Why do I admire this?

[Artyczar]

Allow me to disagree. I believe that it’s a combination of both. Let’s leave the “spilling the guts” thingy for a moment or two. Expressionism in all its forms is purposely intended to evoke certain emotions.

I actually don't disagree with you here. I believe it starts with the artist. But, if the artist hasn't spilled their guts successfully, it will never translate to the viewer. You bring up Van Gogh and we can feel him through every brush stroke (most of us anyway). He had a way about him. What special ingredients did he have to evoke such things? Another artist could have felt those same strong feelings but could not have been able to translate them as elegantly, or at all, and it would all be lost in translation. So, I agree it is both the artist and viewer. We agree I think.

 

[Nufocus]

We sure do, Arty!!

 

[Claude J Greengrass]

These are very interesting. The whole idea is interesting in fact.

Thanks. It's one of those "thing that just painted itself". That it to say, I wasn't aware of the passage of time while I worked on it.

 

[Nufocus]

To be sure I also admire this, but not because of its skillful attention to detail (Bouguerau) but because of that man’s incredible ability to penetrate under the skin of his subject. And in my humble opinion he was an early expressionist because of this ability of his.

 

[Nufocus]

Btw, I guess you all know that this image is not the whole painting...

 

[stlukesguild]

Allow me to disagree. I believe that it’s a combination of both. Let’s leave the “spilling the guts” thingy for a moment or two. Expressionism in all its forms is purposely intended to evoke certain emotions.

The artist's intention, at one level, is rather irrelevant. If I intend to create a brilliant and profoundly moving work of art there is no guarantee that I will succeed.

 

[stlukesguild]

I happen to like this painting, which most people hate.

Count me among the haters.

 

[stlukesguild]

What Vincent applied to his canvases is obviously the result of what he’s been through in his short life, but it is completely unnecessary to know the details thereof in order to feel what needs to be felt while viewing his work.

It's rather difficult to make such a judgment when we are all aware of not only Van Gogh's tragic biography but also Expressionist approaches to art.

 

[Nufocus]

What Vincent applied to his canvases is obviously the result of what he’s been through in his short life, but it is completely unnecessary to know the details thereof in order to feel what needs to be felt while viewing his work.

It's rather difficult to make such a judgment when we are all aware of not only Van Gogh's tragic biography but also Expressionist approaches to art.

“We are all aware”, not really. I am sure that among the millions of visitors to the Van Gogh museum in Amsterdam (to name but one) there are many people who know very little or nothing about his biography.

 

[Nufocus]

Allow me to disagree. I believe that it’s a combination of both. Let’s leave the “spilling the guts” thingy for a moment or two. Expressionism in all its forms is purposely intended to evoke certain emotions.

The artist's intention, at one level, is rather irrelevant. If I intend to create a brilliant and profoundly moving work of art there is no guarantee that I will succeed.

Allow me to disagree. I believe that it’s a combination of both. Let’s leave the “spilling the guts” thingy for a moment or two. Expressionism in all its forms is purposely intended to evoke certain emotions.

The artist's intention, at one level, is rather irrelevant. If I intend to create a brilliant and profoundly moving work of art there is no guarantee that I will succeed.

If the artist intention is irrelevant we should not make art.

 

[Nufocus]

And.... I’m not sure what you define as “success”.

 

[E.J.H.]

Almost none of van Gogh's contemporaries "felt what needs to be felt while viewing his work".
No matter how you define "succes" he didn't achieve it during his lifetime.

 

[Artyczar]

For me it would be a piece that I finish that I'm happy with, not matter who else likes it. Maybe more success if others connect with it too.

 

[Bongo]

“We are all aware”, not really. I am sure that among the millions of visitors to the Van Gogh museum in Amsterdam (to name but one) there are many people who know very little or nothing about his biography.

and very little about art. It's on the "to do" list when you visit Amsterdam. It could be argued that a lot of Van Gogh's current popularity is based on being popular. Famous for being famous.

I don't think an artist's intention should or does matter to the viewer.
Further emotions don't exist in a vacuum. You're happy or sad for a reason. You're dog died. You got a raise. You looked at a Franz Kline painting?? There is a difference between conveying an emotion and invoking an emotion. We have learned "dark colors" -- sad. "bright colors" - happy. You can understand what's being conveyed without having the same emotional response.

What's missing for me is "empathy". For me to "feel", not just understand an emotion external to myself - I must feel empathy. My friend's dog died. My brother got a raise. I looked at a painting?

Imagine walking thru a gallery, seeing a painting and burst into tears, then take a few steps - see another painting and explode with gaiety. What an emotional rollercoaster that would be. Instead you understand what's being conveyed, you appreciate the skill and then you move on.

A real emotional response imo cannot be extinguished or ingnited by taking a few steps in a gallery while looking at paint placed abstractly on canvas

 

[Nufocus]

You got it, Bongo.
maybe we must replace “emotion” with “sensual reaction”??....

 

[stlukesguild]

'In art as in lovemaking, heartfelt ineptitude has its appeal and so does heartless skill, but what you want is passionate virtuosity."
-John Barth