cezanne , the father of modern art whose technique and paintings paved the way for next new art movements for he has always been an inspiration for too many many modern artists .... !
This was fantastic! You've opened my eyes literally and philosophically regarding cezanne's food and drink still life paintings . I used to totally disregard/ dismiss them. Thanks to your video i now see these paintings as well as the landscapes as part of the family of paintings made by Cezaanne' s Impressionist contemporaries. I think theses paintings are beautiful and revolutionary in their own quiet way. I can't wait to watch part 2
I think the key knowledge to understand modern art is to know that the artist is no longer trying to depict photorealistic scenes! They were liberated from traditional fomulars such as using bright and dark tones to model form. They were becoming more SUBJECTIVE and more CREATIVE to use colors (hues instead of tones) to paint a picture from what they saw or what they imagined. The goal is no longer to paint reallity! That's somehow changed the standards critics used for hundreds of years and that's why modernism was finally acknowledged so many years later than when it was born and why we couldn't understand morden art. As to Ceanne's style, it appeared to be flattened image which has less contrast in light and shadow but shifting hues to depict change of form. It's not a real photorealistic reflection of the model in front of the artist but an creation of color and tones which form a harmonious beautiful image on the canvas.
Some of what you said about his approach to landscapes: foreground, background and perspective seems very similar to Chinese landscapes dating back to the 11thC and maybe earlier. Very interesting. Thank you.
Nice video, but there are paintings in the flow that are not Cezanne's and should be marked as such...like Monet's Impression of the Sunrise...because people don't necessarily know that, and could easily and wrongly assume that's Cezanne.
Thanks for the comment and yes, your right, I should label the ones which are not cezanne work. When I did this it didnt even occur to me that it might confuse people. It's all a learning process, will try in future to label images not made by the artist in question
@@theartshole311 No no, no problem with flicker. I guess the painting is that good. Very photo-realistic. And very intetesting/fun too - looking at someone looking at a painting.
@@radioactivedetective6876misschien PL of R van B ,tenminste zij hadden alle twee een smal gezicht waren alle twee stevige drinkers wat ik heel jammer vond ,mocht hun graag
The techniques developed by Cezanne that you describe till 8:26, and the accompanying paintings - the mountain landscape and the fruits, etc - seem in line with Impressionists to me. It is from 8:27 - with the card players - that I see a notable divergence from Impressionism. Is my observation correct? Or have I missed out? I am trying to learn to identify elements of technique and style. have not developed the confidence of drawing my own conclusions yet in stylistic and technical matters - hence checking up with you. Hope u don't mind.
Ok, at 11:43 you have mentioned the similarities Cezanne has with Impressionists. And also the difference. Now, while looking at a Monet or a Pissaro painting and Cezanne's landscape I can see the difference, though can't exactly pin-point on something, except that Monet and Pissaro's landscapes are brighter, and brush strokes are different from Cezanne's. I can also see how Cezanne's style is closer to Abstraction. But, what exactly do you mean when you say "images are solid" - as in "solid" as opposed to what? Also, kindly elaborate on "atmospheric effect". And, rectify me if I have formed any wrong conclusions.
Cezanne was still working in tandem with the Impressionists for much of his career so their influence in his work can make it hard to spot the difference if you will. Those landscapes may appear quite close to Impressionist works at times because of this but it can help to look for areas that appear less naturalistic and more readily identifiable as blocks of paint as a way of differentiating. Impressionist landscapes will use their paint to mimic the effects of light, see some of those nice woodland paintings of Sisley or Pissaro for example. Their paint appears quite naturalistic as it mimics the light we might see in reality. Cezanne by contrast will move away from this mimicry and instead create the space of his landscapes through blocks of tone and colour, relying on the physical characteristics of the paint to break up the scene and create the image. See his Provence landscapes for examples of this, he creates the different elements of distant land, houses an trees not by straight up mimicking the effects of light upon them as Impressionism would, but by breaking them down into shapes which he then differentiates from one another by modulating the tone and colour of his paint. This results in a different finish to the work from that of his Impressionist counterparts, which you might describe as less naturalistic but perhaps more through in its transcription of its subjects. Hope that helps, been a while since I've gone over the Cezanne stuff!
