Spring Turning and Champ de Lin, Normandie (2018)
REBECCA MELMAN
Spring Turning, Grant Wood’s painting from 1936, and Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, Edouard Boubat’s photograph from 1978, are two images of endless farmland. Wood and Boubat both replicate the vast expanses of nature in their respective works. Spring Turning is Wood’s swooping homage to the United States’ Midwestern landscape. Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, is a gelatin silver print of a flax field in Normandy, a region in the north of France. The two pieces, while of different mediums, are both representations of the same subjects and look to line and perspective to enhance the greatness that already exists in nature.
Boubat and Wood rely on line, in strikingly different ways, to create their images. In Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, the repetitive, parallel lines of the field lead our eyes towards the horizon, which lies closely to the top of the image. Wood’s Spring Turning also has a high horizon line, however, this piece strongly contrasts with that of Boubat. This is because Wood’s farmland is rounded, with swelling hills and looping valleys. The softness of the land is mirrored in the white, pillowy clouds, and the only marked line is the narrow road, which starts at the bottom and snakes its way to the center of the field in the middle ground. This contrasts with the rigid pattern of the beveled flax plants. Despite the fixed constitution and flatness of earth in Boubat’s photograph, the field goes on, almost without end, to meet the horizon. This creates a sense of continuity, much like in Spring Turning. In both works, the lines move gracefully, directing the viewer’s eye into the depths of their respective images. Interestingly enough, both artists direct the viewer’s eye immediately left of the center of the composition. Upon closer inspection of Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, one can see the delicate stalks of the flax plant evenly laying upon one another. This detail gives linear and directional diversity, providing horizontal scores to imitate the major horizontal plane, where the field meets the sky. While Boubat uses a system of planar and ordered lines, it shares the same uninterrupted quality that Wood achieves with his undulating and billowy contours.
Another obvious, yet compelling difference between Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978 and Spring Turning is color. Given his medium of choice, Boubat is limited to grayscale. The lack of color enhances the uniformity and details of the image. Spring Turning, on the other hand, is full of rich color. The soft green of the bowed hills takes up most of the space in the image, and is bordered and accentuated by the brick-toned brown squares of land that has already been plowed. This scene is made up of four fields, three of which are in the process of being harvested, from grassy plants to cocoa colored earth. One field, at the back left of the image (seen below), has been tilled into a patch of exposed soil.
Here, the color informs the viewer of the state of cultivation. The sliver of sky, at the top of the painting, fades from light blue to white, and is punctuated with thick, fleecy clouds. The only other moment where white is seen, is on the miniscule horse at the foreground. While this image is simply composed of warm brown, cool green, blue, and white, Wood changes the tint, shade, and quality throughout. These slight alterations can be compared to Boubat’s black and white photograph. Boubat’s photograph is not only composed of black and white, but countless shades of grey, much like the green in Spring Turning. Despite the apparent simplicity of color schemes, the slight variation conceives the fluidity of the land, as seen in both images.
In Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, line shapes the form, but in Spring Turning, line grows from the form. The focus of Spring Turning is held upon the curved shapes of the Midwestern farmland. There is an eroticism personified in Wood’s plump depiction of the hills, calling to the notion of the earth as mother. At the same time, however, he dehumanizes this representation, by projecting an idyllic smoothness through his invisible brushwork. When we acknowledge this, we notice that the shapes, despite their curled roundness, are not organic and natural, in fact, they are quite geometric. Not only are the features of the scene soft and supple, but also structured and heavy. Similarly to Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, there can be a pattern observed in many aspects of Spring Turning. The square fields, settled within the evenly plowed land, progressively shrink on a diagonal, leading the eye to the point that is furthest away from the viewer. The clouds, which at first glance seem circular, are actually square, echoing the shape of the fields. The clouds are somewhat parallel to the fields that they provide shade and rain for. This lateral component is similar to the receding rows of flax in Boubat’s photograph. Unlike in Spring Turning, Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, the earth is not personified through shape and form. The hypnotizing endlessness of the symmetrical flax field lacks intentional shape, and while the lines are straight, even and geometric, there is an organic quality to the repetitive ripples of flax. Both images present a duality in their form, as they both have organic and geometric qualities.
