Bauhaus, 1919-1928 / Edited by Herbert Bayer, Walter Gropius, Ise Gropius. — New York, 1938 包豪斯 當代設計的搖籃2008

包豪斯 當代設計的搖籃 李亮之 黑龍江美術，2008

Bauhaus, 1919-1928 / Edited by Herbert Bayer, Walter Gropius, Ise Gropius. — New York, 1938

http://tehne.com/library/bauhaus-1919-1928-edited-herbert-bayer-walter-gropius-ise-gropius-new-york-1938

  

Bauhaus, 1919-1928 / Edited by Herbert Bayer, Walter Gropius, Ise Gropius (Chairman of the Department of Architecture, Harvard University). — New York : The Museum of Modern Art, 1938. — 224 p., ill.

In 1938 MoMA issued a press memo informing New York City editors that on December 7, the Museum would open “what will probably be considered its most unusual exhibition—and certainly one of its largest.” That exhibition was Bauhaus: 1919–1928, an expansive survey dedicated to this incomparably influential German school of art and design. On display were nearly 700 examples of the school’s output, including works of textile, glass, wood, canvas, metal, and paper. It was a celebration of the remarkable creativity and productivity of the Bauhaus, which had been forced to close under pressure from the Nazi Party just five years prior. The size and scope of this tribute indicated the importance of the Bauhaus to MoMA's development: the school had served as a model for the Museum’s multi-departmental structure, and inspired its multidisciplinary presentation of photography, architecture, painting, graphic design, and theater.

WHAT is the Bauhaus?

The Bauhaus is an answer to the question: how can the artist be trained to take his place in the machine age.

HOW did the Bauhaus Idea begin?

As a school which became the most important and influential institution of its kind in modern times.

WHERE?

In Germany, first at Weimar, then at Dessau.

WHEN?

From 1919 until closed by the National Socialists in 1933.

WHO were its teachers?

Walter Gropius, its founder and first director, Kandinsky, Klee, Feininger, Schlemmer, Itten, Moholy-Nagy, Albers, Bayer, Breuer, and others.

WHAT did they teach?

Architecture, housing, painting, sculpture, photography, cinema, theatre, ballet, industrial design, pottery, metal work, textiles, advertising, typography and, above all, a modern philosophy of design.

WHY Is the Bauhaus so important?

1. Because it courageously accepted the machine as an instrument worthy of the artist.
2. Because it faced the problem of good design for mass production.
3. Because it brought together on its faculty more artists of distinguished talent than has any other art school of our time.
4. Because it bridged the gap between the artist and the industrial system.
5. Because it broke down the hierarchy which had divided the "fine" from the "applied" arts.
6. Because it differentiated between what can be taught (technique) and what cannot (creative invention).
7. Because its building at Dessau was architecturally the most important structure of the 1920's.
8. Because after much trial and error it developed a new and modern kind of beauty.
9. And, finally, because its influence has spread throughout the world, and is especially strong today in England and the United States.

---

PREFACE

It is twenty years since Gropius arrived in Weimar to found the Bauhaus; ten years since he left the transplanted and greatly enlarged institution at Dessau to return to private practice: five years since the Bauhaus was forced to close its doors after a brief rear-guard stand in Berlin.

Are this book, then, and the exhibition which supplements it, merely a belated wreath laid upon the tomb of brave events, important in their day but now of primarily historical interest? Emphatically, no! The Bauhaus is not dead; it lives and grows through the men who made it, both teachers and students, through their designs, their books, their methods, their principles, their philosophies of art and education.

It is hard to recall when and how we in America first began to hear of the Bauhaus. In the years just after the War we thought of German art in terms of Expressionism, of Mendelsohn’s streamlined Einstein tower, Toller's Masse Mensch, Wiene's Cabinet ot Dr. Caligari. It may not have been until after the great Bauhaus exhibition of 1923 that reports reached America of a new kind of art school in Germany where famous expressionist painters such as Kandinsky were combining forces with craftsmen and industrial designers under the general direction of the architect, Gropius. A little later we began to see some of the Bauhaus books, notably Schlemmer’s amazing volume on the theatre and Moholy-Nagy's Malerei, Phoiographie, Film.

Some of the younger of us had just left colleges where courses in modern art began with Rubens and ended with a few superficial and often hostile remarks about van Gogh and Matisse; where the last word in imitation Gothic dormitories had windows with one carefully cracked pane to each picturesque casement. Others of us, in architectural schools, were beginning our courses with gigantic renderings of Doric capitals, or ending them with elaborate projects for colonial gymnasiums and Romanesque skyscrapers. The more radical American architects and designers in 1925, ignoring Frank Lloyd Wright, turned their eyes toward the eclectic "good taste" of Swedish "modern" and the trivial bad taste of Paris "modernistic." It is shocking to recall that only one year later the great new Bauhaus building at Dessau was completed.

It is no wonder then that young Americans began to turn their eyes toward the Bauhaus as the one school in the world where modern problems of design were approached realistically in a modern atmosphere. A few American pilgrims had visited Dessau before Gropius left in 1928; in the five years thereafter many went to stay as students. During this time Bauhaus material, typography, paintings, prints, theatre art, architecture, industrial objects, had been included in American exhibitions though nowhere so importantly as in the Paris Salon des Artistes Décorateurs of 1930. There the whole German section was arranged under the direction of Gropius. Consistent in program, brilliant in installation, it stood like an island of integrity, in a mélange of chaotic modernistic caprice, demonstrating (what was not generally recognized at that time) that German industrial design, thanks largely to the Bauhaus, was years ahead of the rest of the world.

And the rest of the world began to accept the Bauhaus. In America Bauhaus lighting fixtures and tubular steel chairs were imported or the designs pirated. American Bauhaus students began to return; and they were followed, alter the revolution of 1933, by Bauhaus and ex-Bauhaus masters who suffered from the new government's illusion that modern furniture, flat-roofed architecture and abstract painting were degenerate or bolshevistic. In this way, with the help of the fatherland, Bauhaus designs, Bauhaus men, Bauhaus ideas, which taken together form one of the chief cultural contributions of modern Germany, have been spread throughout the world.

