stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,524
I thought I might start a thread on those works of art or artists who we feel to be something of "guilty pleasures"... that we enjoy despite understanding that they are not generally held in high regard, or are seen as unusual, cliche, kitsch, or just weird.
A Guilty Pleasure: Rococo
- François Boucher: Mademoiselle O'Murphy
At the height of Impressionism, Pierre Renoir was the target of negative comments concerning his paintings of voluptuous nudes. Monet famously quipped (to an effect): “You must forgive our dear Renoir, for he’s been seen again in the company of Parisian women.” Monet’s comment had a double-meaning. “Parisian Women” could certainly refer to attractive women of less-than-upstanding moral character… even prostitutes. At the same time, it undoubtedly was intended as a slightly disproving witticism aimed at Renoir’s known admiration for the salacious nudes paintings by Rococo masters such as Fragonard and Boucher to be found in the Louvre.
- Jean-Honoré Fragonard: Bathers
From the very start, the Rococo was the target of criticism based more upon questions of morality than aesthetics. While the art of the Baroque focused upon high-minded religious and mythological themes, the Rococo was an eminent aristocratic art… an art clearly for the upper-middle-classes and the wealthy. The artists of the Rococo satisfied this audience’ dedication to fashionable style, refined taste, wit, intimacy, and delicacy.
-Jean-Frederic Schall: Lovers
Following the French Revolution, the art of the Rococo was denounced for its excessive luxuriousness, its shallowness, its lack of “seriousness”… and for shamelessly pandering to the tastes of the aristocracy… as if Peter Paul Rubens, Michelangelo, and Titian were employed by the masses and sought their approval.
- François Boucher: The Love Letters
Similar criticisms were leveled by later Modernist Marxist and Feminist critics, while the influential Immanuel Kant had questioned the merits any art in which the subject matter itself seduced, and Adolph Loos argued that all ornament was crime… and surely nothing could be more “ornamental” than the decorative art of the Rococo... well that and the art of his arch-nemesis: Gustav Klimt.
-Jean-Baptiste Marie Pierre: Abduction of Europa
Denis Diderot, the philosopher/writer/art critic and contemporary of the great Rococo painters admitted to the seductiveness and “beauty” of paintings by artists such as Boucher: “What colors! What variety! What wealth of objects and ideas!… There is no part of his compositions which, if separated from the others, doesn’t please; even the whole seduces you.” But this alone, was not enough for Diderot: “This man has everything except truth… He is made to dazzle two kinds of people; his elegance, cuteness, romanesque chivalry, coquettishness, taste, ease, variety, daring, his made-up incarnations, his debauchery, should captivate the little artisans, little women, the young, the socialites, the host of people who don’t know true taste, truth, fair ideas, the severity of art; how would such people resist the licentiousness, the pomp, the pompons, the bosoms, the derrières, the epigram of Boucher?”
-Jean-Antoine Watteau: The Departure from Cythera
One might not wish to make a full diet of Antemann’s sweet visual confections... we can't live on chocolate alone, can we? But the Rococo certainly offers the viewer some much-needed eye-candy in contrast to a great majority of the pretentious, angst-laden, and simply ugly art that dominates much of what shows up in the major galleries today.
- Claude Michel Clodion: Nymph & Satyr
A Guilty Pleasure: Rococo
- François Boucher: Mademoiselle O'Murphy
At the height of Impressionism, Pierre Renoir was the target of negative comments concerning his paintings of voluptuous nudes. Monet famously quipped (to an effect): “You must forgive our dear Renoir, for he’s been seen again in the company of Parisian women.” Monet’s comment had a double-meaning. “Parisian Women” could certainly refer to attractive women of less-than-upstanding moral character… even prostitutes. At the same time, it undoubtedly was intended as a slightly disproving witticism aimed at Renoir’s known admiration for the salacious nudes paintings by Rococo masters such as Fragonard and Boucher to be found in the Louvre.
- Jean-Honoré Fragonard: Bathers
From the very start, the Rococo was the target of criticism based more upon questions of morality than aesthetics. While the art of the Baroque focused upon high-minded religious and mythological themes, the Rococo was an eminent aristocratic art… an art clearly for the upper-middle-classes and the wealthy. The artists of the Rococo satisfied this audience’ dedication to fashionable style, refined taste, wit, intimacy, and delicacy.
-Jean-Frederic Schall: Lovers
Following the French Revolution, the art of the Rococo was denounced for its excessive luxuriousness, its shallowness, its lack of “seriousness”… and for shamelessly pandering to the tastes of the aristocracy… as if Peter Paul Rubens, Michelangelo, and Titian were employed by the masses and sought their approval.
- François Boucher: The Love Letters
Similar criticisms were leveled by later Modernist Marxist and Feminist critics, while the influential Immanuel Kant had questioned the merits any art in which the subject matter itself seduced, and Adolph Loos argued that all ornament was crime… and surely nothing could be more “ornamental” than the decorative art of the Rococo... well that and the art of his arch-nemesis: Gustav Klimt.
-Jean-Baptiste Marie Pierre: Abduction of Europa
Denis Diderot, the philosopher/writer/art critic and contemporary of the great Rococo painters admitted to the seductiveness and “beauty” of paintings by artists such as Boucher: “What colors! What variety! What wealth of objects and ideas!… There is no part of his compositions which, if separated from the others, doesn’t please; even the whole seduces you.” But this alone, was not enough for Diderot: “This man has everything except truth… He is made to dazzle two kinds of people; his elegance, cuteness, romanesque chivalry, coquettishness, taste, ease, variety, daring, his made-up incarnations, his debauchery, should captivate the little artisans, little women, the young, the socialites, the host of people who don’t know true taste, truth, fair ideas, the severity of art; how would such people resist the licentiousness, the pomp, the pompons, the bosoms, the derrières, the epigram of Boucher?”
-Jean-Antoine Watteau: The Departure from Cythera
One might not wish to make a full diet of Antemann’s sweet visual confections... we can't live on chocolate alone, can we? But the Rococo certainly offers the viewer some much-needed eye-candy in contrast to a great majority of the pretentious, angst-laden, and simply ugly art that dominates much of what shows up in the major galleries today.
- Claude Michel Clodion: Nymph & Satyr
❤
