Paul Cézanne Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory Part.2
III. Ovals, Cylinders, and Spheres
However, what exactly was Cézanne doing during all those long hours of gazing at his models?
As we can deduce from a passage in a letter to Émile Zola, Cézanne was primarily “observing” his models. He sought to read everything in front of him through his own eyes. But what he was seeing in “Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory” was not the world Monet perceived, bathed in the enchanting undulations of light, nor the warm, fresh allure of well-ripened fruits that Renoir often painted. What he was searching for was the fundamental structure that constituted the essence of his subjects. In the Impressionist world, where everything was often reduced to waves of light, Cézanne, in contrast, was seeking to distinguish his subjects from their surrounding environment by uncovering their basic forms. This pursuit of a firm and definitive form was no longer merely a matter of retinal response but rather an intellectual endeavor—an effort to establish a single order within nature, as succinctly expressed by Georges Braque later: “The eye distorts the form, the mind makes the form.”
The anecdote of Cézanne praising his friend Monet with the words “He is only an eye, but what an eye!” is well-known. This phrase not only underscores Monet’s exquisite sensitivity but also hints at a subtle critique. Understanding form is not solely about the eye; ultimately, it is an intellectual act that aligns with the world of geometry. Cézanne once advised his young friend Bernard to “perceive nature in terms of cones, cylinders, and spheres.” This, too, conveys a similar meaning.
Comparing “Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory” to Monet’s “Woman with a Parasol,” we can better grasp this point. Unlike Monet’s young woman, whose facial features, as well as the contours of her body, are indistinct and bathed in soft, undulating light, Madame Cézanne’s visage asserts itself with clarity. Her elegant countenance is comprised of a series of well-defined curves – her forehead, chin, and the curvature of her entire face are distinct arcs. Even the minute details, such as her ears, are nearly imperceptible. In accordance with the rhythmic curves that define her facial structure, her shoulders form firm arches, and her torso rests solidly upon a conical shape that spreads out from the waist. Her neck and arms take on cylindrical forms, with details such as fingertips left implied. These determined forms are placed within a strict geometric composition. Madame Cézanne, with her slightly inclined head, aligns the lines of her eyes, nose, and lips with the diagonals of the receding background wall. Another critical line, precisely perpendicular to these elements, connects with the slanting lines of the background trees and the model’s right hand. Even though Cézanne is renowned for encouraging young artists to “paint from nature,” what he meant was that they should express their own sensations through the act of painting, and this act was, at its core, a visual and intellectual recognition.
To delve deeper into the mind of Cézanne during his lengthy sessions with his models, we must recognize that his approach was in stark contrast to the Impressionists who surrounded him. While they aimed to capture fleeting effects of light and atmosphere, Cézanne was committed to revealing the underlying structure of his subjects. His method was not purely an act of imitation but rather an assertion of his own sensibilities, an endeavor to transcribe his intellectual comprehension of form onto the canvas. In this quest, Cézanne found not only the physical forms but also the profound geometric patterns that underscored the very essence of nature.
IV. Dramas Without Drama
So, are Cézanne’s paintings akin to geometric shapes drawn with a compass and ruler?
Certainly, in “Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory,” we encounter a starkly contrasting impression. There, amidst the warm sunlight, faithful forms breathe, surrounded by ample space, evoking a subtle lyrical fragrance. This, indeed, encapsulates Cézanne’s sensory experience of his subjects. He managed to capture this, albeit partially, on a canvas that still appeared somewhat incomplete. It can be considered a miraculous feat granted only to the genius of Cézanne—to establish a new painting space through the unity of color and desegregation. This establishment of a new painting space entails reconciling the contradiction between the two-dimensional world of the canvas and the three-dimensional reality of the depicted subjects, a contradiction inherent to the art of painting.
The inherent contradiction between flatness and depth has been a constant in the history of painting. Since the Renaissance, Western art pursued the illusion of a three-dimensional world on a flat surface through techniques such as perspective and chiaroscuro, often neglecting the emphasis on flatness. The emergence of Impressionism shifted perception to view the world entirely through the lens of light, gradually flattening the canvas. In Monet’s enduring painting of the water lilies, for instance, the edge of the pond and even the sky disappeared, leaving only the water’s surface, a consequence that seemed natural.
