Many of the Old Masters created paintings that speak to us not only from the beauty of their brush strokes, but from the stories that they hold beneath the layers of paint. Sometimes we may look at a painting and only see its surface beauty, at other times we may be confused by the way the artist combined certain elements to create the composition. Understanding the historical context, the belief systems and the thought processes of these great artists give us a deeper appreciation for the world of these master painters.

Rembrandt

When we refer to the term ‘The Old Masters’, what and who exactly do we mean?

When we hear the term ‘Old Master’ we usually think of well known artist’s such as Leonardo da Vinci or Michelangelo, but what was so great about all these other artists that they too are included in the same broad category and referred to as one of the ‘Old Masters?’  Was it their skill, their contribution to art overall or their popularity as an artist or teacher? Or was it all of the above and more? In truth, it is hard to define, but easier if we place them in a particular period in the context of art history.

The term usually refers to the great ‘European’ artists who painted before the 1800’s. The term itself tends to be very general, and some art historians consider it not clear enough for us to use. We often here people refer to a skilled artist as being a great ‘Master’ But in more popular terms the ‘Old Masters’ were very different.
The Old Masters were of many different European nationalities; however the Italians, Dutch and Flemish seemed to have produced the majority of the most celebrated and recognized of the ‘Old Masters’ during this 400 year period in art’s incredible history.
The criterion for being an Old Master is usually one who is considered celebrated and an artist who painted between the 14th century and the late 18th century. Amongst this group of Old Masters were some artists who achieved a level of ‘genius’ with some contributing greatly to the full development of the visual arts. Many of these great artists brought with them a new logic and understanding of humanity and their ability to create grand drama with their painted interpretations, making some of these works almost like a great ‘stage show’.

They were able to blend science with art as they worked and struggled to find new lasting pigments and mediums and as a result, developed new methods and techniques to paint with. In their search for enhanced representation of the human form and the world around them, they made significant discoveries such as the principals of ‘perspective’ and dimension. Through these discoveries they were able to create true three dimensional ‘form’. This would change forever the way we artists view objects on a flat two dimensional wooden or canvas surface.

The Old Masters, in their quest to depict portraits, landscapes, still life and floral with such perfect detail and realism, often used light and color to make the viewer believe they could be observing the genuine thing. They strived for sharp focus realism and in doing so; set a standard of excellence for generations to come. The Old Masters left us with a legacy and a standard that many artists have spent their lives striving to achieve.

The Old Masters perfected painting techniques which allowed them the use of ‘visual texture’ to render the realism of painting glass, metal, china, water, and the subtle textures of fruit, flowers and the softness and translucency of human skin.
The Old Masters changed the way landscapes were rendered, breathing life and realistic detail into each painting. They did so by understanding the geography, the climate and the seasons of the land to create extraordinary compositions which established a relationship between man and the earth.

The Old Masters painted with their intellect, they used the canvas as a way to describe not just their stories, but as a way to record history and politics and to make a statement or commentary about the world around them.
It is true; the Old Masters have left us with an extraordinary legacy.

The ‘patrons’ of art – then and now

Then - Ever wonder how lucky we artists are today? We create a painting straight from the heart, if we wish to sell this work we have several avenues we can pursue such as galleries, stores, private sales, shows, and of course the internet. Many of us use art like a child uses a toy, something to play with for purely recreational purposes while others are professional artist’s who make their living from their art. Let us step back in time and understand what pressures and restraints artist’s of old were under, they did not enjoy the spoils of modern life like many of us do. Their survival and their family’s survival depended on the sale of their work. How did they paint under these pressures and what afforded them the opportunity to follow their passion for painting?

The patron of the arts was born from the evolution of culture. The word patron means supporter or benefactor, and in the case of art; the patron was the person who supported the artist. The patrons became those who hired artists to paint what ever they wanted. Art was used as a way to inspire devotion, show wealth, record history. As time passed it was no longer reserved for the aristocracy and nobility, it was available to the new middle classes of society. The art patron became a normal figure of society.
 
The earliest patrons were the Church. Art was used as a way to speak to the uneducated common people; the Church realized that art could be used as a way to decorate the interiors of buildings, creating a spiritual atmosphere conducive to prayer. They hired artists to work directly for them, dictating topics, styles and the subtle messages that were often implied. As Rome became a central power of the Church, we see the patronage of the arts increase as the demands grew.

