A New look at Nature
Farairan magazine, Nos. 3&4,Spring & Summer 2000
By : Ru’in Pakbaz
The Tehran Museum of Contemporary Arts held an exhibition of a collection of works of modern Iranian artists entitled “A New Look at Nature” during the summer of 1999. In this exhibition, a wide spectrum of different attitudes towards nature (landscapes, plants and objects) ranging from realism to symbolism to abstraction was on show. What connected the different experiences was a new understanding of the natural world beyond imitative art. How has this evolution in “seeing” nature emerged and what is its relation to modern aesthetics?
The painter of our time has left behind a long history of traditions in representing the facets of nature. In the distant past, simplified, symbolic shapes of mountains, rivers or trees appeared now and then in the background of mythological, religious, commemorative and other paintings. It seems that the creators of this type of image took the presence of human beings in this natural environment for granted. However, centuries had to pass before the relation between things and their situation in space and with respect to light was taken into consideration and the painting of landscapes or still-lifes appeared. The history of art shows that, even in this particular approach to the natural world, mere imitation of external appearances was not a certainty.
It appears that the Chinese painters began the experience of landscape painting earlier than the Europeans. In ancient China, even before the formation of the Chan (Zen) sect, the subject matter of “mountain and water” was put forth by literary persons acquainted with art. A strong literary tradition based on the communion of Taoism with nature came into being and then became intermingled with Buddhist tenets, beckoning followers into chosen seclusion and exploration of forests, rivers and mountains. This introspection into nature strengthened the foundations of Chinese landscape painting. Ink painting of the Sung period was the most brilliant expression of the mystic thinking of Chinese artists. The artist expressed the essence of the reality he saw around him with the least of pictorial means and in the most meditated brushstrokes. His intended concepts became contained within a single bamboo reed or a few plum blossoms, i.e., in the slightest manifestations of the mysterious life extending throughout nature. He depicted the human being as a minute part of the wide world, and nature in its various atmospheric moments as an unlimited, effulgent and magnificent world. The unsaid, unpainted, and void spaces had just as much importance in his compositions as the painted sections. In this way, the Sung artist developed a particular definition of space, which thereafter became one of the fundamental and enduring principles of Chinese art.
The Chinese tradition of landscape painting found its way into Japan, wherefrom it later greatly influenced European art. A few Iranian painters — including Nasser ‘Assar and Pari-yush Ganji —were also attracted toward the aesthetics of Zen painting. However, only the poetic-natured Sepehri was able to perceive its deepest characteristics and infuse them into his personal style.
If the far-eastern artist’s ideal was to become one with nature, the western artist long strove to apprehend and depict the physical aspects of nature. In fact, for five centuries western art drew inspiration from the worldly philosophy of the Greco-Roman tradition. The objective of reproducing the natural world called for the invention of pictorial techniques (perspective, modeling, etc.) whose origins lie in the antiquity. Thus, the most ancient remaining examples of ancient Roman landscape and still-life painting attest to significant skill in the representation of three-dimensional space, the volume of objects, light and atmosphere.
Having embraced supernatural thought and values, Medieval Europe let the Greco-Roman naturalistic tradition fall into almost total oblivion. However, 15th century Italy revived it and developed its aesthetic principles. In post-Renaissance Europe, interest in natural representation became so prevalent that landscape and still-life painting became established as independent genres. Now, pthe beauties of nature, yet they often included anecdotal elements into their imagery of forests, plains or seascapes in order to make them more “meaningful”. Even when treating subjects with religious, historical or poetic contents, their aim was to depict scenes and things so that they appeared real. In the course of continuous attempts at verisimilitude, a complete system of painterly skills was created. However, European painters, utterly satisfied with their technical skills, were suddenly confronted with a new rival, namely the photographic camera, whose eye was notably keener than theirs.
