History of Modern Art with Klaire
Explore Modern Art history including Impressionism, Cubism, Surrealism, and other key Modernist art movements. Join artist and educator Klaire Lockheart as she examines famous artists and artwork through a 21st century intersectional feminist lens. Whether you’re an artist, student, or patron of the arts, you will hopefully learn something new about Modern Art.
Postimpressionism: I Can’t Pronounce “van Gogh” but I Know Why He’s Famous
Grab your Starry Night coffee cup and get ready to learn about Jo van Gogh-Bonger and how she played a vital role in promoting Vincent van Gogh’s artwork and legacy. You’ll also get to hear Klaire Lockheart explain Pointillism, talk about advertising for the Moulin Rouge, and go on a justified rant about Paul Gauguin.
Artists and Artwork: Georges Seurat (A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte), Paul Signac, Paul Cézanne, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec (Moulin Rouge: La Goulue), Eugene Delacroix, Camille Pissarro, Vincent van Gogh (Starry Night), and Paul Gauguin
Additional Topics: Neo-Impressionism, Pointillism, Divisionism, Sam Phillips (…Isms: Understanding Modern Art), Salon des Indépendants, Color Theory, Optical Mixing, Jo van Gogh-Bonger, Theo van Gogh, Roland Barthes (“Death of the Author”), Hannah Gadsby, Avant-Garde, Lithography, and Louise Weber
Artists and Artwork: Georges Seurat (A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte), Paul Signac, Paul Cézanne, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec (Moulin Rouge: La Goulue), Eugene Delacroix, Camille Pissarro, Vincent van Gogh (Starry Night), and Paul Gauguin
Additional Topics: Neo-Impressionism, Pointillism, Divisionism, Sam Phillips (…Isms: Understanding Modern Art), Salon des Indépendants, Color Theory, Optical Mixing, Jo van Gogh-Bonger, Theo van Gogh, Roland Barthes (“Death of the Author”), Hannah Gadsby, Avant-Garde, Lithography, and Louise Weber
Transcript
Hello, my friends! Welcome to the History of Modern Art with Klaire, where I explore various art movements from a 21st century perspective. I’m your host Klaire Lockheart. Thank you for joining me as I investigate Postimpressionism. I hope you’ll enjoy this episode whether you’re an artist, a student, or you just want to impress your friend who has that Starry Night coffee mug.
[Music]
Postimpressionism is an umbrella term for several different art movements that immediately followed Impressionism in Paris during the late 19th century. These painters used bold, bright colors, and they were interested in color theory. If you want a quick little guide through Neo-Impressionism, Symbolism, Synthetism, and Post-Impressionism, I recommend …Isms: Understanding Modern Art by Sam Phillips. It’s a small little book that is a quick guide to many of the the “isms” of art history. The students who took my Modern Art History course used this book as one of their many texts to introduce them to the various topics without the huge expense most textbooks incur.
To provide a wee bit of context of what is happening in the art world in Paris at this time, the Salon is going strong, but the Impressionists began to rebel against the established academic style of art. Not only did they use bright colors and made fast paintings that clearly show they were handmade in order to differentiate themselves from photography, they also organized art exhibitions independent of the the Salon, and they charged admission to their shows. Meanwhile, the Orientalists were feuding with the Impressionists, but they were also rebelling against photography in their own way.
The last Impressionist exhibition was in 1886, but before I get to that show, allow me to introduce you to the Salon des Indépendants. I would also like to apologize quickly if I mispronounce anything. In 1884, a group of artists including Georges Seurat, Paul Signac, Paul Cézanne, and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, came together with the goal to create an independent art show. Their intent was to host a public exhibition with “No Jury Nor Awards.” The Salon des Indépendants was inspired by the exhibitions the Impressionists organized that were independent of the government sponsored Salon.
Georges Seurat and Paul Signac were two key artists who developed Pointillism. They created paintings with innumerable minute points of paint, and the compositions come together thanks to the developments in color theory. While we call this genre Pointillism, they preferred to call it Divisionism. Sometimes this art style is called Neoimpressionism too because it was, at the time, a newer version of Impressionism since they felt they were updating the Impressionist concepts.
Paul Signac was a big supporter of this new style of painting. When he published Eugene Delacroix to Neo-Impressionism in 1899, he credited Delacroix in paving the way for Signac and his peers to challenge and push color in new ways. The Pointillists were influenced by color theory, and this is how artists organize color and incorporate the relationships into their work. These artists were aware of the color wheel, which is composed of primary and secondary colors. The primaries, red, yellow, and blue, are used to create the secondary colors, which are orange, green, and violet. Signac and Seurat also frequently used complimentary colors, which are the opposites on the color wheel. These pairs include red and green, blue and orange, and finally yellow and violet. They knew that when they mixed opposite colors together, they could create neutral colors. Artists at the time were excited by these developments in understanding color. Signac wrote, “But if this research into color and light is not the whole of art, is it not at least one of the most important parts?”
The Pointillists incorporated optical mixing in their work. They knew that they could apply spots of pure color to their canvases without mixing them, but from a distance the viewers’ eyes would blend the colors together. They would create green grass by painting blue spots and yellow dabs next to each other without physically mixing the paint, but human eyes blend the two colors to make it appear green from a distance.
One of the most famous examples of this phenomenon is Georges Seurat’s A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte, and you can see it at the Institute of Art of Chicago. This painting is over 10’ wide, and took Seurat two years to meticulously apply the dots to create his composition. His intent was for viewers to see the painting from a distance to allow their eyes to optically mix the spots of color. Seurat created a park scene on a sunny day. The green ground is made up of yellows and blues, and the land slopes off to the horizon at a diagonal. The top left of the canvas shows blue water plus various boats. There is a cluster of tall trees in the background on the top right corner of the canvas. There are a few other trees in the middle ground, and there are congregations of people sitting in the shade. Seurat created two groups of people in the foreground, and they are all in the shadows. On the viewer’s right, there is a man wearing a dark top hat and jacket, and he is in profile and facing the left side of the painting. He is holding a walking stick and cigarette. He is almost entirely eclipsed by a woman with a dark parasol. She is wearing a hat with a big magenta pouf on the front. She is wearing a jacket that appears solid black, but on closer inspection it is comprised of blue and orange dots. The most iconic part of her outfit is her violet skirt with the huge bustle on the back, and I bet Sir Mix-a-Lot would appreciate this outfit. The woman holds the leash to a monkey with her left hand. The little primate is in front of her, and it is in profile. The monkey is looking at a small dog that is leaping forward. The dog appears brown, but Seurat created the appearance of this color with various dashes and dabs of blues and oranges. Because blue and orange are complimentary colors, they turn into a neutral color whether they are physically combined together or optically mixed.
