The exhibition's title, “Radical Invention” 1913 - 1917 works perfectly with the paintings showcased. Without repeating verbatim from the MoMa summary regarding this exhibition, I will summarize by stating that Matisse spent four years, primarily in his Paris studio, taking risks and tackling the cubist movement that would undoubtedly shape his visual language for the rest of his career.
The first painting in this show, Cezanne’s, (not Matisse’s) “Bathers” represents a homage to the French post-impressionist painter. Cezanne’s paintings laid the ground work for the cubist movement by incorporating the reduction of painted objects into component planes and geometric solids (cubes, spheres, cylinders, and cones), which so influenced Matisse and his contemporaries.
This painting by Cezanne serves not only as homage but also as metaphor for the rest of the exhibition, as Matisse retreated back to his Paris studio in order to hash out this cubist "problem."
Now, I am going to zero right in on what I consider the roots of this thoughtful show. I’m not going to discuss every painting or every personal challenge Matisse encountered while making these works. Nope, I don’t do that here at www.artblogny”c”.com. Instead, I am going to give you something you can sink your teeth into.
Point Number One: Matisse struggled with drawing. He was not the best draftsman in the world, especially with the likes of Picasso (aka the Big Pink Elephant in the room, no, not the Large Pink Nude silly) looking over his shoulder. Picasso possessed infinitely more natural drawing talent than the bearded one, as he did pretty much everyone else....ever. No doubt about that.
Matisse’s studies were often labored and wonky, obsessively erased and re-drawn to complete the most basic compositions. Also, he would often leave mysterious unfinished lines in the middle of drawings and paintings, see Portrait of Olga Merson. These drawing moves worked in my estimation, because Matisse could not render them in the way he wished his minds eye to portray them, therefore, he had to come up with a different, more sophisticated solution. Lastly, he also developed an animated reductive style of rendering during this time period which he would utilize throughout his career (see Matisse prints). As further proof of my theory regarding Matisse’s lacking (lack of) facility, this animated style of drawing was born directly out of the reductive elements of cubism, placing more emphasis on form than likeness.
 |
| Henri Matisse, Portrait of Olga Merson, 100 x 86 cm, 1911 |
 |
| Madame Josette Gris, etching, 1914-1915 |
Point Number Two: Matisse struggled with rectilinear vs. curvilinear. Let’s remember, before Matisse, Cezanne had made a name for himself by inventing his own unique curvilinear style, utilizing cubes, spheres, cylinders, and cones.
The camera, with it’s rectilinear format, threw another wrench into Matisse's drawing problem.
Furthermore, just prior to Matisse’s, “Radical Invention” period, Picasso was also gobbling up Cezanne as well, in turn, inventing cubism with the likes of Braque and Gris. Matisse, watching all this go down right in front of him, had to find a way to get up to speed fast in order to join in on the discussion, and my theory is that he utilized the camera to get himself there faster.
You see folks, the camera was still a relatively new invention that Matisse became infatuated with. It was also a symbol of 20th century innovation, technology, and modernity. Matisse would often document his paintings between sessions by taking pictures. He even utilized the camera to re-invent and edit such epic paintings as, “Bathers By the River,” also on view in this exhibition.
One thing we learn as children, when we are struggling to render something to likeness and are completely frustrated, we go to the camera. That’s what Matisse did. He would take pictures of the things that he struggled to draw and paint so he could re-visit them time and time again, only to fall back on methods of cubist based reduction and animation to render his subjects. Throw in the problem of the rectilinear and flat nature of photographs in relationship to the curvilinear elements of cubism, well, let’s just say you can end up with one fine mess. And guess what? It all worked out well for Matisse, because, like Cezanne, Matisse possessed the attributes of “radical invention” to cure his drawing “deficiencies.”
Now, let’s get down to the nitty gritty and figure out why Matisse can be considered the first great conceptual painter of the modern era, as “Radical Invention” seems to suggest.
