Artworks in both traditional and modern societies among other uses are majorly used to convey a particular message. Among other significant works of artwork is to store the painter’s message. In the history of time, the Stone Breakers and the Gleaners are among the oil paints that have had an importance in the society which is mainly to communicate both political and social messages. In the 18th and 19th century, realism style of artwork became so popular than any other revolution in the French community and among the pioneers are Gustave Courbet and Francois Millet.[1]
Realists advocated for the elimination of illusions and exaggerations in paintings. The Stone Breakers by Courbet and the Gleaners by Millet have a relationship in their style and the message they convey to the audience. They both also have a political and social agenda.
The Stone Breakers
The stone breakers is an artwork done by Gustave Courbet in 1849 one year after the release of the communist manifesto which was a very influential pamphlet. In the art, Courbet concern is on the challenges encountered by needy. In the painting, we see an old peasant man together with a young man breaking stones on the road under construction. These workers are also isolated from the others as Courbet uses the hill to show the isolation. The mountain in the portrait stretches to the top of the canvas to illustrate how the men are also trapped in the French economy. The poor condition of the men, which is a social need depicted by Gustave, is expressed by use of tattered clothes. He also shows the picture of a man who is too old and a man too young for such stone breaking works.
The painting according to researchers was discomforting to the middle class and the upper class because they felt troubled by the artist’s expressions of the needy on the canvas. They did not think that it was essential to consider or even discuss the plight of the poor. Courbet does not emphasize on the worker’s faces as he paints them facing away from the audience which is meant to mean that the individuals represent the masses. He aims at emphasizing the rural culture of the peasant's hard work and exhaustion. Courbet uses the painting also to disgust the upper class. According to him, the masterpiece was an actual memory of the workers he had seen breaking the stones alongside the road. The painting was among the artworks destroyed during the Second World War while being transported.
The Gleaners
The Gleaners painting is a masterpiece work done by the Frenchman, Jean-Francoise Millet in the year 1857. The picture is one that brings out his message in simplicity without using exaggerations or illusions. The artwork shows three women who are perceived to be living peasant lives and surviving on the grains that spill over after harvest. In contrast, behind the women are grains piled up for the rich. The act of the three characters bowing their heads to the ground reveals the connection between man and the land for survival. Millets work is also an excellent example of realist’s jobs.
Millet’s picture encountered a lot of critics when he introduced it at the Salon in 1857 as the rich cluster treated it with suspension citing that it was glorifying the needy workers. The art to the upper class reminded them that the efforts of the masses built the French nation.[2]
The depiction of the worker's conditions caused the segregated rich to be unease about their social status. The wealthier group being outnumbered by the low- income earners and considering that the nation had just encountered the French Revolution, the picture became even the more disgusting because they perceived the poor majority would overturn them if there were to be a revolt.
The Relationship between the Arts
Works of Realism
The most outward relationship between Courbet and Millet’s work is that both are realism works from Realist. Realism is a form of painting that was very influencing in the 1850s and was pioneered by Gustave Courbet and Jean- Francoise Millet’s works. The style was popular after the introduction of photography and controlled by the objective reality ideology. Since the technique was against exaggerations, the two artists have refrained from using supernatural illusions and focused on the natural expressions in their works. The Realist notion which stated that the painters should paint only what is in front of them and which they could only view with their eyes also inspired both of them.
Peasant’s Message
In the 19th-century artworks were not commonly representing the peasant’s message despite art being unbiased. During the time any artwork conveying the poor people’s message especially the industrial was treated with contempt and termed as propaganda. Both Courbet and Millet’s works are used to depict a similar theme of the plight of the needy citizens in their times and the practices they rely on for their daily meals. They also show that all gender is affected by the hardships. Both the artworks do not have a pleasing message to the middle and the upper-class citizens since they do not want their attention to be shifted towards sympathizing with the needy as to them it is not a significant issue worth a thought. As a result, both works face criticisms from the rich cluster.
In conveying the peasant’s messages, the two artists employ a similar symbolism feature of art. They both use faces that have faced away from the audiences making it difficult to identify them personally. They use the art stylistic feature of the workers facing away to represent the mass which is the majority in the society. Courbet and Millet also have a similar thought of concentrating on the characters and the background equally in their paintings.[3] The act is meant to mean that there is a significant connection between man and ground because man depends on the field for survival.
Political and Social Agenda
Courbet’s and Millet's pictures also have a relation in their conveying of the political message. Both of them intend to represent the conditions of the low-income workers to the nation’s leaders. Unfortunately the arts are perceived as propaganda and criticized by the capitalists and the government leaders.
Conclusion
People have always desired to have channels of expressing their worries, concerns, lifestyles, success or failure and have found art to be the ideal means. In the history of the French society, the subject of the needy low-income earner has been neglected and avoided in the discussion rooms by those who have the power to avert their conditions. Courbet and Millet's arts become among the first arts that convey the peasant’s message, and consequently, they encounter much criticism from the upper class. The paintings also become pioneers in the realism movement which focus on the objective reality.
Bibliography
Johnson, Beverly Elmyra. "THE RELEVANCE OF ART." Creative Renewal for Scholarship
(1987): 64-75.
Nochlin, Linda. The development and nature of realism in the work of Gustave Courbet: a study of the style and its social and artistic background. New York University., 1963.
[1] Elmyra, J.B. "THE RELEVANCE OF ART." Creative Renewal for Scholarship (1987): 64.
[2] Linda, N. The development and nature of realism in the work of Gustave Courbet: a study of the style and its social and artistic background. New York University., 1963.
[3]
Ibid., 8
