Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Impressionism and post impressionism compared
Impressionism and post impressionism compared
Impressionism and post impressionism compared
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Impressionism and post impressionism compared
Applying the Popperian account of growth of knowledge to Gombrich’s theory of representation in impressionist and post-impressionist paintings
Introducing Popper
In general, there are two focus questions that lead the Popperian account of science: firstly, Popper asks how our (scientific) knowledge grows. Secondly, Popper faces an inductive problem, as he questions how science is able to discover universal laws through singular observations (Chalmers, 1999)
Firstly, Popper criticizes classical empiricism and the observation-induction model that was developed from it. Empiricists claim that we gather knowledge through the senses. Yet, our senses deceive us at times, which makes it difficult to what extent we can be certain
…show more content…
In his book Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation”, Gombrich examines the history and psychology of pictorial representation, drawing on various other historians and thinkers, such as Karl popper. He seeks for a rational explanation regarding the changing styles of art. He mainly refutes the notion of art as imitation, and rather sees art as representation of reality. He uses the example of impressionist and post-impressionist painters and applies Popper’s methodology to the development of this particular …show more content…
Gombrich claims that the technique comes about through trial and error: artists attempt to make pictures life-like, and if it fails, they attempt again until the artist is satisfied with the result. He claims that artists work within artistic traditions. These traditions are the source of particular schemas or standardized images, which Gombrich considers to be analogous to a ‘trial’ (Richmond, 1994). The image that is created or the employed schema serves as a trial, which is tested for its ability to create an illusion of life-like objects. This is analogous to an attempt of discovering error. The artist should look critically at his or her attempt, and see whether it matches the expectations of a realistic illusion. This critical attitude is a read thread throughout Popper’s method, hence he himself calls it the critical method (Popper,
Popperian hypothetico deductivists would find several problems with the view of science Alan Chalmers stated in ‘What is this thing Called Science?’ From “Scientific knowledge is proven knowledge” to “Scientific knowledge is reliable knowledge because it is objectively proven” popper would disagree to everything. With Chalmers falsificationism or hypothetico-deductivism view, his statement indicates that scientific induction is completely justifiable. However as it is now known, induction is not a reasonable way to prove or justify science.
This exhibition will examine the changing role of Classical imagery from seventeenth through nineteenth century painting, as well explain how these changes gradually produced Realism. In the seventeenth century Nicholas Poussin and Peter Paul Rubens produced works that corresponded with the Classicism of the French Academie des Beaux-Arts, though they presented these ancient subjects in very different ways. The predominance of drawing and planning in Poussin’s work was seen in contrast with the dynamic use of colour in the works of Rubens. These two means of addressing Classical themes ideologically divided the Academie between the rubenistes and the poussinistes, who quarreled for over a century about artistic approaches and techniques. The innovative and expressive works produced in the eighteenth century and beyond can be seen as a product of the rubenistes’ triumph in this conflict. Following in the example of Rubens, British artist Joshua Reynolds made use of colour and dynamic compositional techniques that combined the portraiture popular in England with the Grand Manner style that gained favour in the Academie. Reynolds became the first president of the Royal Academy in Britain and gained international acclaim for his work. The achievement of such an honour fared more difficult for artists such as Eugène Delacroix, who took a bolder approach to combining Classical imagery with reality and was frequently rejected by the Academie for doing so. This was also the case for Edourad Manet, whose scandalous work shocked viewers of the Salon des Refusés with its perceived immorality and distasteful appropriation of Classical imagery.
Impressionist paintings can be considered documents of Paris capital of modernity to a great extent. This can be seen in their subjects, style of painting, and juxtaposition of the transitive and the eternal.
The overarching or oversimplification of these theories which seem to many to be a strength, for Popper was actually a weakness. With theories such as these anything could be interpreted into them (or the theory could be interpreted into the evidece). Thus, Popper came to the conclusion that unless a theory can be proven wrong, it cannot be labeled as scientific. He also claimed that risky predictions should be made and be testable. Also, confirming evidence should not count unless it is an attempt to falsify the theory. Now, Popper's concern the problem of the "logic of science" or the "logical problem of induction." Popper sees induction as having the same basic problem as the overgeneralization principle of the psychological, historic theories, ect. He regards no actual rule of induction ...
Before Impressionism came to be a major movement (around 1870-1800s), Neoclassical and Romanticism were still making their impacts. Remembering last week’s lesson, we know that both those styles were different in the fact that one was based on emotion, while the other was practical and serious. However, one thing they both shared was the fact that the artists were trying to get a message across; mostly having to do with the effects of the French Revolution, and/or being ordered to do so. With Impressionism, there is a clear difference from its predecessors.
