From Encarta: Rococo Style, style of 18th-century painting and decoration characterized by lightness, delicacy, and elaborate ornamentation. The rococo period corresponded roughly to the reign of King Louis XV of France (1715-1774). The style began with the interior architectural work of French designer Pierre Lepautre and with the paintings of French artist Jean-Antoine Watteau. Rococo is characterized by architectural decoration based on arabesques, shells, elaborate curves, and asymmetry; iridescent pastel colors; and, in painting, light-hearted subject matter. Rococo artisans included French painters Fran�ois Boucher and Jean Honor� Fragonard, and Flemish-born Bavarian architect and designer Fran�ois de Cuvilli�s. From France, the style spread to other countries, where it was grafted onto baroque modes.

And the first painter whose work I'd like to post here (and will do hopefully by Wednesday) is Caravaggio. He was the first and probably the greatest painter to be affected by the scorn with which the art establishment of the 19th century treated Baroque painting.

can't wait to see it....you know, i don't know much (obviously) about the different artistic periods...guess i go more with feeling about paintings or other artwork that i fall in love with. this doesn't fit in this topic, probably, but i just love the sculptures of Venus and David (and no, not because they're both naked). Just something about them that draws my attention.

Oh, if you keep coming back you'll soon be able to tell more or less the differences between art from different periods. But don't worry about it - it is the feeling that counts. And I'll try and find a photo of your Venus and David to post in here.

woohoo!

whaa-haa!

The Lute Player by Caravaggio 94x120cm c. 1596

I chose this painting to start this topic off with, because it was done by Caravaggio (1571-1610), who was probably the first great painter to paint in this style. His early works consisted largely of genre paintings, such as the one above: A boy, painted with colours so full and rich that he can easily be mistaken for a girl. His beautiful, girlish face is framed by seductive curls, his hands are cracful, and cracefully playing the curved lute, his lips are soft and parted - perhaps he is singing? Therefore it is easy to understand why 16th century viewers found this charm frightnening, decadent. It becomes obvious that its painter neither approve nor disapproved of this young man: he presents him as he is, and adds an underlying sadnes ; he is a creature whose favours will fade with time, and whose music will end in a dark room somewhere. The flowers will dry up, and fruit will rot - just so will the young lute player whither too.

DAMN. ..... graceful, and gracefully playing the lute, . . . . that should read. Sorry.

My next contribution is this one by Orazio Gentileschi (1563-1639). Orazio Gentileschi Madonna and Child early 1600's Afraid alot of paintings before impressionism are religious. But isn't this one just beautiful?

it is indeed. and look at the halo around the angel's head, it's so delicate...

Mary and Jesus seem so natural in this painting.

Very much so. If more religious art, if more people were as touching as this, so without pretence and hipocricy, then perhaps even I might have been saved!

Now, here is something with a political theme: Peter Paul Rubens 'The Apotheosis of Henri IV and the Proclamation of the Regency' c. 1621/25 391cm x 727cm In other words, a HUGE painting. I find that the vitality and tenderness of Rubens' paintings make for such an unusual combination that it seems almost unlikely that he became such a success as a political artist. But his genius was immense, and this is an excellent example of why he became so successful. This one is from a series of paintings commissioned by Marie de'Medici, the widowed Queen Mother of France, who needed artistic help in refurbishing and decorating her Luxembourg Palace. Although he is depicting a historical event, the painting is set in terms of classical myth - that, I think, is what makes his works so enduring and vibrant. I think he could probably make a mountain of art over any political molehill of fact.

Henri IV will go down in history as the great conciliator--he converted to catholicism (he was protestant) for the sake of keeping France united and preached religious tolerance. (After Marie de Medici kicked Diane de Poitiers out of the chateau in Chenonceau that Henri had given her, I guess she needed help decorating it.)

Peter Paul Rubens 'Union of Earth and Water' 1618 222.5cm x 180.5cm I suppose that with today's attitude towards fat people Rubens' paintings must be fairly unattractive to alot of people. He was defenitely a great painter of the fair and the fat. And how beautiful his women are! According to my books Rubens was probably one of the most stable, fortunate artists who ever lived. He was handsome, healthy, well-educated, good-humoured, clever, wealthy, twice married, both times with blissful success, and one of the egreatest and most influential artists ever. And on top of all that he was a thoroughly good person. I find this all very evident in his paintings as well. There is just such a sweetness in his work. People in his paintings tend to look at one another with trust, accep ance and confidence. Another artist I would have liked to have met.

I love the detail in this one, the fruit, the skin, the water--it's so meticulous.

i like this. look how she looks at him. y'all did notice the rather muscular cat trying to get a bit of fruit.

Lucky for them it's obviously vegetarian.....

Here's something pretty amazing for you. Jan Brueghel (1568-1625) 'Allegory of Sight' 1670 Oil on Canvas Jan was the second of the three sons of Pieter Brueghel (c.1525-69) who was the greatest Netherlandish painter and draughtsman of the 16th century. Jan's specialities were still lifes and landscapes, but he worked in an entirely different spirit from his father - using brilliant colours and mythological figures. His elder brother, Pieter the Younger (1564-1638) is best known for his copies an variants of his father's peasant scenes. His other speciality was scenes of fires, which earned him the nicknam , 'Hell' Brueghel. Pieter Brueghel III (1589-c.1640) - yeah, I know! - was the lesser artist in the family, and never achieved fame or recognition. Poor bugger.

