What is beauty? Read:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/luna...rks/puskin.htm

"When we speak of the beauty of a work of art, we always mean the strength of its influence, the captivating nature of the work, its ability to hold our interest, to make us happy, to illuminate our consciousness.

All "beauty" has specifically this intent. In uttering the word "beauty" one strives to indicate the objective quality in nature or in a work of art which he believes to be the reason for his elated mood, his emotional uplift.

From a narrow point of view, beauty reduces itself to those elements in nature or in art which are pleasant to the senses, or into correct, i.e. easily-grasped, combination (design, melody, harmony, rhythm, etc.), or into pleasing presentations of physical perfection, vital strength, health, intellectual brilliance, moral fascination, etc.

On the other hand, we know well enough that art does not reduce itself merely to this type of beauty. Art can include elements which from this narrow viewpoint are unbeautiful or downright ugly. Art, as Aristotle pointed out in his day, deals also with ashes, with pain, with unusually accurate reproductions of repelling phases of life (Flaubert). And all this the artist can nevertheless surmount. Whether they depict the stripped carcass of a bull or a brutal scuffle of warriors, Rembrandt or Leonardo da Vinci attain heights of beauty and compel us to exclaim--"excellent !" A powerful sensation, which overcomes the reader, compels him to see the world in a new light, makes him think differently of the world and thus moulds his world-outlook, this essentially is beauty. The more subtle it is, the more novel it is, the further it departs from elementary prettiness--the more we delight in it, for its influence operates in the most difficult realms.

Now for shortcomings. A shortcoming is that which repels us, that which reveals the artist's weakness, betrays his inability to cope with his task, shows that due to his impotence, or in order to be clever, he falsifies reality, or tells us things which are extraneous to us and therefore bore us".


And study beauty from Sargent. There are some patterns of design elements in Sargent's group portraits.
Sargent did not tell what is his scheme. Maybe he thinks that a painting should not be accompanied by words that explain everything.

I have not seen any paintings "accompanied by words" but wonder why it would be in appropriate. Do titles add or detract in any way? What is the point?

Dear Jim:
It might be an unclear verbage. English is my third language after Russian.
I just noticed a sculpture with words.
Many photographers in China tell in what way they shoot.
Some portrait painters rarely reveal the detail of their design, technique, etc. Fechin, an inventor, didn't answer a question by a fellow Russian artist who was busy in painting all over the world.

"Cecilia Beaux vs. J S sargent" is listed #1 in this Google search.

"The information we do have has come from examination of his pictures and direct analysis of his paint. The same commonly available range of pigments is seen in virtually all of the Tate's later portraits and on existing palettes. The range is quite wide but does not include every pigment available at that time. He regularly used Mars yellow (a synthetic iron oxide) and cadmium yellow; viridian and emerald green, sometimes mixed; vermilion and Mars red, both alone and mixed; madder; synthetic ultramarine or cobalt blue; and ivory black, sienna, and Mars brown. The dark backgrounds of many portraits include a mixture of ivory black, Mars brown,and a generous quantity of paint medium: a combination that produces a color similar to the traditional Van Dyke brown. A pale shade of chrome yellow, cerulean blue, red lead, cadmium red, and cobalt violet were found on occasion, but not in every portrait examined. There is a more limited selection of blue and yellow pigments in the later portraits than in the earlier ones. This narrow range of blues,yellows, and greens in his palette went some way to create a color harmony and to fix a cool or a warm overall tone to each painting.
Sargent mixed lighter colors such as flesh tones by adding to lead white, vermilion, and a selection of other pigments including bone black, on occasion rose madder, and even green viridian. Mixing them together roughly on the palette, he then worked them into and onto adjacent brush strokes on the canvas to give more subtle variations in tone."

(Jacqueline Ridge and Joyce Townsend; "How Sargent Made it Look Easy"; American Artist magazine; August, 1999, page 29)

Search Wikimedia
Find out some analyzing of portraits.

http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/...arley_Boit.htm

John Singer Sargent's Daughters of Edward Darley Boit

By: Natasha Wallace

Thanks for posting this, SB. I'm always interested in reading what makes other artists paint the way they do.

