A.Ham Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Of Arms and Artists
Of Arms & Artists
>
Chapter 1
date
newest »
newest »
I imagine Alex is hoping I'll take the reigns on this one as his resident artist. I'll do my best this week.A1. My thoughts on this book is I can't wait to delve deeper into it. For the most part 18th century art history curriculum tends to either gloss over or skip American art. I think that happens because American art doesn't have too much in common with it's European cousins at this time. Often times it is much more rustic and less polished, at other times much more advanced (like Trumbull's gift for amazingly dynamic compositions). I think this will be a worthwhile book to read since so many laymen fail to see art as having a purpose. Art has a way of unifying and motivating people, That's why we have so many Iconic images, and during times of oppression artists, poets and authors are often the first voices to be targeted to be silenced. The idea that art can't be political or that this book is presenting it as "nationalist propaganda" is, frankly, juvenile.
A2. This passage stood out to me "Works of art were thus capable of arousing potent emotions in times of intense political change,"
As an artist myself this has been something I've been struggling to do my for my whole carrier. It's a universal struggle, to produce work that stirs some sort of emotion from the viewer. It doesn't necessarily have to be political but usually attempts to draw on something universally human.
I also couldn't help but thinking of those images I've seen throughout my life that achieve just that, Rosie the Riveter, raising of the flag at iwo jima , tiananmen square. I could go on forever but the power that these images have over people today is still as strong as they ever were. That's the power art has.
Ok, I'm done. for now.
Bring on the "nationalist propaganda"! I've been pretty excited about reading this book for some time...the long-time Humanities professor in me feels like a kid finally getting to open a too-long-awaited Christmas present. I had looked at a Kindle sample some time ago and realized this is the kind of book best read in its physical form. I'm glad I waited until we could read it together.Despite having taken a couple of grad art history classes and some PD seminars, I am most definitely an amateur when it comes to the field of art (I'm an "amateur" in that word's most literal sense-- one who loves it), and no expert. I'm glad, then, that the book is geared toward a general audience and seems that it will deal more with the artists themselves, and with the context and content of their works, rather than relying on overly detailed discussion of technique. Its tone so far is one of an interesting class lecture in a very conversational style, keeping the subject matter engaging while not over-simplifying it.
While we've seen the works of Peale, Copley, West, Trumbull, and Stuart all our lives I at least until fairly recently knew very little about their backgrounds and their place before, during, and after the Revolution. I am looking forward to finding out more about each of them as people of their time and as artists. I'm really grateful for the big refresher course in the history of the period I've been experiencing this past year, as well as for all the new things I have learned, as I feel that will add to my enjoyment of the book.
And I am always on board for a narrative that underscores the great importance of the arts in shaping cultural identity.
I was way too curious and had to check out many of the images in the book, and have already been fascinated by a couple. I confess that I have fallen in love with several of the images with which I was not previously familiar, such as Copley's remarkably naturalistic (to me) 1782 portrait of Elkanah Watson, and his beautifully introspective self-portrait of the same year. Comparing these with his slightly earlier paintings, I sensed a slight stylistic shift, but that's probably just me. [spoiler alert here?-->] I also peeked ahead a bit into Peale's first biographical chapter, and became just a little too obsessed with comparing Peale's self-portrait from the Valley Forge winter of 1777-78 (p. 2) to the stunning portrait painted by Benjamin West of Peale when the latter studied with him almost a decade earlier (p.15). It's no wonder Peale kept it all his life. I find I couldn't stop going back and forth between the two.
I'll try to end here with a couple of passages I particularly enjoyed in the first chapter. I'll also say here that I feel strangely happy and comfortable reading this book, not only because it is about art, but because it is about art wrapped in its historical context... and this context just happens to be the moment in history I now love more than any other.
"As in no previous generation, [these artists] lived through a time of breathtaking historical change that deserved and demanded to be painted for the people of their time, and for posterity. They recognized the gravity of the moment and had their futures unavoidably transformed by the great events of the era... ...their experiences were compelling and captivating at the best of times, confusing and frightening at the worst, and like everyone else they had to confront the inherent incomprehensibility of the events swirling around them. They attempted to make sense of it all by turning to brushes and canvases. Works of art became their means of narrating the Revolution to themselves and to citizens of the new republic." [....] "Because the United States quickly arose from a popular uprising, it was at first unformed and inchoate, and thus in urgent need of images, rituals, and mythologies not only that could replace the old British ones, but that might also bring a disparate population together as a functional union."
[...]
"But in order to bind together as a union ... Americans required a cultural understanding of their mutual identity. In such a perplexing and grave situation, persuasive images -- of historic events, transcendent heroes, and honored martyrs -- could be essential building blocks in the creation of nationhood because they provided a common vision of America for Americans who were far more likely to say who they were not than to embrace who they needed to be."
I love that last sentence. Like I said... "nationalist propaganda"? I'm up for it.
Sarah wrote: "I imagine Alex is hoping I'll take the reigns on this one as his resident artist. I'll do my best this week.A1. My thoughts on this book is I can't wait to delve deeper into it. For the most part..."
I do think it's interesting--and important-- to realize that they were mostly heirs of a European tradition. Benjamin West made quite a name for himself in London, and Peale was under his tutelage for three years, learning to becoming an artist rather than a craftsman. From West he learned classical allusions. Trumbull also went to London to study with West (although I think that might have been curtailed by his arrest and imprisonment as an American officer) and later studied in Paris. Stuart also studied with West, even longer. So we can see American art as definitely informed by European traditions, coming later into its own with distinctly American influences. I love that these were the artists who transformed tradition into a distinctive American narrative.
