André Malraux the founder of the Biennale de Paris by Gisèle Freund in 1935. © Agence Nina Beskow

As an inherently subjective field despite (or perhaps because of) its many changing standards, art has been surrounded by controversy (at least) ever since the Impressionists changed the aesthetic standards of the Academy in the nineteenth century. What was at stake then in the heated debates surrounding the official Salon is similar to what is at stake now in the controversy surrounding the Biennale de Paris: an understanding of art, its forums, its distribution and its cultural value. The Biennale de Paris was launched by Raymond Cogniat in 1959 and set up by the writer André Malraux, who was at the time the Minister of Culture. Its role was to showcase creative talent worldwide and to provide a place where artists, critics, gallery owners, and others involved in the fields of art could share their work and exchange ideas. But ever since Alexandre Gurita took over the BDP in 2000, this forum has been plagued by debates that get to the core of the meaning and place of art today: should it be a place or places? Who counts as an artist? What is art? What counts as an artwork? Who should give it value or cultural meaning?

Will the real Biennale de Paris please stand up?

According to Gurita, the controversy surrounding the Biennale de Paris “would make a best-seller”. The BDP originally directed by Malraux was abandoned by the Ministry of Culture in 1985. Between 1985-2000, there were debates and investigations concerning the ways in which to modernize it and how to relaunch it. In 2000, Alexandre Gurita took over this project and changed it radically, from within. Through the notion of  « invisual art »⁽¹⁾, he broke the sacred law that says « art = art objet » which creates an automatic dependency between art and work of art. He asserts that art can express itself otherwise than through art objects and declares : « There is no proof  that art is depending from the art object. For that reason we can assume the contrary ». In a move that the sociologist of art Pierre Bourdieu would have been proud of, he also challenged the hierarchies imposed by all the mediators – art critics, gallery owners, museum curators – between artists and their public. In so doing, he also disposed with the idea that some artistic spaces – like museums of contemporary art or posh galleries – are privileged spaces to exhibit artwork. Some of the French officials and art critics were up in arms, even though many of them had applauded Bourdieu, one of the most highly consecrated philosophers and sociologists of art, for proposing exactly the same ideas. Gurita just put them into practice.

In his ground-breaking book, Distinction, Pierre Bourdieu argued that society uses “symbolic goods, especially those regarded as the attributes of excellence, […as] the ideal weapon in strategies of distinction” that shape various hierarchies, especially class hierarchies. The art world is still filled with such social distinctions, which aren’t only class-based, by the way. As I’ve argued before, most contemporary artists–no matter what class or place they come from–don’t have meaningful access to the public. Aside from a handful of (mostly postmodern) artists, most artists find it impossible to showcase their art in museums of contemporary art or in the most prestigious galleries. In turn, this means that collectors don’t get to see and buy their artwork and that critics don’t view it and discuss it. To change this hierarchical system of distinction, Alexandre Gurita dispensed with the mediators (gallery and museum curators) between the artists and the public. The participants set themselves the dates and the places for their own activities. On its official website, http://biennaledeparis.org  the reinvented Biennale de Paris includes the following tenets, a true Manifesto of a new aesthetic pluralism:

« The Biennale de Paris was launched in 1959 by André Malraux with the purpose of creating a meeting place for those who would define the art of the future. After a hiatus of several years, the Biennale was relaunched in 2000. Since then it has not ceased in its efforts to unravel art from institutions. The Biennale de Paris rejects the use of art objects, which are too alienated by the market. It does not confine itself to a framework that would hinder its present actions or its political, economic and ideological evolution. By acting upon everyday life and its unfolding realities, the Biennale seeks to redefine art by using criteria which rejects the idea of the artist as the sole protagonist in his work. Simply stated, the Biennale de Paris refuses to participate in today’s conventional art world. By mixing genres, exploiting porous frontiers and practicing the redistribution of roles, the Biennale de Paris allows art to appear precisely where it’s not expected. Furthermore, the Biennale de Paris has its own guidelines⁽²⁾.

