"the academy didn't like this painting because it was 'terribly executed' and 'too romantic'" that painting is one of the most beautiful things I've ever SEEN what
Back then, if things weren’t done in a PRECISE and particular way, the end product was not seen as having any worth at all. It was a very binary art world, dominated by the academy and with a very “our way or the highway” mindset. To even be entered into consideration for whether a piece of art was “beautiful” or not, it had to meet their criteria. If it didn’t, it was discarded and immediately branded as amateurish and trash. And speaking out against that dismissal branded you as an enemy of the academy in equal measure.
Nah he butchered the anatomy pretty bad, you know jackshit about paintings so you wouldn't know.he fucked up the anatomy but its still pretty beautiful
beauty is in the eye of the beholder and art is whatever we make of it, for the standards of said Academy this wasn't crafted flawlessly and that's the reason they didn't approved it...I agree with you, it's extremely beautiful and a classic
I wonder if "despite" is the right word, because what I felt is that they were really trying to test academicism to its extremes. Did the academic artists complained about these standards/limits in public or private? Change had to come when the extremes were achieved. I also enjoy a lot your channel. I know you take lots of requests in each video, but I wish you could analyze Cândido Portinari's "Os Retirantes" (The Migrants). I went to the museum which is housed today and it was, in my opinion, the strongest painting of the entire exhibition.
Ok, really interesting video, but I do have a question. At the start of the video you talk about some of, in your eyes, the greatest pieces of modern art and use the Flag painting as an example. Can someone please explain to me, an untrained and ignorant viewer, what makes that piece so special? To me it just seems to be the American flag. Is it because I'm not American that I don't have any attachment to the symbolism?
I'm not American either, but I made a video a loooong time ago on it. I might revisit it because it's definitely worth more attention. The video is just titled "Flag" and it's an artwork by Jasper Johns
Academic art was much more diverse than people usually think ,both in term of technique and subject. The artists from this era had a superior training that allowed them to fully express their sensibility. The impressionists too had a classical training in art but the post impressionists totaly lacked this kind of education and despite their fame, people like basquiat for exemple couldn't do real art. Nowdays, contemporary art as it is called is nothing but concept. No need to have any skill in painting or sculpting, you just put togever some pieces of trash, add a panel with a stupid title and sell it to so called art conoissers for a fortune.
@@BBWahoo there are many talented art kids out there like Akiane she started painting at the age of 8 while I started at the age of 14 doing portraits anatomy and nature. People are slowly evolving
i fell in love with cabanel's fallen angel piece the first time i saw it, the attention to detail and the anatomy is amazing, the angel's expression and the history it stems from was definitely an addition to my love for it plus its so aesthetically pleasing. needless to say it really took my breath away.
I felt the exact same way when I first saw it, the painting was a huge inspiration for my style at one point, now it’s formed into something different but a lot of his work really helped in my understanding of anatomy and posing of figures Also, really love your pfp of Venti ^^ I’m Genshin fan myself lol
I think you summed this up quite well. It's unfortunate that so many 'academic' artists are no longer as well known as they once were, and while I reject any rigid notions of 'this is what art is, and nothing else'; I also understand the importance of craftsmanship, technique, training - but, above all, talent and creativity. I love Cabanel and Bourguereau, but I also love the Symbolists and the Expressionists. Art is whatever moves you - excites, saddens, pleases and especially, challenges.
So true what you wrote. Something that bothers me is some modern "artists" that do not actually make art, not even work... That is a total exageration and abuse of the earned freedom in art.
@@Malik-Ibi This is just my opinion, and should be taken as such, but I think art should be a sort of dialogue between the artist and the viewer. Sometimes, I feel like much modern art is simply the artist talking to him/her self. And that's fine, I suppose, but I would prefer to be engaged by art - not simply nonplussed by it.
@@curiousworld7912 - Bingo! Dialogue is the key word. The onanistic impulses that consumed the production of art in the 50s and onward were boring, unengaging, woefully self-reflective. What calls itself "art" today is too often vapid nonsense. Take the human out of art and what's left is a mere thing.
The fallen angel may be my favourite piece of art out there, the expression on his face is so immersive, it sucks you into the painting and makes you feel for this angel, someone you have no connection to, but cabanel still makes you relate to him, makes him real for the time you're looking at him, its absolutely beautiful!!
The fact that the fallen angel is now one of the most famous painting is so great since it was rejected in Cabanel’s life time but is now more famous then some of the art works that were academically accepted back then.
To me it's always kinda looked like that frustrated feeling you would get as a young child when things didn't turn out the way you want, but you know you just simply can't do anything about it.
The lack of autonomy. Every child feels that! Especially when being admonished from a parent like Lucifer being banished from heaven for being an ass. He wasn't even trying to rebel against God (he is now). He wanted to have his own kingdom and be his own god. Like a petulant child, he is frustrated at his lack of autonomy, and he is indignant because he knows he's wrong but has to double down to save face. He has no chance for redemption either so that's the ultimate frustration. He's stuck and doomed.
Funny how the tables have turned, now schools impose the boring modern styles of the 20th century onto students and classical art is the insurgent. I guess people never learn.
I feel like the same thing is happening with cinema. Back in the day gritty realism was new, subversive and exciting, now anything other than that is dismissed as sugary crap when that couldn’t be further from the truth.
I'd caution against calling all 20th century styles "boring" just for the sake of discussion -- I think some pieces definitely have their own value. The work of Escher primarily comes to mind for me.
they don't "impose" anything, they encourage. because they encourage unique individual expression. and artists themselves explore alternative expressions, because that's part of their journey. technical perfection leads to uniformity. do we want artists to make a statement, challenge us, make us question or consider new ideas? do we want them to inspire us, offer unique perspective on the world, give us insight into their psyche or would we rather they create decorative poster art? an artist's expression ought to add another layer on top of technical mastery. realistic reproduction of the real world on the canvas simply isn't enough.
Thanks for uploading this video! Cabanel’s Fallen Angel always reminds me of Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader in ROTS. They look alike and share similar subject matter.
Absolutely! They're both pretty tragic characters filled with bitterness, hate, but also sadness. Thank you for leaving a comment Hugo! It's super appreciated!
In church yesterday, in reading some OT, from Numbers and Joshua, the name Anak is mentioned. He was the father of the race of giants known as the Anakim. Anakin. Skywalker. Fallen angels. Nephilim - the abominations created from the offspring of demons and women. Any way! Thought that was an interesting spin, a deeper spin, into the depths of who Anakin is, or how he got his name, especially since he never knew his father.
i wouldn't say i'm into the fine arts much aside from admiring the mind boggling skill these painters have, but the Fallen Angel has always stuck to the back of my mind. the expression is so raw and human. rarely do i see the emotion of "so angry that you cry" depicted in any media, which to me this is depicting first and foremost. the fact that he half hides his face but doesn't use his wings to cover himself, or curl up into a more protected position, gives this such an energy of "i may have lost the battle, but i haven't lost the war". it seems to admit defeat in the moment while not being beaten down for good.
I understand your point of view. It's clear that you are much into modern art then into classical, academic art. But I find it kinda ironic that people who say they like meaning, they like expression of ideas, sensibility, humanity in art, fail to apreciate such deep and beautiful concepts with a said "boring painting". The way they capture light, the beautiful machine that is our body, how we humans capture the world, how a range of different colors can create an impression of living flesh. You can't just "look" at things and sprinkle your concept and philosophys on top of that to make the audience feel something dramatic. You have to observe, you have to really pay attention to the world around you to be able to paint with such precision and technique. Be humble, and look around. Be humble and look at a hand for 10 hours do understand it's form, how the light slides trough it. And I am only talking about the more technical aspects. Of course it's sad that there was a time where academys would be so strict, but it has happened with modern art too. It's "cool" and it's "edgy" and "expensive" to make provocative, and fast artwork, and galleries love it. You can make more pieces in a shorter period, that's more money, and sell it at skyrocking prices because it's so "unique and artistic". Every art shcool around the globe will teach you to "paint like a kid", "do expressive work" and won't give you the tools to learn your craft, and have whatever voice you wanna have as a painter, isn't that strict too? Isn't that some form of authority? To deprive a whole generation from knowledge?
