Preface

Intro
Cezanne, some common sense observations
about the painters perceptual development
Watercolour studies and technical development
Early works and development of still life studies
The art magazine article
Cezannes studio
Oppositional analysis of article painting
Compositional perception and mistaken identity
Conclusion of article analysis
Cezanne on colour
Cezanne and Pissarro
Cezanne on the academic
Cezannes paintings and studies
Czannes Doubt
Cezanne and the landscape
The intimate landscape: trees, rocks, and forests
The distant and monumental
Conclusion
Appendix 1
Appendix 2

2
4
7
14
23
35
36
45
63
71
73
75
82
84
104
107
121
141
153
159
161

Preface:
The purpose here is twofold; firstly to countermand non factual
articles on Czanne such as found in many art magazines, and
to rebut other distortions and myths about him that have been
repeated elsewhere. And further to present Czanne as what he
actually was, a representational realist painter. He is not some
weird aberration, nor is he responsible for nearly 100 years of
distortions and publicity stunts by others claiming him as their
artistic master. He was a dedicated student of nature and made
very significant contributions to realist representation in the
fields of colour perception, colour plane form modelling, and
three dimensional compositional structure.

One should remember that words mean nothing unless carefully

verified as compared to his works; the verbal is not the visual,
the one is simply an aid, the other an actuality. No one should
ever allow others to make claims about a painters works that
they cannot factually substantiate with physical examples. A
writers emotional fantasies and personal conjectures are far
from admissible evidence and even enthusiastic appreciation,
no matter how sincere, is not perceptual comprehension, a
comprehension only had through the physical study of painting.
This is not an art history book or even an art history lesson; it is
rather a physical examination of those things which are not
speculative. In modern times the painters sexuality, personal
psychology, or which hand he wiped his rear with have become
more important than the works he produced, and no wonder, all
one has to do is look and see the degenerative state of things in
all genres of contemporary arts from the conceptual to the
academic, it is more often than not a low state of affairs and
there will be some further commentary on this at conclusion of
this article. Much of what I have written here is in some ways an
overgeneralization, an intentional common sense simplification.
But is that not the preferable place to start, with some simple
straight forward factual information instead of reams of
concocted and fabricated speculations. False premise, false
conclusion, that covers 80% of what has passed for Czanne
scholarship for many decades. For the sake of reason and logic
we will try to establish a common sense baseline from which to
argue our physical position, and not simply make up our own
set of (supposed) facts out of thin air.
Czanne is the pivotal point from which painting moves away
from a dead academic formula, but not towards the chaos of
contemporary modernism but rather towards an orderly and
modern form of representational painting, this point having been
missed by all except a very few for over 100 years. This because
the truth of his advancements were being rejected by the
academics while simultaneously being distorted by the
modernists, neither of whom comprehended his achievements.
Until one physically studies as he studied, consistently studied
for 20 or more years one cannot have a clue as to what he

actually accomplished. And a writers speculations are certainly

no substitute for a developed painters perceptual insights.

Introduction:
I want to express myself clearly when I paint. In people who
feign ignorance there is a kind of barbarism even more
detestable than the academic kind it seems to me that on
some days that I paint naively (but) Im the primitive of my
way, armed with all the faith of my nave clumsiness. Id like
to find the answer to realize fully, for whatever anyone
might say, its the worst kind of decadence to play at
ignorance and navet.as the saying goes, a little
knowledge takes us farther away, but a lot of knowledge
leads us back. Yes, a lot of knowledge leads us back to
nature, because it teaches us the inadequacy of mere
professionalism.
Paul Czanne (1839-1906)
What was called modern painting in 1880 is not what would
later be called modern in 1920 or 1960 or 2010. By 1850 and
beyond, any painting which did not blindly conform to the state
sanctioned academic formula was considered modern, and often
derogatorily called, the work of democrats, men who dont
wash their linens! During Czannes time there was a hierarchy
of subject matter, and a caste system for painters based upon
state recognition, if you failed to receive that recognition you
were marginalized if possible, ignored, or simply starved.
Anyone who relied upon their own vision and expression and
refused to apply a dead academic visual bias to what they were
observing (which were contemporary subjects and situations
showing daily life), were all brushed aside as modern. This
painters revolt against formalized studio concoctions began
long before Czanne, however this does not mean that any of
these rebels were not representational realists. To the contrary,
they thought themselves more realist since they painted from
direct observation and from having devised their own means
and methods of expression, all an affront to the state academics.

Czanne was a modernist in the strictest sense, in that he

completely rejected the stale academic formula as the
foundation for his work. He did not however discard the visual
third dimension in painting or his love of natural beauty or his
classical outlook to composition or even representational
subject matter. Nor did he reject any other painting principles
which were based upon visual observation and expression of
representational form through colour relationships. He jealously
maintained all these foundational and fundamental visual
principles to be utilized by a common sense realist painter.
Unlike so many others (both his contemporaries and those who
came after him) he never allowed his personal theories to
overwhelm his visual perception or his painters common sense.
So the stinking albatross of being the father of modern art,
should no longer be left hanging around his neck, he is not
responsible for those thefts of the surface characteristics of his
work or the stylistic and visual distortions created in his name.
Even the Ancient Mariner was eventually relieved of his burden,
and so too should Czanne be relieved of his. He said, .. nature
strikes me as something highly complex and there is endless
progress to be made the painter should devote himself
entirely to the study of nature So how can a man who was
simply attempting to paint what he saw be grouped with people
who preferred egocentric fantasy to actual observation?
Immediately one hears, well what about his fantasy work!!!?
meaning of course his bather figures, for decades one has been
subjected to those pieces as being his primary works and all
else secondary to them. But this is not the case in actuality, he
painted separately far more still lifes, landscapes, portraits and
figures, and nearly as many flower paintings as he did bathers,
(constituting only 15% of his work), from this one could just as
easily suggest that the bathers were of secondary importance.
To understand Czannes bathers one need look no further than
his often stated virtually idolatrous hero worship of Delacroix,
(comparison fig. A) for which he maintained the life long dream
of creating a grand apotheosis (a large composite pictorial
biography of Delacroixs paintings; thus elevating Delacroix to

a preeminent or transcendent position, the charismatic

romantic painters deification being the actual goal).

Fig. A,

a brief comparison of Delacroixs to Czannes figures

Even as late as 1904, 2 years before his death he was still pining
away to paint that apotheosis as stated in a letter to Emile
Bernard. But this was an irrational passion (or obsession, of
which most men have at least one) and for which he had no
means and little capacity to accomplish.
And as such the excessive emphasis on these works is
completely unjustified, (especially as pertains to his actual
perceptual development), and most writers have pursued these
works only as an historical justification for and the inevitability
of the modern art which followed. But as far as those who
used his figures as a model for their own work I would repeat

Czannes disgust at those who would play at that game, its

the worst kind of decadence to play at ignorance and navet.
Cezannes point being that he did his figures to the best of his
abilities, he was not making cartoons on purpose, if he could
have made them more like Delacroixs figures he would have.
Moreover, Czannes researches (as he called them) into
colour modulation and planer composition were his stated goals
for work, as well as to fully realize and express his visual
sensations as observed from his models (of still life, the
landscape, or sitter). This argument over primacy will not be
settled here but at least an attempt will be made to set the record
straight as to how he physically proceeded in his perceptual
development and hopefully erase from a few peoples minds the
arbitrary fantasies which usually pass for analysis of his work.

Czanne: some common sense observations

about the painters perceptual development
Czanne was the basis of much of Hensches colour and form
studies, these observations and analyses below come from
decades of dedicated investigation of Czanne at Hensches
prompting and from colour study in a very similar manner.
What has provoked this little note was a two decades old article
in an art magazine that a painter sent to me as a jpg and asked
what I thought of it, of course upon reading it I hit the damned
ceiling because it was the typical nonsensical bs that has been
spewed about Czanne since his own day, and worse, has
become solidified as the accepted portrait of Czannes works
and ideas. However, this accepted mythology is just that and
could not be further from the truth of the man or his ideas about
painting. As long as distortions are presented as facts then the
misconceptions and outright lies will continue. And even though
the author of the article was an enthusiastic admirer of Czanne
his analysis is rooted in what he has been taught to see and not
in what is actually there before his eyes, and it is that exact
point we will try to examine.

Since nothing can be understood from an isolated position I

have included a great deal of peripheral material which helps to
back up the premise used to rebut and countermand the
magazine article. I have not included any other lengthy remarks
on Czannes fantasy works from his youth or his invented
studio figures (which were compiled from images of his early
drawings, prints of other painters works, and even magazine
ads). Czanne was a devout catholic, very shy as well as prudish
when it came to women. So aside from being too cheap to pay
nude models, his modesty would not have allowed him to look at
them. I have only touched briefly on those pieces as to how they
improved in their direct connection to his perceptual and
technical development, those works being another discussion
altogether. Right now the point of topic is his perceptual
development and what he was physically attempting to do.

Cezanne, seated in front of his les grandes baigneuses c. 1905

I wanted to burn all the museums in my youth. To invent

something new, it was out of a rage for originalitywhen you
dont know anything, you think its those who do that stand in
your way.
Czanne, recorded conversation, 1900
I must work continuously, not to attain some end, which gives rise to
the admiration of idiots. That thing which is so appreciated by the
vulgar is no more than mere craftsmanship, which makes any work it
produces inartistic and commonplace. I must seek for completeness
solely for the pleasure of working more truly and wisely.
Czanne, letter to his mother, sept. 26, 1874
all my life Ive worked in order to be able to earn my living, but I
thought one could paint good paintings without drawing attention to
ones private life. of course an artist attempts to elevate himself
intellectually as much as he can, but the man must stay in the
background. The pleasure must stay in the work.
Czanne, letter, april 30, 1896
(response to a remark about his standing with the younger generation
of painters), my standing, indeed!... that would mean being
pleased with myself. And that I never am. That I will never be.
Czanne, recorded conversation, 1900
I do not want to be right in theory, but right in nature you have to
be a good workman, to be nothing but a painter, to have a method.
To realize. (and) you have to be incorruptible in your art, and for
that reason you have to make an effort to be incorruptible in life.
Czanne, recorded conversation, 1900
there are two things in a painter: the eye and the brain, and they
need to help each other, you have to work on their mutual
development, but in a painters way: on the eye, by looking at things
through nature; on the brain, by the logic of organized sensations,
which provides the means of expression. I go no further than that
Czanne, recorded conversation, 1900
there is, in an apple, in a head, (all forms), a culminating point, and
this point in spite of the effect, the tremendous effect: shadow or

light, sensations of colour is always the one nearest to our eyes.

(but) the edges of objects recede to another point placed on our
horizon. that is my great principle, my conviction, my discovery. the
eye must concentrate, grasp the subject, and the brain will find a
means to express it (then reading from a personal note) an
optical sensation is produced in our visual organ which makes us
classify as light, half-tone, or quarter-tone the planes represented by
colour sensations.
Czanne, recorded conversation, 1900

