Vasily Vereshchagin "Indian poem"

[Ren Ren]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Picture, photo, Shamshir

Vereshchagin is absolutely correct in detail. This is his personal style.

[mahratt]

Turkestan

[mahratt]

Turkestan

[ariel]

Vereshchagin's pictures reflected fascination of the 19th century Western artists with the "mysterious Orient": he was a Russian Gerome. Both painted Muslim soldiers carrying exotic weapons and dressed in exotic garb. In the absense of photography their paintings are our best source of iconographic information, although their complete veracity cannot be vouched for. Orientalism was heavily Romantic. Studio portraits and use of props were customary. One can only wonder how Central Asian nomads, Egyptian soldiers or Ottoman bashibouzuks managed all wear impeccably clean clothes of heavily saturated colors not faded by the unrelenting sunlight and not given to dirt, dust, wear and tear.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Vereshchagin's pictures reflected fascination of the 19th century Western artists with the "mysterious Orient": he was a Russian Gerome. Both painted Muslim soldiers carrying exotic weapons and dressed in exotic garb. In the absense of photography their paintings are our best source of iconographic information, although their complete veracity cannot be vouched for. Orientalism was heavily Romantic. Studio portraits and use of props were customary. One can only wonder how Central Asian nomads, Egyptian soldiers or Ottoman bashibouzuks managed all wear impeccably clean clothes of heavily saturated colors not faded by the unrelenting sunlight and not given to dirt, dust, wear and tear.

Vereshchagin was not an artist who paints in the studio. He was a direct participant in the events that depict. Of course, like any talented artist, he could embellish some type, which created on the canvas.

Originally Posted by estcrh

The Russian artist’s international legacy is that of a military painter. He had his first taste of war at the age of 26 when he accompanied the Russian Army, under General Konstantin Kaufman on an expedition to modern day Uzbekistan. He was decorated with the Cross of St George for bravery shown during the siege of Samarkand. His future paintings were greatly influenced by what he witnessed during the wars.

Despite Vereshchagin’s beautiful illustrations of India, his legacy remains that of a military artist, who witnessed and documented wars.

More than a century after his death, no single artist, photographer or journalist has come anywhere close to documenting wars and conflicts the way Vasily Vereshchagin did.

But if someone does not have enough dust, dirt and torn clothes, it is known that the Vereshchagin portrayed and this too (because he was trying to show the reality):

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Vereshchagin was not an artist who paints in the studio. He was a direct participant in the events that depict. :

Originally Posted by estcrh

Emir Seyyid Mir Mohammed Alim Khan, the Emir of Bukhara, seated holding a sword in Bukhara, (present-day Uzbekistan), ca. 1910, early original color photograph.:

Come on, guys!

This is art, let's not forget it.


The emir from the Prokudin-Gorski's photograph was posing for a color photo-portrait. Of course, he was asked to wear his most colorful khalat ( being rich did not hurt him, either)

And of course, Vereshchagin painted in the studio. Are we to believe that he set his easel right in front of the Turkomans cutting off human heads? Or that he stood behind the Turkoman horde about to annihilate a small band of Russian soldiers?

Or are we to believe that Ingres was given free access to the harem to paint sultan's naked concubines?

There is no doubt that Vereshchagin tried to be as close to the truth as possible, but so was Rembrandt , whose Samson was blinded with a... Balinese keris:-)

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Come on, guys!

This is art, let's not forget it.

The emir from the Prokudin-Gorski's photograph was posing for a color photo-portrait. Of course, he was asked to wear his most colorful khalat ( being rich did not hurt him, either)

And of course, Vereshchagin painted in the studio. Are we to believe that he set his easel right in front of the Turkomans cutting off human heads? Or that he stood behind the Turkoman horde about to annihilate a small band of Russian soldiers?

Or are we to believe that Ingres was given free access to the harem to paint sultan's naked concubines?