Near the center foreground there is a dark brown dog sniffing the grass behind a group of three people all facing to the left side of the canvas. A woman with a hat is sitting upon the grass. To her right, there is a man in a suit sitting with his knees bent upwards. He is wearing a top hat and holding a cane in his left hand. The closest figure to the viewers is a lounging man. He has gray trousers and a sleeveless orange shirt. He is reclining back on his left elbow and holding a pipe to his mouth with his right hand. There are many other people in this painting, but at the center there is a thin woman with a red shirt and parasol. There is a small child to her right, and the child is wearing a white dress and sunhat. These are the only two figures who face forward to engage the viewer. The woman’s head is turned slightly to her right, but the young child is gazing forward. Another notable part of this composition is that Seurat painted a frame using these same tiny little points. He used complementary colors, and the dots that touch the green areas are quite red. It’s possible to see this feature on photo reproductions, but like with most artwork, it’s best to see it in person if you are able.
After viewing A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte from a distance, Seurat then invites the viewers to move closer to inspect how he created this composition. However, the first time this painting was displayed, it was put in a room that was too small so his years of careful work couldn’t be seen as he intended. A Sunday Afternoon was included in the Eighth Exhibition, which turned out to be the last Impressionist exhibition in 1886. Berthe Morisot took a key role in organizing the show, but from my understanding Edgar Degas also did a lot of work of annoying the other artists and be a general pain in the arse.
Camille Pissarro was the only Impressionist who participated in all eight of their exhibitions, but the work he showed at the Eighth Exhibition was already demonstrating his transition to Neoimpressionism. Pissarro’s paintings were composed of small blobs of color that relied on optical blending. The Impressionists didn’t want their work to be shown alongside the Pointillism/Divisionism/Chromoluminarism/Neoimpressionism/Postimpressionism/whatever “ism” you prefer to call these paintings made out of nothing but itty-bitty points. These artworks, including A Sunday Afternoon, were displayed in a small separate room.
Please stay tuned after the break so I can explain the various ways to pronounce Vincent van Gogh’s name.
[Break]
Before I discuss anything about Vincent van Gogh, I want to address the way I pronounce his name. Yes, I have a Midwestern American accent. I earned a few art degrees in South Dakota, and this is why I say “van-go.” I understand that in Dutch, his name is pronounced more like, “vun Ghogch,” but I know I am not saying that correctly. I struggle with pronunciations, and I’m always impressed by those who speak multiple languages. Several years ago, I was fortunate enough to visit the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, and I did pronounce it just like that. No one in the Netherlands chastised me or made me feel bad for the way I said his name, and so this is why I will continue to pronounce his name with my accent. I know it’s not 100% correct, but I’m doing my best. I’d also like to mention that the other pronunciation of his name is “van Goff,” which I’ve heard on BBC reports and documentaries.
Thank you for attending my TED Talk on “How to Pronounce Vincent van Gogh’s Name if you’re American,” but I would like to address the “Well, actually, it’s pronounced ‘van Gofffffff,” crowd. Number one, I’m really happy that you enjoyed that one episode of Doctor Who, but let’s keep in mind that Dr. Who’s dissertation probably wasn’t in Dutch or Modernist art history. Second, it’s really cool that you passed the PRAXIS exam and now teach high school art even though you never took an art history course, but you need to do more than buy a Night Café tote bag to assert your authority before you can interrupt me to try to shame me. I have no idea why you derive pleasure in correcting me, yet have nothing else to add to the conversation.
Anyway, I need to go on one more tangent before I discuss Vincent van Gogh’s artwork. I must mention Jo van Gogh-Bonger. She is the reason we all know who van Gogh is and why we care about his art. I also want to showcase her importance because the best known Postimpressionists were men, and it’s crucial to keep in mind that women did exist during the 19th century and they were important. Since I’m going to talk about several people in the van Gogh family, I will switch to first names for now. Jo, which is the name she preferred to be called from Johanna, was born in the Netherlands. She lived in many other places including France and the United States. She was intellectual, and she earned the equivalent of an English degree at a time when women faced a lot of obstacles in education. She married Theo van Gogh. I have also heard his name pronounced as “Thee-oh,” but I believe both pronunciations are acceptable for those of us in the Midwest.
Theo and Vincent had an uncle who was a partner in the Goupil & Company art dealership in Paris. Adolphe Goupil was the father-in-law of Jean-Léon Gérôme, who was a famous Orientalist painter. Theo married Jo Bonger, and they made a tiny person they named Vincent van Gogh after Theo’s brother/best friend/person he supported financially. Unfortunately, both Vincent and Theo died shortly after Jo joined the family. Jo not only had deal with the death of her partner and raise her baby, but she also had to take care of over 200 paintings by Vincent, which were considered worthless at the time. Even though Vincent’s brother was an art dealer, Vincent only sold one painting during his life.
Jo moved from Paris back to the Netherlands. She was advised to get rid of Vincent’s paintings, but for those of you who are fans of Postimpressionism will be thankful that she ignored this advice. Not only did she promote and display Vincent’s artwork, she also worked tirelessly to edit Vincent’s and Theo’s correspondence for multiple publications. Jo also wrote the van Gogh family history. Because of Jo’s dedication, Vincent’s fame grew in the Netherlands, the rest of Europe, and the United States. This is especially notable because women weren’t supposed to work outside of the home at the time, and they certainly weren’t supposed to become art dealers. After Jo moved to New York, she translated Vincent’s letters into English to reach a wider audience.
I wanted to make sure I spent time to properly give credit to Jo van Gogh-Bonger because without her, it’s unlikely that Vincent van Gogh would be as well known and appreciated today. I believe it is important that when learning about art history we look into why these artists are famous. It seems that many people like the narrative that hard work or creativity alone makes an artist successful, but I want to point out that success in the art world is often the result of connections and support systems. If Vincent van Gogh didn’t have an art dealer brother who supported him financially, he wouldn’t have had the resources to paint and draw. If he didn’t have a devoted sister-in-law who emphatically promoted his work, he wouldn’t be world famous. I’m taking the time to mention this because I am sure some of you make amazing artwork, and you might wonder why you can’t get the recognition you deserve. I want to reassure you that your art is meaningful, but if you’re not related to anyone in the art market and you don’t have a PR team, it will be a difficult journey for you. It’s not impossible, but you will have to do a lot of self-promotion. If you’re not lucky enough to have someone like Jo van Gogh-Bonger in your biological or chosen family, you need to promote your own work. I encourage you to send out press-releases for your exhibitions, update your website, and start a blog for your artwork if you don’t have one already.
