.jpg?w=1)
拍品專文
Drawn from the room Monet rented at the Savoy Hotel on Victoria Embankment during his 1901 stay in London, Waterloo Bridge demonstrates the artist’s interest in the atmospheric impressions of his subject. The present richly worked pastel depicts Waterloo Bridge’s characteristic arcs, with boats gliding over the Thames and, far in the background, a few faint chimneys. Fog and mist, however, are the real protagonists of the scene: the shades and colors blend under a gryy layer, recreating the feeling of wet, dense air on a misty day. Over the bridge, an energetic stream of marks conveys the busy hustle of a commuting crowd fending through the fog.
In his letters, Monet expressed his enchantment with the English weather. In early February that year, he cheered: "there is no country more extraordinary (than this one) for a painter!" (quoted in D. Wildenstein, Claude Monet, Catalogue raisonné, Colonge, 1996, vol. IV, p. 351). Already in March, however, he bemoaned: "This is not a country where you can finish a picture on the spot; the effects never reappear" (ibid.). Contemplating the uncertain outcome of a series of paintings which he had begun during his previous stays in London and enlarged on that same occasion (Wildenstein, nos. 1521-1614), Monet thus complained: "I should have made just sketches, real impressions" (quoted in D. Wildenstein, Monet, The Triumph of Impressionism, Cologne, 1999, p. 354).
Within this context, Waterloo Bridge is an important counterexample to Monet's London paintings of the same scene. On account of the volatility of London's weather, the artist was forced to complete many canvases back at Giverny, where he reworked and completed them in his studio, far from his motif. Waterloo Bridge, on the other hand, presents a spontaneous, highly evocative and atmospheric drawing of the city's river side: the sought-after “real impression” which Monet tried to recapture at home on his canvases.
In his letters, Monet expressed his enchantment with the English weather. In early February that year, he cheered: "there is no country more extraordinary (than this one) for a painter!" (quoted in D. Wildenstein, Claude Monet, Catalogue raisonné, Colonge, 1996, vol. IV, p. 351). Already in March, however, he bemoaned: "This is not a country where you can finish a picture on the spot; the effects never reappear" (ibid.). Contemplating the uncertain outcome of a series of paintings which he had begun during his previous stays in London and enlarged on that same occasion (Wildenstein, nos. 1521-1614), Monet thus complained: "I should have made just sketches, real impressions" (quoted in D. Wildenstein, Monet, The Triumph of Impressionism, Cologne, 1999, p. 354).
Within this context, Waterloo Bridge is an important counterexample to Monet's London paintings of the same scene. On account of the volatility of London's weather, the artist was forced to complete many canvases back at Giverny, where he reworked and completed them in his studio, far from his motif. Waterloo Bridge, on the other hand, presents a spontaneous, highly evocative and atmospheric drawing of the city's river side: the sought-after “real impression” which Monet tried to recapture at home on his canvases.