Eu pensei em comentar algo nesse vídeo, mas você disse tudo o que eu tinha pra dizer e ainda mais (I thought about let something in the comments, but you said everything i had to say and even more)
academic art is absolutely soulless most of the times, I assume you people just watched a bunch of paintings online, congrats, those are the best of the best, most are forgettable landscapes for your dining room, also a lot of you people seem to confuse academicism with figurative art, there's modern figurative art, a lot, not everything is abstract expressionism, Goya was a figurative painter, and he's probably the fiercest painter ever, nothing to do with photo-realistic dross
you are so right, people overlook the attention to detail and dont look into the painting and the meaning behind it. such a simole painting at first glance is easy for us to admire the skill however if u look closely theres so kuch more. the fineness andshadows and brush work is breathtaking. aswell as thinking back to the access to resources they had back then. now mordern art can be beautiful but now theres obviosuly more types and abstract art is welcomed but as a the modern workd develops, the art developed with it and looses the smartness behind it
I think my favorite part about the piece Fallen Angel is how Cabanel used the expression, pose and imagery combine to tell a story that transcends time. Even if you don’t know the full biblical context, just knowing about fallen angels is enough and the painting does the rest. It masterfully displays all the layered emotions that can only come from a complex, deep personal history. It can play into the idea of the sympathetic villain because seeing the extreme pain and hurt of this character makes us understand why they became so dark. A trope that’s only become more popular since then. For example I see this and I immediately think of Anakin Skywalker. Partially because of the likeness, but I think the story Cabanel was trying to tell lines up well. The dark fallen paragon, who’s rejection by those who are supposed to be the “good guy” almost seems as evil as anything the angel might go on to do. It shows he understood the subject matter and told a story that reached from hundreds of years in his past and still connects with the stories we tell hundreds of years later
i wouldn't exactly say that the birth of venus is his most popular work because i swear to you if you show all of cabanel's work to a person, they'd go "oh, the fallen angel guy"
I've seen many of these paintings many times online, but never knew who did them. Thanks for the great video and for putting the title and artist names.
I always enjoy art that feels both open and inviting - conceptually or stylistically - rather than closed and didactic. I think I’m probably not alone with that. There’s probably another tension in this painting which is challenging which is that the viewer is forced to empathise with Satan’s very human and relatable position. He is vulnerable and indignant. Seeing an icon of evil portrayed as something a little more grey, a little more akin to ourselves, is more challenging for me, than the style or technique. Great video, thoughts and considerations as always.
You're absolutely right! I didn't even talk about how relatable and nuanced Satan is and how that might be even more important than technique. Thank you for the super interesting insight!
One of my favorite paintings! When I come to Montpellier to study, my friend here told me that this painting is at Musée Fabre which is in Montpellier! I was so glad when I heard about it, but due to COVID-19, I still can not visit the museum to see it with my eyes. I hope all these problems will end soon and we'll be able to visit museums again because we really need them. Thanks for the video!
It's really a shame that there are no high-resolution reproductions of this painting online. So many people could benefit from being able to look into the details of this amazing artwork. I envy you for being able to see it in person and have access to these details (once Covid is over). Thanks for the comment!
The fact that you’re still thinking about it is why it’s important. A banana on the floor? You won’t remember. But a banana taped to the wall… it’s been years and people still comment and criticize it. I’d think about it like that.
I on the other hand am not a very big fan of modern art, my personal opinion is that the pendulum swung a bit too far back after the academy got shafted. I agree that they were far too rigid and I have nothing against the artists or anything, but a romantic era or even impressionist, or heck even a good ass roman statue does FAR more for me than any picasso or Dali or really any of them. I'm not saying oh my arts better than yours, no, there's a big market of big thinkers out there for modern art, and it deserves to exist, and hell I'm glad you like it. It just does next to nothing for me. My mother is an artist, and her favorite artist is Claude Monet. I do love Monet, I think some of his art is really brearthtaking. When we went to an art museum and she was able to see one of her favorite Monet pieces she was astounded, but not far away I saw a John Martin painting. Man that really changed me. Just goes to show you, not all art is for everyone. If I had to criticize one thing about the current state of art, it's that I wish it was more of an even spread than galleries exclusively full of this super modern stuff. If I could see a Picasso level, Martin level, Monet level and even more modern art piece all in the same room that would be great. Seeing one or the other is what makes me lose faith in the current state of art, even if just a little. Again, everyone is free to love the art they love, I encourage loving the art you love fully, I just feel like the art I MYSELF love has had it's time pass. And that makes me just a little sad.
why you believe academism is somehow less creative than random shapes on canvas 😭I hate this kind of fans of art who praise modern "experimental" art at expense of something actually requiring skill because you want to be pretentious.. I honestly dislike people who have a lot of opinions about art while not being an artist for this exact reason, though I don't know if the creator of the channel is an artist..
My first thought when I saw this painting was, oddly enough, Anakin Skywalker from Revenge of the Sith. He has the same emotions in his eyes, the sadness, the intense rage, the betrayal. To portray that so well in just a static pair of eyes is genius
I am a 17 yo dude who doesnt exactly care about the paintings of the old masters, they look as good to me as any other painting... But this? From the first moment my eyes fell on this, i felt something. Idk what it was that i felt, but it was something that resonated within me, and struck a little chord of wonder and fear... I like this painting.
Well It's quite the coincidence that I had to write a small essay on Cabanel's Cleopatra Testing Poisons on Condemned Prisoners for my exams this morning ! Also great video !
I feel like the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. I see artists get criticised for making their pieces "too realistic". I don't think artists should be criticized for mastering the art of making their pieces flawless. There is room for all.
If everything is art, nothing is art. Nah. I disagree. It's fine to rebel, but do so in style and not by breaking down what has grown over thousands of years. It's not morally good to dismiss beauty and value because you don't have the talent nor the conscientiousness to practice.
Cabanel’s Birth of Venus is one of my favorites. Fallen Angel is also one that I’ve bookmarked mentally, I just love this style. It’s amazing to me that someone can come along, live their life, and capture images + feelings that I resonate w./enjoy, (even if not exact) and put them on a canvas.. for me to admire. Even if, hundreds, to thousands of years later. what a time to be alive.
The Fallen Angel radiates such emotion to me. I feel like if the academy was'nt so restrictive, we would see more works like the Dallen Angel fom Cabanel. He clearly had a great talent for expressing such vivid depiction of emotions. Like you already mentioned, the complexity in the angels face is astonishing.
As someone who isn’t an art person, I find that the issue with modern art is that it seems to go out of its way to be ugly. Academic art might have had restrictions, but at least it was beautiful.
You would be interested in reading the Communist Manifesto where it outlines a step-by-step process to ruin the modern world. One of the steps is to ruin art by purposefully making it ugly to behold as to uninspire society.
True creativity is not thinking outside the box, it is the thinking within a box of one's own design... in rejecting the learned or academic style of art, we rejected the discipline that is required for quality of craftsmanship. What we have done in modern art is to have enslaved ourselves to ingenuity, and no longer is quality of work, expression, technique acceptable, but rather only what is "expressive" and "inventive" and "new" which is very sad for two reasons. modern art has actually made art *less* accessible for people, as for both creators and consumers of art, the standard tropes, techniques, and constants are utterly rejected, meaning that unless you create something that no one has ever seen before, you are not interesting and not published. This results in artists engaging in a never ending pissing contest of outrage, to the point where signing your name on a latrine, or placing a crucifix in a jar off urine is considered of equal or greater merit for display and patronage than a thousand academic masters. no more can one of perhaps average skill but great dedication "do the work and practice long and hard" and be an artist... only those willing to do something outrageous or new are worthy... we built an aesthetic on destroying something rather than creating somthing... in the end the academics gave a standard to create by, perhaps overly rigid, but a standard of creation... but the modernists gave us only chaos and hatred of any restriction, nothing was deemed worthy unless it subverted or destroyed the old system of oppression and led us to total freedom from anyone but ourselves... and then when we killed the academy... we had no one left to kill but ourselves... and so we did. to our great demise... In the end, we fecked ourselves... what is more oppressive than the Master's of the Academy to free expression? The fickle and constantly shifting idol of popular concession and opinion... If you set the world on fire to give it light, what will you do when you have nothing left to burn? Where is beauty?
Something I really really love about this painting is his flexed arms. Its something young kids do when they’re throwing a tantrum - they clench their arms and throw them around. Or it could be trying to release that anger or holding himself back from lashing out or throwing a tantrum. It makes the subject of the painting seem all the more innocent and young as they utilise these childish ways of calming themselves down, and it makes us feel sorry for them as it maybe suggest that they were just too young to know what they did wrong to result in their banishment
The way people exert creativity within constraints - or even constraints giving birth to creativity - has been one of the most inspiring & encouraging aspects of art history for me. (Like Matisse making cutouts as a response to being confined to a wheelchair.) To be honest, I used to find stuff like Renaissance art boring, but started to educate myself about art styles/movements like Mannerism and Baroque where people, while conforming to boundaries to some degree, transgress and break rules - because we’re humans and it’s in our nature
It'd be very easy to "throw the baby out with the bathwater" in our opinions on academic painters. Yes, the paintings were stilted and formal but the technical ability on display in some of those paintings is truly astounding. The porcelain like skin on some of the female subjects of those portraits, the way the scenes depicted glow with an inner light. They're breathtaking achievements. Art is, and always should be, a broad church. The Cabanel's and Bouguereau's need to be rubbing should be rubbing shoulders with the Van Gogh's and Gauguin's because all of it is important. I just want to do, The Electric Bouguereau.