_____________________

Fig. 1

still life with ginger jar and basket of fruit, 1888-90

What Czanne has described in that last quote above is his

foundational visual principle, also a foundational impressionist
principle, which is a perspective of colour, to be utilized in the
modelling of form volumes as well as to generate aerial
recession. These visual form volumes and depth recession were
to be generated in the eye by colour sensations alone, by
colours reflected to the eye from his canvas, just as colours
reflected to his eye from nature/his subject. This he coupled with
his organization of the visual materials into compositional
planes echoing the observed form planes of his subject and as
he said, I go no further than that. His uniqueness is rooted in
his innate ability to see and perceive three dimensionally, to see
all forms and even empty space as volumes, observed volumes
to be represented as observed colour contrasts, opposing
colours, from the most somber to the most vivid. As he said,
there is no substitute for original colour in a painting.
In looking at anyones paintings it should always be
remembered that we are to look to the painters highest
perceptual development, to their maturity, for the ideas and
principles utilized in practical application for creating those
works. Those are the same principles which we are to use to
discover their secrets; we do not come to understand him or
them by interjecting our own suppositions. This little note is not
intended as an art history lesson or lecture; it is simply a brief
look based upon a common sense study of how Czanne
worked and to reference what he actually accomplished. And to
set this in opposition to the reams of bs which have been
published as critical analysis when not based upon Czannes
actual ideas nor the actual visual and physical content of his
work. The article which prompted this piece is more of a
personal reaction to the Cezanne painting and not so much a
critical analysis, it is however typical of things said over the
years within articles meant to be critical analysis; poetic
musings and vagaries that are passed on and insinuated as fact.
One of the major problems with writings on Czanne is that one
finds those modernist writers continuously critiquing, analyzing
and assessing all of Czannes paintings by that same set of
invented criteria, applied almost evenly whether the piece is a

finished work or one barely developed, an early work or those

from his highest period. That in itself is sheer insanity (just as
insane as the constant critiquing of his works by his
contemporaries with criteria based upon the academic model to
which he did not subscribe in the least). So as a baseline for
contesting the visual ignorance displayed within this typical
article we will begin with one of Czannes refined and
completed paintings (fig. 1), one with a fully developed indoor
light key showing the atmospheric depth of his studio space.
In figure 1 above Czanne has accomplished this through a
perspective of colour, those colour changes which represent an
atmospheric or aerial perspective and create the illusion of
visual recession in depth as well as laterally from the light
source. This is how three dimensional space is visually
rendered, by the use of distinctive colour changes generating
colour contrasts in the eye. The spatial environment of this still
life contains an impeccable supporting cast without which his
right leaning, visually receding, diagonally laid, trapezoidal
plane (generated by his focal area form volumes in full light)
would create no depth at all. This interesting physical point of
view will be further defined with examples in later paragraphs
(figs. 40- 44). He did not use renaissance perspective which is
based upon two dimensional design; he instead utilized form
planes receding by means of colour and shape relationships. He
did this by observing reality; he neither applied cubist theories
nor labored under obsolete academic conceptual restraints. He
simply made observations and registered them in paint on his
canvas as well as his visual knowledge, technical skills, and
native abilities allowed them to be expressed.
It is helpful to know that Czanne was at heart a romantic, as
can be seen from all the rhythmic Delacroix-esque curving
forms found within his youthful fantasy works, this from his
often confessed admiration for those works of Delacroix. he
naturally saw in arabesques and not in conventional lines as
can be seen in the repetition of curving loops above - the loop
of the basket handle, jar strap, napkin folds, distant chair leg etc,
but most importantly is seen in the three dimensional arching
curve of the masses of cool colour notes which start at the

ginger jar and loop into the depth of open space beyond,
curving up and over to the right where they exit, the curve being
compositionally completed by the angle of the stool leg at right,
a colour volume loop, this is not two dimensional design based
upon obsolete conventional linear perspective. (as the first of
many side notes: the ginger jar is propped from behind to tilt
forward, this is for compositional purposes and is not a mistake
in conventional perspective as is often erroneously stated).
He sensed the undulations in things, these he transposed in his
mature years to his arrangements which were filled with
proportionally curved lines based upon observed three
dimensional space and volumes as well as the intersecting of
colour planes. He was inadequate in many ways, especially as
concerns conventional draughtsmanship, but because he was
interested in volumes through colour plane changes (for which
there can be no application for academic linear drawing) this
was actually beneficial to his resolution of his stated goals. His
lack of conventional drawing skills did often lead to proportional
problems where one plane was mistakenly larger or smaller than
its observed proportions, but these were not intentionally
planned or schemed aberrations based upon some esoteric
cubist theories, but were the natural outcome of an intense
concentration which dealt with only what was at hand and
accomplished through the modest skills at his disposal.
every serious student of representational painting can easily
recognize the level of difficulty in the problems he set for
himself, from youth onward he was continuously frustrated with
this inability to simply portray what he saw, this in reference to
not only his inadequacies but from the fact that he saw three
dimensionally. So he had the ability to actually see the full
complexity of the forms in front of him and how they interrelated
as volumes in space. And because he saw these aspects of his
subject as colour changes he had to invent new means to
portray them, the old forms (based upon black and white values
greyscale or upon mathematical linear perspective) were
completely obsolete for representing forms through colour
plane changes and their attendant atmospheric perspective.

Watercolour studies and technical development:

Fig. 2

fruit, glass, and plant,

1902-06

his mature development cannot be understood without a look at

his watercolour studies, it was through these that he developed
a great deal of his observational skills and discipline, as well as
much of his later technique, (these were carried on mutually with
the oils over most periods of his development).
His blue marks at perimeter of forms were his attempt to express
the vibrations of light and air which he saw surrounding objects.
These watercolours were built up through thin washes of pure
colour layered over one another. Shadows and darks are the
result of many layerings of colour as opposed to a single heavily
pigmented dark layer. This approach is also seen in his oils
especially his later works where colour intensity is achieved
through multiple layers of pigment washes as well as delicately

laid taches (touches or small patches) of pigment similar to

these smaller shaped watercolour washes.

Fig. 3

a formal composition in watercolour, 1902-06

as we study these we can see the workings of the mans mind

and his hand, the hand of a simple realist painter attempting to
bring physical expression to his visual perception of the most
common of objects through the modest gifts at his command,
and I will repeat this endlessly technique must never be
mistaken for content, not in a true painters works. For common
pictorialists that is certainly all that is there, but Czanne was far
from common either in his ideas, observations, or the actual
physical expression of his works.
It must become clear to everyones mind that style is not
content, its not even a means of expression; that word style is a

catchall for the visual composite of surface characteristics of a

painting and is the most elementary as well as superficial form
of visual analysis. Actual content is based upon how the
painter has selected and composed the visual essentials of their
subject and how those have been physically interpreted by that
painters level of perceptual development.

Fig. 4

sliced melon, bottles, etc in strong light, 1902-06

Later in this note please examine the other examples of his

watercolours, at fig. 54 there is a developed watercolour self
portrait and at fig. 92 is a very refined watercolour landscape
giving almost complete detail of the subject, at fig. 96 trees by
the road and at 110 - 112 are 5 watercolours of mont sainte
victoire, watercolours showing the bare essence of mountain
compositions, as he told Bernard, the light contains all!

Fig. 5

pomegranates, sugar bowl, bottles and melon, 1902-06

Fig. 6

pears and pans, 1902-06

Fig. 6a an early watercolour, somewhat tentative when

compared with the ease of the later one above in fig.6

Fig. 7

the starting process, commencement of a still life, 1893

rough outlay and general placements of compositional design,

followed by initial colour washes, the english called this the first
rub in, the french called it ebauche (ay-bow-shh) meaning the
beginning (literally rough hewn). Although often defined as
such it is not synonymous with esquisse/sketch. The initial
outlay of a painting establishes the structural and compositional
underpinnings, and is not a sketch (which is an ending in itself).
the ebauche is foundational for extended work, it is the initial
forms of a developed painting. However, these starting
elements are nothing (not an end) in themselves no matter how
charming they may appear to the uneducated eye and mind or
how fancifully a writer might wish to opine upon them. They
simply are what they are, a first summary statement. (As a side
note many if not most of these old jugs as pictured above were
cut from the production potters wheel or jigger in an uneven
manner, imparting most with a decided tilt, just as he has it.)

Fig. 8 a formal composition, 1895-98 seen in the intermediate

state of development,
here the layers of washes and taches of colour are now
becoming more definitive of the form volumes and the
subsequent layers becoming more richly pigmented both in
chromatic content as well as the physical body of the paint. This
done by a very careful and thoughtful man with impeccable
insight into the visual potentialities of his subject, here we see a
flawless colour composition generating a three dimensional
space even at this early stage of development. This is at the
MOMA so one should go see the next time in NYC.

Fig. 9 still life with ginger jar, sugar bowl, and olive jug, 1893-94
(as side note in life green olive jug is oblate as he has it here)
Above is another fully resolved study. the general design
perspective here is an example of a very particular optical field
(referred to as cones of vision, further illustrated and defined
in detail in figs. 40- 44) in which those things furthest from the
eye will appear or seem more upright (because we are looking at
them horizontally, predominately from the side with the line of
sight perpendicular to their upright axes) while those things
closest to the eye will appear more reclined, inclined or flattened
(because to observe these areas the angle of the head or eye is
tilted downward, so one sees more of their upper surfaces). In
a figure this natural optical field would show the parts closest to
the eye as larger (than what would be considered as
academically proportional), and even though the larger form is a
specific visual truth one still finds today that the academic

visual bias (of a false two dimensional symmetry) is being

imposed by nearly all portraitists and figure painters.
Czannes natural way of seeing is set in contrast to the often
sterile visual artificiality of mathematical linear perspective.
the natural visual principle of cones of vision is easily seen in
this painting, fig. 9, as well as many others (and is, along with
Czannes purposeful propping and tilting of objects, the source
of the often analyzed underlying structural planes of his mature
work) and is in compositional structure that which has been
erroneously tagged as multiple viewpoints in the same work. It
is no such thing; this will be explained later in much more detail.
Since obsolete academic perspective cannot be used in colour
plane painting the only counteraction to these supposed (or
seeming) distortions found in Czannes works is through focal
point peripheral vision composition, in which the gaze is
(somewhat unnaturally) fixed upon ones center of interest and
the head is not moved or tilted from beginning to end of painting
the composition, nor is the eye angle ever changed. One sees
the surrounding materials peripherally through the outer orb of
the lens. This is a perceptual effect in which detail is diminished
and colours are more atmospheric and contrasts are lessoned in
those colour planes which are being viewed at a farther distance
from the eyes (and paintings) focal area. This is a physical fact
that one can look to the side without moving the eye or head, it
is the brains perceptual areas which see and not the eye, which
is simply a conduit for stimuli, ones attention or awareness is
simply directed to those outer areas, with practice it becomes
second nature. However, Czanne did not utilize focal point
painting as a discipline per se, but rather naively and naturally
relied upon what we have described as cones of vision. Focal
point peripheral vision composition is explained here only as a
further refinement for the definition of cones of vision and to
clearly characterize how he actually made his observations.
Further, the composition in fig. 9 is lit in full frontal lighting
which virtually eliminates most shadows. A full light situation
appears flat and two dimensional to all those whose perception
has been trained and accustomed to judging a painting from a

black and white, greyscale visual perspective. Without those

shadows value contrasts being present many people cannot
perceive the painted illusion of forms in space through colour
contrasts alone (especially if those colours fall into a narrow
range of values or tone intensities), all that a result of an
inadequate or faulty perceptual development based upon
obsolete forms of knowledge. If this fact is in play then any
judgments made about Czannes works are completely invalid
and are simply a personal opinion or a writers fantasy.

Early works, development through still life study:

Fig. 10

an early still life study, 1877, includes the olive jar

which was to show up in pieces throughout his life, like Chardin

everyone has their favorite objects to paint. This was set up in
his living room, with the wall paper as backdrop, showing the
same simplicity with which everyone begins,

Fig. 11

an early impressionist still life, 1879-80

in which Czanne has utilized the technical division of colours

into their chromatic components, this was taught to him by
Camille Pissarro. Czanne said of him, we all come from
Pissarro, as early as 1865 he eliminated black, dark browns and
ochers from his palette, this is a fact. (he told me to) paint only
with the three primary colours and their immediate derivatives.

This use of broken colour (as the technique above is called),

with pigments applied in small taches is well suited for
expressing shifting light, atmospheric effects and the
dissolution of form within a visual field where the lighting is the
predominant factor and major compositional element. But its
use is counter indicative, counter intuitive where one wishes to
emphasize stability and form volumes, these are best expressed
through the use of planes of colour, separately laid, as can be
seen in many of Czannes later studies.
This painting (fig. 11) was once owned by Gauguin and was
much studied by him as to the technical application of paint
which he adapted to his own later works.

Fig. 12 another early composition, 1879-80

containing many of the elements of his later works (here seen in

front of the same wall paper and set up on the same wooden
chest as previous painting, (fig. 11)

Fig. 13 an intermediate still life, 1895

beyond the impressionist approach but not yet a complete
understanding of forms as colour planes, if one will enlarge this
jpg the orange pear shows the beginning phases of his colour
modulation of forms. I am not an apologist for Czanne but one
must always give him the benefit of the doubt and never
conclude that elementary mistakes like the lack of alignment on
table and drawer are anything other than unintentional.

One hears, well if he was as careful a painter as you say then

how could this be anything but intentional? one should
respond that, as long as the areas in doubt are still in an
unresolved state or still in the beginning stage of the ebauche
then how can one criticize it as if it were a completed
statement? this would be to judge a writers meaning from only
one sentence of a lengthy chapter or a composers intent from
the first few bars of his symphony. All of these examples are
simple common sense truths, so why is this same courtesy not
extended to the works of Czanne?

Fig. 14

wine jug and pears, 1890-95

even in this poor jpg one is struck by the colouration of the

stoneware jug, luminescent, pearlescent, while also having

weight and volume, of course in order to see that one has to

look past ones own prejudices which judge all works by their
linear drawing first, and if failing that biased test looking no
further, and so one completely missing what may be qualities
that are far beyond drawings capacity to express as a visual
truth, the draughtsmans truth is not the colourists truth.

Fig. 15 still life study , 1890-93,

showing a further visual refinement through delicate colour
shifts in his modelling taches in left pear, napkin, ginger jar, and
background, also seen is his utilization of familiar studio
furniture as compositional elements (figs. 22-29). Also of note
here is his pomegranate with leaves, intentionally echoing some
elements found in Chardins works.

