.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
In 1914, at the outbreak of the First World War, Jawlensky was forced to leave Germany, choosing to make Switzerland his home for several years. In the absence of his usual dynamic circle of fellow artists from the pioneering Munich art scene, he found himself in a relatively isolated, private environment. It was in this time and place that the artist saw his style develop in dramatic ways.
Of the very few encounters Jawlensky had with other artists during 1915, the year of this present work’s execution, the one which had the greatest impact and proved to be the most fruitful was that with Ferdinand Hodler. This influence can be seen in the planes of colour - applied in conjunction to create compositional structure - which are virtually devoid of the bold, dark outlines that had formerly been a trademark of the Jawlensky’s Fauve-like work. The layering of fields of colour, many of them similar and placed in relation to each other without the use of strong borders, is evident in both Hodler’s landscapes and Jawlensky’s still-lifes.
Throughout Jawlensky’s career, the still-life genre had been a vehicle for experimentation with ideas and techniques. The still-life provided an important arena for discovery, and indeed self-discovery, as he sought an artistic language that was suited to his vision. The artist, in his recollections, discusses his discovery of the work of Paul Gauguin, which he saw during a visit to an acquaintance, had explained:
‘It was at his place that I saw for the first time a painting by Gauguin, the Rider on the Beach in Tahiti. I liked the painting very much and it taught me a great many new things. I went on working for many years like this, searching for my own language. At that time I was painting mostly still lifes because in them I could more easily find myself. I tried in these still-life paintings to go beyond the material objects and express in colour and form the thing which was vibrating within me, and I achieved some good results’ (Jawlensky, quoted in ‘Memoir dictated to Lisa Kümmel, Wiesbaden, 1937’, pp. 25-33 in M. Jawlensky, L. Pieroni-Jawlensky & A. Jawlensky, Alexej von Jawlensky, Catalogue Raisonné of the Oil Paintings, vol. I, 1890-1914, London, 1991, p. 30).
The flat surface and limited perspective of Jawlensky’s Blumenstilleben allow the subject to dominate the canvas, almost creating an abstract vision. In the bright, intense colours and deliberate eschewal of illusionistic perspective in the present work, Jawlensky’s appreciation of the Synthetism that Gauguin had promoted and embraced is evident.
Of the very few encounters Jawlensky had with other artists during 1915, the year of this present work’s execution, the one which had the greatest impact and proved to be the most fruitful was that with Ferdinand Hodler. This influence can be seen in the planes of colour - applied in conjunction to create compositional structure - which are virtually devoid of the bold, dark outlines that had formerly been a trademark of the Jawlensky’s Fauve-like work. The layering of fields of colour, many of them similar and placed in relation to each other without the use of strong borders, is evident in both Hodler’s landscapes and Jawlensky’s still-lifes.
Throughout Jawlensky’s career, the still-life genre had been a vehicle for experimentation with ideas and techniques. The still-life provided an important arena for discovery, and indeed self-discovery, as he sought an artistic language that was suited to his vision. The artist, in his recollections, discusses his discovery of the work of Paul Gauguin, which he saw during a visit to an acquaintance, had explained:
‘It was at his place that I saw for the first time a painting by Gauguin, the Rider on the Beach in Tahiti. I liked the painting very much and it taught me a great many new things. I went on working for many years like this, searching for my own language. At that time I was painting mostly still lifes because in them I could more easily find myself. I tried in these still-life paintings to go beyond the material objects and express in colour and form the thing which was vibrating within me, and I achieved some good results’ (Jawlensky, quoted in ‘Memoir dictated to Lisa Kümmel, Wiesbaden, 1937’, pp. 25-33 in M. Jawlensky, L. Pieroni-Jawlensky & A. Jawlensky, Alexej von Jawlensky, Catalogue Raisonné of the Oil Paintings, vol. I, 1890-1914, London, 1991, p. 30).
The flat surface and limited perspective of Jawlensky’s Blumenstilleben allow the subject to dominate the canvas, almost creating an abstract vision. In the bright, intense colours and deliberate eschewal of illusionistic perspective in the present work, Jawlensky’s appreciation of the Synthetism that Gauguin had promoted and embraced is evident.