Category: art history

A Woman’s Perspective in Baroque Art

(Artemisia Gentileschi, Part II)

What is Baroque Art

For the last two months I’ve been talking about Baroque art this and Baroque art that, but what is it really? This little blurb sums it up better than I could in an entire blog post:

“The Baroque artists were particularly focused on natural forms, spaces, colors, lights, and the relationship between the observer and the literary or portrait subject in order to produce a strong, if muted, emotional experience.”

(https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Baroque_art)

Essentially we’re looking at drama. We’re looking at using tension in the forms and lighting to draw the viewer into the scene being depicted. Different regions had their own spins on the concept. Last month I wrote about Peter Paul Rubens, another Baroque artist from Antwerp. If you put his work side by side with Artemisia Gentileschi’s you’ll see that they had very different technical approaches to their subjects, but both fall into the definition of Baroque art.

Peter Paul Rubens. Judith with the Head of Holofernes. ca. 1616

Artemisia Gentileschi. Judith and her Maidservant. ca. 1623.

OH the DRAMA… er… Contrast

Ever since I learned the terms chiaroscuro and tenebrism, I’ve used them interchangeably. I think I was even taught that they were the same thing. In researching this post I learned that they in fact are not the same thing – similar, but different. What I’ve noticed is that chiaroscuro tends to be used more when talking about Italian artists, probably because it’s an Italian word, and tenebrism tends to be used more elsewhere. That or my brain is messing with me because I’ve been doing it wrong for a loooong time…

So what’s the difference?

Chiaroscuro literally comes from the Italian words for light and dark. When you see a brightly lit subject against a dark background, that’s chiaroscuro. Tenebrism is a type of chiaroscuro. This article describes the difference as being in the shadows. Tenebrism takes the dark areas to full black and creates a sort of spotlight effect. The article goes further:

“If chiaroscuro is about the relationship between light and shadow, then tenebrism is about the shadow itself.”

Beautifully said. Chiaroscuro is a core element of Italian Baroque art and mastering it is a sure-fire way to get more depth and drama into your art. Personally I fall way too hard into tenebrism when I shade, but I’m doing better! I swear!

Where’s the Art??

Let’s look at some paintings! We’re going to explore Artemisia Gentileschi’s work by comparing it to her contemporaries. Her treatment of various popular subjects was very different than that of her male counterparts. You will often find art historians comparing her pieces to those of Caravaggio – perhaps one of her greatest influences after her father.

Even without these comparisons, her art still stands out. She had a perspective that no other artist of her time could have and the level of her craftsmanship rivaled that of her peers. With that, let’s dive into her first known painting – Susanna and the Elders.

Susanna and the Elders, 1610

The Susanna and the Elders story is from chapter 13 of the book of Daniel. She was the beautiful wife of Jo’akim, a wealthy man from Babylon. He was the most honored in his community and frequently entertained visitors. This included two elders that were recently appointed as judges.

Every day at noon, when everyone had left, Susanna would walk the gardens outside her home. On a particularly hot day, she wanted to bathe in the garden, sending her two maids to fetch her oil and ointments and ordering them to shut the door behind them.

They didn’t see the two elders hiding. The men had grown to lust after Susanna and were lying in wait for the chance to seduce her. As soon as she was alone, they ran to her and professed their “love”. They told her that if she did not lay with them, they would tell everyone that she sent her maids away so she could lay with another man.

Artemisia Gentileschi. Susanna and the Elders. 1610

This is the moment captured here: the two elders leering over the young woman as she resists their advances. Artemisia depicts her twisting away from them, a look of fear and distress on her face as they conspire behind her. The figures of the two men form a single heavy presence hanging above Susanna, making them all the more threatening and oppressive. The three figures form an inverted pyramid, expressing the power they hold over their victim in that moment.

The men are dark and shadowy, while light shines upon Susanna. Not only does this illustrate their ill intentions against her, it highlights Susanna as a virtuous woman who did not give to them. I also believe the light on Susanna foreshadows the favor she received from God later in the story. Despite being arrested as a result of the elders’ false accusations and sentenced to death, her prayers for salvation were answered when Daniel proved her innocence.

Cagnacci vs. Gentileschi

Now let’s compare it to Guido Cagnacci’s version. He was another Baroque painter that lived right around the same time as Artemisia Gentileschi.

