Saturday night I went to First Night at the Brooklyn Museum, which is always a fun party, but maybe NOT the best night to REALLY see the art (or at least not if you show up at 10PM). However, we did pass a really lovely late Claude Monet (Le Parlement, Effet de Soliel, 1903) and I had a pain in my heart when my friend said "Oh, a Monet!"It's not that I don't have love for Monet, it's just that I always feel irked that Eduoard Manet, his slightly older, contemporary is often confused for, or forgotten because of Monet and his commercial success. Part of my annoyance is because I just like Manet better, and I realized it's how vehement Nas fans feel when they hear and see Jay-Z all over the place. Here is a Manet, (Olympia from 1863 at the Musee d'Orsay)- this sort of put him "on the map".
Actually, to continue my hip-hop metaphor, just as Nas and Jay-Z were one time friends and collaborators, so were Manet and Monet. (later, like the two rappers, they became estranged over a "beef" about a novel by Emile Zola). Both of the artists were hugely influenced by Gustav Courbet, the so-called "Father of Impressionism". Courbet was older and on the scene before either Manet or Monet were, acting a bit like a "Big Daddy Kane". He made a name for himself by painting realistic scenes of things like funerals and people at work, generally unfashionable subjects at the time. However, he did so in a pretty way and captured natural light in a way that inspired many. He was controversial, but it appealed to younger painters and started a movement. (below, Funeral at Ornans,1849 by Courbet at the Musee d' Orsay in Paris)
Manet took Courbet's love of realism in subjects and ran with it. He captured the grimy, edgy side of then modern Parisian life. Like Nas, who is known for his lyrics as much as his subject matter, Manet also broke ground with his STYLE of painting as much as his subjects. He painted hookers (like Olympia), barmaids, and controversial current events. His painting style was rough, loose, and far less polished than the accepted standards at the time. It angered and provoked lovers of art. (The Execution of Maximillian, Manet, 1863 The National Gallery)
Monet, on the other hand, really ran with the brighter side of things, in both subject matter and in style; in turn, Monet found acceptance and financial backing from a broader range audience. Like the commercially unstoppable Jay-Z, this isn't to say that Monet didn't have talent or substance (he had both), or even that he was never controversial (his painting style angered so many people, it coined the term Impressionism). However, Monet almost always restricted his subject matter to "flossy" topics like middle class ladies or gentle landscapes. Monet never shied away from being commercial, a label that Jay-Z got comfortable with early on. (below, La Promenade, la femme a l'ombrelle, 1875, National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.; La Portail (soleil), 1892 (signed 1894), National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.).
Monet painted things that he knew people wanted to buy and he painted them well. So well, that to many doing more controversial, less successful work (aka, Haters), it seemed almost too easy. Indeed, as his career went on, Monet selected subjects like the Haystacks and the lily pads that he could paint again and again and again, partly to satisfy the demand for his work. Like a later Jay-Z album, each painting was solid in and of itself, but to a point, it was formula to fill a commercial need.
To me, I don't think it's possible to love them both alike. I think you can enjoy them both, but the human appeal, the chords that their work strikes, are completely disparate. It seems unnatural to me for someone not like one a little more than the other. But then again, I don't think it's possible to love Illmatic and Reasonable Doubt equally either.