This is history. But, one may ask, what have we in America today to learn from the Bauhaus? Times change and ideas of what constitutes modern art or architecture or education shift with bewildering rapidity. Many Bauhaus designs which were once five years ahead of their time seem now, ten years afterward, to have taken on the character of period pieces. And some of its ideas are no longer so useful as they once were. But this inevitable process of obsolescence was even more active in the Bauhaus while it still existed as an institution for, as Gropius has often Insisted, the idea of a Bauhaus style or a Bauhaus dogma as something fixed and permanent was at all times merely the inaccurate conclusion of superficial observers.

Looking back we can appreciate more fully than ever certain magnificent achievements of the Bauhaus which are so obvious that they might be overlooked. It is only eight years since the I920's come to an end yet I think we can now say without exaggeration that the Bauhaus building at Dessau was architecturally the most important structure of its decade. And we can ask if in modern times there have ever been so many men of distinguished talent on the faculty of any other art school or academy. And though the building is now adorned with a gabled roof and the brilliant teaching force has been dispersed there are certain methods and ideas developed by the Bauhaus which we may still ponder. There are, for instance, the Bauhaus principles:

• that most students should face the fact that their future should be involved primarily with industry and mass production rather than with individual craftsmanship;
• that teachers in schools of design should be men who are in advance of their profession rather than safely and academically in the rearguard;
• that the school of design should, as the Bauhaus did, bring together the various arts of painting, architecture, theatre, photography, weaving, typography, etc., into a modern synthesis which disregards conventional distinctions between the "fine" and "applied" arts;
• that it is harder to design a first rate chair than to paint a second rate painting—and much more useful;
• that a school of design should have on its faculty the purely creative and disinterested artist such as the easel painter as a spiritual counterpoint to the practical technician in order that they may work and teach side by side for the benefit of the student;
• that thorough manual experience of materials is essential to the student of design—experience at first confined to free experiment and then extended to practical shop work;
• that the study of rational design in terms of technics and materials should be only the first step in the development of a new and modern sense of beauty.
• and, lastly, that because we live in the 20th century, the student architect or designer should be offered no refuge in the past but should be equipped for the modern world in its various aspects, artistic, technical, social, economic, spiritual, so that he may function in society not as a decorator but as a vital participant.

This book on the Bauhaus is published in conjunction with the Museum's exhibition, Bauhaus 1919-28. Like the exhibition it is for the most part limited to the first nine years of the institution, the period during which Gropius was director. For reasons beyond the control of any of the individuals involved, the last five years of the Bauhaus could not be represented. During these five years much excellent work was done and the international reputation of the Bauhaus increased rapidly, but, fortunately for the purposes of this book, the fundamental character of the Bauhaus had already been established under Gropius' leadership.

This book is primarily a collection of evidence—photographs, articles and notes done on the field of action, and assembled here with a minimum of retrospective revision. It Is divided into two parts: Weimar, 1919-1925, and Dessau, 1925-1928. These divisions indicate more than a change of location and external circumstances, for although the expressionist and, later, formalistic experiments at Weimar were varied and exciting it may be said that the Bauhaus really found itself only after the move to Dessau. This book is not complete, even within its field, for some material could not be brought out of Germany. At some time a definitive work on the Bauhaus should be written, a well-ordered, complete and carefully documented history prepared by a dispassionate authority, but time and other circumstances make this impossible at present. Nevertheless this book, prepared by Herbert Bayer under the general editorship of Professor Gropius and with the generous collaboration of a dozen Bauhaus teachers, is by far the most complete and authoritative account of the Bauhaus so far attempted.

The exhibition has been organized and installed by Herbert Bayer with the assistance of the Museum's Department of Architecture and Industrial Art.

The Museum of Modern Art wishes to thank especially Herbert Bayer for his difficult, extensive and painstaking work in assembling and installing the exhibition and laying out this book; Professor Walter Gropius, of the Graduate School of Design, Harvard University, for his supervision of the book and exhibition; Mrs. Ise Gropius for her assistance in editing the book; Alexander Schawinsky, formerly of the Bauhaus, and Josef Albers, Professor of Art at Black Mountain College and formerly of the Bauhaus, for their help in preparing the exhibition.

Also Miss Sara Babbitt, Mrs. John W. Lincoln, Mr. Paul Grotz, Mr. Philip Johnson and Mr. Brinton Sherwood, who, as volunteers, have assisted Mr. Bayer and the Museum staff; also those who have generously lent material to the exhibition and contributed photographs for reproduction in the book.

The Museum assumes full responsibility for having invited Professor Gropius, Mr. Bayer, and their colleagues to collaborate in the book and its accompanying exhibition. All the material included in the exhibition has been lent at the Museum's request, in some cases without the consent of the artist.*

____________

* The work of many artists in this book is being shown without their consent. When the book was at the point of going to press it was considered advisable to delete the names of several of these artists.

Alfred H. Barr, Jr., Director

---

CONTENTS

Preface by Alfred H. Barr, Jr.  7

The Background of the Bauhaus by Alexander Dorner  11

Walter Gropius—Biographical Note  16

WEIMAR BAUHAUS 1919-1925

From the First Proclamation  18

Teachers and Students  20

The Theory and Organization of the Bauhaus by Walter Gropius (Weimar, 1923)  22

Preliminary Course: Itten  32

Klee's Course  39

Kandinsky's Course  40

Color Experiments  41

Carpentry Workshop  42

Stained Glass Workshop  49

Pottery Workshop  50

Metal Workshop  54

Weaving Workshop  58

Stage Workshop  62

Wall-Painting Workshop  68

Display Design  72

Architecture  74

Typography and Layout; the Bauhaus Press  79

Weimar Exhibition, 1923  82

Extra-curricular Activities  86

Preliminary Course: Moholy-Nagy  90

Preliminary Course: Albers  91

Opposition to the Bauhaus  92

Press Comments, 1923-32  93

The Bauhaus Quits Weimar: a fresh start at Dessau, April 1925  97

DESSAU BAUHAUS 1925-1928

Bauhaus Building  101

The Masters' Houses  108

Other Buildings in Dessau  110

Architecture Department  112

Preliminary Course: Albers  116

Preliminary Course: Moholy-Nagy  124

Furniture Workshop  128

Metal Workshop: Lighting fixtures, et cetera  136

Weaving Workshop  142

*Typography Workshop: Printing, layout, posters  148

Photography  154

Exhibition Technique  158

Wall-Painting Workshop: Wall paper  160

Sculpture Workshop  162

Stage Workshop  164

Kandinsky’s Course  170

Paul Klee speaks  172

Administration  173

Extra-curricular Activities  175

Painting, Sculpture, Graphic Art, 1919-1928  180

Administrative Changes, 1928  206

Spread of the Bauhaus Idea  207

Bauhaus Teaching in the United States  217

Biographical Notes by Janet Henrich  220

Bibliography by Beaumont Newhall  222

Index of Illustrations 224

*As explained on page 149 this and following sections of the book are printed without capital letters is accordance with Bauhaus typographical practice introduced in 1925.

