Day Ninety Eight: Sunset by Charles Warren Eaton
Hello and welcome to day 98 of 100 days of Tonalism.
Today's study is 'Sunset' by Charles Warren Eaton.
We've done a lot of Eaton's in the series and this is the last one. As I mentioned in our previous Eaton post I recently received a book by David A Cleveland called Intimate Landscapes Charles Warren Eaton and the Tonalist movement in American art 1880 to 1920. This book was written before Davids seminal work A History of American Tonalism 1880 to 1920 and is currently out of print. The book was not cheap and I recommend it only for only the most fanatical fans of Tonalism out there (which would include myself). I will be reading from this book today in the video narration so please check that out.
Yesterday I was writing about how there is nothing new in art. I'm afraid my post devolved into yet another rant against a Modern art. I'd like to qualify my views on Modern art a little more extensively today, as this is a topic with a lot of grays and my post yesterday made it seem like my views are black and white.
I am not arguing (as some do) that there should never have been a shift in painting towards, what is now termed Modern art. The reality is that there are many Modern artists whose work I admire and find moving. A short list off the top of my head would include Rothko, Gerhard Richter, Franz Klein, Picasso, Gauguin, late period Willem de Kooning and others that I'm sure just are not coming to mind at the moment. I'm also fan of much of the surrealist work done by Salvador Dali.
I am not an art historian, I am an artist. For that reason I feel absolutely no need to be objective about Modern art or the reasons why it came into existence. I do think that it was probably a good thing that Modern art came along to shake things up. Although, truth be told, things were changing prior to abstracted work taking over, starting with the Barbizon School, moving to Impressionism and post-impressionism and of course Tonalism. Prior to Modern art, some of the classic representational art was becoming staid, over polished and plastic in quality. It's clear that something needed to change.
Even though art needed to shift, much of value was lost in the process, to the point where we're facing an extreme devolution of art now that needs to be remedied. I don't want to list the names of offending Modern artists but I will say that a majority of modern art that I am exposed to, I find to be loathsome and highly offensive. The story that always comes to mind is the Emperor's new clothes. As in that story, something that did not exist and was not worth admiring was regarded highly and lies were put forward as truth while everyone clapped along.
I will always find this offensive. I do not blame artists that are enmeshed in the Modern art hyperbole. Well, I don't blame them much. The fact that some non-representational modern art is actually moving and worth looking at just complicates matters.
In most things, I think you can apply the 80/20 rule but when it comes to much of contemporary modern art, I think it's probably more accurate to apply the 98% versus 2% rule. In other words, 98% of contemporary modern art is dreck and does not deserve to exist, much less be promulgated as anything worth paying attention to let alone paid for.
Sorry, (ahem) it's so easy for me to rant about this topic because I feel very strongly about it. I do try to be fair though, and since that was the initial purpose of this blog post, let me just end todays post here by saying that some Modern art is absolutely wonderful and some Modern artists are really fantastic. Although I often tar the entire movement of contemporary Modern art with the same brush, it deserves to be stated that some of this stuff is okay and a very small percentage is better than okay, it's great.
It's up to each of us as artists or appreciators of art, in the contemporary milieu, to set upon a course whereby we are separating the wheat from the chaff of Modern art, at least for ourselves.
Cheers,
M Francis McCarthy
Landscapepainter.co.nz
A bit about 'Sunset' by Charles Warren Eaton; this is a later period Eaton and I've seen it online quite a few times. In the painting by Eaton you can make out that the background has houses in it. I didn't bother to put that in preferring to keep it somewhat oblique. I enjoyed painting this study and I like the way that the gold and ochre tones contrasts against the green in the foreground.
To see more of my work, visit my site here
 |
| Painted after - Sunset by Charles Warren Eaton, Study by M Francis McCarthy - Size 5x7, Oil on wood panel |
We've done a lot of Eaton's in the series and this is the last one. As I mentioned in our previous Eaton post I recently received a book by David A Cleveland called Intimate Landscapes Charles Warren Eaton and the Tonalist movement in American art 1880 to 1920. This book was written before Davids seminal work A History of American Tonalism 1880 to 1920 and is currently out of print. The book was not cheap and I recommend it only for only the most fanatical fans of Tonalism out there (which would include myself). I will be reading from this book today in the video narration so please check that out.
Yesterday I was writing about how there is nothing new in art. I'm afraid my post devolved into yet another rant against a Modern art. I'd like to qualify my views on Modern art a little more extensively today, as this is a topic with a lot of grays and my post yesterday made it seem like my views are black and white.
I am not arguing (as some do) that there should never have been a shift in painting towards, what is now termed Modern art. The reality is that there are many Modern artists whose work I admire and find moving. A short list off the top of my head would include Rothko, Gerhard Richter, Franz Klein, Picasso, Gauguin, late period Willem de Kooning and others that I'm sure just are not coming to mind at the moment. I'm also fan of much of the surrealist work done by Salvador Dali.
I am not an art historian, I am an artist. For that reason I feel absolutely no need to be objective about Modern art or the reasons why it came into existence. I do think that it was probably a good thing that Modern art came along to shake things up. Although, truth be told, things were changing prior to abstracted work taking over, starting with the Barbizon School, moving to Impressionism and post-impressionism and of course Tonalism. Prior to Modern art, some of the classic representational art was becoming staid, over polished and plastic in quality. It's clear that something needed to change.
Even though art needed to shift, much of value was lost in the process, to the point where we're facing an extreme devolution of art now that needs to be remedied. I don't want to list the names of offending Modern artists but I will say that a majority of modern art that I am exposed to, I find to be loathsome and highly offensive. The story that always comes to mind is the Emperor's new clothes. As in that story, something that did not exist and was not worth admiring was regarded highly and lies were put forward as truth while everyone clapped along.
I will always find this offensive. I do not blame artists that are enmeshed in the Modern art hyperbole. Well, I don't blame them much. The fact that some non-representational modern art is actually moving and worth looking at just complicates matters.
In most things, I think you can apply the 80/20 rule but when it comes to much of contemporary modern art, I think it's probably more accurate to apply the 98% versus 2% rule. In other words, 98% of contemporary modern art is dreck and does not deserve to exist, much less be promulgated as anything worth paying attention to let alone paid for.
Sorry, (ahem) it's so easy for me to rant about this topic because I feel very strongly about it. I do try to be fair though, and since that was the initial purpose of this blog post, let me just end todays post here by saying that some Modern art is absolutely wonderful and some Modern artists are really fantastic. Although I often tar the entire movement of contemporary Modern art with the same brush, it deserves to be stated that some of this stuff is okay and a very small percentage is better than okay, it's great.
It's up to each of us as artists or appreciators of art, in the contemporary milieu, to set upon a course whereby we are separating the wheat from the chaff of Modern art, at least for ourselves.
Cheers,
M Francis McCarthy
Landscapepainter.co.nz
A bit about 'Sunset' by Charles Warren Eaton; this is a later period Eaton and I've seen it online quite a few times. In the painting by Eaton you can make out that the background has houses in it. I didn't bother to put that in preferring to keep it somewhat oblique. I enjoyed painting this study and I like the way that the gold and ochre tones contrasts against the green in the foreground.
To see more of my work, visit my site here
 |
| Original painting,Sunset by Charles Warren Eaton |