Thank you!
View:
http://www.brynmawr.edu/library/exhi...portrait2.html

A secret---Why Sargent feels he is like a rabbit?

Powerful statement
 

What a powerful and inspirational sentence. Thank you SB for posting all this info on Sargent.

I recenlty saw this painting in the Boston Museum and what was so interesting to me was that the two vases, which were right there next to the painting, were so much more complex than the vases in the painting. At first I wasn't even sure they were the same vases. Sargent had painted only the essence of the vases, not every single little tiny detail. Something worthwhile for me to remember!

Joan

Joan: I had a same thought as you. I suspected that the flower/pattern inspired Sargent's brush strokes, which is not true.
I'd like to know the differences between his predecessors and him: Is he the first one to develop that kind of brush stroke,or he refined?

Yes Virginia there is :santa: (in Baltimore)
There is a clue in this painting, http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/...ur_Doctors.htm[url]
for the possible answer for the question: how can we explain that Sargent painted one figure in dark?

I give! What reason did Sargent give for having one figure in the dark?

Did Sargent ever say? . . . or is this all conjecture?

Jim and Steven:
Thanks for your interest in this post. A long term game from this post will benefit more for SOG and participants, so I'll wait for more discussion , while consulting with scholars, masters.
It's conjecture, but in "Sargent's later portrait", one can find an instance of what Sargent's own thought on a group portrait.
"Conjuncture", maybe, explain part of it.

This new discussion was noticed by Yahoo searching engine.

Here is the quotation of Mao that Mr. Clinton likes:
"you want to know the taste of a pear, you must change the pear by eating it yourself. If you want to know the theory and methods of revolution, you must take part in revolution. All genuine knowledge originates in direct experience".

I believe that Sargent made the mouth, and all other things "wrong" because he wanted us to open our eyes to the divine variations of life i general.

And then he had a reputation to live up to.

Allan

Alan:
Good point!
Sargent knows four languages, plus another one, musical language.
Stubborn or clever, I spent a lot of care on analyzing English words as a way of studying art. Many thanks to Cynthia, whose deed enables me for having some time to do this, in return, I hope to donate some income from my future book to Forum.

http://www.jssgallery.org/Resources/Forum/Kidman4.htm

Commemorate Sargent's 150 birthday
...... the most impressive one for me:http://jssgallery.org/Paintings/Youn...ng_a_White.htm

What I noticed, Jim, is that clue--a globe in that portrait of four doctors. More clearly, if you look at a world map, which contain an enigma that is so interesting.

Mike: You are amazing to find those two strikingly similar master pieces.
Steven: Sketch diary is necessary for us.

Why did Sargent paint Madame X's face in profile?

Li Bai, Mao Zedong and Sargent
 

30 years ago, Sept.9th. on Chinese "the Moon Festival", Mao passed away.
My grandfather was with Mao and about ten other students on a Moon Day party. When asked about future plan, proposals, like to run for a senator, to be a scholar or a teacher, were looked down by Mao, who disclosed his own idea: Rebelling, "cheng wang bai kou", ( if successful, one would be the king, otherwise he would be labeled as a bandit).
Li Bai is the the foremost Chinese poet. Now these two great poets meet Sargent in the moon, talking about what they share a common activity attributed partly for their uprupt rising in fame. What do you think?

..............................

What made them so great?
That "starts under (their) feet", Li Bai, Mao and Sargent traveled extensively in their youth.

