Over the Xmas break I went to see the Gauguin show at the Tate. I had seen another blockbluster show years ago at the National in Washington D.C.
Washington. National Gallery of Art. "The Art of Paul Gauguin," May 1–July 31, 1988
and was interested to see how the two shows compared.
The Tate themed the show to include Gauguin's perception of his subjects, especially Tahiti, and also included more of his carved and clay pieces. That goddess, for example, that you can see in many of his paintings is actually a clay piece by Gauguin; by the time he got to Tahiti the French missionaries had converted many of the population so indigenous gods and goddesses were not around as visual elements. I have always liked Gauguin's use of colour, his purples and greens are used as both colour and tone, and the post-impressionist imagery was influential to a wide group of artists. His weaving together of reality and myth in a seamless style is very convincing. The exhibit also discussed his professional practice, if you want to call it that, because historically and personally his version of life was quite questionable when compared to a study of colonisation during that period. In pursuit of his art, he also left his family in search of a paradise to paint during a period when artistic success did not necessarily bring wealth. I thought the show was well put together, 11 rooms with two 'historical rooms' that explained the history of the artist's work and the places he worked in, and I wold recommend a visit. Interestingly the business of art, the Tate, also sent 2 followup emails about the show with a Twitter facility. I passed these onto my daughter who had to review the show for an application...
No comments:
Post a Comment