Art Critique of Emily Carr's Reforestion

           

            In terms of Imitationalism the painting does not have many literal qualities, but Carr's use of shape and colour blending does display some realism.  The line and shape of the painting is to perfect. What I mean by this is, a tree isn’t a triangle. There is more to the tree than that. I think it is the imperfection in nature that makes it beautiful. Although I am in no way saying that the painting was unsuccessful.

            I think that Carr did a great job at portraying a Meaning without forcing the meaning. I think she used line, balance and shape very well. Creating a sense of calmness and serenity, but still, I think , displays empowerment and respect towards the tree. I think her colour palette is sort of dark, but with some light hues, this creating value and emphasis. I think the reason for this is because Emily Carr may have some anger or sadness towards the way people treat the trees and disrespect nature. I think in terms of general meaning Emily has a great love for nature and is not pleased with the fact that not everyone has that same feeling. I think this painting and many of her other paintings are her expressing her feelings about this subject.

            The Emotionalism displayed in this painting is dark, gloomy almost like nighttime. The painting although still has a feeling of peaceful content. I think this stems from the use of horizontal lines throughout the whole painting.  In some parts of the painting, Carr uses lines of texture to show the roughness in the bushes. The sky is dark as if dusk or nighttime but there is no moon. I think the reason for not having a moon is because a moon could imply mystery. I don’t think that is what Emily was trying to portray with this painting.

            My Opinion is that Carr used colour to show light in an amazing way. I think this because the way uses the amount of line and texture she used it can be come difficult to do. I still think that she could have mad it more clear weather or not it was night or day, dusk or dawn.

On another topic I think this painting is interesting because most times the objects in the foreground are larger and the objects in the background are smaller. This displays depth. Now the reason for this could be because Carr didn’t paint this from ground level or it could be another way she displays greatness in the trees and mountains. There is contrast in this painting, but I think that there is emphasis on this middle ground. I know this because the lightest section of the whole painting is the trees in the middle.