No worries, I'll try my best to answer any questions you have. Might take me a while to get to them, I only get so much time to write each day and I try to use it to work on upcoming videos. I will get back to you eventually!
You're grand, I think your on the right track! Solid as in his paint is often applied opaquely and in blocks, as opposed to the Impressionists who would break up their colors by mixing wet into wet or by placing small flecks of colour adjacent to each other, which is what causes that luminous quality
Eeeeeeek those tiny minds are still with us, shutting out the real Artist Expressionist. He is so square and unevolved , masters of war man. Hey killer try and dig Cezanne, it's a new Dawn.
Well done, I talk about and make art to have beauty around me, he is nearly impossible for me to recreate, perhaps it is patience or time that is the barrier.
At 7:40 "he utilized a system of color gradations to depict form. Instead of employing the rules of perspective light and shadow he utilized subtle gradations of color placed next to one another which created the illusion of form". I can hardly understand the way to creat the illusion of from by utilizing color gradation. Does that mean traditional way of modeling an apple is by the different luminance values of red to give us a feeling of how a red apple is lit by light through light and shadow to give us the illusion of form, and Cezanne used gradadent hues (say from red to orange to yellow to green) of colors with similar luninance values which don't have strong contrast of light and dark to creat illusion of form? But I don't quite get the illusion of form. Thank you.
Sorry for the delay, I've been a bit busy recently and couldn't get time to check in on comments. I know it can be a bit hard to get your head around, probably more to do with my convoluted way of expressing the idea. The traditional method would be to describe the apple using tone to show light and shadow, and colour such as red to signify it was an apple. In this way it's something of a symbol rather than an actual depiction of an apple. Cezannes method would differ in that he didn't follow this convention. He would look at the apple in front of him and if the light made it look like it was blue in spots he would paint it that way. This results in a different way of modeling form. Colours can advance or recede based on their hue, saturation and tempreture which can create a sense of form in a different way. This leads to a way of modeling for that is a bit more observed and less of a symbol. That's the main difference anyway, hope that helps. Thanks for your comment and let me know if you have any more questions
In Europe Cezanne is the only humanist artist who can do it alone. He is guiding mankind and attaching itself to nature/life. 塞尚是整个西方世界唯一能拿的出手的人文艺术家，他在引导人类依附于大自然。（这是中国古代先贤几千年前就做过的事情）
Weet je wat de Tamariskboom voor gebruikt werd 😅 Afijn begin bij het begin deze werd al genoemd in Jakobs tijdperk en het is een struikachtige boom in Zuid-Europa waarvan de zout-rijke As voor looien ( L-ooien en Verven wordt gebruikt 😅blijkbaar valt die appel niet zo ver van die stamboom omdat ik deze in mijn tuin heb staan ,blijkbaar vererf men toch nog veel wat de Bijbelse Historische betreft 😂
Modern Art ,eigelijk heb ik daar helemaal niets mee op, het enigste is misschien dat het chaos tijd aangeeft, hopelijk worden zij niet boos erom ,wil niet zeggen dat zoiets met veel kleur niet mooi uit komt in het moderne interieur,maar ik heb liever het oude waar je iets uit kunt halen hoe zij toen leefden dus een stuk geschiedenis om dan te herleiden naar deze tijd vind ik interessant, bovendien gaat deze spreker mij te snel ( in het spreken / uitleg ( moeilijk te volgen, misschien ben ik te gehecht aan een oude spreker 😅 tenminste zijn stem zeker 😊
Nou kijk heeft U weleens gehoord van Haarlemmer olie ? Die smeren zij ook overal op ,of het helpt is de vraag, omdat ik niet van de hakenkruis liefhebber ben zoals Cezanne schijnt te zijn geweest , wat de overeenkomsten zijn is deze dat Cezanne blijkbaar Raszuivere Genen nastreefde en ik daarentegen weet dat er voor iedere mens een Schepper als stamboom als afkomst is 😊
If we could that would make art useful, which is something the area as a whole seems to be against. I'm actually pretty surprised by how nice everyone's been, I've seen enough UA-cam comments sections to know the kinda thing that goes on in them.
Thanks for the comment, as you may well see pronunciation is not a strong point of mine. I'll try my best to be accurate but sometimes I think I'm lucky if people recognise what I'm saying as English at all.
