Behold! The Birth of Impressionism

The birth of Impressionism is as much as a loss as it is a win. But first, we need to begin with why impressionism was created in order to go in to detail about the pros and cons. The time period was around 1850-1900, and one of the greatest inventions was created: The camera. The camera allowed us to capture any moment of time in a matter of minutes. Which was great, except for the fact that now what were painters supposed to do? Around the birth of the camera came the birth of incredibly realistic and moving paintings, ones that if seen one would think was simply a photograph itself.

Let’s take these paintings by Marie Rosalie Bonheur; the image is simply breathtaking with its accuracy in realism. If standing at a far away distance one would think that it was a photograph.

So why are there so few paintings like these? Well we can thank the camera for that. With the birth of the camera there was no need for super realistic paintings – those who weren't artists didn't see the beauty within it, it was just a waste of time to them since they could just capture any moment with the camera.

Because of this painters needed a new way of making money; they couldn’t just lose their job entirely. And so Impressionism was born; a way for painters to continue to do what they love and what they’re best at, but in order to stabilize an income if they were one of the lucky ones of the art realm.

Painters needed something different in order for their paintings to sell, something that hasn’t been done yet. So since a camera is able to capture a moment in time down to the last detail, its only logical that the painter reversed that and took an image and reduced its accuracy to realism and made something new.

But how and why did impressionism stick? It was because impressionist artists combined two things together - realism and its opposite, in order to create a new type of art. If an impressionist painting is looked up close, the first thing you would notice is the direction of the strokes, the lines, the texture. But from far away it looks as though the image could be a realistic painting. Impressionistic paintings had their own charm that was greatly accepted into their time period at the time - though very short lived.

(Jean-Louis Ernest Meissonier - Dragon a Cheval 1870-91)

So why and how is this a win and a loss? A win is that we gave birth to a new art movement, one that was incredibly different yet still exposed raw talent. The natural artist fended for himself in order to find a way to have a sufficient income as well as stick to what they do best. But here's where the loss comes in: we lose the promotion and continuation of the realistic paintings such as the ones done by Marie Rosalie Bonheur, which were in most cases the outright determination of true talent.

-Athena Loizos