One can see that in figs. 10- 13, as here that many of these still
lifes have been set up in the traditional manner at or near eye
level. however this can often cause the eye to see the objects as
more of a simple silhouette than as a volumetric form, that effect
of a silhouette does not give the same sense of depth or space
as does works which are arranged at multiple levels, three
dimensionally in space, and seen partially from above as are
most of Czannes later works,

Fig. 16 pears, sugar bowl and tapestry, 1893-94,

another more refined example of his researches into colour
modulation. And an obvious ongoing technical refinement in the
paint application from the earlier works represented in figs. 10
and 11. Here we see a much surer touch as well as better

representational proportions that are in a realist balance to the

proportional relationships of those objects being observed.
and as will be stated several other times, with resolution of his
colour modelling comes a visual confidence as to that forms
resolution as a completed statement, eliminating the necessity
for his further redefinition or restructuring of those forms
through his use of dark perimeter lines.

Fig. 17 a late work, 1896-98,

showing his mature control of form, colour, proportion, and
compositional arrangement.

Fig. 18

late still life, with tapestry, fruit and tea pot, 1902-1906

a very late work in the beginning stages of development, with

both a richness and an austerity, the tapestry colours showing
a perspective of aerial recession diagonally from the light
source. a highly complex simplification, all showing the
perceptual insights and technical skills of the mature painter.
this reminds one of Hensches compositional philosophy,
eliminate all but the essential. (this jpg should be enlarged to
150% in order to appreciate those evaluations by seeing them
for yourself).

Fig. 19 still life with plaster cupid, 1895

in figures 10-19 one sees his perceptual development and use of
more delicately laid colour shifts. And also his use of full light to
eliminate the majority of value contrasts in favor of colour

contrasts, and once again I point out that he cannot be judged

by rules of conventional drawing which do not apply to and
cannot comply with the visual parameters necessary to produce
colour modulation of forms. even with his constant doubt,
which necessitated his continued outlining of forms, those
outlines were contradictory to his stated goals and must be
considered in light of his (stated) original intentions.
He had an intense interest in colour composition, which meant
composing from the idea of arranging intensities of colour
contrasts (as well as coloured shapes/volumes, often in a series
of studies based upon similar source materials), he did not see
or conceive of forms through value contrasts. This is why we
see him constantly in doubt of where his forms break into
another colour or plane, where they overlap or where they
simply disappear. Thus the constant redefining of the perimeter
of a form with a stark dark contrast, but on those forms which
he actually resolved as to their correct colour modulation there
are no such random or harsh outlines. There is instead plane
changes of several colour shifts as the form turns away from the
eye (see figs. 34-37), this is depth through colour perspective,
not linear renaissance perspective which was based upon two
dimensional design (extensions and modifications of all of these
ideas are also seen in his landscapes, figures and watercolours).
Although he often relied upon the use of a warm versus cool
colour formula and even repeated colours (in the same
composition or also within the same object) and did not have the
colour range of endless variety as Hensche accomplished,
Hensche could not have developed his works to the level he did
without Czanne having developed the visual principle of colour
modulation of forms. Czanne may have been a volatile
personality but was a common sense realist painter with his own
ideas of beauty and design. that coupled with his inabilities,
insecurities, and the fact that he was having to invent new visual
concepts (as well as about 75% of his method of representation)
all contribute to why his mature work looks as it does. He was
dead serious about the representational rendition of form
volumes through colour plane changes, he invented the idea
that every form plane change is also a distinct colour change,

not having a clear understanding of that one idea disqualifies

non colourists or two dimensional designers from having a
legitimate comprehension of the mans work. Once again factual
actualities must not be usurped by allowing fanciful conjecture
or enthusiastic appreciation to be substituted in its place.

Fig. 20 red onions, wine bottle and napkin, 1896-98

an incomplete composition but in an extremely refined indoor
light key, conceived and executed as three dimensional forms in
three dimensional space. often where one sees him make small
light bluish dashes or marks at a forms intersection with the
background or other object was his way of attempting to paint
the vibration of the light as it was reflected back into the air.
(my blue link as he called it, as also seen in watercolour figs.

2-6). this study also reflecting his multiple light sources as

explained in the section on his studio lighting (figs. 22-29).

The Magazine Article:

Fig. 21 still life with ginger jar, 1893-94

This is the painting from magazine article but a better jpg copy
from the Met archive (one in article too black to be of use, this
one colour corrected like the plate in John Rewalds biography
of Czanne), I have attached relevant article text at end so do not
think it necessary to repeat all the writers injunctions here, but
would suggest that you scroll to the end and read the article
quotes first, maybe a couple of times so that what he says is
clear in your mind before diving into the detailed rebuttal below.

with common sense as a baseline (instead of conjecture based

upon conceptual and contextual conditioning) the first thing the
average man does upon encountering this piece hanging in the
museum is to look it over and then wonder who did it and begin
looking for a signature, not finding one he looks at the wall
plaque or plate information, says Paul Czanne, he looks back
but no Czanne signature, so his first logical simple conclusion
is that he is looking at an unfinished work (or one rejected by
the painter), and this reinforced by the fact that many areas are
simple first statements or completely bare canvas, nothing
intended or that could be mistaken for a finished painting.
That one real world fact counters 98% of the conclusions held
by the article's writer who apparently subscribes to the
collective idea that the critics and writers (and art dealers)
should determine the completeness of a work (by adding a
frame?) and not the painter who painted it or not even to
consider the actual physical condition of the work, all that
matters are the opinions of the experts. Beyond this the most
disturbing things in the article are the distortions and
misinterpretations of Czannes words, one quoted phrase from
a letter to young Paul being the entire evidentiary basis for his
erroneous conclusions of multiple vantage points. There has
been much discussion of and many books written about both
the p.o.v. theory and the finished unfinished aspects of his
work, mainly based upon intellectual misconceptions and not
visual or physical facts. So to find some physical facts the
common sense place for us to start is inside Czannes studio.

Cezannes studio:
To get a clear understanding of where Czanne was coming
from we should look at the physical conditions under which the
work was produced, the actual set up and arrangement, the
parameters he placed upon it, and the variables which affected
the end results, the place to find that information is in his studio,
this studio being custom built to his exacting specifications to
recreate the lighting scenarios he had previously utilized and
found best suited to his colour study over the years.

In examining the next several photos below we also see the

fixtures, furniture, and accoutrements with which he staged his
compositions. Of special note is the size and types of tables,
desks, benches, etc, and to think of them in relation to an
average sized man. What we find is that Czannes favorite little
still life stand with the scalloped skirt, (the one upon which the
red onions, in fig. 20 above, were set up to be painted) is about
half thigh high. So he would be looking straight down at any
composition arranged upon it if he were standing near by, and
the level of an objects appearance would rise in the sight line
as the distance one stepped away from that table increased.

Fig. 22

Czannes studio

Interior of Czannes studio, showing his enormous north light

windows with curtains for controlling the amount of light, as
also seen in other photos below.

Fig. 23 Czannes north light windows

I would add another side bar here, someone who is making up
two dimensional cubist designs would never be so fanatical
about the details or control of his lighting, once again these are
the traits characteristic of a dedicated representational painter.

Fig. 24

wide angle view

this shows the strong light which could enter the studio from the
south facing double door window as seen on left as well as
north light to right side in this lens distorted paste up of
panoramic view of studio interior.

Fig. 25 northwest corner of studio

This view showing the curtains used to control the amount of

north lighting both high and low as well as a blast of direct
sunlight from south facing windows hitting the floor and
reflecting warm coloured light planes onto objects and furniture.

Fig. 26 interior south west corner

at left is interior south wall of studio showing one set of closed
windows while light steams in from a second set, you will notice
that there is a pair of small windows at top, this also for
controlled lighting

Fig. 27 interior west wall

this view of studio showing the cool north light entering stage
right and the warm south light entering stage left, this sets up
the lighting situation found/seen in fig. 1 as well as many others.
Having these multiple light sources was standard procedure for
many of his mature works, and was utilized for their abundance
of colour variety and strong colour contrasts.

Fig. 28 studio furniture

Once again in the photo directly above we see the size and
height and proportional relationships of the various flat table
planes to one another, and even the photo suggests the variety
of angles and tilts that present themselves to the eye based
upon ones proximity to each piece (cones of vision). noting in
this photo and the paintings the white linen "napkin" as Czanne
called it. He had his laundress add tons of starch to it each time
it was washed so that it would hold its angles and curves once
arranged in a set up. The blue piece with designs on it which
shows up in many studies as in art magazine article painting is a
piece of "carpet" like a hall runner, like thick woven matting or
tapestry. Stiff as hell and with the ability to support the weight of
objects set on it or within its folds.
Cezanne also used small blocks, coins, folded cloths, etc to
adjust and tip objects, not to distort them but so that the colour
arrangement he desired could be easily seen. This fact is not
contestable as it is laid out in detail by visitors to his studio who

saw his methods and recorded them, and this information is

also mentioned in Czannes own words.
so having now established the optimal physical conditions
through which to study his sensations he picks up his palette
loaded with pigments and steps to the easel, makes an
observation from his model/set up, and with brush in hand
mixes the colour he has observed and smears some paint.
A common sense investigation of his methods and means
disproves most of these writers unfounded conjectures. He
was not an idiot, he was insightful, curious and inquisitive, as
well as volatile (when confronted by stupidity/humans, sorry,
that was redundant). He had the perfect internal mix for still life
as meditation, and had the visual philosophy of any dedicated
still life painter still life must give the sense of immovable
certainty/absolute stillness, yet invoke in the mind/perception an
anticipatory sense of imminent movement. From this these
"educated" people insist that he did this as a scheming
intention, they have no idea that this is the visual result of any
three dimensional composition well laid and well arranged. Non
colourist painters cannot grasp these ideas because they are
perceptual and not intellectual, only seeing is understanding.
However the worst offence in the magazine article is the abuse
of Czannes letter (which the writer does not specify even as to
year) to his son Paul jr , where the writer attempts to reinforce
his premise that the still life in article and all other Czanne
paintings were not done from a single point of view but were
painted from multiple viewpoints on the same canvas. He
implies that when Czanne told his son Paul that he could paint
for months by only changing his position that it was in the
studio, and that Czanne meant actually changing his p.o.v.
multiple times in the same canvas. Both of these insinuations
and assertions are not just distortions but are demonstrably
untrue, whether intentional or out of ignorance the end effect is
to discard the painters actualities in favor of the writers usage
and perpetuation of a false mythology that has persisted for
many decades.

If Czanne had said in the studio he would have meant that he

was to paint the same still life as multiple paintings, as multiple
compositions, as a series of investigations and studies on
different canvases by moving his easel to a new vantage point
due to the abundance of visual materials embodied within each
compositional set up, his body of work is replete with numerous
examples of this approach.
But the actual letter is of September 8th, 1906, and Czanne was
not referring to the studio at all, he was referring to the
landscape, here on the river bank, there are so many motifs, the
same subject seen from another angle offers a (new) subject of
the most compelling interest, and so varied that I believe that I
could work away for months without changing position (area of
location/venue) but just by leaning a little to the right and then a
little to the left.
He was not saying and did not mean that he was doing multiple
points of view in the one/same painting, he was referencing what
all good landscape painters discovered when they found a well
balanced motif and that was that it lent itself to a serial approach
(as he had learned from Mont and Pissarro), multiple canvases
each expressing a different aspect of that same view. And there
are many examples of this in Czannes work, especially in
series of still life paintings based upon the same objects in
alternate arrangements or the same arrangement observed from
alternate positions, all easily provable by examining John
Rewalds Catalogue Raisonne of Czannes works.
The actual basis of this myth, of multiple points of view in
Czannes work, arises first from photo comparisons of motifs
to paintings and as here are based solely upon the works not
being created through academic perspective. But his design
structures have a common sense explanation which will be
covered in the analysis below (figs. 40-44). Beyond his youth
Czanne was not intentionally being avant garde. He was a
realist/representational painter in the strictest sense in that he
was attempting to paint what he saw as best he could, and dealt
with nature based upon his own gifts and observational
understanding. So having disavowed the inaccuracies of the

article we should examine how Czanne actually worked and

discover the visual problems he was attempting to resolve.

Oppositional analysis of article painting:

From having toured Czannes studio we can determine the
physical lighting situation and general light key of article
painting. as seen in the photo of the studio window positions
below we have the same lighting set up as diagramed in fig. 30

Fig. 29 west wall of studio showing south window shutters

open allowing direct light to enter throwing warm coloured
reflections everywhere, this would be the type of lighting
scenario which Czanne had come to favor over decades of still
life painting as he had found it best suited his warm light plane
cool shadow note colour arrangements, this gave him the
highest colour contrasts to make his observations from.