@@theartshole311nou nee ,zou zeker helpen als een Nederlandse vertaling erbij zat , dus zou ik willen zeggen , laat die Haarlemmerolie deze is niet voor ieders gebruik bestemt ,Jesaja 33( 15-16-17-18-19-20 enz
At 3:25 he uses comprised when he should have used composed. Learn the difference. Also, the letter i in Caravaggio is not pronounced. Cara VAH Joe. Cafe Guerbois is pronounced Gair BWAH. The plural of Still Life is.... Still Lifes the way the plural of the Toronto Maple Leaf is Toronto Maple Leafs. I care about language as much as I care about art, which is a lot. And I must say I think these videos are superb.
If you're going to correct someone like an ass, at least be correct. The use of comprised in this context ( describing the colors that make up the early palette) is 100% correct. Just look up the definition. Now to be fair, composed is also correct, though a lesser used definition. Regardless, you're an ass just for the arrogant manner in which you approach these corrections.
@@theartshole311 there's a game called honkai impact, the stigmatas are based from famous inventors, artist, etc. My apologies as this is a gacha game.
For the life of me I'll never understand how anyone can find a sense of worth in Cezanne's paintings...explain as much as you like, to me they're just a mess. I did live with one of his still life's; oranges & green bowl, a horrible piece in my opinion but my aunt prized it s a great work of art...Yuk! I thought & still do.
So Paul Cezanne was Darth Vader of the postmodernist rubbish which calls itself "Art"... Thank you Paul but no than you!!! I have the strong conviction that art must have objective standards.
Duchamp's urinal "frighteningly complex"? More of a trite prank. A one-liner that should have been relegated to the margins of art history a century ago. Other than that credulous blasphemy I enjoyed your video.
Thanks , I'll be getting to Duchamp soon so hopefully I can better explain what I meant by that. The urinal was indeed conceived as a bit of a prank, but humor played a big role in his practice in general, which is why I'd see it as a complex piece that is part of his overarching work rather than a one off one-liner of sorts.
@@theartshole311 "Practice"? I didn't know he was a doctor, or a lawyer. I'm just not a believer in the Duchampian legacy. Each to his own. If everyone liked the same thing, we'd have 10% of the art we do. Thanks for responding, and also form making some art history vids. Cheers.
With another narrator, your videos will improve. I cannot detect the accent's origin, maybe European? Anyway, talking too fast! Are you in a hurry to finish the narration? Take your time!
If only I could get another narrator, its on my list right after convincing someone to help me with the interminable process of editing. Irish btw, believe it or not this is me trying to talk slow! Getting more practice these days, might become understandable yet, you never know
This guy does a workmanlike job defending the clumsy daubs of the great Cezanne but in spite of having looked at his paintings for half a century - during which time I was a professional artist frequently working with architects on large scale projects - I fail to see why he was so revered by other painters - his landscapes were messy mid tone affairs; his figures deplorably ugly and his portraits barely adequate. One must assume that as photography began to replace the work of painters they had to find something the camera could not do and Cezanne showed them the way... maybe... just paint badly.
Apologies for the extended delay responding. I too work in the arts so I must imagine you will understand how busy it can get at times. Workmanlike? Ouch. I'm no expert when it comes to editing video, recording sound, writing scripts etc, but I am learning. I'll take workmanlike over incomprehensible mess and be thankful I got there for now. as for my defense of Cezanne and his clumsy daubs, I'm really not sure where to start. I didn't particularly intend it to be a defense for one thing. I don't think he needs defending. As you say painters generally tend to revere him. I wanted to make more of an overview, describe his ideas and techniques and try to convey what it is that makes his work so revered. I chose Cezanne because he is well known, well documented and is part of the start of Modernism, a topic I want to discuss on this channel in general. Liking him is another thing, perfectly fine to dislike him but describing him as clumsy? Seems a little over the top to me. Cezanne's sensitivity to tone and colour demonstrates his thoughtfulness and consideration over and over. Sure, it doesn't fit the bill as far as traditional academic painting goes but I don't think it constitutes the ineptitude you attribute to him. The camera definitely played a role, as did a lot of other factors in why his work came to prominence but again I can't see the work as being simply bad painting. I've seen(and made!) a lot of bad painting in my time and Cezanne just does not fit that bill. I do see what you mean about the mid toned landscape thing, I love a bit of tone and Cezanne does neglect it a bit alright. Not a deal breaker for me though! Thanks for your comment, I would be interested in hearing more of your opinions considering you worked in the arts. Painters are always the most opinionated people for better or worse, would love to hear your thoughts on art in general from your first hand experience.
