Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe: an art history continuum, by Deanna Georgeson.
1
Script - Art History Continuum: Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe
(Bold highlights refer to text added to each slide)
Slide 01 - Introduction
Welcome to Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe, or Luncheon on the Grass, an art
history continuum that explores connections between the following painters:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Titian – represents the Venetian Renaissance in Italy
Manet – represents a transition from Realism to Impressionism
Monet – represents Impressionism
Picasso – represents Modernism
Yue Minjun – represents Postmodernism
These painters are connected to an art history continuum, by their
relationship to Manet’s Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe.
Slide 01 - Titian’s Pastoral Concert, 1510
We enter this art history continuum by examining a Renaissance
painting called The Pastoral Concert, created in 1510, by Titian (perhaps in
collaboration with his teacher Giorgione). A wealthy Venetian patron
commissioned this painting as an addition to his private collection. In 1671,
The Pastoral Concert was sold to a French King, Louis XIV, and is now
exhibited in the Louvre, in Paris. It is painted on a large canvas, approx.
41x54”, which was the conventional scale for painting classical history
subjects during the Renaissance.
The “Pastoral Concert” is painted in the Venetian Renaissance style,
with careful attention to atmospheric light and color. In keeping with
acceptable Renaissance subject matter, this painting interprets a poem. Two
idealized women, symbolically depicted playing the flute and pouring water,
illustrate idealized figures from an allegorical Roman poem.
These unreal female figures exist only in the imaginations of the two
clothed men they inspire, according to the Venetian taste at the time, for
simultaneous depictions of the visible and the invisible. The main group of
figures is seated in the foreground, at the centre of the landscape. In the
background, under a grove of trees, a herdsman tends his sheep. This
painted image represents landscape as a state of mind, where humans
and nature co-exist in perfect harmony.
Three stylistic features identify this Renaissance painting:
1. Invisible brushstrokes
2. Chiaroscuro (gradual transitions between light and dark tones)
3. Linear perspective is used to create the illusion of spatial depth
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe: an art history continuum, by Deanna Georgeson.
2
Slide 02 - Manet’s Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe
(Luncheon on the Grass), 1863
The second painting in this art history continuum, which this
presentation is focused on, is called Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe, by Edouard
Manet, created in 1863. It signifies a turning point in the history of European
art. Manet was a French artist who lived and worked in Paris. He admired,
studied, and copied the work of Renaissance Masters when he visited
the Louvre. He was particularly inspired by Titian’s painting, The Pastoral
Concert. Manet composed Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe on a large-scale canvas
(82 x 105”), as a tribute to the Renaissance master.
However, Titian’s Renaissance audience was told what the meaning of
the Renaissance painting was, in the context of an original poetic story.
Titian’s classical Renaissance influence that inspired Manet, was
counterbalanced by his subversive interpretation. Manet did not justify his
choice of subject (nudes having a picnic with clothed men), by claiming that
his painting was an allegory.
Manet, in bold defiance of the Renaissance narrative tradition, refused
to tell the audience what his painting meant. He wanted to show us
that paintings do not have to represent historical events to be significant, or
worthy of our attention. Classical allegorical paintings substitute descriptive
narrative for aesthetic presence. This focus on story telling prevented
paintings from being directly experienced and appreciated for their formal
compositional arrangements. These aesthetic considerations include the
organization of shapes, values, colors, lines, textures, and spatial
relationships.
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe is not a historical allegory that represents an
idealized world, but a mysterious tableau of recognizable people. Manet
posed his favorite model, his wife, his brother, and his brother-in-law as
subjects, against a backdrop of what appears to be a Parisian park. This
combination of past and present references, created an unreal scene which
viewers were not able to understand, and it shocked the public’s
sensibilities. Manet’s style of painting was considered vulgar during the
Victorian era when it was painted, because he painted real people, not
idealized imaginary figures.
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe: an art history continuum, by Deanna Georgeson.
3
Apart from Manet’s scandalous choice of live models as his subjects, there
are three formal reasons why Manet’s painting does not conform to
the traditional classical Renaissance painting style:
1. No chiaroscuro: Manet did not paint subtle gradations between light
and dark tones, but instead, leaves abrupt contrasts between tones.
Due to this focus on visual tensions between shapes, he was
reproached for his “mania for seeing in blocks”.
2. No linear perspective: Manet deliberately avoided using the
Renaissance technique of applying linear perspective to create the
illusion of spatial depth. The characters in his composition seem to fit
uncomfortably into the sketchy wooded background, with no clear
vanishing point.
3. Visible brushstrokes: Manet did not blend his brushstrokes to create a
finished surface, but allowed the physical process of applying paint to
a canvas, show through.
At this point, you may be wondering why Manet’s painting became so
famous in the history of European art. When Manet submitted Le Dejeuner
sur l’Herbe to the annual Paris exhibition, called The Salon, it was rejected,
along with may other now famous, paintings by artists such as Cezanne and
Whistler. The year 1863 is important because the Salon des Refuses, (Salon
of the Refused), came into being.
The Salon des Refuses was an exhibition held in Paris, by command of
the French Emperor Napoleon III, for those artists whose works were
rejected by the official Salon jury. Manet’s painting, Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe,
became the principal attraction during the Salon des Refuses. It generated
both laughter and scandal, because it did not conform to the public’s
expectation of “good taste”, or to the moral standards that critic’s expected
classical art to uphold.
