depiction of war in art
Serge
I am doing a project on the depiction of war in art. I want to
research trends, patterns, and changes in the depiction of war in the
eastern world vs those factors in the depiction of war in the western
world. I am wondering if anybody here has any knowledge on this matter
and can help me formulate a topic that I can get information on (as of
now I am not really familiar with any trends in the depiction of war
for eastern vs western world - I am trying to focus specifically on
post 1800s but any other era is fine too). I would greatly appreciate
any resources, specific paintings, or other sources of research that
any of you can suggest. Thank you in advance for any help.
Serge
Paul Mesken
I don't know about the Eastern World but I do know that for the two
World Wars special "war artists" were send along with the troops (much
like the photographers I guess). A search on Google with "war artists"
gives a good number of links, here are some :
http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/art/archive.htm
http://collections.ic.gc.ca/courage/warartistsofworldwartwo.html
http://www.schools.sandwell.net/warley/historyww1.html
It's interesting to compare this work with the "propaganda art" which
is a kind of "controlling device" to the government or a political
movement (search on Google with "propaganda art" and "war", lots of
links). And there's of course the art made by artists who are not
trying to make informational or propaganda art but are expressing
their own personal ideas about war (like Picasso's "Guernica").
So, we already have three groups of war art, each having a different
goal :
- Art recording the war (as the "war artists" made), meant to be a
source of history.
- Propaganda Art meant to control the viewer's behaviour and opinion
regarding or during the war (from "Defending our Liberty" and "Buy War
Bonds" to "Duck and Cover" and "Don't waste Lumber").
- Art being a personal expression by an artist during or about war.
This ranges from "art about war" to "art influenced by war".
I believe these 3 groups to be the main groups although there are
subgroups that can fall under one or more of these main groups.
"Victim Art" for example can both record the monstrosities and express
the artist's feelings about it, there's quite some stuff out there
made in concentration camps.
IMO Propaganda art is the most interesting to examine because it is
meant to bring about a change in the viewer in favor of (or against)
the war effort. One can examine what kinds of sentiments and
ideologies the artist is addressing to achieve this goal (take for
example the sentimental "four freedoms" of Norman Rockwell) and
compare how they are different in different times and cultural
backgrounds (would the "four freedoms" work in the USA today?). The
methods used can change during the war (from "defending our country"
to "getting even for Pearl Harbor" for example). There is a lot of
history and culture to consider for the background of propaganda art.
One needs to know what people thought of as important in those days.
There's also the issue of whether the art comes from a country
involved in the war or not and whether the art was made during a war
or not. Also, it is interesting to see how war influenced the artists.
For example, Alberto Vargas made his pin up girls a good deal more
patriotic during WW2. There's more than only paintings to consider,
there are movies as well, "The Great Dictator" by Charlie Chaplin for
example, or "Triumph des Willens" by Leni Riefenstahl (BTW, according
to Nazi sources, Hitler saw "The Great Dictator" twice). Then there's
also the surpression of art in Nazi Germany in which the Nazi party
decided which art was good and which art was bad, this had a profound
influence on what art was produced in Germany in those days. Some
artists had to fled (like Max Ernst).
I'm not so sure whether there's a big difference between war art made
in the Western World and the Eastern World (compare the propaganda art
between the USA and Nazi Germany for example, they're very different
although both countries are part of the Western World).
The question should not be *what* the difference between Western and
Eastern war depiction is but *whether* there is a distinct difference.
Only a very thorough taxonomy of war art can answer this question and
making such a taxonomy is not a small feat (perhaps it's better to
focus on WW2 first, it's very well documented). I believe such a
taxonomy will show there are lots of differences between mainstream
depictions of art but that these differences will not be brought about
by whether the origin is Eastern or Western but by time, culture and
political convictions of the intended audiences.
Cliff D. Weller
says...
>I would greatly appreciate
>any resources, specific paintings, or other sources of research that
>any of you can suggest. Thank you in advance for any help.
>
>Serge
Here is a "specific painting" which is titled
"Mother of Battle" as a pun on Saddam Hussein's
1991 brag about how the coming fight for return
of Kuwait to Kuwaiti's would be "the mother of
all battles."
http://www.zianet.com/jaxart/people/mombattl.jpg
Additionally, it is a statement about women in
the USA military taking on combat roles. I am someone
who personally knows women with children who were
sent to the front lines, and continue to be sent.
Andrew Werby
some interesting war art on the other side of the world. In the Far East,
I'm not sure war, in the literal sense, was traditionally thought of as a
fit subject for artistic portrayal. I can't recall seeing any older Chinese
or Japanese paintings that deal with it (although they could well exist).
But towards the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth
century, images prompted by the Russo-Japanese and Sino-Japanese wars, in
which Japan was victorious, began to be popular. This was the time when the
art of the multiblock print was at a high point, and the result was some
artistically vigorous work at a technical level; deplorable as the subject
matter tends to be. Here's a good example:
http://www.trocadero.com/floatingworld/items/105111/item105111store.html
Here's an article on this genre:
http://www.artelino.com/articles/japanese_war_prints.asp
The Mughal painting tradition in India gave rise to some interesting battle
paintings. Here's one representing Tipoo Sultan in action:
http://www.taletwist.com/studio/pages/ttinarchc0075.htm
There was a tradition of painting and carving in the Hindu empires of the
East, and the frequent battles in the Mahabharata and Ramayana epic poems
were a natural subject for all the cultures - Thai, Sri Lankan, Indonesian,
and Indian linked by these stories:
http://www.bowdoin.edu/~ndenzey/re101/hinduism/mahabharata35.jpg
http://nipponsanpo.fc2web.com/asia2003/30111085.jpg
Aside from that, I'm hard-pressed to think of any noteworthy Oriental art
dealing with war, unless you go back to the early Mesopotamians and
Persians, who of course made some of the best:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~itxbyt/jonah/078_BattleScene_NimrudC.htm .