Guido Cagnacci. Susanna and the Elders. ca. Second Half of 17th Century

Artemisia Gentileschi. Susanna and the Elders. 1610

In Cagnacci’s version, Susanna is on the same level as the Elders. She leans slightly away from them slightly, but her face is calm and she’s making eye contact. This is hardly the reaction a woman would have when being interrupted by two old men in the middle of her bath. We see the same shadowy figures contrasting against the light on Susanna, but the composition and her pose suggest she is the one seducing them. Any indication of her virtue, such as her crossed legs, seems like an afterthought. Her presence and her beauty appear to be more for the consumption of the viewer than a realistic portrayal of Susanna’s plight.

If you look at other versions of this scene, you’ll see varying degrees of resistance (or lack thereof) from Susanna. You’ll also see varying degrees of menace from the elders. In a few paintings they even look kind of… nice.

Sources:

https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/susanna-apocrypha

https://medium.com/thinksheet/how-to-read-paintings-susanna-and-the-elders-by-artemisia-gentileschi-28098c776476

https://www.artemisiagentileschi.org/susanna-and-the-elders/

Judith Slaying Holofernes, ca. 1614

If there was one thing Artemisia Gentileschi could do it was to capture a moment. Not just any moment, but one of raw emotion and tension. In Judith Beheading Holofernes, she captured every ounce of anger and vengeance when she portrayed Judith sawing off the head General Holofernes.

The story goes that Holofernes was an Assyrian General sent by the king to besiege the city of Bethulia where the beautiful widow Judith lived. She prayed to God and decided to kill the General herself. Judith put on her finest clothes and went to the enemy camp with her maidservant. She seduced the General and got him drunk. Once he passed out, she cut off his head with his own sword.

Artemisia Gentileschi. Judith Slaying Holofernes. ca. 1614

The scene is brutal. The maidservant holds down Holofernes as Judith grips him by the hair and saws into his neck. Blood drips down the bed. The women wear expressions of anger and determination while the general’s face is frozen in fear and panic.

This composition is lit by a single light source outside of the scene, the lights and darks adding even more tension and drama to the act itself. The pure darkness of the background adds an element of the unknown and contains the focus of the viewer to that of the women – to kill the general.

Now I really didn’t want to do this because everyone does it, but it’s such a good comparison that we pretty much have to look at Artemisia’s version next to Caravaggio’s. After all, he is one of the best known Baroque painters. This really takes me back to the good ol’ college days looking at slides of this exact thing…

Caravaggio vs. Gentileschi

Caravaggio. Judith Beheading Holofernes. ca. 1599

Artemisia Gentileschi. Judith Slaying Holofernes. ca. 1614

In Caravaggio’s version we have the same beautiful chiaroscuro, a great moment of tension, and a gruesome portrayal of Holofernes’ death. What’s different is Judith. Sure, she has a handful of hair to hold the General’s head while she cuts it off and the tension in her hand as she grips the sword is beautifully rendered. But look at how far back she’s standing and the uncertainty in her expression. This is not the look of a woman that’s there to murder someone in the night.

The maidservant is elderly and looks on as she hold the bag to carry the General’s head – a far cry from Artemisia’s version where the maidservant is actively involved. It’s almost as if the artists are expressing two different views on what a woman is capable of. In these moments it can be hard not to place a modern feminist perspective on viewpoints from centuries ago, but it’s just as difficult to deny that Artemisia had something to say about what women can do.

Sources:

https://smarthistory.org/gentileschi-judith-slaying-holofernes/

https://www.hypercritic.org/experience/art/artemisia-gentileschi-judith-beheading-holofernes-stories-of-women-and-revenge-1620/

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-judith-beheading-holofernes-art-historys-favorite-icon-female-rage

Judith and Her Maidservant, ca. 1623

This is one of my all-time favorite paintings. I love everything about a single light source painting and anyone that’s been in one of my streams and witnessed my struggle with making things way too dark totally gets why I love this piece. This is what tenebrism is all about.

We’re at the next part of the Judith and Holofernes story where Judith and her maidservant are about to escape the camp and return to Bethulia. They have the bag full of severed head and are peering into the darkness, presumably to see if anyone is coming. Judith still holds the sword she used to kill Holofernes while her maidservant secures the head.

Artemisia Gentileschi. Judith and her Maidservant. ca. 1623.

This is an example of a composition using tenebrism rather than chiaroscuro. The blackness that surrounds them alludes to the unknown and the potential danger as they complete their missions. Strangely they have no blood on their clothes, but this is true for all of the depictions of this tale at the time. Perhaps it was an aesthetic choice or some sense of propriety (weird since we’re talking about two women that just cut a guy’s head off), but maybe the red drapery here is an allusion to the bloodshed.

