Comments on: William-Adolphe Bouguereau

By: cj

cj — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 02:46:15 +0000

Art by artists like Waterhouse and Bouguereau grabbed my attention first and foremost and I study and stare at the work, the style, the sheer sensualness, the depth, the tranquility, then I try to imagine what the artist was attempting to say without really saying anything.
I love the almost photographic quality of Bouguereau’s work and the fact that the reality of the subjects could almost walk off the paintings.
Bouguereau cold? Funny, I’ve always thought of his work as warm.
There is another artist, much less known, whose work I admire.
Different artists, different works … and I admire them all.
Although, I’m not a fan of the Impressionalists.

By: AleFuentes

AleFuentes — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 08:58:14 +0000

Painting is not literature. It is not supposed to have any thing to say. Painting is not supposed to be narrative, or decorative, or political. Painting is supposed to target the eyes of the observer first, the rest is just a side effect.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 21:58:44 +0000

I first heard of/encountered Bouguereau at my home gallery, the Mememorial Art Gallery of the University of Rochester in Upstate NY. I was doing an essay for art history and was absently meandering in search of a peice to compare to a Wendle Castle clock in the downstairs gallery- formalism or lack of it one of my requirents. Anyway, I turned a corner and suddenly had my mental (proverbial)rug ripped from under me. I had this notion that paintings that wee suposedly realistic would seem cold and lifeless, and that as much as I did not like abstract, they at least were bold with color sometimes, and you could not have it both ways. Here was “young priestess”- color so real she seemed narnian- more real than real- formal greek subject, realistic drawing, i almost expected her to say something or walk off the canvas or at least breathe. I was blown away, by this artist id never heard of with a weird name.
Scince then I have also been to the Chrysler in Norfolk,their ouguereau is not bad,but mine is better. And I think of her as mine, and I think of her as a person-not so much a thing of paint on canvas. Weird eh?

By: Mike Burke

Mike Burke — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:08:41 +0000

I have mixed feelings about Bouguereau. I can see that he was a painter with great skill but I have to agree with the comment that he had little to say. Far too many times now I’ve come away from seeing an image of a painting I had not seen before saying to myself “Yeah, but I’ve seen that story before – ‘A pretty girl in need of help or attention.’” My personal opinion of his body of work is that he made the transition from being a storyteller to being a pin-up artist.

I can cite only four of his paintings that I really enjoy seeing. Homer and His Guide, Return From the Harvest, Rest, and Meditation. That last is on the list mostly because a poster sized print of it was my first notice of his work.

I also have to disagree with the suggestion that Impressionism was the beginning of the end of Representational art. Just look at the works of the California Impressionists and the Soviet/Russian Impressionists. Their work seems very representational to me and the Soviet/Russian Impressionists carried on the Representational tradition throughout the 20th Century. I could say more but it would end up being a rant so I’d better stop here.

Thanks for another good posting.

By: Johan Baptiste

Johan Baptiste — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:22:07 +0000

As with many other painters before 1900`s try to judge Bouguereau for his technical abilities rather than the theme of the painting.

He was a really great painter, everyone here would love to paint as good as him but not everyone (like myself) would like to adhere to his subjects, of course that was his low point & everyone with a brain can see that.

Right now, no one in this planet can paint half good as he did so he must`ve done something right!

By: nessuno niente

nessuno niente — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:17:33 +0000

He is technically one of the best artists in his ability to reproduce what he sees (with his usual idealization, of course –there is nothing real about his peasants, they are too obviously models) but he has almost none of the imagination of a Rembrandt, for example. He is a man to whom God gave one of the finest talents and yet denied him any real art. He (again I have to stress that I would give anything to paint 1/10 as well as he)is proof that all the ability in the world will not make a true artist unless the “spark” is present. Van Gogh had none of his talent and yet was a thousand times more of an artist. An artist paints with his soul, not with paint (I am paraphrasing Chardin here).

By: Jorge Silva

Jorge Silva — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:43:31 +0000

Bouguereau to me is a God. He goes where no other artist take before, Pure Beauty, softness and gratitude. Is his glory ! life
represented as positiv way, good taste and
the respect by the Golden Rules of the Drawing and Painting.

By: Matt Aquino

Matt Aquino — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:53:24 +0000

I bought a framed picture(lithogragh?) of Nymphs and Satyr at a Sacramento gun show. I never saw it before and only found out later it was from a huge painting. This one I have is about 21″ by 15″ in an old frame. I don’t know if this is a rare lithograph or a modern poster or whatever. Did Bouguereau make smaller lithograph of this work and if so what are thier value? Any help is much appreciated. Matt Aquino 916-339-1013