While I can't stand self-righteousness and an elite superiority like in the Academe, I likewise can't stand the fact that people think scribbles on paper, a crudely drawn picture, or ugly abstract shapes are some sort of deeper look into the human soul and reality and are deserving of being called "art". Sorry, if you draw something that your average child could have produced, then you haven't produced anything of value.
is the process of creating art not worth anything? is production the only reason for art, the end product all an artist is worth? is the pottery I've kept from the beginning of my career not art because anyone could make it with a week long wheel class? what separates the pottery I make now as a form of art from the crappy ones I made in the beginning? why does something have to have monetary value to be art? I'm wondering how you fail to recognize that your own pretension surrounding modern art is just like that of the Academe. there are pretentious people in every form of art- modern to academicism. that doesn't make a pollock worth any less just because it doesn't meet your personal standard. modern art, things you would just consider 'scribbles on paper', can have depth of meaning beyond looking pretty just like the typical academic works can. I know a lot of people are very anti-modern art, which I get since I also used to dislike it for its snobbery, but you should try to have an open mind and analyze art beyond their surface value.
@@Charlie-pt1ks There's all sorts of art, I'm not arguing that. A person's early works can be just as important, maybe moreso, to them than their later and more skilled works. But that doesn't mean that their art inherently has value outside of their reckoning, and it doesn't mean I am somehow beholden to respect what they claim is art. I consider some things art that you probably don't. I'm an electromechanical technician. To me, machines are art. They way they fit together, the way they move, a combination of machinery and circuitry that has the power to DO things, is an artform. From highly organized, neat and clean machines where everything works together in well-tuned precision, to a dirty, modified, rusted contraption held together with electrical tape and zip ties as much as actual welds but still manages to do the job it was made for, I see it all as art. I see tools as art as well. A well-used wrench that is pitted and scratched may be a hunk of metal to you, but I can see it's history, what it's been used for, how it's been used, and the inherent value in it beyond it's purely physical utility. They say that art is an extension of ourselves. What more is an extension of ourselves, that the very things we use to create? I'm a writer too. You can see depth and soul in the thoughts and feelings someone puts to words, see into the very nature of someone's mind and how they think about situations or how they think others think about situations by the dialogue they write for their characters. But I don't see you touting dime-store novels as some deep and pure form of expression. "Artists" are so much about a simple visual medium of expression, when in truth it's incredibly limited. Static images or carvings have their place. Even crude drawings and carving and pottery can have meaning to the people who make them. But I am not beholden to share those feelings simply because it's called "art".
Oh, thank you for this amazing video! I have never heard about Cabanel before, and I absolutely love it - the Fallen Angel and the Birth of Venus as well. I will for sure search for more information and I am curious to see more of your videos. Thank you once again!
Once you establish that art needs not be accomplished with skill, training, expertise and accuracy, the door is opened to all sorts of, what I call , illiterate art. This s what much of “ modern art” is today. For me at least. We now accept any work by any untrained apprentice or novice or hack. Worthy of attention and adoration. Sadly, this is the legacy of those early resisters to the academy tradition. It is true that whenever a new art movement presents itself, everything that came before is looked on with disdain. In with the new. Sadly, today, Academicians, with any training and ability, are now maligned, and discarded. The word itself “academician” is considered passé. Out of date. And holds no place in contemporary art. We did this to ourselves for not appreciating how great these master were and hold them in very high esteem. Today we pay the price for - modernism- no matter how lauded and accomplished we say the work is.
his rebellion against the academy, knowing that the fallen angel piece wouldn't be favored well, only shows me a painter that believed so heavily in his talents that he can follow both the norms and standards of the academy but also commit to his own narrative of self expression....that's beautiful to me, he just became my favorite painter!!
it's ironic how then it was ¨the academy¨ that gave the validation. now it's the ¨modern art¨ gallery¨ what gives that recognition. ¨if it's in the gallery, it's art ¨. at least the academy had very well-established rules and requirements. the modern galleries on the other had simply took advantage of the modern idea that ¨anything can be art¨ to make a bs business out of it. there's no rules, no criteria. literally anything can be sold as ¨art¨ if they place it in a gallery. Modern ideas were important to free the artist from strict rules and explore new ideas. but to break the rules with a purpose, one has to dominate those rules first. otherwise is just bs. if anything can be special, nothing is
Great video! The salons are most famous these days for the work their rejection inspired in the Impressionists, but the academy's training sure did help create some wonderful art on purpose as well, even if it was more limited in scope.
as an art history major, the movement i spent the most time studying and analyzing was modernism, but academicism was always visually my favorite and a huge guilty pleasure. what you said in the defense of academicism chapter is exactly why i enjoy it!! and i also find it funny that these people tried so hard to pass off their art of sexy ladies as "academic" just because they're supposed to depict venus or whatever ((mythological, therefore an academic subject!!!))
It's sad that appreciation for the work of great masters is called a "guilty pleasure" these days. Beauty is a better judge of art -- and harder to make -- than crap made for shock value. "Beautiful" is a much better adjective than "edgy" or "transgressive" or "irreverent." I'm sick of that crap, and don't feel any guilt whatsoever in loving Academic art.
This painting has always been one of my all-time favourites, but I had only ever seen it digitally and I never knew where it was being held. That was, until I moved to Montpellier and visited the Musee Fabre. I can still remember the moment like it was yesterday- I was walking from hall to hall, admiring each painting, until I walked into a room and the first thing I saw was the Fallen Angel. I had never rushed towards a painting like that ever in my life. I remember just standing in front of the work for minutes, drinking in every detail, in complete awe. I still get excited to see it whenever I visit the museum
i dont get it.....isnt art suppose to be a channel for your emotions and expression? The Fallen Angel does exactly that and does it in an amazing way. I felt drawn to it from the moment i first saw it...jsut because of the eyes. The eyes were so expressive that i almost wanted to talk to the fallen angel and listen to his story of his downfall.
"The literature on creativity strongly suggests that when you impose restrictions on people, it actually makes them more creative rather than less. Because part of what creativity is is overcoming of obstacles. Imagine someone who write poetry in Haiku format. It's very restrictive and obviously arbitrarily so, but the fact of restriction is part of what makes the poetic form possible. The same thing is True when you're playing a game - there's far more things that you can't do, when you play chess, than there are things that you can do, but there's still an infinite variations of chess games. So this idea that there is a dichonomy between structure and rules and creativity is perniciously false and contradicted by the evidence." - Jordan Peterson I think that we shouldn't compare modern and academic art at all, both of them have their own problems. I love early modern art - where they still applied their skills and made their art look absolutely beautiful to most people, including average people. Nowadays art is often used just for making a statement, for propaganda. Art is meant to be more like a search for meaning rather than for saying what is True. As long as these things are included in an artwork - we shouldn't care about the movement.
Your perspective is that of a child. The Academy taught the _mechnics_ of being an artist. Perspective draftmanship, material handling, canvas preparation, and how to market and merchandise oneself. Almost none of the successful artists of the Impressionist period escaped the rigorous training of the Academy.
I think the story behind the Fallen Angel is really simple. And the painting is really simple, too. But nothing beats that expression in the eyes. It's that powerful; it pushes the piece into value for me all on its own.
very instructive... having majored in French, I along w/ my classmates always heaved a collective ho-hum whenever l'Academie was brought up. you've succeeded in drawing a very insightful point that lifts the mundane to a place of admiration for the hard-fought exceptionalism among some of them.
I am so grateful for the modern art movement and the endless range of subject, style, and creativity that was liberated for the art world from it. However, I think there’s a tragedy lost in the death of Academicism. We went from it being everything that is art to basically not being a part of it. I took several art electives during my college major, and not one gave the time of day to it. To go and learn how to master the brush in the way pre-modern artists had to feels like a near entirely self-guided and almost impossible endeavor. I’m glad with where art is now, but just wish Academicism didn’t have to die to get us there.
I'll begin this comment by saying I agree with most commenters here that this is a beautiful painting that masterfully captures a great range of emotions. But, the more I look at this painting the more I see that it is anatomically incorrect; either the subject's head is perched on top of his right shoulder or the left shoulder was stretched over to rest on the rock. Either way , the head doesn't center on the torso. That said, I still love the painting.