What have I missed? Anything good? Have we done the guy's homework for him
yet?]
Andrew Werby
www.unitedartworks.com
"Paul Mesken" <usu...@euronet.nl> wrote in message
news:4o9670t763efdhme0...@4ax.com...
Chris
A couple of other points (Paul & Andrew seem to have covered a lot). The
primary emphasis in Western war art changed pretty dramatically from the
late 1700's on, though the change from war as "heroic" to war as reality
took at least a century, (and examples of both seem to exist in all periods
of Western art). A few starter resources for the change in Western art are:
Goya's paintings (like the 2nd & 3rd of May) and etchings (the Disasters of
War);
Matthew Brady's photographs of the American Civil War (which, btw, weren't
just snaps; he and is assistants weren't above arranging the corpses for
maximum impact);
Etchings and paintings from the 1848 rebellion in France (see T.J. Clark's
book "The Absolute Bourgeois" for a number of great examples, from
Meissonier to Daumier).
Kenneth E Silver's "Esprit de Corps"; though it primarily focuses on the
effect of the first World War on the French avant-garde in the early 20th
Century, it does have a good bit of material w/r war art per se - especially
the difference between the art actually done on the front lines by Allied
artists serving as soldiers, and that done behind the front lines by artists
either producing propaganda, or trying to stay in the government's good
books.
I think you'll find that the change in the art correlates well to the rise
of individualism and the notion of individual liberty (so that war as
reality sort of fades in places like the old Soviet Union, or in most
western nations during the actual crises. For a great example, watch
"Casablanca", particularly near the end, when Bogart is saying goodbye to
Bergman )
Chris
"Serge" <puls...@email.com> wrote in message
news:2481ff4b.0404...@posting.google.com...
Dilettante
In thailand and India one can see depictions of armies fighting. They
usually use elephants. The painting style is quite different from that
in the west, more graceful and more emphasis on line. Paintings in
thailand often adorn the walls of buddhist temples and constitute
historical records.
Dilettante
Serge
I truly appreciate all the responses. Thank You so much!!! My first
darft was due Wed, so I that didn't give me enough time to choose a
topic based on some of your suggestions. The topic I chose is the
artistic representation of war in the US Civil War vs the artistic
representation of war in WWI, specifically in paintings. My starting
argument is that during the time period in between the wars, media
technology has greatly progressed; i.e. while photography was not too
practical during the Civil War (long exposures were required etc), it
was practical along with motion picture during WWI. So a lot of Civil
War art has a lesser artistic intent .. some of the artists were hired
by newspapers and magazines to paint pictures with realism to depict
what was actually going on, not the artists reactions/feelings towards
what was going on. Photography seems to have killed off this role
during WWI. Hence the move from realism to impressionism. Another
factor for change is the fact that while most of the artists did not
actually fight in the Civil War, a lot of the WWI paintings are
actually from artists that fought in the war. Again, this has
influenced expressionistic intent. Anyway, I still need to do a whole
bunch of research on this and I would greatly appreciate if anyone
knows of any other patterns, differences, etc between Civil War and
WWI art or other reasons for some of the things I outlined. There is
also the whole issue with technology, methods of warfare, "total war"
concept, "world war" concept (i.e. civil war was confined to a single
continent; not so with WWI) and other things that have influenced
changes in art. I'm trying to look into some of these things.
I truly appreciate all the responses this post has received. Thanks so
much for all the suggestions! They are all greatly appreciated. I wil
continue to greatly appreciate any specific painting examples and
other suggestions like you provided in response to my first post (now
with respect to Civil War and WWI since i have to stick to that
topic:) if you have any. Thanks again for your responses.
Serge
Serge
this one) might focus on art from Eastern vs Western parts of the
world so I can definately make use of some of the suggestions you have
posted. Thanks! As of now I am trying to concentrate on Civil War vs
WWI art.
Serge
Chris
I guess you'll probably be doing this from an American perspective (just
guessing, based on your NNTP posting host) , in which case it could be
interesting as a side note to see how American portrayal of WWI changed
after her entry into it. After all, Europeans had been merrily slaughtering
each other for two and a half years prior to the American declaration of war
in 1917, by which time both sides were physically & morally exhausted.
On a larger theme, realism (as vs. idealism) had been steadily gaining
ground over the nineteenth century, mirroring the trend in social attitudes.
W/r to war, if you have the time you might want to look into novels like
Zola's "The Debacle" (set in the tragi-comical farce of the Franco-Prussian
War), or Crane's "Red Badge of Courage", which were quite a leap from the
classical portrayal of war (say, as depicted in Benjamin West's painting
"The Death of Wolfe" - which at it's time was quite controversial - or
Meissoniers paintings of the glories of the First Republic). But they still
had a ways to go before Owen's WWI poem "Dulce et Decorum Est" . If you
aren't familiar with that one - I don't know what they teach in schools
these days - it's available on the internet & worth a read. The title phrase
relates to "the old Lie: Dulce et Decorum Est /Pro Patria Mori" - it is
sweet and proper to die for one's country.
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/LostPoets/Dulce.html
Here's an interesting link I found when looking for that poem:
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/LostPoets/Sargent.html
The other thing to keep in mind is that no single point of view ever
completely wins over; for every Wilfred Owen there's an Owen Seaman. Check
out the poem "Pro Patri" based on the same phrase, and available on the same
site:
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/LostPoets/Seaman.html
Anyway, good luck;
Chris