Part Two….After Cezanne met Coldstream

After a month since I wrote part one of this commentary I have completed “the Fruit Dish with Fruit” composition with similar dimensions of the Cezanne original; as I stated above, I did not copy directly but recreated the original still life with some minor adjustments. I also carried out a couple of exercises of the same still life but from different bleak angles. Having been somewhat derogatory about so that’s work in part one of this essay I have turned “volte face” with respect to my initial judgement of Cezanne.

 The consequence of my endeavours has been that I now understand the angst and nervousness that emanates from the Cezanne painting. I could not generate a smidgen of the agitation hence I consider my exercise educational and humbling as my still life, perhaps competent, is dead and lacks a vibrancy as depicted well in the original. I am actually not depressed by this but actively challenged and realise that I need to find a freedom in my interpretation of such banal subject matter to make it fizz.

If Cezanne met Coldstream!

Last Tuesday, while on a rare visit to London, I took the afternoon off and visited the Cezanne exhibition at the Tate Modern. I have known the works of Cezanne since childhood and recollect as a ten-year-old writing an essay based on the picture The Card Players (currently exhibited in the Courtauld Institute). My essay, the plot now long forgotten was a very infantile story, but I distinctly recall my primitive analysis of the painting and the recognition of Cezanne’s style; identifying at an early age his peculiar and distinctive hand, displayed in his inexact and freedom in painting style.

I have always liked Cezanne’s work: the very French landscapes, his articulate still lifes, particularly of fruit, but unfortunately remain slightly less so enthusiastic about his figurative work. I have been aware of his work for over half a century and seen many examples both here and abroad. It is human nature that over time one forgives the irritating idiosyncrasies of one’s friends; it is the same with artists as one has become accustomed to their works over a lifetime. I have now become more cynical about Cezanne’s work and came to a minor realisation at the exhibition.

I am no Brian Sewell, but I realised as I wandered through the eleven large rooms, packed with the art intelligentsia all listening intently to the art historians espousing “art talk” through their headsets, that actually I was looking through a closed window in the continuum of artistic development. It seemed to me that I was watching a classic 1940s film, brilliantly constructed for its time with the technology available, attendant to the morals and standards of that age, further enhancing the fashions and the style of acting. The Cezanne exhibition seemed no different to that classic 1940s film.

It occurred to me that perhaps Cezanne had enjoyed limited training. I enjoy his colour palette but realised that his dependence on viridian green, particularly in his landscapes suggested that perhaps his true observational skills were somewhat incomplete. With respect to his still lifes, I enjoy his obsession with apples and oranges, actually any fruit but over the last century the understanding and development of still life painting has moved on so far that certain aspects of Cezanne’s work now appear to be relatively primitive. Yes, he was ground-breaking in his time but on reflection does he merit still to have this Messianic status. His measuring was poor and inaccurate, suggesting his handling of perspective was also limited. The most frustrating aspect of his still life works was his inability to create an accurate ellipse when painting a bowl or compotier. Accuracy is important, but when perspective is impaired then the painting is incorrect and it meets with my disapproval: he was not trying to abstract or render a flat perspective… he just got it wrong!

I also take issue with his figurative paintings: yes, they are instantly recognisable but technically they come across to me as inept. His basic understanding of human anatomy is questionable and although it might be sacrilegious to question this giant of his era, if I drew or painted figures such is his paintings of his various “Bathers”, I would expect to be heavily criticised. I take on board the sculptural aspect of his work but as I said before, he has his time and place and with our level of visual knowledge and understanding now, I felt his work is somewhat passé. No doubt I will be cancelled by the artistic fraternity for daring to suggest that a great master was perhaps much more naïve and unsophisticated painter then he is recognised as.

