Although Klimt’s influence is evident in Schiele’s early work, he soon found his own distinctive style. The heavily decorative elements of Symbolism, Art Nouveau and Jugendstil are gone and in its place is raw, naked Expressionism. Schiele’s females nudes, often featured in provocative poses are emaciated and sickly looking with a distorted line that renders the figures close to grotesque. It is true that after his marriage in 1915 to Edith Hams that the models are more fully fleshed, however the doll-like appearance of these later studies makes them even more disconcerting.
In 1918 after a brief, tumultuous life which had included being imprisoned for exhibiting erotic drawings and considerable controversy for his use of teenage models (who tended to be juvenile delinquents) Schiele died in the Spanish Influenza outbreak that was gripping Vienna at that time, just three days after his pregnant wife Edith had died and only 8 months after the death of his mentor Gustav Klimt.
I was perusing some of his work after your mention in the Klimt post yesterday. Some of these show great skill while others seem a little crude. However, I am in no position to judge – art is so personal. And it doesn’t have to be ‘pretty’ to be beautiful. I am drawn to the one on the bottom left. I wonder what she’s looking at.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am ambivalent about Schiele… I personally prefer Klimt, this is something uneasy about Schiele’s work. He does show great mastery of line in some drawings but other are crude but I think that is deliberate, done at speed to fully capture the essence of the person in the expression, hence expressionism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Right. There is a method in figure drawing where you hastily sketch, trying to capture movement, not really trying to be precise. I can see why this work would make you uneasy. And what a short and tragic life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A tragic life indeed…he is a important figure in expressionism and erotic art. I am glad you liked
LikeLike
So do you like Schiele? He is a major figure but I am decidedly on the fence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like him. But I wouldn’t want to dwell on these over long…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed I like him but I agree with Emma, too tortured, too dark and too obscure. However he does deserve a place in this series.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I went for another look… you are right . There is no light in these at all. And Dreams of Desire? Yes, poor soul
LikeLiked by 1 person
It really should be a book…where the patron who will pay me a big fat advance so I can research and write it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It should!!! And I don’t know! Keep going and maybe you’ll get their attention!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well maybe I will write to Taschen or Phaidon and make some bogus qualifications
LikeLiked by 1 person
Let me know if you need help with that… fiction writer at large
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you as always
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wonder what she is looking at as well… though I could hazard a guess… his splashes of colour work to great effect
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it achieves The desired effect – provocation. And thus it is good work
LikeLiked by 1 person
True, very provocative.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wonderful post Mr. Cake. Schiele’s work is quite beautiful. Some may find the pieces a bit unnerving, yet they don’t look away, it’s part of the appeal. ~ Miss Cranes
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Miss Cranes the discussion is in relation to my previous post on Klimt. I do find them unnerving but you are right, I don’t look away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is good art judged by viewer’s perception of beauty just for the sake of beauty, or is it the artist’s ability to capture your attention?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent question Miss Cranes…I have to sit on the fence on this one and say I would have to give judgement on a case by case basis. Beauty alone isn’t enough yet the ability to grab attention isn’t either. In the post on Klimt I refer to the discussion in Blue is the Warmest Colour regarding Schiele and Klimt, the positions of the characters are revealing, just as I think people’s responses are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and often irrelevant when it comes to art, example Goya’s Black Paintings. Attention is a big umbrella, and if you can get your viewer to stand under that you’ve done your job, whether the work is considered, “beautiful” or ‘ugly”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
True and I can see how Klimt is decadent both in the Symbolist and Marxist senses, however I still find them sexy. Beauty can be irrelevant to art where beauty isn’t the attention, yet in some artwork beauty is the purpose. Hence the need for a case by case basis and accepting the artwork on its term. I missed these exchanges Miss Cranes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sad if beauty is the only intent in the creation of a piece of artwork. Many artists would be greatly disappointed to read that. Successful artists of any genre are notorious for weaving a canvas of many ideas and emotions. As with analyzing most things, big to small. Once the piece, regardless of the type of art it is, grabs the attention of the participant, then the brain will chip away at what is relevant to that individual.
I’m indifferent to Klimt the market is saturated, it’s like a bird to something shiny. Just me, perhaps I missed the gold lamé boat.