Fig. 30 lighting etc.

from the warm coloured light planes at A, B, C, D, E and
positions of X marks on melon, jar, and napkin it is obvious that
it is a sunny day outside and south light is entering at high
middle and low positions, coupled with the variety of warm
pigments which show these colour notes we can say that the full
length of double shutters are open and the direct sunlight is
hitting the floor and being reflected up into the compositional
set up (reference figs. 25-27,29 of studio interior).
this still life is in almost wrap around high frontal light (from
south windows and reflection from floor), this destroys
academic form based upon value contrasts, (which is the biased
visual form in which most people perceive), and makes the
colour shifts more luminous in most every example, in full light
what few shadow contrasts are there must work double duty in
defining form and depth, and for design emphasis. With almost
as much light (excepting in a cooler range of wavelengths)
entering from north windows what cast shadows there are
appear almost as illuminated as the light planes except being a

different colour, instead of value contrasts he has a composition

consisting of colour contrasts.
As such the arrangement contains no accidental colour
planes. The partially opened drawer catching the warm light, the
flash of warm light crossing corner of table top as well as the
warm note which runs the length of its edge, the flash of warm
light on the forked stick supporting eggplants, the vertical light
plane on wall, the napkin at C and D, plate edge and frontal
planes of all the objects and tapestry generate a closed reclining
loop, a large oblate movement of warm colour notes which were
to lead the eye from one to the other as ones gaze traversed the
composition. These warm notes appear at first to dominate the
colour scheme of the painting but they are brought into balance
not only by the cool shadow notes but the intermediate notes of
colour which are neither warm nor cool. So from a lighting
standpoint he has a thoughtful and well balanced scheme.
The plate is tilted forward upon the pile of starched napkin so
that it will receive the maximum amount of warm light, it is his
focal point and where he is constructing his most structurally
modelled and vivid colour forms. Had the bowl been sitting flat
on table plane this hoped for effect would have been
conventional and dull (showing a light plane and a shadow note
in similar or equal spatial proportions). In that situation the
surface areas exposing strong colours to the eye would have
been diminished in proportion and would no longer carry the
desired emphasis for that part of the composition, simply
meaning 6 square inches of red or yellow have a far stronger
effect on the perceptual areas of the brain than does 2 square
inches of the same colour. So his propping and tilting of the
dish was a common sense solution to a colour design problem.
Beyond the lighting we see at R the hanging eggplants in upper
right, these have far passed their prime, have become flabby
and dull skinned, anyone who has raised a garden and grown
this vegetable will easily recognize their condition as such from
his accurate representation of them, a representation which one
would be hard pressed to say contains anything esoteric.

The actual ginger jar with its rattan webbing used in this set up
is covered with blue designs, a colour emphasized when in half
tone and more so in shadow, this in effect acts as a colour
contrast for the warm lit area, this use of near chromatic
compliments in close proximity creates a vibrational effect in the
eye which clearly amplifies both pigments, a fundamental
principle of the impressionist approach. He often complained of
not being able to reach the intensities that he saw in nature, in
his subjects, this is one small solution to that problem.
But the writer of article appears to be judging the painting not
from Cezannes actual approach using colour contrasts but from
a black and white tonal perspective. He has as well made
comparisons from a linear drawing standpoint, thus making a
judgment based upon criteria from an academic formula, (a
formula totally rejected by Czanne as obsolete). The end result
being that the writer seems to see only his own contextual
education and conceptual conditionings instead of actually
seeing the physical reality of the painting itself.
before getting to the more complicated ideas I have tried In figs.
31 and 32, to point out two of the writers most elementary
mistaken assumptions and these from people who love
Czanne, this only giving more ammunition to the Czanne
haters, they believing him to be making a distorted mess, when
in truth neither side having a clue about what he was doing.

Fig. 31 this detail above from a different work, 1887-88,

contains the same green and bisque clay olive jar as is in article
piece, as can be easily seen the opening of this jar is oblate, not
round, but almost rectangular, here in its unmodullated state it
looks like a solid rectangular surface but that is the starting
colour note. The jug in reality slightly dishes open showing a
cupped hollow space before actually constricting to the neck
proper, and if one will note the base of jar we see the narrow
elongation of an ovate form, not the rendering of a circular one.
So contrary to authors statements the physical characteristics

of this jar actually do comply with how Czanne attempted to

paint it. The other discrepancy of height and shape openings of
jars is covered below under fig. 33

Fig. 32 the flat lemon in question from article:

It is obvious that in this detail area of the painting it contains
mostly incomplete statements. The author mentions the
modelling of this lemon but says it looks flat; he does not seem
to be able to visually separate its actuality from the dark
masking out of Czannes reemphasis of his shadow shapes.
This projecting of ideas or theories of finish (or poetic emotions)
on to unfinished paintings is simply egocentricities on the part
of writers and shows little visual logic as well.

This lemon is as "modelled as all the other areas that have had
the time to be modelled and only stands out because it is in the
incomplete process of being redefined within its aerial space. if
you look at the close up of the lemon it is obvious that Czanne
has modelled it in to the form volume as well as the light and
distance it was from his eye, the top right and left arrows point
to a readdressing of the spatial placement of this form, the
bottom arrow points to a delicate penumbra (a lighter secondary
shadow) cast by this object, all of which are close observations
of the subjects actuality in an attempt to express it as seen.
And as is often the case with works in progress he has redefined
the perimeters of many objects and areas for further modelling
and redefinition of both placement, shape, and spatial
adjustment. The dark outline is characteristic of his pentimenti,
his developmental process but this has caused this writers
perception to see flatly since he cannot see the colour
modulation of the lemon form as separate from its contrasting
surroundings (or otherwise wishes to cast some emotional
trappings on to it that were never the intentions of the painter).

Fig. 33 a common sense look at lighting details and unresolved

areas the author has judged as if being completed statements.
WL (representing areas marked with X in fig. 29) is warm light
from south windows illuminating frontal surfaces, while at A the
cool light from north window washes over forms from the rear.
the entire colour area A colliding with the north light illumination
of the ginger jars shadow area virtually dissolves the edge
separating the two. at B we see the transitional colour planes as
the south light and north light mingle in a nebulous half tone.
and the melons redefined edge and shadow at D, seen in close
up, are more resolved than not.
at F we see a redefining of the olive jars as yet unmodelled
contour to pull it loose from the background shadow area to its
left under table, and in area F1 there are multiple gradations of
tone in an attempt to have the wall in shadow fall away from the
form of the olive jar, thus deflating the idea of an intentional

flatness in those areas of table legs also still in an unmodullated

state of ebauche. at both G and E1 we also see form planes and
area shapes as yet remaining in their initial pigment washes
applied in a thin and summary manner with bare canvas
showing in many places. Once again the common sense
impression is of an unresolved work in progress.
C demarks unresolved first statement pear (in contrast to those
developed ones in plate). author mentions the stem of that pear
at C1 behind ginger jar as being something almost esoteric, but
this is how a painter works, not all the painting is simultaneous,
some areas are always ahead and some lag behind in refinement
(just as the areas marked with X are undeveloped thin washes of
the original start), to suggest that the stem area is anything
other than an original summary of the ebauche is total b/s and
an emotionalized fantasy on the writers part.
The visual heights and openings in the 2 jars at E and E1 are
where the writer wishes to exploit his (demonstrably false)
premise that multiple viewpoints were utilized. fig. 31 offers
objective information about the oblate and cupped opening of
olive jar, seen in person as a dished out receptacle of pale and
reflective bisque clay it gives the impression of a much larger
opening than its actual measurements. and at E we see an as yet
unresolved reworking of the opening in the ginger jar, the upper
left quadrant of which has been redefined with dark lines both
inside and out. Upon close examination one sees that the upper
left third of the rim has been carefully and accurately defined
(with an upper surface light plane colour note) as the correct
forwardly opening shape seen at that distance from the eye, this
fact makes the other two thirds of rim even more incorrect thus
allowing no legitimate shape comparison to the opening in the
olive jar. The unresolved nature of both openings invites no
comparison at all that could be seen as anything but a surmisal.
The distance at which each jar is viewed also accounts for the
writers supposed academic drawing discrepancies. But these
are not conventional errors in academic perspective but are
shape relational problems as viewed when utilizing cones of

vision. Figs. 40-44 offer a more complete description and

explanation of this phenomena and visual field effect.
Many years ago some one made the comment that they were
trying to see if some of the colours they saw were real or just an
optical illusion before they mixed them and put them in their
study, hearing this dumbass statement the painter Charles Miller
responded, its all an optical illusion! this is another simple
common sense truth that is often lost or disregarded, especially
by all those wishing to promote their theory de jour about
Czanne. As far as the stage to which Czanne has developed
this abandoned study one sees nothing that would not easily be
considered a realist painters as yet incomplete attempt to paint
an interestingly complex still life, to paint a pear as a pear.

Fig. 34 detail of painting from article:

areas of refined colour modulation of reflected and rereflected

chromatic shifts. as can be seen, with resolution of his colour
shifts, comes a certain confidence that the forms are complete,
with little need for further redefinition or searching for a border.

Fig. 35 Detail of colour modulation:

(consult fig. 36 for detailed analysis), this one area is enough to
completely validate the simple fact that Czanne was a common
sense realist painter attempting to render his visual sensations
as accurate colour notations. in truth that is profound enough
when accomplished, no need to look for further miracles (or
assume that we are better at judging his work than he was, this
being the most heinous mistake in modern times by visually
uneducated writers). One should refer back to this figure as the
designated areas are described below in order to see the colour
shifts and visual effects for yourself.

Fig. 36

achromatic detail of pears,

Here is an area which shows extremely close attention to

perceptual detail, A indicates a plane shift into halftone light. B
indicates a plane shift into half tone shadow, F indicates a half
tone shift as well as reflected light, E shows a bare quarter tone
shift almost overwhelmed by light as that plane just begins to
break into a turn. at D we see a colour saturated light plane
acting as a half tone, generating a turn as well as volume by
colour alone without the need for several form plane shifts. All
of these executed by distinctively different and separately laid
coloured pigments.
The 3 arrows at left indicate an edge being lost due to halation
effect, (where light is jumping from a light area into a shadow
area) creating a glare that actually has volume, he has done this
with several colour shifts separately laid with the brush and did
not do it with a generalized blending or smearing of the edge.
The arrow in upper middle indicates an aerial penumbra, this is

where a form has cast a shadow and the light passing through
the air immediately surrounding the object (that has cast that
shadow) has acted as a lens refracting the light, so casting a
totally different colour between shadow and light planes upon
the object receiving the cast shadow. (this lens type phenomena
is generated by the objects volume causing minute air
compression or displacement, just as a boat displaces water).
The elongated oval area is where Cezanne has modelled the
form volume as it turns away from the eye with 3 or 4 distinct
colour planes, also separately laid. at C we find at least 6 colour
plane shifts showing multiple chromatic reflections and rereflections. This level of observational insight only comes with
years of acute study by someone who places great value on his
ability to perceive and register these effects in paint. Hensche
would call him someone who values visual truth.
These are the intensely concentrated searches of a man
investigating his own perception of reality, and dealing with the
purgatory of frustration into which that casts one who would
attempt to actually understand what is there before him.
Cezanne was and is a common sense realist with an intense
determination as well as an uncommon ability to ferret out visual
truths others were completely blind to. The writer of that article
is a member of a large group of critics and connoisseurs who try
to cast their superficial observations of the visual in to
supposed verbal profundities, always failing however because
of an inability to look past their perceptual ignorance.
The reason the actual painter eludes them is because his
perceptual development is beyond the scope of their reasoning,
their insight, and even their imagination. If they would only look
with common sense at what he said he was doing they might
actually see. Like everyone they see his nave non academic
drawing and immediately judge that he was intentional in his
errors. Well it was intentional to the degree that he wished to
use his own abilities (and shortcomings) and his own merits and
would accept the result (no matter how faulty in others eyes)
and not be beholden to anyone else for his perceptions (by
having conformed to their obsolete academic standard).

painting is first and foremost an optical affair, he has painted

a pear that is just a pear. No need to look for the esoteric beyond
the already miraculous.

Fig. 37 details of colour modulation

further details of colour modelling of the form volumes (and
although he often repeats colours), these separate colour planes
(laid as delicately as he was capable of making his taches/colour
patches) defining these three dimensional visual volumes are
not the thinking processes of someone attempting to make two

dimensional images or thinking two dimensionally at all, or

attempting to purposefully distort the reality before him.
All that absurd b/s is the thinking of writers and non painters as
well as those who call themselves painters yet have no
perceptual development beyond the ability for simplistic two
dimensional posterization of vision. Those people looking at his
paintings or these jpgs would see nothing but flat patterns. How
one sees Czanne is a perceptual problem not an intellectual
one. As for Czanne himself he did the very best he could as a
realist painter with the gifts he had at his disposal.

