Saturday, March 18, 2017
POINTILLISM IN ROCK ART - A MISAPPLIED DEFINITION:
Mammoth engraving from Abro
Cellier, France. Photo and
drawing by R. Bourrillon.
I have commented on recent discoveries by
Randall White from New York University and his team of researchers, and their
discoveries in the French rock shelters Abri Blanchard, Abri Castanet, and Abri
Faravel. Now another article adds Abri Cellier to the list of their discoveries
of remarkably old rock art. Lorraine Boissoneault, writing in www.smithsonianmag.com,
has detailed their discoveries in her column "Prehistoric Pointillism? Long Before Seurat, Ancient Artists
Chiseled Mammoths Out of Dots."
Aurochs engraving from Abri
Blanchard, France. Photo and
drawing by R. Bourrillon.
The same
story was well covered by Laura Geggel, a senior writer for LiveScience.com on
February 24, 2017, in her article "Just
Like Van Gogh: Prehistoric Artists Used Pointillist Technique."
These
articles illustrate 38,000-year-old imagery carved into blocks of limestone
from the above mentioned locations with animals portrayed in patterns of dots,
and both authors liken these images to the "Pointillism" used by
George Seurat and some other impressionist artists. One example, found in 2014
at Abri Cellier, has been identified by White and his team as a wooly mammoth,
and another from Abri Blanchard as an aurochs.
Sketch for Sunday Afternoon on
Grande-jatte, Georges Seurat.
1886, Public domain.
The problem
is that neither of these images, nor any others that they have identified have
anything to do with Pointillism. As I have written elsewhere this problem
occurs when non-art historians use artistic terminology without really
understanding it. The Impressionism movement of the late 1800s was essentially
motivated by an attempt to reproduce the effect of light on the surface of the
subject, relying on the eye to mix areas of color to form the bright, colorful
image. As an offshoot of Impressionism, Pointillism was also driven by the goal
of providing areas of pure color and pigment which were then mixed in the
viewers eye to provide the other hues. In basic Impressionism the colors were
applied loosely to the surface of the canvas (thus, an area intended to be green might include yellow and blue and rely on visual mixing) , while in its purest form,
Pointillism, they were patterned much more regularly leading to a painted
surface that consisted essentially of ordered dots of pure color. These artists were
aiming for the same effect that we perceive today when we view a color
half-tone picture in a book or magazine, or now on the television screen.
Pointillist color wheel.
The color
wheel above illustrates this in the orange, green, and purple secondary colors.
They are composed of mixed dots of the primary colors red (magenta), blue
(cyan), and yellow.
Georges Seurat, 1886.
Public domain.
I am certainly not disputing any aspect of the discoveries of Paleolithic imagery composed of dot patterns, I am only addressing the misuse of the term Pointillism as a description of those dots. While I
cannot determine what the Paleolithic artists were attempting to do with their
patterns of dots, it cannot by definition, be anything related to Pointillism.
Lacking color, an image constructed by a pattern of dots might be likened to
the black-and-white half-tone pictures in our books and magazines, or on an old
black-and-white television. I do not personally think that even this is,
however, an accurate representation. Half-tone reproduction essentially
required the invention of photography before it was conceived, and I am not a
believer in the Paleolithic camera obscura. Indeed, while I am vastly impressed
by the many sophisticated effects and images produced by these artists, I
cannot credit these dot-covered images with being attempts at half-tone
reproductions of the animal.
What do the
animal images comprised of dots actually imply? I do not know. But I am very
confident that I know what they are not.
NOTE: Images
in this posting were retrieved from the internet after a search for public
domain photographs. If any of these images are not intended to be public
domain, I apologize, and will happily provide the picture credits if the owner
will contact me with them. For further information on these reports you should read the originals at the sites listed below.
REFERENCES:
Wikipedia
www.livescience.com
www.smithsonianmag.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment