PART I:
Having studied Paul Cezanne (Fr. 1839-1906) for virtually a lifetime, the newly-opened exhibition at Art Institute of Chicago is a real treat. I visited the galleries twice thus far and attended a members lecture. Here are a few summative questions that come to my mind.
Does Cezanne qualify as a great artist? Historically, yes he does. Was Cezanne a remarkable man? No, his biography is not remarkable relative to several of his contemporaries, but his exceptional temperament was crucial to the art’s startling originality. Would Cezanne’s influence have been as great if he was not French, living near Paris at end of the 19th century? No, his iconoclastic tendencies were appreciated by other artists in Paris, the center of modernist art at turn of the century.
PART II:
Annie Morse, a museum specialist, gave a helpful lecture on the exhibit to members. Here are several takeaways from her talk: Cezanne returned to the familiar throughout his life, Cezanne returned to motifs until he had exhausted them, and heavy impasto and light transparency were counterpoints in his technique.
As I savored the exhibit on two successive days, I noticed how quiet (noise levels) the galleries were; very few people talking to each other as they moved. Also, the galleries were not packed, and I could easily move around, even being able to sketch with little interruption. My hunch is that this show will attract a loyal audience—loyal to AIC, loyal to art history, and loyal to Cezanne as an artist. The general audience for art may likely continue to be confounded by (what are perceived as) clumsy paint handlings, lack of important theme, and a general unfinished-business quality to the body of work.
PART III:
After attending Morse’s lecture and thinking about what I caught and missed on the first day, I returned on the second day. These are among the things I noticed during the second visit:
I haven’t studied the dimensions precisely, but I was struck by how many of the canvases / formats seem to have a 5:6 aspect ratio, being a little bit longer or taller than a square. This preferred format was used for landscapes, still-lifes, and portraits. Not all of them but many of them. Also, having previously been aware of an informal or casual geometry in Cezanne’s compositions, I noticed in this show how many of them incorporate a subtle or not-so-subtle horizontal banding. As Morse pointed out, Cezanne returned to objects, motifs, and sites over and over again, which once the paintings are understood more deeply in their geo-cultural context made me wonder if it might be helpful to me to think of the artist as a “regionalist.” He was provincial.
The example below appeared even more green in person. I tried to capture geometry and rhythm in my sketch.
