Renoir's Problem Nudes (century, day, painters, paintings)

[Cida]

Funny, for the first time, looking at the image, it seems hopelessly contrived and saccharine

Renoir’s Problem Nudes
An argument is often made that we shouldn’t judge the past by the values of the present, but that’s a hard sell in a case as primordial as Renoir’s.
He could be collegial with female artists, notably Berthe Morisot, but he gave no sign of regarding women as other than a species subservient to men.
Sex and art figured for him as practically interchangeable rewards for living.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-problem-nudes

[in_newengland]

Originally Posted by Cida

Funny, for the first time, looking at the image, it seems hopelessly contrived and saccharine

Renoir’s Problem Nudes
An argument is often made that we shouldn’t judge the past by the values of the present, but that’s a hard sell in a case as primordial as Renoir’s.
He could be collegial with female artists, notably Berthe Morisot, but he gave no sign of regarding women as other than a species subservient to men.
Sex and art figured for him as practically interchangeable rewards for living.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-problem-nudes

As the author says, "Let's not get rid of him." Although he's not one of my most favorite painters, I do like most of his work. "Sugary" is a good way to describe it (in the article.) I always thought his figures looked sort of cartoonish but his paintings of couples dancing do make me happy. He does manage to bring a feeling of movement/motion to the canvas, a liveliness. I like the feeling that they could swirl right off into the distance. I think he knew how to use color very well too--flashes of red suddenly appearing where you least expect it.

If he was sexist, well, that's another matter. I don't know how much we should allow the artist's personality to interfere with how we judge the paintings. Any type of artist, a singer, a dancer, do we let their flawed personal life change the value of their artistic creation.

OTOH, I did lose enthusiasm for the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge after visiting a cottage in which he spent some time. Wow, what a cruel husband! How can I ever read his poetry again knowing what he was really like. But maybe there's more of a reason to judge when it pertains to the written word which is portraying what he thinks of life.

Do I think less of the golfer who was a total cheat when he was touring? Yes, I do. But the golf scores still stand as among the best so you can't take that away. Thankfully, sports are something that result in black and white scores and are not subject to our judgement. It either is or it is not.

Do I think less of one of the most popular opera singers in history? I don't know. But if we do judge them by what they do in their personal lives, we are in danger of lowering the standards of art just because of human behavior. So it's a good question--do we let art (any sort of art) stand on its own or should we consider the personality and behavior of the artist too?)

I tend to want to ignore the actual person and just consider the art.

[Cida]

I think we can safely say that most male artists prior to at least 1960, and probably later, were sexist, right?

And I agree. Although I think cheating at a game which is your livelihood is not at all the same as, say, cheating on your wife in your private life.

[bachslunch]

The issue of course is that you don’t have to be a great person to create great art. In music, there are several examples such as Wagner and Gesualdo. I don’t know the peccadilloes of visual artists as well, but I’m sure there are many examples; if memory serves, Caravaggio and Benvenuto Cellini were pretty awful people.

[Cida]

Originally Posted by bachslunch

The issue of course is that you don’t have to be a great person to create great art. In music, there are several examples such as Wagner and Gesualdo. I don’t know the peccadilloes of visual artists as well, but I’m sure there are many examples; if memory serves, Caravaggio and Benvenuto Cellini were pretty awful people.

Yes, and somehow it seems that maybe we're more tolerant with painters? Think about the uproar with peccadilloes in Hollywood.

[twinkletwinkle22]

I don't love Renoir's nudes but all is forgiven for his portrait painting "Madame Charpentier and her Children". Nudes sell, and they probably kept his household well funded. They look gelatinous to me, the backgrounds look much more interesting but human flesh, especially peach white flesh with little shadow is really hard to paint. I know, I've tried and given up.

Male painters of his era were of course misogynists, how can we expect him to have a 21st century relationship to women? It's clear that a lotta men today would like to return to that era where men were kings, they want to be great again.

I do judge a painter by their life as well as his art. Nothing Renoir did personally makes me dislike his art. I like his friend Monet's art more and Gauguin's art not much at all due to his lifestyle.