DOI Heft:
No. 53 (July, 1901)
DOI Artikel:Mourey, Gabriel: The work of Jean-François Raffaëlli
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22775#0019
Jean-Franqois Raffaelli
Indeed, M. Raffaelli’s gifts are, to my thinking,
more intuitive than instinctive; but he is an intuitij
who, by dint of sound reasoning and long study,
has a marvellous knack of making Nature and Life
disclose their secrets.
Some of his works will doubtless be regarded
by posterity as more significant than others of his
“ manner of seeing ”—will form a “ document ”
more complete, more expressive both of his talent
itself and of the milieux wherein he laboured ; but
not one can I find of which it might be said that
he misapplied his methods or went astray in realising
the effects desired, for there is always perfect equi-
librium between his capacity and the purpose to
which he intends to put it. Consequently he is
never declamatory, never goes beyond the limits
of his subject, but knows how to contain his feel-
ings, and is at all times master of himself.
Are we to regard Raffaelli as an Impressionist ?
Has he ever been one ? Is he one still ? Who
shall say ? And what does it matter, after all ?
In the first chapter of his admirable book, “ L’Art
Impressionniste,” Georges Lecomte, explaining the
“ tendencies ” of the masters of that school, thus
expresses himself: “ Even to a greater extent than
the painters of the Fontainebleau School they
challenged the conventional treatment of rural
scenes, with their sentimental ‘ arrangement ’ and
the commonplace prettiness of their embellished
landscapes; still more, too, did they strive to
brighten the atmosphere of their canvases.
“ Moved by the calm joy, the poetry of the
fields, they realised that the aim of every artist
should be to record in all sincerity the personal
impressions he has received, and, casting aside all
academic dogma in order to commune direct with
nature, they studied each with his own eyes. Instead
ot wearisome sessions in the doubtful light of the
studio, under the influ-
ence of a master ever sug-
gesting his own manner
and his own methods,
there were daily excur-
sions into the suburbs,
profitable studies in the
open air of rural Mont-
martre and in the neigh-
bouring woods.
“They endeavoured to
reconstitute everything,
just as it first impressed
them — landscapes, trees,
and light. In their very
first efforts this passion for
atmosphere was clearly
seen. By means of an
absolutely free and indivi-
dual method, which aimed
at the realisation of instinc-
tive sensations, they sought
to enfold the fields, the
woods and the streams in a
sunny radiance, or in those
shaded mists which veil
them so delicately.”
“The New School,” re-
marks M. J. K. Huysmans
in “L’Art Moderne,”
“proclaimed this scientific
truth: that broad daylight
diminishes the colour
of tones ; that the outline,
the colour of a house or
“the grandfather” by jean-fran^ois raffaelli
(In the Collection of M. P. Gallimard)
4
Indeed, M. Raffaelli’s gifts are, to my thinking,
more intuitive than instinctive; but he is an intuitij
who, by dint of sound reasoning and long study,
has a marvellous knack of making Nature and Life
disclose their secrets.
Some of his works will doubtless be regarded
by posterity as more significant than others of his
“ manner of seeing ”—will form a “ document ”
more complete, more expressive both of his talent
itself and of the milieux wherein he laboured ; but
not one can I find of which it might be said that
he misapplied his methods or went astray in realising
the effects desired, for there is always perfect equi-
librium between his capacity and the purpose to
which he intends to put it. Consequently he is
never declamatory, never goes beyond the limits
of his subject, but knows how to contain his feel-
ings, and is at all times master of himself.
Are we to regard Raffaelli as an Impressionist ?
Has he ever been one ? Is he one still ? Who
shall say ? And what does it matter, after all ?
In the first chapter of his admirable book, “ L’Art
Impressionniste,” Georges Lecomte, explaining the
“ tendencies ” of the masters of that school, thus
expresses himself: “ Even to a greater extent than
the painters of the Fontainebleau School they
challenged the conventional treatment of rural
scenes, with their sentimental ‘ arrangement ’ and
the commonplace prettiness of their embellished
landscapes; still more, too, did they strive to
brighten the atmosphere of their canvases.
“ Moved by the calm joy, the poetry of the
fields, they realised that the aim of every artist
should be to record in all sincerity the personal
impressions he has received, and, casting aside all
academic dogma in order to commune direct with
nature, they studied each with his own eyes. Instead
ot wearisome sessions in the doubtful light of the
studio, under the influ-
ence of a master ever sug-
gesting his own manner
and his own methods,
there were daily excur-
sions into the suburbs,
profitable studies in the
open air of rural Mont-
martre and in the neigh-
bouring woods.
“They endeavoured to
reconstitute everything,
just as it first impressed
them — landscapes, trees,
and light. In their very
first efforts this passion for
atmosphere was clearly
seen. By means of an
absolutely free and indivi-
dual method, which aimed
at the realisation of instinc-
tive sensations, they sought
to enfold the fields, the
woods and the streams in a
sunny radiance, or in those
shaded mists which veil
them so delicately.”
“The New School,” re-
marks M. J. K. Huysmans
in “L’Art Moderne,”
“proclaimed this scientific
truth: that broad daylight
diminishes the colour
of tones ; that the outline,
the colour of a house or
“the grandfather” by jean-fran^ois raffaelli
(In the Collection of M. P. Gallimard)
4