There is no doubt that Vereshchagin tried to be as close to the truth as possible, but so was Rembrandt , whose Samson was blinded with a... Balinese keris:-)

We know that Vereshchagin made sketches from nature. Of course, he did not paint during battles. At this time, it is as an ordinary soldier, fought in the ranks of his comrades. This is, in the memoirs of his contemporaries.

But he saw Russian soldiers, the inhabitants of Bukhara and battles. And show us the battles and other terrible pictures helped his memory.

Vereshchagin saw all that and then depict. He was at the center of these developments. And not in a quiet studio ... Therefore, his paintings so accurate in detail. Maybe you point out errors in the pictures Vereshchagin? Such like Balinese keris Rembrandt?

Thank you in advance.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Come on, guys!

This is art, let's not forget it.


The emir from the Prokudin-Gorski's photograph was posing for a color photo-portrait. Of course, he was asked to wear his most colorful khalat ( being rich did not hurt him, either)

And of course, Vereshchagin painted in the studio. Are we to believe that he set his easel right in front of the Turkomans cutting off human heads? Or that he stood behind the Turkoman horde about to annihilate a small band of Russian soldiers?

Or are we to believe that Ingres was given free access to the harem to paint sultan's naked concubines?

There is no doubt that Vereshchagin tried to be as close to the truth as possible, but so was Rembrandt , whose Samson was blinded with a... Balinese keris:-)

Supposedly Eugene Delacroix was allowed access to an Algerian household during a 3 month North African journey, he was said to have actually been allowed to view the female household/harem, something most painters had to imagine or paint from discriptions told to them. He is said to have filled sketch books with drawings of what he saw during his travels.

Along with sketches made while visiting foreign countries some painters did in fact use photographs to capture the memories of what they saw.

Photography makes it possible to incorporate elements in a painting that would be impossible to do otherwise. Certain fleeting lighting conditions for example would long be gone before most artists had the opportunity to set one’s palette, let alone collect the visual data necessary to replicate a scene in the style of high realism.

To this end, the amazing 19th Century Academician, Jean Leon Gerome, used photographs extensively in his process. In fact, he traveled with a photographer on his numerous excursions to the Middle East, specifically for the purpose of gathering the degree of information necessary to execute his brilliant Orientalist paintings.

Would it have been possible for Gerome to create these paintings without using photography, by simply working from life? Personally, I don’t think so, because before Gerome, no artist had ever achieved anything near the same level of illusionistic atmospheric realism so effectively and prolifically.

Before photography was invented, artists used a vast array of devices and strategies to augment their ability to record the world around them. Once photography appeared on the scene, however, realism “coincidently” took a big leap forward.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Vereshchagin's pictures reflected fascination of the 19th century Western artists with the "mysterious Orient": he was a Russian Gerome. Both painted Muslim soldiers carrying exotic weapons and dressed in exotic garb. In the absense of photography their paintings are our best source of iconographic information, although their complete veracity cannot be vouched for. Orientalism was heavily Romantic. Studio portraits and use of props were customary. One can only wonder how Central Asian nomads, Egyptian soldiers or Ottoman bashibouzuks managed all wear impeccably clean clothes of heavily saturated colors not faded by the unrelenting sunlight and not given to dirt, dust, wear and tear.

Ariel, you can not simply group all painters from that time period together as "orientalist" as a way to discredit the accuracy of their paintings, although I do see this happening a lot. Many painters visited the areas they painted, some for extended periods of time and they took great pride in factually painting what they saw, while others may have not been so detailed, you have to examine the painting individually before making judgements.

As for the often seen (but not always) paintings of clean, colorful clothing and the people wearing them, I have wondered about that myself, especially when you see someone wearing all white, but photographs from the same time periods can show that this was not just imagination.

Emir Seyyid Mir Mohammed Alim Khan, the Emir of Bukhara, seated holding a sword in Bukhara, (present-day Uzbekistan), ca. 1910, early original color photograph.