---

Sample pages

  

  

---

Download link (pdf, yandexdisk; 41,9 MB).

Source: moma.org

van Gogh...First, van Gogh's Millet, Then van Gogh's van Gogh梵谷書簡【梵谷傳奇】

Jean-François Millet
史書說他的素描影響更大為多名藝術家所崇敬--一些標本圖

NYT

Arts Abroad; First, van Gogh's Millet, Then van Gogh's van Gogh

By ALAN RIDING

Published: October 28, 1998

At first sight, the new show at the Musee d'Orsay suggests a bizarre attempt to resuscitate a neglected 19th-century French painter by exhibiting him alongside a rather more famous name. In truth, the idea of uniting Jean-Francois Millet and van Gogh is far more interesting. Since the Dutchman looked to the Frenchman as a role model, Millet's life and work serve as a mirror that reveals much about van Gogh.
Of course, van Gogh's name alone would suffice to draw crowds to ''Millet/Van Gogh'' just as it is doing to ''Van Gogh's van Goghs'' at the National Gallery of Art in Washington. Both exhibitions, which run through Jan. 3, have also benefited from the closing for renovation of the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, which has sent 70 paintings to Washington and provided 27 of the 53 van Goghs on display here. Millet, however, gives the Paris show an unusually strong theme.
The exhibition displays two dozen or so of Millet's paintings and engravings alongside van Gogh's copies of the same works as well as others inspired by Millet's pastoral themes. It also records van Gogh's progress as an artist: his early copies are clumsy; his later copies overwhelm the originals. Yet his identity with Millet ran much deeper.
He never met the French naturalist painter, but he was immediately impressed when he came across his drawings and engravings of peasant life at an exhibition in Paris shortly after Millet's death in January 1875. Five years later, when van Gogh himself decided to become an artist, he acquired copies and photographs of some of Millet's work to assist his early drawing efforts.
More significantly, in 1882 van Gogh obtained a copy of Alfred Sensier's new biography of Millet, and it proved a revelation. Its pages portrayed Millet as a man of piety, virtue, simplicity and courage whose proximity to nature and peasants tilling the land exuded a spirituality that spoke to van Gogh's own search for a meaning to life. The Dutchman, who had turned away from the formal Christianity of his pastor father, found a new pantheistic father-guide in Millet. ''It gives me courage to read Sensier's book about Millet,'' he wrote to his brother Theo.
In 1883, now 30, van Gogh returned to Nuenen to live with his parents, but his objective was to move closer to nature, indeed to follow the rustic peasant life style that Millet supposedly adopted during his final 26 years of life at Barbizon. In another letter to Theo, van Gogh wrote that Millet ''desired nothing more'' than to share ''the food, drink, clothes and sleep'' of the peasants. Soon van Gogh himself assumed the appearance of a peasant.
To those who knew Millet in life, however, Sensier's account was more hagiography than biography. Millet may have worn clogs and simple clothes, but he enjoyed the company of artists and writers. He had been poor, but not from choice, and in later years his paintings sold well. He was presented as a man of fervent faith, but he was apparently an agnostic. In brief, van Gogh was devoted to a Millet who probably never existed.''If semi-truths pervade Sensier's book, it is no less true that, using elements of the biography, van Gogh created his own image of Millet, one into which he projected a great deal of himself,'' wrote Louis van Tilborgh, chief curator at Amsterdam's Van Gogh Museum and one of the organizers of this show. ''Van Gogh then supported his vision of Millet through his careful selection of Millet's major works.''
In Nuenen, van Gogh was able to find his own subjects among the local peasantry, but his principal inspiration remained Millet. As early as 1881, van Gogh had copied perhaps Millet's greatest work, ''A Sower'' (1850), and he would return to the subject triumphantly years later, although his early version compares poorly with the original. He also did his own variations of Millet's ''Potato Planters'' and other farming scenes, struggling by his own admission to capture figures in movement.
Like Millet, van Gogh showed little interest in the faces of peasant farmers, which often appeared blurred or in shadow. When he did, as in ''Potato Eaters'' and two portraits of peasants, all done in 1885, he painted them as physiognomically primitive, as if ''a resolutely animal expression,'' as Mr. van Tilborgh put it, brought them closer to nature.
In 1884, having already declared Millet to be his ''father'' and ''eternal master,'' van Gogh wrote to his brother: ''For me, it is not Manet, but Millet who is the essentially modern painter who has opened the horizons for many others.''
In March 1886 van Gogh moved to Paris, and Millet's influence suddenly receded. The Dutchman discovered Impressionism and befriended bohemians like Toulouse-Lautrec and Gauguin. His own painting also changed radically, abandoning Millet's mid-19th-century Neo-Classicism and somber colors for the thick brush strokes and vivid colors that would make him famous.
Yet when van Gogh returned to the countryside, moving to Arles in February 1888, Millet re-entered his life. He turned again to Millet's themes, but he now attacked them with violent yellows and blues that reflected the wheatfields and skies of Provence. He was also ready to try his hand afresh with a new ''Sower'' series, climaxing with one of his most dramatic works, showing a large sun rising behind the darkened figure of a sower, with a gnarled and blackened tree truck cutting across the entire image.
In April 1889, increasingly aware of his mental instability, van Gogh checked into a hospital at St.-Remy-de-Provence, but after a break he resumed painting. Working from engraved copies, he completed his own copies of a series of 10 oils painted by Millet in 1852 called ''Work in the Fields,'' each showing some aspect of peasant labor. During this period, he also painted ''Noon: Rest from Work'' from an engraving of ''La Meridienne'' (''Midday''), which Millet executed in 1866.
''The copies of Millet are perhaps what you do best,'' Theo wrote to van Gogh at the time.
Even with ''Starry Night'' (1888-1889), in which the gaslights of Arles shimmer in the water of the Rhone, van Gogh seems to be following his mentor, who painted a ''Starry Night'' above a shadowy countryside in the late 1850's. Yet there is no evidence that van Gogh ever saw a copy of Millet's version. Perhaps by then, he was working purely on instinct. ''I have a terrible need for -- I will use the word -- religion,'' he wrote to Theo nine months before his suicide at in July 1890, ''so I go outside at night to paint the stars.''