Examples of naturalistic painting are rare in the tradition of Persian painting. Even when treating nature as a subject, the Persian miniaturist sought to depict the original essence of natural forms and the design reflected in his inner self. Thus, neither a determined time nor place nor a reflection of physical quantities appears in his paintings, and the rules related to the vision of the world bear no functionality in them. And his mountains, trees and streams are archetypes rather than imitative forms of nature. Therefore, imitative art — which present-day painters have come to consider worthless — was not rooted in Iranian art. It was a phenomenon which reached Iran from the west.
More than three centuries have passed since Iranian artists became first acquainted with European art; however, experiments with landscape and still life date to a less distant past. Perhaps it may be said that Iranian artists began this experimentation when they had completely abandoned the traditional approach to archetypal nature — which constituted the essence of Persian painting aesthetics. Mohammad Ghaffari (Kamal-ol-Molk) became known as the flag-bearer of this rift with tradition; and it was he who promoted the rules and principles of European naturalism in Iran through his followers. At this time, the painters — unlike their predecessors — assumed the responsibility of depicting natural scenes with utter precision, which required them to make use of all their talents for this purpose. The best landscapes and still lifes of Hassan-‘Ali Vaziri, ‘Ali-Akbar Yassami, ‘Ali-Mohammad Haydarian and the other followers of Kamal- ol-Molk show the peak of their capabilities in imitating external appearances; yet, they bear no trace of the painter’s mental world.
Photographic images illustrated not only the ultimate in the imitation of appearances but also the possibility of recording chosen moments of the visible world. By presenting an “image of magical instantaneity”, the photographic camera created an enthusiasm to which the French impressionists strove at responding. They set aside all the “non-pictorial” aspects of earlier painting and devoted themselves entirely to the visual impressions of natural reality. The image of the sky, water, tree and flower was now reduced to a series of chromatic feelings perceived through the atmosphere. In this ephemeral optical realism, the brilliant world of colors was discovered. However, when the entire image is transformed into a harmony of colors and special light effects, the solid structure and linear mold of objects disappears and, consequently, little remains of objects’ palpable distinct characteristics and independent existence. Jeopardizing the world of objects is the first sign of the discredit of the representation of the visible world in the traditional manner, as well as the first step towards the creation of new forms.
The artists who came to be known as post-impressionists left behind not only the impressionistic notion of reality but the entire naturalistic tradition as well. The main reason for their rupture from the past are to be found in the time’s European crisis of values and certainties. In fact, these artists trained in impressionism had lost interest and trust in objective reality, and if they set out to paint still lifes, their aim was to discover a hidden meaning under the visible skin of objects. On a surface beyond appearances — one which did not necessarily reflect shapes and appearances — , they sought another reality. They eventually came to the conclusion that the outer, visible world is only definable in terms of man and his inner world. By delving into formal structural problems, and taking advantage of the decorative possibilities of two-dimensional designs and the meaning of color, post-impressionist masters paved the ground for the experiences of the next generation.
The echoes of these achievements reached Iran about half a century later. A society on its way towards modernity often readily turns to using novel models. This is how emulating western styles and methods first appears in the works of some of Kamal-ol-Molk’s pupils. For example, the landscapes Abol-Hassan Sediqi painted during his first trip to Italy are evocative of the impressionists’brilliant colors and brushstrokes. However, it was during World War II that modern art came into serious demand in Iran. In those years, emulating the works of European modernists was a way out for art students who sought to free themselves from the limitations of academic art. Such painters as ‘Abdollah ‘Ameri, Ahmad Esfandiari, Mahmood Javadipoor, André Govalovich, Habib Mohammadi and Gholamhossein Saber learned from the impressionists that one has to go outdoors and capture the moments of nature and life. They began working in the countryside and rural environments, in bright sunlight, painting scenes which the previous generation had overlooked: lush trees, golden wheat fields, purple mountains and bright blue skies. Of course, these young modernists’ “plein air” landscapes were often technically and stylistically akin to the works of the painters of the Barbizon school. Similarly, those who turned toward the post-impressionists did not become properly acquainted with the works of these masters. In fact, the upshot of these early efforts was the diversity of painting subjects and a kind of freedom in coloring.
