Tag Archives: Joseph Mallord William Turner

John Ruskin and Modern Painters

John Ruskin goes hand-in-hand with the work of J.M.W Turner, because as critics ravaged Turner’s new, non-traditional approach to art, it was Ruskin who defended him and other artists like him, with the release of the book Modern Painters.

The well-reasoned critique within Modern Painters helped set the stage, or at least, provided enough rationale to new and different approaches to art, that it is a variable that needs to be accounted for in the transition from Romanticism to Impressionism.  There is much in the book that should be devoured with glee, but I want to point out a specific quote: There is a moral as well as material truth – a truth of impression as well as of form – of thought as well as of matter.

In other words, there is truth in perception as there is in reality.  A mountain exists in the landscape whether I see it or not. It is true by its nature. But when I do finally see that mountain, my impression of it is equally true, regardless of how it measures up to its nature.

What Ruskin states in Modern Painters is that an artist is obliged to be truthful to the thought of the mountain as to the mountain itself.  And if the techniques of paintings used to convey the truth of the thoughts run counter to the techniques employed by the Italian and Dutch masters of the seventeenth century, than so be it.   For an artist, it is truth one is after, not a specific technique or approach to the truth.

So when J.M.W. Turner showed this piece…

…yes, it was different, new, and non-traditional in its approach.  But from Ruskin’s point of view, Turner was being truthful to the impression of what he saw,  and was effective enough in his technique to convey it. This is, in part, what makes Turner great.

There’s far more to Modern Painters than that simple idea. His take down of the painters who we deem “The Masters” is, in of itself, masterful. From an art history perspective, however, just know that this book exists and that it challenged the notion of what “art” was at the time of its release in 1843.


A Few Paintings by Joseph Mallord William Turner

Moonlight, A Study at Millbank – J. M. W. Turner – 1797

Take a few moments to look at these paintings by Joseph Mallord William Turner (aka J.M.W. Turner aka William Turner). While the subjects are important, what I wish to point out is the techniques used, and how Turner’s approach to light evolved. When looking at these paintings, focus on the approach the artist took to convey his ideas, and how that translated into technique.


Mount Vesuvius in Eruption – J. M. W. Turner – 1817


The Decline of the Carthaginian Empire – J. M. W. Turner – 1817

The Devil’s Bridge at St. Gothard – J. M. W. Turner- 1841

Rain, Steam, and  Speed, The Great Western Railway – J. M. W. Turner – 1844

Looking into his catalog of work, the evolution is just as clear.  By the time he reached near the end of his light, Turner was experimenting, not just with light, but with how the light was conveyed on the canvas, and how the approach used could alter the scene or event being painted.  What makes Rain, Steam, and Speed, The Great Western Railway so intriguing to me, is not just the technique, but how it relates to the artist and his previous works.  Early on, he followed tradition. By the end, he was painting almost nondescript scenes, with areas left clouded or ambiguous, and only a few items on the canvas that could be recognizable. He was pushing and exceeded traditional boundaries that had been taught in the art academies.

What Was The Art World Like in 1850?

Venice, from the Porch of Madonna della Salute – Joseph Mallord William Turner


We, or should I say, I have a very specific idea on how non-famous artists get their pieces viewed today. Either they place them on the walls of any business that will have them – say, your local coffee shop or book store – or, the pieces are submitted for review to local galleries. There,  the artist will either have individual pieces that will become part of a collection that’s trying to convey a specific theme, or the artist themselves will be highlighted, with several to dozens of pieces are shown.

I have no idea how true this is today, and I admit that it’s a fiction created in my head based off of nothing more than minimal inputs from actual artists. I do know that the world today is more capitalistic, and that this drives the art scene, somewhat.

My point here is what it’s not. It’s not patronage (although this probably still occurs today), and it’s not a student getting a showing at the local art college (which definitely still occurs today, having been to a few of these myself). It’s this latter example I want to expand upon, because in the early 1800′s, the Art Academies of Europe were where an artist learned their craft, cultivated their talent, found patronage, and had their work shown at annual exhibits. It was the academy system that was the primary means of promoting art in Western Europe, and if one wished to succeed in the art world, inevitably an artist had to demonstrate whatever skills and talents that the leaders of each Art Academy felt was indicative of such.  In other words,  an artist had to meet someone else’s definition of what was acceptable, rather than meet their own. This is a broad interpretation of what likely happened, but it needs to be said for reasons I will cover later.

That’s not to say that those who held sway with the academies were less than liberal in their approaches.  Pieces that pushed the boundaries were featured a fair bit. For example, The Grand Canal, Venice by Joseph Mallord William Turner, pictured above, was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1835 is an exercise of imprecision*, a sacrifice of “reality” and technique in order to create a more balanced painting.

My point here is that the Academies weren’t necessarily stodgy, but there was a well worn path that one needed to follow. This is a topic for a different post. Right now, all we need to know is that the Academy system existed, and it was the primary means for an artist to succeed in the early to mid 1800′s.

(*The painting is based off of separate sketches that were drawn at different locations in Venice, combined into a single painting that creates a scene that doesn’t truly exist in our reality. This imperfect approach was seen as a detriment to Turner’s work by some, not an asset. The same could be say of his approach to color, as well as technique. While his subjects were classic romanticism subjects – at one point he believed that landscapes could “convey a full range of artistic, historical, and emotional meanings” – it was his techniques that separated him from other artists of the times. Looking at his piece from 1844 entitled Rain, Steam and Speed,  - The Great Western Railway, you can see he was doing things differently.  You can also see a better detailed reprint of his The Grand Canal, Venice here)