Point Number Three: For whatever Matisse lacked in draftsmanship, he made up for as a “pure painter.” Matisse possessed an uncanny ability to organize and coordinate his pallet. One can see in his earlier works, (before the Radical Invention period) that Matisse used more traditional glazing techniques to punch up his colors by incorporating translucent overlays. During the “Radical Invention” period we see an almost complete abandonment of this style for the flatter, more direct painting approach. Gone are the mixing of glazes and overlays in favor of direct interpretation of color, the measured mixing of primary colors into compositionally and structurally correct variations. This more direct method allowed Matisse to get to the essential “thing” in his compositions much faster and rely far less on his ability to render with realistic clarity. The “thing” being the essential formal and narrative components melding into one newly invented composition.
Where does this first take place in “Radical Invention?” The year was 1914 and the paintings involved were, “Portrait of Yvonne Landsburg,” “ View Of Notre Dame, “ and “Window at Collioures.” I wish that I could have been in Matisse's studio during this time to see how/when he finished these paintings in succession. For my theory, I am going to state that the experimental “disaster” of, “Portait of Yvonne Landsburg” acted as both low point and turning point in Matisse’s development during this time. This painting presents itself as a horrific travesty, bordering on novice work. I can only imagine what visitors to his studio must of thought. “Have you gone mad Henri?” “Are you smokin hash with Pablo again?” and “Henri baby, you must be depressed” are possible responses that come to mind. “Portait of Yvonne” gets all the demons out, that’s for sure. After this painting we see a dramatic shift, what I call Matisse’s, “Blue Period.”
 | |||
| Portrait of Yvonne Landsberg, 1914 |
In the “View of Notre Dame” a painting that I consider a masterpiece, Matisse gathers up all of his painting and intellectual powers to come up with a picture that not only incorporates cubism, but also takes on the charged and historically relevant subject matter of Notre Dame, transforming it into a completely different kind of logical and modern looking structure. Matisse gives birth here to a new kind of image and a new way of thinking. Notre Dame has not only been abstracted in a way never seen prior, it has been given a new place to LIVE! When looking into this imaginary world, one can believe that this place actually exists! It flips our whole sense of accepted logic upside down. The gravitational pull, the all over blue, the mannered, “unfinished” composition, the vertigo feeling, the overall upside down effect. If "View of Notre Dame" still has this kind of effect on the viewer today, imagine what kind of impression it made when it was created in 1914.
 | |||
| View of Notre Dame, 1914 |
 |
| Window at Collioures, 1914 |
Similarly, in "Window at Collioures," Matisse shows us perhaps the first color field/minimalist painting of the 20th century. I will infer that this painting was completed last in this series of three from 1914. It makes sense. The window in the painting remains open. A black vacuous space inhabits the canvas from top to bottom, enticing the viewer to be sucked in or be pushed out. The window also represents transition, a passage way. The different hues of blue, in particularly the sea green blue, suggest openness and a "vast expanse" where infinite possibilities exist. I would like to believe that Matisse thought of this painting as a realization, a kind of naturalistic truth, and a portal into his future as a painter.
After this shift, Matisse would now complete some of his most important and related works, all from 1914 - 1916, including, Goldfish and Palette, 1914-15, Still life after Jan Davidsz, 1915, and The Piano Lesson, 1916.
In conclusion, I could write a book (which I just might do) about this exhibition because the issues raised here are vast and deep, influencing art in the later part in twentieth century in a major way. Matisse found a way to convert his limitations into strengths. while at the same time being obsessively self referential regarding his studio practice. The evidence to this point lies in the fact that each painting in “Radical Invention” has it’s own distinct place in time and could not have been created if the painting before it had not existed first. These types of dramatic shifts from one painting to the next define Matisse’s genius. He ultimately gave up his role as “the traditional artist” for the role of thinker, creator, and problem solver, which in turn, would set the stage for nearly every major art movement to follow in the 20th century.
 |
| The Piano Lesson, 1916 |
No comments:
Post a Comment