(xp)
― portrait of velleity (woof), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:41 (thirteen years ago) link
Turner was one of the first painters I thought of:
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/turner/i/snwstorm.jpghttp://0.tqn.com/d/arthistory/1/0/C/i/jmwt_mma_16.jpg
― ball (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:41 (thirteen years ago) link
Oh weird -- two very different looking photos of what appear to be the same painting. Anyway:
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/turner/i/ulysses-detail.jpghttp://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/turner/i/deluge.jpg
― ball (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:43 (thirteen years ago) link
I still don't even get what this is. I mean this: idg what this thread is for. is it "weird" paintings from "the past"?
Is it just like painters/ings that were "weird" before being "weird" was in vogue? Also anachronism in the title is bugging me because most of these aren't actually anachronistic.
― ENBB, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:44 (thirteen years ago) link
i think i have a theoretical objection to the premise of this thread but im not sure what it is yet
― max, Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:35 AM Bookmark
Tracer's subtitle: "old art that seems to affirm contemporary taste" makes more sense than the thread title
― ball (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:44 (thirteen years ago) link
Yes, I guess it would.
― ENBB, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:45 (thirteen years ago) link
I don't know what's hard to understand about "prefigure much later developments in art" tbh.
― boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:46 (thirteen years ago) link
Piranesan gothic nightmare machines, or more hypertortoises.
― portrait of velleity (woof), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:41 (1 minute ago)
ha yeah, kinda
but i liked his prospect of constantinople, and various other sketches that seem strangely restrained for their time, a kind of neutrality, tempted to say a non-representational representation but i'd be going waaaay over my paygrade there
http://i.imgur.com/253IR.jpg
― lex eduction horror (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:47 (thirteen years ago) link
― ball (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:43 (4 minutes ago) Bookmark
that's when you know JMW was going faaaar out into abstraction
― lex eduction horror (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:50 (thirteen years ago) link
Milo, I didn't read the first post tbh. Thread title was just misleading because I was looking for examples of anachronism within the "old paintings" and not in the larger sense. It's clear now and was probably just me misreading it.
― ENBB, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:51 (thirteen years ago) link
xxxp
Oh, nice, that is something. Maybe I'll try to look again without the same expectations. And find a book rather using gis.
― portrait of velleity (woof), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:53 (thirteen years ago) link
there kindof is nothing but a theoretical objection wrt this thread. The past was fn weird. Idg y modernism has some strange license on weirdness. Modernism raided plenty of styles of non-western and pre-renaissance art but its only in the context of 20th century modernism that avant garde makes sense as an ideology, that is the violent break w/ tradition as a means of progress. If you reframe these things as "avant garde anachronism" you basically fetishize the outre elements as an ahistorical prefigurement of the conclusions that art history has retrospectively drawn.
It might be interesting to note that there are discontinuities in the perspective of Ingres paintings that has led some viewers to think that either he worked from sources that used lensed based drawing styles or he used lenses or concave mirrors himself. To be like "omg he is inventing photorealism" completely misunderstands Ingres and photorealism.
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:54 (thirteen years ago) link
also, most of this stuff is presumably pre-art-history, that is pre wolflinn and artists did not conceptualise art history in the same linear chronologies that we do now (therefor break w/ tradition made a lot less sense as a historical move)
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:58 (thirteen years ago) link
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qY6O6h8S_Ho/TEDT5sPRjGI/AAAAAAAAFT4/iFg1b49vwZs/s1600/ancient_beekeeping_bruegel.jpg
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:58 (thirteen years ago) link
Idg y modernism has some strange license on weirdness
evidently doesn't, hence this thread
title will appear quasi challopsy to history of art bros (itself obv an anachronism in applying echt modern rhetoric to the pre-modern)
first posts gives a fairly liberal purview that ppl seem to understand, idk
― lex eduction horror (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:59 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/math5.geometry/unit16/OT7.jpeg
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 16:59 (thirteen years ago) link
vasari was a p linear-chronological guy istr
― rip whiney g weingarten 03/11 never forget (history mayne), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:00 (thirteen years ago) link
x-posts <3 Bruegel
― ENBB, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:01 (thirteen years ago) link
yah but vasari is pretty damn impt in that regard
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:01 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.principiosdeconomia.org/EHELP/index_archivos/prehistory/Images/venus-Willendorf.jpghttp://www.clusterflock.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/lucien-freud.jpg
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:02 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.abcgallery.com/I/ingres/ingres44.JPGJean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres. Portrait of Madame Moitessier Sitting. 1856. Oil on canvas. National Gallery, London, UK.
