> In an effort to integrate art into the regular classroom I have been
> asked to introduce early American artists...pre civil war. I've done
> some research and they all seem to be portraits or landscapes.
> Are they all like this? Thanks, Sal
hahaha....well, that's how history goes and progresses. American painters
born in Europe to American parents...learning to paint in art schools or
influences, then coming to America to teach. Or, born in America then
traveling to Europe to learn...coming back and more of the same.
Portraiture, classic, and landscape were the big thing in Europe, and to be
taken as a serious artist in the 1800's you had to get Europe's attention,
or have a history of learning over there.
Our landscapes here were believed to be phenomenal...and a new land to gain
the attention of future immigrants. Like many, artists went where the money
and opportunity was, and portraiture and landscapes were it. Aristocrats,
politicians and pioneering. That is, 'till the camera came along creating
another competitive and cheaper vehicle for such.
AS for any other art...you'll have to look to the folk arts and crafts
(self-taught'ers) of homesteaders and villages...and you'll have to look
specifically for such. "American Art Review" is a staple decent resource
for all early American art...but, you're going to see a lot of portraits and
landscapes! There will be this early folk art as well.
Kinda hard for us to go back and rewrite history...artists weren't saved
from the toil and burden of that 'till roughly the late 40's and 50's of
this past century. I'm still lost myself....and happily so. haha...