art History Exam Please help by 30/01/06

[prairie dog]

For my exam I need to compare two artists from different periods/ movements that worked in one or more of the feilds of Portraiture/ figure composition / Still Life / Natural Environment / Built environment, (predferably more than one field.

I was considering studying Manet but am unsure of who to compare him with in the above fields. Plese can you suggest a suitable artist for comparing and contrasting with Manet that fits the criteria . Or can you syggest a pair of artists that would also suitably work in comparison.

Please help I am becoming slightly desperate.Thank you!

[Buenchico]

(2-part post):

I know next to nothing about art history but I love a challenge! I've asked myself what I would write about if I had to try to bluff my way through an exam such as the one which you're facing. To do this, I've spent quite some time looking at this wonderful website:
http://www.artcyclopedia.com/
(Even if you don't like my ideas, you should find some inspiration there).
I quickly gave up using Manet as a starting point. Like you, I couldn't really find someone to compare him with. After a lot of searching I came up with the rather unlikely pairing of Vincent van Gogh and Andy Warhol. (OK, I know it might sound like an odd combination but, if you can't find differences between their styles, then you're definitely on the wrong course!).

[Buenchico]

Both worked in Portraiture:
Here's Van Gogh's 'Man With a Pipe':
http://search.famsf.org:8080/view.shtml?keywords=%67%6F% 67%68&artist=&country=&period=&sort=& ;start=1&position=4&record=61073
and here's Warhol's 'Marilyn Monroe - Orange':
http://www.allposters.co.uk/gallery.asp?aid=85097&it em=382978&Referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eartcyclopedia% 2Ecom%2Fartists%2Fwarhol%5Fandy%2Ehtml&SAID=85097&am p;SAIDTime=1%2F28%2F2006+3%3A37%3A43+PM&maid=85097&a mp;AffClickThroughID=678600245

Both worked with the Natural Environment:
Here's Van Gogh's 'Bank of the Oise at Auvers':
http://www.dia.org/the_collection/overview/full.asp?obje ctID=46068&image=1
and here's Warhol's 'Flowers':
http://search.famsf.org:8080/view.shtml?keywords=&ar tist=%77%61%72%68%6F%6C&country=&period=&sor t=&start=1&position=6&record=1540

Both worked with Still Life:
Here's Van Gogh's untitled still life:

00:03 Sun 29th Jan 2006

[dotjhawkes]

Good choice there, i was thinking Warhol but havn't got around to anything else!

[Buenchico]

(Eek! I've been edited!)

Here's Van Gogh's untitled still life:
http://search.famsf.org:8080/view.shtml?keywords=%67%6F% 67%68&artist=&country=&period=&sort=& ;start=1&position=6&record=64346
and here's Warhol's 'Campbell Soup Series II 1968 Old Fashion' :
http://www.allposters.co.uk/gallery.asp?aid=85097&it em=290829&Referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eartcyclopedia% 2Ecom%2Fartists%2Fwarhol%5Fandy%2Ehtml&SAID=85097&am p;SAIDTime=1%2F28%2F2006+3%3A50%3A46+PM&maid=85097&a mp;AffClickThroughID=678606942

Finally here are the links to Artcyclopedia's entries for the two artists:
van Gogh: http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/van_gogh_vincent.ht ml
Warhol: http://www.artcyclopedia.com/artists/warhol_andy.html

I hope that this is of some use. (Even if it's not, I enjoyed working on your question!).

Chris

[gary baldy]

I wasnt going to bother answering this one ( i think prairie dog should be trying a bit harder - but thats the ex-teacher coming out in me!) but seeing as chris went to so much trouble....!
One of the most interesting contemporary artists (IMHO) is Robert Mapplethope. He's a photographer so i dont know if he fits the bill but his portraiture and figurative work is amazing if somewhat pornographic. But along with this he has done some beautiful still life , flowers mainly, which also manages to be very erotic.
Would be interesting to compare his forms with some one more 'traditional' and from a completely diferent period, such as Manet.

[Buenchico]

Following on from Gary's comments:

It seems that two ex-teachers can both disagree and agree at the same time! I take great care to avoid simply answering 'homework' questions but, when someone just needs 'pointing in the right direction', I'm happy to contribute. (Even if Prairie Dog accepts my suggestions, there's still a great deal of work to be done in finding ways to describe the differences in style between Van Gogh and Warhol. So I've only provided 'pointers' rather than 'answers').

It's interesting, however, that Gary suggests a photographer as half of the duo to be used for comparitive purposes. This was also my first thought but I pushed it to one side in case it wouldn't be acceptable to the examiners.