Gentileschi vs. Gentileschi

But what about her father’s version? How does Orazio’s Judith compare?

Orazio Gentileschi. Judith and Her Maidservant with the Head of Holofernes. ca. 1621

Artemisia Gentileschi. Judith and her Maidservant. ca. 1623.

Orazio’s version seems to show more confusion than determination in the expressions of the women. The way they huddle suggests fear. In Artemisia’s Judith, one is on the lookout while the other secures the head. She also added more tension with her single light source where Orazio’s composition includes ambient light that fully illuminates the figures. They still don’t have blood on their clothes, but in this one Judith is wearing red. Maybe it represents the blood and aggression here too?

Finally, Orazio’s composition has the women forming a pyramid. There’s no space to breathe between them and maybe he chose to do that to create that moment of tension. But Artemisia chose to split them up, with one standing and one crouching. This creates a more dynamic interaction between the figures, the scene, and the viewer.

Sources:

https://www.artemisiagentileschi.org/judith-and-her-maidservant/

https://www.sartle.com/artwork/judith-and-maidservant-with-head-of-holofernes-artemisia-gentileschi

Conclusion

Phew! This was a long one, wasn’t it? Thanks for going on this journey with me. Artemisia Gentileschi truly is one of my favorite artists! I could have gone on for longer, but I want to know what you think. How do you interpret these paintings? What other differences do you see?

Most of all, I want to know what artist you want to see next! Let me know in the comments below or holler at me on Twitter!

If it ain’t Baroque, don’t fix it. Hehe, I had to.

July 21, 2022
Artemisia Gentileschi, Part I

Female Strength in the Baroque Period

Early Life

Artemisia Gentileschi was born in Rome on July 8, 1593 to Prudentia Montoni and Orazio Gentileschi. Her father was a painter that was friends with and closely followed Caravaggio**. Despite his attempts to put Artemisia in a nunnery (it was exceedingly rare for a non-aristocratic woman to become an artist), she still ended up in his studio. This gave her all the tools she needed to develop as an artist. She was tutored by Orazio’s colleague Agostino Tassi and worked as their apprentice on some of their larger commissions.

Orazio and Caravaggio – Partners in Crime!

Tragic Notoriety

Artemisia’s life was not an easy ride on her father’s coattails into becoming an artist in her own right. He himself even commented that her skill rivaled his own when she was a teenager. She worked hard to perfect her craft, which may have drawn the ire of her tutor, Tassi. Some have speculated that he was jealous of her skill.

One day in the studio he repeatedly ordered her to stop working – a command she tried to refuse. He then forced her down, placed a handkerchief over her mouth to keep her quiet, and raped her. In an attempt to salvage her her honor and reputation, Artemisia began a relationship with her rapist, thinking he would marry her. In the end, he refused.

As if that wasn’t traumatic and humiliating enough, Orazio decided to press charges against Tassi. This lead to a very public trial where Artemisia not only had to recount the rape in detail, but she was subjected to thumbscrews to determine her honesty. Because the entire trial hinged on the loss of her virginity, she also had to undergo a gynecological examination. After months of being thoroughly re-traumatized, Artemisia was able to convince the court that Tassi took her virginity and it ruled in her favor.

Tassi was sentenced to prison, although some accounts say he was exiled from Rome. Either way, he never served his sentence.

Florence

Since Artemisia’s virtue was (legally) restored, her father arranged for her to marry soon after the trial. The groom was a painter from Florence named Pietro Antonio di Vicenzo Stiatessi. She relocated to Florence with him, leaving the drama and spectacle behind. They had one daughter, Prudentia***, named after Artemisia’s mother who passed away when she was 12.

The marriage was convenient, but there was no love. If anything it gave Artemisia the freedom to pursue her art. While in Florence she gained the patronage of Cosimo II de Medici, cousin of Marie de Medici (remember her??). He was an ardent supporter of education and gave full support to Galileo. Artemisia also became friends with many artists and intellects – including the famous astronomer.

Cosimo II de Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany

This access to the powerful and the affluent also broadened her own knowledge. She learned to read and write as well as courtly etiquette. The connections she fostered with her patrons not only allowed her to continually grow as an artist, but to gain an education most women could not access.