I finished University of fine arts and I always loved Cezanne. Who doesn't he is a father of modern art. My professors of painting also loved him and Picasso. Cezanne himself explained:"A work of art that begin without emotion is not the art." Painting is more phylosophy than skill. To be skillful without proper education you will become artisan but not an artist. Gillo Dorfles famous aesthetician said:"If artist have tendency to make painting real most of the time he will create kitsch but not the art." We should be more concerned for art elements like colour,balance,composition etc. Instead to be concerned about motive is it like in reality. At University we started with reality to become more skillful. Kazimir Maljevich suprematism said:"If we paint exactly what we see we creating "dead picture" of reality." Also he said:" Diference between engineer and artist is that engineer using his conscious while artist using subconscious."
Never bored of Cezanne's works of great painting, what a man.
Perfect video to refresh the own knowledge about Cèzanne before a art exam about his works. Thank you!
No problem, best of luck with your exam!
Thanks
cezanne , the father of modern art whose technique and paintings paved the way for next new art movements for he has always been an inspiration for too many many modern artists .... !
A great video!
6:27 paused, laughed, wrote this comment, drank some water.
Now back to study!
Little humor hopefully goes a long way to help with the tedium of study, hope it helped!
Did not expect to laugh out loud. I will remember more because of it.
This was fantastic! You've opened my eyes literally and philosophically regarding cezanne's food and drink still life paintings . I used to totally disregard/ dismiss them. Thanks to your video i now see these paintings as well as the landscapes as part of the family of paintings made by Cezaanne' s Impressionist contemporaries. I think theses paintings are beautiful and revolutionary in their own quiet way. I can't wait to watch part 2
Thanks so much! I’ve got a paragraph to do on Cézanne due in 2 days and this video taught me a lot! Thanks again!
I think the key knowledge to understand modern art is to know that the artist is no longer trying to depict photorealistic scenes! They were liberated from traditional fomulars such as using bright and dark tones to model form. They were becoming more SUBJECTIVE and more CREATIVE to use colors (hues instead of tones) to paint a picture from what they saw or what they imagined. The goal is no longer to paint reallity! That's somehow changed the standards critics used for hundreds of years and that's why modernism was finally acknowledged so many years later than when it was born and why we couldn't understand morden art. As to Ceanne's style, it appeared to be flattened image which has less contrast in light and shadow but shifting hues to depict change of form. It's not a real photorealistic reflection of the model in front of the artist but an creation of color and tones which form a harmonious beautiful image on the canvas.
Excellent part I in going into how Cezanne relates to art in his past and future
Thanks!
Your doing this for school to huh? Lol
Great series! Thank you so very much. Keep it up.
Thanks! Will do, more videos coming soon
Great job!!
Thank you!
Woahhhh...its excellent!
What a great video, thank you for posting.
Glad you liked it!
Well done, you have done a good job here.
as someone who’s always been into art this channel is such a blessing!! Love the vid love from the Pacific Northwest ❤️❤️❤️
This is a perfect intro for me into the world of art I’m about to binge all of your vids asappp!!
Thanks a million! Glad you enjoy the videos, I'll keep them coming!
Great artist one of the best. Expressionist.
well done! thank you
Glad it was helpful!
Holy cow! Only 700 views?! This is excellent.
I was amazed it got that many to be honest! Thanks though, glad you liked it!
I'll certainly watch if you make more!
I definitely will, there's more coming soon. Have lots of interesting topics and artists to cover!
Interesting and insightful!
Nice video and even nicer choice of music
Cheers!
Some of what you said about his approach to landscapes: foreground, background and perspective seems very similar to Chinese landscapes dating back to the 11thC and maybe earlier. Very interesting. Thank you.
Nice video, but there are paintings in the flow that are not Cezanne's and should be marked as such...like Monet's Impression of the Sunrise...because people don't necessarily know that, and could easily and wrongly assume that's Cezanne.
