Realism and Early Avant-garde

            By the middle 1800’s, the Industrial Revolution was increasing at an unprecedented rate all over Europe and the United States. Many machines that required energy and a solid structure increased the demand for coal and iron. Many of the rural populations moved to the newly formed urban societies to hopefully work in the factories and industrial plants. Thus the middle class was born, also known as the bourgeoisie. While the factories provided work, the conditions in the factories and mines were unsanitary and unhealthy. Many of the workers subject to these working conditions were women and children, which forced the government to create regulations to have a safer workplace. Although the regulations helped the factory workers to a certain degree, some socialist thinkers shunned the capitalistic exploitation of the workers for maximum profit. Men like Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels argued against the economic structure of capitalism and prophesized the eventual demise of the bourgeoisie to the proletariat, or the working class. In the art world the same movement was taking forth.

In France, the Academie des Beaux-Arts was considered the highest influence over what styles of art was the most significant. Many of the art works were historic paintings and depicted the struggles and journeys of heroic and important men. Then in 1831, an architect named Eugene Viollet-le-Duc brought the idea of avant-gardism to the art world. Avant-garde artists thought their work to be in advance of the current artwork at the time and would reflect the ideas of socialism. Viollet-le-Duc gathered a few independent artists to create art that was against the Academie Beaux- Art. He wanted artists to create controversy and new political and social ideas. From this came Realism, the depiction of life in the real and natural world. Many of the independent artists depicted the urban lower class in their daily activities. The art was not to celebrate a historic moment or commemorate an important figure; the art was simply to show the reality of the modern world. An artist that conveyed this was Gustave Courbet in his work of the Stone Breakers.

At the time the Stone Breakers was looked down upon by the bourgeoisie. The piece looks very innocent and simple from a certain perspective, but upon further examination the piece conveys ideas of socialism and the flawed social class of the bourgeoisie. In the Stone Breakers two men are in their occupation breaking stones for road gravel. At the time, this was considered the lowest type of work, so this piece automatically receives negative attention from the bourgeoisie as it does not portray a historic moment and being in a large scale it should have portrayed something historical. One of the men is old while the other is young; they are both faceless, purposely done this way to show the unimportance of the men. This was another detail that was frowned upon the bourgeoisie because their styles of art called for figures of grand importance and with recognizable faces. Courbet then pictured the men in pheasant-like clothing; the younger one in more modernized attire, making a political statement that the new generation will have a grim future in a capitalistic system. This was far from the styles the bourgeoisie promoted in their artwork. Many of their artworks promoted the wealth and prestige of individuals, and emphasized the importance of an intellectual and ambitious mind. Courbet fought against this by picturing a scene with two poor male figures of unimportant background with little to no education, working in the lowest of society’s occupations. By doing this, Courbet in a way made these anonymous men into some kind of heroes, which was far from the hero the bourgeoisie conveyed in their art. The composition of the piece and the use of color further carry the piece closer to realism. The figures are juxtaposed in awkward positions and the colors used for the piece are dark gloomy and give a feeling of exhaustion. Courbet was intent on creating a piece that was a real as possible to give the viewer no indication that this was a dramatized scene in history like in the bourgeoisie art. The viewer is to see the harsh reality of the lower class and the exploitation they are subjected to by the bourgeoisie.