I mostly agree with your Angel's emotions take, but as a 4 decades' fan of the painting my interpretation is slightly different (as I stare at a print of just his face on my dressing table). He's devastated, but also angry and the coveres face in an attempt not to let his emotions and twisted face to be seen i.e. 'I won't give you the satisfaction!'. There's more than despair, but a glint of a seething 'fuck YOU!' anger brewing deep beneath. In modern terms, imagine a troublemaker son kicked out of the house (movie Western style), doors flying open with a boom and he lands on the hard ground hearing 'AND STAY OUT!'. He's shamed BUT also at a an early point of starting to feel deeply wronged. I see a bit of '🤬'! I'll show YOU!' in it, fueled by humiliation. The intentionally pearl-like tear isn't just sadness, but remaining 'good angel stuff' leaving him. The stare is very direct, not cast downward or to a side. It's all in the Angel's head and eye position. Imagine his head tilted up or down a tad, (shame, etc) eyes cast upward, furrowed brows' inner tips raised in a last ditch pleading. Nope! No wonder it was found to be too unnerving and stirred raw emotions. It was rejected in a flowery appropriately Academic phrased form, but it's easy to read between the lines. I've looked at those eyes for decades because of the all the reasons above. In fact, as a prank birthday gift to my art student avid outdoorsman friend who got plenty of scrapes (🤦♀️😈), I DIY'd a BD gift - printed just the eyes on clear labels in different sizes and put them on top of various types of larger bandaids/plasters. Larger full-face image went on the small flat tin first aid box, travel-sized saline and tear less antiseptic rinse bottles. 🤪 Took a couple of hours on a rainy week-end but SO totally worth it. He loved it. 🤣🥴
"Modern art gave us one of the best works of art ever produced and allowed artists new ways to express themselves" - *shows some doodles* I'm not sure I parsed it quite right but that was sarcasm, right?
In academic art there is aways some type of art being rejected even today. When i was in that field, conceptual art was praised above all and it still is today. Skill is looked down upon and seen as pointless, only meaning and how many pages of text you can write about the piece is where it's value is at. I wish we could go decades or 100 years back when art where skill and meaning was ballanced
I have a certain fondness for naturalistic art with a clear narrative. As a teenager I would copy paintings from books, including Cabanel's Birth of Venus. I had a certain fascination with the female form and drew a lot of naked women, a fact which made more sense after I came out as a trans lesbian.
I Am Lucifer Heylel Morningstar, The Son of The Dawn,The Shining One,The Anointed Cherub,The Seraphim of Light, and The Original Fallen Angel,The Devil,The Serpent, The Dragon,The Prince of Darkness.
Calling Lucifer 'Beelzebub' and 'Satan' as if they are the same character somehow irks me. I know if you haven't at least read the Wikipedia article, you might throw them all in the same pot, but there are so many pictures and stories in today's media, each name having a specific depiction, one might realize there is a difference. And the picture of the falling angel has always been Lucifer. Thank you for coming to my TED talk
2:59 The Execution of Lady Jane Grey has got to be one of the most 4k looking paintings I have ever seen! It looks like a picture taken by a digital camera. That said, I am obsessed with the Fallen Angel painting and wanted to know more about the artist. Something about the eyes, the emotions and how he was able to capture it so well pulled me in the second my eyes landed on the art.
Modern artist could not paint like the academy painters they did not have the skills and talent. That's why they were not excepted. Modern artist were promoted in the 19th century by the galleries because they could pump out paintings very quickly do to there simplicity. I master piece takes much more time to create. The galleries needed to make quick lucrative sales so they spread propaganda that the academic artist were out of style and were not worthy of consideration. The academic painters could copy any of the Modern contemporary painters, but the Modern artist could never copy a true masterpiece. Just like a pop artist could never compose of the likes of Bach or Mozart. These are just facts and facts are not based on emotion they are on reality.
Hilarious that you think this art is somehow worse than modern art. It’s much much better. It’s only bc you have art training. All of us with no training can see academic art is better than modern crap.
The academy was part of the state government created by King Louis XIV so the Salon was a government institution & they had every right to set the rules. Also Manet & many impressionists had paintings accepted by the salon jury. Gustave Courbet who never attended the academy was a realist painter achieved his first Salon success in 1849 with his painting After Dinner at Ornans. The work, reminiscent of Chardin and Le Nain, earned Courbet a gold medal and was purchased by the state. The real dictators of art were the modernists who tried to silence anyone who didn’t tow their line. Modern art is all about producing art fast so you can make more money quickly it’s not art.
Reminds me of the church commissioning a marble statue of the devil. Finding it too sexy, commissioned ANOTHER one which was also extremely sexy. Like Lucifier is a fallen ANGEL, he is meant to be beautiful.
Student creates a beautiful, emotional, photorealistic painting during a time when the internet or online art tutorials didn't exist yet. Gets rejected by the academy. WTF
Given the historical context of the power of the Academy at the time, it does make sense that the Fallen Angel represents the author's emotions regarding its restrictions on artistic freedom. It must have been very frustrating indeed.
“Modern Art” has left a particular distaste within my mouth. Many people simply fling colors at a painting (like Jackson Pollock) and call it “painting.” Technically, anything is art, because art is subjective- that’s what makes it art. With all honesty, I simply don’t care. Flicking paint at the canvas, or not even painting whatsoever- or taping a banana to a wall? It is all terrible.
![CAMPปลิ้น | EP.82[1/2] แก๊ง 3 สาวเพื่อนซี้บุก CAMPปลิ้นครั้งนี้ห้ามเสียอาการ](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_6WUjXHe1TM/mqdefault.jpg)
"the academy didn't like this painting because it was 'terribly executed' and 'too romantic'"
that painting is one of the most beautiful things I've ever SEEN what
Back then, if things weren’t done in a PRECISE and particular way, the end product was not seen as having any worth at all. It was a very binary art world, dominated by the academy and with a very “our way or the highway” mindset. To even be entered into consideration for whether a piece of art was “beautiful” or not, it had to meet their criteria. If it didn’t, it was discarded and immediately branded as amateurish and trash. And speaking out against that dismissal branded you as an enemy of the academy in equal measure.
Nah he butchered the anatomy pretty bad, you know jackshit about paintings so you wouldn't know.he fucked up the anatomy but its still pretty beautiful
beauty is in the eye of the beholder and art is whatever we make of it, for the standards of said Academy this wasn't crafted flawlessly and that's the reason they didn't approved it...I agree with you, it's extremely beautiful and a classic
@@christianurena510 hm yes.. i love it, but there is something wrong with the position of the head
i think thats why the academy hated it in the first place, its shows way too much emotion for their tastes
you know the video is guna be good when the most replayed part is the beginning of the video
Sin dudas uno de mis pintores favoritos!!!
I wonder if "despite" is the right word, because what I felt is that they were really trying to test academicism to its extremes. Did the academic artists complained about these standards/limits in public or private? Change had to come when the extremes were achieved.
I also enjoy a lot your channel. I know you take lots of requests in each video, but I wish you could analyze Cândido Portinari's "Os Retirantes" (The Migrants). I went to the museum which is housed today and it was, in my opinion, the strongest painting of the entire exhibition.
Ok, really interesting video, but I do have a question. At the start of the video you talk about some of, in your eyes, the greatest pieces of modern art and use the Flag painting as an example. Can someone please explain to me, an untrained and ignorant viewer, what makes that piece so special? To me it just seems to be the American flag. Is it because I'm not American that I don't have any attachment to the symbolism?
I'm not American either, but I made a video a loooong time ago on it. I might revisit it because it's definitely worth more attention. The video is just titled "Flag" and it's an artwork by Jasper Johns
Academic art was much more diverse than people usually think ,both in term of technique and subject. The artists from this era had a superior training that allowed them to fully express their sensibility. The impressionists too had a classical training in art but the post impressionists totaly lacked this kind of education and despite their fame, people like basquiat for exemple couldn't do real art. Nowdays, contemporary art as it is called is nothing but concept. No need to have any skill in painting or sculpting, you just put togever some pieces of trash, add a panel with a stupid title and sell it to so called art conoissers for a fortune.
he was 24 years old when he painted the Fallen Angel, that's mind blowing
You weren't impressed when he started at 13!? THAT is mind blowing!
@@BBWahoo there are many talented art kids out there like Akiane she started painting at the age of 8 while I started at the age of 14 doing portraits anatomy and nature. People are slowly evolving
Imagine what we could of accomplished if we didn't stare on screens all day.
24 is kind of old to go through an emo phase.
@@dragoon260Or didn’t have to study many random subjects in school instead on focusing what you want to learn
i fell in love with cabanel's fallen angel piece the first time i saw it, the attention to detail and the anatomy is amazing, the angel's expression and the history it stems from was definitely an addition to my love for it plus its so aesthetically pleasing. needless to say it really took my breath away.