"Déjeuner sur l'herbe", Catherine et Jacques Pineau, Biennale de Paris 2004

In a personal interview, Gurita told me that he perceives undermining the system of distinction as “an instrument of liberty placed at the service of art. In 2000 my act created an enormous scandal and enraged certain representatives of the system. Others, however, liked the idea that an artist combats an institution.” Not everyone in France greeted this radical overhaul quite as enthusiastically. Government officials initially disowned the Biennale de Paris, claiming that the real Biennale was moved to Lyon. Even art critics–who generally can’t praise enough the cutting-edge and avant-garde art–weren’t too flattering. Did the Biennale escape them? In the Editorial of Beaux-Arts Magazine, for instance, Fabrice Bousteau referred to the project as “the regrettable Biennale de Paris, mixing expos, concerts, performances, conferences, and accomplish with the creators of the whole world in several areas of the city” (May 2007). The critic for France’s elite leftwing newspaper, Libération, adopted the official government position that the Biennale de Paris has been transferred to Lyon: “Since 1991, France itself has its Biennale in Lyon. The latter picks up the slack from the defunct Biennale de Paris, which had its last meeting in 1985.” (Libération, April 2006)

The objective of the new Biennale de Paris is nothing less than changing the idea of art as a unified domain of cultural production and rigid, hierchical distinctions. More than that, it proposes an art “without pieces of art, an art without exhibition, an art without spectatorship, an art without curatorship, authors without authority.” As for when it happens, don’t set your calendars, since that’s also relative. “The Biennale de Paris takes place when it happens. It exists in real time. Each biennial begins when the previous ends. Associated practices evolve over the course of successive editions.” Where does it take place?  “The Biennale de Paris takes place where it happens. Relocating itself, it looks for a reciprocity with the practices locality, in order to ponder over and modify social, economical, political and ideological backgrounds.

The Precedent of Impressionism and the Salon des Refusés

"Déjeuner sur l'herbe", Edouard Manet, Wikipedia Commons, Warlburg.edu

Before you conclude that you’re finding yourself in one of Eugen Ionesco’s absurdist plays, I’d like to remind you that the art world has often been subject to radical redefinition from within. To stick to the theme of French culture, I’ll use the Impressionist movement as an example. The Biennale de Paris is not the only one to be rejected by the establishment. It finds itself in good company, since the Impressionists -  are arguably still the most popular artists in the world–were rejected as well.

If any art collection can be said to have a profound impact upon the history of art and aesthetics, the paintings exhibited at the Salon des Refusés in 1863 would certainly be on a top ten list. This collection of paintings marks both a change of views about what counts as good art and a liberating shift in the institutions that consecrated French art to begin with. Before this crucial moment, the production of good art was heavily regulated. From the seventeenth-century, when Colbert instituted the first Salon that would display the art of the painters of the Académie Royale de Peinture et de Sculpture in the Salon Carré of the Louvre, the Salons and the Academy largely determined artistic standards. Even when the Salon was opened to all artists in 1791, the rules by which they were judged did not become less rigid, even though the number of artists who could display grew substantially as did the public patronage of the arts.

When in 1863 the official Salon rejected 3000 pieces out of the 5000 submitted by artists, with hindsight we can safely say that it was the straw that broke the camel’s back. In a half-mocking, half-appeasing gesture towards the rejected artists, Napoleon III authorized a Salon de Refusés in a space that was distinct from the prestigious Salon sponsored by the Académie.

Like Napoleon I, the Emperor utilized art to express the glory of the French empire. The standards of the official salon were set by the traditional Count Nieuwerkerke, who was the Intendant of the Beaux Arts. He lived in a seventeen room suite in the Louvre and regulated all artistic life at court. By the 1860′s, however, artists and intellectuals–especially in more liberal newspapers– began to object to the rigid standards of the Academy and the Salon. Many of them demanded inclusion in the Salon for a wider range of talented artists.

Napoleon III paid a visit to the Salon and told Nieuwerkerke–perhaps in part to clip his wings–that many of the works rejected were just as good as those accepted. He then ordered that all the works rejected by the Salon be shown in the Palais de L’Industrie in its own show that would be called, condescendingly, the Salon de Refusés. This created the opportunity for new artists such as Manet, Pissaro and Whistler –the generation that had a profound influence upon modern art and especially upon the Impressionist movement–to become more visible in the public eye.