“The History Painter renders space in general, whereas the Portrait Painter only represents the individual in particular, by consequence, a model often ordinary or full of faults.” (31)
“And while the seated portrait of Madame Moitessier operates at a great remove from ‘history’ – as conceived of as that which takes as its subject the public and the ‘ideal,’ and which is figured compositionally through the deployment of multiple figures – what it helps to illuminate is the degree to which Ingres’s own distinction between history painter and portraitist [quoted above] must be understood as surpassing the question of subject matter.” (51)
Sarah Betzer, “Ingres’s Second Madame Moitessier: ‘Le Brevet du Peintre d’Histoire,” in Susan Siegfried and Adrian Rifkin, eds. Fingering Ingres (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001), pp. 31-51.
― Kevin John Bozelka, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:02 (thirteen years ago) link
http://static.artbible.info/large/cranach_adameva_1526.jpghttp://www.page291.com/blog/images/tree.jpg
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:03 (thirteen years ago) link
lol
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:03 (thirteen years ago) link
lol am0n
lol - whose is the pic on the right? mcginley?
― ENBB, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:04 (thirteen years ago) link
I literally lold at willendorf/frued
― ENBB, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:05 (thirteen years ago) link
If you reframe these things as "avant garde anachronism" you basically fetishize the outre elements as an ahistorical prefigurement of the conclusions that art history has retrospectively drawn.
i KNEW i had a theoretical objection, thx
― max, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:05 (thirteen years ago) link
lol sometimes i just want a fight
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:07 (thirteen years ago) link
If you reframe these things as "avant garde anachronism" you basically fetishize the outre elements as an ahistorical prefigurement of the conclusions that art history has retrospectively drawn.i KNEW i had a theoretical objection, thx― max, Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:05 PM (5 seconds ago) Bookmark
― max, Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:05 PM (5 seconds ago) Bookmark
that's not an objection, per se, you've just used the word 'fetishize' without discrimination is all
art/literary history isn't like real history, in that it always involves some scale of values
people worry too much about being teleological
― rip whiney g weingarten 03/11 never forget (history mayne), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:07 (thirteen years ago) link
http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lcpjbpbOZl1qdu6dfo1_400.jpghttp://madinkbeard.com/blog/wp-content/images/vallotton1.jpghttp://madinkbeard.com/blog/wp-content/images/vallotton2.jpg
― boss margins, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:09 (thirteen years ago) link
"real" history, mayne?
― (ㅅ) (am0n), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:11 (thirteen years ago) link
real history doesnt involve a scale of values!!!!!!!!!!!!!?
― max, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:12 (thirteen years ago) link
xxpost OMG! Who is this FV?
― Kevin John Bozelka, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:12 (thirteen years ago) link
F. Volloin?
― Kevin John Bozelka, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:13 (thirteen years ago) link
Ah! Félix Vallotton! Never heard of dude!
― Kevin John Bozelka, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:14 (thirteen years ago) link
― rip whiney g weingarten 03/11 never forget (history mayne), Tuesday, November 30, 2010 12:07 PM (2 minutes ago)
except that what you're doing is a) inverting influence so that each act becomes anticipatory b) disregarding the historical context and creating "weirdness" by mapping contemporary ideas of weirdness onto work which is coded with its own contemporary meaning.c) teleological views of art history and "progress" are an invention of the enlightenment, modernism and "art history" and their imposition on work made outside these contexts disregards their historically specific meaning.d) i'm kindof uncomfortable w/ the *need* for finding "historical precedents," somebody recently pointed out how much fun ppl have looking for anal sex refs in chaucer like its a way of being like "hay guy, its ok, ppl have always been doing this" like its a way of excusing yourself. Im a bit sketchy about it as a strategy is what im saying.