Gary suggests Robert Mapplethorpe as a contemporary artist to make comparisons with. Mapplethorpe is certainly an accomplished photographer. His photography of the male body, together with his still life work (notably with flowers) has received critical acclaim from around the world. If I was looking for an artist to 'compare and contrast' with Mapplethorpe, my first thoughts would go to Rubens. A comparison of Rubens' techniques with the female form and Mapplethorpe's male nudes would certainly make for interesting reading.

So, Prairie Dog, if you're looking for a different perspective, Robert Mapplethorpe could be a suitable choice as a contemporary photographer. Having written that, I have to say that, while I recognise Mapplethorpe's talent and skill, his work doesn't 'do anything' for me. If you really want to find a photographer to 'compare and contrast' with a classical artist, then I would suggest my favourite living photograper, Martin Parr. (Other candidates would have to include Robert Doisneau or the the ultimate master, Henri Cartier-Bresson).

Chris

[jno]

lumme Chris, how did you manage to get edited at Saturday midnight? The Ed is supposed to be in bed by then...

You could compare Manet's Olympia with Titian's Venus of Urbino, on which it was based, or perhaps Goya's Naked Maja for the different ways they handled nudity and titillation. But it's hard to compare Manet's whole career with anyone else's. Perhaps you could do Van Gogh and Rembrandt - two Dutchmen who often did self-portraits becaue they couldn't afford models. How do the results differ?

[prairie dog]

Wow! I really did not expect anyone to answer me and just think I'm trying to cheat, and I definately didn't think there would be such depth of answer, ( so much in fact I'm kind of regretting asking in the first place, it has all kind of confused me.) I thank you all so much, and especially Chris who obviously went to alot of trouble, thank you.

I have previously looked at comparing and contrasting Van Gogh and Warhol, but just their self-portraits, and I wasn't sure about using them again due to being a bit uncertain about the depth to which Warhol worked in the other fields. THank you for giving me that idea and for all your research(of which I hesitate to use for fear of really cheating, but thank you al the same, and at midnight!).

About the suggestion of Robert Mapplethorpe, I am not sure about the use of a photographer, it probably won't be wrong, just it just semms out with the norm, and I kind of want to stick within theat norm for feart of failing, if you know what I mean. Also, his use of obvious, if slightly pornographic and homoerotic, nudity may also be frowned upon. However I have researced him a bit and he does seem quiet a viable option, but I am uneasy about it. THankyou very much all the same.

THank you jno for the examples for comparison with 'Olympia', I had been trying to find something like that for direct comparison, yet as many people have said, the artists might not rellly fit well in comparison with Manet.

Again thank you for all your sugestions, I guess now I will have to spend the rest of the day using all this information. Thank you

[jake-the-peg]

If you're thinking of Manet a really interesting comparison might be with Turner.

Manet is a hugely important impressionist - painting what you might see if you looked at it.

Now take a look at this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/paintingtheweather/assets/tour/picture/turner.jpg

Impressionism no? Well no! you see Turner was 30 years too early and distictly, well not French.

You could do a really interesting comparison between the two and examine whether or not Turner deserves to be thought of as the first impressionist

[willh]

Prairie dog:
I know it is late after your final but:

I would have suggested another French contemporary or two. If not a contemporary, someone in or around France about the same time period. The two artists I would utilize to compare Manet to would be two lesser know artists of the time James Tissot and Edouard Debat-Ponsan. Tissot for comparative figures to Manet with his lewd direct stares and Debat-Ponsan for a great comparative of �Olympia� and �The Massage�

Now I am curious what did you use for your final exam? And how was it graded.

willh

[prairie dog]

I have to admit I did research alot of the suggestions put forward but I got slightly confused and went a bit off-task. I was looking through the book of 20th centuary artists, trying to find two artists and after narrowing it down to a long shortlist I ended up going for. . . . Christo and Jeanne Claude, the artists that 'wrapped' the Reichstag amongst many other things, and the Boyle family, the family who make hyper-realistic fiberglass replicas of random areas of land. I researched their work in responce to the Natural/Built environment. My teacher seemed to be so pleased with my originality and intence intrest in the artists ( yeah, sure) that I ended up getting full marks for that part of the exam, and having my work, embarassingly, held up as an examlpe of what to do!

I'm sorry I din't pursue any of your suggestions, but hey I still have a note of them all and no doubt they'll come in handy sometime. Thanks again.

[mummytait]

Cool

I'm really impressed you used sculptors. They're too often overlooked and I think it's a really original way of thinking. I'm glad you got full marks and i enjoyed reading all the answers to your question.