The Starry Night is one of the most famous Postimpressionist paintings, and Vincent van Gogh made it in 1889. This horizontal artwork is about 3 feet wide, and it is housed at the Modern Museum of Art. The scene is composed of bold, thick dashes of oil paint that pop off the surface. There is a tall green cypress tree on the left side of the canvas; it is so dark it almost appears black. In the lower right corner, there is a village with little houses and a building with a tall steeple. There are blue hills rolling in the distance. The earth meets the sky about 1/3 away from the bottom edge. The bulk of this painting is filled with the sky. The artist painted a gold crescent moon in the top right corner, and it is surrounded with dashes of yellow light. There are 11 stars in the sky, each surrounded with a halo of light. If your eyes get dry or your are recovering from Lasik surgery, you might have van Gogh night vision like this too. The sky appears lively, with two big swirls that meet at the center. The sky is made of blues, whites, greens, and yellows. To me, the dashes make it looks like the wind is blowing through the scene.
Before I move on from Vincent van Gogh, it’s necessary for me to address his mental health. There’s a common misconception that artists have to suffer in order to make great art. This is false. Great artists make artwork despite the challenges they face, but can you imagine the work they could create if they had the resources? If van Gogh didn’t have to take breaks from painting to work on his mental health, he could have made a lot more art. If van Gogh lived past 37, and was able to sell his work, I would bet he could have made even more imaginative and impactful paintings. If you’re an artist or a student now, wouldn’t you be able to make some amazing artwork if you didn’t have to worry about healthcare and funding your projects? Artists shouldn’t have to suffer to appease the mythos of the brooding artist. Artists are humans, and they should be able to have access to healthcare and should be fairly compensated for the work they do so they can continue to make art that enriches the lives of their communities. Hannah Gadsby stated this point eloquently when she said, “This romanticizing of mental illness is ridiculous. It is not a ticket to genius. It’s a ticket to nowhere.”
[Music]
As much as I don’t want to include this next Postimpressionist artist, I have to because he is very well known and I would be doing a disservice to you by ignoring his existence. History is complicated and messy, and if everything you encounter about the past makes you happy, then you’re not really learning history. So, without further ado, allow me to introduce you to a giant gaping cloaca named Paul Gauguin. Yes, I will note that I am going to be very biased in my description of Gauguin’s life and work. I want to start a campaign where from now on we refer to him as Paul “Trigger Warning” Gauguin because he was abusive, and if you’re not in a frame of mind to learn about a famous artist who physically and sexually abused women and children, then you should be able to opt out. I will not go into excessive detail about his atrocities, but we can’t gloss over his biography because a lot of his paintings depict his victims.
There are many people who will argue that we should separate the artist from the art, and they’ll sometimes use Roland Barthes’s “Death of the Author” as justification. If reading mid 20th century obtuse French philosophy is your bag, then I suggest you find a copy of this essay if you haven’t read it yet. However, the gist of Barthes’s argument is that whatever an author writes isn’t complete until it is read. The reader is the one who activates the text, which causes the death of the author. He believed that the author’s background doesn’t matter and shouldn’t be taken into consideration. As you can probably guess by now, I disagree with this assertion. I have spent a lot of time learning about and sharing the background information for various works of art because I truly believe that context helps us understand the work. If the author was truly dead, the concept of art history would be irrelevant as it would have no bearing on how current viewers see art.
I also want to quickly illuminate that “Death of the Author” doesn’t mean we boycott or remove all traces of authors with whom we disagree. I have seen many people use this phrase in this way, but that is kind of is the opposite of what Barthes intended. Now, if I want to get super metacognitive, then I would have to argue that what Barthes meant doesn’t matter since I, as the reader, hold the only true interpretation, but I don’t feel like being that pedantic right now. The concept of death of the author just means that the author’s background and inspiration doesn’t need to be considered when readers or viewers consume their creations. As I stated earlier, I disagree with this concept because I do believe the creator’s background should be considered. Who the artist was, what they did, and what they believed does influence their work, but it’s alright if you disagree with me. We all have boundaries of what leeway we’re willing to give to the people who create the art, books, movies, and songs we consume. Perhaps you can’t enjoy Harry Potter anymore because you don’t want to support the author, but you still can watch The Mandalorian because you know it’s an ensemble cast and one actor doesn’t change the meaning of the entire show for you. Where you draw the line is entirely up to you.
Since I feel that context is necessary, let me provide a little bit of background for Paul Gauguin. He, like most famous artists, grew up privileged. He was born in Paris, but spent some of his childhood in Peru waited on by servants. His family returned to Paris after they feel from power, and then Gauguin grew up to become a stockbroker. He earned about $150,000 a year for about a decade. He got married to Mette-Sophie Gad, who he physically abused. They had 5 children, who witnessed Gauguin beat their mother. Unfortunately, Gauguin’s treatment of women and girls gets worse after a stock market crash, and he decided he wanted to become an edgy avant-garde artist.
I have zero desire to go into all the details of Gauguin’s biography, but he spent a lot of his career trying to become a “Bohemian,” and I’m saying this word in air quotes purposefully because white Parisian avant-garde artists weren’t the most culturally sensitive. At the time, some white French people referred to the Romani people as “Bohemians” because they thought they all originated from Bohemia. I still sometimes come across people who use the word “Bohemian” to describe a romanticized, artsy, exotic, nomadic lifestyle, and they forget that actual Romani people have been severely persecuted and suffered genocide. It’s kind of like when white people use a certain “g-word” I’m not going to say to describe their fortune-teller Halloween costumes. These terms are offensive, and we need to stop using them to describe a free-spirited artsy lifestyle. Just use “avant-garde” instead.
