Then he writes in a translated letter Share at the Tate, The fire was gradually lit, and the smoke and haze of industrial pollution returned to the sky. His work continued.
new research, Published on Tuesday In the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, we analyzed the variations in style and color in nearly 100 paintings by Monet and Joseph Mallord William (JMW) Turner. Known for his Impressionist art, Turner lived during the Industrial Revolution in Western Europe in the 18th century and his 19th century. century. The study found that over time, as industrial air pollution increased throughout Turner and Monet’s career, so did the skies in their paintings.
“Impressionist painters are known to be very sensitive to changes in light and changes in the environment,” said atmospheric scientist Anna Lee Albright, lead author of the study. She said, “It makes sense that we are very sensitive not only to natural changes in the environment, but also to man-made changes.”
The early industrial revolution changed the lives and skies of painters’ hometowns of London and Paris in unprecedented ways. Coal-burning factories created more job opportunities, but they also masked the atmosphere with harmful pollutants such as sulfur dioxide.
Much of the change is evident in Britain, which emitted nearly half of the world’s sulfur dioxide emissions between 1800 and 1850. London accounts for about 10% of UK emissions. Although Paris was slow to industrialize, after 1850 there was a marked increase in sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere.
Air pollutants can greatly alter the appearance of landscapes in ways that are visible to the naked eye. Aerosols can absorb and scatter radiation from the sun. Scattered radiation reduces the contrast between different objects, making them more blended. Aerosols also scatter all wavelengths of visible light, resulting in a whiter tint and more intense light during the day.
Turner, one of Britain’s most prolific painters, witnessed firsthand the dramatic development of his life. He was born in his 1775 in the age of sailing ships and died in 1851 in the age of steam and coal.
One of his most famous works, Rain, Steam and Speed — The Great Western Railway, depicts trains of the time. State-of-the-art engineering marvels made possible People are traveling at unprecedented speeds and are about to be overrun by Britain’s fastest land mammal, the hare. However, the details in this painting were mostly difficult to discern. Haze and fog obscure much of the painting, indicating increasing air pollution.
Studies show that the haze in this painting was no fluke or a one-off event. The team examined Turner’s 60 paintings from 1796 to his 1850 and Monet’s 38 paintings from 1864 to his 1901. Lower contrast means more hazy conditions. They also examined haze intensity by measuring the level of whiteness. Generally, whiter shades indicate more haze.
Researchers found that about 61% of the change in contrast in the painting was largely dependent on the increase in sulfur dioxide concentration during that period. (They also found a trend for whiter shades, but put less emphasis on these results because the pigments in the paintings themselves can fade over time.)
Visual changes are drastic.
Turner’s “Apulia in search of AprusIn his 1814 drawing, the sharper edges and clear sky are easily discernible. Hazy skies dominate in Rain, Steam and Speed — The Great Western Railway, painted 30 years later. Meanwhile, his sulfur dioxide emissions have more than doubled.
The beginning and end of Monet’s career are also different.his 1867 “Santo Address” in stark contrast to him Houses of Parliament The series began around 1899, when he spent several months on and off in London.
The team also assessed visibility, the distance at which an object was clearly visible, and before 1830 Turner’s clear and cloudy paintings had an average visibility of about 25 kilometers, compared to 10 kilometers after 1830. was found to decrease to , the farthest visible object was estimated to be about 1 kilometer away.
“Impressionism is often contrasted with realism, but our results underscore that Turner and Monet’s Impressionist work also captures a particular reality,” says co-author climate scientist and Harvard University professor. Professor Peter Hoyvers says: “Specifically, Turner and Monet seem to have shown realistically how sunlight passes through smoke and clouds.”
Perhaps some would argue that Turner and Monet’s painting styles changed over the decades, giving rise to what we now call Impressionist art. We also analyzed the contrast and intensity of another 18 paintings by four other Parisian Impressionist artists (James Whistler, Gustave Caillebotte, Camille Pissarro, and Berthe Morisot). They found the same result: the visibility of the painting decreased as outside air pollution increased.
“Different artists paint in more similar ways when exposed to similar environmental conditions,” says Albright, who is based at the Ecole Normale Superieur in Paris.
In its abstract, the study also dismissed a possible theory that Turner and Monet’s vision deteriorated as they got older, which could have affected their ability to draw clear landscapes. But Turner was able to render the foreground objects of the painting in sharp detail, while also successfully blurring the background objects, Albright said. Monet also did not develop cataracts until decades after he began painting Impressionists.
Ophthalmologists also work on an artist’s vision, the author said in an interview. Michael Marmore, Professor of Ophthalmology at Stanford University, Said: “Monet wasn’t short-sighted. Turner didn’t have cataracts.”
Moreover, the letters Monet wrote to his wife while living in London provide compelling evidence of his keen awareness of the changes in his surroundings. In some letters he even laments the lack of new industries to inspire his creativity.
Art historian James Rubin, who was not involved in the study, said the study was an interesting analysis of pigment and blur progression.
“This study … provides an empirical basis for what art historians have observed,” said Rubin, professor emeritus of art history. Stony Brook University, State University of New York. “These artists were certainly interested in atmospheric change and were in a period of change.”
Rubin added that both artists drew inspiration from the changing environment around them, but certainly from different perspectives.Turner was generally anti-modern. Monet was ready to celebrate modernity and it signaled change for him.
For example, Rubin said it is now commonly understood that “Rain, Steam, Speed - The Great Western Railway” is not a celebration of new technology.
“Anyone who looks at a train and sees it as nothing more than a furnace on wheels,” he said. “A lot of people were afraid of the speed these engines could go, about 35 mph.”
By contrast, Monet revels in the aesthetic effects of sunlight bouncing off clouds in polluted air, “celebrating the spectacle of modern change,” said Rubin.
Depicting environmental changes and meteorology in painting is nothing new.Some meteorologists believe that Edvard Munch’s “scream” It represents the clouds in the polar stratosphere.some have identified “Moonrise” by Vincent van Gogh On July 13, 1889, at exactly 9:08 p.m., in Saint-Rémy-de-Provence, France. Turner’s other painting accurately depicts a sunset during a volcanic eruption, appearing redder due to scattering by the aerosol-laden stratosphere.
Atmospheric scientist Fred Plata analyzed meteorology In Munch’s “Cry,” he states that the research reinforces his view that “art and science are far more correlated than most people believe.”
Albright said the study was, to her knowledge, “the first to look at man-made environmental change and how artists can portray it on canvas,” and the passage of time. said with
Artists and others living in London and Paris at the time “were aware of changes in air pollution and were serious about those changes,” Albright said. “Perhaps this is a kind of parallel to today in how society and artists respond to these unprecedented changes we are going through,” she said.