梵高（Vincent van Gogh）160歲/ 梵谷書簡  The Letters of Vincent Van Gogh/ Van Gogh’s Evolution

Van Gogh’s Evolution, From Neophyte to Master

By TED LOOS

Published: October 26, 2012

There are some artists on whom the sun never sets.

Enlarge This Image

Van Gogh Museum Amsterdam

“Self-Portrait With Straw Hat,” is in an exhibition at the Denver Art Museum. More Photos »

Multimedia

Slide Show

An Artist’s Evolution

Van Gogh is certainly one of them, given his status as an artist beloved by the public and revered by curators, a genius with a compelling, sad life story to boot.

“There’s always a van Gogh show on the horizon, just as there’s always Beethoven being played somewhere,” said Joseph J. Rishel, a curator of European paintings at thePhiladelphia Museum of Art, who organized “Van Gogh Up Close” there earlier this year.

The latest major entry is “Becoming van Gogh” at the Denver Art Museum. The exhibition, featuring 70 works by the master and 20 by other artists who inspired him, is scheduled to remain on view until Jan. 20 and does not travel to any other sites.

The show traces van Gogh’s development through the 1880s from a struggling, inhibited neophyte, represented by works like the drawings “Girl Carrying a Loaf of Bread” (1882), to a painter in full flourish who could make the shimmering “Landscape from Saint-Rémy” (1889).

Timothy Standring, the curator who organized the Denver show, has his own version of Mr. Rishel’s Beethoven analogy: “Can there be too many books about Shakespeare?”

But while van Gogh’s reputation virtually guarantees that people will flock to the show, “It’s the hardest kind of exhibition to put together,” Mr. Standring said.

The trick for curators is twofold. First, they must come up with a fresh angle on an artist who lived to be only 37 and consequently did not produce as many works, as, say, Picasso. Second, they have to secure loans of incredibly valuable artworks from museums that might be reluctant to share.

Mr. Standring called the exhibition “the most ambitious show we’ve done, as ambitious as the Libeskind building,” referring to the architect Daniel Libeskind’s striking, angular design for the addition to the museum that was completed in 2006.

He added, “We don’t even have a van Gogh in our collection.”

Mr. Standring’s first step was to make a call to Amsterdam. “When you plan a van Gogh exhibit, you need to get blessing of the Van Gogh Museum,” he said, because of its ability to lend works and share its expertise.

In discussions with Louis van Tilborgh, a senior researcher there, Mr. Standring laid out an idea for one exhibition — a focus on van Gogh’s work from 1888 — but it was deemed logistically too difficult to mount.

But his second idea, a look at van Gogh’s crucial years in Paris, became the seed of the current show, which expanded to cover a whole decade.

Mr. Standring said he wanted to give nuance to the popular perception of the artist as sui generis. “People are generally unfamiliar with anything pre-“Sunflowers” or pre-“Wheatfields,” he said, referring to two of van Gogh’s iconic later series. “We’re doing corrective art history.”

Van Gogh’s struggles with illness and the artistic flourishing of his last two years may have warped the public’s perception of his learning curve, Mr. Van Tilborgh said.

“We all think he’s a genius, but he placed a lot of value on craftsmanship. When he started, he had no talent for drawing. If you look at his early drawings, they’re horrible. So how did he develop?”

The answer, Mr. Van Tilborgh said, was persistence. “If he couldn’t do it, he tried it 50 more times. He was one of those rare artists who had the energy to work through the fear of failure.”

“Becoming van Gogh” gives particular attention to the period the artist spent in Paris, staying with his brother Theo and studying color theory.

“He was hovering in Paris for two years,” Mr. Standring said. “Maybe we’re fortunate he didn’t land. He might have turned into a second-rate Impressionist.”

Works from that period in the exhibition include “People Strolling in a Park” (1886) and “View of a Park in Paris” (1886), neither of which resembles the late-career masterpieces that made him famous after his death.

Also featured is a Paris work with a strange past: “The Blute-fin Mill” (1886). The painting — an unusual depiction of a group of people, rarely tried by Van Gogh — was bought from a dealer in Paris by the controversial Dutch curator Dirk Hannema in 1975.

Mr. Hannema, who died in 1984, believed it was van Gogh’s work, but the art world doubted him because of previous missteps — in particular, his attributions of several works to the 17th-century Dutch master Vermeer, which were later discredited.

“His reputation was so bad in the 1970s after the Vermeers,” Mr. Van Tilborgh said. “But when we investigated, we came to the conclusion that he was right about the van Gogh.” The painting was authenticated in 2010, and it was lent to Denver by the Foundation Museum in Heino, the Netherlands.

Mr. Van Tilborgh’s enthusiasm led the Van Gogh Museum to lend seven works to the show, including “Self-Portrait With Straw Hat” (1887). He also edited the catalog with Mr. Standring.

“That gave us our imprimatur,” Mr. Standring said of his attempts to pry other van Goghs out of other institutions.

One major Midwestern museum proved the hardest sell. “It took eight asks, including in-person trips, to get them to agree,” Mr. Standring said, declining to name the institution.

“You have to be prosecutor, defense attorney, psychologist, sociologist and diplomat to do this kind of show,” he added. “They don’t teach you all that in art history graduate school.”

Usually, the Van Gogh Museum tries to stagger major shows of the artist’s work at other museums, so that loans are easier to get and its own resources are not taxed.

So what Mr. Standring called “the beautiful confluence of two big van Gogh shows in a year” — his own and Mr. Rishel’s — could have caused problems all around.

But the curators played nice, which was easier given that their points of focus were different. Mr. Rishel was primarily exploring van Gogh’s perspective on nature, so the Philadelphia museum was more willing to lend an important portrait, “Portrait of Madame Augustine Roulin and Baby Marcelle” (1888), to Denver.

“I shared my checklist early on with Joe, and he was very generous and very cordial,” Mr. Standring said. “And I helped arrange for one picture to go to his exhibit.”

