Arts is a form of expression that requires freedom to develop its true potential. Great art is developed by the environment surrounding the artist. John Singer Sargent did not receive any conventional schooling: his father taught him subjects such as geography and reading. His mother encouraged him to draw. Sargent’s mother’s desire to travel expose him to the world and in May 1874, Sargent became a student of Carolus-Duran, who taught all of his student to paint off the head and make no preliminary drawings. As a result of the teaching, Sargent showed painterly freedom in almost all of his works. In the autumn of 1879, Sargent began traveling from place to place in order to view the works of past painters and gather ideas for his art work. In Paris, one of his most known work, Madame X was denounced for its radical styling. He then traveled to London and engaged himself in impressionist paintings. When he painted Carnation, Lily, Lily, Rose, he became more acceptable to English critics. However the Americans were more acceptable of his art, and it wasn’t until the 1890s did British patron agree to pay commission for his artwork. In the 1900s, Sargent became so enervated at the demands for portraits that eventually he went off to study watercolor. As a watercolorist, Sargent received great critic approval and was able to make money. Therefore he chose to refuse all future portrait demands and became an establish watercolorist.
Based on the biography from “John Singer Sargent,” by Weinberg H. Barbara, John received most of his inspirations from traveling. He has demonstrated painterly freedom. When he faced opposition to his artwork, he doesn’t change his style to match what the people would like. Instead he travels to find patrons who are willing to support how he paints. In the Generalife appeals to me because of how it is painted. There are little to no defined lines in this paintings, the faces are unclear, and it gives the impression of how art is defined, or rather undefined. The painting made me feel some sort of sorrow. It seems as though the young lady find the painting appealing, but the old lady and the young man isn’t satisfied with it.
In Picture and Text, the writer notes the details in the art work that are based upon his perception. Henry James sees Sargent as a developing artist.
James analyzes the artwork. In his mentioning of The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit, he compared the two girls in the back to the tall porcelain jars. He admires the complete effect of the painting and how it reveals their instincts in playing together.
James analyzes the artwork. In his mentioning of The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit, he compared the two girls in the back to the tall porcelain jars. He admires the complete effect of the painting and how it reveals their instincts in playing together. In this respect, Sargent “sees deep into his subject, undergoes it, absorbs it, discovers in it new things that were not on the surface, becomes patient with it, and almost reverent, and, in short, enlarges and humanizes the technical problem.”
Citation
Weinberg, H. Barbara. “John Singer Sargent (1856–1925)”. In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/sarg/hd_sarg.htm (October 2004)
James, Henry. “Picture and Text.” In Harper’s Magazine, 1893.
I think the environment surrounding art and the artist are key to unlock the greatest potential of a work of art. A point you made that interested me and led me to think further was “When he faced opposition to his artwork, he doesn’t change his style to match what the people would like. Instead he travels to find patrons who are willing to support how he paints.” I can not come to a conclusion as to what would have happened to John Singer Sargents’s career had the ability to relocate not been available to him. Would he have continued to explore his “radical styling” or would he have adapted and became a more conventional painter? Does anyone have any thoughts?
Jason, you and I shared many similar viewpoints on Sargent’s pieces. Indeed, his artwork needs to be seen as a whole, rather than focus on separate details such as the individual or setting. By taking in the whole artwork, we begin to see a clearer meaning to his work and better understand and appreciate his style. Without his parents nurturing and encouraging his talent for art, he wouldn’t have reached to his legendary status today. Although he was privileged, he took great artistic risks in his career by following his own path of creativity, which I admired.