Manet also proved to be a key factor in the dissolution of the Salon de Refusés, however. Once the Emperor saw his Déjeuner sur l’herbe, he was shocked by its undisguised sexuality and agreed with the Academy that the first Salon de Refusés should also be the last. Nonetheless, the controversy stirred a heated debate over the nature of modern art and eventually opened the way for the Salon des Indépendants, galleries, and other institutions that soon rivaled and eventually exceeded the official Salon’s influence upon art. In fact, in a reversal of aesthetic values, less than twenty years after the Salon de Refusés, the artists associated with this controversial exhibit, particularly Manet, would be enshrined as the founders of modern art. Conversely, the official Salon art would fall into disrepute as mechanical, uninventive, formalistic: in short, l’art pompier, a pejorative term used to describe David’s Roman headgear, which resembled the helmets of firefighters (pompiers). As it often happens, the most effective subversive, anti-establishment artists and artistic movements often become–by their sheer cultural impact and visibility–the new establishment in art.

I believe that a similar process is at work in the manner in which Alexandre Gurita is redefining our understanding of the art world today. His pluralistic understanding of art opens up the field of cultural production to diverse artists, locations, modes of giving cultural value, and audiences. Although his project may have been accused by some of nihilism, I’d say that there’s a big philosophical -  actual – difference between pluralism and nihilism. Nihilism represents a flat denial of all values, be they ethical or aesthetic. By way of contrast, pluralism supports the value of a multitude of standards. Although pluralism can be relativistic, it doesn’t have to be. The standards for many aesthetic values can be defended and validated. Personally, as the founder of a more or less traditional movement in art (postromanticism.com) I’ll take artistic pluralism over rigid hierarchy any day.

As I have argued in my previous article, The Conformism of Postmodern Style, I object to the fact that elitist practices in museums of contemporary art and in some galleries impose a certain conformity (which I loosely associate with postmodern art) upon the art world. In so doing, they don’t give diverse artists a real, fair and democratic shake at presenting their works to the public. But, to my mind, envy of those artists who have “made it” or tearing down the entire artistic establishment is not the solution. Opening up the art world from within is. The French have a saying about this: Vive la différence! The art that Alexandre Gurita endorses – invisual art – is as far removed from my more traditional postromantic art movement as you can get. However, to my mind, the real issue is not imposing one standard of what constitutes good or true art, but making it possible for different kinds of artists and artistic styles to be shared with the public in a multitude of venues. This is what the reincarnated Biennale de Paris directed by Gurita aims to do.

In such a newly redefined art world – or art fields, more like it–it’s possible for more traditional artists like the postromantics to coexist and share cultural space and ideas with the more avant-garde postmodernists.  And if anybody in France still accuses Gurita of political correctness, they can blame it on Pierre Bourdieu, who, incidentally – and ironically – won the prestigious Médaille d’or du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS). This goes to show that it pays to shake things up and repudiate cultural consecration. You might even get awarded a medal for it!

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

⁽¹⁾ The invisual is visible but not as art. Invisual do not need to be seen to exist.

⁽²⁾ -Orientations : The Biennale de Paris rejects exhibitions and art objects. It refuses to be ”thought by art”. It identifies and defends true alternatives. It calls for “non-standard practices”.

-Strategy : To be liquid. If the ground floor is occupied, occupy the floor below.

-An Invisual Art : No serious proof exists that art is dependent on the art object. We can therefore assume the opposite. The Biennale de Paris promotes invisual practices which do not need to be seen to exist. The invisual is visible but not as art.

-A Non-Artistic Art : The Biennale de Paris defends an art which does not obey the common criteria for art: creative, emotive, aesthetic, spectacular…

-An Art which Operates in Everyday Reality : The Biennale de Paris promotes practices that relegate art to the background in order to conquer everyday reality.

-A Public of Indifference : With the Biennale de Paris there are no more art spectacles. The Biennale addresses what it calls “a public of indifference”: persons who, consciously or accidentally, interact with propositions that can no longer be identified as artistic.

-A Unified Criticism : Organised as a network, the Biennale de Paris constitutes a critical mass composed of hundreds of initiatives, which would otherwise have been isolated and without impact.

Carole Feuerman‘s life-like–yet also larger-than-life sculptures–are well-known throughout the world. Her works have been featured at the Queens Museum in 1987, at the Southern Alleghenies Museum of Art in 2000 and the travelling exhibit curated by Stephen C. Foster at the Circulo de Bellas Artes in Madrid. Feuerman received countless awards for her art, including the Amelia Peabody Award  and first prizes in the Austrian Biennale and the Florence Biennale.

