Amsterdam, Part III: Impressions, Impressionists, and Scarlett O’Hara

In the main market area---scroll down for fascinating prose and more photos...

canal by night

just strollin' in the rain

During our week in Amsterdam, we spent most of our time in the bright halls and cafés of solidly built museums, gazing at classic and modern paintings, studying painters, and writing about color, form, vanishing points, and changing perceptions of art.  The topic was Vincent van Gogh, but the scope expanded like a married man’s waist.  Where did van Gogh get his inspirations, his techniques?  What was his background?  How did he live his life, and which painters influenced or were influenced by him?

Fueled by curiosity, discovery is a wonderful thing.  Leads to a certain depth of understanding and a warren of unknown trails.  The point is not whether you like a painter, or painting.  Personal likes and dislikes have to be cast aside like spent peanut shells.

Why did van Gogh paint the way he did?  Who were the Impressionists?  How did they vary from classical styles, color, and form?  Chances are, you’re asking yourself, who gives a damn, Scarlett?  Or, as Scarlett O’Hara herself famously said:  “I can't think about that right now. If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow.”

I don’t have time to wait for you to catch up. I’m pressing on.  Something huge happened in the art world in the period 1836-40.  Photography.  Most historical art had been descriptive, capturing a moment, an event, a portrait.  Now a camera could do all that and better.  Artists were liberated to move on from their journalism in paint, to something entirely different.  But, can a camera also be a device for impressions?  I decided to go on my own voyage of discovery and seek out beer, pretty women, and the colors and shapes of Amsterdam.

In the world of art up to 1860, classicism held the field.  But, around this time, or a little before, painters like Manet, Monet, Degas, Cezanne, Renoir, and Toulouse-Lautrec, and many others, threw aside the trappings of classic art and began to paint common subjects, but with an uncommon touch.  A decade later, under the influence (he met and painted with many of the impressionists) van Gogh injected even more expressive techniques.  Depictions of landscapes became swatches of color, only suggesting individual stalks of wheat.  Skies roiled with smears of blues and greens and yellows.  Van Gogh wanted to make the viewer feel what he saw;  wanted to make the viewer a participant by expanding the boundaries.  Expressionism.

Heard the joikes (that’s Jersey for jokes) already.  “Makes me feel like I want to throw up!  I’ve seen that painting before --- in kindergarten.  Looks like the breakfast I saw twice.”  Or, my favorite:  “I could do that!”  Or, as Scarlett proclaimed:  “I never heard of such bad taste.”

Those are all judgment calls, which means against all odds, you’ve managed to miss every single point.  WHY, WHAT, and WHO?

Ever seen a game of craps?  To the initiated, it’s a group of people, standing around a table, throwing small cubes and screaming at the tops of their lungs for no particular reason.  Game’s been round since Roman times, but casinos haven’t.  Rules have changed.  Understanding takes work.  Otherwise you’re just looking, not seeing, or understanding.

I picture a chain of events.  Curiosity leading to discovery, leading to study, leading to knowledge, leading to more curiosity.  Doesn’t have to be art.  Can be anything, from cake decorating to motorcycle maintenance. Of course, you could disregard all that and stick with  the cuddly warmth of your personal comfort zone.   Of course, if you're not engaged,  that means, as Scarlett said, “My life is over. Nothing will ever happen to me anymore.”  At least nothing new.

Here’s a short course on the Impressionists.  They brought real subjects and real emotions to paint and canvas.  No longer stuck on historic figures, Biblical scenes, or moral lessons, they unglued the use of color, form, painting en plein air, and impressions of subjects rather than faithful reproductions.  As a result, controversy swirled around them. Museums bared their work.  But the paintings were real.  They resonated, and in Scarlett’s words, “He looks as if... as if he knows what I look like without my shimmy.”  Ah, Scarlett, if you only knew.

During my week in Amsterdam, I combined camera and Impressionism (intentionally and capriciously)  to offer a few of my impressions of Amsterdam.  I found that Black and White often provides more drama and texture, while night scenes lend impressionistic colors. Rain helps to expand the palate.  Should you find these photos objectionable, insane, or in bad taste, “Frankly my dear….etc.”

Near the market area 

In the tangle of restaurant streets... 

Amsterdam is a melting pot

bike lane