Artist: Gustave Courbet
Title: "The Painter's Studio: A Real Allegory Summing Up Seven Years of My Life as an Artist
from 1848 to 1855"
Year: 1855
Medium: oil on canvas
Dimension: 359 x 598 cm
I.
Introduction
“The Painter’s Studio: A Real Allegory Summing Up Seven Years of My
Life as an Artist from 1848 to 1855” is one of the most famous paintings of the
artist, Gustave Courbet. Not only the large size of the painting, but also the
complex combination of a large amount of figures in the painting amazed the
spectators. The painting also astonished everyone since it seems to bring out
an issue of the society and call awareness on it, which is the main feature of
Realism. Everyone looking at the painting will be busy at puzzling all the
hints in it with a considerable questions in their mind, and I am no exception.
This painting is categorized into the style of Realism since it
focuses on the life of workers and peasants and brings out the social issue of
French society at that time. However, the question of the ultimate message that
Courbet wanted to bring out through the painting has stirred up much debate
among the art critics. Some critics even claimed that Courbet presented his
political belief in this painting. So in this essay, I am going to first
introduce more details about this painting, and then I will discuss why and how
this painting fit into the style of Realism as well as analyze the message that
may probably carried out in the painting.
II.
Details and
Analysis of the work
Historical
background
Gustave
Courbet finished this work in 1855 in Paris and he wanted to exhibit it.
However, “The Painter’s Studio” was rejected by the selection
committee of the Exposition Universelle des Beaux-Arts, which was going to hold
in Paris in late 1855. Courbet then showed everyone this work in his personal
exhibition in the same year[1].
In the
seven years from 1848 to 1855 that mentioned in the title of the painting,
France was undergoing a state of war. Starting from the February Revolution and
the proclamation of the Second Republic in 1848, to the declaration of war on
Russia by Napoleon III, while at the same time the financial crisis broke out
due to the war in June 1848. The French society was suffering from the poverty
and the policy of the emperor’s policy.
Features of the painting
“The
painter’s studio” is a large oil painting on canvas,
which is 361 x 598cm in size. It depicted the studio that Courbet occupied on
the Rue Hautefeuille in Paris from 1840s until 1871. There are total thirty
figures in the painting; including the painter himself in the right middle,
sitting on a chair and completing the landscape painting, with a naked model
and a young boy around him. Other
figures included the supporters of the artist and his friends with identifiable
faces, for example, Baudelaire, Champfleury, Buchon and Promayet, the kissing
couple, and also a huntsman and an Irishwomen feeding a baby on the floor, to
list just a few. The man seated on the chair, wearing high boots at the front
of the left part is spotted, he is considered as the portrait of Napoleon III
since he was often symbolized by a jackboot[2]. These figures are divided
into three parts, the left, middle and the right part. According to the letter
from Courbet to Champfleury, who is Courbet’s friend that
also appeared in the right part of the painting, Courbet described the right
part as “all the shareholders, that is friends, workers, and art lovers”, and
the left part as “the other world of ordinary life, the people, misery,
poverty, riches, the exploited, the exploiters, those who live on death”[3]
Analysis
of the painting
There are
parallel lines formed among the painting by the direction and gestures of the
characters, which make the three parts of the painting looks connected and
coordinate although they have no communication and there are actually nothing
linked between them. The naked model, the kid standing in front of the artist,
the tree on the painting that the artist is working on, on the right side, the
man who is sitting on a wood chair, the man sit on the table reading a book,
the man with a big black hat sitting on the left side and the curtain at the
background formed a set of parallel lines; while the artist, the
manikin behind the painting, the art lovers admiring Courbet's work and the
upper body of the kissing women on the right side, and the man with boots who
is said as Napoleon III on the left part formed another set of parallel lines
in a opposite direction.
Among all
the figures in the painting, the naked model standing behind the artist is
being highlighted and spotted in the first instance because of the light color
tone. She is holding a long white cloak with her right hand but failed to cover
her left breast. She looks inharmonious in the painting since she is the only
one person who wore no clothes among all of the clothed people. It also seems
so strange because the artist is turning his back to her and not looking at her
at all. Meanwhile, the artist is actually drawing a landscape painting, which
means that there is no need for the model standing there. Some of the critic
pointed out that she is likely the symbol of the classic and traditional art
style since it is common to see this kind of naked figures in the traditional
painting. She seems to act as a role of muses to the artist and inspire him. In
the meantime, the artist turning his back to her seems to mean that the artist
hope to break though the traditional art style[4].
The male
manikin with a torturous pose, which is abandoned, also called people’s
attention. It comes together with some guitar, dagger and hat that are thrown
everywhere on the floor of the studio. They may act as a symbol that represented
the tradition art style, especially the style of Romanticism. This token again
showed the artist’s determination of bringing out a new art style.
III.
How this work
fits into Realism
Unlike other Realistic painting by Courbet or other artists, “The
painter’s studio” did not depict the natural or real scene life, like the
Burial At Ornans (1849-1850) or the Stonebreaker (1849) by Courbet; it carried
out the message of contemporary life and social issue by symbolic.
