Tags: Bressay Shetland IslandsBiotechnology Business PlanCenter For Alcohol Policy EssayQuotes On Good Essay WritingDefending A Doctoral ThesisBlack Boy Essay RacismEnglish Essay HeadingsCriminal Law DissertationsNinety-Five ThesisEconomics Thesis Pakistan
Instead, in a highly influential passage he proposed that painting was like a view through a window.It is, as we now know, nothing like that though writers think so.One who is hungry for knowledge and experiences, in constant pursuit of the unknown.
Earlier scribes, with far less access to art’s masterpieces than we have today, failed to grasp that.
And that, in turn, might explain why artists recognize the shared philosophy between literature and art but writers don’t.
Guys, he expounded, was a man of power and originality yet the art world is in universal agreement that he was neither of the two.
But worse, he describes painting’s art as no more profound than taking snapshots in a crowd, the painter strolling about as a And we all know how wrong that is.
In between the Renaissance and modern writers are a host of others who considered visual art as either mere copying of nature or an illustration of literature, be it the Bible or their own plots.
Thomas Puttfarken, specialising in Renaissance art, has also challenged the majority view, claiming the Renaissance humanists who promoted painting had no particular love of the art nor any particular belief about its merits.
The persona in Song of Myself by Walt Whitman teeters on the line of ‘he is flaneur’ versus ‘he is not flaneur’, in accordance with Baudelaire’s definition that is.
Whitman’s persona in Song of Myself undoubtedly has an abundance of experiences to share, and is therefore indeed an observer of the world; a man of the world, but whether he has pursued these experiences with the attitude, curiosity and hunger characteristic of a flaneur or merely had them by means of existing hinders his qualification to be flaneur. Much of the definition being communicated through the behavior and characteristics of his main character Monsieur G.
"He [Manet] arranges the figures before him, more or less at random, and then is only interested in getting them down on the canvas as he sees them, with all the vivid contrasts that they make with one another. Charles Baudelaire, whose impact on art history has been greater than the others, was certain that he knew as much about art as painters.
Ask nothing else from him than an exactly literal translation. He knows how to paint and that is all…" After those unsuccessful attempts, the honesty with which Gustave Flaubert admitted he understood nothing about Manet’s paintings is rather refreshing. He was brilliant but the fact that he chose an insignificant draughtsman, Constantin Guys, as his main example in And he published the essay in the same year his friend Manet was the talk-of-the-town.