Young artists who rise against the conventions of traditional art under the banner of impressionism or post-impressionism are still bound, just as their teachers, to outward reality. But innovative effort soon becomes concentrated on experiences of inward vision and the most diligent artists find motivations for mental research in the highly diverse nature of Iran. Thus, the tree trunks of Sepehri, the branches of Sa‘idi, the flowers of Mansooreh Hosseini and the leaves of Parvaneh E‘temadi appear as inward images; and the mounts and vales of Hossein Kazemi become transformed into symbols of the ambiguity of existence. The categories of landscape and still life in modern aesthetic vision have been utterly transformed. The common tendency of the fauvists, expressionists and many other twentieth century painters has been to use natural subjects as a raw material for creating constructs of color and form. The tendency towards abstraction was the logical result of the emancipation of pictorial means from a purely representational function. On the other hand, the surrealists turned to the world of dreams in their search for new forms. In any case, the modern artist demonstrated that not only did he have no interest in depicting the familiar beauties of nature, but that he had also lost all belief in the natural order. In expressionist painting, under the pressure of a paralyzing terror, men and trees alike are either bent or looking skywards in rapture; at times, space appears stiflingly restrictive and at others reaches so far away that its containment within the framework of the pictures seems astonishing. In the dreamlike surrealistic landscapes too, strange and mysterious objects announce their equivocal presence. Truly, what can be seen in these distorting mirrors other han reflections of a world falling apart and submerged in struggles?
Quite a few Iranian painters have reflected the agitated soul of the modern artist in their depictions of nature. Manuchehr Yekta’i gives assault to the canvas with thick paints, scattering signs of trees, flowers or fruits here and there. Farideh Lasha’i, using a chaos of line and patches, transforms a mass of soil and brushwood into a visual event. In the landscapes of Ya‘qub ‘Ammamehpich, rocks fight with each other, trees move about and mountains and rivers converse. Such pictorial dramas can also be found in the semi-abstract paintings of Mostafa Dashti and Mojgan Moslehi. Such abstract painters as Sirak Melkonian, Kamran Katoozian and Gholamhossein Nami convey a dual feeling of finiteness and infinity, remoteness and nearness, motion and immobility, by altering the dimensions of conventional space. Even Hossein Mahjoobi, who is well familiar with the serene meadows of Gilan, occasionally reveals his anguish in his sinuous trees. Can anyone rest for a moment in the shade of Davood Emdadian’s colossal trees — these “natural skyscrapers”?
Sepehri’s lyrical expressions indicate that the artist of the age of the “ascension of steel” can still be attached to simple, serene and beautiful nature. Desert dunes, faraway alignments of willow trees, pebbles scattered within sight, flowers and bushes growing beside a stream, and occasionally a few apples, are incentives for a moment of communion with nature. Sepehri does not see nature from the outside; he imagines it from within himself. In the minutest objects he depicts, he reflects a generality of which he has become aware by intuition. And we know that this vision is rooted in Iranian mystic thought and far-eastern aesthetics.
Returning to the idyllic garden that once portrayed the creative Iranian soul is unimaginable, but a painter such as Abolqassem Sa‘idi is able to recreate the memory of corners of that garden with his vernal trees. For long years, he only painted lush trees using meandering intertwined lines and round colorful shapes. Later on, he turned to still life and combinations of flowers, fruits and trees. All through, an echo of the past — occasionally mixed with a pleasant nostalgia — is discernible in his paintings.
The experiences of nature in contemporary Iranian painting are much more diverse than the examples mentioned here. Javad Hamidi, ‘Abdorreza Daryabeigi, Jalal Shabahangi, ‘Ali Golestaneh, Ya‘qub Emadian, ‘Ali-Reza. Ahmad Vossuq Ahmadi, Nami Petgar, Mostafa Goodarzi, Manijeh Mir-‘Emadi, Karim Nasr, Reza Hedayat, etc., each occupies a particular space in this vast domain. In our time, nature can be seen with great diversity, but through the eyes of the heart.
