Notes On Poussin
Dec. 30th, 2022 11:38 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
poliphiloI adore Caravaggio, but Poussin loathed him and said he'd "destroyed painting". Where we see magic and mystery in Caravaggio's pioneering use of chiarascuro Poussin saw cheap theatrics and corners being cut. Both views have validity.
Caravaggio was a very great artist. Poussin was even greater.
His classical romps- intended for the delectation of cardinals- are among the sexiest paintings ever.
As a young man he nearly died of syphilis. That learned him.
He had a problem painting eyes. There's something a bit screwy about the pictures in which the faces matter. Unsurprisingly he eschewed portraiture, though his self portraits- produced because a friend asked him to- aren't at all bad.
In old age he got the shakes. It shows up in the later paintings but never affects their numinosity.
I couldn't see the point of him when I was young, I thought him academic and frigid. I was very wrong.
He worked slowly- and didn't run a workshop. You commissioned a picture from him and what you got was all his own work. This was very modern of him.
He probably thought of himself as a good Christian but his pictures on Christian themes (as I wrote a few posts back) are dutiful rather than heartfelt. He's at his best with mythologies and landscape because then he didn't have the Pope breathing over his shoulder.
He's never showy. Put him in a gallery with Rubens and it's Rubens that makes you go "Wow!" But you can tire of Rubens, and of Poussin, never. He invites contemplation. Once he hooks you in, you stay hooked.
One of his greatest paintings is the landscape in the Getty which doesn't seem to be about anything- just a nice view with people and animals and a calm lake and a distant bonfire- but is actually about everything.
Caravaggio was a very great artist. Poussin was even greater.
His classical romps- intended for the delectation of cardinals- are among the sexiest paintings ever.
As a young man he nearly died of syphilis. That learned him.
He had a problem painting eyes. There's something a bit screwy about the pictures in which the faces matter. Unsurprisingly he eschewed portraiture, though his self portraits- produced because a friend asked him to- aren't at all bad.
In old age he got the shakes. It shows up in the later paintings but never affects their numinosity.
I couldn't see the point of him when I was young, I thought him academic and frigid. I was very wrong.
He worked slowly- and didn't run a workshop. You commissioned a picture from him and what you got was all his own work. This was very modern of him.
He probably thought of himself as a good Christian but his pictures on Christian themes (as I wrote a few posts back) are dutiful rather than heartfelt. He's at his best with mythologies and landscape because then he didn't have the Pope breathing over his shoulder.
He's never showy. Put him in a gallery with Rubens and it's Rubens that makes you go "Wow!" But you can tire of Rubens, and of Poussin, never. He invites contemplation. Once he hooks you in, you stay hooked.
One of his greatest paintings is the landscape in the Getty which doesn't seem to be about anything- just a nice view with people and animals and a calm lake and a distant bonfire- but is actually about everything.
no subject
Date: 2022-12-30 03:21 pm (UTC)This may tell you lot about me and art.
no subject
Date: 2022-12-30 03:29 pm (UTC)