Mr. Standring added that he hoped both shows — with their highly specific, nonblockbuster approaches — would deepen an understanding of the artist.

“Maybe this represents a maturity of van Gogh exhibitions,” he said. “Thematic, instead of just a collection of great objects.”

Vincent van Gogh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_van_Gogh - Cached

Vincent Willem van Gogh was a Dutch post-Impressionist painter whose work, notable for its rough beauty, emotional honesty and bold color, had a far-reaching ...

*****

 我有一版本 The Letters of Vincent Van Gogh , Penguin Classics, 1996

 *****

經過一世紀多的整理:

 Van Gogh Letters – The complete letters of Van Gogh, translated into English and annotated. Published by the Van Gogh Museum.

Version: June 2012

Edited by Leo Jansen, Hans Luijten and Nienke Bakker

The letters are the window to Van Gogh's universe.

This edition, the product of 15 years of research at the Van Gogh Museum and Huygens ING, contains all Van Gogh's letters to his brother Theo, his artist friends Paul Gauguin and Emile Bernard, and many others.

Here you will find the letters in the latest edition (2009), richly annotated and illustrated, with new transcriptions and authorized English translations.

Quick Guide

 *****

名譯家雨云的作品
 翻譯的底本是 I. Stone夫婦的選本 出版社誇說全集是井底之蛙

梵谷書簡全集

• 作者：梵谷/著
• 譯者：雨云
• 出版社：藝術家
• 出版日期：1990年
•  
•  
•  梵谷是偉大的畫家；也是世上最孤的靈魂之一。他活著的泰半日子裡，身旁幾乎沒有一個可以信託，可以敘述快樂、苦難的人。他在世的最後十年，也就是他沈迷征 服了繪畫藝術的期間，他渴求對一個人傾述他那澎湃的生命，和徐緩成熟的技藝之所思所感的一切事物。然而卻難找到一位願意了解他想說什麼的人。於是一部自傳 誕生了。文生、梵谷用筆向他的弟弟－西奧傾吐心聲，如此，他寫下了感人的生命故事。 
•  
•  
•  昨天是荷蘭後印象派畫家梵高（Vincent van Gogh）160歲冥壽，他生前繪畫了多幅《向日葵》，分散在全球不同的博物館展出。為慶祝一項10年的「梵高研究計劃」踏入高潮，阿姆斯特丹梵高博物館及倫敦英國國家美術館將輪流展出兩幅「向日葵」，使兩地遊客有機會看見兩幅「向日葵」並列的奇景。
  

  《向日葵》（Sunflowers，1888年）。

  

  【本報國際組報道】昨天是荷蘭後印象派畫家梵高（Vincent van Gogh）160歲冥壽，他生前繪畫了多幅《向日葵》，分散在全球不同的博物館展出。為慶祝一項10年的「梵高研究計劃」踏入高潮，阿姆斯特丹梵高博物館 及倫敦英國國家美術館將輪流展出兩幅「向日葵」，使兩地遊客有機會看見兩幅「向日葵」並列的奇景。
  　　準備輪流展出的兩幅畫，同樣畫了15朵向日葵，其中倫敦收藏的初版於1888年末期完成，翌年初他又畫了阿姆斯特丹收藏的新版本，顏色更明亮， 而且多了藍色的種子。梵高博物館館長魯格（Axel Ruger）表示，這兩輻畫將向遊客展示梵高並非傳言中的瘋子。他說：「梵高的藝術創作富條理，這與一般理解指他在畫布上瘋狂亂潑顏料的形象很不同。研究 顯示梵高是很認真地仔細繪畫，他有研究其他藝術家的作品，並學習色彩理論。」
  　　梵高在全心作畫前，曾做過藝術品買賣及傳教士，也關心低下層農民的生活苦況，早期如《吃馬鈴薯的人》、《一雙鞋子》等油畫，靈感正是來自貧民， 惟盡是陰沉暗黑色彩，表現憂鬱。畢生只售出一幅《紅色葡萄園》的梵高，一直靠弟弟西奧接濟，兩人感情要好，來往的上千封書信，助後世窺探梵高創作的心路歷 程。
  　　2個版本難得輪流展出
  　　梵高正式學畫畫後，33歲時到法國巴黎居住，並結識了高更（Paul Gauguin）等同時期的畫家；至遷往南部城鎮亞爾後，油畫用色由一向陰沉轉趨明亮，特別愛用大量鮮黃色。亞爾時期的名作，包括住處《黃屋》、用來迎接 畫家朋友高更的《向日葵》等。梵高後期光明亮麗的畫風，以及大膽的粗筆觸，成為作品的標記。
  　　梵高與高更本是好友，但有說法指高更出於嫉妒，曾經買通妓女，向梵高佯言想要他的耳朵作聖誕禮物，喝醉的梵高竟「照單全收」割下左耳。不過，有說法稱，兩位畫家吵架後，高更盛怒下用劍割掉梵高左耳。
  　　梵高的愛情生活亦波折重重，初戀是上流富家女，後戀上表親而觸怒擔任神職的爸爸，父子決裂。後來對懷孕妓女一見鍾情，並節衣縮食助養生下的孩子，可惜妓女恩將仇報，偷錢吃喝玩樂。唯一愛過他的瑪戈特因家人干涉，最終與梵高未能開花結果。
  　　梵高晚年傳患上精神病，終在37歲時懷疑開槍自殺，另有指他被小童玩槍時走火誤殺。
•  
•  

【梵谷傳奇】






■ 播出時間：8/2、9、16、23 週日上午11點
梵谷的畫，你一定認得出幾幅！像是《自畫像》、《向日葵》、《星夜》等作品皆廣為人知…。
梵谷的瘋，你無法想像！他瘋狂到曾割下了自己的耳朵，讓人認為他是徹底地瘋了…。
梵谷是藝術界的傳奇，是繪畫界的經典人物，也是後印象派的著名畫家…。
不論他的畫作還是個人本身，都一直是後人感到好奇的經典傳奇人物代表。
《梵谷傳奇》將帶你更深入瞭解荷蘭畫家梵谷他一生的傳奇故事，本節目每集一小時、共有四集，以戲劇手法呈現紀錄寫實與虛構劇情，全片以一種特殊的時空交錯方式雙線並行，真實與虛構穿插，帶出梵谷每幅偉大作品誕生的緣由與其背後的故事，精彩呈現最美的畫作與梵谷瘋狂般的人生紀實。