Artemisia was the first woman to be admitted into the Accademia del Disegno – a sort of guild for working artists. The likes of Michelangelo and Bronzino were members of the organization, but membership meant for more to Artemisia than honor and prestige. Women were not allowed to do many things during her time – simple things like making a purchase. Her association with the Accademia del Disegno allowed her to buy her own art supplies, travel alone, and sign contracts.

Self Portrait as St. Catherine of Alexandria, 1619

Later Life

In 1621, Artemisia left her husband. She returned to Rome where her career continued to grow and she enjoyed a healthy patronage from many elite clients. After a few years she moved to Venice and in 1630 she settled in Naples. In 1638 she was invited to the court of Charles I of England where her father had been working for over a decade. She may have gone there to help him finish a large commission as he was 74 at the time. He died the following year.

Artemisia stayed in London for a short time after her father’s death before returning to Naples. She spent the rest of her life there, continuing to paint. Documentation from this part of her life is sparse and her date of death is unclear. Some place it as early as 1652, but some of her later work is dated after that. What we do know is that she died in Naples, where the plague struck in 1656. It can’t be proven, but many believe she died of the plague that year along with many other great artists.

**At one point Orazio and Caravaggio were charged for graffiti in Rome They wrote some not-to-nice things about another artist and even went to trial!

***Some articles say Artemisia had two daughters. Wiki says she had five kids and Prudentia is the only one that survived into adulthood. The only thing that any of them agree on is that Prudentia (also known as Palmira) grew up to be a painter like her mom.

Part II

Sources:

https://www.biography.com/artist/artemisia-gentileschi

https://www.artemisiagentileschi.org/biography/

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-baroque-master-artemisia-gentileschi

https://www.theartstory.org/artist/gentileschi-artemisia/

July 13, 2022
July Artist of the Month

I’ve been waiting for this one all year! She is one of my favorite artists EVER. I even wrote my senior thesis on her. Her dad was friends with Caravaggio and she was the center of a rape trial that treated her as property. Sadly these things sometimes overshadow her artistic career. We’ll talk about it, but I want to focus on her ART and all the reasons it was better than her contemporaries. Are you ready?

[I totally tried to insert a fun gif here, but my site was being a jerk, so just imagine a little fanfare here.]

I’m talking about Artemisia Gentileschi! She was an Italian painter from the 17th century and a master of color and light. She painted strong female figures in a time when women were often portrayed as fragile and vulnerable.

Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting. 1638.

We have to tread carefully here though. A woman’s role in society at the time was very different than what it is now and we can’t go applying modern feminist principles to what was going on in Artemisia’s life. Still, we can absolutely appreciate the way she represented female figures from biblical stories and we will be comparing her versions to those of her male counterparts.

You’ll see a lot of contrast and single light source compositions in her work and guess what! That’s going to be our project for this month. We’ll focus on tenebrism (the use of light and dark) and how it impacts a composition.

My son once asked me if I could meet any artist, dead or alive, who would it be? It would have to be Artemisia Gentileschi.

June 30, 2022
Digitizing a Master’s Technique

Technique is something we haven’t talked about enough for Artist of the Month. Lucky for us, Peter Paul Rubens is a *fabulous* master to study when it comes to materials and application in painting! The man was able to finish a masterpiece in a matter of hours thanks to the media and techniques he used. So how did he do it?

Influence of a Master

Rubens was heavily influenced by Titian, a talented and prolific Italian painter from the 16th century (that’s really an understatement). The two artists just missed each other by a couple of decades, as Titian died in 1576, the year before Rubens was born. Still, Rubens was able to enjoy Titian’s work in travels to Italy and copied the master’s work well into his own career. In total he painted 21 Titians!

Venus of Urbino. Titian. 1538.

Although Rubens studied the master in depth, they worked in different ways. Titian started with a complete composition painted in grayscale called a grisaille as an underpainting. Then he would add color and depth with transparent glazes. Rubens wanted to create the same effect, but with an all prima technique. This literally means “at first attempt” and refers to wet in wet painting. Think Bob Ross painting happy little trees and making sure every bush had a friend – that’s alla prima.

Tools of the Trade

There are few things Rubens did to speed up his process. First, he almost always started with a finished drawing. This meant he didn’t have to worry about the composition while he painted – he was able to focus completely on his technique.