Famous people collect her sculptures, including former President Bill Clinton and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Henry Kissinger and Mikhail Gorbachev. It occurs to me, as I’m writing this list, that Feuerman could have a model U.N. just from the politicians who are fans of her art.

As an art critic, I can see why Carole Feuerman’s hyperrealist sculptures are so sought-after. They are striking in their execution: a testament to the artist’s talent to not merely copy what she sees but to convey a monumental reality. I think it’s save to say that Carole Feuerman’s sculpture represents verisimilitude at its finest. Furthermore, as an aesthetic philosopher, I see a lot of value in the rich tradition of verisimilitude which, with the advent of photography, we first rejected and are now embracing in contemporary art again. I’d like to examine briefly the role of verisimilitude in the history of art, in order to highlight the aesthetic importance of Carole Feuerman’s sculptures in the artworld today.

Verisimilitude in Art

The aesthetic revolution that occurred during the twentieth-century is unprecedented in the history of Western art. Even the invention of one-point perspective and the soft shading that gives the illusion of depth (chiaroscuro) during the Renaissance didn’t change aesthetic standards as radically as the creation of non-representational, or what has also been called “conceptual” art.

Since Andy Warhol we have come to accept that brillo boxes and other ordinary household objects, if placed in a museum, are objets d’art. And since Jackson Pollock and the New York School of abstract expressionism we have come to realize that what may appear to be randomly spilled paint, globs and other kinds of smudges are not only artistic, but also considered by many to be the deepest expressions of human talent, thought and feeling.

Once art took a conceptual turn, it also became philosophical. As the art critic and aesthetic philosopher Arthur Danto argues in representational art what constituted “art” was more or less obvious. The only question that was always difficult to determine was: is it good art? By way of contrast, Danto explains, conceptual art compels viewers to think about the very nature of art. The postmodern answer to this question is not only philosophical–namely, that art is a concept because it cannot be identified visually, just by looking at it–but also sociological. Art is, as Danto himself declares, whatever the viewing public and especially the community that has the power to consecrate it–by exhibiting it in galleries and museums, buying it, writing books about it, critiquing and reviewing it, etc– says it is.

A priori, art can be anything. A brillo box, a toilet seat. But it isn’t everything for the simple reason that not everything is consecrated as art. What may seem, by older standards, to be art—such as contemporary Impressionist-style paintings–may not be considered art (but only cheap imitation) by the public or critics, while, conversely, what doesn’t seem to be art—a brillo box—can be perceived as the highest manifestation of artistic genius.

As noted, what makes twentieth- and twenty-first century art conceptual is the fact that what makes it be “art” can no longer be seen with the eye. We can’t see the aesthetic difference between the brillo boxes we discard and Warhol’s brillo boxes. Yet one is called trash and the other pop art. Clearly, it’s not the physical qualities of the object, but rather the assumptions of a community that determine what is (good) art. I cannot dispute this argument—made in different ways by Pierre Bourdieu and Arthur Danto–because, given everything I observe is being called art, I see it as the most compelling explanation of the term “art” as it’s being used today. Having conceded the artistic nature and value of nonrepresentational art, however, postromantic aesthetics argues that just because nonrepresentational art is valued doesn’t mean that contemporary representational art should be dismissed.

To explain the conceptual revolution that occurred in art at the end of the nineteenth-century and the beginning of the twentieth century, some art historians claim that photography eliminated the need for representational art, or the kind of art that tries to imitate “nature” by depicting faithfully what the eye can see. We can add in parentheses, as E. H. Gombrich observes in The Story of Art, that the notion of the representation of what the eye can see has changed throughout the history of art. Needless to say, it too is shaped by social assumptions. Nonetheless, the difference between a kind of art that aims at faithful visual imitation of the three-dimensional qualities of physical objects and one that doesn’t remains relatively easy to discern.

For instance, even without reading the descriptive title of the painting, it’s clear to tell by just looking at Renoir’s Girl Bathing (1892) that it features a nude girl bathing. Without its explanatory (or deceptive) title, however, it would be impossible to know what Duchamp’s Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 1 (1911) is supposed to represent The last thing that might occur to those who look at it–if it were not for the title–is that it shows a nude.

photo Jeanloup Sieff

The invention of photography had a lot to do with the move away from visual representation. To say that photography eliminated the need for representational art, however, is an overstatement. Undoubtedly, the invention of the camera encouraged artists to experiment with other means of representation in the same way that the invention of machines displaced hand-made crafts. The camera probably did for painting what the industrial revolution did for artisanship. But that doesn’t mean that artisanship–or hand-made beautiful objects–are no longer valuable. For what the human imagination, sensibility, eye and hand can create will always be somewhat different from what can be made with the aid of machines. The texture, sense of color and vision that are captured by painters are not identical to those that photography can produce, even though photography can bring us closer to visual reality and even though photography can be artistic.

