Impressionism vs. Renaissance

Impressionism is a style of art that originated in with a group of Paris-based artists in the 19^th century. It received its name a painting by Claude Monet, painted in France in 1872, titled Impression, Sunrise. The subject matter included ordinary elements of the human experience. They were able to capture the essence of ordinary moments because artists often painted outdoors. Impressionists were considered radical at first because they went against the rules of painting. Impressionist paintings are characterized by small, thin brush strokes with an emphasis on the depiction of light. Artists painted their works in the way in which the eye receive an image. It relied on the ability of the eye to form and interpret what could be called optical illusions. Lines and contour became less important to artists of that time.

(Pierre) Auguste Renior: Le Moulin de la Galette, 1876 (Paris)

Impressionism requires a certain taste. I would say that I am in between loving it and hating it. Due to the departure from the rules of art, it is hard to figure out whether the artist is extremely talented or not. A great example of Impressionist art that matches the beauty of Renaissance art is Le Moulin de la Gallete. It was painted in1876  by Auguste Renior in Paris. This is a scene at a popular Partisan restaurant and dance hall. I like this painting because despite the muted colors, the warmth and charm of the party goers is still captured in a magnificent way. The spirit of the crowd is captured only with patches of color.  The characters in the forefront of the painting have only slight details in their faces, but the viewer can clearly see that each person at the dance is enjoying themselves. The characters in the background begin to blur together as the eye would eventually do when an individual has been focusing on one area for an extended period of time.

This style was not welcomed at first. However, the public gradually became more accepting of Impressionism even though it was still shunned by art critics. The Impressionists style could be considered to be the opposite of Renaissance style art. In my opinion, Renaissance art is some of the best.  Unlike the loose, sketchy lines from the Impressionists era, the Renaissance artists painted with solid, vivid lines. Renaissance art left little room for interpretation. The subject matter was usually religious and did not usually include people going about their lives and doing everyday activities. An immense amount of detail was put towards creating vibrant color while Impressionists went for a more muted sense of color.

Jan Van Eyck: Giovanni Arnolfini and His Bride, 1434 (Bruges)

Jan Van Eyck’s painting, Giovanni Arnolfini and His Bride, was painted in 1434 in Bruges Netherlands. It was used a as marriage certificate for Giovanni di Nicolao Arlnofini and his bride. When comparing the Jan Van Eyck’s painting to Renior’s, the viewer can instantly see an almost night and day difference in the attention paid to the lines in Van Eyck’s work. For example, the chandelier appears to be real. There is also a more vibrant sense of color in this painting.

I think that both Impressionist and Renaissance art are beautiful. Even though Impressionist artists blended colors together, they were still able to create some great works of art. I prefer Renaissance art because I love the use of color and the attention paid to detail.

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_art

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impressionism

http://smarthistory.khanacademy.org/renoir-moulin.html