Thanks for the comment and yes, your right, I should label the ones which are not cezanne work. When I did this it didnt even occur to me that it might confuse people. It's all a learning process, will try in future to label images not made by the artist in question
Amazing essay. Thank you a lot
You're very welcome!
thank you for this series! I'm new to understanding art in this much depth but you've made it much more easier and exciting :)
I'm glad that it helped, thank you for the kind words!
Great video! It helped me understand how to do my hw.
Happy to help the best character from part 5
9:45 - Is that a painting of someone looking at a Jackson Pollock-ish painting? Or a photograph?
I believe that is a Norman Rockwell painting of a man looking at a Pollock. My god that flicker is bad, I really need to learn to edit better
@@theartshole311 No no, no problem with flicker. I guess the painting is that good. Very photo-realistic. And very intetesting/fun too - looking at someone looking at a painting.
@@radioactivedetective6876 I assumed it was a photo, too. Norman Rockwell - now there's a man who could paint!
@@radioactivedetective6876misschien PL of R van B ,tenminste zij hadden alle twee een smal gezicht waren alle twee stevige drinkers wat ik heel jammer vond ,mocht hun graag
The techniques developed by Cezanne that you describe till 8:26, and the accompanying paintings - the mountain landscape and the fruits, etc - seem in line with Impressionists to me. It is from 8:27 - with the card players - that I see a notable divergence from Impressionism. Is my observation correct? Or have I missed out?
I am trying to learn to identify elements of technique and style. have not developed the confidence of drawing my own conclusions yet in stylistic and technical matters - hence checking up with you. Hope u don't mind.
Ok, at 11:43 you have mentioned the similarities Cezanne has with Impressionists. And also the difference. Now, while looking at a Monet or a Pissaro painting and Cezanne's landscape I can see the difference, though can't exactly pin-point on something, except that Monet and Pissaro's landscapes are brighter, and brush strokes are different from Cezanne's. I can also see how Cezanne's style is closer to Abstraction. But, what exactly do you mean when you say "images are solid" - as in "solid" as opposed to what? Also, kindly elaborate on "atmospheric effect". And, rectify me if I have formed any wrong conclusions.
Thanks a ton for the videos. I hope I am not bothering you with the questions ... Please reply at your convenience, take all the time you need.
Cezanne was still working in tandem with the Impressionists for much of his career so their influence in his work can make it hard to spot the difference if you will. Those landscapes may appear quite close to Impressionist works at times because of this but it can help to look for areas that appear less naturalistic and more readily identifiable as blocks of paint as a way of differentiating. Impressionist landscapes will use their paint to mimic the effects of light, see some of those nice woodland paintings of Sisley or Pissaro for example. Their paint appears quite naturalistic as it mimics the light we might see in reality. Cezanne by contrast will move away from this mimicry and instead create the space of his landscapes through blocks of tone and colour, relying on the physical characteristics of the paint to break up the scene and create the image. See his Provence landscapes for examples of this, he creates the different elements of distant land, houses an trees not by straight up mimicking the effects of light upon them as Impressionism would, but by breaking them down into shapes which he then differentiates from one another by modulating the tone and colour of his paint. This results in a different finish to the work from that of his Impressionist counterparts, which you might describe as less naturalistic but perhaps more through in its transcription of its subjects. Hope that helps, been a while since I've gone over the Cezanne stuff!
No worries, I'll try my best to answer any questions you have. Might take me a while to get to them, I only get so much time to write each day and I try to use it to work on upcoming videos. I will get back to you eventually!
You're grand, I think your on the right track! Solid as in his paint is often applied opaquely and in blocks, as opposed to the Impressionists who would break up their colors by mixing wet into wet or by placing small flecks of colour adjacent to each other, which is what causes that luminous quality
Eeeeeeek those tiny minds are still with us, shutting out the real Artist Expressionist. He is so square and unevolved , masters of war man. Hey killer try and dig Cezanne, it's a new Dawn.
Thanks man soooo appreciate it
No worries, glad you like it.
will you be making more videos
Great stuff! Thank you from a fellow Irishman
go raibh mile maith agat!
@@theartshole311 ta failte romhat
great videos
Thanks!