Verisimilitude, or the true-to-life physical representation of objects, already existed in classical Greek, Hellenistic and Roman art, all of which rendered the beauty, movement and sinuosity of the human body especially palpable in their breath-taking sculptures. In classical Greek and Hellenistic art in particular, the human body conveyed (what was perceived as) the essence of beauty: the glorification of divine powers and aesthetic ideals were embodied in the human form. I think Philip Scott Johnson’s artistic video of Classical sculpture (above) captures this beautifully.

While Greek paintings and especially sculptures showed knowledge of human anatomy, movement and foreshortening, it’s Renaissance artists who discovered the two other key components of verisimilitude in painting: one point-perspective and shading, which give the illusion of three-dimensionality to two-dimensional painted forms. Gombrich and other art historians credit the architect Filipo Brunelleschi with the invention of one-point perspective as it was enthusiastically adopted by Italian Renaissance painters. Perspective entailed the application of geometrical principles to convey in painting the relative size of objects in terms of their distance from one another and from the viewer. (The Story of Art, 228-9).

The most famous Renaissance artist, Leonardo da Vinci, added another dimension to making the objects represented in art seem almost real. His most famous painting Mona Lisa is said to deceive the viewers into believing that the woman’s eyes move, returning and even following their gaze with her eyes. Likewise, many have speculated about the meaning of Mona Lisa’s ambiguous smile, whose lips have a mobility that renders her at once impenetrable and expressive. Leonardo was able to achieve these complex visual and psychological effects through the technique called sfumato, or the smoky blurring the contours of the object depicted—especially the corners of Mona Lisa’s eyes and mouth—to leave their outline and expression more open to interpretation.

The study and representation of human anatomy and of nature, foreshortening, capturing human movement and expression, one-point perspective and the creation of soft shadows which give the illusion of three-dimensionality to painted forms — all these techniques which took centuries to develop–have the magical effect of making objects represented by art come to life before our eyes. This kind of naturalistic art is not necessarily “realistic” in the sense of capturing human life as it actually is. For instance, some of the paintings of the surrealists were realistic in their anatomically accurate and three-dimensional representation of the human body, but fantastic in their rendition of reality.

EBG postcard Carole Feuerman art

There are several movements in contemporary art that perpetuate the tradition of verisimilitude for our times. Photorealism, pioneered by the American painter Denis Peterson, revealed human (manual) talent as a rival to what the capera can do. Hyperrealism takes photorealism a step further. Not merely copying reality, it provides a more compelling, monumental rendition of the real. It brings to life an image down to its finest details yet at the same time reveals it as created and contrived: unreal. For this reason, the postmodern philosopher Jean Baudrillard called hyperrealism “the simulation of something which never really existed.” Hyperrealism is not a false reality or a lie, but a compelling illusion. Carole Feuerman’s sculptures–particularly those of swimmers which are her signature style–reveal her as a master illusionist.

http://www.carolefeuerman.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

There is something other-worldly about the paintings of the French-American painter Georges Yatridès. Although the artist was influenced by Gaugin and the Fauve movement, Yatridès’ work stands apart, on its own. Painted during the height of modernism, it also seems very contemporary in feel, prefiguring  Japanese pop art influenced by comic books.

Luminous, colorful and evocative, these mythical, fantasmogoric paintings bring to mind classical heroism in a modern pictorial translation. They straddle the divide between pop culture and high art, fitting in perfectly with both.

