Saturday, April 13, 2013

Luigi Lucioni


"Clouds Over Equinox,"1935,Oil on Canvas,26x47",Gerald Peters Gallery

One of my favorite 20th Century painters is Luigi Lucioni, who created meticulous still lifes, landscapes and portraits in a highly personal manner that he likened to classical realism derived from his study and worship of the early Italian Renaissance masters.  Lucioni also produced masterful etchings and watercolors that brilliantly showcase his affinity for precise line work.


“Resting Athlete,1938,Oil on Canvas,43 ½ x 48",Gerald Peters Gallery
One goofy reason I like this wonderful painter is because it’s easy to remember his dates.  Born in 1900 in Malante, Italy, moved with his parents to America in 1910 and died in New York City in 1988.  Painters love to check the dates on other painters to see how they measure up with their own creative progress.  He did that one before he was 30?  Holy Cow!  I’m 100 years old and I’ve accomplished nothing!  When a painter’s career straddles the start of a century, you have to “do the math” in a serious way to figure out their career landmarks.

I also like the fact that Lucioni had absolutely no interest at all in photography, even though his work was often described unknowingly as “photographic.”  I like the fact that his painstaking style was consistent in all the work he produced.  I like the fact that he loved opera, which in his case led him to hobnobbing with a lot of celebrities, including Henry Fonda, who received some painting instruction from him.  I didn’t like learning, though, that Lucioni came to dislike Rubens and other brush stroke painters, even though his first painting teacher was William Starkweather, who had studied with Joaquin Sorolla.


“Pattern of Trees,”1943,Watercolor,13x20 ½",www.antiques.com
But most sincerely, I am in awe of Lucioni’s superb draftsmanship, and fascinated by his highly personal choices regarding color, subject matter and design, the latter under the early influence of the skewed perspectives of Cezanne, whom he considered a great artist.   But he loved most the early Italians, especially Piero della Francesca, for their purity of line and form.

I’ve never seen another still life painter use such distinctive, harmonious color combinations to such impressive effect on objects that are so perfectly rendered from nature.  He loved browns, ochres, lemon and dusty yellows, olive and deep greens and mauves, and obviously gave careful consideration to the color scheme in planning his extremely realistic works.  No brown sauce or commonplace color for him.


Harmony in Minor Key,c. 1974,Oil on Canvas,22x26",www.godelfineart.com
His tabletop still lifes feature ordinary, often unusual household objects and superbly painted draperies with a multitude of folds in them.  Folds are very hard to paint convincingly, and most of us eliminate them whenever possible.  That’s one reason you see so many flat backgrounds in works done by today’s painters.  “Keep it simple” could be construed to be the mantra of the lazy painter.  I’ve been advised on several occasions to put more draperies in my own still lifes, but I paint them only once in a great while because of the difficulty in getting the folds to look right.  Lucioni obviously embraced the challenge of painting folds, a common task for the early Italians.

"Dominant Colors,"1956,Oil on Canvas,20x28",www.antiques.com
In Lucioni’s work, a single lemon or a small grouping of fruit placed judiciously often serve as significant color accents in the prevailing tonal theme.   He didn’t paint the ordinary very often.  For example, he frequently painted the devil out of a bouquet of dried dieffenbachia leaves in an earthenware jug or a potted, green dieffenbachia in the midst of cascading drapery, finding beauty in the overall color scheme he selected.  He liked to paint oddly shaped pots or bottles and place things on their side for design purposes. 

Many second-rate artists like to flippantly respond “a lifetime,” when innocently asked how long it takes them to finish a painting.  But we are told that Lucioni worked nearly a month on each still life.  He was obsessed with the beauty of accurate line and form, and he had the patience to study and render in exacting detail all the essential facts from nature that would bring life to his paintings. 

Rendering crockery, fruit and other objects with well-defined contours, as Lucioni did, can sometimes result in a “cut-out” look, an opinion of some of my painter friends about his work.  But I think his sharp contours are perfectly in keeping with his reverence for the line work of the early Italians, and all the objects he paints sit comfortably in their artfully staged environments.

Lucioni never tried to fool himself or the viewer with tricks to overcome drawing difficulties, like smudging form into form, or employing the much-abused concept of lost and found edges so fashionable with many of today’s realists, who misinterpret their occasional use by the older painters.  He tackled the most difficult passages, such as where shadows and cast shadows of juxtaposed objects come together, and succeeded in keeping separate the firm contours of each object, just the way close observation with the human eye would reveal.  