Fig. 38 achromatic showing compositional structure of form

volumes

Contrary to the authors assertions things do not appear to be

running off (or about to run off) in various directions. everything
above the broken magenta line; the tall oblate olive jar, the
ginger jar, wine bottle, as well as the melon are all obviously
sitting solidly and firmly upon the same stable ground plane of
the table top, the unresolved openings in them (discussed
earlier) do not distract from their visual stability, (the yellow
lines indicate subtle colour and form plane shifts which define
where the frontal planes are descending from the unseen edge
of that same table top, the descending yellow line in lower
middle demarking where the front plane of tapestry breaks from
light to shadow, not at a fold but mostly in open air).
This while the napkin folds are supporting and pressing up and
forward to present the stronger colours to the eye (like watching
an experienced waiter handling a full tray without spilling
anything), he is presenting bold colouration to the eye served
with an uplifting flourish. He is concentrating his visual thrust
forward, he has not designed it for the lines to run the eye off
the canvas but for the volumes they outline to lift and hold the
other forms. these volumes hold the eye as one actually sees,
spherically, with the peripheral areas receding from the eye and
the focal area advancing to the center of the eye (as stated in his
quotes).
He has done this through colours and designs which are
visually insinuating structural planes beyond and beneath the
pictorial surface, these planes not being an aesthetic scheme
but being the natural result of well conceived three dimensional
colour composition (his structural planes are a topic too lengthy
for any in depth discussion here).
Once again it is only the areas that are still unresolved and
being redefined that are generating the writers misconceptions
(two most obvious marked in red and discussed previously with
lemon). His mistaken judgment arising because he has taken
tentative components to be complete compositional elements
when they are far from what Czanne intended once those
particular visual problems were resolved, (false premise will
always generate a false conclusion). Mont understood that

people were for the most part perceptually incompetent and was
why he burned most of his unfinished works.

Fig. 39
While poor perceptual development did not allow him to see
things clearly, (such as the colour modelling of the lemon form
as a volume), the writer of the article has not seen this painting
at all. He has only seen his intellectual education about the
painting; he sees what he has been told and indoctrinated to see
and then waxes poetic about these misconceptions as if they are
attributes instead of liabilities. He has stated his emotional
reaction upon seeing his mental conditioning but certainly has
not encountered Czanne himself. Had he simply canned the bs
and looked out with his own eyes and actually seen a single
Czanne pear there on that plate what might he have written

then? But no, emotional fantasy and intellectual conjecture are

far preferable to reality, in any form, nest-ce pas?!
The reason these writers are completely mistaken about
Czanne is that they have reverse engineered their theories for
analysis of Czannes work, they have worked backwards from
the questionable cubists and their unfounded sayings, writings,
manifestos, and works (instead of confining themselves to what
Czanne and his intimates actually had to say about what he
was doing and how he was doing it). And that is another
egregious offence, when they actually do use Czannes words
they distort the meanings based upon those theories arrived at
through this reverse engineering, as this one did in Czannes
letter of 1906 when he implied that Czanne set up his easel all
around the room to work on this one piece from totally different
points of view.
As was said before, some uneducated person would easily see
this work as incomplete or as one rejected by the painter and
not make assumptions about it that are patently false and
without physical justification. These writers on art are quite
often without visual education or perceptual development yet
they think that words can explain it all. But the visual is not the
verbal or the intellectual, they are entirely unrelated.
visual perception is a silent resource and must be both trained
and untrained in equal parts without conflict before one can
understand, only in the actual seeing is there actual
understanding (and only through decades of strict colour study
is there actual seeing), making up emotional and fantasy
scenarios is never a valid explanation, for anything.

Compositional perception and mistaken identity:

Fig. 40 simulated Czanne still life: photo simulation

reproducing many of his characteristic visual effects,
To repeat from fig. 9: the general design perspective here is an
example of a very particular optical field; in which those things
furthest from the eye will appear or seem more upright (because
we are looking at them horizontally, predominately from the side
with the line of sight perpendicular to their upright axes) while
those things closest to the eye will appear more reclined,
inclined or flattened (because to observe these areas the angle

of the head or eye is tilted downward, so one sees more of their

upper surfaces).
This is a most natural way of seeing and is once again set in
contrast to the visual artificiality of mathematical linear
perspective. the natural visual principle of cones of vision is
easily seen in this simulated painting above as well as many
other figures of Czannes paintings in this note and is, along
with his purposeful propping and tilting of objects, the source of
the often analyzed underlying structural planes of his mature
work. This is, in compositional structure, that which has been
continuously and erroneously tagged as multiple viewpoints
in the same work.
To repeat, the phenomena represented in fig.40 above is not to
be mistaken for multiple viewpoints (which implies that the man
kept moving his easel around the room, or physically changed
his standing position to another area of the room). Unlike the
academics who wish to deny the actuality of vision by rectifying
all form drawing to the same false symmetrical representation
(fig. 42), Czanne did not consolidate forms in this formulaic
manner. He followed his own natural vision through a series of
overlapping visual frames or cones (called cones because they
are based upon the concentric orb of the eyes lens which
whether focused near by or at a distance generates a conical
shaped visual field).
But these separately seen cones are not multiple viewpoints, in
any particular painting they are all utilized from standing and
making ones observations from the same spot, this is actually
how the eye takes in whatever passes in front of it. This is a real
vision optical perspective which he expressed in his paintings
through colour/chromatic recession. This effect is more
prominent in those compositions where there are multiple focal
areas (whether those areas are fully developed or not).

Fig. 41 crude diagram of simple cones of vision,

Once again not to be mistaken for multiple vantage points
which implies moving to a different position in relation to the
overall compositional model being observed. When standing in
the same spot this is the natural tilt of the head as we look at
various areas of set up and paint them in accordance to that
areas lay lines or planes seen from that distance and at that
angle of incidence.
One cannot judge this mans work by simplistic academic clich
which no real painter has subscribed to since about 1850, the
academics are the non realists, always painting a mental
concept instead of their own vision. As well as the simple
minded photo copyists who have none of these in depth
compositional problems with painting because they have
allowed a machine to dictate a fixed p.o.v. on to a two
dimensional image which they are very happy to repeat in
another format while erroneously thinking they are realists.

Fig. 42 crude illustration of overlapping cones of vision,

it is from within the multiple continuous overlapping
observations of the subject that a semblance of balance and
continuity are brought to the painted composition, it is through
the individual resolution of these conflicting observations that
a painting is freed from the clich of the academic characteristic
of false symmetry which forces one to comply to the same
visual template of a single homogenized concept of conditioned
vision. And as one can see in fig. 9, page 21, when the visual
problems are all completely resolved the end effect is one of a
seamless whole, with no jarring divisions between those things
seen upright and those seen on the incline.

Fig. 43 crude example of academic perspective

in rounded forms even in mathematical linear perspective there
is a visual distortion based upon the forms or shapes keel
line being longer than its beam, the upper parabola being
smaller and steeper sided than the lower parabola. or if on the
horizontal of the two parabolas being of smaller and larger
surface area. but because they always try to turn everything
into a two dimensional flat pattern the academics ignore this
distortion in favor of what is in most cases a non existent
visual symmetry, a false visual symmetry.
The symmetrical ellipse of the opening in a bowl or cup or jug is
only a symmetrical oval if that object is seen dead on (both eyes
focal length being exactly the same and hitting the object
exactly at its vertical center line) and at near eye level, all other
situations negate that symmetry, this is a simple visual and
more importantly physical fact. so who is making realist
observations and who the hell is making things up? The
academics of course, not Czanne, as he stated he is just
naively trying to copy what he sees as best he can, he is
following his visual common sense to the best of his abilities.
This diagram and text are also further clarification of the
discussion of the shapes of jar openings found under fig. 33

Fig. 44 (hard to draw with a mouse so please indulge the wavy

lines, all meant to be smooth or straight both here and in fig. 43)
this is a crude attempt to illustrate 10 or 20 or 40 point
perspective, and how each and every object and major structural
plane have their own vanishing point. also shown are the
simple motion lines generated by three dimensional forms in
space according to how we see them (which optical cone area
they may reside in related to ones observational p.o.v.). at A we
see the 2 rotational axes of table plane seen from its expanding
edges, at C is the upright plane of the wall, perfectly vertical and
perfectly horizontal as if perfectly parallel to vision thus
seemingly without vanishing points and so without visual
movement. at D we see the directional movements of the floor
plane moving away from its 2 vanishing points, in both table and

floor we are aware of those planes expanding forward or

acceding and not receding, a strong characteristic of Czannes
compositional insights.
at E is the rotation line off the keel of the fruit plates lay plane.
at B is the elongated S curve generated by the movement of the
major form volumes. the orange lines coming off the olive jar
and wine jug show where their volumes are projecting a lateral
motion, their weighted shape visually pulling the objects forward
from their (seemingly) already tilted axiss, both of which
deviate forward and away from the completely vertical upright
plane of the background (C), purposely and precisely
perpendicular to floor plane (D) for absolute visual stability of
composition, an anchor. This is the shear wall or stabilizing
plane often seen in many of Czannes compositions.
The blue dots: at 1 shows the vanishing point (vp) of the table
planes left traversal. 2 represents what would be an unseen
spot far above our illustration as the vp of wall plane. 3 the far
distant vp of the floor plane. 4 the vp of white plates edges, and
5 shows the nearby vp of the pear just beyond and below the
surface of the table plane, and on and on and on. two vanishing
points for each separate object and plane as well as every form
plane change which is indicated in the colour modelling of that
form. if a pear has 10 notes registered as form plane changes
then there are a minimum of 20 nearby vanishing points just for
those smaller planes. Not that these would ever come into
consideration, it is all simply to illustrate the complexity and
multiplicity of the numbers of elements and components which
perception is constantly juggling to rectify sight to vision.
the table is not tilted, this is how a low table appears when one
stands close by to observe it, nor is the floor or the pots or
chairs. the only tilted form here is the bowl which is intentionally
propped (as Czanne did) under back and right edge and
showing an obvious rotation up and to the left, all else is in its
naturally seen perspective as observed from close at hand. The
apparent visual confusion that some may see here will only
exist if the obsolete academic convention of mathematical linear
perspective is applied to a visual problem it cannot explain. this

because its program does not have the capacity to compute an

explanation, just as newtonian physics was made obsolete by
the capacity of quantum mechanics to more clearly rectify
physical notions of reality.
there is, in an apple, in a head, (all forms), a culminating point,
and this point in spite of the effect, the tremendous effect:
shadow or light, sensations of colour is always the one
nearest to our eyes (the colour plane we are facing directly).
the edges of objects recede to another point placed on our
horizon (a horizon which reincarnates in multiple positions).
that is my great principle, my conviction, my discovery (a
perspective of colour plane recession).
Cezanne was not an idiot, he was a well educated man, if this
quoted statement had anything to do with academic perspective
it would never have been a point of personal discovery (and
therefore also dumb as hell to analyze his work with that
academic sort as article writer does). Once again, Czannes
reference here is to the fact that each and every form has its
own lay plane or angle of incidence, as well as its own individual
vanishing point upon that horizon he mentions. But that
horizon is not an academically fixed single horizon line. The
horizon for each vanishing point is established by the lay plane
of each form, and that plane and its directional movement is
completely dependant upon the position of ones particular cone
of vision during that observation. There is no single visual
horizon, just as in reality all it takes is blinking ones eyes for the
horizon to shift, but even that is not to be mistaken for multiple
points of view, because it is no such thing.
His multiple planes generating multiple vanishing points upon
multiple horizons is the most natural non conceptualized way of
seeing yet is beyond the perceptual grasp of most painters
because their perceptions have been programmed to an
obsolete academic conceptual bias. Because of that situation
this Czanne effect is also beyond their intellectual grasp. Its
not that it is non existent but because of perceptual biases it is
beyond even their ability to imagine it as a possibility or
potentiality, and is therefore explained and interpreted by them

as multiple viewpoints, this is the perceptually ignorant

clinging unknowingly to the conceptually obsolete.