Anyway, Gauguin spent his life trying to prove how cool and edgy he was to all his little artist bros, and he did this by moving to Tahiti, abusing children, claiming those children were his “muses,” making paintings, coming back to France to see if he was popular yet, going back to Tahiti, reaping the benefits of being a colonialist, abusing more children, making more paintings, writing an unreliable autobiography, and so on. I’m not going to share any of his paintings specifically, because I really don’t think they should even be in museums. Not everything made with paint is art, and just because a famous artist made it doesn’t mean I want to look at it. I really have no desire to see nude paintings of children that Gauguin lusted after and abused. I also have no idea why someone paid $210 million for one of his paintings in 2015.
Now, I have heard people defend Gauguin by stating that the age of consent in France at the time was 13 years old. They will defend him by saying that no one at the time knew that a 50 year old man with visible signs of an STI engaging in forced sexual relationships with colonized teenagers was wrong. I don’t buy that. It was wrong. I would just guess that the people who thought this behavior was wrong didn’t have the power to speak up or change the situation. If you want to know what his paintings look like in general, he kind of used flat colors. His perspectives are wonky. The proportions of his nude children models are exaggerated and unrealistic. Just imagine a still-life by Paul Cézanne, but instead of apples, there are Tahitian women and children.
Let’s take a quick break, and when we return, I’ll share about one more Postimpressionist.
[Break]
The last Postimpressionist I want to discuss is Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. Like many of his peers, he was an artist born into wealth and extreme privilege. His dad was a count, and his mom was a countess, but they were first cousins and this caused Toulouse-Lautrec to have some health conditions. When he was a teenager, he broke both of his legs, and they ceased growing. Due to his health, he was only about 5 feet tall, and he needed to walk with a cane. Unfortunately, he was taunted for his physical disabilities, and this factored into him developing alcoholism.
Despite the disadvantages Toulouse-Lautrec faced, he made a lot of art during the 1890s. When he painted, he used scratchy, gestural brush strokes. He was inspired by Japanese prints and Impressionist paintings. He spent a fair amount of time in cabarets, cafés, bars, and brothels. He painted, drew, and made prints of his favorite subjects, which often included dancers. In 1891, he created a poster called Moulin Rouge: La Goulue. The Met in New York has a copy, and so does the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam. This poster is a lithograph, which is a type of print where the artist draws on a smooth stone block. After the printmaker prepares the block for printing, ink is applied, and then the image is transferred to paper by running it through a press. This process sounds pretty simple, but I have made a few lithographs and I found the process fairly challenging. The Moulin Rouge: La Goulue poster is over 6 feet tall, and the top left corner has a giant red letter “M” which is for the word “Moulin” 3 times. Each “Moulin Rouge” text is stacked on top of each other. Underneath the red text, “La Goulue” is printed in black uppercase letters. La Goulue was the stage name of Louise Weber, and it means “the glutton” because Weber was known for finishing the drinks of patrons. The dancer is at the center of the composition, her hair is in a bun on the top of her head, and she is wearing a red shirt with white polkadots. She is balancing on her left foot, and she’s wearing red stockings and shoes. She is kicking her right leg out to the right, and her white skirt is flying up in the air, and the audience can see her white bloomers too. Behind the star of the show, there is a silhouetted mass of people, and most of them are wearing top hats. The floorboards slope toward La Goulue, and this draws more attention her energetic dance. There is a brown silhouette of a slim man wearing a top hat in the foreground. We can see him from the waste up, and he is turned to the side with his right hand raised to the direction of La Goulue. He was her dance partner, but he couldn’t look less interested because the corner of his mouth is downturned and his eyes are closed.
The term “Post-Impressionism” was first used at an art exhibition in London in 1910, which was after most of the artists I mentioned died. George Seurat, Vincent van Gogh, and Henri Toulouse-Lautrec all passed away in their 30s. Postimpressionist artwork was varied, but it encompasses art that was made in Paris between Impressionism and the turn of the century. I know I shared a lot of information with you, but I hope that you’ll be able to identify and categorize Postimpressionist artwork. The paintings, prints, and drawings are identifiable due to the bold mark-making, simplified forms, vivid colors, and deliberate use of color theory.
[Music]
Thank you very much for joining me to explore Postimpressionism. I hope you will be back next time when I examine Fauvism. To find a transcript of this episode, the resources I consulted, or to support this program, please visit klairelockheart.com, spelled K-L-A-I-R-E-L-O-C-K-H-E-A-R-T dot com, and visit the “Media” page. Join me on Instagram @klairelockheart to see my current projects and paintings, or you can follow me on Facebook by searching for Klaire A. Lockheart.
The History of Modern Art with Klaire was conceived, written, and performed by me, Klaire Lockheart. This episode was created with equipment provided by Aaron C. Packard of Aaron C. Packard Productions. Find his awesome photography at aaronpackard.com, that’s A-A-R-O-N-P-A-C-K-A-R-D dot com.
Please subscribe to this podcast if you enjoyed this episode so you won’t miss future topics. Thank you once again for sharing your time with me, and, as always, I appreciate your positive feedback.
[Music]
Postimpressionism is an umbrella term for several different art movements that immediately followed Impressionism in Paris during the late 19th century. These painters used bold, bright colors, and they were interested in color theory. If you want a quick little guide through Neo-Impressionism, Symbolism, Synthetism, and Post-Impressionism, I recommend …Isms: Understanding Modern Art by Sam Phillips. It’s a small little book that is a quick guide to many of the the “isms” of art history. The students who took my Modern Art History course used this book as one of their many texts to introduce them to the various topics without the huge expense most textbooks incur.
To provide a wee bit of context of what is happening in the art world in Paris at this time, the Salon is going strong, but the Impressionists began to rebel against the established academic style of art. Not only did they use bright colors and made fast paintings that clearly show they were handmade in order to differentiate themselves from photography, they also organized art exhibitions independent of the the Salon, and they charged admission to their shows. Meanwhile, the Orientalists were feuding with the Impressionists, but they were also rebelling against photography in their own way.
The last Impressionist exhibition was in 1886, but before I get to that show, allow me to introduce you to the Salon des Indépendants. I would also like to apologize quickly if I mispronounce anything. In 1884, a group of artists including Georges Seurat, Paul Signac, Paul Cézanne, and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, came together with the goal to create an independent art show. Their intent was to host a public exhibition with “No Jury Nor Awards.” The Salon des Indépendants was inspired by the exhibitions the Impressionists organized that were independent of the government sponsored Salon.