A notable feature in these works, is how each artist projects space in their respective images. In Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, Boubat’s lens is focused on the foreground, yet our eye is drawn to the horizon. This is due to the parallel lines of the field receding into the vanishing point. In this work, there is an obvious three dimensionality and sense of perspective, which allows us to be comfortable in our position. In contrast, Wood’s expansive painting does not allow our eye to rest at any point. At first, we notice that we are able to see a huge amount of land, ranging from the hill closest to us, reaching as far back as the coupled hills in the far left corner. The composition, however, does not have a significant amount of depth to it, as the perspective is slightly tilted horizontally. This, in addition to the extremely smooth quality of Wood’s brush stroke, skews our perspective, and flattens the image.
Another property that complicates Spring Turning more than it does Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, is the sizing and scale of various objects in the image. Champ de lin, Normandie, 1978, is barren of figures and any element other than the field and what might be a small hill in the far distance (shown below).
Spring Turning, on the other hand, is loaded with many articles of farm life. The land, and the figure that inhabit it, exaggerate one anothers’ relative size. The hills seem massive compared to the tiny men and animals that are working hard cultivating the land. The fence posts, scattered evenly around the fields, are so small, they seem like dots at first glance. However, they are far from dots; Wood carefully places a shadow below each post, indicating his attention to detail. Equally small are the bushes that align the path on the bottom right corner. The two larger trees that reach the edge of the painting seem huge compared to the bridge, and the single, flowered tree painted directly to their left. The miniscule figures and objects amplify the grandiosity of land. Different from Wood, Boubat intensifies the enormity of land by eliminating all forms and objects, and strictly documenting the plowed field.
Symmetry is prevalent in both images, yet they are both slightly awry, as the focal points both lean to the left of the center. Despite the skewed focal points, both artists present a unified and balanced image. Wood paints a heavy shadow on the front left, to mirror the low valley at the front right, and evenly disperses the figures throughout the landscape. The rhythm of line in Champs de lin, Normandie, 1978, creates a sense of evenness and equilibrium.
Light plays a vital role in each piece. In Champs de lin, Normandie, 1978, the light captured in the image is responsible for creating the pattern, the line and partially the perspective. Given that the flat stretch of this land is illuminated entirely, and that we can see as far as possible, we can assume that this photograph was taken during the day, when the sun sits at the top of the sky, warming and drying the flax plants. There is no doubt that the sun is the source of light, and the lack of shadows upon the field allows us to imagine the clear blue sky, without a cloud in sight. In Spring Turning, we know that there are clouds that block the sun from beaming upon the hills, not only because they are presented in this image, but also because of the heavy shadows seen in the foreground. The fence posts and trees also show us that the sun is the source of light.
It may be easier to identify an artist’s style if his medium of choice is painting, but Boubat makes his mark known in Champs de lin, Normandie, 1978. With his distinct perspective, he is able to add depth to a flat surface, and to expand an already expansive landscape. His photograph instills a feeling of longing and desire; the viewer wants to be in Boubat’s position, perhaps to smell the scent of the flax plant, or to experience what it is like to be the only person for miles. Wood also has a recognizable style. His portrayal of nature is apotheosized and unrealistic, due to his meticulous brushwork. His hand is controlled and purposeful, and it is almost impossible to see the direction and width of the strokes. If we look very closely, we can see hints of his painting style; miniscule and thin brushstrokes that give direction to the plowed land or slight, barely visible blades of grass. Close up) Given the precision and completion of this representation of Midwestern farmland, one can see that Wood looks lovingly upon the beautiful farmland of his home. However, the veil of perfection provides a sense of detachment from this utopian image of the agrarian ideal.
The boom of urbanization and industrialization in cities throughout Europe and the United States made it more difficult for individuals to connect with nature. Landscape painting, however, allowed for city dwellers to maintain a relationship with nature. It also functioned, and still functions, as a vehicle for the artists to relate their artistic vision to nature, and for some, as a way to reject the rapid expansions and developments seen in urban areas. As machines became more prevalent in daily life, some artists chose to isolate their work from factories, cities, and other results of industrialisation. These pieces are examples of how two artists see nature changed by mankind. While Boubat does not show any people, animals, or plants (other than the flax plants), we are aware that the field has been touched by humans because of the presence of agriculture as the subject matter. Wood literally and figuratively introduces man into his painting. Not only do we see men working the fields, we also see man’s presence - in the house, the quaint path sneaking through the valleys, and the perfectly groomed fields. It is also important to note that this work was painted around the same time that the United State’s Midwest was ravaged by the Dust Bowl. This luscious painting is both an homage to the Midwest and also serves as a beacon of hope - despite the hardships faced during the Dust Bowl, there is promise that the beautiful farmland of the Midwest will one day bloom again.