Cubism And Surrealism

While the painters after the Impressionism period were collectively called the “Post-Impressionists,” the label is quite reductive. Each artist had their own unique style, from Seurat’s pointillism to Signac’s mosaic-like divisionism, Cezanne, Émile Bernard, and others. These artists were all connected in that they were reacting to the aesthetics of Impressionism. Two of the more influential painters from this movement were Vincent van Gogh and Paul Gauguin, who aimed to connect with viewers on a deeper level by access Nature’s mystery and meaning beyond its superficial, observable level. However, each artist’s approach to achieving this goal was different. In close examination of Vincent van Gogh’s Self-Portrait (Dedicated to Paul Gauguin) and Paul Gauguin’s Self-Portrait with Portrait of Émile Bernard (Les misérables), one may clearly see the two artists’ contrasting styles on display.

It is composed of geometrical shapes, abstraction and time. There are no specific colors or objects used. Cubists were looking for a different way to express human form as well as art in general. They provided what we could almost call a God's-eye view of reality: every aspect of the whole subject, seen simultaneously in a single dimension. According to Fiero, the Cubist image, conceived as if one were moving around, above, and below the subject and even perceiving it from within, appropriated the fourth dimension-time itself. In a sense, Cubism is four-dimensional: depth, height, breath, and time, but seen all at once. It displays different viewpoints from different aspects. The object is taken and looked at in many perspectives and is represented that way on the canvas.

On the other hand, Vincent van Gogh did not do any cubism work during his time as an artist, however, had more of an interest in drawing. Pablo Picasso had an interest in drawing too, but unlike his work, Vincent van Gogh’s drawings are appreciated without the need for bright colours, drawings such as his depiction of figures, light and landscape. Van Gogh drew using a lot of different media, such as chalks, red pen and charcoal, although he often mixed mediums as well when it came to drawing. He drew on not just paper, but a variety of paper types, and materials. However, Van Gogh’s methods of ‘drawing’ are very different to Pablo Picasso’s.

Picasso's innovations expanded our minds and actually went to the art. His work has influenced many art and research not only in the art world, but also influenced the sculpture, architecture and music. The CUBIST movement revolutionized many of the world's features. This has provoked a new thinking process, which leads to a new style and deep in the sense. It changed the way to see the world. Picasso's Cubism is trusted as the greatest break in the art history since the Renaissance revolution. The Picasso artist's "rules" gave to the people. His analytical cubism transformed the paintings from a single perspective to many perspectives and broke geometric shapes. His later cubism, Synthetic Cubism it’s developed by use of daily

Kandinsky transformed colour into a completely abstract art absolutely divorced from subject matter. The fauvists and expressionists shared an appreciation of the pure and simplified shapes of various examples of primitive art, an enthusiasm that was generated by Gauguin and extended to Picasso, Brancusi, Modigliani, Derain, and others.

Every artist has his or her own style of painting. Each painting tells some sort of story or has some type of personal meaning to the artist. One of the most important figures in modern art is Pablo Picasso. Not only was Pablo Picasso a genius in the field of abstract art, but he also experimented with sculpting and ceramics. Pablo Picasso has taken the world to many places with his unique style of work which is why I believe he is considered to be a genius of the 20th century.

The painting shows man and nature in harmony. A clear sign that he focused mostly on drawing is the geometric forms used in the painting. He used very calm tonality to give it the calmness. His artwork and brushwork are very fluid and focused. This painting has no historical meaning because this painting was after his transition from historical to landscape. Instead of telling a story it is supposed to evoke a calm mood. The golden light contributes to its peacefulness. Now that I have explained both paintings individually, in the following paragraph I will talk about their differences and what makes them different.

He forever changed the world and had a huge impact on the 20th century. He believe that they should do away with so much art that impresses the eye and rather make them mind travel.

He tended to explore the darker aspects of life and death in his paintings. Rebelling against conventional ideas- divine intervention, Virgin Mary, and death- he came to create his own style, forcing civilization ahead, and forcing others to follow his path. His paintings show pleading through man's direct knowledge of God (Cunningham and Reich 1640). By revolting against the classical traditions, he created his own style, which other artists wished to portray also. Thus, he created a forward movement in the fashion of art and architecture.

His early paintings had an unconventional, unique, and unfinished look about them. The images were known to everyone in everyday life.

“He merged American visual culture into European avant-garde (modern art) design, integrating Cubism, Constructivism, the Bauhaus and De Stijl into his work.” (Reed, Norah)

His artworks have a distinctive impact on the viewer, which makes them distinguishable among any other artwork of the time. His paintings had had a strong influence on the artists of the future.

The first painting, “Under the Birches, Evening”, is done by Pierre Etienne Theodore Rousseau. He

An Old Master’s painting provides for the viewer the possibility of being part of the space created as an illusion of depth by the painters, and this in itself characterizes how these painters found their own different way of challenging painting compared to what it previously used to be, by breaking the limits of painting defined by the medium. And on the contrary, Modernist paintings focusing on the flatness of the pictorial plane give the viewer the possibility to travel through the painting “only with the eye” (experienced by Manet and Impressionist painters). But, Greenberg insists that being self-critical doesn't suggest that leading painting into the extreme abstraction is the answer to Modernist painting (he gives the example of Kandinsky and Mondrian).

the painting is a synthesis of numerous sketches made by the painter a year earlier in Collioure,