有人形容梵谷是用盡性命作畫的悲劇性畫家，此話說一點也不為過，《梵谷傳奇》還原了梵谷當年畫畫時的身影，看見他作畫的熱忱和熱情，以及他一生對畫畫的執著與堅持。梵谷的畫作，在他生前一文不值，在他死後卻價值連城，可見他對後代藝術的影響有多麼深遠！

《梵谷傳奇》以1959年文生梵谷的侄子文生威倫梵谷欲變賣梵谷的名畫為故事開場，時空穿插交錯，又回溯至梵谷畫作產生的1876年，從他早年在國際藝術品交易商公司的工作講起，後來立志要去佈道，想當一位牧師，放棄了牧師工作之後，重拾畫筆，打算靠畫畫賺錢，想要成為真正的畫家，他開始發了狂的畫畫，梵谷因畫結識了不少女性朋友，也畫裸體女性，還一度想跟被別人形容為蕩婦的妓女組成家庭，朋友勸他要畫些值錢的東西，並離開那個女人，梵谷開始捕捉鄉村的情景，但又被批評畫的人物沒有生氣，他越來越怪，甚至變成別人眼中的神經病，最後甚至割下了自己的耳朵。

影響梵谷的人很多，與梵谷一直有書信往來的弟弟西奧，他們不間斷的連繫，絕對證明了他們兄弟的感情，還有梵谷的老師高更，高更跟梵谷一起工作生活，甚至一起作畫。梵谷的自畫像鼎鼎有名，畫自己的房間也成為傳奇畫作，一幅《在亞爾的臥室》到現在仍是最具代表的畫作之一。《梵谷傳奇》為事實與虛構情節交錯並行的作品，為求戲劇效果，與文生威倫梵谷有關的事件多為虛構，但仍可透過精彩的影像來了解這偉大畫家梵谷的傳奇故事。

人緣書緣：棟方志功 (Munakata Shiko 1903~75) 海上雅臣「棟方志功： 美術と人生」 1976/《棟方志功：美術與人生》2014 林皎碧《名畫紀行 福光美術館 分館 棟方志功記念館 愛染苑》 絵手紙

人緣書緣：棟方志功 (Munakata  Shiko 1903~75)     海上雅臣「棟方志功： 美術と人生」  1976/《棟方志功：美術與人生》2014  林皎碧《名畫紀行 福光美術館 分館 棟方志功記念館 愛染苑》   絵手紙   

https://www.facebook.com/hanching.chung/videos/201711552619923

（法）讓-保爾·克雷斯佩勒 著《印象派画家的日常生活》 《The Impressionists 》(2006,BBC)；The Impressionists:Painting and Revolution(2011, BBC)

 （法）讓-保爾·克雷斯佩勒 著《印象派画家的日常生活》       《The Impressionists 》(2006,BBC)；The Impressionists:Painting and Revolution(2011, BBC)

印象派畫家的日常生活

• 作者： （法）讓-保爾·克雷斯佩勒 著
• 出版社：華東師範大學出版社
• 出版日期：2007/06/01
• 語言：簡體中文

印象派画家的日常生活 / 让-保尔.克雷斯佩勒(Jean-Paul Crespelle)著 ; 杨洁,王奕,郭琳译

Crespelle, Jean-Paul.

內容簡介

本書既不講述印象派的歷史,亦非印象派畫家傳記集,其宗旨在於再現那些以「落選者沙龍」為起點,開始向始終受到官方保護的沒落學院派發起進攻的畫家的生活和創作狀態。

印象派畫家的活動在很大程序上取決於其社會階層，他們當中有富人，也有窮人。這種差異不僅導致了他們美術觀點的不同一一德加即強烈反對在戶外創作油畫一一也在實際操作上影響著作品本身的完成。富有的馬奈和德加能夠雇用模特，而莫奈和雷諾阿卻不得不讓他們的朋友來充當模特，甚至不得為那些富有的繪畫愛好者繪制肖像。

將印象派畫家從傳說中抽離出來、還原他們於真實的日常生活之中,使讀者能夠以全新的角度評價和欣賞法國藝術史上那個獨特的時期，這就是本書的目的。

 

目錄

前言
印象派大事年表
第一章 早期印象派
　「托爾托尼，身價的標志」
　藝術家咖啡館
　印象派論壇
　貧富畫家
　貴族畫家
　舞女
　窮畫家
　幸運與不幸
　沖突與不和
　獎章之爭
　德雷福斯案件
　同舟共濟
　庸俗而放盪
　撲朔迷離的戲劇情節
　另一樁奇遇
　愛情之果
　相對貧困
　悲劇之死
　經濟危機
　「總聯盟」倒閉
第二章 沙龍，抵制印象派的堡壘
　學院教育
　高級官吏
　藝術家的巴札
　研究院預感到了危險
　印象派畫家與官方關術沙龍
評審委員會的規則
重要的日本畫展開幕
左拉的描述
皇帝定奪
落選者沙龍
落選者引起公憤
「奧林匹克，哪里來的奧林匹亞？」
卡巴奈的成功
有益健康的機構
三個對手
兩個狂人
不斷加劇的困難
守舊派朋友
核心人物德加
佚事畫
左拉的轉變
決定性的一年
納達爾家的展覽
《印象·日出》
批評不絕於耳
好事多磨
第三章 印象派的熔爐
美院生活
維奧萊-勒-迪克批評美術學校
私人畫室
自學成材的德加
……
第四章 印象派畫家及其世界
……








****

The Impressionists (2006 BBC)；The Impressionists:Painting and Revolution(2011 BBC)

BBC 2006和2011各有一部同名的The Impressionists，前者3集戲劇，YouTube可找到---英文發音，
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eBah6c5kyA
May 14, 2014 - Uploaded by Ariana Viktoria
The Impressionists Part 1 ..... Breaking the Code: Biography of Alan Turing (Derek Jacobi, BBC, 1996) - Duration: 1:30:47. by Ciencias ...

