In this paper we will analyze two different paintings from two different artists of, almost, the same era. They were executed with only thirteen years of difference, and there are clear distinctions and likes between both styles. The first painting is The Goose Girl at Montfoucault, White Frost by Camille Pissarro. This painting represents a country scene, where a human figure, accompanied by a group of domestic animals, is seen in the middle of a natural setting. The attitude of the characters seems to be describing a typical day in the country life.
In this image we can see some of the most typical characteristics of impressionistic style. The first thing that can be remarked is that the subject is a trivial one. Impressionist artists were no longer concerned with religious, mythological, historical subjects, as there had been the case with traditional painting. Their concerns referred to everyday routines and banal characters. The main subjects during this period were taken from the artist’s own surroundings. A preferred subject was the representation of nature, as can be seen in this particular piece.
The human character plays a minor role in this scene, her presence used only to give the sense of life and civilization to the, otherwise, wild landscape. Her identity is completely unimportant and overlooked. There is no display of features on her face that will narrate who she is, or even what emotions she is feeling at the moment. It’s the portrait of a generic person that only acts as an extra beside the real star of the painting which is the landscape. The fashion of the time was inclined more towards showing a scene, an image, rather than tell a story, as it had been the fashion before.
The use of limited characters that perform simple activities, gives way to explore and develop the way the image is shown. By not telling a story, the spectator’s attention is focused entirely on the feeling of the image: the colors, the texture, the contrast between the various shapes. The perception is oriented towards the senses, less than the logic. Impressionistic school leaned heavily toward the portraying and representation of nature. The different variations of light and colors play a principal role in the fashion of the era.
The brush strokes are quite big and rough, drawing line in almost nonexistent, the figures of the drawing being given only by the vibration of colors, and the contrast between different shades. As it was typical of impressionistic painting, shapes and volumes are given by optical illusions and not by detailed drawing lines. In Pissarro’s work, the use of colors is very discreet, leaning towards pastel shades and balanced combinations. The suave palette recreates the mood that the autumn scene is trying to imply, the quiet shades used to pass on the spectator the quietness of the country life.
The gooses are in a vague suggestion of motion, contrasting with the rest of the setting that is rather still. This little contrast gives a bit of life to the whole arrangement and a break into an otherwise rather monotone landscape. The colors of the sky and the angles of the shades clearly represent a very specific time of the day, the inclination of these shades denoting an advanced hour of the afternoon. Pissarro, like Monet and other painters of his time, was concerned with representing light effects in the atmosphere. Likewise, the scene clearly denotes a very specific time of the year, as it shows a yellow-leafed tree.
Half of its branches are bare, announcing that the autumn is coming to an end and winter clearly approaching. This particular element of the painting seems to play a vital role in the whole scene, for it is positioned right in the middle of the set, and its particular half naked side attracts the eyes of the viewer to this specific point. It might even be suggested that this tree was actually the main character in the scene and that the artist intention was to portrait the fall of the year, and not the characters that fill the picture. The general view is seen from a lengthy distance.
The use of light and dark colors overlapping in the scene gives depth the painting. The brush strokes are harsh, free, oriented in different directions. The paint is not smoothly placed on the surface, but rather sharp, thick and obvious. The mark of the brush is clearly visible and contributes to create the texture of the various materials presented. The overall texture of the painting gives the optical impression of roughness. The use of rough strokes on the leaves of the trees and bushes helps recreate the texture of dry vegetation.
However the change of feeling between different materials is not so clearly differenced, as the elements: leaves, clothes, feathers and clouds all seem to have the same treatment from the artist’s brush. The sky is as rough as the bark of the trees. The scene is viewed from a high point of view, as if the viewer is standing on the top of a low hill, overlooking the picture. The second painting The Rocks by Vincent van Gogh, represents a wild landscape, void of human presence and apparently showing a place far away from civilization.
While Impressionism was a smooth portraying of nature, Post-Impressionism was somewhat more aggressive in its representations. This can be seen also in the technique used, sketchy and fast, as the former style, but more accentuated. This particular scene does not seem to show any clear message or philosophical purpose, unless perhaps, the display of loneliness and wildness. The brush, very rough in this painting, communicates to the viewer the wildness and roughness of the landscape, the harshness of the grass, the hardness of the rocks and the turbulence of the sky.
In this case, the view is somewhat from a lower perspective, seen from a point below, looking up, but in a very soft degree. The main attraction in this scene is, again, a tree, that stands alone in the center of the set, stealing the eye of the spectator. The tree is twisted, inclined, dark and, on first impression, not very tall. However, lacking a human figure to use as point of measure, the viewer can not be sure of the size and proportions of the objects, which gives more freedom of interpretation in this work. The use of colors is much harder than in the other painting. This palette being more saturated and brighter.
Van Gogh had a clear preference for very saturated colors. This can be seen in many of his paintings, a typical characteristic of Post-Impressionism, which used vibrant colors and aggressive contrasts, differing from the Impressionist style that was more suave and less obvious to the eye. In this scene depth and perspective are clearly shown, as the contrast between lights and shadows is accentuated by the rough lines that define the figures. The use of line or drawing is, again, absent, shapes being contoured only by the variations of colors and the contrast with the adjacent objects.
However the perspective is very clear and the space is given quite convincingly. In this one, the time of the year and hour are less obviously shown. The view is also smaller, and the artist view closer to the scene as it was in the other painting. The brush strokes are thick, hard and short. The different feelings of the materials are clearly delimited, although somewhat exaggerated: we can see the same harshness on the grass, the leaves, the rocks, and the sky. This roughness of touch gives everything a much defined texture that gives a clear feeling to the overall image.
The surface of the rocks is clearly flat and edgy, while the grass around it, obviously shaggy and sharp. The general impression is hardness. The freedom represented in this painting shows speed and motion, through the strokes, almost with the impulsiveness of a sketch. The general feeling is that the painting was left unfinished, without polishing the contours or brush touches, leaving clear marks where the paint was set on the canvas. The whole impression is as though the work was done in haste, perhaps in the rush of capturing the moment.
Van Gogh’s style was usually rough in touch and violent. The paint looks “thrown” on the surface, carelessly and abruptly. The use of color demonstrates vigor, strength, determination from the artist, the display of wild nature in a wild painting style. The scene is full of light, apparently representing a very bright day at a bright hour. From the angle of the shadows it is hard to tell the exact hour of the day, since there is no clear or accentuated direction, as it is in the work of Pissarro, described above.
In Pissarro’s The Goose Girl at Montfoucault, White Frost the inclination of the afternoon sun is clearly visible. It can be added that, by the gray, pale shades used in the sky, the image might be interpreted as being a cloudy day, where the direction of the sun will not guide us to establish more exact circumstances. However the colors are bright and strong, as if bathed directly in a very shining light. This was probably a touch of accent given by the artist and not the real image he had before his eyes, which adds a bit of personal interpretation of the landscape.
As a conclusion, we could state that the two paintings show the transition from one style to the other. Impressionism was preoccupied with representing the feelings of life, the perception of the artist about the environment around him and the way he captured moments in time. Although Post-Impressionism still retained the same ideas and concepts of the former style, the way of expression began to change. The calm expressed by the first style slightly began to sharpen into a rougher image, accentuating, even exaggerating the ideas promoted by the Impressionistic school.