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:16 (thirteen years ago) link
Wtf? How have I not heard of this guy?? New favorite painter ever = Félix Vallotton! Prolly outside the purview of this thread but mon dieu:
http://www.canvasreplicas.com/images/Child%20Playing%20Ball%20in%20the%20Park%20Felix%20Vallotton.jpg
― Kevin John Bozelka, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:22 (thirteen years ago) link
xp would you object if the thread title/premise was changed to "surreal pre-20th C. paintings"?
― for the next throbbing minutes (corey), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:22 (thirteen years ago) link
thread should b renamed 'paintings we like'
― max, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:23 (thirteen years ago) link
except that what you're doing is a) inverting influence so that each act becomes anticipatory
im not doing it, but also im sure this is what's being done -- ppl are saying look at the cool outlying stuff that maybe influenced later artists
b) disregarding the historical context and creating "weirdness" by mapping contemporary ideas of weirdness onto work which is coded with its own contemporary meaning.
this is absolutely legitimate behaviour, i think. context-dependent. on an internet thread i think it's ok. and artists don't have to give a fuck about the contemporary meaning of what moves them. and in a way we're all artists.
c) teleological views of art history and "progress" are an invention of the enlightenment, modernism and "art history" and their imposition on work made outside these contexts disregards their historically specific meaning.
was gonna go with YOU'RE an invention of the enlightenment, modernism and "art history", but again only in specific contexts do we need to respect the historically specific meaning, and anyway what's wrong with the enlightenment?
d) i'm kindof uncomfortable w/ the *need* for finding "historical precedents," somebody recently pointed out how much fun ppl have looking for anal sex refs in chaucer like its a way of being like "hay guy, its ok, ppl have always been doing this" like its a way of excusing yourself. Im a bit sketchy about it as a strategy is what im saying.
it's an image thread on ilxor.com
― rip whiney g weingarten 03/11 never forget (history mayne), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:27 (thirteen years ago) link
vallotin is hella hip right now
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:28 (thirteen years ago) link
not surreal but Pieter Jansz Saenredam did some interesting minimalistic stuff with church interiors in the 1600s
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Pieter_Jansz._Saenredam_006.jpg
― zappi, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:29 (thirteen years ago) link
I'm not an art student and pretty much clueless ftmp but the perspective in a lot of pre-Renaissance stuff is so strange — it's flattened to the point of there being almost no illusion of depth, but just geometric forms interacting on the same plane.
Ambrogio Lorenzetti: Effects of Good Government on City-Life (c. 1330)
http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/3892/effects20of20good20govepk0.jpg
― for the next throbbing minutes (corey), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:29 (thirteen years ago) link
i take image threads seriously
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:30 (thirteen years ago) link
Thread has inspired me to Xmas list this book:
The Artist and the Camera: Degas to Picasso
― Kevin John Bozelka, Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:31 (thirteen years ago) link
it is so weird that you would go to so much trouble to point by point be like "hay, i dont really care about any of these reasons bc this is a message board?"
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:32 (thirteen years ago) link
idk id check it out irl, i remember that book being only okay
teleological views of art history and "progress" are an invention of the enlightenment
Vasari's preface has a fairly teleological view of things, comfortable talking about improvement and decline. Don't know much about art history, but in general Greece/Rome give Renaissance Humanism its yardsticks.
― portrait of velleity (woof), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:33 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.oilpainting-frame.com/upload1/file-admin/images/new17/Felix%20Vallotton-243742.jpg
this valloton cracks me up
― plax (ico), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:34 (thirteen years ago) link
teleological views of art history and "progress" are an invention of the enlightenment, modernism and "art history" and their imposition on work made outside these contexts disregards their historically specific meaning.