The Impressionists:Painting and Revolution(2011, BBC)
後者4集，副標題為 Painting and Revolution，由藝術作家Waldemar Januszczak主持，7月5日起在公視播出：

In this landmark four part series the art critic Waldemar Januszczak explores the revolutionary achievements of the Impressionists, through the stories of some of Art’s most famous painters: Monet, Degas and Van Gogh, as well as less-known Impressionists such as Caillebotte, Cassatt and Braquemond.

Although today Impressionism is considered appropriate for chocolate boxes, Januszczak argues that it was actually a remarkably exciting and radical movement in Art.
Travelling from the shores of the West Indies, to the city of Paris and the suburbs of London, Januszczak explores the key locations that inspired the Impressionists, and discovers the ground-breaking scientific advancements that allowed the movement to flourish.

4 x 1 hour

- See more at: http://www.zczfilms.com/shop/films/the-impressionists-painting-revolution/#sthash.anPDPTlP.dpuf

【就是印象派】

■ 播出時間：7/5、12、19、26 週日上午11點 1.【繪畫革命】本集可看到有史以來最偉大的畫作，以及最偉大的畫家，有莫內、雷諾瓦、梵谷、 塞尚和高更，印象派的故事就是他們的故事，是叛逆和勇氣的歷程，莫內畫了一些美術史上，最勇敢的圖畫，而雷諾瓦畫了一些最活潑的，竇加則是釋放芭蕾舞，秀拉釋放點畫派，梵谷 他釋放出色彩，他們的貢獻可說是為藝術界帶來大革命。2.【油畫和革命＆偉大的戶外】印象派最著名的是什麼！？是戶外畫作。於印象派戶外活動中，當然也看到很多陽光，印象派畫家們用新方法觀察和紀錄大自然，莫內的畫好像與世無爭，雷諾瓦也一樣，那些跳舞和午餐的美麗景象，輕鬆舒服，畢沙羅也一樣，金黃色的玉米田、晴朗的果園，即使他畫 冬季，他也會使寒冷看起來很受歡迎，印象派畫家的戶外畫作，是他們對繪畫最大的貢獻，大家都熱愛的東西，其實非常難畫，達成這種愉悅的戶外輕鬆感覺，比看起來要困難得多了。 3.【繪畫和革命＆繪畫人物】對印象派畫家來說，留在室內觀察人物，跟到戶外觀察風景同樣重要，在印象派畫作裡， 有許多流傳很久的名作，讓人看得見當代的社會及人文景緻。如竇加所繪的「芭蕾舞孃」，充份可知當時劇場界的故事，與其後的秘辛，像雷諾瓦等人，亦出繪當時中產階級人物 的生活。 4.【繪畫和革命：最後盛況】

4.【繪畫和革命：最後盛況】本集中探討關於色彩輪和光學的一些複雜技術問題，以秀拉的『大碗島上的星期天下午』（嘉德島的假日午後）為例，在1886年的印象派畫展中出現時，大家都注意到了，印象派在這裡顯然有新東西出現，秀拉製造出現代巴黎的刻板印象，一個正面、一個反面，現代 世界的兩面隔著一條河，互相對峙。

錯誤之處在（嘉德島的假日午後），以其標點符號系統，應該是秀拉的『大碗島上的星期天下午』vs『嘉德島的假日午後』為例，這是兩幅畫作標題，塞納河兩岸的後者表示工人階級，前者是腐敗；怕曬陽光的中產階級.......

公視的節目說明應該向英文學習，介紹要求全貌簡述 (末行his later waterlily paintings in the Orangerie in Paris也過份簡單，背後的故事很有意思，如Mason說那兒是現代藝術的Sistine Chapel......)，而不是拿一處說說：我讀過John Russel的Seurat 專書和Monet多本專書，這節目都給我些新知識。

Final Flourish

******

Information

Art writer Waldemar Januszczak explores the revolutionary achievements of the Impressionists.As the name suggests Waldemar Januszczak's aim is to show that despite appearing on chocolate boxes and tea towels the impressionists' art was and still is pretty revolutionary. Despite veering into gimmickry from time to time the series covers the ground well. The last episode, in which he considers the optical theories underlying Seurat's dottiness and how Monet's cataracts affected his vision, is perhaps the best of the lot.

[edit]Gang of Four

In the first episode, Waldemar delves into the back stories of four of the most influential Impressionists - Pissarro, Monet, Renoir and Bazille - who together laid the foundations of the artistic movement. He finds out what social and cultural influences drove them to their style of painting, how they were united and how ultimately they challenged and changed art forever. Waldemar journeys from the shores of the West Indies, to the progressive city of Paris to the suburbs of South London, where these four artists drew inspiration from the cities and towns in which they lived. He discovers how the Impressionists broke conventions by depicting every day encounters within the unpredictable and ever changing sights around them. 

[edit]The Great Outdoors

Waldemar Januszczak continues his investigation of the Impressionists by taking us outdoors to their most famous locations. Although Impressionist pictures often look sunny and relaxed, achieving this peaceful air was hard work. Trudging through fog, wind and rain, across treacherous coastal rocks and knee-deep snow, Waldemar shows us how the famous spontaneity of the Impressionists is thoroughly misleading. This episode visits the French riverside locations that Monet loved to paint, and where Renoir captured the bonhomie of modern life. Waldemar also introduces a number of technical and practical developments of the age which completely revolutionised Impressionist painting - the invention of portable easels; the use of hog's hair in paint brushes; as well as the introduction of the railway through France. Plus, Januszczak explains Cezanne's part in the Impressionist story. 

[edit]Painting the People

Waldemar Januszczak continues his investigation of the Impressionists, focusing on the people they painted and in particular the subjects of Degas, Caillebotte and the often forgotten Impressionist women artists. The Impressionists are famous for painting landscape but they were just as determined to paint people. Looking closely at the work of Edgar Degas, (他的姓氏讀法如出身貴族、他的厭女；"斯巴達女性挑戰男性是著名Jacques-Louis David的 Oath of the Horatii (from 1786)之戲仿......)Waldemar reveals how he consistently challenged traditions and strove to record real life as it appeared in the city. Waldemar also reveals the unusual viewpoints and dramatic perspectives of Caillebotte's paintings (真正有錢人；解釋為什麼要將木頭地板刨出一道道痕，因為整體地板均勻；畫室多亮色，讓陽光進來越多越好) from the Place de L'Europe and the rebellious and revolutionary art of Morisot, Bracquemond (她的作品多在陶器上頭)and Cassatt, three impressive female artists who were eagerly embraced by the progressive movement of Impressionism. (這集還介紹高更，因為他棄家到大溪地時已43歲，藝術生涯已可觀。)

[edit]Final Flourish

This episode takes a closer look at the late years of Impressionism, using the last show these artists did together as a starting point. Waldemar looks in considerable depth at the work of Georges Seurat, taking into consideration his academic training at the Beaux-Arts School in Paris and the artists that influenced him, such as Piero della Francesca and Puvis de Chavannes. There is also an insight into the complex but fascinating world of optics and art, and the ways in which the Impressionists were using the new discoveries in light and eyesight to influence their work. Van Gogh's time in Paris, a period very little is known about, is also covered, charting the incredible journey the artist made from his brown and dull canvases to the splendid colour and light that pervaded his work on the cusp of his departure for the South of France. The film finishes with a revisiting of Monet and his later waterlily paintings in the Orangerie in Paris. 

