Cèzanne's spatial ambiguities

Home / Education / ARChives / Foundational Discussions

Cèzanne's spatial ambiguities

From Jeffery LeMieux

Published before 2005

Piet Spijkers wrote:

Well it might have been the case (teaching, etc.)

It is good to read. I read all the time.
Cézanne`s father became rich as a loan shark (started as a buyer of rabbit skins). Paul all the time waited - not for his turn but just waited because he didn't know what else to do. He was not vicious I think. Why do you think "Cezanne may have done much to dishonor his father". This is a strange turn in this discussion.

I am even more amazed to read your statement that "I'm sure the senior Cézanne was a terrible man and deserved it, right? That's the impression we're left with anyhow."

You saw it in a video? Come on Jeffery, think for a second.

The second part of your post merits another answer.



Do you disagee that many in the artworld tend to see Louis Auguste Cézanne as a negative influence on Paul Cézanne.... as a domineering authority, insensitive to his son's desires, questionably involved in business deals, etc? Why this portrait of someone who could be said to have done much for his son?

Yes, interesting that Cézanne's father "became rich as a loan shark." I guess that makes him a bad man and thus it was good for Paul to argue with him. Maybe they argued that Louis Auguste's money was tainted with the wrong morality. Of course none of that bothered Paul when he inherited it and used it for what his father disapproved of and wasn't willing to support during his lifetime. (Yes, I know he gave 2/3 of it to his model/wife mother of his child who spent it on living large in Paris. Apparently they deserved one another.)

I agree it is a good thing to read. And I did consider the way that my saying I "saw it in a video" would be received, but in the interest of honesty, I felt I needed to report the source. (It was a BBC documentary video... maybe that explains something....) I felt that I might have some credibility from other discussions, but I can see that's not the case.

My sense of the flawed humanity of Cézanne as well as the low level of virtue in his paintings (compared with their reputation) remains. I believe I did ask for any evidence that Cézanne was intentional in his distortions of perspective and atmosphere. I am open to being shown where my position is flawed. And finally, I must report that I am have been in a bit of a frenzy about this person ever since I learned about his lifechoices.