Oh! so it is about modern ert!
Well done, I talk about and make art to have beauty around me, he is nearly impossible for me to recreate, perhaps it is patience or time that is the barrier.
hard enough to paint like Cezanne, but with time and practice you might get close
hope you find the means to continue...very useful and well conceived...thank you!
Thanks for the kind words, glad to hear it is useful! I'll definitely be making more in the future, lots of stuff in the works.
At 7:40 "he utilized a system of color gradations to depict form. Instead of employing the rules of perspective light and shadow he utilized subtle gradations of color placed next to one another which created the illusion of form". I can hardly understand the way to creat the illusion of from by utilizing color gradation. Does that mean traditional way of modeling an apple is by the different luminance values of red to give us a feeling of how a red apple is lit by light through light and shadow to give us the illusion of form, and Cezanne used gradadent hues (say from red to orange to yellow to green) of colors with similar luninance values which don't have strong contrast of light and dark to creat illusion of form? But I don't quite get the illusion of form. Thank you.
Sorry for the delay, I've been a bit busy recently and couldn't get time to check in on comments. I know it can be a bit hard to get your head around, probably more to do with my convoluted way of expressing the idea. The traditional method would be to describe the apple using tone to show light and shadow, and colour such as red to signify it was an apple. In this way it's something of a symbol rather than an actual depiction of an apple. Cezannes method would differ in that he didn't follow this convention. He would look at the apple in front of him and if the light made it look like it was blue in spots he would paint it that way. This results in a different way of modeling form. Colours can advance or recede based on their hue, saturation and tempreture which can create a sense of form in a different way. This leads to a way of modeling for that is a bit more observed and less of a symbol. That's the main difference anyway, hope that helps. Thanks for your comment and let me know if you have any more questions
Thanks for the reply. It helps a lot.@@theartshole311
In Europe Cezanne is the only humanist artist who can do it alone. He is guiding mankind and attaching itself to nature/life.
塞尚是整个西方世界唯一能拿的出手的人文艺术家，他在引导人类依附于大自然。（这是中国古代先贤几千年前就做过的事情）
I mainly watched this so I could continue to hear the narrator say art as Errt. I’ve never in my heard it pronounced that way. Bizarre.
Foi o precursor da moderna arte..
Oof this is to good it helped me with my hw Thank You
Joan Mitchell used to say that for her art she was influenced by Cezanne's latest works, well I can totally say now !
Can definitely see it in her alright, will have to cover her work when we make it to abstract expressionism
This is Excellect (with much nerd spit)
thanks buddy, got an exam in advanced art class tmr
Good luck!
Study his Still Life work, the fruits, wine bottles and fabric.
Good work! Very helpful. Your Scotish/Irish accent is a bit hard to understand just at first, but mellifluous.
Thank you! I will work on my pronunciation, I know my accent can be hard to follow.
Flatness, harmony. He created a use of colour which makes him my favourite painter.
thanks. No need for the music
Weet je wat de Tamariskboom voor gebruikt werd 😅 Afijn begin bij het begin deze werd al genoemd in Jakobs tijdperk en het is een struikachtige boom in Zuid-Europa waarvan de zout-rijke As voor looien ( L-ooien en Verven wordt gebruikt 😅blijkbaar valt die appel niet zo ver van die stamboom omdat ik deze in mijn tuin heb staan ,blijkbaar vererf men toch nog veel wat de Bijbelse Historische betreft 😂
Adoro Cezanne
Rejected by the Establishment, Hey Jimi Hendrix should have been around to blow their tiny minds.😎🎨✌️♥️
Modern Art ,eigelijk heb ik daar helemaal niets mee op, het enigste is misschien dat het chaos tijd aangeeft, hopelijk worden zij niet boos erom ,wil niet zeggen dat zoiets met veel kleur niet mooi uit komt in het moderne interieur,maar ik heb liever het oude waar je iets uit kunt halen hoe zij toen leefden dus een stuk geschiedenis om dan te herleiden naar deze tijd vind ik interessant, bovendien gaat deze spreker mij te snel ( in het spreken / uitleg ( moeilijk te volgen, misschien ben ik te gehecht aan een oude spreker 😅 tenminste zijn stem zeker 😊
Thanks you
I see you're a connoisseur. Breugel paintings are the best.