Conclusion of article analysis:

Always a tenuous draughtsman at best, Czanne struggled for
visual accuracy, this was his constant life long lament, the
modern writers academic assumption is that drawing that bad
must be intentional and purposeful, but that is their fantasy and
not his actuality, an actuality which was his cross to bear. It is a
profound mistake to not understand that It is ones
shortcomings which make ones works unique/original. If all
painters were equipped with the same gifts of observation and
skill all expressions in painting would likely have nothing but an
academic sterile and mechanical representation of the world.
The sick sad part is that this sterility appeals to the vast majority
and mass of the public, this because that is the lowest and most
common of all perceptual levels, a photo and copyist mentality.
Czannes often used word temperament should be
understood as character, a strength of perseverance which
allows the painter to eventually accomplish his lifes work, to
finally reach the conclusion of his original intentions, as with all
things character is the key to going the distance. Sadly beyond
that most painters are more interested in sales than perceptual
development, had Czanne also been that weak and lacking in
character (so as to conform to public wishes for the lowest
possible perceptual level in painting, that of the academic
copyist) then we would not have his unique contributions to the
advancement of colour and visual perception or the originality of
the man rooted in his inadequacies. It was his dogged
determination to become a fine painter that marks his life and
which he undoubtedly achieved.
What was discussed here is not so profound as it is simple
common sense observation. One must always keep in mind that
the visual is not the verbal, one should first look with common
sense before the verbal parts of the brain are allowed to prattle

on and obscure what one is seeing. The eye does not lie, while
the educated intellect and conditioned perception continuously
do. Before we try to show how smart we are by concocting
(false) profundities we should first use visual common sense to
acknowledge the simple physical actuality of what is in front of
us and not imply motives to the painter which never entered that
painters mind. Czanne was born with only modest gifts for
painting but he was also born with an intense tenacity which
compensated for many of his shortcomings. He was a simple
realist painter, period, and should be encountered as such
before judging him as otherwise.
Without doubt he had a unique vision (because of his innate
abilities to see and conceive three dimensionally), but was also
intelligent enough to follow his own common sense when it told
him to trust his own eyes, his own vision, theres a logic of
colour, damn it all! the painter owes allegiance to that alone.
never to the logic of the brain; if he abandons himself to that
logic, hes lost. painting is first and foremost an optical affair.
the stuff of art is there, in what our eyes are thinking. And once
again all practical technical expression is the painters attempt
to rectify sight to vision.
It is possible to be both passionate and serene. Czannes still
lifes are the embodiment of his own evaluation of his painting
stance, both serene and passionate, stillness imbued with
imminent motion, not as an intentional aesthetic scheme but a
byproduct of deep inquiry into the nature of ones subject. Even
having discussed many aspects of his work and understanding
him better should in no way diminish the mystery and beauty of
his finest works, that remains unchanged because they cannot
be explained away, the verbal is not the visual.
In rereading the article just now I would have moments of being
ready to let the writer off the hook, and say oh this guy aint so
stupid, he hangs many of his observations on visual facts. But
then you read on and the disconnect reasserts itself, the
rhetoric having little or nothing to do with the painting or with
Czanne, simply a compounding of misconceptions and false
assertions. Here one would like to echo the sentiments of Dr

Albert C. Barnes, the great early Czanne collector, when he

stated that in most cases the cubists cannot look to Czanne for
justification of their intentional distortions, nonsensical planes,
or incoherent manifestos.
Perceptual incompetence has been the norm through a hundred
years of constant speculation about Czanne with only a very
few (like albert c. barnes, violette de mazia, erle loran, marcel
merleau-ponty), actually grasping much of the true content of
his works, and even they are often mistaken because none are
painters in the vein of Czannes actual perceptions. So it is
necessary for each person to study Czanne for themselves
(and to actually study as he studied), not listening to those who
constantly substitute speculation for fact. One must first start by
interjecting visual common sense (the nuts and bolts of painting
and seeing) before asserting ones own intellectual speculation
as if it were true.
But all that is just an ignorant old rednecks opinion, easily
dismissed as another false premise arriving at another false
conclusion. However, unlike many others my appreciation of
Czanne came through perceptual development and not
intellectual inquiry, through 40+ years of similar study my
perception grew up to a modest comprehension of his works.
But to guard against being classified among all those others I
will let Czanne speak for himself:

Czanne on colour:
(nature) cannot be copied but must be reproduced by some
other means, by colour! All the rest; theories, drawing, ideas,
even sensations, all of them are nothing but detours. Sometimes
you think youre taking a short cut, but youve gone the long
way round. Theres only one road to a full rendering, a full
translation: colour, colour if I may say so is biological. Colour is
alive, and colour alone makes things come alive.to paint the
essence (of ones subject) you need to have the kind of painters
eyes which see the object in terms of colour alone, capture it,
and relate it, as it is, to other objects.

Nature is not at the surface; its in depth. Colours are the

expression on this surface of that depth drawing, on the other
hand, is a complete abstraction. So that it must never be
separated from colour. That would be like trying to think without
using words, just figures and symbolsfullness of drawing
always corresponds with fullness of colour. when you come
down to it, where in nature do you ever find anything drawn?
Where? Where?.......
light , producing colour sensations, gives rise to abstractions
(optical effects) which prevent me from covering my canvas or
fully defining the contours of objects when the points of contact
are subtle and delicate. Moreover the planes fall on top of one
another, producing the neo-impressionist effect of a black line,
or rim, running around the edge of things (simultaneous
contrasts) , a fault we must fight against with all our might.
Nature duly consulted gives us the means of attaining this
end.(which are) planes in colour, planes!.... i produce my
planes with the colours on my paletteyou have to see the
planes, clearly, but fit them together, blend them. they must
(both) turn and interlock at the same time. Only (colour) volumes
matter (for these volumes) Contrasts must be set up through
correct colour relationships.
objects enter into each otherimperceptivity they extend
beyond themselves through intimate reflectionsdraw? Yes by
heaven, draw! But its the enveloping reflection, the light, from
the general reflection, its the envelope thats what Im after
in my ideal of good painting, theres a unity. The drawing and
the colour are no longer distinct; as soon as you paint you draw;
the more the colours harmonize the more precise the drawing
becomes (through chromatic proportions). I know that from
experience. When the colour is at its richest, the form is at its
fullest. Contrast and relationship of colours thats the secret of
drawing and modelling all the rest is poetry. Which you need
in your head, perhaps, but which you must never try to put on
your canvas let it find its own way in there.
theres a logic of colour, damn it all! the painter owes
allegiance to that alone. Never to the logic of the brain; if he

abandons himself to that logic, hes lost. allegiance to his eyes

always. If his feeling is right his thinking will be right also.
painting is first and foremost an optical affair. the stuff of art is
there, in what our eyes are thinking if you respect nature it will
always unravel its meaning for you.

Cezanne and Pissarro:

If a degree of selfishness is needed to undertake a work involving
severe sufferings, how much more is required to continue for many
years an unbelievable effort which does not awaken the slightest
echo! To (truly) renounce praise one must have the strength to
overcome ones own doubts and to progress with no other guide than
oneself. John Rewald, intro, letters to his son Lucien, 1944
This statement of Rewalds applies in equal shares to the
struggles of both Pissarro and Czanne. As was said earlier
Pissarros influence on, association with, and guidance of
Czannes perceptual development cannot be overstated, or his
effect upon all of those who sought his guidance;
Camille Pissarro conquered these newcomers by his knowledge of
art, by his character and kindness. His councils, dictated by a
complete disinterestedness, showed the young me around him that
he was not one of those who jealously keep to themselves the fruit of
their researches. On the contrary, Pissarro was anxious to help
others profit by his experience, convinced as he was that any truth
won by human effort should belong to all. This generous sentiment
explains the role he played among the young painters. No one would
advise, help, encourage as he could; though his criticism was just, it
was tempered by indulgence. In acting thus he endeavored to
transmit to the new generation the warmth with which his first efforts
had been welcomed by the old Corot whenhe sough the advice
of the master whose influence is evident in Pissarros early work.
John Rewald, from his introduction to Camille Pissarros
letters to his son Lucien, c. 1944

 we are all the subjects of impressions, and some of us seek to

convey these impressions to others. In the art of communicating
impressions lies the power of generalizing without losing that logical
connection of all the parts to the whole which satisfies the mind.
work at the same time on sky, water, branches, ground, keeping
everything going on an equal basis... don't be afraid of putting on
colour... paint generously and unhesitatingly, for it is best not to lose
the first impression
everything depends upon how knowledge is used it is clear
that we could not pursue our studies of light with much assurance if
we did not have as a guide the discoveries of Chevreul and other
scientists. I would not have distinguished between local colour and
the colour of the light if science had not given us the hint; the same
holds true for complimentary colours, contrasting colours, etc.
one can do such beautiful things with so little. (but) Subjects that
are too pretty end by appearing theatrical.
I recognize no secret in painting other than that of the artists own
sentiment, which is not easily swiped.
Camille Pissarro 1830-1903
Pissarro believed that each painters own vision, abilities,
knowledge, and shortcomings combined to make that painters
works original, and that style was a singular and unique
thing possessed by only a single painter through individual
effort. The idea of a style of painting to be followed or to which
large groups adhered to was anathema to him. No painter ever
worked harder at his art or was more anti academic formula than
was Pissarro. So instead of deterring Czanne from his uniquely
individual and anti-academic path Pissarro simply stoked the
flames while adding a much needed and dedicated discipline.

Fig. 45

Paul Czanne and Camille Pissarro, 1870s

Fig. 46

Pissarro and Czanne landscapes, 1875-77

seen above are several landscapes where the two painters were
working together, Czanne (on right) under Pissarros careful
and measured guidance, as he said, my greatest fear is that
they will all look too much like me. as can be seen by

comparison Pissarro is atmospheric and drawn, Czanne still

very heavy handed and structured.

Fig. 46a, one of Czannes landscape paintings most like

Pissarros works, both in composition as well as execution,
although still lacking in Pissarros colour range and variety

Fig. 47

Pissarro and Czanne, self portraits

Many of Czannes early works are tentative for lack of a

better word, unsure is incorrect although assured would also be
completely wrong, he was clumsy but deeply engaged as are
most nave but committed amateurs such as Van Gogh and
Gauguin, and several others could be listed in that category
(those and others also students of Pissarro). Under the guidance
of Pissarro Czanne managed to get his emotions under control
(his sister Marie had served this function through most of his
life, Mont had said, its too bad this great talent has not had
more [psychological] support in life. Czannes near constant
state of emotional distress as well as his debilitating diabetes
are the reasons behind there being so many incomplete works).
However, through the impressionist process of working from
direct observations sur le motif Czanne begin to actually not
just see but also perceptually comprehend what was in front of
him. Through Pissarro and necessity he began developing an
orderly technique to replace his formerly nave and randomized

smearings. Pissarro guided him with a very loose rein

understanding as he did the volatility of the man (Pissarro had
an empaths insights into individual human nature). The
importance of this time and this association with Pissarro
cannot be overstated, without Pissarro there would be no
Czanne as we know him. So grateful was Czanne for this that
even late in life he listed himself as pupil of Pissarro in a tribute
to his old master whom he always referred to as the humble
and colossal Pissarro.

Fig. 48

Pissarros still lifes on left, Czannes at right,

Fig. 49 Czanne (seated), Pissarro (standing at far right), 1877

the three other males are Pissarros sons

Czanne on the academic:

in speaking of the academics of his day he said, (one)must
be wary of the literary approachthat approach which so often
diverts the painter from the right path, (which is) the concrete
study of nature, so that he gets lost too long in intangible
speculationthere are three basic principles in art, which you

will never have and towards which I have striven for thirty-five
years, and they are scrupulousness, sincerity, submission.
scrupulousness about ideas, sincerity to ones self, submission
to the objectabsolute submission to the objectif you are in
command of the model and the means of expression, you have
only to paint whats before the eyes and to persevere
logically.(to paint the essence of ones subject) you need to
have the kind of painters eyes which see the object in terms of
colour alone, capture it, and relate it, as it is, to other objects.
You can never be too scrupulous, too sincere, or too submissive
to nature, while still remaining more or less in control of your
means of expression, (but) you must adapt these to your motif,
not bending it your way but bowing to itpainting what is in
front of you and persevering in expressing yourself as logically
as possible, a natural logic. of course I have never done
anything else. you have no idea what discoveries await you
then. you see, its only through nature that you can make
progress, the eye educates itself through contact with nature. by
dint of looking and working, it becomes concentric.
(but) what is senseless is to have a preformed mythology,
ready made ideas of objects, and to copy (as the academics do)
that idea instead of reality - those imaginings instead of this
earth. Bogus painters dont see this tree, your face, this dog,
but only a tree, a face, a dog. They dont see anything, nothing is
ever the same, yet, for them a hazy kind of fixed type, which they
relay to one another, constantly floats before their eyes (in front
of their subject)..(so if I am without my colour expression) if I
am cold, if I draw, if I paint as they do in art schools, Ill no
longer see anything, a mouth, a nose, always done to formula,
always the samewithout soul, without mystery, without
passionhow do those people suppose that it is possible to
capture changeable, iridescent substance (light) with plumb
lines, academic arbitrary rules of measurement laid down once
and for all?....they dont see anything anymore, theyve never
seen anythingtheir rule is the universal rule, (the only true)
drawing is their drawing, that covers everything for them(but
how can it suffice) when infinite diversity is natures
masterpiece!

