Caspar David Friedrich

Google photo album: https://photos.app.goo.gl/YYazZS1CxcbhqwQ39
dates: 1774 – 1840, Rügen paintings early 1800s, Monk by the Sea 1810, Wanderer 1817, decline in 1820s and 30s.
In general I would describe Friedich’s oeuvre (as represented in this exhibit) as dramatic landscapes, with a small number of small spectators or none at all. His subjects are above all the mountains and the sea and the skies above them, but he also depicts city skylines, fields, ruins (especially dolmens), boats, fog/clouds, and stars.

He depicts real landscapes – the island of Rügen, Dresden, the towns of Neubrandenburg and Greifswald, the mountains of Riesengebirge – but I’m not sure how much German-ness I see in these locations. They often look to me like the Hudson River School (rel’n)?

that is to say, it’s hard for me to see in them the German nationalism that they were associated with in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
the Riesengebirge (now in Poland) were in Silesia, which was the border region between Prussia & Bohemia. Briefly occupied by the Nazis in the 1930s and 40s. Possibly some nationalist claims there in depicting them?

Often these are depicted by moonlight or with fog – some extra dramatic setting in addition to just the mountains (though
In his early work he often depicts crosses in dramatic settings (an ugly one is Cross in the Forest), but that appears to recede at his peak, though he is still interested in monks.
In this sense his Wanderer and Monk by the Sea is pretty typical, while something like Meadows near Greifswald is more unusual. I do like the dramatic touches – the Watzmann falls flat because of it.
Almost no indoor scenes at all. The only one in the exhibition was Woman at the Window.
In general his choice of settings and treatment reminds me a lot of Homeric similes – lots of dramatic nature, sometime switch a single spectator looking at them (e.g. the shepherd in Eastern Coast of Rügen with Shepherd, a bit like the simile at the end of Il. 8 of stars with a shepherd).

In general the paintings feel ‘timeless’ – like in their subject matter they could have been painted two hundred years earlier. Overtly contemporary touches, especially in clothing choices (Wanderer or Stages of Life, or the medieval clothes of Two Men Contemplating the Moon) stand out to me.

I find his single individuals, often with their back to the audience (Rückenfigur), to be uninviting and unnerving. I prefer the paintings with small groups, often families (The Stages of Life).

I think partly I’m more out of tune with Romanticism than I think. I like the landscapes, but the idea of self-discovery through nature is a tough one for me to swallow. Though, if you aren’t getting anything out of nature or paintings of nature, then why bother?
I think in this context I best appreciate Two Men Contemplating the Moon – that guy is definitely pointing at the moon and appears to be getting something out of it.

His North Sea by Moonlight reminds me a lot of Peder Balke’s North Cape by Moonlight, which make sense since Friedrich’s friend and neighbor Johann Christian Dahl was Balke’s teacher.
I find his brushwork to be slightly impressionistic, especially with rocks. Look at the grass and rocks in the foreground of Monk by the Sea.

Questions:

Weekday Greek