Here is the way Cézanne's palette was prepared when I met him in Aix:
Yellows
Brilliant yellow
Viridian (Veronese green)
Naples yellow
Greens
Emerald green
Yellows
Chrome yellow
Green earth
Yellow ochre
Raw sienna
Vermillion
Blues
Indian red (red earth)
Cobalt blue
Ultramarine blue
Prussian blue
Peach black
Burnt sienna
Reds
Madder lake
Carmine lake
Burnt crimson lake
EMILE BERNARD
page 72 -
He claims that this method of working, which is his alone, is the only correct one, the only one leading to a serious result. He mercilessly condemns all preference for simplification which does not pass through submission to nature by means of a meditative and progressive analysis. If a painter is easily satisfied, it is because, according to Paul Cézanne, his vision is mediocre, his temperament practically worthless.
Leonardo da Vinci put forth a similar idea in his treatise on painting when he said, "The painter who has no doubts will profit little from his studies. When a work of art surpasses the judgment of the creator, he who works advances little; but when his judgment rules his works, those works become more and more perfect if inconsistency does not interfere." The artist will arrive at self-knowledge and the perfection of his art not through patience, therefore, but through love that gives insight and the desire to analyze in greater depth and to improve. He must extract from Nature an image which will be, properly speaking, his own; and only through analysis, if he has the strength to press it to the end, will he make himself known ultimately, unambiguously, abstractly.
page 37 -
At the beginning of the twentieth century, Denis (like many others) observed that artists of his own age were being dehumanized by the leveling effects of modern urban life mechanization, commodification, standardization, social regulation-all leading to impoverishment of both intellectual and spiritual experience. He argued that the remedy could be found in an "abstract ideal, the expression of inner [mental] life or a simple decoration for the pleasure of the eyes." Under the circumstances, the representational arts would strive to mask out dull environmental realities, "evolving toward abstraction." However much this kind of "abstraction" might appeal to the intellect and imagination (subjective "inner life"), it would retain a distinct material component, located in a purified form and a straightforward procedure (the objective "beauty" of "a simple decoration"). Cézanne was exemplary because his marks appeared independent of any strict mimetic function and were also very physical, therefore representing a material (not conceptual) abstraction of the painting process. This was an aestheticized, humanized materialism, intense in both sensation and spirit; it seemed fit to counter the anesthetizing materialism of modern bourgeois existence.
page 31 -
When Lecomte evaluated Cézanne so intelligently in 1899, "abstraction" had not yet settled into its twentieth-century, formalist definition. Nor had images called "abstract" abandoned representational reference, as they would begin to do not long after Cézanne's passing. The meaning of
"abstraction," circa 1900, was fluid and confused, an amalgam of contested notions. Regardless of anything Cézanne said, it was his technique that caused many of his witnesses to link the autonomy of his form and the purity of its beauty to a process of abstraction. This turn in interpretation entailed a certain irony: "form" and "beauty" were conceptual entities suited to endless verbal philosophizing, precisely what Cézanne disliked in Bernard among others. To reconcile abstraction, itself an "abstract" notion with the very physical nature of Cézanne's painting, most of those familiar with him claimed that his abstraction developed from the senses, not the intellect—more intuitive harmony than science of color, more spontaneous rhythm than planned geometry. This variant of "abstraction" broke from the term's nineteenth-century connotation of intellectual excess (we still say that certain arguments are "too abstract," or that a mentally distracted person has an "abstract" look). Lecomte's perception that Cézanne's style satisfied antithetical demands coming from impressionist naturalism and symbolist idealism was ingenious and should have been adequate to the situation; but other commentators began to acknowledge somewhat different alignments, cognizant of competing notions of "abstraction." For Denis, the conflict between Monet's impressionism and Gauguin's symbolism amounted to a dispute between sensualist lovers of nature and rationalist devotees of abstract form. Reacting to attitudes that troubled him in others, Denis complicated matters by switching sides in the ongoing debate. First he praised, then he denigrated abstraction, lamenting Cézanne's inadvertent role in furthering it.
Why all this happened is crucial to the historical fortune of Cézanne's art. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Denis (like many others) observed that artists of his own age were being dehumanized by the leveling effects of modern urban life-mechanization, commodification, standardization, social regulation—all leading to impoverishment of both intellectual and spiritual experience. He argued that the remedy could be found in an "abstract ideal, the expression of inner [mental] life or a simple decoration for the pleasure of the eyes.", Under the circumstances, the representational arts would strive to mask out dull environmental realities, "evolving toward abstraction." However much this kind of "abstraction" might appeal to the intellect and imagination (subjective "inner life"), it would retain a distinct material component, located in a purified form and a straightforward procedure (the objective "beauty" of "a simple decoration"). Cézanne was exemplary because his marks appeared independent of any strict mimetic function and were also very physical, therefore representing a material (not conceptual) abstraction of the painting process. This was an aestheticized, humanized materialism, intense in both sensation and spirit; it seemed fit to counter the anesthetizing materialism of modern bourgeois existence.
page 30 -
CÉZANNE SPEAKS…
(I publish [...] these notes collected by Cézanne's son without adding one line of my own, not wanting to alter in any way the thoughts, reflec-tions, and opinions of the artist ...)