Georges Seurat and Paul Signac were two key artists who developed Pointillism. They created paintings with innumerable minute points of paint, and the compositions come together thanks to the developments in color theory. While we call this genre Pointillism, they preferred to call it Divisionism. Sometimes this art style is called Neoimpressionism too because it was, at the time, a newer version of Impressionism since they felt they were updating the Impressionist concepts.
Paul Signac was a big supporter of this new style of painting. When he published Eugene Delacroix to Neo-Impressionism in 1899, he credited Delacroix in paving the way for Signac and his peers to challenge and push color in new ways. The Pointillists were influenced by color theory, and this is how artists organize color and incorporate the relationships into their work. These artists were aware of the color wheel, which is composed of primary and secondary colors. The primaries, red, yellow, and blue, are used to create the secondary colors, which are orange, green, and violet. Signac and Seurat also frequently used complimentary colors, which are the opposites on the color wheel. These pairs include red and green, blue and orange, and finally yellow and violet. They knew that when they mixed opposite colors together, they could create neutral colors. Artists at the time were excited by these developments in understanding color. Signac wrote, “But if this research into color and light is not the whole of art, is it not at least one of the most important parts?”
The Pointillists incorporated optical mixing in their work. They knew that they could apply spots of pure color to their canvases without mixing them, but from a distance the viewers’ eyes would blend the colors together. They would create green grass by painting blue spots and yellow dabs next to each other without physically mixing the paint, but human eyes blend the two colors to make it appear green from a distance.
One of the most famous examples of this phenomenon is Georges Seurat’s A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte, and you can see it at the Institute of Art of Chicago. This painting is over 10’ wide, and took Seurat two years to meticulously apply the dots to create his composition. His intent was for viewers to see the painting from a distance to allow their eyes to optically mix the spots of color. Seurat created a park scene on a sunny day. The green ground is made up of yellows and blues, and the land slopes off to the horizon at a diagonal. The top left of the canvas shows blue water plus various boats. There is a cluster of tall trees in the background on the top right corner of the canvas. There are a few other trees in the middle ground, and there are congregations of people sitting in the shade. Seurat created two groups of people in the foreground, and they are all in the shadows. On the viewer’s right, there is a man wearing a dark top hat and jacket, and he is in profile and facing the left side of the painting. He is holding a walking stick and cigarette. He is almost entirely eclipsed by a woman with a dark parasol. She is wearing a hat with a big magenta pouf on the front. She is wearing a jacket that appears solid black, but on closer inspection it is comprised of blue and orange dots. The most iconic part of her outfit is her violet skirt with the huge bustle on the back, and I bet Sir Mix-a-Lot would appreciate this outfit. The woman holds the leash to a monkey with her left hand. The little primate is in front of her, and it is in profile. The monkey is looking at a small dog that is leaping forward. The dog appears brown, but Seurat created the appearance of this color with various dashes and dabs of blues and oranges. Because blue and orange are complimentary colors, they turn into a neutral color whether they are physically combined together or optically mixed.
Near the center foreground there is a dark brown dog sniffing the grass behind a group of three people all facing to the left side of the canvas. A woman with a hat is sitting upon the grass. To her right, there is a man in a suit sitting with his knees bent upwards. He is wearing a top hat and holding a cane in his left hand. The closest figure to the viewers is a lounging man. He has gray trousers and a sleeveless orange shirt. He is reclining back on his left elbow and holding a pipe to his mouth with his right hand. There are many other people in this painting, but at the center there is a thin woman with a red shirt and parasol. There is a small child to her right, and the child is wearing a white dress and sunhat. These are the only two figures who face forward to engage the viewer. The woman’s head is turned slightly to her right, but the young child is gazing forward. Another notable part of this composition is that Seurat painted a frame using these same tiny little points. He used complementary colors, and the dots that touch the green areas are quite red. It’s possible to see this feature on photo reproductions, but like with most artwork, it’s best to see it in person if you are able.
After viewing A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte from a distance, Seurat then invites the viewers to move closer to inspect how he created this composition. However, the first time this painting was displayed, it was put in a room that was too small so his years of careful work couldn’t be seen as he intended. A Sunday Afternoon was included in the Eighth Exhibition, which turned out to be the last Impressionist exhibition in 1886. Berthe Morisot took a key role in organizing the show, but from my understanding Edgar Degas also did a lot of work of annoying the other artists and be a general pain in the arse.
Camille Pissarro was the only Impressionist who participated in all eight of their exhibitions, but the work he showed at the Eighth Exhibition was already demonstrating his transition to Neoimpressionism. Pissarro’s paintings were composed of small blobs of color that relied on optical blending. The Impressionists didn’t want their work to be shown alongside the Pointillism/Divisionism/Chromoluminarism/Neoimpressionism/Postimpressionism/whatever “ism” you prefer to call these paintings made out of nothing but itty-bitty points. These artworks, including A Sunday Afternoon, were displayed in a small separate room.
Please stay tuned after the break so I can explain the various ways to pronounce Vincent van Gogh’s name.
[Break]
Before I discuss anything about Vincent van Gogh, I want to address the way I pronounce his name. Yes, I have a Midwestern American accent. I earned a few art degrees in South Dakota, and this is why I say “van-go.” I understand that in Dutch, his name is pronounced more like, “vun Ghogch,” but I know I am not saying that correctly. I struggle with pronunciations, and I’m always impressed by those who speak multiple languages. Several years ago, I was fortunate enough to visit the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam, and I did pronounce it just like that. No one in the Netherlands chastised me or made me feel bad for the way I said his name, and so this is why I will continue to pronounce his name with my accent. I know it’s not 100% correct, but I’m doing my best. I’d also like to mention that the other pronunciation of his name is “van Goff,” which I’ve heard on BBC reports and documentaries.
Thank you for attending my TED Talk on “How to Pronounce Vincent van Gogh’s Name if you’re American,” but I would like to address the “Well, actually, it’s pronounced ‘van Gofffffff,” crowd. Number one, I’m really happy that you enjoyed that one episode of Doctor Who, but let’s keep in mind that Dr. Who’s dissertation probably wasn’t in Dutch or Modernist art history. Second, it’s really cool that you passed the PRAXIS exam and now teach high school art even though you never took an art history course, but you need to do more than buy a Night Café tote bag to assert your authority before you can interrupt me to try to shame me. I have no idea why you derive pleasure in correcting me, yet have nothing else to add to the conversation.
