American painting and its tradition : $b as represented by Inness, Wyant, Martin, Homer, La Farge, Whistler, Chase, Alexander, Sargent — John Shaqi
American painting and its tradition : $b as represented by Inness, Wyant, Martin, Homer, La Farge, Whistler, Chase, Alexander, SargentVan Dyke, John C.
History
American painting and its tradition : $b as represented by Inness, Wyant, Martin, Homer, La Farge, Whistler, Chase, Alexander, Sargent
Van Dyke, John C.
Painters -- United States; Painting -- United States
Back in Cincinnati and painting pictures after his own formula, Wyant
found a purchaser and a patron in Nicholas Longworth. It became
possible for him shortly thereafter to move to New York. There, in
1863, he saw a large exhibition of Düsseldorf pictures that probably
stirred his imagination. Pictures in America at that time were rather
scarce, and any exhibition of foreign work would be more impressive
then than now. The next year he exhibited at the National Academy
of Design for the first time, and in 1865 he went to Europe on a
Düsseldorf pilgrimage, impelled thereto by a mountain-and-waterfall
landscape of Gude which he had seen in New York.
He went straight to Gude at Carlsruhe and put himself under his
tutelage. Gude was a Norwegian painter, influenced by Dahl, and
imbued with the Düsseldorf method and point of view. The grand
landscape--panoramic in extent and mountainous in height, with a hot
sun in the heavens--was then in vogue, and Achenbach was its prophet.
From Wyant’s short stay with Gude it seems that his enthusiasm was
soon chilled down to zero. In after-life he often referred to the
great kindness of Gude and his wife, but he seemed to think that his
instruction in art had been fundamentally wrong. His pupil, Bruce
Crane, says that he spoke of his art environment there as being “a
miserable one,” and Wyant believed that “environment played the greater
part in the making of a painter for good or bad.”
He left Gude and started back to America, but stopped on the way
in England and Ireland, where he studied pictures and painted some
of his own. The old masters in the National Gallery apparently did
not make a strong appeal to him. His work shows no sign of Claude,
Salvator, Poussin, Ruysdael, Hobbema, or Cuyp. Even Gainsborough and
the ascendant Turner seem to have left him cold. But Constable he
liked very much. Here at last was a man seeing things in a large way
and doing them with breadth of brush. Moreover, he was doing simple
transcripts of nature, not the panorama of blazing perspective. In
America Wyant had inherited something of the spectacular from his
Hudson River predecessors; Düsseldorf had aided the conception, and
Turner had abetted it; but Constable seemed to be against it. Wyant was
inclined to renounce it. Constable produced the broad realistic look,
and at that time Wyant had probably not arrived at any other conception
of art than as a large transcript of nature. Ruskin’s doctrine of
fidelity to fact was in the air, and the landscape as emotional
expression, or as a symphony, or even as a decorative pattern, was
little known either in the studios or the critic’s den. There was,
however, plenty of controversy going on. And yet fresh from varying
theories and impressions, Wyant went over to Ireland and painted
pictures that bore no earmark of any painter or any school.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account