The Human Facet of Landscapes
Interactions between men and landscape are a common subject matter throughout art history allowing artists to explore the several different aspects of this theme as seen in Claude Monet’s Garden at Sainte-Adresse, 1867, oil on canvas and Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s The Harvesters, 1565, oil on wood. Both works are on view at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the galleries 818 and 642 respectively. Monet’s painting is about 38 inches by 51 inches which appears to be a good size for a decorative painting, moreover, the scene of Parisian suburban leisure is pleasant to look at and the dimensions would have made it suitable for decorating a house. Bruegel’s work is larger, measuring around 47 inches by 64 inches which seems to invite the viewer into the unidealized rural setting of the peasant agricultural labor and their relationship with nature. This comparative essay will discuss the differences between both works and the use of formal characteristics in each composition to achieve their overall goals contrasting the realities of upper-class suburban leisure and rural work.
An important consideration about the subject matter is needed before considering the elements of design (composition, color, form, line, perspective, texture, balance and rhythm) used by each artist. Taking into consideration that both works were created nearly three hundred years apart, they present very different motivations for which aspect of human and nature relationship would be emphasized. Monet was an important Impressionist and his motivations were to capture the fleeting moments of modern Parisian society. Monet’s depiction of the vacation destination of Sainte-Adresse celebrates the contrast of Parisian suburban leisure, seen in the relaxation scene in the foreground, and the modern steam vessels representing the technological advances fueled by the Industrial Revolution in the background, thus creating a dialogue of how the industrialization was changing the landscape. On the other hand, Bruegel is motivated by Humanism, emphasizing the rural setting of peasants working in the wheat fields, heroicizing the modest routine of the workers and their relationship with nature. A good example of this relationship can be seen in the foreground on the right. The group of peasants on their lunch break are eating pears while three others are harvesting the pears from the tree in the background to the right. Thus, illustrating their symbiotic relationship with nature in which the group of peasants devote their sweat, effort and time into the land and, in return, nature gives them the fruits of their labor, such as the pears to eat and the grains to make the bread.
Furthermore, both artists organize their compositions to reinforce their motivations and goals. Monet’s composition is influenced by the flatness of Japanese woodblock prints achieved by the restriction of juxtaposition of elements with the exception of the foreground garden area of the bottom left corner that is partially blocking the seated woman, as well as the two seated figures that are partially blocking the central circular garden giving a clear sense of space. In the rest of the composition, however, Monet stacks the standing figures and sailboat in the middle-ground and the sailboats of the background by making the tip of the men’s shoes touch the central garden, the point of the parasol touch the sailboat which touches the bottom of the sailboat on the background flattening the space between the picture planes. The two flag poles reinforce the verticality of the stacked elements and the absence of clouds in the upper half of the sky are all used to reinforce the flatness of the space. Bruegel is more concerned to depict and emphasize the value of the peasants working the land. Rather than idealizing it, he creates his composition from observation. Bruegel includes many different aspects of the routine and labor of the wheat field workers including in the foreground a group on their lunch break eating bread and pears which are products of their land. Women are depicted tying the wheat that is being reaped at the same time by the men. Another two women are gathering the pears that the man is harvesting from the tree. In the middle-ground Bruegel takes the viewers eyes down the narrow path in between the fields by adding three figures with two of them carrying bundles of wheat down the path that leads towards the wagon filled with wheat. The path continues through the village leading the viewers towards the port, thus portraying all different aspects of their life and trade.
In addition to composition, Monet and Bruegel utilize color very differently. Monet has a high-keyed palette while Bruegel’s colors are much more muted. One of the technological advances of the Industrial Revolution was the production of oil paint in tubes that made a vast array of hues readily available allowing Monet to paint “en plein-air” and explore his desire of capturing the effects of light at a giving time of the day. His sun-filled work gives the viewer the impression of a sunny summer morning with the crisp breeze from the blue and green ocean reinforced by the movement of the flags illustrating the perfect bright weather, vibrant flowers and refreshing ocean breeze one would expect from a summer vacation. By contrast, Bruegel’s painting, which is also a summer scene, is dominated by an opaque palette of browns, yellow ochres and greens confronting the viewer to feel the harsh heat those peasants had to work in which is reinforced by the man drinking from the large jug of water, another man bringing two extra jugs of water from the wheat field path and the group gathered under the shade of the tree to rest and eat.
Color can also be used to create form which is the case for Monet’s work. Monet places splotches and patches of colors next to one another to create the forms in his composition. The flowers and foliage are created by dabs of color, the ripples of the water are formed by animated broken brushstrokes and even the shades used for modeling the volume of the clothing and flags are achieved by the use of various hues placed next to each other but not necessarily black, for example, the shades of the dress of the standing figure are rendered in blues and violets. Whereas Bruegel also creates some forms in his composition with color such as the bundles of wheat in the foreground and the foliage of the trees throughout the composition, he reinforces the outlines to define the contour of his shapes as seen in the figures.