Cézanne, influenced by the Impressionists, couldn’t revert to the traditional techniques of his time, such as linear perspective or chiaroscuro. To do so would have required sacrificing the richness of color and betraying his own sensibilities. Yet, submitting entirely to the two-dimensionality of the canvas was not an option either. If he did so, his cones, cylinders, and spheres would be reduced to triangles, rectangles, and circles. In essence, he trod a path that the Cubist group, influenced by Cézanne, would later follow. Cézanne aimed to express both spatial depth, the volume of the subjects, and the flatness of the canvas simultaneously.
Thus, Cézanne employed the method of formalization through color. His approach differed from the traditional painting process, which typically involved first delineating form through drawing and then applying color. However, it wasn’t like the Impressionist color division, where form was often disregarded, and strokes of color were applied in parallel. Instead, Cézanne had his unique way of creating form through color.
For instance, in “Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory,” the face is expressed through traditional shading. In other words, shadowed areas are rendered in colors with a bluish hue, while the rounded portions are colored in red or orange. In our perception, cold colors don’t reveal depth, as they recede, and warm colors come forward, creating a sense of volume.
In “Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory,” the facial expression doesn’t emphasize form through color as strongly; it leans more towards flatness. In contrast, in “Madame Cézanne with Red Armrest,” for instance, there is a more pronounced emphasis on volume, but the face appears almost mottled, as if painted with blue makeup.
Regardless of the approach, if the type of color or the brushwork is slightly off, it could ruin the structure of the entire face. Cézanne’s prolonged contemplation in front of his models was precisely aimed at capturing these precise expressions.
Similarly, the purple dress in “Madame Cézanne in the Conservatory” appears to be constructed using color. The areas that appear to bulge out are infused with a purple tinged with red, while the recessed areas have touches of blue, resulting in a form being shaped by color. While the work is near-completed and appears very natural, it is in these subtle calculations that Cézanne’s efforts lay. The incomplete parts, such as parts of the clothing or the back of the subject, reveal Cézanne’s working process. Adding a single touch to the canvas affects the overall balance, and he always worked with an eye on the entire effect.
Cézanne didn’t work on parts in isolation but rather progressed with a constant consideration of the overall effect. Therefore, while there are incomplete areas scattered throughout, a strict order pervades the entire canvas. His famous statement, “Color and desegregation are one and the same. When color is richly applied, desegregation becomes robust, and when desegregation is faithful, color becomes abundant,” encapsulates the essence of form through color.
In this manner, Cézanne achieved a sense of volume in Madame Cézanne’s body. The combination of color blending and the interaction with elements such as the wall behind Madame Cézanne and the trees beyond provides depth to the space. We clearly sense the presence of a three-dimensional world and a living human body within it. Yet, on the other hand, color, as a crucial player in spatial formation, radiates with equal intensity throughout the canvas, thereby highlighting the flatness of the painting on a gut level. The vibrant red of the flower on Madame Cézanne’s right or the green of the trees behind her, just like the intense purple of her attire, equally shine brightly, making us acutely aware of their presence within the canvas. Though they are unmistakably positioned in depth, they simultaneously feel like they exist on a single plane. This momentarily creates a dizzying sensation, akin to vertigo.
In the case of “Madame Cézanne with Red Armrest” at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, the juxtaposition of blue in the dress, red in the chair’s armrest, and yellow in the background wall similarly imparts this sensation. They are all distinctly occupying their rightful places within the space. Particularly, the vertical stripes on the skirt emphasize flatness further, enhancing the experience of a ‘flat space’ or a ‘flat surface with depth.’
Entrusting color with such a pivotal role might seem audacious. In this context, even the slightest deviation in the hue or placement of colors could immediately disrupt the overall order. Cézanne’s contribution was the ability to orchestrate a drama without drama—a world painted with the mundane subjects of everyday life, yet infused with the unsettling drama of color and form. Indeed, his redirection of the course of painting can be attributed to this drama without drama.