As time passed and the new wealth of the Renaissance movement increased and spread across Europe so did the number of patrons. Some of the greatest patrons other than the Church were wealthy families like the Gonzaga family and the Medici family of Florence Italy. The Medici family spent great sums of money on making the city of Florence one of the most important cultural art centers of Europe.  They were the patrons of famous artists like Raphael, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and Botticelli and so many others. The patrons were responsible for the artist’s welfare.

Patrons were in such a position of control that they could dictate not only the subjects or theme of a painting, and the details of the composition, but they could even state the quality of the materials used and the length of time that it should take the artist to complete the work. These patrons were the clients or the employers of the artists, they held the purse strings and with that came great power over the artists career and direction, if there was to be one. Patrons were extremely important to the artist, and we can just imagine how difficult it would have been at times, to be held hostage by the patron’s vision rather than that of the artist’s heart.

Now – Do we have patrons today? Not is the same style perhaps, but patrons none the less are those clients who hire us artists to paint custom works.  It is easy to draw a parallel between the two; however there are many differences that have caused a power shift from one to the other. The biggest is that relative to the artist’s skills and notoriety, some artists have a choice of who their clients might be, especially for custom work. Populations are larger, economics of the modern age are different and of course communication is made easier with the internet and modern advertising. Word of mouth does travel so work is easier to be had. Centuries ago, wealthy patrons may not have been too eager to share their latest discovery of a talented artist.

Today the power can also swing between galleries and artist with the exclusive and more affluent galleries dictating to the artist, as well, the more celebrated artist dictating to the gallery.

We too can be considered a ‘patron’ of the arts, we choose who we support don’t we? By attending their classes, purchasing their books and instructional materials or by buying their art, we support them. Our patronage might be seen as being more indirect, yet it is patronage all the same. The medieval Church was responsible for the direction and the development of art in many ways; the wealthy patrons were responsible for creating the demand and as a result made art collecting a popular past time amongst the middle classes.  Today the responsibility of art patronage lies with each of us. To preserve and pass on to the next generation of artists the appreciation for traditions and style.

'Schools of Art' – What does this mean?
We often hear the phrase, ‘schools of art’ when discussions about art history or styles are raised, but what really is meant by the phrase ‘Schools of Art?’ we may think that this refers to a physical building that housed an art school, but that would be somewhat inaccurate. This phrase refers to a school of though, a style or a belief system where certain principals were adopted by those who were influenced or impacted by a style.
Some schools were born as a response or a ‘reaction’ to another movement or time, used to comment or address a particular artistic belief. Some schools were used to revive an ancient influence or concept.

Some ‘schools’ originally started because of the influence of a particular period in history, or by an individual artist or distinct group of artists. For example, during the 1800’s a group of landscape painters from France formed the Barbizon School. This was an association that operated from about 1840 -1870.  These artists who were the members of this association lived near a small village in France called Barbizon which was outside of the larger metropolitan area of Paris. They broke away from the norm of painting indoors and began painting outdoors as they enjoyed painting directly from Mother Nature. All members of this group embraced this philosophy as their common link or ‘belief’ – painting from nature outdoors. They then shared their artistic endeavors between each other and their common beliefs and it is known as the ‘Barbizon School”

Today we can say we have the ‘Traditions ‘school’ of thought’, which is a philosophy about art education or specifically, about teaching and learning the more ‘formal’ elements of art. Once the Traditions Teacher begins to teach the program to others it is fair to say they have adopted the Traditions philosophy or ‘school of thought’. We all believe in a particular methodology and in the Traditions progressive style of teaching art education to others.

Susan Abdella MDA, Dutch Floral and Sue Pruett MDA, Glass Study

The Traditions Education program embraces the 'formal' elements of teaching all artforms from Folk Art to Fine Art

Folk Art if looked at for its literal meaning is wildly accepted as a particular school or style of art. Though this is generally a very board description where the individual artists may never have known each other well enough to share any common principals or ideology, the Folk Art is usually referred to as art from artists and artisans who have been influenced by their own cultures. The common thread or link between this classification of art style is often that the artists is untrained and the artwork could also be considered a craft. Today we know differently as many of these artists are highly skilled and take a more serious approach to their art form.
In the Decorative Art world, historic ‘Folk Art’ has evolved and been raised to a more sophisticated art form and now widely accepted as a new generation of art created by skilled artists.

coming soon...