When it comes to the visual arts, I am a bit of a dabbler.
(Some might even say a bit of a babbler.)
But I think I know the good stuff when I see it.
And I saw some today at the MFA’s Monet exhibit.
Impressionists don’t care about reproducing reality.
That’s what photographs are for.
The real challenge, as Monet saw it, was to create something that doesn’t look like a photo.
But conveys the imaginative spirit of a scene better than a photo ever could.
Take this painting, for example.
When you look closely at the canvas, you see colors that are simply not part of a natural snowscape.
The painter translates the scene into an impression.
And the viewer’s imagination translates that impression into a form that is more real than the actual reality.
Which is more real?
Monet’s scene is in Normandy, whereas this is Cuckmere Haven near Seaford, with the Seven Sisters in the background.
Whether on the French or English coast, the topography is remarkably similar.
Painting or photo? You decide.
This is Monet’s vision of Charing Cross Bridge in London.
With Parliament and Big Ben in the background.
This is the same scene. With a lot more pink.
Here is the artist with her subject.
The woman, the myth, the legend:
Capturing the essence of rural England delight.
(I believe this is called a “selfie”.)
And here she immortalizes the moment of total tiramisu tastiness.
Peak pedi pandemonium!
You want pink? I’ll give you pink!
What astounding powers of composition!
The word “iconic” is grotesquely overused.
But this masterwork surely qualifies.
Speaking of pink, Erin was the one who designed the totally groovy letter J for my blog’s home page.
Painting or photo? Depends on what you are trying to accomplish.
Both can be pretty.