As seen through studying Neo-classicism, Romanticism, Realism and Impressionism, we can learn much more about the art and artists of these periods. In the historical scenes of Neo-classicism, the nature and emotion of Romanticism, the non idealized and ordinary people of Realism and the bright colors of Impressionism the true perfection of the artists of these periods is clearly pointed out through their artwork.
He wanted to distinguish between scientific theories in terms of “science” and “pseudoscience,” also known as the “problem of demarcation.” He states that Marx’s theory of history, Freud’s psychoanalysis, and Alfred Adler’s Individual Psychology were pseudosciences–posing as real science (Popper, 2). In this case, Freud’s psychoanalysis focuses on human behavior dictated by inborn, subconscious desires that cannot be falsifies, so Freud’s psychoanalysis is pseudoscience. In addition, he states his dissatisfaction with these pseudo-science theories because of how doubtful their claims are to the scientific status, and how they have “more in common with the primitive myths than science” (Popper, 2). However, he argues “Einstein’s theory of gravitation” is science because it was proven that gravity did exist, and this theory clearly satisfied the criterion of falsifiability (Popper, 2). Popper has clearly stated the problems of demarcation, and he wants to use falsification as demarcation between scientific and nonscientific
It appears to me that pictures have been over-valued; held up by a blind admiration as ideal things, and almost as standards by which nature is to be judged rather than the reverse; and this false estimate has been sanctioned by the extravagant epithets that have been applied to painters, and "the divine," "the inspired," and so forth. Yet in reality, what are the most sublime productions of the pencil but selections of some of the forms of nature, and copies of a few of her evanescent effects, and this is the result, not of inspiration, but of long and patient study, under the instruction of much good sense…
Comparing these two paintings mentioned, one would first notice that the paintings belong to different art periods, namely Rococo and Neoclassicism. Labeling and categorizing things usually end up being disadvantageous, and considering these two paintings independent from each other would be a severe misconception caused by labeling. “Neoclassicism” is the term that describes works of art that draws inspiration from the classical art: Ancient Greek and Roman art , yet by comparing these paintings, it will become clear that neoclassical paintings’ distinctive quality is not being influenced by classical art, but having a moral message. The term of “Neoclassicism” was not the best choice for describing this genre of paintings. We will also see the roots of nostalgic paintings, romantic art and neoclassical art in Rococo period.
From the creation of art to its modern understanding, artists have strived to perform and perfect a photo realistic painting with the use of complex lines, blend of colors, and captivating subjects. This is not the case anymore due to the invention of the camera in 1827, since it will always be the ultimate form of realism. Due to this, artists had the opportunities to branch away from the classical formation of realism, and venture into new forms such as what is known today as modern art. In the examination of two well known artists, Pablo Picasso and Jackson Pollock, we can see that the artist doesn’t only intend for the painting to be just a painting, but more of a form of telling a scene through challenging thoughts, and expressing of the artists emotion in their creation.
In this essay, I will contrast and compare the two art movements, Impressionism, and Post-Impressionism. I will be concentrating on the works of the two leading artists of these styles Claude Monet and Vincent van Gogh.
In Confronting Images, Didi-Huberman considers disadvantages he sees in the academic approach of art history, and offers an alternative method for engaging art. His approach concentrates on that which is ‘visual’ long before coming to conclusive knowledge. Drawing support from the field of psycho analytics (Lacan, Freud, and Kant and Panofsky), Didi-Huberman argues that viewers connect with art through what he might describe as an instance of receptivity, as opposed to a linear, step-by-step analytical process. He underscores the perceptive mode of engaging the imagery of a painting or other work of art, which he argues comes before any rational ‘knowing’, thinking, or discerning. In other words, Didi-Huberman believes one’s mind ‘sees’ well before realizing and processing the object being looked at, let alone before understanding it. Well before the observer can gain any useful insights by scrutinizing and decoding what she sees, she is absorbed by the work of art in an irrational and unpredictable way. What Didi-Huberman is s...
Among the many theories of art that have emerged over time, the theory I will defend in this paper is the Neo-Wittgensteinian theory of Art. I will defend this view against the following (two) objections: a) The “open concept” idea of art is too expansive, and b) the “family resemblance” theory of artworks is also too expansive.
Due to the subjective nature of the impressionistic art and literary style, both mediums possess an ambiguous quality. According to Bernard Dunstan, in Painting Methods of the Impressionists, impressionism “has come to have overtones and associations which can obscure its true meaning,” (11). This is also true for impressionistic literature. However, Metz argues that “ambiguity surrounds the process through which the impre...
Popper believes that science does not begin with the collection of empirical data, but starts with the formulation of a hypothesis (Veronesi, 2014, p1). Alexander Bird outlines Popper’s view on the scientific method in his book Philosophy of Science (1998, pp.239-240). This view is that scientists use a process of imagination to invent a hypothesis. However, once this has been established, scientists must attempt to