I felt the exact same way when I first saw it, the painting was a huge inspiration for my style at one point, now it’s formed into something different but a lot of his work really helped in my understanding of anatomy and posing of figures
Also, really love your pfp of Venti ^^ I’m Genshin fan myself lol
I know right it's such a beautiful painting with aot of emotion
I think you summed this up quite well. It's unfortunate that so many 'academic' artists are no longer as well known as they once were, and while I reject any rigid notions of 'this is what art is, and nothing else'; I also understand the importance of craftsmanship, technique, training - but, above all, talent and creativity. I love Cabanel and Bourguereau, but I also love the Symbolists and the Expressionists. Art is whatever moves you - excites, saddens, pleases and especially, challenges.
So true what you wrote.
Something that bothers me is some modern "artists" that do not actually make art, not even work... That is a total exageration and abuse of the earned freedom in art.
@@Malik-Ibi This is just my opinion, and should be taken as such, but I think art should be a sort of dialogue between the artist and the viewer. Sometimes, I feel like much modern art is simply the artist talking to him/her self. And that's fine, I suppose, but I would prefer to be engaged by art - not simply nonplussed by it.
@@curiousworld7912 - Bingo! Dialogue is the key word. The onanistic impulses that consumed the production of art in the 50s and onward were boring, unengaging, woefully self-reflective. What calls itself "art" today is too often vapid nonsense. Take the human out of art and what's left is a mere thing.
@@jamesrobiscoe1174 Thank you, and I must say; this is the first time I've seen the use of the word 'onanistic' in a TH-cam post. Well-put. :)
art is beauty and nothing else
The fallen angel may be my favourite piece of art out there, the expression on his face is so immersive, it sucks you into the painting and makes you feel for this angel, someone you have no connection to, but cabanel still makes you relate to him, makes him real for the time you're looking at him, its absolutely beautiful!!
It reminds me of anakin crying with his yellow eyes
@@thrilloasis Anakin is a religious reference to Lucifer
The fact that the fallen angel is now one of the most famous painting is so great since it was rejected in Cabanel’s life time but is now more famous then some of the art works that were academically accepted back then.
I feel like the emotion that’s portrayed the most in the painting Fallen Angel, is frustration
Jojo is good you hater
is that really the best word you can come up with lol
i can recognize that floch joker profile picture anywhere...
Bro it's more than frustration lol
i see “jealousy” in his eyes
To me it's always kinda looked like that frustrated feeling you would get as a young child when things didn't turn out the way you want, but you know you just simply can't do anything about it.
The lack of autonomy. Every child feels that! Especially when being admonished from a parent like Lucifer being banished from heaven for being an ass. He wasn't even trying to rebel against God (he is now). He wanted to have his own kingdom and be his own god. Like a petulant child, he is frustrated at his lack of autonomy, and he is indignant because he knows he's wrong but has to double down to save face. He has no chance for redemption either so that's the ultimate frustration. He's stuck and doomed.
My thought exactly. The tense musculature and the angel's seething, semi-hidden face all speak to a childlike anger and impotence.
It looks like dude is about to shred the whole universe down to atoms
@@lonnacamacho4383 wow. you couldn't have said it better. do you mind if i save your comment?
@@cursed6368 Absolutely. Thank you for the compliment!
You have introduced a world of art to me that I honestly would of never dove into without your videos. Keep up the great work!
Awww! This means the world to me! It makes me very happy! Thank you so much!
Funny how the tables have turned, now schools impose the boring modern styles of the 20th century onto students and classical art is the insurgent. I guess people never learn.
I feel like the same thing is happening with cinema. Back in the day gritty realism was new, subversive and exciting, now anything other than that is dismissed as sugary crap when that couldn’t be further from the truth.
Trying to join in what art is and can be has never worked. It by definition defies all boundaries of self expression if done genuinely
Skill talent always did more for me then modern Art
I'd caution against calling all 20th century styles "boring" just for the sake of discussion -- I think some pieces definitely have their own value. The work of Escher primarily comes to mind for me.
they don't "impose" anything, they encourage. because they encourage unique individual expression. and artists themselves explore alternative expressions, because that's part of their journey. technical perfection leads to uniformity. do we want artists to make a statement, challenge us, make us question or consider new ideas? do we want them to inspire us, offer unique perspective on the world, give us insight into their psyche or would we rather they create decorative poster art? an artist's expression ought to add another layer on top of technical mastery. realistic reproduction of the real world on the canvas simply isn't enough.
Thanks for uploading this video! Cabanel’s Fallen Angel always reminds me of Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader in ROTS. They look alike and share similar subject matter.
Absolutely! They're both pretty tragic characters filled with bitterness, hate, but also sadness.
Thank you for leaving a comment Hugo! It's super appreciated!
@@TheCanvasArtHistoryThank you for responding to my comment and giving your take on it! I really love your videos and keep doing what you’re doing!
Yeah me too, and I‘ve never even watched all of the films fully lmao
Only you can understand the context of the Fallen Angel, whereas the other guy is a puny psychopath that kills kids for no reason.
In church yesterday, in reading some OT, from Numbers and Joshua, the name Anak is mentioned. He was the father of the race of giants known as the Anakim. Anakin. Skywalker. Fallen angels. Nephilim - the abominations created from the offspring of demons and women. Any way! Thought that was an interesting spin, a deeper spin, into the depths of who Anakin is, or how he got his name, especially since he never knew his father.
He looks like Anakin in that one scene.
i wouldn't say i'm into the fine arts much aside from admiring the mind boggling skill these painters have, but the Fallen Angel has always stuck to the back of my mind. the expression is so raw and human. rarely do i see the emotion of "so angry that you cry" depicted in any media, which to me this is depicting first and foremost. the fact that he half hides his face but doesn't use his wings to cover himself, or curl up into a more protected position, gives this such an energy of "i may have lost the battle, but i haven't lost the war". it seems to admit defeat in the moment while not being beaten down for good.
Weirdly inspiring for a depiction of a “demon”! Can’t help rooting for the guy
@@Camel_P_oxI thought Lucifer was a non canon name for satan?
@@Camel_P_ox Oh wasn't trying to be rude. It was a genuine question
I understand your point of view. It's clear that you are much into modern art then into classical, academic art. But I find it kinda ironic that people who say they like meaning, they like expression of ideas, sensibility, humanity in art, fail to apreciate such deep and beautiful concepts with a said "boring painting". The way they capture light, the beautiful machine that is our body, how we humans capture the world, how a range of different colors can create an impression of living flesh. You can't just "look" at things and sprinkle your concept and philosophys on top of that to make the audience feel something dramatic. You have to observe, you have to really pay attention to the world around you to be able to paint with such precision and technique. Be humble, and look around. Be humble and look at a hand for 10 hours do understand it's form, how the light slides trough it. And I am only talking about the more technical aspects.
Of course it's sad that there was a time where academys would be so strict, but it has happened with modern art too. It's "cool" and it's "edgy" and "expensive" to make provocative, and fast artwork, and galleries love it. You can make more pieces in a shorter period, that's more money, and sell it at skyrocking prices because it's so "unique and artistic". Every art shcool around the globe will teach you to "paint like a kid", "do expressive work" and won't give you the tools to learn your craft, and have whatever voice you wanna have as a painter, isn't that strict too? Isn't that some form of authority? To deprive a whole generation from knowledge?
You summed it up so well. The "defense of academic art despite its inferiority to modern art" was certainly a little grating lol.
Eu pensei em comentar algo nesse vídeo, mas você disse tudo o que eu tinha pra dizer e ainda mais (I thought about let something in the comments, but you said everything i had to say and even more)
academic art is absolutely soulless most of the times, I assume you people just watched a bunch of paintings online, congrats, those are the best of the best, most are forgettable landscapes for your dining room, also a lot of you people seem to confuse academicism with figurative art, there's modern figurative art, a lot, not everything is abstract expressionism, Goya was a figurative painter, and he's probably the fiercest painter ever, nothing to do with photo-realistic dross
Modern art is a money laundering scheme, not art
you are so right, people overlook the attention to detail and dont look into the painting and the meaning behind it. such a simole painting at first glance is easy for us to admire the skill however if u look closely theres so kuch more. the fineness andshadows and brush work is breathtaking. aswell as thinking back to the access to resources they had back then. now mordern art can be beautiful but now theres obviosuly more types and abstract art is welcomed but as a the modern workd develops, the art developed with it and looses the smartness behind it
I would take any painting of the Academists, rather than the childrens' drawings by Modernists.