gave an answer to this iirc
i think you mean that the works have "historically specific meaning" outside of our own (necessarily post-enlightenment) discourse, and that it can be reconstructed, or s.thing
i don't, and i think, basically, yes, constructing a history means seeing things as contemporaries did not see them, and im ok with that
― rip whiney g weingarten 03/11 never forget (history mayne), Tuesday, 30 November 2010 17:45 (thirteen years ago) link
more on a similar vein, this statue of a robot is from 2000bc (Valdivia it says, not sure if that's a place or a race or a person but there are others if you Google)
https://www.christies.com/img/LotImages/2018/CKS/2018_CKS_16217_0667_000(valdivia_stone_figure_circa_2300-2000_bc).jpg
― koogs, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:17 (four years ago) link
ancient aliens assemble
― mark s, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:22 (four years ago) link
btw tho i <3 nahk and miss his contribution and acknowledge the ferocious excellent of many of the images on this thread the thinking behind its title is unsatisfactory
― mark s, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:23 (four years ago) link
(took me a while to find because I was looking for 'anachronistic')
― koogs, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:36 (four years ago) link
tl;dr my argument = "whiggism for futurists"
― mark s, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:38 (four years ago) link
whatever happened in older historical periods of painting/sculpture are not really an "anachronism" are they? like african art influences on cubism, turner's influence on impressionism to make 2 simple examples.
― calzino, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:43 (four years ago) link
i mean that sculptor who did screaming heads and that 18th C portraitist who painted self portraits of himself pulling silly faces are both unusual for their day and can both seem "modern" in unexpected ways BUT the notion that there's an iron line of progress that all can recognise at a particular and some can knowingly jump ahead of is a bad notion promulgated a bit too much by art history 101 and thus unsatisfactory captions in museums and galleries
― mark s, Sunday, 19 January 2020 12:56 (four years ago) link
(a particular = a particular date)
plax absolutely covered this at the time
but as a thread for looking at diverse pictures speaking to each other why not
― the Swedish taboo (Noodle Vague), Sunday, 19 January 2020 13:11 (four years ago) link
In the Turneresque "stuff that verged on abstraction before abstraction per se was rilly cool" category I like to include Thomas Wilmer Dewing
https://uploads6.wikiart.org/00114/images/thomas-dewing/the-lute-1904-1.jpg!Large.jpg
― Yeets don't fail me now (Ye Mad Puffin), Sunday, 19 January 2020 13:30 (four years ago) link
https://www.wikiart.org/en/rembrandt/the-apostle-bartholomew-1661
If you saw this in the gallery without any info, what era would you have said it was from? Me - 1914
― glumdalclitch, Sunday, 19 January 2020 13:31 (four years ago) link
― glumdalclitch, Sunday, 19 January 2020 13:32 (four years ago) link
plax otm throughout thread yes
in nakh's defence you maybe probably actually do need the nudge of "anachronism" to dig out what you consider "weird" in um "pre-modern" art = "things i totally didn't expect to see"?
except then you have to be all the more alert for it not to turn into "chariots of the gods"-type misconception = "if you didn't expect this maybe the ignorant fool is you von so-called daniken"
(no shade intended koogs the stone age robot is excellent)
― mark s, Sunday, 19 January 2020 13:34 (four years ago) link
lol @ me recapping the entire thread's beef with inadvertent precision, yes i HAVE been on ilx too long
― mark s, Sunday, 19 January 2020 13:53 (four years ago) link
Isn't cultural history in all areas generally the most whiggish of all historical narratives? As practiced I mean, not from necessity.
― the Swedish taboo (Noodle Vague), Sunday, 19 January 2020 15:11 (four years ago) link
plax otm yeah, although unmoored weirdness for its own autotelic sake is a distinctly modern flex as far as I can tell. Sorry if the point has already been made, I haven't read the whole thread.
― pomenitul, Sunday, 19 January 2020 15:26 (four years ago) link
‘Judith Slaying Holofernes’ by Artemisia Gentileschi, 1610.https://t.co/RuaoBc6DNR {Photo: @sylviethecamera} pic.twitter.com/qrn9fVyDIT— Cora Harrington (@lingerie_addict) September 24, 2019
― calzino, Sunday, 26 January 2020 23:09 (four years ago) link
Nice recreation! Brings to mind a few years ago a load of us including emil.y recreating Las Meninas in a Barcelona apartment.
― lilcraigyboi (Craigo Boingo), Monday, 27 January 2020 00:00 (four years ago) link
https://www.wga.hu/art/a/arcimbol/4composi/1vertum.jpg
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/jadensadventures/images/a/a4/Vegetable_Gremlin.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20160824073044
Sorry, couldn't resist. Carry on...
― Deflatormouse, Tuesday, 28 January 2020 03:47 (four years ago) link