There are several unique artists in the history of modern art that defy categorization–such as Mondigliani and Balthus–whose works are enjoying a contemporary revival. The time has come for a look back at the forward-looking artistic legacy of Georges Yatridès.

http://www.yatrides.com/anglais/index.htm 
http://www.yatrides-21st-century.com/ 

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

photo by Alin Mocanu

By chance, I was fortunate enough to come across the photography of Alin Mocanu, whose wedding pictures stand out in their capacity to evoke the poetry of commitment.  Alin Mocanu’s images are synecdoches (small yet significant fragments) in picture form that capture the hope, the innocence and the beauty of our dreams of love when we first embark upon a lifelong commitment and promise to love and cherish each other for life. Alin’s photography, which you can view on his website below, brought out the poet in me.

http://www.mocanuphotography.com/

Roots and air

by Claudia Moscovici

The morning dew

Sparkles upon my finger

A treasure of emotion

I only need from you

The richness of desire

Warms up cooler evenings

And nights that tremble softly

In the briskness of the air

Sometimes when you’re asleep

I extend my body upwards

Drawn by the luminous magic

Of stars that silently tempt me

With their majestic height

I bend, turn, stretch, move

With the smooth suppleness

Of a vine faithfully winding

Around her loyal trunk

You plant yourself in me

In you I find my shelter

From life’s harshest storms

In the disarming intimacy

Of our communication

We find each other’s roots

While breathing the fresh air

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

Italian photographer Luigi Fieni brings us the best in photojournalism. Although Luigi began his career as an aeronautical engineer, since 1999 he has chosen a different, artistic, path. For nearly fifteen years, he has been a master conservationist of wall paintings, wood carvings and sculptures in Nepal.  He also passes on his craft by leading a training program in Lomanthang, the capital of Mutang.

Versatile and international, Fieni also restores some of the most majestic monuments in Europe. He has helped restore Basilica dei Santi Ambrogio e Carlo al Corso, Church of San Pietro Apostolo in Poli, Church of Santo Stefano in Poli, and the Civic Archaeological Museum of Albano Laziale among others.

The deep knowledge and respect for cultures throughout the ages and across the globe that Fieni exhibits in his restoration projects also shines through in his breathtaking photojournalism.  A poet with images, Luigi also has a way with words.  The presentation of photography, restoration projects and background on his website, below, is in itself a work of art, combining beautiful images, soothing music and his own poetic eloquence.  

http://www.luigifieni.com/#/Home

Like the Impressionists, Luigi explores the relation between light, meaning and meditation. He states on his website, “Using cameras, in all their forms, fascinates me. Mesmerized by the noise of the shutter I am granted sorcery… I am enthralled by the diversity and am always looking to capture a moment rather than an image.”

Fieni experiments artistically with the format, focus and angle of the camera to produce images that capture motion, beauty, emotion, energy and yet, somehow, also remain faithful to the scenery or people they portray. There’s a sense of reverence that pervades Fieni’s images that may have something to do with his years of experience with the restoration of cultural artifacts. But it has even more to do with his modesty and appreciation for world cultures and, above all, for his fellow human beings.

“In a way,” Luigi explains, “the light entering through the lens does not just alter some silver grains or some pixels but it carries all the vibrations, all the emotions in one evocative moment.” In our regular lives, filled with the routines of work, familial responsibilities, or even mindless diversions, it’s easy to bypass a deeper, almost spiritual, appreciation for life in all its kaleidoscope of emotions, forms and colors. Luigi Fieni’s spectacular photorealism represents not only the best of this arform, but also a form of meditation through art.

 Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

Port of Baltimore by Todd Materazzi

Objects can speak to us. Presented in the right way, and in the right light, they can even move us. A lonely bridge, a desolate house can be haunting images in themselves. Sometimes such images can reach into our minds to stir our most cherished memories. Thematic photography has deeply expressive powers. Like Marcel Proust’s madelaine, they evoke scenes and lived experiences that mattered to us in the past and that still resonate in the present.

Todd Materazzi is an award-winning thematic photographer. Masterfully captured, haunting and sometimes even eerie, his city scenes and country landscapes evoke our emotions. Materazzi aptly calls his images “emotional transformation through thematic photography.” In the first image of the series Port of Baltimore, (above) the perspective is geometric, simple, even stark. Parallel train tracks engulfed by darkness eventually unite, through an optical illusion, in the distant horizon.  Where they meet we encounter the focal point of the image: several small spheres of light. This painting evokes the theme of voyage while also giving the impression that no matter how dark the pursuit there is, both literally and figuratively, a light at the end of the journey.

The warmer hues of the second image in the series Port of Baltimore (above) shines through the darkness of the night with the bright lights on the horizon that frame the sharply delineated bridge. They also offer a counterpoint to the reflecting surface of the shimmery water which embraces our field of vision. The rundown bridge in the foreground seems overpowered by the triumphant bridge in the background, crowned by its hallow of lights.

