POST 6

Option #2: Use your knowledge of Primitivism to analyze a painting by Henri Matisse, "Blue Nude: Souvenir at Biskra" (1907). First, consider how this female nude is different from other depictions of female nude that exist in Western art. Why is this work avant-garde? Using what you know from reading p. 174-177 ("Challenge of the Avant-Garde"), how can we interpret this painting as being influenced by primitivist ideas? Feel free to mention if/how this painting reminds you of any of Gauguin’s works. (Please note that Matisse is a Fauvist painter from the early 20th century. Although Matisse made this painting a few years after Gauguin’s death, we can still pinpoint some connections between these two artists via Primitivism.)

Henri Matisse, "Blue Nude: Sovenir at Biskra" (1907)

 

The female nude that is depicted in Henri Matisse’s “Blue Nude: souvenir at Biskra” is different from female nudes in Western art, because of many reasons. First she does not seem to be in a very relaxing pose though she is laying down, her feet look scrunched in to her body, and her left arm is pulled up above her head in a very unnatural pose. Secondly, she is very muscular comparative to normal Western female nudes, she has very toned arms, and torso, as well as her posterior isn’t very “not proportioned right”. Lastly she does not seem to have very “feminine” hair, it seems to be rather short and her face masculine. This work however is Avant-Garde because of the new “primitive” art movement, as we talk more about the term Avant-Garde, it seems to mean the new art form that did not exist before its time. 

Primitive art releases itself from the post-impressionists which paid a lot of attention to color and form and lighting, with strict attention to their surroundings. With Primitive art it pulls away from all of these things and looks back to the Egyptian and Greek art forms, which are more outlined subjects and solid block color backgrounds. 

This painting is influenced by primitive art because of, how she does not resemble traditional female nudes, and she is boldly outlined. As we look at the painting we see the bold strokes of colors not only on the woman but in the background. Let us talk about the woman first, she is a flat skin color in nature, with strokes of blue that try to show where the shadows on her body lay, this differs from previous art forms of the century because artists would of used other shades of nude to help form shadows and contours of her body, the blue color is not necessarily at question here, as impressionists would of most likely used that color too, but the primitive form only uses other colors to shadow the body form, and no other shades of nude. As we look at the background we can see that she is surrounded by bushes and ferns, but that is the image that out brain puts there, they are actually wide strokes of the artists brush that takes the shape of these things. 

Gauguin, "self-portrait"

Matisse’s painting resembles Gauguin’s works such as Gauguin’s, “self Portrait” we see the bold outlining again. As well as the “flowers” that are in the foreground only resemble flowers that our minds can put together. Another thing that we can compare from this specific painting is the apples in the back ground. If we pay attention to the red apple we see the shaded area of the apple is a light baby blue, showing that even though it is a red apple you do not have to use other shades of red to portray a shade and contour of the apple, and if we look at the background behind the green apple we see the shade on the, what seem to be a wall, which is baby blue again. Finally is the human form, unless Gauguin is morbidly obese and his shoulders rather rounded instead of broad, his attention to human form in his painting is almost thrown out the window, but we still get the idea that it’s a man, not an animal or alien of some sort.