Texture In Modernity

Texture in Modernity

More than one definition is ascribed to Modernity. Similarly, more than one way of living was experienced by modern artists. The modernity that they were experiencing is shown through the content and form of their paintings. By comparing and contrasting various textures in Edouard ManetÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s A Bar at the Folies-Bergere and Mary CassattÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s The Coiffure, one can discover the multidimensional characteristics of the modern world.

Painted in ManetÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s late years, A Bar at the Folies-Bergere presents the Parisian night life with a scene in a bar. In the foreground, a barmaid stands in front a table facing viewers. Behind the barmaid, at the right hand side, a girl and a man in black are talking to each other. The background is ambiguous. The viewers cannot be sure whether it contains a large mirror that reflects the luxury party or there is no mirror, it is just the room behind the barmaid. As for CassattÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s The Coiffure, the content is much clearer. Cassatt depicts her maid sitting on a sofa in front of a mirror and tying her hair.

The way Manet and Cassatt handle textures is very different too, although the influence of Japanese woodblock prints is obvious in both of the paintings, because there are flat areas with little modeling of the three-dimensional objects. The treatment of depth is apparently influent by Japonisme too. In Japanese prints, the depth is either missing or displayed with a very weird arrangement. In A Bar at the Folies-Bergere, even though the background is ambiguous, one can still get a sense of space. In The Coiffure, there is virtually no depth at all in this print. Usually, the treatment of the texture can creates depth. Here, the lack of texture results in the lack of depth.

The exciting textures of A Bar at the Folies-Bergere come from ManetÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s characteristic broken brushstrokes through which the hazy atmosphere is rendered. The boundaries of objects are blurred. Starting from the middle ground, shapes are blended into other shapes. Moreover, the loose and free worked brushstroke creates a confusion of material. The wine bottles look as if they are made of ragged paper. The barmaidÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s dress has a stony quality, and the lavish chandelier looks more like cotton balls hanging on the ceiling. Furthermore, deliberate flat white patches of paint are scattered all over. They not only produces the ambiguity of the background but also flatten the scene. In A Bar at the Folies-Berger, the texture engenders ambiguity but also creates energy.

In comparison, The Coiffure is less interesting in terms of texture. Even though prints are very different from painting, prints are still famous for their beautiful texture. Medium does not limit CassattÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s potential of developing texture. Yet Cassatt portrays little texture and leaves the print with a clean appearance. Patterning substitutes texture and becomes the major interest of the scene, whereas pattern is invisible in A Bar at the Folies-Bergere. For example, in The Coiffure, the pattern of the wallpaper and the mats are so intricate that one cannot help but look at them. Furthermore, in contrast to the misleading texture of A Bar at the Folies-Bergere, the textures of the hair and the sofa are depicted realisticly. Therefore, the viewers can recognize the materials at the first glance. The servant, the mirror and the sofa are also outlined with clean thin lines. However, the lack of texture creates this unrealistic feeling of the mirror, but not like the mirror in A Bar at the Folies-Bergere, one can still recognize it as a mirror. There is no depiction of some reflected light dabs. And with the same treatment on both the reflection of the servant and the real servant, the scene looks somehow like two twins sisters sitting in adjacent rooms mimicking each otherÐ'ÐŽÐ'¦s