We can still find out some distinct features of Realism in the
painting, for example, the un-ideal body of the naked model and the un-posed
characters, however, it does not rely solely on the ‘real’ of depiction but
more on satire and symbolic.
First, Courbet
created a strong contrast between the atmosphere of the left and right group in
terms of lighting and the gesture of the characters. The overall lighting of
the right part is brighter then the left part. The faces of the people in the
left part cannot be seen clearly except the man believed as Napoleon III sit at
the front; while the faces of most of the characters in the right are clearly
depicted, and their clothes also showed that they are in a superior class. In
the meantime, the up-straight gesture of the characters in the right part makes
them look more confident; contrasting to the characters in left part, they look
depress and frustrated because of their crooked poses and downward line of
sight. This contrast then emphasized the suffering situation of the characters
in the left part, which the artist wanted to call attention on.
Moreover,
the skull on the newspaper, which showed behind the landscape painting, can
also be considered as an example of satire in the painting. It may be a sign to
reflect the death of journalism of France at that time since the emperor
pressed the right of reporting. Courbet achieved his aim of Realism through
satire by engaging in social comment. And I think this may probably be the
reason why Courbet made a contrast between real and allegory in the title of
this painting.
On top of
these two allusions, there are still many riddles in the painting. The
conjecture of the representation of Napoleon III is the hottest topic discussed
by the art critics. But if the man seated on the chair in the front of left
part is really the representation of Napoleon III, so why he is placed on the
left part as Courbet describe this group of people as “people who lived on
death”? Some art critics inferred that Napoleon III is depicted here as a
Poacher, who had taken the country for his own good[5], however, some critics
have different point of view. Klaus Herding in his book “Courbet: To Venture
Independence”, mentioned that the emperor portrayed in the painting together
with socialists and foreigners in the left part of the painting is “to
symbolically demonstrate the possibility of the peaceful coexistence of diverse
opinions and stances”[6]. Nevertheless, Courbet
described nothing detailed about this part, and it is ambiguity to affirm the
meaning behind with insufficient information showed in the painting.
IV.
Conclusion
Courbet put the world into his own studio in “The Painter’s Studio”.
Although the thirty characters are arranged unevenly without linkage in the
studio, the picture that they created is ordered within chaos. The scene that
“The Painter’s Studio” depicted is not captured from ‘real’ life just as other
works of Realism, but it did reflected some issues of the French society at
that time, for example, the freedom of news, by the means of using symbols and
allusions. There are still many puzzles that not yet be solved in the painting,
the meaning that Courbet wanted to bring out though the painting maybe deeper
than our imagination. But the thing I can sure is that Courbet’s “The Painter’s
Studio” is a milestone in the style of Realism as well as in the art history.
(1725 words)
V.
Reference
Books
Fried, Michael.
Courbet’s Realism. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1990.
Herding,
Klaus. Courbet: To Venture Independence.
New York: Yale University, 1991.
Schneider-Adams,
Laurie. Art Across Time, Vol II, 2nd
edition. Boston: McGraw Hill College, 2002.
Beaumont, Matthew. Adventures in realism. UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd
, 2007.
Journal
Bianclotti,
Vedette. “A Study of Gustave Courbet’s ‘Realism’”. The Motley View (October 20, 2011). https://ardfilmjournal.wordpress.com/tag/the-painters-studio/
Website
Galitz, Kathryn Calley. "Gustave
Courbet (1819–1877)". In Heilbrunn
Timeline of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–.
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/gust/hd_gust.htm (May 2009)
“Gustave Courbet The Artist's Studio”. Musee
d’Orsay (2006).
[1] Kathryn Calley Galitz, “Gustave Courbet
(1819–1877)”, The Metropolitan Museum of Art: Heilbrunn Timeline of Art
History, http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/gust/hd_gust.htm
[2] Michael Fried, Courbet’s
Realism (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990), 158
[3] Laurie Schneider-Adams, Art Across Time, Vol II, 2nd
edition (Boston: McGraw Hill College, 2002), 782
[4] Khan Academy, “The
avant-garde: Realism, Impressionism and Post-Impressionism” Khan Academy, https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/becoming-modern/avant-garde-france
[5] Vedette Bianclotti, “A Study of Gustave Courbet’s
‘Realism’”, The Motley View (October 20, 2011)
https://ardfilmjournal.wordpress.com/tag/the-painters-studio/
[6] Klaus Herding, Courbet:
To Venture Independence (New York: Yale University, 1991), 57
Gemma Yim:
ReplyDelete1) Very well organised essay with clear structure and well written analysis. It gives guidelines for readers to understand the message of the painting but not over-interpret the picture with subjective opinion. Very well written in general.
2) It would be great if there is a paragraph explaining the definition of Realism so that the reader would have a better understanding in classfiying "Interior of My Studio" as a Realistic artwork
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHester Yip:
ReplyDeleteYour essay is well-structured with clear division of parts. The analysis of the painting is quite detail.
If it's possible, it would be even better if you could include the analysis of it's painting skills. Also, the riddles you mentioned in part 3 seemed to be not related to the reason for this work being as a realistic one. It might be better if you put it in the analysis part. Stating your own impression on the painting might enrich your essay and you may need to correct some minor language error.