Although Monet creates all the shapes of his composition with color without the use of outlines, the implied lines of vision created by the shapes guide the viewer’s eyes throughout the work. The two diagonal lines from the patio point at the two flags that take the viewer’s sight almost to the top of the work emphasizing the verticality of the organization of elements in order to flatten the space. The horizontal lines are used to separate the garden of the ocean and the ocean from the sky. Similarly, Bruegel’s implied lines of vision, as well as the reinforced outlines, are used to guide the viewer through the spaces and paths that illustrate a complete setting of the different activities involved in the daily lives of these group of peasants. But differently from the straight lines that grant great stability and serenity in Monet’s work, Bruegel’s lines are predominantly sinuous and rounded conveying a naturalistic and organic atmosphere as a representation of life itself, glorifying the arduous and gratifying rural work but recognizing how labor intensive and tiring it could be at the same time.
In addition to the lines of vision that guide the viewer’s eye through the compositions, both artists create the space and depth of field utilizing perspective. Monet’s foreground represents a nearly convincing sense of depth and spatial accuracy through one-point perspective in which the lines of the patio and wooden fence seem to point at the direction of concordant vanishing point. Beyond the garden area, however, the perspective is flattened by the stacked positioning of elements, by the placement of the sailboats and steam vessels in the background on a horizontal line without any overlapping and also by the lack of any clouds from the upper half of the sky confusing the sense of depth. Moreover, the ocean and the sky are interrupted by the vertical flag poles that emphasize the flatness of the middle and background picture planes. Monet’s choice of an elevated vantage point is due to the fact that he was observing the garden from an elevated balcony. Bruegel, on the other hand, is concerned with a naturalistic depiction of the land which is achieved by organizing the elements of his composition according to laws of perspective, by representing farther objects accurately smaller than the ones in the foreground and by the use of aerial perspective. Aerial or atmospheric perspective can be seen in the use of progressively fading pale tones for objects in the background to a point that the distant hills, bay, and ocean are painted in different tones of pale blues, therefore imitating the natural effects of the atmosphere when one is outdoors observing a landscape.
Another important aspect that can influence the final result and texture of a painting is the medium utilized by each artist. Bruegel’s work is on a wood panel in which he applies a thin layer of oil paint achieving a smooth surface of the painting. Monet’s painting is oil on canvas which allows a thicker application of paint because the intrinsic texture of the canvas naturally holds more paint. Monet’s visible brushwork adds texture to the surface of the painting but is also utilized to mimic the texture of different elements of the composition which can be seen on the circular motion application of paint for the clouds, steam from the ships and flowers, and the broken brushstrokes on the water to convey the ripples in the ocean. Mimetic texture is achieved in Bruegel’s work through the modeling of shapes and the use of light and shadow for the modest clothing of the peasants, by the variation in tones of the wheat, tree trunk and foliage.
All the elements of design utilized in both works serve each artist to create balance in each composition. Monet’s painting is asymmetrical, but balance is achieved by the repetition of colors in the composition such as the colors of the flowers carry the yellow and red of the flag on the upper left throughout the bottom half of the composition as well as the blue, white and red of the French flag that is present in the sky, clothes, flowers and on the red ship. The greens from the garden are incorporated in the ocean as well. Lastly, Monet creates a harmonious balance between the vertical, horizontal and diagonal lines achieving a lively and stable composition. Bruegel’s work is also asymmetrical, but balance is achieved by creating a pathway for the viewer’s eye to follow starting by the area of the wheat field that has been harvested by the peasants through the narrow trail in between the wheat field that splits leading to the village and continuing to the top of the other wheat field towards the left in the background until finally leads the eye towards the bay circling back to the beginning as an allegory to the cycles of agriculture and life.
Lastly, the repetition of elements used in each composition creates rhythm. Monet’s repetition of colors throughout his painting not only serves the purpose of achieving balance but also creates a dynamic rhythm that keeps the viewer engaged. For example, the variation in size of the blobs of red in which Monet renders the flowers enlivens the garden in similar way the wind seems to wave the flags. In the same fashion, Monet depicted the ocean with a number of undulating brushstrokes of various lengths to convey the movement of the water ripples. The undulating brushwork that forms the flags and the steam from the vessels reinforce how the breeze animates the whole landscape which translates as a lively visual rhythm. In contrast of Monet’s flamboyant composition, Bruegel’s rhythm is more muffled reinforcing the strenuous work routine of the harvesters. In the foreground, Bruegel creates a pattern on the ground with the bundles of wheat that have been recently cut bordering the wheat field. The stacked wheat bundles that have been tied form a triangular pattern that directs the viewer’s eye from the foremost picture plane in which the group is having lunch to the background where two other figures are tying the grains and three more are harvesting the pears from the tree. Bruegel also uses the repetition of the burnt sienna color in different elements of the composition to draw the viewer’s attention to all the activities that take place in his work. The color is seen in the pears that are being harvested, in the vest of the men tying the wheat, in the shirt of the peasant drinking water, in the fabric which the man asleep rests his head on, in the water jug the man brings from the wheat field, in the cattle pulling the wagon, in the clothes of some of the figures in the village and the cattle in the field near the bay, thus emphasizing the agricultural cycle that seems to define their lives.
In conclusion, the comparative analysis of the works of Monet and Bruegel allowed me to evaluate how the elements of design were utilized in each painting as a vehicle, or better, as a language allowing each artist to express his motivations and achieving his goals in the depiction of two contrasting realities of a new form of upper-class Parisian leisure and the way of life of a rural community of peasants who live off and work the land.