“Village of Stowe, Vt.,”1931,Oil on Canvas,23 ½x33 ½",Minneapolis Institute of Arts
Lucioni’s attractive, airy Vermont landscapes, with their precisely outlined birch trees and barns and distant hilltops, stand apart from those executed by most other landscape painters, who adopt a broader, less focused manner of painting the great outdoors.   His landscape etchings and watercolors most clearly exhibit his love of the precise line.

Lucioni spent summers in Vermont and the rest of the year in New York City, painting seven days a week, holidays included, with opera music playing in the background.  By his own account, Lucioni painted every day from 9 a.m until noon and from 1 p.m until 4.  “I enjoy painting, so for me painting is not work,” he once said.  When he wasn’t working at his art, he enjoyed the city’s rich musical life and the companionship of his beloved Scottish terrier, the two other great loves of his life.


“Two Silos,”Etching,1942,Indianapolis Museum of Art

Not many people are familiar with Lucioni’s art these days.  A woman who moved to Vermont after art school didn’t know he painted still lifes.  And I didn’t know he painted landscapes until I saw a show of his work at the Richard York Gallery in 1991.   His etchings and watercolors were a complete surprise to me until a few years ago.  Part of the reason may be that he kept to himself during his long career as an artist, working right up until the very end.  He had few artist friends, preferring the company of musicians, and had long given up on entering juried competitions.  “I find artists get along better if they are separate rather than together,” he once said.  “There's always a kind of jealousy and all that sort of thing you know.”

The story was quite different early in his career.  During the Great Depression, when other artists were working for the WPA to get by, Lucioni was selling every one of his carefully crafted paintings.  He had his first solo exhibition in 1927 at the Ferargil Gallery in New York City.  And in 1932, he became the youngest contemporary painter to have a work purchased by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, a still life titled “Pears with Pewter.”

During an oral history interview conducted by Robert Brown on July 6, 1971 for the Smithsonian Institution’s Archives of American Art, Lucioni had some interesting things to say about Realist painting and photography.

Lucioni said he tried to find “the thing that makes it real without copying all the little trivial things.  People say I paint every leaf on the tree. I don't…I paint what I think is there.  I mean I try to make it look as though it belonged there, but very often when people look at my landscapes and look at the painting I am doing, ‘Oh, you changed this, you changed that,’ they don't realize that…you can't cope with nature, as you know, and therefore you can't put in all the little things that nature can do so easily and you can't. So you have to get the essentials of these things and that is my idea of realism…for me nature is the greatest artist that ever lived, you know, and all the great artists have tried to follow nature, well, [nature] can do so many things that a brush can't do, I mean, for instance, how can you paint, well to begin with you can't paint sunsets, you can't paint sunrises, you paint a blue sky, but if you paint it blue it looks absolutely opaque where nature can have it transparent. Nature is a great, great inspirer, but also a terrible tease for an artist, but you do the best you can.”


 "Steeple Through the Birches,”1977-79,Oil on Canvas,23x19",www.artfact.com
He said his realism is “not a copy of nature, although lots of people think so. But let them think so, it's alright. But the realism is something else. First of all, you have to know what a thing looks like, what a thing is made of…I studied the things that I painted, I studied the trees, I'd go and look at them up close and then when I would go back I'd try to simplify by a line or two. It doesn't always come off.  But you try awfully hard to make a thing look as though it was casual.  But I don't think there is anything casual in art.”

He said the goal of his carefully planned still life paintings is to make the objects within “as absolutely alive as possible…even more alive than they really do look like to you when you are looking at them.”

Asked how his work compares to photography, Lucioni replied:

“I don't think it compares with photography at all. People say, ‘Oh you can take a photograph and make it look as good.’ You just can't, to begin with. I don't think realism and photography have anything in common, for my point of view, I may be wrong. In fact, I am really not a good photographer. I can't take good snapshots or anything, and I never. . .People say, ‘oh we can do that from a photograph.’ I never work from photographs. I couldn't possibly work from a photograph…I cannot imagine a tree. I have to study, I have to be in front of it in order to get it. See, that's one of my limitations…you can't imagine something that you just don't know. I mean, you have to know about it. But there are a lot of people who do work from memory, but I am no good at that, I can't do that. I mean, it's as I say, it's my limitation, but it's me and there's nothing I can do about it. I am too old now to change, and I don't know if I would want to change or not.”

I understand completely this immensely gifted artist’s sincere, fumbling attempts to describe the nearly indescribable act of painting from nature, which stirs up so much emotion.  And I’m extremely happy to know that we share many of the same feelings about the work.  Like Lucioni, all I want to do is make the things I paint look real on canvas.  And I, too, am trying to do the best I can.