As a rule, any style of painting as a culture phenomenon has its roots hidden in a separate individuals’ techniques, their vision of how the picture should be composed, painted and perceived. Individuals with common vision and ideas are associated with one painting style.
However, a problem with such distribution may occur when, in spite of the general similarity of style, the painters use different techniques and follow different aims in their art. Thus, Post-Impressionism emerged while impressionists were still creating their most famous works, which made it hard to distinguish these two styles clearly.
However, there are some changes in the style which caused a shift from Impressionism to Post-Impressionism. These changes will be analyzed in this paper using the comparison of two works: Camille Pissarro, The Goose Girl at Montfoucault, White Frost, 1875 and Vincent van Gogh, The Rocks, 1888.
Both of the chosen paintings represent individual styles of their authors, as well as the major tendencies of Impressionism and Post-impressionism, correspondingly. Indeed, vague forms and mild effect of Pissarro’s painting can give a clear picture of Impressionistic vision, while Van Gogh’s work represents the out-and-outer style of Post-Impressionism with its sharp forms, contrasts and dazzling colors.
The major detail that allows detecting different techniques in the two paintings is the technique of using a brush. Pissarro uses paint with a paste consistency to place dots and clouds on the canvas, which, in combination with each other, create certain forms. The surface of the painting seems smooth, or at least of one level. The artist applied mostly thin brushstrokes.
A peculiar detail is that the direction of the brushstrokes does not depend on the form or shape of the objects; their shape is shown with the help of tones and light values. A different approach can be observed in Van Gogh’s painting; the artist uses energetic brushstrokes with tones of thick paint, and, unlike the Impressionistic method, the artist emphasizes the geometric forms of the objects with the direction of the brushstrokes.
If we transformed the two pictures into black and white, we would see that Pissarro’s painting has vague and rather light objects depicted, and it would be hard to distinguish certain details. In contrast, Van Gogh’s painting has an illusion of having a number of edges, as every brushstroke has a function of building some object and intensifying its shape.
The thick paint gives an additional volume to the painting and also contributes to the general geometry. The artist used thick and confident brushstrokes. At some areas of the painting, Van Gogh seems to have literally pressed the paint in the canvas, which gives a very vibrant impression. This technique also gives the picture another dimension, allowing to see not only the content of the painting, but also its actual texture.
Another striking difference between the two paintings is the use of color. The palette of Pissarro is rather discreet, with all the hues being chosen carefully. Burnt umbra is a basis for some tones of green and yellow in the trees and background, and cool bluish whites of the sky and the ground are combined with strokes of warm ochre, which helps the whites stay in accord with the rest of the picture.
This way of using color values is consistent with the Impressionistic art aims, as these colors allow making the impression of an evening in September. As for Van Gog’s painting, its colors are very rough, contrasting to each other and competing for leadership. Cold blue and snowy white cover the major part of the canvas, and the brushstrokes of ochre and warm green, as well as spots of pure sun yellow make an impression of mosaic.
Moreover, the artist used pure black to outline the rocks and show shadows. Such contrasts make it hard for the viewer to define the general value of the painting, to see what tones are dominating, and as a result it distracts from analyzing the picture and makes the viewer simply perceive it as it is.
Unlike in case of Pissarro’s painting, Van Gogh’s picture does not allow getting a clear idea of a certain season or time of the day. Only the colors of the painted bushes and grass make the viewer suppose that it could be autumn.
Similar difference can be seen in the role of light in the two paintings. Pissarro has its painting divided into two areas: light, where the light from setting sun is covering the objects, and shadowy, where the mild shadow of the trees is sheltering the gooses and the girl. This use of light awakens the feeling of comfort and stillness.
A totally different feeling occurs while looking at Van Gogh’s “Rocks”: there is no source of light defined by the artist, and the light areas can be found on any side of the rocks. In addition, the painter did not make any clear shadows; the only way of showing the geometrical form of the objects is the use of black strokes.
This specialty of Van Gogh’s light depiction can be determined by the setting, as there are no flat areas depicted, which makes it impossible to show areas of shadows or of light.
The painters’ positions are similar in the two pictures. Pissarro has painted his picture as if he was standing in the yard together with the goose girl. This position is traditional to a man’s eye, and it causes a calm and relaxed mood. Despite the fact that Van Gogh’s perspective also implies looking at the object, the horizon is not visible, as it is beyond the rocks.
In addition, the top of the oak is extremely close to the upper line of the canvas. These two aspects of the picture composition leave no space for the viewer, causing a feeling of panics and lack of space. However, it should also be noted that both of the paintings are spatial.
The light background and shadows in the yard in Pissarro’s painting give an impression of three-dimensionality. Van Gogh also shows the different levels of rocks, making the painting look rather deep.
The textures of various objects are shown by Pissarro by the more or less smooth brushstrokes. For instance, the goose girl’s apron and the gooses’ plumage are shown as smooth and solid stains, while the tree’s bark has its texture shown with dynamic brushstrokes of different hues.
The artist also uses black to show the sharp texture of the bark. Van Gogh also focuses on depicting the texture of the objects, giving them exaggerated values compared to the ones they have in real life. Van Gogh’s stones are depicted with curly brushstrokes, which make them rocky; the sky seems to be embroidered with thick threads, and the bushes seem very sharp, although no sign of their texture was depicted.
The motifs of the two paintings also differ. Pissarro covered a wide range of objects in his composition, focusing on the situation rather than on a separate object. As for Van Gogh’s painting, it can be said that the main objects in his composition are rocks, as they take the majority of space, and the whole composition is built around them.
One of the major differences between the paintings is that one of them depicts a cultivated landscape, and another shows a wild place. Thus, Pissarro’s painting depicts a small rural glade with natural surroundings, but some details in the picture point to the human presence, such as gooses (domestic birds) and a small wooden fence. The presence of a girl in the picture has an effect of harmony between nature and human.
In contrast, Van Gogh’s picture shows a wild piece of nature, which seems to have never been explored or intruded by human. Absence of people and piles of sharp rocks make a wild impression, in every sense of this word.
As it can be seen, the two analyzed works have many contrasting aspects, such as use of color, light, composition, theme, aim, and painting technique. However, it is obvious that these two styles root from one idea: to make an impression. For Impressionism, it is an impression of atmosphere, mood, and situation. For Post-Impressionism, it is an impression of inner state of the artist, perception, and mood of surroundings.