Landscapes Extraordinaire

Fine Art

Ever since I took a few Art Appreciation classes during my belated university career*, I have been an admirer of Corot’s landscapes — sheesh, okay, Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot — because for some reason, they seem to me to straddle the hyper-realism of the Academy and the later swirling Impressionists like Monet.  Here are a few which typify this part of his work:

A Farmyard near Fontainebleau

A Farmyard in the Nievre

The Path leading to the House

Trees and a Swamp

A View Near Volterra

Smyrna, A Boat

A Sudden Gust Of Wind

I love this last one most of all, because it’s almost a photograph, so well does he capture the effect of wind on both the trees and the walker.  But I would be happy to hang all the above on my walls.

In fact, what I think I’d do is get four small 18″x12″ Corot landscapes from, say, iCanvas and arrange them on a wall, thus:

Hey, it’s not too bad a dream, is it?

Corot also did portraits and such, but to be honest, I don’t care for them at all.  Here’s one which I think is his best:

…and another more like his others:

Sorry, but no.  I have high standards when it comes to portrait paintings, what can I say?

*The appreciation of art was truly a neglected part of my education.  Art classes at high school gave me an understanding of movements such as Impressionism, Dadaism, Surrealism and so on, but I never learned to appreciate art properly.  So when I went back to university in my early 50s, I took one such class, realized that I needed to take another, and then took a couple more.

I just wish I’d taken them earlier on in life, because I’ve missed so much.

11 comments

  1. “The appreciation of art was truly a neglected part of my education. Art classes at high school gave me an understanding of movements such as Impressionism, Dadaism, Surrealism and so on, but I never learned to appreciate art properly. So when I went back to university in my early 50s, I took one such class, realized that I needed to take another, and then took a couple more.”

    IMO, if you need to be taught how to “appreciate art”, iow what you’re supposed to like and find beautiful, there’s something wrong with it.
    Those portraits, you’re right. They’re not nearly as good as the landscapes. The painter clearly wasn’t very good at painting especially faces.
    This may have been the norm at the time, but that doesn’t mean we now have to go “oooh, how great that portrait is”. What we can do is see them for what they are, and learn from them how people of the day clothed themselves.

    1. “IMO, if you need to be taught how to “appreciate art”, iow what you’re supposed to like and find beautiful, there’s something wrong with it.”

      You could not be more wrong.

      Appreciation of any art form requires that you understand the forms and artistry — not to mention the historical context — and this is not an instinct, it has to be taught.

      Liking art doesn’t require anything other than a visceral response, and anyone can do that.

  2. I tend to like landscapes or scenes in paintings. Portraits aren’t that interesting to me. I find these to be very brown and dim though. Nice works and far, far better than I could ever do. I used to get dragged into the local art museum when I was growing up. Later in life it’s interesting to reflect back on what I saw.

    Thanks for posting classic art. It’s broadening my horizons.

  4. Those paintings look as if they’ve lost something in digitisation. Probably the subtle three-dimensionality that comes with oil.

    1. Quite true. We had a “landscape” exhibition here in Dallas a while back, and the three Corot works were among the best.

Comments are closed.