.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
拍品專文
This amusing painting exemplifies Previati's youthful but accomplished realist style of the early 1880s. His expert draftsmanship and understanding of perspective are evident in the spatial negotiations throughout the work, particularly in the receding pile of objects to the left of the composition. The rear wall, displaying a lush use of white hues, sets off the figures and birds that are the subjects of the image. Most notable is the artist's exploration of richly contrasting dark and light tonalities. In this he is influenced by the Scapigliati masters Tranquillo Cremona (1837-1878) and Daniele Ranzoni (1843-1889), whose work Previati would have come into contact with in Milan by the late 1870s.
Francesco Tedeschi and others have suggested that Previati probably exhibited this painting in the Indisposizione Artistica di Belle Arti (Artistic Indisposition of Fine Arts) in 1881. This was an exhibition mounted by the Scapigliati masters in response to Milan's annual official exhibition. As the punning title of the rebel exhibition suggests, there was a satirical edge to this show which challenged the academic norms and staid mores dominating its competitor. Previati's work likewise takes a sardonic approach. The couple's physiognomy is easily comparable to that of the stuffed birds. The man's tiny head and prominent nose are not dissimilar to those of the goose, while the woman's frothy white lace jabot seems to mirror the cockatoo's elaborate crest. Finally, their own alternately peering and blank expressions appear to be mocked by the respectively inquisitive or empty stares of the feathered creatures.
But this reading could be pushed even further, and the painting could be understood as an ironic critique of both the official exposition's bourgeois visitors and its art. Cluttered not only with a variety of birds, but also ceramic ware, fabrics, and at least one religious painting, this taxidermist's studio borders on junk shop. The well-dressed couple examines merchandise of dubious taste with apparent interest, much as many visitors, wishing to seem cultured, would view the art of questionable value at the annual exhibition. The implication is twofold. The sanctioned art was no better than bric-a-brac, its audience a group of little intelligence and discernment. Within this interpretation some relevant avian symbolism applies. The man's counterpart, the goose, represents stupidity; the woman's counterpart, the parrot, mimicry. Thus, the image might be proposing that the gentleman is too dull-witted to judge quality for himself, while the lady may simply be imitating prescribed behavior, each performing a role to fulfill middle-class societal expectations.
The lot is accompanied by a photcertificate dated 26 May 1992 by Annie-Paule Quinsac.
Francesco Tedeschi and others have suggested that Previati probably exhibited this painting in the Indisposizione Artistica di Belle Arti (Artistic Indisposition of Fine Arts) in 1881. This was an exhibition mounted by the Scapigliati masters in response to Milan's annual official exhibition. As the punning title of the rebel exhibition suggests, there was a satirical edge to this show which challenged the academic norms and staid mores dominating its competitor. Previati's work likewise takes a sardonic approach. The couple's physiognomy is easily comparable to that of the stuffed birds. The man's tiny head and prominent nose are not dissimilar to those of the goose, while the woman's frothy white lace jabot seems to mirror the cockatoo's elaborate crest. Finally, their own alternately peering and blank expressions appear to be mocked by the respectively inquisitive or empty stares of the feathered creatures.
But this reading could be pushed even further, and the painting could be understood as an ironic critique of both the official exposition's bourgeois visitors and its art. Cluttered not only with a variety of birds, but also ceramic ware, fabrics, and at least one religious painting, this taxidermist's studio borders on junk shop. The well-dressed couple examines merchandise of dubious taste with apparent interest, much as many visitors, wishing to seem cultured, would view the art of questionable value at the annual exhibition. The implication is twofold. The sanctioned art was no better than bric-a-brac, its audience a group of little intelligence and discernment. Within this interpretation some relevant avian symbolism applies. The man's counterpart, the goose, represents stupidity; the woman's counterpart, the parrot, mimicry. Thus, the image might be proposing that the gentleman is too dull-witted to judge quality for himself, while the lady may simply be imitating prescribed behavior, each performing a role to fulfill middle-class societal expectations.
The lot is accompanied by a photcertificate dated 26 May 1992 by Annie-Paule Quinsac.