Why The Oil Painting Olympia Is One Remarkable Piece

By Timothy Moore


Some of the best paintings were made using oil paint. The most realistic ones were by the great artists from the Renaissance. The subjects for the works made during this era were essentially religious, evolving around concepts with an abundance of cherubs, biblical characters, gods and goddesses.

Nudes with both men and women are a favorite subject with themes revolving around religion. A goddess in particular that has graced so many notable works is Venus. Traditional Renaissance works make a point that brush strokes are not evident and the anatomical representation as accurate as possible. These conventions were challenged by Manet with his oil painting Olympia.

The thing with late Renaissance art was that it was very heavily rooted to technique and how well it was able to portray anatomy and physics of the objects in the painting. This piece by Manet was essentially a parody of Venus of Urbino, notable for its subject, the goddess Venus laying on a chair like bed in the nude. Nudes then were not at all seen as lewd, but this artwork by Manet was an exception.

One huge reason why this painting caused such an uproar was because he replaced the goddess with a prostitute. Olympia is a common name for a courtesan, a more prominent and highly paid sex worker. To do this was an act of blasphemy in a sense. Manet saw it as honesty that 1865 France did not want to face.

Manet probably was not doing this for shock value. Notice that this is no ordinary prostitute since she has a servant handing her some flowers. The flowers look like they came from a suitor or a patron. Nudes then of goddesses and historical figures were not vulgar, but rather, coy. This one, in particular, was a great exception at the time.

The question now remains to be the difference between traditional nudes of Venus versus what Manet made. The goddess was always painted with divine perfection barely showing any flaw and you never really see any of them looking directly at you. Now, with Manet and his prostitute, the discomfort comes from the naked woman looking directly at the viewer.

This feature is not the only thing that makes it sexual. Notice that there are barely any details on shadow and contrary to what was conventional at the time, brush strokes can be clearly seen. It was as if the artist wanted people to make sure they knew they were looking at a painting. What makes it eternally captivating is the honesty that viewers are forced to see.

This painting effectively became something revolutionary and is a genius way to cross abstraction with traditional realism. Then it would have been considered as a bad painting. But it is general understanding that if the piece is able to evoke emotion. It can never be considered as bad art.

Just like anything unconventional, Olympia was met with jeers, laughter and so much criticism. Manet was as much a painter as he was a revolutionist. His honesty regarding aesthetic and his personal interpretation of beauty was bold and this shook the art community of 1865 France. This artworks is one of many pieces reminding people that a single act of revolt as non violent as an image on a canvas can turn the world.




About the Author:



Popular Posts