古賀 春江, Koga Harue, 1895 – 1933

 川端康成的好友Harue Koga (古賀 春江, Koga Harue, 1895 – 1933)  《古賀春江 : 前衛画家の歩み》  《Parallel Modernism  Koga Harue and Avant-Garde Art in Modern Japan 》(2019 )      0423

https://www.facebook.com/hanching.chung/videos/765501498351850

2月9日今昔：訪友..........從川端康成 的好友Harue Koga (古賀 春江, Koga Harue, 1895 – 1933)收藏品說起：以Koga Harue說明日本的西方平行的現代主義   Parallel Modernism：Koga Harue and Avant-Garde Art in Modern Japan. 

https://www.facebook.com/hanching.chung/videos/369832994516264

The artist-plantsman Sir Cedric Lockwood Morris (1889-1982 西崔克．莫里斯)

 

Happy Easter! Have a sunny, chocolate-filled weekend.

Sir Cedric Morris, Iris Seedlings 1943. https://bit.ly/3UhpBoL

 

Art in Isolation Episode 8: 'Cedric Morris: Painter and Plantsman'

https://www.youtube.com › watch

6:51

In the latest episode of Philip's lockdown series he brings you the work of one of his favourite artists, Sir Cedric Lockwood Morris ...

YouTube · Philip Mould & Co · 2020年4月6日

這部影片中有 3 個重要時刻

May Flowering Irises | Cedric Morris | Masterpiece 2022

https://www.youtube.com › watch

2:14

Striking in colour and composition this important work was painted by Cedric Morris in 1935 and depicts his favourite flowers: Irises.

YouTube · Philip Mould & Co · 2022年6月30日

【藝術風景｜西崔克．莫里斯的〈圓亭咖啡館，巴黎〉】

　蒙帕納斯區的圓亭咖啡館（La Rotonde）和穹頂咖啡館（Le Dôme）是莫里斯最常光顧和觀察的地方，他在現場以鉛筆速寫所見，回到畫室後再進行繪製，從草圖可見其深厚的素描能力。〈圓亭咖啡館，巴黎〉一作的風格具整體性，同時畫中各個人物特色鮮明紛呈：中央的女子令人聯想到羅特列克著名的繆斯珍．阿芙麗（Jane Avril），而左下角人物面具般的表情和慘白的氣色則如天外飛來一筆地擾亂原本穩定的畫面。（節選自《藝術家》573期，2023年2月號）

#西崔克_莫里斯 #Cedric_Morris

#根茲巴羅故居 #Gainsboroughs_House

#藝術家雜誌 #ArtistMagazine

圖說：西崔克．莫里斯　圓亭咖啡館，巴黎　約1921　油彩木板　103.5×78.5cm　英國薩弗克郡薩德柏里根茲巴羅故居藏 ©Gainsborough’s House, Sudbury, Suffolk

《藝術家》573期選購這邊請～～～

———————————————————

藝術家官方網站│https://reurl.cc/QWGbmO

長期訂閱│https://pse.is/38vkc4

金石堂│https://reurl.cc/4X0lvR

誠品線上│https://bit.ly/3knI8Cf

所有心情：

55

 

The artist-plantsman Sir Cedric Lockwood Morris (1889-1982) grew up in Sketty, South Wales. He spent his younger years intermittently abroad, regularly travelling across Europe and North Africa, whilst renting studios in Cornwall, Paris and London and becoming a conspicuous figure in the art world. In the 1930s, Cedric and his partner, the artist Arthur Lett-Haines (‘Lett’), made South Suffolk their permanent base, moving to Pound Farm in Higham, known as The Pound.

It was not far from Sudbury and Gainsborough’s House that Cedric and Lett founded the bohemian East Anglian School of Painting and Drawing (1937-1978).

The school started life in Dedham, but following a devastating fire in 1939, moved to the large farmhouse of Benton End in Hadleigh, where Cedric and Lett also lived. More of an artistic community than a school, the East Anglian School of Painting and Drawing encouraged individuality and painting en plein air. Two of its most notable alumni are Lucian Freud (1922-2011) and Maggi Hambling (b. 1945).

Throughout his career Cedric painted portraits, landscapes, still lifes, and flower and animal studies in equal measure. He painted in a very direct and idiosyncratic way, using bold impasto colour. Today he is perhaps best known for his flower paintings, particularly of irises. Cedric was principally a painter, but also an avid and experimental plantsman. He was a noted iris breeder and each winter would travel to places such as Portugal and Turkey to paint and find plant species that he would then establish in the garden at Benton End.

Cedric sat outside his studio at Pound Farm, Suffolk
c. 1930. —Gainsborough’s House © Cedric Morris Estate

 

In 1938, he /Lucian Freud was expelled from Bryanston, in Dorset, after dropping his trousers on a dare on a street in Bournemouth. But his sandstone sculpture of a horse earned him entry into the Central School of Arts and Crafts in London. He left there after a year to enroll in the East Anglian School of Drawing and Painting in Dedham, where he studied with the painter Cedric Morris. While it is true that the school burned to the ground while he was there, the often repeated story that Mr. Freud accidentally started the fire with a discarded cigarette seems unlikely.
In 1941, hoping to make his way to New York, Mr. Freud enlisted in the Merchant Navy, where he served on a convoy ship crossing the Atlantic. He got no nearer to New York than Halifax, Nova Scotia, and after returning to Liverpool developed tonsillitis and was given a medical discharge from the service.