Borrowing terms from other art forms
Luis Fontanills
erni...@AOL.COM writes:
> Luis,
>
> Thanks for the information. Is there also an impressionist movement in
> architecture?
>
You're welcome.
No there is no impressionist movement in architecture. The term as applied to
painting/drawing refers to the capturing of a moment of light/ activity as if
frozen in time - an impression - the essence of the scene. Monet, Renoir,
Degas are some of the most representative and well known of this movement. Of
course the term can be used on any contemporary work that has these
characteristics or can be labeled contemporary post-impressionist ;-)
In bonsai, I could see this term used if one captured a moment in time - an
impression. For example: In a windswept form bonsai, if every leaf and twig
appeared as if the wind was just rustling through, it could be labeled
impressionistic. I'm going back to Walter Pall's most recent draft to study
this aspect: he has a good definition of how he would ascribe this term to
bonsai, in general he broadens it from the above definition for painting.
Luis Fontanills
Miami, Florida USA
********************************************************************************
+++++This list is supported, in part, by a contribution from Jim Ranshoff+++++
>>-->> The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ <<--<<
To leave the list, send SIGNOFF BONSAI to: LIST...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Lynn Boyd
> In bonsai, I could see this term used if one captured a moment in time -
an
> impression. For example: In a windswept form bonsai, if every leaf and
twig
> appeared as if the wind was just rustling through, it could be labeled
> impressionistic. I'm going back to Walter Pall's most recent draft to
study
> this aspect: he has a good definition of how he would ascribe this term
to
> bonsai, in general he broadens it from the above definition for painting.
>
That would be the most meager description of a larger
concept, if you intend that, okay, but I don't think that was the
intention when it was suggested.
Impressionism was a Movement- not some decided upon category. As such it
spread, it changed with artists and grew in concept to much more. It began
in the mid-1800s under that name, but may have started a bit earlier. It
moved to UK, to America and produced works by Turner, for example, that
were close to nature's light and colors, became a Naturalistic and then
Romantic even mode. The "bundle" is much more integrated with other
effects. I cannot agree that it meant momentary in viewing - nor that it
was intended to be such. The artist employed an instantaneous lighting
effect for other purposes too.
One of the difficulties of explaining the expansive use of
Impressionism and Expressionism, and other terms is that they were
Movements, lasting sometimes over decades, to a century or more, and
accrued meanings that are much farther reaching than an initial effect.
They now all encompass more than a few words re the beginning, and within
each category are differences, often broken down often by just an artist's
name. I f one says it is like a Monet, than it is different than if it
is like a Renoir. There are even terms, like Pointillism, that fall under
the term of an Impressionist beginning. The term is large enough to find
home in more than one context. As is Expressionism and Romanticism, and
Classic - and once past that initial categorization that is easily
understood one in most cases must describe by simple words - Because no
work of art is the same, and it deserves an individual recognition, so we
often just use the name of an artist, as you speak of the Expressionist
architect to be more specific.
However, I suspect you were using it purposefully in its
narrowest sense which is a description of its origin, not its maturity as a
category.
Lynn