Lol, can't beat a bit of Breugel
Thank you so much ! subbed !
Glad you liked it, thank you for the sub!
Can't beat an Irish accent and some craic learning about arrrt
It's some craic alright, glad you enjoy it!
I think he used the same model for another painting.
is this about Cezanne, or everybody else ?
Nou kijk heeft U weleens gehoord van Haarlemmer olie ? Die smeren zij ook overal op ,of het helpt is de vraag, omdat ik niet van de hakenkruis liefhebber ben zoals Cezanne schijnt te zijn geweest , wat de overeenkomsten zijn is deze dat Cezanne blijkbaar Raszuivere Genen nastreefde en ik daarentegen weet dat er voor iedere mens een Schepper als stamboom als afkomst is 😊
Nice video, but these comments man. If we could harness the smug pretension here we could solve the energy crisis.
If we could that would make art useful, which is something the area as a whole seems to be against. I'm actually pretty surprised by how nice everyone's been, I've seen enough UA-cam comments sections to know the kinda thing that goes on in them.
Ecce mono cameo lawl
I wish the narrator spoke more slowly.
Sorry! believe it or not this is me speaking slowly! I will try to be more coherent in the future
Enjoyed the video, except for your pronunciation of Camille Pissaro's name. It's not pronounced "peezaro" but "pissa-ro" with the accent on o.
Forgot..extra points for the subtle funny touch of adding the Spanish restore-fail Borja Jesus under 'set styles' of painting :)
Thanks for the comment, as you may well see pronunciation is not a strong point of mine. I'll try my best to be accurate but sometimes I think I'm lucky if people recognise what I'm saying as English at all.
@@theartshole311nou nee ,zou zeker helpen als een Nederlandse vertaling erbij zat , dus zou ik willen zeggen , laat die Haarlemmerolie deze is niet voor ieders gebruik bestemt ,Jesaja 33( 15-16-17-18-19-20 enz
At 3:25 he uses comprised when he should have used composed. Learn the difference.
Also, the letter i in Caravaggio is not pronounced.
Cara VAH Joe.
Cafe Guerbois is pronounced Gair BWAH.
The plural of Still Life is.... Still Lifes the way the plural of the Toronto Maple Leaf is Toronto Maple Leafs.
I care about language as much as I care about art, which is a lot.
And I must say I think these videos are superb.
I liked the variant pronunciation. I think the French would find it exotique et bien charmant
If you're going to correct someone like an ass, at least be correct. The use of comprised in this context ( describing the colors that make up the early palette) is 100% correct. Just look up the definition. Now to be fair, composed is also correct, though a lesser used definition. Regardless, you're an ass just for the arrogant manner in which you approach these corrections.
How woefully pedantic of you.
Griseo led me here
Dunno who that is but tell them thanks! Hope it was useful
@@theartshole311 there's a game called honkai impact, the stigmatas are based from famous inventors, artist, etc. My apologies as this is a gacha game.
Hades abducted Persephone
I like to draw dark moody.
You do know that the pic at 0:18 is a prank right? Hahaha Those glasses are not some art piece
Haha, was that the one with the glasses on the floor? Yes, I am aware it is a prank, I just thought it was a good image for my purposes here.
Stopped to write this and then will go back: the background music is irrelevant, pointless and irritating. Let you know how I get on in a bit
For the life of me I'll never understand how anyone can find a sense of worth in Cezanne's paintings...explain as much as you like, to me they're just a mess. I did live with one of his still life's; oranges & green bowl, a horrible piece in my opinion but my aunt prized it s a great work of art...Yuk! I thought & still do.
You just show how ignorant you are. Enjoy!
So Paul Cezanne was Darth Vader of the postmodernist rubbish which calls itself "Art"...
Thank you Paul but no than you!!!
I have the strong conviction that art must have objective standards.
Paul Cezanne was an artist who had nothing in common with modern art, modern art is bunch of mentally disturbed crap on canvas...
Here comes Cezanne dudududu
Duchamp's urinal "frighteningly complex"? More of a trite prank. A one-liner that should have been relegated to the margins of art history a century ago. Other than that credulous blasphemy I enjoyed your video.