This one is so rich with detail, I love it. What are they watching on TV, "Angels Among Us"?

my goodness, look at all the paintings within the painting!

ha-ha, Autumn! Suppose they had to watch TV by candle light back in those days, since they had no electricity. It's amazing, isn't it, Wolf? It's painting like this one that make my illusional bubble of artistic skills burst like it never existed in the first place. And each painting within the painting is just overflowing with detail - not just some vague little suggestions in the backgrounds - they're for real!

exactly, and the subject matter is different too. he just put his whole career into one piece of work! very clever... (you know, at first, the picture on the table did look like a laptop!)

Yes, that's just what I thought!!! ha-ha!! So, how about it, Wolfie. You with your naturalistic skills could do something like that.

i'm not real good with drawing people or animals. i mean, i try, but the stuff looks funny to me. think i could just paint skies all the time?

Sure, why not!? I just paint figures all the time, and nobody ever seems to wonder where the landscapes are! They ASSUME you can do them, because you call yourself an artist! ha-ha!!! But I'm a stern believer in the one golden rule of Art: paint what you're good at, not what you think you ought to be able to paint. I mean, why concentrate on something one is bad at, when you're GOOD at something else already? And you're not just good at painting skies, the rest of your landscape was very good as well! I shall post Wer my first ever painting effort - an effort at being a naturalist in painting a studen in Caius College, Cambridge. THe poor guy would by seriously offended if he ever saw it, and it's give you a good laugh!

Damn, sorry for all the mistakes - having a bad flu, and not concentrating so well.

hope you feel better soon!

Thanks, Wolf. I'm okay.

i hope so! we can't have our Queen Babe Goddess of the Spring feeling bad!

Why, gee, what do ya know?? I feel wonderfully invigorated all of a sudden! Great to see your bear face here, King Hunk God of the Spring!

Canaletto 'Piazza San Marco' 1735-1740 Canaletto was the most famous view painter of the 18th century. I think this painting demonstrates why.

wow!

Or wowl! in your case....

I'd like to come back to the first artist whose work I posted in this topic, namely Caravaggio. You know, the painter who painted boys so girlishly that his works were considered to be decadent by the public and other artists alike. Now, his religious paintings were ifen more controversial. A good example is this one: Caravaggio 'The Death of the Virgin' 1605-06 370cm x 244 cm This painting really drew down condemnation for its uncompromising realism. The Carmelite priests who commisioned it rejected it in the end, saying it was indecent. There was even a rumour that the model for the Virgin had been a drowned prostitute. I must say I find it a somewhat disturbing picture too; the way the light almost strikes the corpse's plain face as she lies there, sprawled across the bed with the dirty looking pair of feet sticking out quite unromatically. What is disturbing to me is the way he presents death as an event with a great deal of grief; there is no sense of hope in this painting, just this heavy DEAD feeling. But it's the way it should be, I feel. The poor, aged, worn Virgin he painted makes sense to me, as well as the grief of the Apostles. I mean, this woman was all they had left of Jesus, right? The woman in the forground, I guess, must be Mary Magdalene. I find her very very poignant - she mourns differently from the Apostles; perhaps she mourns for Maria, and they for Jesus. And unlike most other religious paintings mary does not ascend to Heaven gloriously. She is surrounded by scarlet - perhaps a symbol of her Son's blood. I could go on. Basically I just find it an incredible painting.

are Carmelites not a Catholic order? the non-ascension thing strikes me as odd, also... and, I do like the painting (maybe my Protestant brainwashing is leaking out...)

What denomination, wer? (Methodist here)

Southern Baptist

Oh, THAT's what they call atheists nowadays!!! Just kidding, Wer, though I shouldn't, because I used to be DUTCH REFORMED before becoming a relativist.... Yes, the Carmelites are catholics. And that is, of course, what made the painting so shocking. So I must be a good thing.

what is a relativist? (methodist by baptism, but really don't claim any particular protestant sect)

I suppose. But I sure don't see myself as a protestant - probably sound like one alot of the time though! More like a person who believes in God, but it's more of a personal thing, and the person doesn't belong to any specific church, protestant or catholic. I figure I've had all the church going I can TAKE as a child. So much so, it turned me into a good atheist for a while - but that's not me either. I need a spiritual life of some sort to be happy, and so now I believe in God as I see Him.

no, i don't believe God belongs to any specific church. He is ours and we are His. there are things in both Catholic and Protestant faiths that i don't agree with.

What faith does Dutch Reformed most closely resemble?

Oh, Jesus, Autumn, I don't know. But the rightest of right-wing Irish protestant kind of faith is utterly liberal in comparison....

so it's like puritan law or something? all i know is i believe. i really don't like visiting a catholic church and being told that i cannot have communion. so, what, did Jesus only hang out with the people who "belonged"? i don't think so. and communion means a great deal to me. i was seriously offended. AND i had gone with my mother (who is Catholic) and SHE was the one who wouldn't let me participate. can you imagine? i think she was too stuck on rules.

yeah, 'cause if you don't believe, all that will happen at communion is that you'll just be eating crackers, bread, etc... and drinking grape juice, wine, etc...instead of being a cannibal like everyone else...

I spent hours in the Piazza San Marco. The artist captured it perfectly...minus all the annoying Italian guys hitting on me. They never show them in the paintings!!!

That's because Italian guys never stay with one particular girl long enough to be painted....

good point

lol!

Stick with Norwegian guys, Kristen.

Absolutely! Italian guys are ghastly!