Was Joan Eardley a social realist, a neo-romantic or an abstract expressionist?

Taking into account that most of Eardley’s work, exempting the later landscape paintings, show scenes of social deprivation and dilapidation promotes the opinion that she is a social realist. The heroic days of Glasgow were declining and Eardley engages in this and the people of this time. Physically, by encouraging the children that lived near her studio to wander in and out as they pleased and mentally by getting to know everyone she drew, as I mentioned above. Eardley often gives her ‘street kids’ squint eyes. They were probably not all cross-eyed of course, but it adds humour to these otherwise pitiful depictions of deprived children. The fact that that the kids were unaware of their deprived situation and retained their flamboyancy and enthusiasm is also perhaps demonstrated in the humorous expressions they bear. Although, some of her best figurative works came from the time when she was in France and Italy. She produced some remarkably honest pictures of Italian peasants, still in a realist style, in which their personalities seem to shine out of the page. She achieved this whilst being in a frame of mind in which, “the beauty lies in the things exactly as they are. – No distortions or –isms.” This proved very significant because in this post-war era art was something of beauty, or something present to fulfil a decorative function. Eardley’s peasants and Glasgow street kids were not things of beauty. This notion bears relevance with Dubuffet’s ideas of art. Dubuffet wrote that the artist should dispose the idea of beauty and harmony in art and return to its real, original function, which was simply to serve as a visual language. It then addresses itself to the mind and not the eyes. She realised and accepted that painting is only a visual reaction to things, but to Eardley it had to be more than that. The story behind the subject really mattered. It is clear that true skill was developing in Eardley’s ability to pick out beauty in things otherwise deemed unworthy of notice. However, in letters home from Italy, she began to talk much about the shadows and the light’s effect on her subject. She noticed that the shadows there were shadows ‘of lightness and colour’, rather than grey patches that she had been used to at home. This new interest prompted me to compare Eardley’s work with Monet and his paintings concerning the fleeting effect of light over his subject matter. Eardley took ideas similar to Monet’s and combined them with her own passion for expressing herself on the canvas and consequently produced some impressive landscape works at her time in Catterline. These paintings are very impressionist-reminiscent and begin to verge on abstract expressionism.

This term is most commonly associated with huge canvases onto which paint is applied rapidly and with force, often using large brushstrokes. ‘The spontaneity of the artist’s approach would release the creativity of their unconscious minds.’ This is all true to Eardley’s landscape works and it is most likely correct to assume that she had seen and heard about much of the American abstract expressionists such as De Kooning and Pollok. These artists and their work were constantly reassuring Eardley that what she was doing and what she aspired to do, was the right way forward.

Eardley’s works became more abstract as she progressed and developed.

It is known that she saw many exhibitions in the 40’s at Kelvingrove in Glasgow, of artists such as Van Gogh, Picasso and Matisse and she was excited by Van Gogh’s work. Van Gogh’s paintbrushes were loaded with emotion and the way in which he applied the paint gives the viewer an insight into mind and soul. Eardley clearly saw this in his work and took the idea on herself. Van Gogh talked of himself as a caricaturist - someone who takes the physical and mental sides of the sitter and exaggerates them in the prospective portrait. Eardley was a follower of this motif, though she took primarily the mental aspects of her sitters. The acute details of the physical were not her major concer.

The Abstract Expressionists often sought inspiration from ‘primitive’ and childlike works and it seems fair to say that Eardley shared this admiration. The use of strong lines charged with determination and certainty is reminiscent of child-art.  Children are not hesitant or cautious when scribbling something onto a page, resulting in something authentic and true. There is no danger of overworking a painting this way. This technique is most effective in expressing emotion, and any hesitation or caution in making a mark can alter the whole image entirely. Eardley’s works boast this confidence in expression and mark making, which works to her advantage. This spontaneity is also mirrored in the work of the Impressionists. We know that both often completed paintings very rapidly in order to capture the moment or the feeling they were trying to convey at that exact point in time. Eardley’s children have been labelled, ‘...children frozen in time’ suggesting the painting is a frame from a scene of the child’s life. Neither the Impressionists nor Joan Eardley were aiming for accuracy in their works, but a true depiction of the subject they see before them; their vision.

On the other hand, though her works are, in sense ‘true’ depictions, they are of course imaginative and later on, abstract. In most of her paintings it can be seen that Eardley is led by the heart rather than the head and reason, which was a characteristic of the Romantic painters. Paintings such as ‘Three Children at a Tenement Window’ [Plate 4] and ‘A Clifftop with Snow’ [Plate 5] are very rich in colour and very emotion-led. For these reasons it would be true to say that Eardley is reviving the romantic tradition. The Neo-Romantic’s work, ‘often included figures, […] was generally somber, reflecting the Second World War and its approach and aftermath, but rich, poetic and capable of a visionary intensity.’ I found it interesting to trace back her influences here. For example, she was influenced by Scottish artist William McTaggart. Whilst looking at a piece of his work, there is indeed some common ground between the two artists. McTaggart uses ideals of the Romantic movement, the ‘ideal of a society based on sympathy and harmony with nature.’ In both Eardley and McTaggart’s works, (see Plate 5 and Plate 6) one can feel a sense of the urgency to include all aspects of the scene in the painting. Eardley has clearly admired the energy and roughness apparent in McTaggart’s ‘The Storm’ and taken this idea to a new, more expressionistic and imaginative level. Eardley’s paintings in the sixties of the sea and the shoreline at Catterline are mostly on 4” by 6” pieces of hardwood. Standing in front of one of these works has the same effect as standing in front of a Turner painting. It causes one to feel lost in the sea of emotion she has created on the board. The struggle and attempt to express heightened emotion is apparent.

These works towards the end of her life seem so remote from the sketches she drew in Glasgow and in Italy earlier on. However, some people are of the view that her early works and sketches such as, ‘Study of a Harness’ are her real masterpieces. This picture in particular shows off Eardley’s real talent in straightforward drawing. In conversation with Cyril Gerber, of Cyril Gerber Fine Art in Glasgow, he said that although her street kid pictures were the most popular and sold very well since they were easy for the public to digest, works like the ‘Study of a Harness’ were timeless: ‘Eardley’s ‘Study of a Harness’ shows great draughtsmanship… her drawings were not easy to sell but other artists at the time were afraid to draw realistically and accurately which made her work unique.’

This skill was a result of her academic training and way of thinking, promoted by her tutor James Cowie who warned her of ‘the ills and dangers in succumbing to the urge towards gestural expression in painting.’ His work was predominantly strong and calculated and although Cowie and Eardley retained a mutual respect and both had an interest in the figurative, Eardley’s work is more expressive and vigorous.

In attempting to arrive at my conclusion, I am left unsure again after reading Alick Sturrock of the Glasgow Herald’s words on Eardley: …’If she had to be classified in contemporary terms it would no doubt be as a social realist.’ She then states that, ‘Joan Eardley, too, was romantic but only in the sense that for her, reality was romance.’ After considering these opinions and looking at Eardley’s work in considerable detail, I would like to conclude that she has a strand of all three genres in her work as I have demonstrated above. Still, I think it is unjust to judge her or place her in a category since her work was not fully developed and tragically cut short. Is a tragic loss that Eardley is not here today to continue our emotional education.

*End Note

 I also am obliged to mention a factor I feel has some significance in writing this essay. Being a retired artist herself, a contemporary of Eardley’s, to talk about her work that has been so successful could be a very difficult task for many. It would have been easy to warp the story or put a certain slant on the writings subconsciously. Oliver does not let these factors influence her obvious genuine admiration for Joan and her work.

 

 

---