meaning the artist had in mind versus experimenting to achieve an “emotional tone.” An “aura.”
Gayford’s Introduction starts with the same questions he asks of painters who ask themselves, “Where shall I start?” He starts by presenting a far-reaching view back to prehistoric times to claim the everlasting need for creative expression of an art form existing at least 45,000 years. Then fast-forwards to starting with the abstract expressionist genre, and the narrative’s pattern of blending his personal observations and discussions with British artists that expand globally by artist, styles, and movements, informed by the work he’s dedicated “half my life” to.
Gayford is not looking to tell us what we know.
Before painters put anything down on a white canvas, he discusses other types of surfaces unfamiliar, such as “frichons,” or tea towels Van Gogh used in a painting that’s impressionistic, Daubigny’s Garden, not his post-impressionistic paintings we’re familiar with. Similarly, “Van Gogh’s Chair, 1988” isn’t the painting we thought we knew, when he says, it’s “an emotional and spiritual self-portrait disguised as a study of a humble piece of seating.”
From the first page to the last, this exciting compilation challenges our thinking. Intrigues in examining the language of painting on three dimensions, as “an interaction between mind, hand, and physical matter.”
Even the idea that a painting must be beautiful in the eyes of the artist isn’t necessarily so. For instance, German painter Georg Baselitz intentionally painted “ugly” paintings to “put off” people. His in-your-face painting “The Foot”, the least ugly in a series of eleven, meant to make us feel the “disharmony” and ugliness he reacted to post-WWII. His unconventionality also a reaction to valuing art for “prettiness.”
Not all artists start with or end up with a painting reflective of meaning per se, though we’re primed to give it one. Are Gayford’s intentions meant to provoke us into seeing today’s avant-garde art as a reflection of the present era of uncertainties, chaos, extremism? What they’re not are the “calm” emotions he ascribes to Johannes Vermeer’s paintings.
They’re also not like the early Italian renaissance masters Michelangelo and Titian and Dutch giant Rembrandt. And yet other aspects of their paintings – originality, colors, types of paint, brushstrokes – share common elements. Gayford breaks these down for us, such as the materials used that make a difference (types of oil in the paint, whether egg whites used as in frescos, “turps” or turpentine, and other surprising paint ingredients like champagne.) The discussion on paintbrushes could fill a book.
Like Wayne Thiebaud’s pastry brush creating a glaze giving his mouthwatering desserts a “creamy quality.” “Quintessentially American,” they emit such a strong “edible quality” that Gayford first tempts us with a smaller image of “Dessert Tray” knowing we want more, followed by a two-page pastel spread of “creamy mint green, pink, and lavender colors” encircling the desserts.
It’s impossible in this space to present all the other painters and paintings discussed. Below a sampling of a few standout visuals and literary comments.
George Hume’s paintings of a series of doors is part of discussions on the “fluidity” of paint. Is this even art? David Hockney, Gayford’s friend and collaborator, remarks that some artists paint doors better than others. When another iconic painter and friend, Lucien Freud says, “Painting is all about paint,” he’s not being facetious but agreeing that different paints create a smoother effect without showing lines better than others. Lucien Freud is also depicted through the eyes of his model – Gayford – having painted his portrait and written a book about the experience, Man in a Blue Scarf: On Sitting for a Portrait by Lucian Gayford.
My favorite painting discovery is by Scottish Peter Doig who lives in Trinidad: “Gasthof zur Muldentalsperre, 2000-2002” (German Pier), considered a “photocollage,” sort of. Stunning how its watercolor-y elements reflect the starry skies, lighting up the lake, trees, grass. It’s also a self-portrait if you look close enough. Those two tiny figures standing on the bridge are the artist and a friend. Inspired by a postcard, it falls under a section on painters who use photographs or “sketchbooks” for inspiration.
Other intense emotional paintings include Sean Scully’s “Landline Star, 2017” engendering warmth and richness from dark colors painted in horizontal blocks one atop the other; Patrick Heron’s “Long Cadmium, with Ceruleum in Violet (Boycott), 1977,” that makes your eyes pop out. Red being the most intense color. The “scale” of this painting “became a feat of stamina and concentration.” Scale a critical factor in how a painting can overwhelm our senses. Scale hitting us in Claudette Johnson’s “Figure Blue, 2018,” a painting to elevate black female “individuality” after she was the only black woman in art school.
The scale of Jackson Pollock’s abstract creations are described as the work of a genius in deep concentration physically and emotionally, lost inside his on-the-floor paintings.
Colors are explored in terms of how a painting speaks to us. “Is color a matter of science or poetry?” asked when color changes depending on what else it borders or touches. Color is also seen philosophically in terms of how the painter thinks of the universe as “lightness,” “brightness,” or “darkness.” People also “perceive and experience color” differently. Matisse and Picasso were color masters, yet Matisse’s paintings were “harmonies” whereas Picasso’s were “psychedelic.”
Familiar paintings here, too, yet new information. For instance, did you know all the women in American Edward Hopper’s paintings were his wife? So jealous of any other woman modeling for him. He used “different lights” to project loneliness.
So many painters influenced others. So much more presented. That’s why you can’t put this hefty book down.