Realism – Is It Necessary?
Realism. Necessary or not? Good question. I’ve often pondered this question myself having tried many styles of artwork throughout my life. Now that I’ve embraced realistic form and lighting in my artwork, I often question whether or not I made the right decision.
When visual art first came on the scene, one of its primary functions was to record persons, places, things and events that were going on at the time. Lack of education was rampant. People relied on pictures to help them understand their world. The current King had his portrait painted. Stories from religious texts were brought to life. The latest land war was commemorated in oils.
Photography didn’t exist yet. Interpretation by an artist was the only way to keep a record of what was going on. In this regard, Realism could only help the cause and, if you know your art history, you’ll see how artwork progresses basically from pictographs to the beautifully fleshed out, fully formed masterpieces of the high renaissance. This was not an accident.
For years High Realism dominated the world of Art. Chances are, if you couldn’t produce artwork in a realistic fashion, it didn’t get taken seriously and was probably never seen. In fact, this penchant for Realism is what turned artists away from it around the turn of the 20th century.
In France they would have a yearly art show called the Salon or the Paris Salon. Its major dominance was during the late 19th century when it was widely recognized as the largest and most important art show in the western world. It was a great honour to be accepted into it. If your artwork was not good enough to make the cut, you were turned away presumably while the admissions committee laughed at your humbled shoulders as you slouched away — merde.
By the late 19th century the Impressionist movement was in full swing and many artists and their artworks were refused entry into the show. The uproar that ensued spawned the birth of the Salon Des Refuses, a collateral show which featured all the artists who were ‘refused’ by the regular Salon. The birth of this second Salon was the fracture point that would shatter the art world and the stranglehold that Realism had on it. Impressionism led the way for Dadaism, Surrealism, Abstraction and eventually the train wreck that was Abstract Expressionism and Modernism. Yeesh! Talk about thinking yourself right into a hole. But I digress…
At the time that Impressionism was gaining popularity, so was a little known documenting method called the Daguerrotype, an early type of photograph. Photography was born and immediately started underminding everything that Art used to be for. Artists no longer needed to paint portraits – patrons could be photographed. Events no longer needed to be commemorated – they could be photographed. It’s a good thing that impressionism’s bruised ego spoke up or else Art may have died a horrible death right there!
Realism in Art was born out of a necessity for its frank nature. When a renaissance artist painted an apple, the viewer new it was an apple. There was no capacity for it to be an abstract green cow. That would have been unthinkable then — not so much these day, I think. There have been so many new art movements since the beginning of the 20th century that just about anything can be considered Art as long as it can be defended.
Now that we have some background on why Realism came to the fore and why we can now question it, lets get back to the original query, is Realism necessary?
For my own work I’d say yes, at least at this stage of the game.
When I was little, I started honing my skills as a draughtsman. I really liked the challenge of making my drawings look exactly like my subjects. Now, there is nothing that I can’t photographically reproduce with a pencil. Just because you don’t see anything like that here on my website doesn’t mean I can’t do it.
The level of skill I acheived with graphite made me want to hone my skills as a painter as well. Ever since I picked up a paintbrush, I’ve been working to further my abilities at depicting higher and higher levels of realism. Even though I dabbled at Abstraction and Expressionism for awhile I always came home to Realism. Now, after painting for more than half my life, I’ve reached a level where I’m comfortable at depicting just about anything. Is it photo-realistic? No. But it’s realistic enough for me and for my viewers.
I think, for my own work it has helped my credibility. I work with subjects that don’t exist. The situations I put them in are real enough and the topics I choose to discuss are real too, but the characters I populate my paintings with have never lived beyond my mind. I’m not working from a model or a photograph. I’ve got to pull them out of my head and give them life on canvas and the more life-like I can make them, the more powerful they become. I don’t think my work would have half the power it does if I went abstract with it or cartoonish. Realism is what cements my concepts and gives them validity.
What about your work? Will Realism lend your artwork more strength or hinder it? Will Realism bring more life to your characters or squash it out of them? The power in your work may come from your brushstrokes or your mark making capabilities. Realism certainly won’t help there. Perhaps your work is more emotional and is based on bold fields of colour. Realism won’t help there either.
One of the problems with going realistic is that you create a universe in which there are very rigid and strictly defined rules, not unlike the world in which we live. Of course, like the movie “The Matrix” some of these rules can be bent and others can be broken but on the whole they’re set in stone and, if you don’t follow them, elements of your artwork will not feel right to the viewer. The background, foreground, middle ground, the characters – all the elements have to coalesce into one artwork or else the illusion of Realism will be shot.
Due to this confinement within a set of rigid walls, I find Realism to be a much more difficult path to follow than one of abstraction. If your intention is to paint an apple then it better damn well look like an apple. In this scenario your reputation as an artist is riding on your ability to depict things realistically. Like the Paris Salon of old, if you do a poor job, people will let you know and you’ll be sent packing with laughter at your back.
So, is Realism necessary? No. Not today anyway. There are all kinds of artistic expressions outside the realm of Realism and they all have their positive and negative aspects. Is Realism right for you? Only you can answer that for yourself. Your artistic path may not be leading you down the road of Realism and that’s okay. Since the fall of Realism’s dominance as the only way to work, the floodgates have opened – pick your poison.
Abstraction. Expressionism. Abstract Expressionism. Cubism. Surrealism. Abstacto-Cubic-Surreal-Express-Actionism? No matter what you do, generally speaking, you’ll always find a proponent or two who’ll be willing to extol the virutes of your artwork. Someone will be in your corner.
I’ll tell you this though. Something I’ve found out through my own artistic journey is that people will always respect realistic depictions in Art whether the artist is depicting an apple, the “Mona Lisa” or pumpkin headed men with a social agenda like me. The ablility to bring to life a three dimensional scene on a two dimensional surface will always be lauded above other forms of artwork by professionals and common folk alike. Viewers respect the illusion.
I don’t want to sound immodest but the skills it takes to depict things realistically in Art outweigh the skills to not depict things realistically in Art – and people know this. To give you an example…
Take someone who knows absolutely nothing about Art. Put him infront of a Jackson Pollock painting and the “Raft of the Medusa” by Gericault. Give him a moment to ponder both pieces and see which one he turns to first and says “I could do that”.
This is of course a matter for the ego, not Art. If you couldn’t care less about opinions based on your artwork then who cares if it’s respected for being realistic or not. The whole scenario is moot. So…
Is realism necessary? In the end, you must decide for yourself.
For now, that is all. Goodnight.