I think my favorite part about the piece Fallen Angel is how Cabanel used the expression, pose and imagery combine to tell a story that transcends time. Even if you don’t know the full biblical context, just knowing about fallen angels is enough and the painting does the rest. It masterfully displays all the layered emotions that can only come from a complex, deep personal history. It can play into the idea of the sympathetic villain because seeing the extreme pain and hurt of this character makes us understand why they became so dark. A trope that’s only become more popular since then. For example I see this and I immediately think of Anakin Skywalker. Partially because of the likeness, but I think the story Cabanel was trying to tell lines up well. The dark fallen paragon, who’s rejection by those who are supposed to be the “good guy” almost seems as evil as anything the angel might go on to do. It shows he understood the subject matter and told a story that reached from hundreds of years in his past and still connects with the stories we tell hundreds of years later
i wouldn't exactly say that the birth of venus is his most popular work because i swear to you if you show all of cabanel's work to a person, they'd go "oh, the fallen angel guy"
I've seen many of these paintings many times online, but never knew who did them. Thanks for the great video and for putting the title and artist names.
I feel disgusted by modern art. It looks like shit and piss Or someone had a diarrhea on the canvas and traditional art was much better than this
Bruh
I always enjoy art that feels both open and inviting - conceptually or stylistically - rather than closed and didactic. I think I’m probably not alone with that. There’s probably another tension in this painting which is challenging which is that the viewer is forced to empathise with Satan’s very human and relatable position. He is vulnerable and indignant. Seeing an icon of evil portrayed as something a little more grey, a little more akin to ourselves, is more challenging for me, than the style or technique.
Great video, thoughts and considerations as always.
You're absolutely right! I didn't even talk about how relatable and nuanced Satan is and how that might be even more important than technique. Thank you for the super interesting insight!
I see his eyes and hear Anakin scream I HATE YOU, I wonder if Hayden Christensen took this painting as inspiration for his performance
I hate sand. It's rough and coarse and gets everywhere.
Darth " No beach for me" Vader.
One of my favorite paintings! When I come to Montpellier to study, my friend here told me that this painting is at Musée Fabre which is in Montpellier! I was so glad when I heard about it, but due to COVID-19, I still can not visit the museum to see it with my eyes. I hope all these problems will end soon and we'll be able to visit museums again because we really need them.
Thanks for the video!
It's really a shame that there are no high-resolution reproductions of this painting online. So many people could benefit from being able to look into the details of this amazing artwork. I envy you for being able to see it in person and have access to these details (once Covid is over).
Thanks for the comment!
Every time I see tat painting I just think
“it’s over Anakin I have the high ground!”
“YOU UNDERESTIMATE MY POWER”
Frrrr
The rejection of Academicism made it so that a banana taped to a wall is now considered "art". I don't like this.
The fact that you’re still thinking about it is why it’s important. A banana on the floor? You won’t remember. But a banana taped to the wall… it’s been years and people still comment and criticize it. I’d think about it like that.
I dont agree. I prefer Cabanel and Bourguerois over many modern artist.
I on the other hand am not a very big fan of modern art, my personal opinion is that the pendulum swung a bit too far back after the academy got shafted. I agree that they were far too rigid and I have nothing against the artists or anything, but a romantic era or even impressionist, or heck even a good ass roman statue does FAR more for me than any picasso or Dali or really any of them. I'm not saying oh my arts better than yours, no, there's a big market of big thinkers out there for modern art, and it deserves to exist, and hell I'm glad you like it. It just does next to nothing for me. My mother is an artist, and her favorite artist is Claude Monet. I do love Monet, I think some of his art is really brearthtaking. When we went to an art museum and she was able to see one of her favorite Monet pieces she was astounded, but not far away I saw a John Martin painting. Man that really changed me.
Just goes to show you, not all art is for everyone. If I had to criticize one thing about the current state of art, it's that I wish it was more of an even spread than galleries exclusively full of this super modern stuff. If I could see a Picasso level, Martin level, Monet level and even more modern art piece all in the same room that would be great. Seeing one or the other is what makes me lose faith in the current state of art, even if just a little. Again, everyone is free to love the art they love, I encourage loving the art you love fully, I just feel like the art I MYSELF love has had it's time pass. And that makes me just a little sad.
Still good video doe :)
why you believe academism is somehow less creative than random shapes on canvas 😭I hate this kind of fans of art who praise modern "experimental" art at expense of something actually requiring skill because you want to be pretentious.. I honestly dislike people who have a lot of opinions about art while not being an artist for this exact reason, though I don't know if the creator of the channel is an artist..
My first thought when I saw this painting was, oddly enough, Anakin Skywalker from Revenge of the Sith. He has the same emotions in his eyes, the sadness, the intense rage, the betrayal. To portray that so well in just a static pair of eyes is genius
Sand
Omg I thought the exact same thing 😮
Lucas placed a reference to The Fallen Angel in Revenge of the sith when Obi-Wan and Anakin are fighting on Mustafar
Christensen is a great actor I hate how he was treated back then
This brought tears to my eyes. Loved this video
That's very nice to hear! Thank you Eli
I love that Lucifer in this painting is pictured a lot like Anakin Skywalker, whereas he fell to the dark side
I am a 17 yo dude who doesnt exactly care about the paintings of the old masters, they look as good to me as any other painting... But this? From the first moment my eyes fell on this, i felt something. Idk what it was that i felt, but it was something that resonated within me, and struck a little chord of wonder and fear... I like this painting.
It made me aroused
Its funny because im 17 rn and im in the same exact position as you were 2 years ago, i can relate to every single word you’ve said
Well It's quite the coincidence that I had to write a small essay on Cabanel's Cleopatra Testing Poisons on Condemned Prisoners for my exams this morning ! Also great video !
What are the odds? That's a crazy coincidence! I really hope you did well on your exam!
Thank you for the compliment and thank you for commenting!
I feel like the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. I see artists get criticised for making their pieces "too realistic". I don't think artists should be criticized for mastering the art of making their pieces flawless. There is room for all.
If everything is art, nothing is art.
Nah. I disagree. It's fine to rebel, but do so in style and not by breaking down what has grown over thousands of years. It's not morally good to dismiss beauty and value because you don't have the talent nor the conscientiousness to practice.
i’m so happy i found this channel in 2020. it reinvigorated my love of art. another fantastic vid as always, hope to see so much more in 2021
Thank you so much Ethan for such a sweet comment! I'm very excited for what's in store for 2021!
@@TheCanvasArtHistory do you still reply to comments ?
Cabanel’s Birth of Venus is one of my favorites. Fallen Angel is also one that I’ve bookmarked mentally, I just love this style.
It’s amazing to me that someone can come along, live their life, and capture images + feelings that I resonate w./enjoy, (even if not exact) and put them on a canvas.. for me to admire. Even if, hundreds, to thousands of years later. what a time to be alive.
"Bookmarked mentally" i wish i could do that
The Fallen Angel radiates such emotion to me. I feel like if the academy was'nt so restrictive, we would see more works like the Dallen Angel fom Cabanel. He clearly had a great talent for expressing such vivid depiction of emotions.
Like you already mentioned, the complexity in the angels face is astonishing.
As someone who isn’t an art person, I find that the issue with modern art is that it seems to go out of its way to be ugly. Academic art might have had restrictions, but at least it was beautiful.
You would be interested in reading the Communist Manifesto where it outlines a step-by-step process to ruin the modern world. One of the steps is to ruin art by purposefully making it ugly to behold as to uninspire society.
beauty really is up to the beholder. i find most modern art very beautiful.
@@nothingbutfleurs Some of it looks good, but somr of it seems like it is being ugly on purpose to be deconstructive.
True creativity is not thinking outside the box, it is the thinking within a box of one's own design... in rejecting the learned or academic style of art, we rejected the discipline that is required for quality of craftsmanship. What we have done in modern art is to have enslaved ourselves to ingenuity, and no longer is quality of work, expression, technique acceptable, but rather only what is "expressive" and "inventive" and "new" which is very sad for two reasons.
modern art has actually made art *less* accessible for people, as for both creators and consumers of art, the standard tropes, techniques, and constants are utterly rejected, meaning that unless you create something that no one has ever seen before, you are not interesting and not published. This results in artists engaging in a never ending pissing contest of outrage, to the point where signing your name on a latrine, or placing a crucifix in a jar off urine is considered of equal or greater merit for display and patronage than a thousand academic masters.
no more can one of perhaps average skill but great dedication "do the work and practice long and hard" and be an artist... only those willing to do something outrageous or new are worthy... we built an aesthetic on destroying something rather than creating somthing... in the end the academics gave a standard to create by, perhaps overly rigid, but a standard of creation... but the modernists gave us only chaos and hatred of any restriction, nothing was deemed worthy unless it subverted or destroyed the old system of oppression and led us to total freedom from anyone but ourselves... and then when we killed the academy... we had no one left to kill but ourselves... and so we did. to our great demise...
In the end, we fecked ourselves... what is more oppressive than the Master's of the Academy to free expression? The fickle and constantly shifting idol of popular concession and opinion...
