So Kittelsen's fairytale illustrations are seen as "more" than just illustrations in Norway, if that makes sense? They have in a way received another dimension of being "typical Norwegian" and part of the "Norwegian ideological make-up". That makes perfect sense. In a way it might be compared with the xylographic illustrations Ludwig Richter designed for Ludwig Bechstein's fairy tale collection in 1853/57. They were the most popular fairy tale illustrations for decades and at the same time they were considered to be genuinely German ("volkstümlich"). The reception of certain artists is sometimes nearly as thrilling as art itself: tells a lot about the wishes and ideas of the reviewing society/culture.
Norwegian Art Historical writing have been very focused on the development of Expressionism and Modernism It's strange (and sad) how little art history has been written on topics that does not relate to the "typical" European countries (Italy, France, Germany, etc.), even Ireland is a step child in art history. When I visited Krakow I saw a lot of really fascinating works of Polish artists of the late 19th century. And the museums shops did not even had a catalogue in English. I was so disappointed, because the language barrier makes these topics nearly unavailable for me. And that's only one example... It's really a shame, that Munch is the only artist that comes to my mind, when I think of Norwegian art. And I remember a conversation with fellow art historian students about Scandinavian art in general and they summarized it: well, there is not much to talk about. *head-desk* So much arrogance is really annoying. Do I have to mention that one of them specialised on Italian Baroque painting. Is there anything more traditional to do?
Any reason why you chose to focus on the Tristan and Isolde legend? A rather nostalgic one. I love the Arthurian legends since I was a small child, reading the comic books of Prince Valiant and other related stuff etc. I simply liked the imagery, I think: the idea of noble warriors having glorious adventures. As the Arthurian legends (mostly around the love triangle Arthur, Guenevere, Lancelot)is covered by a lot of literature, I was looking for something less popular and more German and ended by Gottfried von Straßburg's Tristan. I wanted to focus on German art first, but did not find enough material and most of the works were highly influenced by Richard Wagner. So I took Great Britain instead and was rather happy about this, because so I could work on English art as well which I am still very interested in. Beardsley's drawings to Malory's Morte D'Arthur (that's the text source for Tristan in the UK) are simply fantastic...
How did you come to be so interested in the German Wilhelmine epoch or in German art in general???
. But since it is art things can be allowed to go over the top, I think that's exactly the point. Watching these works of art the viewer knows that he does not see reality but a "Inszenierung". He does not pseudo-witness a political event that is presented by means of realism as in the paintings of Anton von Werner or Ilija Repin, etc. And so he can indulge in this most theatrically production. In the "realistic" political paintings the "Inszenierung" (I don't know the English term for this)is more subtle. I think in these cases the visual mechanics are better compared to the propaganda messages in modern war films. Do you know, what I mean? I haven't had time to read your post on war films. I don't like this genre much, I cannot handle the patriotism and war-enthusiasm that is somehow always there. It scares me. 300, though not really a war film, was full of this pseudo-heroic rant.
((an yay for completing the thesis btw! Must be great to soon be finished.) Oh, it is. Believe me. But frightening as well, considering the future and the disputation... Better not going there :-))
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-09-14 06:56 pm (UTC)That makes perfect sense. In a way it might be compared with the xylographic illustrations Ludwig Richter designed for Ludwig Bechstein's fairy tale collection in 1853/57. They were the most popular fairy tale illustrations for decades and at the same time they were considered to be genuinely German ("volkstümlich"). The reception of certain artists is sometimes nearly as thrilling as art itself: tells a lot about the wishes and ideas of the reviewing society/culture.
It's strange (and sad) how little art history has been written on topics that does not relate to the "typical" European countries (Italy, France, Germany, etc.), even Ireland is a step child in art history. When I visited Krakow I saw a lot of really fascinating works of Polish artists of the late 19th century. And the museums shops did not even had a catalogue in English. I was so disappointed, because the language barrier makes these topics nearly unavailable for me. And that's only one example... It's really a shame, that Munch is the only artist that comes to my mind, when I think of Norwegian art. And I remember a conversation with fellow art historian students about Scandinavian art in general and they summarized it: well, there is not much to talk about. *head-desk* So much arrogance is really annoying. Do I have to mention that one of them specialised on Italian Baroque painting. Is there anything more traditional to do?
A rather nostalgic one. I love the Arthurian legends since I was a small child, reading the comic books of Prince Valiant and other related stuff etc. I simply liked the imagery, I think: the idea of noble warriors having glorious adventures. As the Arthurian legends (mostly around the love triangle Arthur, Guenevere, Lancelot)is covered by a lot of literature, I was looking for something less popular and more German and ended by Gottfried von Straßburg's Tristan. I wanted to focus on German art first, but did not find enough material and most of the works were highly influenced by Richard Wagner. So I took Great Britain instead and was rather happy about this, because so I could work on English art as well which I am still very interested in. Beardsley's drawings to Malory's Morte D'Arthur (that's the text source for Tristan in the UK) are simply fantastic...
How did you come to be so interested in the German Wilhelmine epoch or in German art in general???
I think that's exactly the point. Watching these works of art the viewer knows that he does not see reality but a "Inszenierung". He does not pseudo-witness a political event that is presented by means of realism as in the paintings of Anton von Werner or Ilija Repin, etc. And so he can indulge in this most theatrically production. In the "realistic" political paintings the "Inszenierung" (I don't know the English term for this)is more subtle. I think in these cases the visual mechanics are better compared to the propaganda messages in modern war films. Do you know, what I mean? I haven't had time to read your post on war films. I don't like this genre much, I cannot handle the patriotism and war-enthusiasm that is somehow always there. It scares me. 300, though not really a war film, was full of this pseudo-heroic rant.
( Oh, it is. Believe me. But frightening as well, considering the future and the disputation... Better not going there :-))