Painter of Sight
New at Reason: Who's that guy squinting at the canvas? Why it's landscape wiz J.M.W. Turner! Charles Paul Freund explores the controversy over understanding art through biology.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
If one sees only a blur, does one paint what appears (to him) to be a sharp edge? Or does he paint an even blurrier blur? Turner's works are all the more impressive.
But if everything appeared to "glow" to him, ordinary paintings would too, with or without his technique, since it would all be seen though the same eyes.
That's not to say that I buy into the Romantic artist thing. The idea of the pure artist pursuing his vision without influence lurks behind much of the BS in the arts, IMO.