Van Gogh’s art was one of the first to particularly resonate with me. I remember going into my secondary school library to take books about Van Gogh’s paintings just to be able to look at them. Part of this appeal likely comes from Gogh’s association with being a mad genius who toiled away in isolation and churned out masterpieces. Although apparently, he did not cut off his entire ear, only a chunk of it. However, to himself, he was not a madman and his mental struggles appeared as an illumination of what art could be, perhaps from heaven. Van Gogh possessed a highly cognitive side to him that I want to explain. The origins of Gogh’s need to express himself come from his early life. His father was a Calvinist preacher and – even when whisked off to London to be an art dealer – Van Gogh found himself wanting to save people from the brutal reality of the Industrial Revolution with God. Yet this failed and, having been kicked out of missionary society for excessive zeal while preaching in the coal mines of southern Belgium, the Dutchman turned to painting despite having never picked up a brush before being nearly thirty.
Van Gogh transferred his religious philosophy into his painting: he would illuminate the joy present in trivial things to hopefully invigorate the poor and downtrodden to the simple beauty of life. Unfortunately, his early efforts as a painter were unsuccessful. He had to be entirely dependent on his brother Theo economically, and the paintings Gogh gave to him were called ‘unsellable’ by Theo. Van Gogh later moved back to his parents and it was around this time he painted his first true masterpiece – 'De Aardappeleters' or 'The Potato Eaters'. The painting was perfectly representative of the toiling class, as it created the impression of having been dug out of the earth with thick brush strokes and muddy tones. In addition, the religious aspect of Gogh’s work is present as it appears to be a Holy Communion for the poor – with simple potatoes instead of bread and wine. This was a critique of the lively and colourful paintings sold in London and The Hague in the late 19th century. However, this again made it difficult for Theo to sell it.
Disappointed with his lack of success, Vincent moved in with his brother to mingle with the contemporary painters of the day – the Impressionists. With this, he integrated more vibrant colours into his work and began to become obsessed with it. Despite this, he was still unsatisfied with impressionism, finding it too decorative, and still integrated earthier and altogether truer tones into his work. And his work still struggled to be sold. So, existing on the fringes of the impressionist movement, Gogh found himself forming a relationship with Paul Gauguin. It was not an equal relationship; Vincent was the student and Gauguin, the master. Yet Gauguin left for Brittany and Van Gogh did not follow. Inspired by his collection of Japanese ukiyo-e prints, he went to the yellowish countryside of Provence. His summer in Provence was the first time that Vincent felt that paintings really worked for him. Colour was something that he could play with on his own terms, and his vision of the universe as a revelation could finally be realised. This was to the point that he described painting as orgasmic. And it was. His paintings now held a great release of emotional energy and paint simultaneously, as shown by the 'Sower at Sunset', painted in 1888.
It was with this energy that Gogh also imagined creating an artists’ commune with Paul Gauguin in Arles. This commune would allow a process of ‘creative fusion’ to occur and a ‘great explosion’ of artistic expression would be liberated. Gauguin was hesitant and it seemed that Gogh was undergoing this without the French artist anyway.
But Gauguin did come. Nevertheless, Gogh’s vision of artistic liberation did not come to fruition, and the two painters found that they did not actually get on – artistically or personally. Gauguin also grew envious of Van Gogh’s manic obsession, with the Dutch artist usually painting at least a picture a day. Even with this obsession, Gogh’s paintings still did not sell. Furthermore, Gogh realised the failure of his grand project and, while suffering from depression and epilepsy, prompted Gauguin to leave their collective lodgings. That same night – while Gauguin stayed in a hotel – Gogh had cut off a piece of his ear and given it to a prostitute. After a period in hospital, Gogh admitted himself to a mental asylum and Gauguin was gone.
This is where the impression of Gogh as a madman comes from. This origin is wrong. It was while recovering or staving off epileptic fits that the artist tried to realise his vision of creating heaven on Earth. His art was an outlet for his struggle against his mental health issues. During these times, he painted with absolute control and understanding. Consequently, he created some of his pieces that resonated the most with people, including The Starry Night, called one of the most recognisable paintings in Western Art. Gogh continued to struggle with his mental health. Yet this did not stop him from continuing to feel a great surge of creative energy, art historian Simon Schama described it as ‘translating mental upheaval onto a revolution on the canvas.’ Theo was worried that this energy was too intense and so moved his brother to Auvers-sur-Oise, an artistic refuge.
In Auvers-sur-Oise, Vincent van Gogh’s art continued to be churned out. And it was ‘unflinching, tumultuous, heroic and completely new.’ At this time, he painted what might be my favourite Van Gogh painting: 'Wheatfield with Crows'. The painting is unflinchingly unique and powerful. It completely discards the entire history of landscape paintings. This begins with its perspective. It does not have the great depth that landscape paintings usually do, the painting is quite flat and the paths to the side seem to go nowhere, rising vertically up the canvas. The painting is scrambled and suffocating but simultaneously immersive. One reason for this could be the ambiguity of the crows. They could be coming towards us or going away. Furthermore, their shape is mirrored in the branching of the sideways paths, giving the painting the sense of motion, and revealing the power of nature. Finally, the painting seems to writhe with the ‘colour itself seems to tremble, pulse, and sway.’ Simon Schama said that these moving blocks of colour make the painting physical and ‘simultaneously thrilling and terrifying, [and give the feeling] of being swallowed alive in paint.’ It appears that Van Gogh had realised the goal of his first vision of art. How could a depressive madman have painted this? Something so visionary and brilliant.
Yet even as he reached new heights in his painting, Van Gogh faced increasingly difficult personal issues. Theo was less willing to financially support his brother while he had a wife and child. This weighed on Van Gogh, and the artist continued to suffer from his chronic mental health issues as well. Culminating in Vincent shooting himself in the chest with a revolver, he died two days later, with his brother Theo at his bedside. A great tragedy for an artist who had only just reached his triumph. And yet his legacy lives on. His paintings only grew in recognition as art developed in the late 19th and early to mid-20th centuries. He inspired many artists including Oskar Kokoschka, Willem de Kooning, Howard Hodgkin, and Jackson Pollock. However, the most important aspect of his legacy was the emotional resonance of his art. According to Schama, his art obtained what once was in the exclusive control of religion, consolation for our mortality. His art manages to speak to everyone who sees it, even to this day.
Comments