Anyway, I need to go on one more tangent before I discuss Vincent van Gogh’s artwork. I must mention Jo van Gogh-Bonger. She is the reason we all know who van Gogh is and why we care about his art. I also want to showcase her importance because the best known Postimpressionists were men, and it’s crucial to keep in mind that women did exist during the 19th century and they were important. Since I’m going to talk about several people in the van Gogh family, I will switch to first names for now. Jo, which is the name she preferred to be called from Johanna, was born in the Netherlands. She lived in many other places including France and the United States. She was intellectual, and she earned the equivalent of an English degree at a time when women faced a lot of obstacles in education. She married Theo van Gogh. I have also heard his name pronounced as “Thee-oh,” but I believe both pronunciations are acceptable for those of us in the Midwest.
Theo and Vincent had an uncle who was a partner in the Goupil & Company art dealership in Paris. Adolphe Goupil was the father-in-law of Jean-Léon Gérôme, who was a famous Orientalist painter. Theo married Jo Bonger, and they made a tiny person they named Vincent van Gogh after Theo’s brother/best friend/person he supported financially. Unfortunately, both Vincent and Theo died shortly after Jo joined the family. Jo not only had deal with the death of her partner and raise her baby, but she also had to take care of over 200 paintings by Vincent, which were considered worthless at the time. Even though Vincent’s brother was an art dealer, Vincent only sold one painting during his life.
Jo moved from Paris back to the Netherlands. She was advised to get rid of Vincent’s paintings, but for those of you who are fans of Postimpressionism will be thankful that she ignored this advice. Not only did she promote and display Vincent’s artwork, she also worked tirelessly to edit Vincent’s and Theo’s correspondence for multiple publications. Jo also wrote the van Gogh family history. Because of Jo’s dedication, Vincent’s fame grew in the Netherlands, the rest of Europe, and the United States. This is especially notable because women weren’t supposed to work outside of the home at the time, and they certainly weren’t supposed to become art dealers. After Jo moved to New York, she translated Vincent’s letters into English to reach a wider audience.
I wanted to make sure I spent time to properly give credit to Jo van Gogh-Bonger because without her, it’s unlikely that Vincent van Gogh would be as well known and appreciated today. I believe it is important that when learning about art history we look into why these artists are famous. It seems that many people like the narrative that hard work or creativity alone makes an artist successful, but I want to point out that success in the art world is often the result of connections and support systems. If Vincent van Gogh didn’t have an art dealer brother who supported him financially, he wouldn’t have had the resources to paint and draw. If he didn’t have a devoted sister-in-law who emphatically promoted his work, he wouldn’t be world famous. I’m taking the time to mention this because I am sure some of you make amazing artwork, and you might wonder why you can’t get the recognition you deserve. I want to reassure you that your art is meaningful, but if you’re not related to anyone in the art market and you don’t have a PR team, it will be a difficult journey for you. It’s not impossible, but you will have to do a lot of self-promotion. If you’re not lucky enough to have someone like Jo van Gogh-Bonger in your biological or chosen family, you need to promote your own work. I encourage you to send out press-releases for your exhibitions, update your website, and start a blog for your artwork if you don’t have one already.
The Starry Night is one of the most famous Postimpressionist paintings, and Vincent van Gogh made it in 1889. This horizontal artwork is about 3 feet wide, and it is housed at the Modern Museum of Art. The scene is composed of bold, thick dashes of oil paint that pop off the surface. There is a tall green cypress tree on the left side of the canvas; it is so dark it almost appears black. In the lower right corner, there is a village with little houses and a building with a tall steeple. There are blue hills rolling in the distance. The earth meets the sky about 1/3 away from the bottom edge. The bulk of this painting is filled with the sky. The artist painted a gold crescent moon in the top right corner, and it is surrounded with dashes of yellow light. There are 11 stars in the sky, each surrounded with a halo of light. If your eyes get dry or your are recovering from Lasik surgery, you might have van Gogh night vision like this too. The sky appears lively, with two big swirls that meet at the center. The sky is made of blues, whites, greens, and yellows. To me, the dashes make it looks like the wind is blowing through the scene.
Before I move on from Vincent van Gogh, it’s necessary for me to address his mental health. There’s a common misconception that artists have to suffer in order to make great art. This is false. Great artists make artwork despite the challenges they face, but can you imagine the work they could create if they had the resources? If van Gogh didn’t have to take breaks from painting to work on his mental health, he could have made a lot more art. If van Gogh lived past 37, and was able to sell his work, I would bet he could have made even more imaginative and impactful paintings. If you’re an artist or a student now, wouldn’t you be able to make some amazing artwork if you didn’t have to worry about healthcare and funding your projects? Artists shouldn’t have to suffer to appease the mythos of the brooding artist. Artists are humans, and they should be able to have access to healthcare and should be fairly compensated for the work they do so they can continue to make art that enriches the lives of their communities. Hannah Gadsby stated this point eloquently when she said, “This romanticizing of mental illness is ridiculous. It is not a ticket to genius. It’s a ticket to nowhere.”
[Music]
As much as I don’t want to include this next Postimpressionist artist, I have to because he is very well known and I would be doing a disservice to you by ignoring his existence. History is complicated and messy, and if everything you encounter about the past makes you happy, then you’re not really learning history. So, without further ado, allow me to introduce you to a giant gaping cloaca named Paul Gauguin. Yes, I will note that I am going to be very biased in my description of Gauguin’s life and work. I want to start a campaign where from now on we refer to him as Paul “Trigger Warning” Gauguin because he was abusive, and if you’re not in a frame of mind to learn about a famous artist who physically and sexually abused women and children, then you should be able to opt out. I will not go into excessive detail about his atrocities, but we can’t gloss over his biography because a lot of his paintings depict his victims.
There are many people who will argue that we should separate the artist from the art, and they’ll sometimes use Roland Barthes’s “Death of the Author” as justification. If reading mid 20th century obtuse French philosophy is your bag, then I suggest you find a copy of this essay if you haven’t read it yet. However, the gist of Barthes’s argument is that whatever an author writes isn’t complete until it is read. The reader is the one who activates the text, which causes the death of the author. He believed that the author’s background doesn’t matter and shouldn’t be taken into consideration. As you can probably guess by now, I disagree with this assertion. I have spent a lot of time learning about and sharing the background information for various works of art because I truly believe that context helps us understand the work. If the author was truly dead, the concept of art history would be irrelevant as it would have no bearing on how current viewers see art.
