Why I Hate Courbet
Feb. 24th, 2009 05:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
osprey_archerGustave Courbet was a French painter in the middle nineteenth century, and he was a world-class jackass with an ego the size of Paris (or possible the moon). I offer two illustrative stories.
First. For class we read a letter that Courbet wrote to Champfleury, in which he crows about how he’s just been paid nearly 5000 francs for a couple of paintings. A few paragraphs later, he complains, “I feel very depressed – my soul is quite empty, my liver and heart full of gall…You know my “wife” [Courbet wasn’t married; this was his lover of fourteen years] got married. I no longer have her or the child – apparently she was forced into it by poverty.”
Because apparently Courbet, who was rolling in dough like Scrooge McDuck, couldn’t be bothered to pay upkeep for either of them; and too sunk in self-pity to see that the fact that she left him might be his fault.
Second. In the 1860s other painters started to surpass Courbet as the most scandalous man in France, particular Manet with pictures like Olympia. This picture may not look too shocking now, but it was. Critics hated it so much that they said the young lady looked "corpse-like." The history of the nude is fascinating but really a topic for another post.
Anyway. Courbet, lacking the generosity of spirit to share the limelight, paints this (completely not work-safe. No really, do not let the fact that it’s 150 years old fool you; it’s not work safe) nude. He painted the picture from a pelvic-examination sort of angle, presumably while cackling “Ha! No one will pay attention to that upstart Manet now!”
I must admit, the fact that Courbet managed to make a picture that’s still shocking and tasteless 150 years later is impressive. But not impressive enough to make up for the fact that he painted it as a temper tantrum because he couldn’t bear to share the spotlight.
First. For class we read a letter that Courbet wrote to Champfleury, in which he crows about how he’s just been paid nearly 5000 francs for a couple of paintings. A few paragraphs later, he complains, “I feel very depressed – my soul is quite empty, my liver and heart full of gall…You know my “wife” [Courbet wasn’t married; this was his lover of fourteen years] got married. I no longer have her or the child – apparently she was forced into it by poverty.”
Because apparently Courbet, who was rolling in dough like Scrooge McDuck, couldn’t be bothered to pay upkeep for either of them; and too sunk in self-pity to see that the fact that she left him might be his fault.
Second. In the 1860s other painters started to surpass Courbet as the most scandalous man in France, particular Manet with pictures like Olympia. This picture may not look too shocking now, but it was. Critics hated it so much that they said the young lady looked "corpse-like." The history of the nude is fascinating but really a topic for another post.
Anyway. Courbet, lacking the generosity of spirit to share the limelight, paints this (completely not work-safe. No really, do not let the fact that it’s 150 years old fool you; it’s not work safe) nude. He painted the picture from a pelvic-examination sort of angle, presumably while cackling “Ha! No one will pay attention to that upstart Manet now!”
I must admit, the fact that Courbet managed to make a picture that’s still shocking and tasteless 150 years later is impressive. But not impressive enough to make up for the fact that he painted it as a temper tantrum because he couldn’t bear to share the spotlight.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 02:57 am (UTC)FYI: That's not art, that's porn. Painted porn. I like the Manet though...not corpse-like so much as she looks my Shift's wife.
Okay, so I looked it up and the Manet painting is actually really cool. Especially the part where it wasn't the least bit controversial because of the nudity--I was actually a little confused about that. By no fault of yours, I was assuming that Courbet was responding to the naked woman by painting, well, more naked woman. I have to say though, L'Origine du Monde is kind of an awesome title.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:04 am (UTC)The history of nudes is fascinating - the odd thing is that, in art contexts, the Victorians were cooler with the whole naked thing than we are. (This is not necessarily a good thing - there's something skeevy about a lot of classic nudes - but its there.)
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 03:11 am (UTC)Re: the Courbet you linked to: I actually like it. It's very realistic, and I love how non-idealized the figure is. And the way the sheet is painted. I'm a sucker for beautifully painted fabric.
The hell of it is, Courbet was obviously a Complete Ass, but he really could paint.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:41 am (UTC)The thing about Courbet's paintings - I don't like many of them; no matter how many times I hear about how NEW and EXCITING Burial at Ornans (http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/courbet/ornans.jpg) was, visually speaking I still think it's boring.
And yet. Tucked in the corners he has these interesting human interactions, like the little alter boy on the left, just by the cross, looking up at an adult with a "who the heck are you?" expression. It makes me sad that he wasted so much time inflicting his ego on the world when he could have been painting.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 04:54 am (UTC)So, I guess Courbet's not a family man, but he still loses points in skeeviness to Gauguin, who went to Tahiti and spread STDs around to the underage female population (the youngest being 13). There's also that famous story where VanGogh cut off his ear after Gauguin went off with the woman he was trying to chat up. This was after being paid off by VanGogh's dealer/brother-in-law to hang out with VanGogh at his artist retreat in Arles.
Oh, I just noticed. Is the "Origin of the World" title Courbet's or the website's?
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:21 am (UTC)Courbet didn't even try to get this one in the Salon; they probably would have banned him for life. (I'm not sure if they could do that, but I get the impression that a lot of Academicians actually wanted to.) He kept it in his studio and showed it to art critic types so they could spread the word that Courbet is STILL the most vulgar man in Paris.
I'd always been under the impression that Van Gogh cut off his ear because a young lady jilted him? (Unless by "the woman he was trying to chat up" you mean the woman Van Gogh was chatting up?)
It does add an interestingly slashy angle if it was all about Gauguin all along. Although given Gauguin's creepiness it's probably just as well for Van Gogh that Gauguin ran off.
Gauguin/Van Gogh: the most fucked-up pairing in the entire painter!slash fandom. Which totally ought to exist. I am, God help me, trying to think of other workable pairings now.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 08:16 am (UTC)I am mostly amused by the title - I'm going to assume he's mocking the insipid mythological erotica (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/1863_Alexandre_Cabanel_-_The_Birth_of_Venus.jpg), and I am all in favour of that.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-26 02:46 am (UTC)Oh dear muse please please please don't make me write this.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:52 am (UTC)If I think about this too much I'll want to write the scene. Like fanfic, except for history.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-25 05:45 am (UTC)I do like some of Courbet's paintings - when he wasn't busy tormenting others he would occasionally paint things like this self-portrait (http://experimentiv.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/self-portrait-or-desperate-man-gustave-courbet.jpg), which is visually arresting if nothing else...but he was such a jackass. So egotistical. I swear, he painted like a dozen self-portraits, he loved himself so much.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-26 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-02-26 04:44 pm (UTC)Quoted for truth.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-26 10:12 pm (UTC)provides access
Date: 2011-01-16 10:15 pm (UTC)