The next key to his craft was the medium he used in his paint. Described as a “thick jelly”, it consisted of 10 parts each linseed oil, turpentine, and mastic tears, and one part litharge (or powdered white lead pigment or white lead paste). Talking about the properties of these materials is for another post (let me know if you want to jump down the rabbit hole!), but this medium gave Rubens the ability to apply both transparent and translucent layers while retaining the texture of the brushstroke. It gave him the flexibility to scumble in colors or blend them seamlessly.

The medium was also a bit of a double-edged sword. It would start to dry after a few hours, making it unworkable. So Rubens was able to work a piece quickly, but it was partly because he had to.

Can the Technique Be Digitized?

For our project this month I decided to follow the same steps Rubens did to make a painting. Since Rubens’ first step was to start with a finished drawing, I grabbed a sketch I did from some unknown length of time ago and created a color palette based on colors he actually used (more on that next post).

These are some of the colors Rubens used.

The Base

He would start on a light umber background, so I took the umber and lightened up about halfway for my base. Next he would sketch his composition on top of that with a wash of darker brown, using it to map out the shadows and line the lighter areas. I copy pasta’d my sketch onto my base, locked the pixels, and colored it in with Van Dyck brown. It’s a little cheatsy, but I figured it was about the same thing.

The problem with this is that the sketch was done with a pencil brush, so I was starting with a rough base. As I continued with the painting, I found myself constantly fighting that roughness and making sure it was all blended in. Maybe throwing a blur over it before painting would have helped, but hey – hindsight.

Next he took a medium brown tone to lay in the lighter areas, typically where the skin tones would go. I lightened up the Van Dyck brown a bit and filled in the skin areas. It really did make a beautiful base there – something I’ll try again in the future.

Adding Color

Color be added next. Red for lips and cheeks, blues for… blue stuff. Honestly I derped a little bit on this part. I looked at my piece and thought, there’s not that much color… For some reason my brain didn’t register that the car and the hair needed color. I added a touch of cochineal lake red to the lips and it mixed with the base into a beautiful soft pink. Then I put some indigo in the eyes and they looked totally creepy. So I tried lazurite blue, but it didn’t help much. I never was able to paint all the creep out of those eyes, but thankfully a good highlight can help.

Creating Depth

Graytones came next. This is how Rubens built up light and shadow – with various tones of plain old gray that he mixed himself. I wanted the denim jacket to be gray, so I skipped the color and went right in with gray. Against the warm background it gave it a bluish appearance. Then I went in and defined the darker areas and modeled the lighter areas.

At this point I started to wonder if I should be using separate layers for this. The grays didn’t always mix nicely into the dark browns and it got frustrating at times. It also wasn’t always the smoothest blend, which shows in the finished piece. There are areas in the jacket where the warmth peeking through is kind of nice. I feel like there are times where doing that on purpose could be useful, but making it look intentional might require an extra layer or two. That being said, if it’s all prima, we should be going all in on one layer, right?

Adding More Color!

After the gray, Rubens would have added stronger colors to add more depth. The color forced the gray back, while the gray pushed the color forward.

At this point I added color to the car. I went with a mix of reds and browns. My attempt at chrome trim was a little half-hearted, but a little more time would have gotten it there. I also added color to the hair. I don’t think I did enough with the gray tones because I didn’t get the depth I really wanted. Again, using additional layers probably would have fixed this and I wondered if I should redo the whole thing.

With all the color and depth, Rubens would have added transparent layers of reds and grays to the shadows to create bounce highlights. I missed this step. Oops. Then it was time to add the darkest shadows with translucent darks and brightest highlights with opaque light color. I went back in and darkened up the deepest parts and popped in those highlights. Overall the piece looked instantly better. I’m not at all biased because contrast is my favorite thing ever. Nope, not at all.

Did I Replicate the Technique?

Rubens’ work didn’t come together until the end and I found that to be the case with my painting too. It was those final applications of value and color that made it cohesive. Did I nail his process digitally? Definitely not. But I think I could with another try. It took a round of trying it all out to see how it really works. I’m not mad about the way my painting turned out and I have a few more tricks up my sleeve for future work.

Trying out the techniques of the old masters is 100% worth trying out whether you work traditionally or digitally. I got my information from the book “How to Paint Like the Old Masters” by Joseph Sheppard. He talks about many other famous painters and their materials and techniques. Check it out if you’re interested in seeing how some the most famous artistic minds worked!

If you want to see me work on these projects in real time, I stream it on Twitch and YouTube. I’d love to share the experience with you!

Thanks for reading!

June 29, 2022
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
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