I also want to quickly illuminate that “Death of the Author” doesn’t mean we boycott or remove all traces of authors with whom we disagree. I have seen many people use this phrase in this way, but that is kind of is the opposite of what Barthes intended. Now, if I want to get super metacognitive, then I would have to argue that what Barthes meant doesn’t matter since I, as the reader, hold the only true interpretation, but I don’t feel like being that pedantic right now. The concept of death of the author just means that the author’s background and inspiration doesn’t need to be considered when readers or viewers consume their creations. As I stated earlier, I disagree with this concept because I do believe the creator’s background should be considered. Who the artist was, what they did, and what they believed does influence their work, but it’s alright if you disagree with me. We all have boundaries of what leeway we’re willing to give to the people who create the art, books, movies, and songs we consume. Perhaps you can’t enjoy Harry Potter anymore because you don’t want to support the author, but you still can watch The Mandalorian because you know it’s an ensemble cast and one actor doesn’t change the meaning of the entire show for you. Where you draw the line is entirely up to you.
Since I feel that context is necessary, let me provide a little bit of background for Paul Gauguin. He, like most famous artists, grew up privileged. He was born in Paris, but spent some of his childhood in Peru waited on by servants. His family returned to Paris after they feel from power, and then Gauguin grew up to become a stockbroker. He earned about $150,000 a year for about a decade. He got married to Mette-Sophie Gad, who he physically abused. They had 5 children, who witnessed Gauguin beat their mother. Unfortunately, Gauguin’s treatment of women and girls gets worse after a stock market crash, and he decided he wanted to become an edgy avant-garde artist.
I have zero desire to go into all the details of Gauguin’s biography, but he spent a lot of his career trying to become a “Bohemian,” and I’m saying this word in air quotes purposefully because white Parisian avant-garde artists weren’t the most culturally sensitive. At the time, some white French people referred to the Romani people as “Bohemians” because they thought they all originated from Bohemia. I still sometimes come across people who use the word “Bohemian” to describe a romanticized, artsy, exotic, nomadic lifestyle, and they forget that actual Romani people have been severely persecuted and suffered genocide. It’s kind of like when white people use a certain “g-word” I’m not going to say to describe their fortune-teller Halloween costumes. These terms are offensive, and we need to stop using them to describe a free-spirited artsy lifestyle. Just use “avant-garde” instead.
Anyway, Gauguin spent his life trying to prove how cool and edgy he was to all his little artist bros, and he did this by moving to Tahiti, abusing children, claiming those children were his “muses,” making paintings, coming back to France to see if he was popular yet, going back to Tahiti, reaping the benefits of being a colonialist, abusing more children, making more paintings, writing an unreliable autobiography, and so on. I’m not going to share any of his paintings specifically, because I really don’t think they should even be in museums. Not everything made with paint is art, and just because a famous artist made it doesn’t mean I want to look at it. I really have no desire to see nude paintings of children that Gauguin lusted after and abused. I also have no idea why someone paid $210 million for one of his paintings in 2015.
Now, I have heard people defend Gauguin by stating that the age of consent in France at the time was 13 years old. They will defend him by saying that no one at the time knew that a 50 year old man with visible signs of an STI engaging in forced sexual relationships with colonized teenagers was wrong. I don’t buy that. It was wrong. I would just guess that the people who thought this behavior was wrong didn’t have the power to speak up or change the situation. If you want to know what his paintings look like in general, he kind of used flat colors. His perspectives are wonky. The proportions of his nude children models are exaggerated and unrealistic. Just imagine a still-life by Paul Cézanne, but instead of apples, there are Tahitian women and children.
Let’s take a quick break, and when we return, I’ll share about one more Postimpressionist.
[Break]
The last Postimpressionist I want to discuss is Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec. Like many of his peers, he was an artist born into wealth and extreme privilege. His dad was a count, and his mom was a countess, but they were first cousins and this caused Toulouse-Lautrec to have some health conditions. When he was a teenager, he broke both of his legs, and they ceased growing. Due to his health, he was only about 5 feet tall, and he needed to walk with a cane. Unfortunately, he was taunted for his physical disabilities, and this factored into him developing alcoholism.
Despite the disadvantages Toulouse-Lautrec faced, he made a lot of art during the 1890s. When he painted, he used scratchy, gestural brush strokes. He was inspired by Japanese prints and Impressionist paintings. He spent a fair amount of time in cabarets, cafés, bars, and brothels. He painted, drew, and made prints of his favorite subjects, which often included dancers. In 1891, he created a poster called Moulin Rouge: La Goulue. The Met in New York has a copy, and so does the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam. This poster is a lithograph, which is a type of print where the artist draws on a smooth stone block. After the printmaker prepares the block for printing, ink is applied, and then the image is transferred to paper by running it through a press. This process sounds pretty simple, but I have made a few lithographs and I found the process fairly challenging. The Moulin Rouge: La Goulue poster is over 6 feet tall, and the top left corner has a giant red letter “M” which is for the word “Moulin” 3 times. Each “Moulin Rouge” text is stacked on top of each other. Underneath the red text, “La Goulue” is printed in black uppercase letters. La Goulue was the stage name of Louise Weber, and it means “the glutton” because Weber was known for finishing the drinks of patrons. The dancer is at the center of the composition, her hair is in a bun on the top of her head, and she is wearing a red shirt with white polkadots. She is balancing on her left foot, and she’s wearing red stockings and shoes. She is kicking her right leg out to the right, and her white skirt is flying up in the air, and the audience can see her white bloomers too. Behind the star of the show, there is a silhouetted mass of people, and most of them are wearing top hats. The floorboards slope toward La Goulue, and this draws more attention her energetic dance. There is a brown silhouette of a slim man wearing a top hat in the foreground. We can see him from the waste up, and he is turned to the side with his right hand raised to the direction of La Goulue. He was her dance partner, but he couldn’t look less interested because the corner of his mouth is downturned and his eyes are closed.
The term “Post-Impressionism” was first used at an art exhibition in London in 1910, which was after most of the artists I mentioned died. George Seurat, Vincent van Gogh, and Henri Toulouse-Lautrec all passed away in their 30s. Postimpressionist artwork was varied, but it encompasses art that was made in Paris between Impressionism and the turn of the century. I know I shared a lot of information with you, but I hope that you’ll be able to identify and categorize Postimpressionist artwork. The paintings, prints, and drawings are identifiable due to the bold mark-making, simplified forms, vivid colors, and deliberate use of color theory.
