Pictorial Art

Love it or hate it there is no ignoring it.

A forum dedicated to our good friend Miguel (Luis) who rekindled an interest in studying art for me).

The power of the artist has been recognised by religious and political leaders worlwide for centuries. After all, before the invention of photography, the pictorial and portrait artists in particular were capable of delivering messages about civilizations, leaders, kings and queens and movements for change. Why? Because sight is the most influential of the senses but also the easiest to deceive.

The result is that much art contains intrigues. Did the artist plan to portray what we perceive? Did the artist bow to personal or financial pressures in an effort to survive or in an effort to gain a financial independance which in turn led to the artist being able to live a dream?

So, what do I aim to do in this forum?

I aim to open a discussion which moves on, returns and encompasses pictorial art as we understand it but also to compare possibly related themes or ideals and coincidences.

Why?

Because, while there is a need to study and understand any one particular artist there is also a need to discuss without destroying the original thread of a forum.

Firstly, let's compare two artists who's careers slightly overlapped but, to my knowledge had no conection. Or do you know differently?

The first is

NICHOLAS ROERICH

Luis has brought us beautiful images created by this most spiritual of Russian painters

Examples:

The second is

Ferdinand Hodler

I bring you just some images first but no opinions yet.

Ok.

So mountains are mountains.

So colours are colours.

But, can you see differences AND similarities?

One similarity is that these two artists lives overlap but are not of exactly the same time. Both were painting at a time when the Art Nouveau movement was on the rise and this can be seen particularly in the Hodler paintings.

A difference, that I think that I'm right about, is that the mountains in Hodlers are European and in Roerich's case are mountains of India/Nepal etc.

So, do you, like me, see the likenesses that go beyond the obvious differences? Roerich's paintings are obviously spiritual and often contain spiritual characters whereas Hodlers scenes are largely unpopulated.

Both artists show skills beyond these iconic images. Both are capable of producing detailed and realistic art but developed a style which they clearly loved to develop. I know that Hodler was influenced by Camille Corot and Gustave Courbet. Did Hodler have similar influence?

I for one would love to know.

Here are another two very different Hodler paintings which show another aspect of his art.

Roger

Quote:
Hi Roger,

Thought I would drop in and let you know I think this one is neat. Looks like they are writing something in the sky. The colors are so nice, it really caught my eye.

You are so right Myrna.

This is the first of his paintings that I saw and this was the one that first made me see the similarities between these artists.

Apparently this artist was interested in balance in composition and you can see how both sides of the picture are very similar without being an exact mirror image.

Luis has taught me so much about appreciation and I'm finding more and more wonderful artists but more than that, I'm beginning to piece together the development of movements.

I love the colours too. So often the great paintings have a few well balanced colours and shades, instead of the whole range of the spectra.

I am so glad that you found me here.

Roger