Artist's Eyes and Cockeyed Art
|
 |
Not only do artists live and die by the eye, they teach the rest of us to see. "Monet is only an eye, but what an eye.” said
Cezanne. He added, "The sky is blue, no? It is Monet who discovered that.” These statements inspired ophthalmologists James Ravin and Michael Marmor into an investigation that resulted in an excellent book, "The Artist’s Eyes." The text offers information on how the artist's eye sees the world around us.
They presented a number of examples, such as, "It would be incorrect to assume that non representational painting, such as abstract or cubism, implies poor visual acuity or that painting with strong colors (or lack of color) implies the presence of a cataract or color vision abnormalities." Most artists have a keen sense of color, balance and form but use non conventional methods to tell their stories. Some writers have concluded that all this was due to the formation of cataracts or other ocular anomalies.
|
The authors explain that Picasso's work was innovative during his rose and blue periods and with his explorations of Cubism and abstraction. But his later style, which utilizes simpler colors and forms, has received mixed reviews. Some critics have admired his work during that period. While others felt that it was crude or repetitive. In 1918, at the age of 78, Monet described his visual troubles of the preceding few years.
"I no longer perceive colors with the same intensity,” said Monet. “I no longer painted light with the same accuracy. Reds appeared muddy to me, pinks insipid, and the intermediate or lower tones escaped me. As for forms, they always appeared clear and I rendered them with the same decision. At first I tried to be stubborn. How many times have I stayed for hours under the harshest sun sitting on my campstool, in the shade of my parasol, forcing myself to resume my interrupted task ands recapture the freshness that had disappeared from my palette. When the attempt was over, I compared it to former works and I would be seized by a frantic rage and slash all my canvases with my penknife."
Monet had bilateral cataracts and they were of the dense yellow-brown nuclear variety. This condition resulted in blurred vision and a severe loss of color perception since the wavelengths of color could not penetrate his cataract like they did when he was healthier. He relied on the physical placement of his pigments to help maintain his technique.
Degas had a chronic and progressive retinal disease. To close friends he confessed what a torment it was to draw when he could only see around the very spot which he held in regard. He finally resorted to sculpting to be able to utilize his sense of touch and feeling in order to continue to create art. Marmor and Ravin also reveal that Impressionist Camille Pissaro suffered from recurrent inflammation and infection of the lacrimal system. One of the most intriguing cases involves Cezanne who was diagnosed with diabetes around the age of 50, with doctors reporting "retinal maladies."
Many of us have left an art exhibit of modern paintings with the feeling that the artist has lost touch with normalcy to produce such unusual looking pictures. We may deduce from what we know that the strange colors, distorted figures and queer impressionistic effects of modern paintings are due, in some cases, to defects in the eyesight of the artists. Dr. Lloyd A. Mills, a Los Angeles eye physician, does not think the artists are cockeyed but claims some visual defects account for what the average man considers strange in modern art. He agrees with other experts that visual defects may also have been responsible for much that is great in modern art and was perhaps a factor in the founding of the modern school of impressionism.
The uncorrected nearsighted artist will portray nearer objects with much more clarity than distant objects. Dr. Mills argues that great art depends on the proper use of both central and peripheral vision working in concert with one another. The main theme of a work of art is usually rendered in a clear manner, but the surrounding scenery is not as distinct, yet you have an impression of it. Artists who lived a few generations ago would would have painted every detail clearly in the scene whether far or near, central or peripheral. This is called a photographic style. While it has its place for decoration or historical precision purposes, it is never really optically correct. Impressionism reaches its extreme when it sends a message that its world is different and perceived all wrong to most of us.
Dr. Mills cites his own refractive error and how it influences his visual perception. "Because of my uncorrected astigmatism I see an oblique distortion at far distances, which differs between the two eyes,” he said. “Often only the essential lines of forms provide the clues needed to identify the object under consideration."
In the April, 1997 issue of the Journal of the AOA, Dr. Sol Tannebaum wrote an article about artist's vision that, in my opinion, has never been bettered. He utilizes the research and study of the famous Dr Trevor Roper. Dr. Roper's remarks can be found in his excellent book, "The World through Blunted Sight." In that book he noted that in myopia the entire spectrum would focus in front of the retina, with the red rays in better focus than the other colors. Renoir was famous for using red and the warmer colors in his work. Thus, we may deduce that Renoir might have been an uncorrected myope.
George Seurat brought pointillism to a highly regarded art style. He placed dabs or spots of color next to one another without emphasis of form or line in and of themselves. The viewer used a psychological exercise to stand back and blend the spots into a recognizable scene. Another example can be noted in Holbein’s painting of King Henry VIII of England wherein the subject's girth was excessively wide and out of proportion to the remainder of the figure. Experts judge that this was caused by the artist's uncorrected astigmatism. When viewed with a corrective lens in place, the subject looks much thinner. On the other hand, his "Christ in the Tomb" depicts the subject tall, but when examined through an astigmatic lens at axis 90 degrees he becomes wider with a more normal appearance. It is also proposed by Dr. Roper that Gainsborough's subjects often had elongated bodies and necks, possibly due to uncorrected astigmatism. We cannot omit the works of Modigliani from the artists with uncorrected astigmatism category, as exampled by how he depicts his long necks and bodies as well.
|
Vincent Van Gogh's "Crows over the
Cornfield."
|
Dr. Tannebaum cleverly points out that the famous Rembrandt, in his youth, mastered details, yet in his advanced age his work contained less detail. Was presbyopia rearing its ugly head at the time? Norwegian artist, Edvard Munch, often used birdlike images in his paintings. It is believed that these images were visualized from the vitreous opacities that were encamped within his eyes. The same conclusion was reached upon noting the appearance of crows in Van Gogh’s work, "Crows over the Cornfield."
|
Goya's color sensitivity started to deteriorate at the same time he became deaf. For example, his piece "The Witches Sabbath." was "decolorized" in comparison to his earlier works. The painter, Louis Wain, specialized in painting cats. His later work depicts his cats with odd, tense, terror stricken patterns. Unfortunately, he ultimately lapsed into the realm of schizophrenia.
The painter, Max Ernst, comments that the aberrations of vision may actually add an interesting element that will help the viewer to better understand the surrounding environment as the artist struggles to interpret it through his own limited senses. It may be a world through blunted sight, but it is ever more intriguing due to the efforts of these talented artists.
|