Czannes paintings and studies:

Fig. 50 uncle dominic, four heads from Czannes youth,

mostly palette knife 1866,

Fig.51 from middle age, a conventional tonal self port, 1878-80

Fig. 52 late Czanne self portrait,

1898-1900

Cezanne is not trying to make a cartoon of himself, he is

attempting to model the form plane changes of flesh through
colour changes instead of local colour value changes, and like
everyone who attempts to develop in this manner until they
arrive at a level of refinement the colours they use are often

somewhat jarring even as the colours shapes define anatomical

structure. As he said I am only the primitive of my way, the
man making the discoveries and perceptual breaktroughs. He
hoped others would follow his understanding and further
develop and complete what he had started.

Fig. 53 self portrait , detail of colour taches and colour planes

Fig. 54 self portrait, in watercolour, 1895 ,

obviously not a man attempting to escape realism

Fig. 55

portrait of henry gasquet ,

1896

one of the earliest portraits ever to be attempted completely

through complex colour plane changes. pioneers in a new (non
academic) realist visual language cannot be criticized by
obsolete academic rules that do not apply to them. the personal
opinions of like or dislike also have no bearing on what he

actually accomplished. the draughtsmans truth is not the

colourists truth and a colourist cannot be judged by a
draughtsmans rulebook, criteria, or visual biases.

Fig. 56 Gasquet, detail of colour planes of flatly laid taches,

I have removed the big black brush mark with which Czanne
defaced this work during one of his emotional episodes (fits)

Fig. 57 portrait of ambroise vollard,

1899

after 100 mostly miserably uncomfortable sittings vollard asked

Czanne when will you cover those blank spots on the hand, ,

oh non non monsieur, if I cover them prematurely before I

have discovered the exact colour note it could ruin the whole
ensemble, then I would have to start all over, vollard made no
further comment.

Fig. 58 vollard, detail,

Cezanne was doing his damndest to paint a colour portrait of
vollard under the light key he was observing, as usual his
inabilities so frustrated him that during his last attempt he yelled
out loud and broke his bundle of brushes and threw them on the
floor and told vollard I cannot continue, vollard sheepishly
asked well is there nothing here that pleases you?, after a
moments pause Czanne said, the shirt front is acceptable,
and walked away.

Fig. B Photographs of Paul Czanne, Czanne had diabetes,

so debilitating that very often a handshake or even the slightest
touch was excruciatingly painful, because of this he refrained
from public gatherings or crowds and eventually from outside
contacts, these simple facts of his physical condition have often

been perverted into other motives on his part, but this is simply
idle speculation by many with a voyeurs mentality.

Fig. 59

the smoker, 1891-92

Weight, form, and volume from colour planes generated by flatly

lain colour taches, one must never mistake technique for or as
vision, it is merely a means and as every painter knows is
always inadequate to the service it is asked to perform. As with
all of his realist works this painting is based upon visual
observation of the model and is expressed to the best of his
technical abilities, and contrary to all the modernist critiques it
is not based upon some jackshit theory. It is an unfinished
partially developed painting of a man leaning on his elbow with a
pipe in his mouth, painted as an interpretation of the colour
arrangement before him and not expressed through academic
sterility. My point being that Czannes unique expression is
unavoidable and inevitable but never intentional, it was never a
style, it was an imperative, a necessity, and based solely upon
his perceptual development and his modest skills.
And rather than taking away from or diminishing what he
accomplished it shows a further extension of impressionist
visual colour principles taught to him by Pissarro as applied to
form volumes,
we must make something solid of
impressionism, like the paintings in the museums , he desired
to arrive at a classical approach to form through colour.
He said, we do not set ourselves in the place of art history, we
simply add our link,
He did not want to abolish representational painting, he simply
wanted to do two things; firstly to remove the academic
straightjacket which was then constricting all visual expression,
and to return to the painters approach that existed before that
dead academic formula had become the only acceptable
aesthetic. A man with the word classical passing his lips
every other sentence was in no way attempting to overturn
realist painting by initiating (what were later to become) cubist
absurdities, a style solely based upon a wholesale appropriation
by others of his paintings surface characteristics, yet carrying
nothing of his profound vision or perceptual development.

Fig. 60 Madame Czanne in the conservatory, regardless of

ones personal opinion of Czanne this is a beautiful colour
composition, 1891-92

Fig. 61 detail of colour taches

Fig. 62 Madame Czanne in a red armchair, 1877, MFA Boston,

upon seeing this the last time years ago, I decided that it ranked
only second to Vermeers girl in a red hat (National, D.C.) as
being the two most beautiful head paintings ever done,

Fig. 63

detail of colour planes

Fig. 64

Marie- Hortense Fiquet, Madame Czanne,

for that time considered to be a high maintenance woman, was

called by his friends and associates, the ball, she cares only
for Switzerland and lemonade, after Czannes death it took
her only 3 years to gamble away her fortune. I shot this from a

photo in Czannes Letters, I could find no jpgs of her on

internet.

Fig. 65

a younger Marie- Hortense Fiquet, 1883-85

Fig. 66

Marie- Hortense Fiquet,

Madame Czanne,

in a quick comparison to photo in fig. 64 it is obvious that

Czannes studies of her are quite a flattering of the model.

Fig. 67

louis guillaume,

1879-80

as can be seen from the partially developed pieces of madam

Czanne above and of the young boy here (fig. 67), Matisse,
Braque, Picasso, Modigliani, and quite a few others, basically
confiscated or stole the most elementary surface and design
aspects of Czannes work, seeing in them only a style to be

appropriated, but unlike Czannes work (which has the stamp

of integrity, which is always marked by the obvious evidence of
a deep and honest struggle) it is for them a style without
substance. These people had no idea that what they perceived
to be his estyle as he called it, was not the content of
Czannes work. That being the difference between someone
like Czanne who wished to research, discover, and express the
sources of his own perception and all those others who were
simply looking for a quick reputation bought by cheap
sensationalism or any other possible means, borrowed or
otherwise.
its the worst kind of decadence to play at ignorance and
navetin people who feign ignorance there is a kind of
barbarism even more detestable than the academic kind, so
in Czannes opinion feigning navet, as all these others did, is
the worst deceit of all. Which is not to say they could not do
anything they wished to; but having done so they cannot
legitimately claim Czanne as their source, mentor, or master.
Once again, it is time for that stinking albatross (of being the
father of modern art) to be removed from around Czannes
neck and to be lain at the feet of those who also rightfully
deserve the accolades which come with it.

Czannes Doubt
I would add here that much has been said about Czannes
halting progress or his indecisiveness as to how to complete
or conclude a work (as seen in many of the pieces illustrated in
this article). There were many reasons for this, including the
fact that he was not just making a picture, he also had to await
the return of the same light key (the exacting light and
atmospheric conditions) in order to make accurate comparative
observations of painting to subject. Often by the time that these
exacting conditions repeated he had gone on to other studies.
There is also the sincerity that comes with that type of honest
struggle which leaves an abundance of humility in its wake, this

allowed him to comprehend the truth of his modest

developments, and his admittedly slow progress, so blunting
any arrogant overestimation of his own worth or the worth of
any particular painting, finished or unfinished. That all being far
preferable to those conceited novices who having had only a
short apprenticeship think so highly of their rudimentary efforts
that they consider themselves the worthy heir of any master,
this without ever having developed either the perception or
insights of even a competent journeyman and certainly not the
character or depth of expression of any master. A sincere
humility is the fundamental trait of any true master and the one
human trait which can neither be faked nor feigned.
In the magazine article the author, as many have before him,
referenced the essay Cezannes Doubt by Marcel MerleauPonty, but as with the letter to young Paul his remarks have
misled the reader as to its actual accounting within the original
essay. Not an intentional deception but as a reiteration of
decades of misconceptions being continuously repeated as if
they were facts and not simply the various authors conjectures
that they are. In the essay there are some very perceptive
insights about Czannes vision, his actual work, etc, but over
half of the essay is simply existential prattle, a blizzard of words
which offer nothing of practical application for the painter. But
since M-Ponty is often referenced by those who need
"legitimacy" for their pronouncements he should be read.
(downloadable PDF link attached on pg. 160)

After doing so one finds that he gives them no cover because it

is all speculation without the inclusion of the physically tangible
efforts of the painter, as even Merleau-Ponty says, these
conjectures nevertheless do not give any idea of the positive
side of his (Czannes) work... (and) the meaning of his work
cannot be determined from his life. an intelligent man willing to
admit to his speculations as being just that.
Yet probably worse than all of these writers are the intellectual
academics who hang such heavy importance upon superficial
stylistic quirks yet cannot seem to see what is actually there of a
perceptual normalcy within the actual content of the paintings,

which of course is not sexy enough to be able to sell to others.

So instead of thoughtful analysis of the actual content of the
works we find irrational garbage projected on to the mans life
and then that being reproduced as graduate papers. These
apparently now pass for Czanne scholarship but are nothing
more than the voyeur mentality of students projecting their own
sexual fantasies, sexual hang ups and modern permissive social
mores on to a great painters works as well as on to an era in
which they do not belong. As example, if one can stomach the
inanities, please read the asinine papers posted on the URL in
appendix 1, page 160.
Once again one finds nothing whatever of a practical nature
embedded in their circular logic and nonsensical prattle, simply
another attack upon a painter that none of them know or ever
will know. This because the encounter with Czanne is a
perceptual one, not an intellectual or sociological one. It is their
own conceptual thought processes which blind these writers to
the actuality of his works, because of this the most superficial
aspects are grasped as significant when they are completely
devoid of perceptual importance.

Czanne and the landscape:

where everything slips away in these paintings of
Monts we must now insert a solidity, a framework

Fig. 68

an early landscape, 1879-80

showing sole use of local colouration, but also indications of his

paint being lain as impressionists taches - touches or small
patches of pigment. Czanne was to be very much a product of
his learning from his forebears, through Pissarro he learned the
impressionist viewpoint about technique which was to forget
what is before the eye and simply put down the colour you see

the shape you see it. As Mont said, and soon you will have
your own nave impression of what is before you. This idea
disturbed the academics to no end in that it seemed that a
mans head is no more important than a head of cabbage!,
which in truth its not, and destroyed their hierarchy of subject
matter upon which they congratulated themselves with awards
and maintained the state sanctioned academic caste system.

Fig. 69 auvers sur oise, 1873-74 ,

This landscape is very Pissarro-esque yet already showing his
unique ability at organizing complex materials into simple colour
planes, however he remains under the influence of local
colouration and has not yet begun to see how the light affects
the colour planes as distinct colour changes.

Fig. 70 impressionist landscape of his fathers home 1887- 90

Fig. 71

house seen through trees, poplars at right, 1885-87

Fig. 72 boulders by the sea, 1879-82

Fig. 73 river landscape study,

1894

Fig. 74

house by a river, a partially developed start, 1892-95

Fig. 75

rocks and trees, steep incline,

1878-79

this piece reminds one of how the painters influenced one

another, as when Renoir and Czanne were painting side by side
and one sees the uncharacteristic control and structure in
Renoirs work because of Czannes influence, or to see as here
Czannes use of Renoirs less controlled broken colour
application of more vibrant colours

Fig. 76 stone house and mountains, 1886-90

an early example of Czanne turning the landscape into still life
by treating all visual elements as colour planes.

Fig. 77 stone house on rocky hillside, morning light. 1879-82

a brilliant light key in which Czanne has used his taches of
colour to make his structural form planes shimmer, as well as
vertically recede in an upward thrusting incline. The eye
moves up the mountain, as the mountain descends to the eye.
An ambitious landscape composition totally defying all tenants
of academic perspective, yet with an accuracy beyond that
obsolete ideas capacity to fully illustrate.

Fig. 78 landscape as still life, a colour block study 1886-90

Excepting light keys, there is within this one landscape 90% of
everything Hensche tried to teach and get people to understand,
this because Czanne was the basis of much of his own work.
And this dedicated study of Czanne was at his prompting.

Fig. 79 intermediate start, 1895

Subject still showing a certain personal concession to the flow
of observational drawing, as opposed to the more complex
colour plane construction of the compositions which populate
his later works.

Fig. 80 late day, full light, 1892-95, a highly refined version of

his intermediate approach, very controlled taches of colour
transitioning to solid form planes

Fig. 81 mont sainte victoire, 1904-1906, late mature approach

showing colour plane composition through very controlled
taches of separately applied colours, one is struck by the
discipline and avoidance of the unintentional or blended

colour notes, in these late works he is finally nearing his stated

goal of uniting form and the envelope (light key).

The intimate landscape: trees, rocks, and forests

Fig. 82 spring landscape, 1890-92

showing shifts in visual level of ground planes as well as colour
plane recession, technique is still in his impressionist stage, this
composition filled with his visual arabesques which enliven it
with the flow of rhythmic forms.