Thank you as always Mr. Cake, for an engaging exchange. ~ Miss Cranes
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well I think any great artist will try to capture the full range of emotions and experiences, beauty, terror, the sublime, boredom, ecstasy, passion etc. However they are many worthwhile minor artists whose range is more limited yet are still worth a look. You are funny, missed the gold lame boat. Thank you for the engaging exchange Miss Cranes you always make me think.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I never saw the link with Klimt although Egon was his acolyte had I not known, I’m not sure I would have been capable of observing the influence. That may be my error, as when I know, I can almost see it, but I think it’s my bias of knowing that makes it so. Whilst Klimt was about the tiny portion of truth (the face, say) then the ‘gilt’ of deception, and most are drawn to the latter, Egon was more invested in revealing the entireity, in that sense I suppose he went that necessary step further, not just a revealed angst in the (Jewish) face of the Woman in Gold but the entire body too and then another step, the emotion, another, the impression, another, the act. In the latter, he opens up everything, we don’t need imagination, the smut, the lines, the ruddy color, he has pictured ourselves as we inspect our nether emotions in the mirror. It is definitely his candor and repulsion (today’s favorite word no doubt) much like Walter Sickert (sp?) he isn’t afraid of ‘going there’ but he does it in a far more intimate way. Sickert really does appear to be the voyuyer who is watching whilst Egon is asking the model(s) and they obey, there is less smut more yield. For some they say who wants to see the labia of a pre-pubescent girl isn’t that paedophilia? Maybe it is? But the way in which it is rendered, judgement or purpose aside, is truly masterful. I would say he’s far more homosexual than paedopilic, he’s a definite penis man, but that said, he knows how to capture a girl/woman with equal if not more, ability, maybe because he’s less invested? I found them so beautiful – something in them spoke to me of how I felt as a child when we played doctors and nurses looking at each other, revealing, stepping back, growing up, experimenting, letting loose, it seemed very natural to me, reminding me of say, the unselfconscious portrayal of ballet dancers getting dressed that Degas was so good at doing (never found his bathing girls as realistic in terms of stance).
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like Schiele and he is a hugely influential Expressionist and erotic artist and quite brave in going so far but I will admit he makes me uneasy. With the possible exception of Bellmer I don’t know of another 20th Century artists who causes such uneasiness. He was more daring than Klimt certainly, however the competition between mentor and pupil (which I seemed to have perpetuated) didn’t exist in real life. They were very good friends.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see him as a talented pervert, hard to know what to do morally but he was talented in ways few have replicated and i wonder why that is
LikeLiked by 1 person
it is an excellent question, maybe it forced him to look at things for a different, uncomfortable angle. Hard to know what to do morally though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Or if you’re repressed i.e. cannot have sex with boys, you curb through intense artistic rendering? In which case, without acting upon, no real wrong?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is that where his proclivities lay? I thought he just liked young girls, apart from self-portraits he rarely draw males unless there were no girls around, like his time in the army…though there is that whole Freudian argument about that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Replace with girl, interchangable, not sure to be honest.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That makes both of us on Schiele.
LikeLiked by 1 person
For me it poses the question why. The personal testimonials of artists and their reasons for doing what they do I liken to seeing their unmentionables.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is indeed a mystery, sometimes the naked truth can be disturbing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yet, our outlook forever changed, which means growth, probably.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like the probably there Ms Dawn. Probably indeed
LikeLiked by 1 person
Smiling
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very beautiful and in some ways very disconcerting. I have always liked the lead photo / painting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed I am a bit uneasy with Schiele but undoubtedly striking and talented.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is always an edge of uneasiness to great art. We were discussing Goya and the Disasters of War at super this evening … the cutting edge of how to feel uneasy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed, sorry for the delay Roger I have been busy with all that reality stuff that is so tedious but necessary. I will be visiting shortly
LikeLike
So you prefer Klimt? I had never really seen any of his work until I watched WOMAN IN GOLD with Helen Mirren.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am not sure if I prefer… I do like Klimt though, Schiele is probably a genius but an uneasy genius
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think all geniuses are a little uneasy. If you met them in a dark alley you’d be like, “OK, I get why people like you. But get the f*** away from me.” 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank God I am not a genius then.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I disagree. But since I’m familiar with you, I wouldn’t shy from you in a dark alley.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That almost sounds like a proposition C M!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Does it? Hmmm, I guess it kind of did. Whoops! You are a strangely enigmatic fellow, though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am only joking. I probably more vague fellow
LikeLiked by 1 person
Schiele is one of my favourite artists, being the one to introduce Europe with the black line… Haha. He was truly a wicked genius, dying far too young.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He was truly a wicked genius and definitely in the category of artists that died too young. This may interest you, another artist with line who shuffled off this mortal coil at an early age.
https://cakeordeathsite.wordpress.com/2017/07/26/the-sinuous-curve/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mortal coil… You are crazy indeed but I like it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wish I could claim credit for the phrase but Shakespeare beat me to it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Still crazy…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Is that a good thing?
LikeLike