Search This Blog

Translate

Showing posts with label Valenciennes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Valenciennes. Show all posts

Saturday, July 30, 2016

Cecilia Metella and the via Appia

Looking north on the via Appia Antica
in the afternoon
THE CLASSICAL LANDSCAPE IS A REAL PLACE

Spending two months this summer in Rome just outside the Aurelianic walls afforded relatively easy access to both those magical ancient roads leading into the city from the Porta S. Sebastiano and Porta Latina, and the via Appia Antica which led out from the Porta S. Sebastiano (so-called because it led to the pilgrimage church of S. Sebastiano). The via Appia has been a destination for plein air artists for centuries, and despite way too much (and two-way!) traffic in the first stretch outside the walls, it becomes quiet, and profoundly evocative, for miles on. One of the essential sites along the road is the tomb of Cecilia Metella, incorporated in the Middle Ages into a Caetani family stronghold. Despite the prominent inscription to the Roman matron for whom it was built, the building was known as the Capo di Bove through the eighteenth century because of the bull skulls, or bucrania (capo head bove bull) that ornament the frieze.

18th century French view
Artists have been drawing and painting the tomb of Cecilia Metella for centuries, but perhaps most compellingly in the eighteenth. And she then shows up in a variety of capricious landscapes, a recognizable landmark transposed to very different contexts, including seasides. What was the appeal, given there were so many suggestive remains along the via Appia? Part of it, I would argue, is the round form, albeit fragmented. Like a kind of sundial, the tomb’s shadows track the sun’s path across the arc of the day, its varied aspects (owing to differing states of ruin or infill) and orientations to context—the Appia on one side, the overgrown remains of the Circus of Maxentius on the opposite side—made it a rewarding subject to depict from different angles at different times of day.

Since I had the luxury of returning to the site several times, I took a more deliberate tack than I usually do, starting first with pencil drawings on toned Magnani™ Annigoni paper highlighted with white gouache (and occasionally black, as I did for the Arco di Druso). For the first version I couldn’t resist introducing the blue sky, and warm brick color; but I subsequently resisted introducing color, and for some studies elsewhere relied on black mixed with white for the sky, the cool grey functioning as an effective blue. Only after several drawings did I start in oil, the first on prepared paper, the second on canvas board. The images shown here are all from the via Appia side; I did both draw and paint from the Circus of Maxentius (part of the emperor’s villa complex, now visitable), but I’ll save those for a subsequent post.



For the oils I’m showing some of the steps in the process. My technique is almost always to start with the sky; working on a toned ground I often then move to the lights, modeling the form in shade and dealing with the materials, and generally dealing with the shadows proper near the end. The last touches are really calibrations, pushing and pulling the lights and darks. Again, working within Valenciennes’ two hour window, there’s no small amount of editing necessary, and light is a transient phenomenon whose principal effect is shadows. As an architect as well as painter, I prefer the shadows to be consistent with a more or less single light orientation, which means they need to be done within a short period of time.








Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Painting En Plein Air is Painting Out of Doors in a Short Window of Time

Period

Painted in one hour on the walls of Lucca, June 2015
It's wonderful to see the breadth of interest in the idea of plein air painting, especially in America. It’s not unallied to our penchant for know-how, figuring out how something is done, because it is, in fact, a learnable and teachable discipline. The phrase "plein air" has become so popular, in fact, that it has taken on a value that transcends its actual meaning. At one level, this is fine, since anything that gets people to paint landscapes is positive. But the confusion of meaning, to the point at which plein air becomes more a euphemism than a definition, defeats both an historical conception of what artists were doing in the past who painted en plein air (like the works in the Gere Collection at London’s National Gallery), and confuses the playing field for those doing it today (whether in terms of practice or the publication/premiating of practice).

Let me put it another way. Painting en plein air is painting out of doors, perforce in a short window of time. Anything that is not painted in that way is a landscape painting. That is not a value judgment—a well-painted landscape not done en plein air can be a much better painting than an actual plein air work. But to paint in the open air is to be subject to a moving light source (the sun) and a changing atmosphere. The former especially conditions the window of time within which the artist may work, because after about two hours (as Valenciennes recognized centuries ago) you’re simply not looking at the same scene anymore. While mid-day in the summer the light is fairly constant for hours, it’s also a bleaching light that rarely yields compelling paintings. Of course, you can try to return to the same scene over subsequent days at the same time and find the same light, possible in the summer in Italy but not often in the late autumn or early spring, much less in England any time. And since the reason people started painting en plein air in the first place was to record fleeting conditions on site, to bring back to the studio like captured game, why would you want to treat the out of doors like a painter’s studio, expecting to show up day after day to paint in the same conditions? Record your experience, and go home and work it up in the studio.


And it’s not true to say that the amount of time to make a painted sketch is not a factor in its appreciation. Fragonard famously painted a series of portrait sketches in an hour, which he proudly scribbled on the back of the canvas. I’ve realized that the time constraint focuses the mind, and forces a focus on the essential elements of a scene. Whittling the time down to an hour not only conditions a subject doable in that time, but an economy of means in realizing it. It shouldn’t be forgotten that one of the reasons to paint en plein air is to hone one’s skills, not only to bag an appealing painting.

Thursday, January 1, 2015

What’s He Painting?

What He Sees.

oil on gessoed card, 18x36cm

If you paint en plein air anywhere in Italy but the remote countryside, you will be the subject of conversation, either directly or in passing. While painting on a winter’s afternoon along a high-traffic path into one of the smallest gates in the city walls of Lucca, I overheard this exchange between a mother and her young daughter:
M Look, that man is painting.
D What is he painting?
M What he sees.

That, in nuce, is what plein air painting is. Painting what you see. The challenge, of course, is that you can’t paint all of it, certainly not in a limited arc of time. So you focus and choose, from the moment you choose the subject to the aspects of what you see that you can or should include in the painting.

The scene I chose to paint is something I thought I could accomplish in roughly an hour. While I have long held to Valenciennes’ two-hour limit, I’ve found I tend to pick too-ambitious subjects to realize in that time, so now I’m aiming for an hour, which forces me to choose simpler, clearer subjects. And even if I stretch over the limit I’m still within a relatively small arc of time—more important in the seasons when the day is shorter and sun moves faster.

Compare this with a similar, albeit longer, view from the summer, to see the difference in hue of the sky, the trees, even the walls. The summer view was a July morning.


Sunday, October 30, 2011

Rome in Two Hours


The Window of Time

Valenciennes' two hour window for me defines the essence of what working en plein air means: in the open, natural light, looking at sun-illuminated forms and attempting, in the time available, to capture an effective summary of what you see. If it’s not that—if you’re not looking at forms in sunlight, and trying to capture that image, and are not therefore constrained to work within the window of time the sun allows—I’m not sure what it is you’re doing, but I wouldn’t call it “plein air.” One needs to be quick, or better, economical, in attacking the scene as the sun tracks across the sky (plein air painters have a Ptolemaic understanding of the cosmos!). I have found, especially for Rome, that working on a medium toned—ochre/brown, or burnt sienna, or Venetian red—ground facilitates that economy, not to mention gives body and volume to forms. Here are some recent examples. I’d welcome any thoughts on this topic….
Theater of Marcellus from the Portico d'Ottavia

Pons Fabricius from the Tiber level