Monet vs Manet

During the 19^th century France went to hell and back, starting with the collapse of the French Empire in 1870. At this time Napoleon III was defeated by the Prussian leader Otto von Bismarck.  Driven by distaste for the new Prussian government the people of France revolt, which is called the Paris Commune of 1871. During the Paris Commune many people were killed and war devastated until 1878 when things started to look up. To celebrate French accomplishment and a brighter future France holds a nation festival on June 30^th of 1878. This festival was depicted through impressionist painting by both Claude Monet and Edouard Manet. Both of these artists interpreted the festival through painting in very different ways, yet they maintain similarities as well. Similarities can be found in the way each of the works were composed however it is the subject matter and overall feel that differs.

Monet’s painting is titled The Rue Montorguil, Festival of 30^th of June 1878. Monet’s work produces and effect of celebration and vitality of a society. Our text describes Monet’s painting as “[transforming] the physicality of the streets and buildings into a blazing atmosphere of red, white and blue.” Monet’s painting is an impressionist painting. This is easily seen through the thick application of color and the overall spontaneity of the composition. The brush strokes are bold and visible. Blues, whites and reads are sprawled wildly though out the painting representing the presence of many French flags, as the people of France celebrate their “rebirth” as a society. On the street Monet painted hundreds of people all lively and sort of massing together into one cheerful society.

Edouard Manet’s painting is titled The Rue Mosnier with Flags. His painting like Monet’s is painted in the impressionist style. Similarly to Monet, Manet paints the street during the festival of June 30^th however the use of less color really gives the painting a completely different feel. It is a feeling of more reserve and is very sober. However the way in which Manet painted the building gives off a feeling of a very sunny and hopeful day because the sunlight seems to be gleaming off the surrounding buildings. Similarly to Monet, Manet painting has impressionist qualities because the brush strokes are still visible and slightly playful even though overall this painting has a very somber feeling.

I believe the main difference between Monet’s painting and those of Manet is the overall subject matter along with the mood and feel that are being emitted thought these works of art. Monet’s painting is filled with excitement just as the streets are filled with flags and people. The “brush stroke” looks give this impressionist painting a feeling of movement and cheer as the flags whip around in the air. Monet’s subject matter reflects the excitement and hopefulness felt by the citizens for France. Also it seems to be looking forward to a successful French Utopia now that the people are free of war and destruction. The message conveyed by the work of Manet is very different than that of Monet. Manet’s work gives off a much more serious and sort of more difficult to like feel. This is because of the focus on the crippled veteran and the continued work that is being done on the streets, in a hope to rebuild. Manet’s painting definitely gives off a more serious and somber feel with political backing.

Overall, despite the differences is subject matter and the overall feeling of each painting, Monet and Manet have given a really interesting spin of the Festival of June 30^th. Monet’s painting is definitely more bright and lively where Manets is much more reserved and somber. 

Impression: Sunrise by Claude Monet

Claude Monet’s Impression: Sunrise is a painting that captures the very essence of a foggy morning at the harbor at Le Havre. This work of art is a great example of impressionism because Monet became the leader of this style of art by using color as the main factor to represent what he saw before him. Despite critics, this work of art powerfully conveys a very moment in time, which gives off a vivacious feeling. Monet’s work of art uses color, value, and texture to capture essence of the world waking in a vivacious manor. 

In Monet’s Impression: Sunrise he uses two main colors to construct his composition. Blue tones are found through out the entire image with sudden lively splashes of orange. At first glance one will notice there are many small strokes of different colors, which give the scene a very playful and merry feeling as the colors more around and transition within the painting. The painting is mainly blue with soft blends of pinks and oranges, which really gives off a feeling of warmth as the sun finally rises steadily over the soft hills in the background. The water seems to move within the painting because of the use contrasting colors within the bottom and middle of the scene. This technique gives a sort of jolly attitude to the rippling water. It almost seems excited by the sun finally reaching down and lettings its rays hit the top of the water. Overall the use of two colors really adds to the vivacious feel of this painting. The simplicity of the color is what makes this image very strong.