The city scene above, however, has a more intimate, human touch as father and son find solace from the rain inside a department store. There’s complicity, affection (as the father protects under his umbrella the tiny figure of the son) and an adorable sense of mirroring, as the bigger Me and little me, reflect one another in the similarly dressed figures of father and  son.

Materazzi’s stark images capture desolate urban scenes and gorgeous landscapes that straddle the delicate line between abstract, geometric lines and curves and highly expressive landscapes that many of us have encountered and that remain all the more memorable when captured with talent and depth by Todd Materazzi’s emotive thematic photography. For more information, take a look at the artist’s website, on the link: http://titaniumphoto.wordpress.com/

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

Leonardo Pereznieto is, along with me, the co-founder of the contemporary art movement postromanticism. He lives in Mexico and comes from an artistic family: his mother is a musician and his father was a well-known artist. He has won the Mozart Prize for the Arts for his sculpture, which epitomizes the ideals of postromanticism: an incredible life-like quality which is nevertheless full of imagination and fancy; a delicate sensual touch; a passionate sense of the spirituality of earthly existence.

On January 12th, 2012, Leonardo Pereznieto exhibited some of his works at the Able Fine Art Gallery, in New York City, alongside other notable international artists: Tanya Kazakowitz, Kim Wan, Steve Hickok, Kim Wan, Oh Se-Chul, Kim Ji-Young and Park Ju-Hyun. The opening reception was lively, with hundreds of art lovers in attendance. Laura Ramirez, the Associate Director of the Mexican Cultural Institute in New York, participated at the opening, representing the Mexican Consulate. The artist John Wellington, the sculptor Cynthia Eardley, the actress Suzi Lorraine, playwright and the director Micheal Simon Hall  also attended the show.

Leonardo Pereznieto has exhibited his work in many prominent galleries throughout the world, including Paris, Florence, London, Montecarlo, Frankfurt, Seoul, New York, Los Angeles, and Mexico City and has delivered over 50 lectures including at the New York Academy of Art, the University of Michigan and at the Celebrity Centre Florence, Italy. Among other honors and prizes, he has been awarded the Gold Medal of the Italy Award for Visual Arts; Premio Firenze (sculpture); the Mozart Prize for the Arts (sculpture), Nice, France and the award at the International Art Festival, New York, NY (sculpture).

Aside from his devotion to art, the artist has also dedicated a large part of his life to humanitarian causes. He is the Director of Visual Arts for the non-profit organization Artists and Runners for Human Rights Mexico, which has the purpose of raising people’s awareness about the UN´s Universal Declaration for Human Rights. Believing that art should also contribute to worthwhile social goals, Leonardo has dedicated the sculpture featured above, entitled The Scream, to the protection of human rights.

We’ve all seen Evard Munch’s Expressionist painting, The Scream (1893). The frantic colors, the skeletal shape of the man on the bridge, his gaping mouth, all suggest angst. This painting might as well be a symbol for the horrors humanity suffered after the artist died: the Stalinist purges, the Holocaust. How do you capture the human capacity for evil and senseless violence through sculpture?

Leonardo Pereznieto manages to do it eloquently in his version of The Scream. This sculpture features a man who resembles in some way Munch’s figure on the bridge: his gaping mouth voices a silent scream, while the lines on his face suggest hopeless anguish. His face is slanted upward, as if appealing for an explanation to the divine. We can’t tell if he finds any solace in faith. But we see quite clearly the source of his anguish: the beautiful woman he has lost, who lies languidly in his arms. Her lifeless shape is now free of pain. His rage contrasts with her endless repose. Together they form a symbol of the innocence and outrage of senseless human suffering.

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

Jeff Cornell was born and raised in Connecticut. He studied at the Paier School of Art in Hamden. He is a nationally acclaimed artist who specializes in figure painting. His delicate drawings and pastels of the female form capture not only beauty, but also moments of contemplation and tranquility suspended in time and far removed from worldly problems. He exhibits his paintings in galleries throughout the country.

“The female form is of arresting beauty; there is no other thing I would care as much to portray through my work,” states Jeff Cornell, describing the main inspiration for his art. And, certainly, his appreciation for feminine beauty shows in every contour, every line. What is perhaps more unique and surprising, however, is how fully Cornell can convey the mood of feminine serenity, contemplation and sensuality with so little use of color, such delicate texture and such an economy of lines.