I'm excited to begin this book, too, once my copy arrives in the mail, hopefully in a couple of days. I actually picked this one up in a bookstore a couple of months ago and looked through it, but didn't pull the trigger. Meant to wait for a used one I guess!
Patti wrote: "I confess that I have fallen in love with several of the images with which I was not previously familiar, such as Copley's remarkably naturalistic (to me) 1782 portrait of Elkanah Watson, and his beautifully introspective self-portrait of the same year."I'm in love with these as well Patti. Copely had a Wonderfull eye for dramatic lighting, almost theatrical in a way, and something I've been drawn to myself in my own work. His portrait of Elkanah Watson seems to be the epitome of that eye. And his self portrait, which is not only technically superb, but has a quality to it in his rough, painterly brush strokes, that evokes art from a later period. Where I am torn on all of the other artist in this book works I wouldn't hesitate to own one of Copely's works.
Patti wrote: "From West he learned classical allusions. Trumbull also went to London to study with West (although I think that might have been curtailed by his arrest and imprisonment as an American officer)"
If I recall correctly (I'll have to get out my book on him) Trumbull went to London as an ambassador and was imprisoned as retaliation for the capture and death of Major Andre. I believe his study with West came after he was freed and decided to hell with Politics, Don't quote me on it. I'm sure the book will cover it. Trumbull is interesting because he went back and forth between wanting to pursue art and politics/public service. He's get sick of one and retreat to the other then vice versa. Very strange man, disliked painting portraits and yet his passion was grand history paintings which were multiple portraits on a larger canvas.
Jane wrote: "I'm excited to begin this book, too, once my copy arrives in the mail, hopefully in a couple of days. I actually picked this one up in a bookstore a couple of months ago and looked through it, but ..."I tried finding a used one too, It's just too new. But the color plates in this book are stunning, as Patti has noted.
Excuse my not replying directly to your comment about Copley, but I'm using the phone app (which I really hate) and can't seem to; excuse the typos that are bound to occur. I've been sitting in bed for the last 15 minutes staring at those two Copley images and then back at the date 1782, because they do seem far ahead of their time. There's the drama of the larger painting, and the unstylized, completely human expression on Watson's face. He looks almost as if he's listening and about to engage in conversation with us. But the classical symbols are around him: the column, the quill, the tome, the glimpse of outdoors... And his self-portrait is so poetic and sensitive. Somewhere in between those is his beautiful portrait of John Quincy Adams. What a gifted painter he was during those years.
Now I'm enthralled with Stuart's self-portrait (especially juxtaposed with the famous Washington portrait directly across from it in the book). Had I come across that painting elsewhere I'd almost have said it was from the 17th century, like Rembrandt....or maybe even earlier -- Caravaggio, perhaps, with its use of tenebrism. And that gaze! It's so intense, as if he's looking into our souls. It's so different from GW's deadeye look right next to it. Just remarkable. OK, for everyone's sake, I'll hush up and just go to bed now. I have to get up super early, ugh.
After reading Sarah and Patti's comments, I am not really feeling qualified to comment here. However, there were a couple of passages that caught my attention and for some odd reason, it made me think about the symbolism of the flag as an American icon, much like the art of the Revolution. Don't ask, it's just what came to me.The passages that stood out to me were:
"But in order to bind together as a union, and not just a weak confederation of independent states, Americans required a cultural understanding of their mutual identity." and "They breathed visual life into historical events and figures, and over the centuries their images have become our indispensable icons, the American equivalents of what the Iliad and the Aeneid meant to the ancient Greeks and Romans."
These passages reminded me of how Americans embrace our flag for its symbolism, perhaps because we are a melting pot and don't have a lot of strictly "American" cultural traditions. The stars and stripes on the flag conjures up strong emotional feelings. Unlike nations that have cultural traditions that unite them (same language, same foods, etc), our flag gives us a cultural identity we can all identify with. In a similar manner, the portraits of our founding fathers and the paintings of these events (i.e., crossing the Delaware) give us that same emotional connection to our culture. I know I get a tugging of the heart when I see the a portrait of Washington or the Signing of the Declaration by Trumbull. These portraits and paintings stir up strong patriotic feelings as they offer us the opportunity to visualize the early days of our nation. These experiences are unique to us, unique to our revolution and unique to the formation of our Republic.
I am excited to read this book, to learn more about the artists that captured the spirit of the Revolution, and were later present when the foundation for our government was being laid.
Nancy wrote: "After reading Sarah and Patti's comments, I am not really feeling qualified to comment here."Nancy, you always make such great comments ...and I don't think anyone is more "qualified" than any other to comment on this book! I am excited about it because it's a subject I love so much, and I'm pumped about learning more here, in the context of the history I love so. Your point about the flag and the portraits evoking such strong emotions from us as Americans is spot on. And I loved the same quote that you posted. I think it states an important theme of this book.
I just want to add that I am learning so much from everyone's comments here and on Twitter. You're so knowledgeable, so perceptive, that at times I am very humbled by it all, to the point that I am pretty reticent to make comments on some topics as they would add very little. But I do love reading everyone else's ...they really make me think. So thanks to you all. I look forward to hearing what everyone has to say about this book.
As always, these questions are not required nor is discussion limited to just these.
1. What do you think of the book so far? Do you think this will be a worthwhile book or is this "nationalist propaganda" as one reviewer put it?
2. Is there any particular passage that you liked or didn't like? Why?