Another component in this painting, which emphasizes vivaciousness is the use of value. It is the different values within this painting really strengthen this feeling.  The contrasts between different light and dark values makes this painting seems very lively. This is because the contrasts create movement within this scene, which is very suiting because it is a seascape. The use of value also allows one to see depth within this painting. There are two boats located within the middle ground of this painting, yet they are much closer to the viewer because they are a the darkest form on the painting and not yet within the warmth of the waking morning, which conjures a feeling of excitement in anticipation of the suns warmth. In the horizon ships rest. The ships almost blend in with the hills behind them, yet it is clear that they rest in the water because of the soft lightening of value around the bottom of the vessels. The sky to the left is very lit up by the sun and the masts of the ships stretch upward. On the right side the ships seem to be cast in fog, which is emphasized thought the really slight change in value around the ship. One can identify shy amounts of pinks and oranges, which begin to light of the sky. And at the very top most section of the painting its as if the clouds have taken on the color of the sun in celebration of the approaching day. The use of soft tones of orange against the blue really gives a feeling of excitement and liveliness, which leads to an overall feeling of vivaciousness within this painting.

Finally the use of texture is a huge contributing factor to the feeling of this painting. Monet paints with daubs and strokes of varying weight and thickness, which adds a really awesome textural element to his paintings. The water in Monet’s Impression: Sunset below the surface is comprised of large soft strokes of paint giving the water a very soft and subdued feel. However laid on top of that are more firm and smaller strokes of darker paint, which literally gives the impression of ripples on the water as it softly dances around. The brush strokes used to create the boats were also more firmly applied strokes with a lot of paint. The texture created by this gives a three-dimensionality to the ships. This separates the ships even more from the background and makes a stronger relationship between the ships and the sea because their shadows, which dance on the water, lack this quality. The texture really adds to the feeling of vivaciousness and excitement because it every different stroke of the paintbrush really gives off an element of movement within the scene.

Overall Impression: Sunrise by Claude Monet embodies a feeling of vivaciousness. This feeling is conveyed by a combination of visual elements. Monet’s painting shows movement and a liveliness through the use of color and many varying values of that color. This painting also is extremely strengthened through the style in which Monet paints, which is very textured. I feel had it lacked just one of these elements the impression given off would have been weakened.

Case Study 2: Maria Camille

I really enjoyed reading the second case study in The Challenge of Avant-garde. I find it very interesting to dive deeper into the different ways one can define avant-garde. In this case study we are introduced to an author who signed her works as Marie Camille De G. who had very strong convictions about the purpose of avant-garde work and the way in which it should affect a society. She had beliefs rooted in God and in the ideals of the utopian socialist Saint-Simon. The ideals of avant-garde works as set forth by Saint-Simon desire for art to adhere to a standard of leading a society to do good, to generate a better society. Just like Saint-Simon, Maria Camille calls for the avant-garde arts to be politically progressive with the hopes of it leading society or transmitting a vision of the utopian socialist future as a better and more progressively equal place for all of its members to reside in.

Along with sharing Saint-Simonian ideals I feel in a way she also shares mild feminist ideals. Maria Camille is very off put by works like that of Eugene Delacroix because they show nothing more than “female boredom and inaction”. She felt that avant-garde works needed to inspire a feeling of empowerment in the woman of working class. She calls for images of woman as guides to humanity and leaders of social struggles. In one of her writings she tells artists to allow paintings to show a true views of the “sufferings of the poor.” Also Maria Camille feels artists should strive to emotionally arouse spectators to the evils of capitalism. Overall she strives to instruct avant-garde paintings to work on a social level to work to in some way influence the future by bringing on a social change with the end result being equality of resources, race, and class.

One work of art I feel expresses the exact message that Maria Camille was calling for is that of Jean-Francois Millet. His work, The Gleaners despite the soft warmth initially felt by this painting the scene is one of extreme poverty. Rich land owners who had a plentiful harvest would then open up the already harvested fields to the rural poor to collect whatever wheat the could scour from the barren field. This work was extremely arduous and time consuming to just collect enough wheat to produce a single loaf of bread. The painting shows three woman, in what appears to be the hazy heat of the afternoon. Two woman bend down and scavenge their surrounding area for fragments of usable wheat. The third woman is standing slightly hunched to provide some kind of relief to her hurting back. I feel that Millets scene is one that fits Maria Camille’s ideas of avant-garde work.

I feel that this painting is a good example of what Maria Camille wanted avant-garde work to feel, look, and influence the viewer. I feel this way because this work is not some idealized image of woman laying around in luxury or woman in a demeaning way what so ever. This image shows the strength within a woman who is simply trying to survive on a day-to-day basis. This painting reflects the suffering of the poor because this painting shows the raw truth of life in poverty, while others are in excess. When I look at this painting I feel sort of disgusted that of all the wheat that must have been harvested from the vast wheat field there are still people in extreme poverty. Also If I was alive during this time I feel that this image would completely inspire in me a feeling of needed social change. These feelings that this image arouses within me are the feelings that Maria Camille only hoped would be achieved some day through the works of avant-garde artists.