I Critics' opinions about art are formulated more on literary principles than on aesthetic ones.
Il The artist must avoid literature in art.
Ill Art is the manifestation of an exquisite sensitivity.
Iv Sensitivity defines the individual. At its highest level, it identifies an artist.
v Great sensitivity is the most powerful characteristic of any beautiful artistic creation.
vi The most seductive element in art is the artist's own personality.
vIl The artist gives form to his sensibility, to his own, innate individuality.
vIll The nobility of an artist's creation reveals his soul.
Ix The artist materializes and individualizes.
x The artist knows the joy of being able to communicate to others his excitement about nature, that masterpiece whose mysteries he believes he has deciphered.
xI Genius is the ability to renew one's emotion by daily contact with nature.
xII For the artist seeing is creating; creating is composing.
XIII Because the artist does not note down his emotions as the bird sings his song: he composes.
xIv The universality of the immediate impact of a work of art does not indicate its importance.
xv Art is a religion. Its goal is the elevation of thought. xVI He who does not hunger for the absolute (perfection) is content with placid mediocrity.
XVIl An intellect's excellence can be judged by the originality of its creations.
XVIII A mind that can organize powerfully is the most precious collaborator with sensibility in the realization of a work of art.
XIX Art is the adaptation of things to our needs and tastes. xx The technique of any art consists of a language and a logic.s xx1 Style is perfect when it is commensurate with the character and grandeur of the subject it interprets.
xXII Style does not result from the slavish imitation of the old masters; it develops from the artist's personal manner of feeling and expression.
XXIII The manner in which a work of art is rendered allows us to judge the distinction of the artist's mind and insight.
xxIv The quest for novelty and originality is an artificial need which can never disguise banality and the absence of artistic tempera-ment.
xxv Line and modeling do not exist. Drawing is the relationship of contrasts or, simply, the rapport of two tones, white and black. xxvi Light and shadow result from the rapport between colors.
These two most important phenomena differ not by their general intensity but by their individual resonance.
xxVII The form and contour of objects are created by oppositions and contrasts which result from their particular hues.
XXVIII Pure drawing is an abstraction. Drawing and color cannot be separated, since all things in nature are colored.
xxIx As we paint, we gradually draw. Accuracy of tone gives an object both its light and shading. The better the color harmonies, the clearer the drawing becomes.
xxx Contrasts and relations of tones are the secret of drawing and shading?
xxxI Nature exists in three dimensions. There is a distance-a plane- between the painter and his model; it is atmosphere. All bodies seen in space are convex.®
XXXlI Atmosphere forms an enduring foundation. Oppositions of colors divide all the phenomena of light into separate elements upon the screen that is atmosphere. This atmosphere, then, envelops the painting, contributing to its synthesis and general harmony.
xxxIII We can say, therefore, that to paint is to create contrasts. xxxIv There is neither light painting nor dark painting, but simply relationships of tones. If they are placed well, by themselves they will establish harmony. The more numerous and varied they are, the greater is their effect and the more pleasing they will be to the eye?
xxxv Like all the arts, painting has its own techniques, but beauty of tone and harmonious combinations of sensations depend entirely on the artist's discernment.
xxxvi The artist cannot perceive all these relationships directly;
he must feel them.
xxXVII To sense correctly and represent that sensation fully is the foundation of style.
xXXVIII Painting is the art of combining sensations, in other words, of establishing harmony between colors, contours, and planes.
xxxx This method comes from contact with nature and develops through experience. It consists of searching for the expression of what one feels and of organizing sensations within a personal aesthetic.
xL Schools of art, a priori, do not exist. 10
XLl To paint from nature is to set free the essence of the model.
Painting does not mean slavishly copying an object. The artist must perceive and capture harmonyl from among many relationships. He must transpose them in a scale of his own invention while he develops them according to a new and original logic.
XLII To paint a picture is to compose.
page 16 -
…in all the struggles and gropings there was one thing he was prepared to sacrifice if need be: the conventional ‘correctness’ of outline. He (Cezanne) was not out to distort nature; but he did not mind very much if it became distorted in some minor detail provided this helped him to obtain the desired effect….he hardly realized that this example of indifference to ‘correct drawing’ would start a landslide in art. - The Story of Art, E.H. Gombrich, Page 544, Zettel 152
Cezanne had ceased to take any of the traditional methods of painting for granted. he had decided to start from scratch as if no painting had been done before him….Cezanne had chosen his motifs to study some specific problems that he wanted to solve….- The Story of Art, E.H. Gombrich, Page 543, Zettel 151
..it was Pollock who, according to even to de Kooning, “really broke the ice.” Pollock proved to be by far, the strongest personality of his generation. As de Kooning put it: “Every so often, a painter has to destroy painting. Cezanne dd it. Picasso did it with Cubism. Then Pollock did it. He busted our idea of a picture all to hell. Then there could be new paintings again. (Galenson 2009) - Reductionism in Art and Brina Science, Eric Kandel, pg 101, Zettel 120