The history of czech landscape painting
In this short essey, we would like to very briefly summarise the development of Czech landscape painting. The subject is so broad that we have to reduce it to the most important periods and most significant representatives.
Landscape, as an individual branche of painting, first appears in late renaissance, at the court of a great patron and late 16th century mannerism ruler par excellence, Emperor Rudolph II. From his period, we should notice at least the drawings of Roaland Savery, whose art is close to Brueghel´s, and the work of engraver Egidius Sadeller.
We can find landscape in late beroque, for instance in the work of J.R. Bys and J.J. Heermann, commonly with human or animal facade, although perhaps the only painter who can be, with certain reservation, considered a landscape painter, was the rococo master of Venetia-like gallant scenes Norbert Grund. We should not forget to mention the work of decorater an wall painter of idealized Roman landscape Antonín Tuvora, a representative of Wien-orientated classicism.
Although the 19th century is considered the golden age of landscape, its development remained delayed and much dependent on middle-European models for a long time, practically untouched by western example of artists like Constable or Turner. Romanticism mixed up with the second rococo and culminated in the work of Josef Navrátil. Perfect and lively grasp of formal means and marvellous atmosphere are the dominant features of his small watercolours, which he made besides other works in the 1830´s.
Most view-of-a-town and romantic landscape painters of the period did not manage to overcome the limits of topographical description and rigid academism, not excluding Josef Mánes, who was usually respected as the founder of Czech landscape painting. His spontaneous studies show a lot more vivacity than his studio paintings and unintentionally adumbrate the commencement of a new generation. Undoubtedly, his son Josef Mánes reached much higher artistic level.
Another important representative of romanticism is antimely deceased Adolf Kosárek. Kosárek outdid his generation in many aspects not only in his brilliant technique, also in the emotional expression of his idealised compositions.
The second half of the 19th century was long influenced by late romanticism, respectively neoromanticism. Landscape painting was dependent on Haushofer´s example he taught at Prague Academy and himself painted romantic mountainous pictures, obviously a reminder of the Alps in his homeland, where he took his students to paint. It took years until there appeared real artistic personalities of Julius Mařák and Antonín Chittussi. The first of them, whose brilliant technique matches him with his fellow Bedřich Havránek, soon achieved respect in the whole Habsburg monarchy and was given the most prestigeous demands. Mařák later became the leading personality at the lanscape class of the Prague Academy, where he passed on his great experience and human qualities. He even found finantial support for his students. The travels to the surroundings of Okoř were favourite events of his school, where the best Czech landscape painters were about to grow. Mařák himself, excellent in drawing, engraving and, of course, painting, was long influenced by temporary conventions, he always made his paintings in the studio according to previous studies as late as in 1890s. So his colours ale always united by one dominant tone. Later his students influence led to more modern expression of his work. His paintings of the memorable places for the National Theatre seem to be a bit mannered, in keeping with temporary fancy for fervour. Although Mařák created, especially during the later part of his life, an impressive legacy, there is no wonder that his young students were much impressed also by so different Antonín Cittusi. Shortly after his death, in 1992, there was an exhibition of his paintings in Prague. Chittussi had lived in France and learned a lot in Barbizon, especially painting the daily light colours. Although the direct influence of Daubigny or Corot can be traced in his work, Cittussi´s smaller things, simple views of surrounding landscape, painte d spontaneously outdoor, his courageous sketchy brushwork and well-conveyed, neat colours, certainly struck the sensitivity of the young generation, their love for nature and its moods. Late Chittussi´s work lacks previous natural easinness. Mistakenly chosen too large scales, seldom suitable for such intuitive approach, caused rigid results, which put a sheadow on his otherwise masterly style. His contemporary Vilém Riedl, who is practically unknown in our country for he spent most of his life in France, was probably even better.
The most famous era of czech landscape comes with the work of Mařák´s students Antonín Slavíček, František Kaván, Otakar Lebeda and others. In my opinion, the best quality of this generation is their realistic, but full of empathy, approach to painting.They were often critical to French impressionism, which Slavíček claimed to be too programme-bound, and so stressing the form. Many theorists considered Slavíček a representative of Czech impressionism, perhaps due to his occasionally similar technique, but if we compare the late work of Slavíček (he died at the age of fourty) and the late work of Monet, the difference is more than apparent. Intuitive Slavíček was far more conserned by the genius loci of the country, its moods, bitterness, and therefore is rather similar to emotive russian Peredvishniki artists, though his technique is very modern. There is much more than sensualism in his art and although light is often an important part of his paintings, which he made mostly outdoor, it seldom resembles the decorative effect of late Monet´s pieces. Slavíček and his fellows never really accepted modern French trends, on the contrary of the enthusiastic influential esseist, literary and art reviewer, F.X. ¦alda, who never fully understood them. Their reservance was never of the intellectual or academic kind, their nature simply did not really accept the darwinistic opinion on the develpment of art, which implies that the recent trends are superior. Let me mention connected opinions of completely different artists. Paul Gaugin said that there was no development of art, no old or modern art, and Kandinski, who said that form is like a glove but the quality is the hand in it, so there can be as well empty gloves in modern art and full gloves in realism. Slavíček and Lebeda, the two most talented leaders of th generation, soon tragically died and others stayed on the margin of public interest until the second world war.
The period of the first republic was a time of great boom of Czech art, because it had had a long and excellent tradition, schools, respect abroad, great personalities. But landscape was not so much of an interest, it mostly remained a pretext of formal constructions under the influence of Cézanne or the Cubists, or inspired by expressionism tried to follow some aspects of Slavíček. The best known representatives of landscape expressionism are Vojtěch Sedláček, Karel Boháček and robust Václav Rabas, all linked by simple rural motives. Oldřich Bla·íček, another member of the generation, familiar with old masterpieces and well-equipped with his techjnique, became one of the most favourite painters of the mid-20th century, despite his paintings seldom have the feel of Slavíček´s generation.
The post-war period was concerned by different problems and theorists supporting postmodernism mistakenly called landscape descriptive realism. Perhaps this contributes to the fact that both the public and artists take it as an old-fashioned, marginal affair, worth to one´s sentiment but seldom to serious interest. We must hope that it will change for as far as land exists, landscape painting will have its irreplecable importance.