Thanks , I'll be getting to Duchamp soon so hopefully I can better explain what I meant by that. The urinal was indeed conceived as a bit of a prank, but humor played a big role in his practice in general, which is why I'd see it as a complex piece that is part of his overarching work rather than a one off one-liner of sorts.
@@theartshole311 "Practice"? I didn't know he was a doctor, or a lawyer. I'm just not a believer in the Duchampian legacy. Each to his own. If everyone liked the same thing, we'd have 10% of the art we do. Thanks for responding, and also form making some art history vids. Cheers.
With another narrator, your videos will improve. I cannot detect the accent's origin, maybe European? Anyway, talking too fast! Are you in a hurry to finish the narration? Take your time!
If only I could get another narrator, its on my list right after convincing someone to help me with the interminable process of editing. Irish btw, believe it or not this is me trying to talk slow! Getting more practice these days, might become understandable yet, you never know
Did you ever stop to think that maybe you listen too slow?
american english hurts hard. this is art not chewing gum!
This is an irish person narrating.
This guy does a workmanlike job defending the clumsy daubs of the great Cezanne but in spite of having looked at his paintings for half a century - during which time I was a professional artist frequently working with architects on large scale projects - I fail to see why he was so revered by other painters - his landscapes were messy mid tone affairs; his figures deplorably ugly and his portraits barely adequate.
One must assume that as photography began to replace the work of painters they had to find something the camera could not do and Cezanne showed them the way... maybe... just paint badly.
Apologies for the extended delay responding. I too work in the arts so I must imagine you will understand how busy it can get at times.
Workmanlike? Ouch. I'm no expert when it comes to editing video, recording sound, writing scripts etc, but I am learning. I'll take workmanlike over incomprehensible mess and be thankful I got there for now.
as for my defense of Cezanne and his clumsy daubs, I'm really not sure where to start. I didn't particularly intend it to be a defense for one thing. I don't think he needs defending. As you say painters generally tend to revere him. I wanted to make more of an overview, describe his ideas and techniques and try to convey what it is that makes his work so revered. I chose Cezanne because he is well known, well documented and is part of the start of Modernism, a topic I want to discuss on this channel in general.
Liking him is another thing, perfectly fine to dislike him but describing him as clumsy? Seems a little over the top to me. Cezanne's sensitivity to tone and colour demonstrates his thoughtfulness and consideration over and over. Sure, it doesn't fit the bill as far as traditional academic painting goes but I don't think it constitutes the ineptitude you attribute to him. The camera definitely played a role, as did a lot of other factors in why his work came to prominence but again I can't see the work as being simply bad painting. I've seen(and made!) a lot of bad painting in my time and Cezanne just does not fit that bill. I do see what you mean about the mid toned landscape thing, I love a bit of tone and Cezanne does neglect it a bit alright. Not a deal breaker for me though!
Thanks for your comment, I would be interested in hearing more of your opinions considering you worked in the arts. Painters are always the most opinionated people for better or worse, would love to hear your thoughts on art in general from your first hand experience.
What is the point of everybody doing the same? He was extremely groundbreaking in everything that we consider art today.
I finished University of fine arts and I always loved Cezanne. Who doesn't he is a father of modern art. My professors of painting also loved him and Picasso. Cezanne himself explained:"A work of art that begin without emotion is not the art." Painting is more phylosophy than skill. To be skillful without proper education you will become artisan but not an artist. Gillo Dorfles famous aesthetician said:"If artist have tendency to make painting real most of the time he will create kitsch but not the art." We should be more concerned for art elements like colour,balance,composition etc. Instead to be concerned about motive is it like in reality. At University we started with reality to become more skillful. Kazimir Maljevich suprematism said:"If we paint exactly what we see we creating "dead picture" of reality." Also he said:" Diference between engineer and artist is that engineer using his conscious while artist using subconscious."
You just don't understand.
The narrator's voice is terrible.
apologies for my terrible voice, at least you only had to suffer though a few minutes of it, I'm unfortunately stuck with it
The narrator's voice is wonderful.
Cezanne drew and painted like shit, so he became a famous artist.
I am going to save this in Graphics file. Cezanne was an inspiration to Pablo Picasso. Makes you want to be Francois.🎨😎🐻👽✌️♥️🎥🚐
Thanks