Compare Li Bai's
The Hard Road
Pure wine costs, for the golden cup, ten thousand coppers a flagon,
And a jade plate of dainty food calls for million coins.
I fling aside my food-sticks and cup, I cannot eat nor drink...
I pull out my dagger, I peer four ways in vain.
I would cross the Yellow River, but ice chokes the ferry;
I would climb the Tai-hang Mountains, but the sky is blind with snow..
I would sit and poise a fishing-pole, lazy by a brook --
But I suddenly dream of riding a boat, sailing for the sun...
Journeying is hard,
Journeying is hard.
There are many turnings --
Which am I to follow?...
I will mount a long wind some day and break the heavy waves
And set my cloudy sail straight and bridge the deep, deep sea

With Mao's "The Long March":
The Red Army fears not these prodigious distant campaigns,
A thousand mountains, ten thousand rivers, they look upon as pleasantly usual.
The tortuous Five ranges are but ripples they leap,
The dread crests of Wumeng, mud dumps under their heels.
Warm are the fog-wrapped cliffs lapped by the Golden Sands river,
Cold were the iron chains spanning the Dadu stream.
How much laughter amid the unending snows of Minshan,
And when the Three Armies had crossed, smile were on all their faces.

Two of Sargent's works are in display at the Mint Museum, Charlotte, till 31th, Dec., 2006.

I was in front of this original painting for 6 hours:
http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/..._Pailleron.htm
Please find out what parts bother your eyes in above web image.

Gosh, SB, 6 hours in front of this painting?

After 6 minutes I can find nothing that "bothers my eye" in this painting - perhaps something in the original painting does not appear in the digital photo of this portrait?.

Please explain the point you are trying to make here.

Hee hair and the shadow made by the hair is troubling. All is so masterfully done detail, value but the hair looks like a wash-in or should I say washe-out. Comparing the hands to the face it seems not to rime. She was painted inside sitting on a bar type stool made too look outside.

It bothers me that I didn't paint it.

Well, I deleted my previous post because I confused this painting with another one.

I'd like to see the original. But that's not my favorite amongs Sargent's work. Here is a better photo.

Thank you all for your interest!
Karin:
The Mint Museum (70 years old this year) has internet, so helpful.
Bonfim:
This photo is close to the original, so the hair color in the first image is not right. Some parts, like the white area besides her head is due to reflection of light.
This show will be in Sarasota, FL, starts on Feb. 6.

I am in sympathy with Claudemir on this painting which is not among my favorite Sargent works either. For the many of us who hold Sargent with the highest regard it is very difficult to note anything about his efforts that seem to question his choices and execution. The painting of Madame Edougard Pailleron however has left me with a few questions. It is puzzling that Madame seems to be balancing on one leg or preparing to do a dance or jig of some kind. She seems to be a cut out and placed in an open field and is unlike most of Sargent

Thanks!
Try view this digital and voice your opioning.
http://www.corcoran.org/collection/h...ults.asp?ID=68

I read the blurb on your url avove. It was interesting until I read:

"...Sargent

Well, that's Sargent's first full-figure portrait, he improved a lot after that.

This is exquisite and masterfully done! The values make each part of the painting dance even though the subject was in a seated position while painted. The light of the day so delicately placed around the head not to distract but to eluminate the subjects features. There is detail in every section yet perfectly balanced and again the subject and clothing dominating. The dress, the hands are simply breath taking. The edges lost found sharp receding, wow! That detail in the dress just blows my mind. There is so, so much one can learn from this example. What I would not give to have a chance to study it! Even to have a high rez would be a treat.

SB thanks for bringing this one to view.

Sargent's periodicity
 

You may never know Sargent's "code", but may find out his periodicity in his fortune. By doing so you can say that those Sargent scholars are not free from oversight.

Matthew 7:8
For everyone who keeps on asking receives; and he who keeps on seeking finds; and to him who keeps on knocking, [the door] will be opened.

Sargent & Pavarotti

Come Back To Sorrento...

http://www.lucianopavarotti.com/

http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/...am_Sisters.htm

http://threes.com/cms/index.php?opti...1837&Itemid=42

http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/p...venue=7&id=137

Gold vs. natural gas hydrate
 

By homonym, the word "Sargent" is "alluvial gold " in Chinese.
I liken Van Gogh to "combustible ice"--a kind of natural gas hydrate:It is formed by natural gas and water in conditions of high pressure and low temperature. It looks like ice and can be lit up like solid ethanol, hence the name "combustible ice".
http://english.people.com.cn/200706/...05_381172.html