If you set the world on fire to give it light, what will you do when you have nothing left to burn?
Where is beauty?
this said... great work on this channel. "Fallen Angel" is indeed a masterpiece.
"Modern" art for me is someone taking a massive shit on a rug and calling it art.
I still think that a lot of modern art is bullshit. Like come on, wtf is a few scribbles of paint on canvas? Some artist even sold a blank canvas
Something I really really love about this painting is his flexed arms. Its something young kids do when they’re throwing a tantrum - they clench their arms and throw them around. Or it could be trying to release that anger or holding himself back from lashing out or throwing a tantrum. It makes the subject of the painting seem all the more innocent and young as they utilise these childish ways of calming themselves down, and it makes us feel sorry for them as it maybe suggest that they were just too young to know what they did wrong to result in their banishment
The way people exert creativity within constraints - or even constraints giving birth to creativity - has been one of the most inspiring & encouraging aspects of art history for me. (Like Matisse making cutouts as a response to being confined to a wheelchair.)
To be honest, I used to find stuff like Renaissance art boring, but started to educate myself about art styles/movements like Mannerism and Baroque where people, while conforming to boundaries to some degree, transgress and break rules - because we’re humans and it’s in our nature
Really ?
You think that some shit Picasa draw when he is drunk are better than the fallen angel !
It'd be very easy to "throw the baby out with the bathwater" in our opinions on academic painters. Yes, the paintings were stilted and formal but the technical ability on display in some of those paintings is truly astounding. The porcelain like skin on some of the female subjects of those portraits, the way the scenes depicted glow with an inner light. They're breathtaking achievements.
Art is, and always should be, a broad church. The Cabanel's and Bouguereau's need to be rubbing should be rubbing shoulders with the Van Gogh's and Gauguin's because all of it is important.
I just want to do, The Electric Bouguereau.
Let's be real, regardless of brilliance or creativity, most modern art is ugly
While I can't stand self-righteousness and an elite superiority like in the Academe, I likewise can't stand the fact that people think scribbles on paper, a crudely drawn picture, or ugly abstract shapes are some sort of deeper look into the human soul and reality and are deserving of being called "art".
Sorry, if you draw something that your average child could have produced, then you haven't produced anything of value.
is the process of creating art not worth anything? is production the only reason for art, the end product all an artist is worth? is the pottery I've kept from the beginning of my career not art because anyone could make it with a week long wheel class? what separates the pottery I make now as a form of art from the crappy ones I made in the beginning? why does something have to have monetary value to be art?
I'm wondering how you fail to recognize that your own pretension surrounding modern art is just like that of the Academe. there are pretentious people in every form of art- modern to academicism. that doesn't make a pollock worth any less just because it doesn't meet your personal standard. modern art, things you would just consider 'scribbles on paper', can have depth of meaning beyond looking pretty just like the typical academic works can. I know a lot of people are very anti-modern art, which I get since I also used to dislike it for its snobbery, but you should try to have an open mind and analyze art beyond their surface value.
@@Charlie-pt1ks There's all sorts of art, I'm not arguing that. A person's early works can be just as important, maybe moreso, to them than their later and more skilled works. But that doesn't mean that their art inherently has value outside of their reckoning, and it doesn't mean I am somehow beholden to respect what they claim is art.
I consider some things art that you probably don't. I'm an electromechanical technician. To me, machines are art. They way they fit together, the way they move, a combination of machinery and circuitry that has the power to DO things, is an artform. From highly organized, neat and clean machines where everything works together in well-tuned precision, to a dirty, modified, rusted contraption held together with electrical tape and zip ties as much as actual welds but still manages to do the job it was made for, I see it all as art. I see tools as art as well. A well-used wrench that is pitted and scratched may be a hunk of metal to you, but I can see it's history, what it's been used for, how it's been used, and the inherent value in it beyond it's purely physical utility. They say that art is an extension of ourselves. What more is an extension of ourselves, that the very things we use to create?
I'm a writer too. You can see depth and soul in the thoughts and feelings someone puts to words, see into the very nature of someone's mind and how they think about situations or how they think others think about situations by the dialogue they write for their characters. But I don't see you touting dime-store novels as some deep and pure form of expression. "Artists" are so much about a simple visual medium of expression, when in truth it's incredibly limited.
Static images or carvings have their place. Even crude drawings and carving and pottery can have meaning to the people who make them. But I am not beholden to share those feelings simply because it's called "art".
Oh, thank you for this amazing video! I have never heard about Cabanel before, and I absolutely love it - the Fallen Angel and the Birth of Venus as well. I will for sure search for more information and I am curious to see more of your videos. Thank you once again!
I'm so happy to read this. Thank you so much Jaroslava! Your comment made my day :)
Art is beautiful. Most modern art is just a laundering sceme.
Once you establish that art needs not be accomplished with skill, training, expertise and accuracy, the door is opened to all sorts of, what I call , illiterate art. This s what much of “ modern art” is today. For me at least. We now accept any work by any untrained apprentice or novice or hack. Worthy of attention and adoration. Sadly, this is the legacy of those early resisters to the academy tradition.
It is true that whenever a new art movement presents itself, everything that came before is looked on with disdain. In with the new.
Sadly, today, Academicians, with any training and ability, are now maligned, and discarded. The word itself “academician” is considered passé. Out of date. And holds no place in contemporary art. We did this to ourselves for not appreciating how great these master were and hold them in very high esteem. Today we pay the price for - modernism- no matter how lauded and accomplished we say the work is.
his rebellion against the academy, knowing that the fallen angel piece wouldn't be favored well, only shows me a painter that believed so heavily in his talents that he can follow both the norms and standards of the academy but also commit to his own narrative of self expression....that's beautiful to me, he just became my favorite painter!!
it's ironic how then it was ¨the academy¨ that gave the validation. now it's the ¨modern art¨ gallery¨ what gives that recognition. ¨if it's in the gallery, it's art ¨. at least the academy had very well-established rules and requirements. the modern galleries on the other had simply took advantage of the modern idea that ¨anything can be art¨ to make a bs business out of it. there's no rules, no criteria. literally anything can be sold as ¨art¨ if they place it in a gallery.
Modern ideas were important to free the artist from strict rules and explore new ideas. but to break the rules with a purpose, one has to dominate those rules first. otherwise is just bs. if anything can be special, nothing is
This is not Beelzebub. Its Lucifer. It was Lucifer who was cast out of heaven and who was in 'Paradise Lost'
Great video! The salons are most famous these days for the work their rejection inspired in the Impressionists, but the academy's training sure did help create some wonderful art on purpose as well, even if it was more limited in scope.
as an art history major, the movement i spent the most time studying and analyzing was modernism, but academicism was always visually my favorite and a huge guilty pleasure. what you said in the defense of academicism chapter is exactly why i enjoy it!! and i also find it funny that these people tried so hard to pass off their art of sexy ladies as "academic" just because they're supposed to depict venus or whatever ((mythological, therefore an academic subject!!!))
It's sad that appreciation for the work of great masters is called a "guilty pleasure" these days. Beauty is a better judge of art -- and harder to make -- than crap made for shock value. "Beautiful" is a much better adjective than "edgy" or "transgressive" or "irreverent." I'm sick of that crap, and don't feel any guilt whatsoever in loving Academic art.
This painting has always been one of my all-time favourites, but I had only ever seen it digitally and I never knew where it was being held. That was, until I moved to Montpellier and visited the Musee Fabre. I can still remember the moment like it was yesterday- I was walking from hall to hall, admiring each painting, until I walked into a room and the first thing I saw was the Fallen Angel. I had never rushed towards a painting like that ever in my life. I remember just standing in front of the work for minutes, drinking in every detail, in complete awe. I still get excited to see it whenever I visit the museum
i dont get it.....isnt art suppose to be a channel for your emotions and expression? The Fallen Angel does exactly that and does it in an amazing way. I felt drawn to it from the moment i first saw it...jsut because of the eyes. The eyes were so expressive that i almost wanted to talk to the fallen angel and listen to his story of his downfall.
i know i'm asking for much, but oh my god, could someone make a time stamp for all the art pieces featured in the video?😅
Beelzebub is not Satan. He’s sorta satans general. A high ranking henchman if you will
"The literature on creativity strongly suggests that when you impose restrictions on people, it actually makes them more creative rather than less. Because part of what creativity is is overcoming of obstacles. Imagine someone who write poetry in Haiku format. It's very restrictive and obviously arbitrarily so, but the fact of restriction is part of what makes the poetic form possible. The same thing is True when you're playing a game - there's far more things that you can't do, when you play chess, than there are things that you can do, but there's still an infinite variations of chess games.