 “I want my work to speak to every person who views it, but it is important to me that the message be whispered rather than shouted,” the artist states. His message is certainly whispered, if not softly sung.

With very little use of shading, his paintings show rounded, sinuous forms, volume. With very little use of color, they show vibrancy, emotion. With an economy of lines, they reach a level of astonishing realism, but only through suggestion. With almost no texture, they are nonetheless palpable. And with very little narrative structure, they hint at movement, thought, feeling and action.

Jeff Cornell’s art is perhaps the most difficult of all: the art of understatement. The art of suggesting human subjectivity—unexpressed thoughts, subcurrents of emotions and hidden desires—rather than displaying them dramatically on the canvas.

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

Christmas Is Coming! What better gift than page after page of beautiful dancers caught at the peak of their expression? Your holiday shopping was never easier! Two books are available: DANCE  MAGIC and the new WATER  DANCE.  Stunning images will inspire everyone from dance students to those who simply love dance or those who love photography. Editions for every budget! Click here to preview books or order:    .http://richardcalmes.com/books.html Creative Photo Sessions this YearIt’s been quite a year for experimenting with both new lighting techniques and unusual shoot locations. From a classic car graveyard to a fabulous town center fountain, my dancers always give me more than I expect. See for yourself!  Click on a thumbnail to see the gallery                               About Richard Calmes Photography Richard is available for photographing live dance events, publicity work, and studio work. His goal is not simply to photograph but to create art. Creativity and new ideas are always the priority. Please call us today to discuss any needs, or any wonderful ideas,  you might have. 404-317-8470 404-444-7629 Visit the web site for thousands of beautiful images! http://www.richardcalmes.com/

On February 1, 2011 Google launched the groundbreaking Google Art Project. This is an online, high-resolution compilation of some of the greatest works of art, featured in some of the most famous museums, worldwide: including the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Museum of Modern Art and, my personal favorite, the Frick Collection in New York City; the Uffizi in Florence; the Palace of Versailles in Paris and the Tate Gallery in London. All in all, seventeen museums and galleries participated in this revolutionary venture.

According to the Wikipedia, Elizabeth Merritt, the Director of the Center for the Future of Museums, described the project as an “interesting experiment.” Other leaders in the world of art greeted this venture with more optimism. Julian Raby, the Director of the Freer Gallery of Art, stated that this project would increase viewers’ interest in visiting the actual museums. Brian Kennedy shared this view, stating that even though the virtual museum and gallery tours offer better resolution and panoramic perspectives, that’s still not a substitute for seeing the works of art in person.

It’s not the same, but, in my opinion, the Google Art Project represents the wave of the future–if not the present–not just for museums, but also for art galleries. Galleries in particular have taken a terrible hit during the past few years. Many were forced to go out of business. During tough economic times, art is seen as a luxury that many consumers are willing to forgo. The Google Art Project generates interest in great works of art once again. And with interest comes visits to the museum and galleries, which in turn, increases the number of  art collectors and buyers.

Incidentally, I also love the idea that Google, which now owns YouTube, combines the virtual museum tours with YouTube videos related to selected artists or works of art. By combining beautiful art and music, sometimes even local scenes, and by being so widely accessible to hundreds of millions of YouTube viewers, Google is making art accessible and inviting not only to art lovers but also to those who have only a remote interest in art.

The world of art has reached a pivotal turning point due to this, and similar, technological advances. Those galleries that will adapt to these new ways of reaching viewers to inform and attract the general public will be much more likely to survive than those that will not. I can’t see virtual reality becoming a substitute for actual reality in any domain: be it art, sex or entertainment. But I do see virtual reality as the most effective–and now, indispensable–way to spread information about the reality that will count most in the twenty-first century. You can learn more about this project by visiting the website http://www.googleartproject.com/c/faq.

More recently, in May 2011, Google also launched Google Music, an online service that offers music in a similar fashion to itunes (in fact, you can import songs from itunes on it). This new service is very versatile: you can purchase songs on Google plus as well as store up to 20,000 songs for free. So far Google Music is available only to U.S. residents, but it will soon open up to other parts of the world. You can find more information about Google Music on the website http://music.google.com.

Claudia Moscovici, postromanticism.com

http://www.amazon.com/Romanticism-Postromanticism-Claudia-Moscovici/dp/0739116754