To Call Cézanne a "Post-Impressionist"

Many art historians categorize Paul Cézanne with post-impressionism. But what exactly does that mean? 

Cézanne was a product of the late 19th century, the era of Impressionism. However, his practice protested Impressionism's rejection of classical structure and composition. Impressionists painted images as a fluid memory or a momentary impression, but Cézanne painted images an experience. He wanted his still lifes to feel tangible rather than ghostly, and permanent rather than momentary. And so Cézanne brought back the permanence, the physicality, the composition, and the structure of classical painting. At the same time, Cézanne was trying new things. Classical art sought perfection and objectivity, but in real life, seeing isn't like that. It's subjective. Vision can be blurry at times and clear at others. It can change the apparent shape of objects and places through the slightest flick of an eye. Cézanne wasn't trying to go back to classical art, but he was gleaning wisdom from classical art and Impressionism, and moving forward with it. He was exploring color, brush stroke, and the way that shapes change when the angle of our head changes. And in that sense, Cézanne was neither Impressionistic nor classical. His still lifes have a physicality, presence, and weightiness, but they also have an emotive force to them that makes the paint itself seem to be living. they make us want to sit and stare at them for a long time. This artist of the late 1800s had an eye for visual techniques perfected by his contemporaries and the old traditional masters, but he also had a mind of his own. Cézanne wanted to move forward - but without throwing out the past.

Still Life with Apples and a Pot of Primroses

Paul Cézanne

ca. 1890

Oil on canvas

28 3/4 x 36 3/8 in.

In this still life, Cézanne wanted the viewer to feel like they were looking at a physical setting with real objects, and he emphasized the composition, the idea that the still life should be set up almost architecturally. The objects in this still life form a Fibonacci spiral, and their shadows, highlights, and clarity give them a sense of volume. One of Cézanne's dreams was to wow Paris with apples so bright and healthy, and flowers so fresh and delicate, that viewers would feel as though they would last forever without rotting. These were the challenges he took on that made him stand out from the bulk of Impressionism. Unlike classical painting, however, his vibrant colors, oft-blurry edges, thick brush strokes, and slightly out-of-kilter placement of parts such as the wall and table edge deviated from tradition.

Rouen Cathedral: The Portal (Sunlight)

Claude Monet

1894

Oil on canvas

39 1/4 x 25 7/8 in.

Impressionism is aptly named; it's a movement of capturing impressions. An Impressionist painting is not supposed to be a physical place where one could dwell so much as a memory stuck in one's head. Something one glimpsed; a footprint in the sand. Many Impressionists intentionally veered away from traditional composition; they cropped the edges in unexpected ways, and didn't put a lot of emphasis on rational 3-D space or familiar textures as Western painters traditionally had. Eastern ideas of space deemphasized a logic or math; such parameters were not necessary. Monet's ephemeral way of seeing and his intentionally imbalanced compositions are a case-in-point example of ephemeral Impressionism.

Still Life with a Glass and Oysters

Jan Davidsz de Heem

Ca. 1640

Oil on wood

9 7/8 x 7 1/2 in.

Classical representation sought to elevate the viewer's mind through a rational, solid, and clear presentation of the physical world. Dutch still life is an example of Renaissance rationality, naturalism, and transcendence. This strain of classical painting painstakingly delineates every detail. Each object is a proud display of how skillfully the artist can represent any texture or substance. Reflections web through the glass and bend in its liquid. A thousand tiny indentations pucker the surface of the vibrant lemon peel. Fruit and oysters glow, and silk gleams. Light falls in a warm, purifying glow across the objects and then vanishes into total darkness in their shadows. The composition stands in the solid pose of a Pyramid. Everything breaths perfection - or at least, an attempt at perfection.

Roses

Vincent van Gogh

1890

Oil on canvas

36 5/8 x 29 1/8 in.

Eastern art had a significant influence on Western art in the Impressionist era. Van Gogh was particularly influenced by Japanese art. We can see that influence coming through in the outlines around his figures, in the sense of space that doesn't adhere to a consistent horizon line, and in the flowing, teeming gesture of his flowers. Some of these themes touch Cézanne's work, too; his objects sometimes seem almost outlined, and his sense of perspective is not traditional. The biggest trait Van Gogh and Cézanne share, though, is their vivid, intense colors. These colors seem to express something in and of themselves, to glow outward from within the painting and play a role of their own, rather than simply describing what is actually seen in real life. Thus, many art historians categorize Van Gogh and Cézanne with the same label: Post-Impressionism.

Still Life with a Skull and a Writing Quill

Pieter Claesz

1628

Oil on wood

9 1/2 x 14 1/8 in.

Classical still lifes (and classical paintings in general) had long emphasized dramatic contrast over expressive color. Color was not neglected - indeed, the colors had a richness of their own, and not all Classical still lifes appear as dark as this one. But even the richest color here - the red of the candle holder - is subject to the light. This approach - chiaroscuro - contrasts the clarity of objects hit bit light with the severe darkness of shadows, background, or anything the artist wants to de-emphasize. The light appears dim in this still life, but the shadows and background are far darker. Dramatic tones are the priority. By comparison, Cézanne's evocative, living colors have left the dark of chiaroscuro far behind.

Still Life with Apples and Pears

Paul Cézanne

Ca. 1891–92

Oil on canvas

17 5/8 x 23 1/8 in.

Similarities in many of his still lifes offer a peek into Cézanne's life and practice. He was myopic, unable to see distant objects with complete clarity. Color was important to him. When viewed closely, his paintings radiate rainbows. We can see hints of his personal way of viewing the more distant physical world through blurry backgrounds and textures, as well as attention to clarity in the edges of forms. He married classical composition to an experiential, new way of looking, allowing shapes and edges to shift irrationally as they do in the real world when the eye moves. He wanted his objects to engage in the tangible world. The theme of fresh, bulging fruit was something he worked at carefully; apples would have changed color and rotted quickly, so Cézanne used them to showcase his ability to compose and clearly remember a still life rather than simply repeating what is seen.