So this idea that there is a dichonomy between structure and rules and creativity is perniciously false and contradicted by the evidence." - Jordan Peterson
I think that we shouldn't compare modern and academic art at all, both of them have their own problems. I love early modern art - where they still applied their skills and made their art look absolutely beautiful to most people, including average people. Nowadays art is often used just for making a statement, for propaganda. Art is meant to be more like a search for meaning rather than for saying what is True. As long as these things are included in an artwork - we shouldn't care about the movement.
Your perspective is that of a child. The Academy taught the _mechnics_ of being an artist. Perspective draftmanship, material handling, canvas preparation, and how to market and merchandise oneself. Almost none of the successful artists of the Impressionist period escaped the rigorous training of the Academy.
Modern art sucks ass, persons these days could piss on a white piece of paper and suddenly it’s worth thousands.
You deserve so much more subscribers, your videos are great! And btw, is that a québécois accent I'm hearing? ;)
Aw thank you so much!! And yes! You're right! Greetings from Montréal :)
I think the story behind the Fallen Angel is really simple. And the painting is really simple, too. But nothing beats that expression in the eyes. It's that powerful; it pushes the piece into value for me all on its own.
Hear, hear.
I'm not really a painting specialist but The Fallen Angel is magnificient art. Those eyes contain everything. Incredible work!
Thanks for an illuminating video on this fascinating corner of Art History. Informative & enjoyable. Agree that "Fallen Angel" is a stand-out piece.
very instructive... having majored in French, I along w/ my classmates always heaved a collective ho-hum whenever l'Academie was brought up. you've succeeded in drawing a very insightful point that lifts the mundane to a place of admiration for the hard-fought exceptionalism among some of them.
These videos are stunning and truly deserve more shine. Please keep up all of your hard work
i KNEW I saw the Birth of Venus somewhere. And then it hit me, it was part of a puzzle in the Resident Evil remake😱
I am so grateful for the modern art movement and the endless range of subject, style, and creativity that was liberated for the art world from it. However, I think there’s a tragedy lost in the death of Academicism. We went from it being everything that is art to basically not being a part of it. I took several art electives during my college major, and not one gave the time of day to it. To go and learn how to master the brush in the way pre-modern artists had to feels like a near entirely self-guided and almost impossible endeavor. I’m glad with where art is now, but just wish Academicism didn’t have to die to get us there.
I'll begin this comment by saying I agree with most commenters here that this is a beautiful painting that masterfully captures a great range of emotions. But, the more I look at this painting the more I see that it is anatomically incorrect; either the subject's head is perched on top of his right shoulder or the left shoulder was stretched over to rest on the rock. Either way , the head doesn't center on the torso. That said, I still love the painting.
Look i know he's satan but damn would i let the fallen angel fall onto me and break every bone in my body.
I mostly agree with your Angel's emotions take, but as a 4 decades' fan of the painting my interpretation is slightly different (as I stare at a print of just his face on my dressing table). He's devastated, but also angry and the coveres face in an attempt not to let his emotions and twisted face to be seen i.e. 'I won't give you the satisfaction!'. There's more than despair, but a glint of a seething 'fuck YOU!' anger brewing deep beneath. In modern terms, imagine a troublemaker son kicked out of the house (movie Western style), doors flying open with a boom and he lands on the hard ground hearing 'AND STAY OUT!'. He's shamed BUT also at a an early point of starting to feel deeply wronged. I see a bit of '🤬'! I'll show YOU!' in it, fueled by humiliation. The intentionally pearl-like tear isn't just sadness, but remaining 'good angel stuff' leaving him. The stare is very direct, not cast downward or to a side. It's all in the Angel's head and eye position. Imagine his head tilted up or down a tad, (shame, etc) eyes cast upward, furrowed brows' inner tips raised in a last ditch pleading. Nope! No wonder it was found to be too unnerving and stirred raw emotions. It was rejected in a flowery appropriately Academic phrased form, but it's easy to read between the lines.
I've looked at those eyes for decades because of the all the reasons above. In fact, as a prank birthday gift to my art student avid outdoorsman friend who got plenty of scrapes (🤦♀️😈), I DIY'd a BD gift - printed just the eyes on clear labels in different sizes and put them on top of various types of larger bandaids/plasters. Larger full-face image went on the small flat tin first aid box, travel-sized saline and tear less antiseptic rinse bottles. 🤪 Took a couple of hours on a rainy week-end but SO totally worth it. He loved it. 🤣🥴
I absolutely love your descriptions
"Modern art gave us one of the best works of art ever produced and allowed artists new ways to express themselves" - *shows some doodles* I'm not sure I parsed it quite right but that was sarcasm, right?
facts nnowdays they aint got skills
In academic art there is aways some type of art being rejected even today. When i was in that field, conceptual art was praised above all and it still is today. Skill is looked down upon and seen as pointless, only meaning and how many pages of text you can write about the piece is where it's value is at. I wish we could go decades or 100 years back when art where skill and meaning was ballanced
I have a certain fondness for naturalistic art with a clear narrative. As a teenager I would copy paintings from books, including Cabanel's Birth of Venus. I had a certain fascination with the female form and drew a lot of naked women, a fact which made more sense after I came out as a trans lesbian.
I Am Lucifer Heylel Morningstar, The Son of The Dawn,The Shining One,The Anointed Cherub,The Seraphim of Light, and The Original Fallen Angel,The Devil,The Serpent, The Dragon,The Prince of Darkness.
Calling Lucifer 'Beelzebub' and 'Satan' as if they are the same character somehow irks me. I know if you haven't at least read the Wikipedia article, you might throw them all in the same pot, but there are so many pictures and stories in today's media, each name having a specific depiction, one might realize there is a difference. And the picture of the falling angel has always been Lucifer. Thank you for coming to my TED talk
2:59 The Execution of Lady Jane Grey has got to be one of the most 4k looking paintings I have ever seen! It looks like a picture taken by a digital camera. That said, I am obsessed with the Fallen Angel painting and wanted to know more about the artist. Something about the eyes, the emotions and how he was able to capture it so well pulled me in the second my eyes landed on the art.
Modern artist could not paint like the academy painters they did not have the skills and talent. That's why they were not excepted. Modern artist were promoted in the 19th century by the galleries because they could pump out paintings very quickly do to there simplicity. I master piece takes much more time to create. The galleries needed to make quick lucrative sales so they spread propaganda that the academic artist were out of style and were not worthy of consideration. The academic painters could copy any of the Modern contemporary painters, but the Modern artist could never copy a true masterpiece. Just like a pop artist could never compose of the likes of Bach or Mozart. These are just facts and facts are not based on emotion they are on reality.
Hilarious that you think this art is somehow worse than modern art. It’s much much better. It’s only bc you have art training. All of us with no training can see academic art is better than modern crap.
Another Banger video
Instant like 👍
Thank you so much! It feels amazing to read this!
Now, replace his face with eren
Había visto esa pintura, más no sabía el autor. Esa mirada generalmente la ponen los niños cuando lloran de impotencia.
I think if I saw this in real life I’d cry, it’s breathtaking.
That painting in the thumbnail is anime as fuck, before anime appropriated the dark anti-hero archetype.
The academy was part of the state government created by King Louis XIV so the Salon was a government institution & they had every right to set the rules. Also Manet & many impressionists had paintings accepted by the salon jury. Gustave Courbet who never attended the academy was a realist painter achieved his first Salon success in 1849 with his painting After Dinner at Ornans. The work, reminiscent of Chardin and Le Nain, earned Courbet a gold medal and was purchased by the state. The real dictators of art were the modernists who tried to silence anyone who didn’t tow their line. Modern art is all about producing art fast so you can make more money quickly it’s not art.
It’s fun how now people look down on academic art, It’s definitely gain a lot of haters lately
Reminds me of the church commissioning a marble statue of the devil. Finding it too sexy, commissioned ANOTHER one which was also extremely sexy. Like Lucifier is a fallen ANGEL, he is meant to be beautiful.
reminder that this academicism most probably brought the world Hitler
Student creates a beautiful, emotional, photorealistic painting during a time when the internet or online art tutorials didn't exist yet. Gets rejected by the academy. WTF
Given the historical context of the power of the Academy at the time, it does make sense that the Fallen Angel represents the author's emotions regarding its restrictions on artistic freedom. It must have been very frustrating indeed.
Star Wars, Arcane, and Attack on Titan all reference this painting.
“Modern Art” has left a particular distaste within my mouth. Many people simply fling colors at a painting (like Jackson Pollock) and call it “painting.” Technically, anything is art, because art is subjective- that’s what makes it art. With all honesty, I simply don’t care. Flicking paint at the canvas, or not even painting whatsoever- or taping a banana to a wall? It is all terrible.
Only recently did I discover this painting exists, and I absolutely fell in love with it...
Those. Damn. Eyes.