Fig. 83 old cistern in the woods, 1892-94

Fig. 84 detail of trees in a ravine, obviously so, 1893-94

Fig. 85

study of large pine, watercolour

Fig. 86

study of rocks, watercolour

Fig. 87 rocks and trees, 1898-99

Fig. 88 trees and rocks, 1898-1900

Fig. 89

forest and rocks, 1900

Fig. 90

woods and rocks, watercolour

Fig. 91

old millstone in the woods, 1892-94

Fig. 92 pistachio tree in the courtyard of chateau noir,

watercolour, 1900

Fig. 93 trees, rocky bluff, overlooking a town by the sea, 1883-85

Fig. 94 ebauche of colour taches, 1900-1904

a start of pines on a hillside, a modest subject well composed,
this initial visual summary already showing depth recession.

Fig. 95 road in the forest, 1900-1902, initial oil colour washes,

an example of how his oils are often mistaken for watercolours

Fig. 96

trees by the road, watercolour, 1900

Fig. 97

mountain and pines, 1902-1906

bend in a road through forest showing taches/colour patches in

an intermediate stage of development

Fig. 98

compositional start with some form modelling,

Descending bend in a mountain road, 1902-06

Fig. 99 creek in the woods, 1895-1900

Fig. 100 town by a river, intermediate colour planes 1904

Fig. 101 a bend in a mountain road near LEstaque,, 1879

showing spiral colour plane accession as well as aerial
recession

Fig. 102 diagram of spiral colour plane accession within fig. 74

magenta lines indicate bands of grouped planes feeding into an
unseen central point, a spiral composition in which the
descending planes are submerged beneath the dominant spiral.
The entire weight of his mountain composition is being drawn
into that single unseen point, the distance is drawn to the eye,
the eye is not drawn to the distance. This arrangement is the
essence of three dimensional colour composition. And we can
see how the naturalness of observation indicating the use of
cones of vision comes into play here on the macro scale just as
it did in the still lifes on the micro scale.
Unlike what is seen in the works of all those who appropriated
his surface characteristics (his look) for Czanne this is not a
stylistic affectation, cones of vision as well as the rhythmic flow
of compositional planes, are how he naturally perceived his
subjects. As he stated, his expression of his arrangements are
dictated by his subject, not by him imposing a style upon them,

as he said one must adapt their means of expression to the

motif, not bending it your way, but bowing to it.
But neither is Czannes colour compositions beholden to any
academic aesthetic, and those who attempt to apply or hybridize
those outdated ideas upon this type colour plane composition
immediately turn a 3d composition into a 2d design, just as
most of the portraitists do to their heads today. The idea of
applying academic drawing to colour composition is the
antithesis of what Czanne achieved (and by extension also a
complete betrayal of what Hensche taught and accomplished as
a further development upon these ideas introduced by Czanne).

The distant and monumental:

Fig. 103 photo of mont sainte victoire,

the following photos are also of mt st victoire and its environs

Fig. 104 photo of mont sainte victoire

Fig. 105

photo of mont sainte victoire

Fig. 106

photo of mont sainte victoire

Fig. 107 morning, mt st victoire 1902-06

Fig. 108 mt st victoire, 1902-06

late afternoon light key and showing an incredible facility for
visual organization of complex materials.

Fig. 109 mt st victoire 1902-04

Fig. 110

three watercolour studies of mt st victoire 1902-06

Fig. 111 mt st victoire, watercolour, 1900

Fig. 112 an early watercolour of mt st victoire

Fig. 113 extended start, mt st victoire, 1900-02

Fig. 114 ebauche/start: village, trees and mountain 1904-06

Fig. 115

landscape start,

1892-95,

colour planes representing form changes stated with his mature

taches of colour which were developed to this refined degree (as
stated at beginning of this note) through his study of
watercolour. In looking at this start one is reminded that style or
means must never be misinterpreted as content, means of
expression are not what is being expressed but are simply a
vehicle through which the painters vision might find
expression. Means of expression and visual content are not to
be separated, but neither are they to be mistaken for one
another as is so often the case.
this particular start also reflects advanced visual ideas about
colour plane movements and rhythmic form (as previously seen
in his tapestries used in his still life compositions), but these
topics are too complex for any in depth discussion here, except
to say that these are actual and observable elements discovered

within ones subject and constantly utilized by perceptually

adept and dedicated colourist painters, they are not fabrications
based upon theories found in nonsensical cubist manifestos.

Fig. 116 initial development of a start, overcast skies, 1902-06

Conclusion:
As said in preface and introduction the purpose here was to
remove the rotting corpse of that albatross hanging around
Czannes neck as having supposedly been the father of modern
art; to do this by countering the typical perceptual ignorance
and false assumptions based upon myths as used in the
magazine article and elsewhere. But more importantly to

present Czanne as a representational realist not unlike

Daubigny, Courbet, Pissarro, Mont, and many others of his
day. Of course those academics as well as all others whose
perceptions are trapped by the pictorialist or copyist mentality
will loudly protest to this classing of Czanne as a
representational realist.
But these people are far from understanding that a copyist type
drawing is not the only method or means of representing reality
and is actually one of the most superficial ones. When one
makes an honest, sincere and disciplined effort to portray in
their work that which is there before their eyes then they are
most certainly a realist. And even more so if having approached
it through their own vision and abilities, not aping it from a
visual bias borrowed from any segment of a now dead past. As
Hensche said, the moderns have their own thing, and they are
welcomed to it, it is the academics who refuse to allow anything
new, or to even recognize any new development in perception
that might be a threat to their obsolete formula, this because
all visual biases only recognize one outcome as the correct one.
I have also tried to explain the necessity of physical colour
study, the encounter with Czanne is a perceptual one and not
an intellectual one. To study as he studied does not mean
copying his works or using his surface characteristics to portray
ones subject, it means to look upon nature with your own eyes
and to see the coloured shapes that are there and to render
them to the best of your ability without visual biases. No
amount of intellectual speculation can explain what he was after;
and it is only a refined perceptual development that allows one
to see what he actually accomplished. By studying as he did,
with intense discipline, Czannes vision became unique and his
style one of a kind as all styles should be.
Perceptual development is a silent resource which must be
trained and untrained in equal parts for there to be actual visual
growth in the comprehension of ones subject. The intellect can
be an aid in analyzing what one has done in their paintings after
the fact, but should never be applied while standing at the easel.
That will become a barrier to perceptual development if it is

allowed to continuously apply any visual bias (whether a

colourist or a tonalist bias) to what is being observed. If that
occurs what ends up on the painting will be a mental concept
instead of an actual observation, a picture from inside your head
and that end result is certainly not a realist representation at all.

Fig. 117

commencement of ebauche: grey day start

1904-06

Of the one hundred plus illustrations in this note there are only
three or four pieces which Czanne actually completed to his
satisfaction, the rest are not only incomplete but often only the
first visual summary of the subjects impression upon his eye as
here (fig. 117). Virtually all of 1900s modernism were based upon
superficial interpretations and misconceptions of the simple
surface characteristics of an incomplete ebauche like this one

(or of Monts late works either first statements or abandoned

pieces or when he was working blind).
As far as using Czannes own statements as the source of all
that came afterwards we have seen here how the writer of one
article completely (unknowingly?) misrepresented Czannes
letter reference which was entirely (intentionally?) out of
context. As usual this is also the case with the most often
quoted Czanne-ism in the cubist manifestos - When Cezanne
told Emile Bernard to see in nature the cube, the cone, the
cylinder etc, his meaning was abundantly clear, he meant to
conceive every form observed in nature as a solid, as a volume,
as proportionally related forms in space, which also has form
and volume. He did not mean to turn his beloved nature into
cubes, cones, cylinders, etc. (which he obviously did not do
himself), he was giving guidance to those who wished to study
as he had done and it is an absolute absurdity to see it
otherwise.
These common sense explanations in themselves do not
invalidate the cubists works or their aims, but it does mean that
they cannot appeal to Czanne, et.al. as the cornerstone upon
which they built their empire. That in itself is another common
sense observation which rejects all the theoretical and
mythological b/s based upon writers personal opinions,
assumptions, conjectures or emotional reactions being
projected on to Czannes works.
These same writers contend that In his mature works Czanne
flattened space (the implication being that he was designing
two dimensionally, but this is a false assumption made by
perceptually undeveloped eyes and minds). One is reminded of
Meyer Shapiros nonsensical coinage flat depth used in his
attempt to explain the supposed contradictions in Czannes
visual effects (famous for their form volumes yet revealing none
to his eye). What these writers failed to perceive in his mature
works was simply the envelope as picture plane which
consisted of the singularity of atmosphere, lighting, and form
recreated as a single visual volume through refined colour
relationships (he was rendering the light key). Czanne called it

the surface of nature (obvious in fig. 1 as well as fig. 81, and

as in so many other developed ones in between).
Through most of his development Cezanne sacrificed this
unifying light key this surface of nature in order to
apprehend the full complexity of forms (whereas his teacher
Pissarro had sacrificed form in order to fully comprehend the
infinite complexities and varieties of light keys). It took Czanne
almost a lifetime to be able to perceive and consistently paint
the light key affecting his forms, the envelope as it is called,
the enveloping reflection of light, as he said, the light
contains all, and this is missed by people whose analysis is
based solely upon fabricated myths about the mans work (and
also missed by those with academic prejudices which judge
content solely on the basis of conventional drawing).
So, far from abandoning the principles of impressionism he
painted as he stated was his life long goal, to make something
solid of impressionism, he wanted to bring form to Pissarros
light keys. He did not abandon the lighting, as can be seen in
his fanatical adherence to these principles in a tour of his
studio. He added his coloured link to classical form found
missing in earlier impressionism. He returned to classicism
through nature. He did exactly what he damned well said he
was attempting to do, abandoning what had become the
obsolete academic formula to return to classical form through
nature. And no amount of farcical fantasizing can reduce or
eliminate this mountain of facts related to his personally stated
original intentions.
The writers who champion contemporary art all keep returning
to those few legitimate painters whose works are the supposed
sources of modernism in an attempt to bolster the legitimacy
and historical inevitability of the works they champion. Most
often utilized is this mythology that Czanne, in the guise of a
cubist, is the root of all that followed. For common sense
reasons which I have attempted to outline in this note theirs is
an assertion which now has little currency with collectors and
none with the general public (and certainly should have none
with painters), and is only subscribed to for supporting evidence

by dealers and galleries who continue to sell the modernist era

items back and forth to one another in order to maintain an
artificial price ceiling to keep the museum collections, as well as
their own holdings, from being valued as completely worthless,
(and that from published financial reports during the 1990s).
Although Czanne was a modernist in the strictest sense, in that
he completely rejected the obsolete academic formula as the
foundation for his work, he did not however discard the visual
third dimension in painting or his love of natural beauty or his
classical outlook to composition or even representational
subject matter. Nor did he reject any other painting principles
which were based upon visual observation and expression of
representational form through colour relationships. He jealously
maintained all these foundational and fundamental visual
principles to be utilized by a common sense realist painter. So
unlike so many others (both his contemporaries and those who
came after him) he never allowed his personal theories to
overwhelm his visual perception or his painters common sense.

Theories are mans downfall! You need a

powerful constitution and inexhaustible energy to
withstand them

Paul Czanne, (1839-1906)

Fig. 118

lime kiln, seen in full light, watercolour

Appendix 1:
written and original jpg content/diagrams/illustrations for this
article are copywrited to george t thurmond, june 2011, all other
materials remain copywrited to original owners, much of which
is from freely accessed web materials. This article and the
totality of its contents are for non profit educational purposes
only and not to be sold in any format whatever.

a note on the dates for works appearing in this PDF :

Czanne rarely dated anything, the researchers have narrowed
works to the period shown by approximate dates, these dates do
not mean that he spent several years on a piece simply that it
was done during that period.
For those interested in further study of Czanne and colour
study in painting in general there is a 200 page Colour Study pdf
that is available for free download at this web link
http://blueridgeartist.com/media/pdfs/Henry_Hensche_Colour_Study.pdf

For historical as well as other relevant information on Czanne:

Letters, Paul Czanne, edited by John Rewald
Letters to His Son Lucien, Camille Pissarro, ed. by John Rewald
Czanne, a Catalogue Raisonne, edited by John Rewald
Czanne, a memoir with conversations, Joachim Gasquet
The Art of Cezanne, Alfred C Barnes and Vilolette de Mazia
Czannes Compositions,
Erle Loran
Czanne, Finished Unfinished
Czannes Watercolors,
Gotz Adriani
Pioneering Modern Painting, Pissarro and Czanne
Referenced from page 106, the essay Czannes Doubt can be
downloaded as a free pdf here
http://faculty.uml.edu/rinnis/cezannedoubt.pdf
and is recommended to read in conjunction with this article,
there is also this Wikipedia article on its author merleau-ponty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Merleau-Ponty
referenced for page 106, this is typical of totally speculative
subjective graduate papers passing as Czanne scholarship
http://blogs.princeton.edu/wri152-3/f05/jcfields/

Appendix 2:
text of magazine article, enlarge to 150% for easier legibility