[Music]
Thank you very much for joining me to explore Postimpressionism. I hope you will be back next time when I examine Fauvism. To find a transcript of this episode, the resources I consulted, or to support this program, please visit klairelockheart.com, spelled K-L-A-I-R-E-L-O-C-K-H-E-A-R-T dot com, and visit the “Media” page. Join me on Instagram @klairelockheart to see my current projects and paintings, or you can follow me on Facebook by searching for Klaire A. Lockheart.
The History of Modern Art with Klaire was conceived, written, and performed by me, Klaire Lockheart. This episode was created with equipment provided by Aaron C. Packard of Aaron C. Packard Productions. Find his awesome photography at aaronpackard.com, that’s A-A-R-O-N-P-A-C-K-A-R-D dot com.
Please subscribe to this podcast if you enjoyed this episode so you won’t miss future topics. Thank you once again for sharing your time with me, and, as always, I appreciate your positive feedback.
Resources
Dita Amory, “Georges Seurat (1859–1891) and Neo-Impressionism,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art, October, 2004, https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/seni/hd_seni.htm
Roland Barthes, “Death of the Author,” 1967, Aspen.
Sarah Bochicchio, “How Vincent van Gogh’s Market Was Tirelessly Built by His Sister-in-Law, Jo,” Artsy, May 28, 2018, https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-vincent-van-goghs-market-tirelessly-built-sister-in-law-jo
Starr Figura, “Paul Gauguin,” MoMA, 2016, https://www.moma.org/artists/2098
Hannah Gadsby, Nanette, directed by Madeleine Parry and John Olb, performed by Hannah Gadsby (2018; Sydney, Australia, Netflix).
Michael Glover, “Gauguin’s Predatory Colonial Gaze,” Hyperallergic, October 26, 2019, https://hyperallergic.com/524297/gauguins-predatory-colonial-gaze/
Peter Kalb, ed., H. H. Arnason History of Modern Art, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc, 2004).
Jane Kinsman and Stéphane Guegan. Toulouse-Lautrec Paris and the Moulin Rouge. (Canberra: National Gallery of Australia, 2012).
Hans Luijten, “Research Project: Biography of Jo van Gogh-Bonger,” Van Gogh Museum, September, 2019, https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/about/knowledge-and-research/completed-research-projects/research-project-biography-of-jo-van-gogh-bonger
Meredith Mendelsohn, “Why Is the Art World Divided over Gauguin’s Legacy?” Artsy, August 03, 2017, https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-art-divided-gauguins-legacy
Sam Phillips, …isms: Understanding Modern Art. (New York: Universe, 2013).
Paul Signac, “From Eugéne Delacroix to Neo-Impressionism,” in Art in Theory 1900-2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas, ed. Charles Harrison and Paul Wood (Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2003), 15-18.
Meilan Solly, “New Biography Spotlights Jo Bonger, Sister-in-Law Who Helped Rescue van Gogh From Obscurity,” Smithsonian Magazine, September 20, 2019, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/new-biography-spotlights-jo-bonger-sister-law-who-rescued-van-gogh-obscurity-180973183/
Richard Thomson, Phillip Dennis Cate, and Mary Weaver Chapin, Toulouse-Lautrec and Montmartre. (Washington: National Gallery of Art, 2005).
“Vincent van Gogh and Goupil & Cie,” Van Gogh Gallery, November 21, 2016, http://blog.vangoghgallery.com/index.php/en/2016/11/21/vincent-van-gogh-and-goupil-cie/
Gracie Ward, “An Open Letter To The Unbeknownst Racist,” February 03, 2017, Affinity,
http://affinitymagazine.us/2017/02/03/an-open-letter-to-the-unbeknownst-racist/
Roland Barthes, “Death of the Author,” 1967, Aspen.
Sarah Bochicchio, “How Vincent van Gogh’s Market Was Tirelessly Built by His Sister-in-Law, Jo,” Artsy, May 28, 2018, https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-vincent-van-goghs-market-tirelessly-built-sister-in-law-jo
Starr Figura, “Paul Gauguin,” MoMA, 2016, https://www.moma.org/artists/2098
Hannah Gadsby, Nanette, directed by Madeleine Parry and John Olb, performed by Hannah Gadsby (2018; Sydney, Australia, Netflix).
Michael Glover, “Gauguin’s Predatory Colonial Gaze,” Hyperallergic, October 26, 2019, https://hyperallergic.com/524297/gauguins-predatory-colonial-gaze/
Peter Kalb, ed., H. H. Arnason History of Modern Art, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, Inc, 2004).
Jane Kinsman and Stéphane Guegan. Toulouse-Lautrec Paris and the Moulin Rouge. (Canberra: National Gallery of Australia, 2012).
Hans Luijten, “Research Project: Biography of Jo van Gogh-Bonger,” Van Gogh Museum, September, 2019, https://www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/about/knowledge-and-research/completed-research-projects/research-project-biography-of-jo-van-gogh-bonger
Meredith Mendelsohn, “Why Is the Art World Divided over Gauguin’s Legacy?” Artsy, August 03, 2017, https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-art-divided-gauguins-legacy
Sam Phillips, …isms: Understanding Modern Art. (New York: Universe, 2013).
Paul Signac, “From Eugéne Delacroix to Neo-Impressionism,” in Art in Theory 1900-2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas, ed. Charles Harrison and Paul Wood (Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 2003), 15-18.
Meilan Solly, “New Biography Spotlights Jo Bonger, Sister-in-Law Who Helped Rescue van Gogh From Obscurity,” Smithsonian Magazine, September 20, 2019, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/new-biography-spotlights-jo-bonger-sister-law-who-rescued-van-gogh-obscurity-180973183/
Richard Thomson, Phillip Dennis Cate, and Mary Weaver Chapin, Toulouse-Lautrec and Montmartre. (Washington: National Gallery of Art, 2005).
“Vincent van Gogh and Goupil & Cie,” Van Gogh Gallery, November 21, 2016, http://blog.vangoghgallery.com/index.php/en/2016/11/21/vincent-van-gogh-and-goupil-cie/
Gracie Ward, “An Open Letter To The Unbeknownst Racist,” February 03, 2017, Affinity,
http://affinitymagazine.us/2017/02/03/an-open-letter-to-the-unbeknownst-racist/