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe changed the history of European art. It is a
testimony to Manet’s appreciation for, yet refusal to conform with, historical
conventions of narrative painting subjects and modes of representation. This
painting could be considered the turning point for Modern Art, because it
allowed the Impressionists the freedom they needed to paint common
scenes, rather than grand, symbolic stories.
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe: an art history continuum, by Deanna Georgeson.
4
Slide 03 - Monet’s Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe, 1865
In the third slide, we see the Impressionist painter Monet’s
interpretation of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe, from 1865, two years after his
friend Manet, had created such a scandal with the original Le
Dejeuner. Monet’s composition did not create sensational news. Monet
lacked the conceptual subtleties of Manet’s treatment of the
allegorical Pastoral Concert, which confronted the art establishment.
Monet ignored the original theme of the Renaissance Pastoral Concert, and
paints only what he sees in a Parisian park, using a fresh lively palette that
does resemble Titian’s colors.
This painting reveals Monet’s talent for observing the play between
color and light, which is a defining feature of the Impressionist aesthetic, and
why Monet stands out as a leader of the Impressionist movement.
Slide 04 - Picasso’s interpretations of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe,
1960-62
The fourth slide leads us to one of Picasso’s interpretations of Le
Dejeuner, inspired by Manet’s original painting. In 1932, Picasso saw
Manet’s famous painting exhibited in Paris. He was so impressed, he
wrote this message on the back of the gallery envelope: “When I see Manet’s
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe, I tell myself there is pain ahead.”
Picasso studied many European masters, including Poussin,
Velazques, and Rembrandt. But his attempts to come to terms with Manet’s
painting, was the most remarkable tribute that one painter has ever paid
another. From 1959, until the end of his career, Picasso completed a
series of 27 paintings, 140 drawings, and sculptures based on the figures
posed in Manet’s painting. This was the most profound and complex
exploration of any subject that Picasso ever undertook. Picasso admired
Manet’s modernity and subversive attitude.
Even though Picasso predicted his involvement with Manet’s painting in
1932, he waited 24 years before he began to seriously confrontation it with
his own variations. In 1954, Picasso opened a sketchbook, and wrote on the
cover First Drawings of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe, 1954. At that time, he
completed four drawings based on Manet’s painting. He studied its layout, its
protagonists, and the formal relationships between these elements. Picasso,
like Manet before him, copied and interpreted at the same time. He modified
the original composition, like Manet had done with the Renaissance work that
inspired him.
Today, in our postmodern world, we refer to this practice of
borrowing another person’s work without their permission, as
appropriation. From 1954 to 1959, Picasso explored many variations of
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe: an art history continuum, by Deanna Georgeson.
5
Manet’s composition in drawings. There was no pain involved in any of these
experiments, only amusement, and typically, for Picasso – showmanship.
Picasso took his time reducing his anguish towards Manet’s painting. In
1960, he produced his first painted version of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe.
Slide 05 - Picasso’s interpretations of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe
In this slide, we see another variation by Picasso, appropriating, or
borrowing the composition from Manet’s original painting, Le
Dejeuner sur l’Herbe. Picasso rearranged the players in the scene,
reorganizing the formal elements into a new composition. The characters
change roles and positions in the play, receding, or coming forward,
establishing a new scene each time. Like Manet, Picasso was not following
representational conventions, but was making a statement in favor of
artistic freedom.
Slide 06 - Picasso’s interpretations of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe
In 1962, Picasso designed a set of sculptural models based the
characters from Le Dejeuner. These large, cardboard figures, were folded
and placed in real landscape settings, for Picasso to photograph and create
new arrangements to experiment with. Later, a sculptor was hired to
create concrete versions of these models, which are permanently located in a
real park. He transformed the original composition into many new
arrangements of the figures. In 1970, when Picasso was 89 years old, he
painted his final interpretation of Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe. Picasso
transcended his connection to Manet’s painting, by referring to the whole
history of painting, and establishing himself as a significant part of the
art history continuum.
Manet was the first painter to break with tradition, while at the same
time referring back to the Renaissance masters. Picasso, a leader in the
Modern Art movement, recognized that he was participating in a dialogue
about painting. Perhaps it was at this intersection, where the painter
challenges the past that the source of Picasso’s anguish resided.
Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe: an art history continuum, by Deanna Georgeson.
6
Slide 07 – Yue Minjun’s Le Dejeuner 1995
In the final slide, we see the work of a contemporary, Postmodern
Chinese artist, Yue Minjun, once again, practicing the art of appropriation. He
creates self-portraits by photographing himself in a variety of poses,
as reference material for paintings and sculptures. Every image Minjun
creates includes his enigmatic, exaggerated smile.
Like Manet and Picasso before him, he never tells us what this smile
means. The repeated smiling portrait of Yue Minjun, is a postmodern
phenomenon, which has been defined by Modernism. Postmodernists
combine respect and ridicule towards Modernism, as a failed attempt to
represent an unachievable utopia.
When we look at Minjun’s Le Dejeuner, we might ask ourselves why
every character wears the same smile? Does Minjun respect European
art history, or is he ridiculing it? We are never certain of the artist’s
intentions. Perhaps they represent artificial smiles that can be purchased and
applied like make-up. Can these smiles be manufactured in large
quantities, like mass-produced and consumed products? These questions
are open to interpretation. However, unlike the allegorical Renaissance
paintings, we have no artistic authority telling us what to think. We must
reach our own conclusions.