I don’t want be negative about Cezanne, and considering what I saw and expanding my thinking on his work, I thought it might be an interesting exercise to extend one of his classic still lifes (“Fruit dish with fruit” currently on display in the MOMA) and applying the traditional Slade School approach with accurate measuring as extolled by Sir William Coldstream. I have the security and knowledge that the composition of the picture is totally sound. Furthermore, it is not difficult to find a selection of green and red apples, a fruit dish, tablecloth and a spare wine glass.  I set up the composition as similar as possible to the original picture with a grey/blue background. I subsequently measured, drew and painted several pictures: one from Cezanne’s own original viewpoint and a two more from other positions. I would be very arrogant to suggest I could capture Cezanne’s dynamic style but the exercise led me to a much greater understanding of the interrelationship of objects within the composition. The beauty of the exercise is that I am not copying a Cezanne masterpiece but taking his template of a still life and reinterpreting it in my own hand or style. My work could no way be considered accomplished but its value to me has been to follow his journey in painting the assemblage which gave me a greater understanding and hopefully develop on my journey to become a painter.

It is important not to forget the metaphor: “We stand on the shoulders of giants”. (Nanos gigantum humeris insidentes)

The New Rip Van Winkle…

Nearly 50 years ago, when leaving school, I toyed with the idea of attending a one-year Arts Foundation Course at one of the most prestigious and internationally recognised Art Schools based in Central London. I remember reading the colourful and attractive prospectus for the course and thinking how much I would enjoy what it had to offer over the year. However, my life took a different direction and ended up missing Art School. Now, fifty years later, having worked in a wide range of businesses, I am returning to my original vocation.

I feel like Rip Van Winkle… who spent twenty years lost in a deep sleep (although, in my case it is nearly half a century!) and then he woke up in a new very changed world. I recently looked at the latest prospectus of the Foundation Course from the same Art School. My memory might not be so great, but it appears that the core and integral subjects that were offered back in the day and were definitive to the Art School are unavailable and no longer pursued. The introduction of a more technological and digitally orientated syllabus (if that is the right word) has tended to override the basic artistic training I was motivated by. It has all become too conceptual. Consequently, I have researched a wide variety of courses, all online (I am too old now to go back to any educational establishment) from three to twelve-year degrees to a one-year diploma. In many respects, they initially looked attractive but somehow it became all too apparent to me that much of the important foundational and basic training in any artist’s practice appear marginalised and given little importance.

On further digging, the teaching of the traditional techniques, skills and practices for painters were not offered or readily available as core at any university level art school. In the private sector, there were many courses available but very few of any material duration and most were rather narrow and limited in their offerings. So after much cogitation, I have decided to navigate my own course designing and constructing my own practices to achieve my ambition to be a painter.  Over the last two years, the COVID pandemic has allowed me to work relatively freely in my studio at home. Initially, I was very excited at the prospect of being so free to draw and paint. The reality is, it’s not quite that simple.

The transition from being a disciplined businessman to a freethinking artist/painter does not occur easily or overnight. Apart from the occasional course attended in holidays or weekends, I had only dabbled with my art. Like any new endeavour, one needs to practice and train to improve; without self-criticism and failures, one will never make material progress. The next factor that became very clear to me was that I needed to engage with people of a similar disposition to take my practice further. 

I have been very lucky to find an extraordinarily talented artist who lives locally and, who loves to teach. To date, we have conducted ten workshops covering a variety of topics which have, in some areas, engendered a much greater understanding of the subject and I have enjoyed a significant lift in my ability.

When Rip Van Winkle emerged from his twenty years sleep, he had missed the American Revolution and was at a loss to understand the new world as he found it. I similarly have some issues with the current interpretation as to what counts as Art compared to what I thought a half century ago. 

The Art world has always been somewhat over-liberalised by nature. However, I am often told that one is free of all rules or conventions and that anything goes. Anything is acceptable and anyone may be called an artist. My key issue with this tenet is that in any other discipline e.g., music, cookery, writing etc. there are strict guidelines that, if broken, result in complete failure: a recipe followed without the correct ingredients, quantities or cooking time, or some music played without following the score closely will always result in catastrophe. Nevertheless, visual artists are allowed to express themselves without adhering to any of the traditional conventions that ensure that art is good. A topic for another day!

This is my first “News and Views” and I want to make it as interesting and readable as possible. I want to cover many topics and update you, the reader, on my progress. I am sure there will be some serious pitfalls and hopefully some successes along the way so please be patient and enjoy my news and views as well as some opinions, some controversial, some not.

Cheers. John