J.M.W.Turner- Snow Storm: Hannibal and His Army Crossing the Alps. 1812. Oil on canvas. Tate Gallery, London

I viewed this magnificent painting in 2009 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art during a visit to New York.


I know what you must be thinking right now: "What 21 year old spends the day at the Met when they visit New York?" and "I thought this guy was gonna talk about blank canvases and urinal sculptures and shit!" I am.  Stay tuned.  I believe however, it is just as, if not more important to speak about the primordial soup of modernism.  


Due to pop cultural representations of what defines "modern," many of you may believe that modernism began sometime in the 1960's or 70's with the introduction of retro interior designs such as the "Egg Chair" (by Arne Jacobsen).  Sleek, sexy, cool: this is the meaning of modern for many, if not the majority of people.  This definition is true to some extent.  Arne Jacobsen's curvilinear, futuristic egg chair is indeed a part of modernism.  But it's not the beginning by any means.  In fact, there is a long developmental history behind the word modern and some would say it started around the time that the painting above was created.  What you're looking at is  J.M.W. Turner's Snow Storm: Hannibal and His Army Crossing the Alps, done in 1812.  Some may say that this is a modern work of art.


PREPOSTROUS!!!  What could possibly be modern about something that looks so romantic, historic, boring and OLD?


Look again.  Remove the figures in the bottom of the canvas (if you even saw them there in the first place).  Focus on the sky and the ominous effect Turner creates with his colors and shapes.  THAT CLOUD!!  That cloud.  Oh the cloud of doooommmmm!  So foreboding, so threatening, so Evil (with a capital E).  The circular swooshing motion (repeated in other Turner paintings) makes the cloud resemble a title wave.  It's as if this black form has mutated into some sort of angel of death, surveying its victims before it swoops down to collect the lives of Hannibal's men.


Now we get to the grit.  What visual indications does Turner provide (besides the title) that informs the viewer that this image depicts Hannibal and his men?  What compositional elements (the way the image is constructed, where things are placed, background/foreground etc.) draws the viewer's eye to the figures in the bottom left-hand foreground?  The answer to both questions:  Not many.  IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER WHAT AN ARTIST LEAVES OUT OF THEIR WORK AS WELL AS WHAT HE/SHE INCLUDES.


Indication of Hannibal's identity is almost nonexistant.  Nothing draws our attention to the figures in the foreground.  Instead our attention is focused on the landscape, and the crazy, odd, interesting forms Turner creates in his sky.  

Therefore, I believe Turner intended the viewer to experience this threat of death vicariously through these figures--empathy baby ;o)  The artist does not intend the viewer to necessarily gain a historical lesson from this painting, but an emotional one.  In fact, odds are, if one were to be an eye-witness to Hannibal crossing the Alps, their account probably wouldn't resemble this image.  The point of the painting is not to provide the viewer with an accurate representation of history, but rather to 1) conjure emotions and memories inside the viewer of when they felt threatened or scared  2) remind the viewer of the grandiose beauty and magnificence and awe-inspiring power of nature 3) (the modernist would say) experiment with the idea of how shapes and colors impact the human psyche without necessarily referencing or relying on a narrative (a story) or figure (identifiable person place or thing).  

It is interesting to consider the time as well.   The art world in 1812 hadn't yet come to accept paintings with a highly abstracted images.  If Turner removed the landscape and figures and titled the painting Fear the chances of it being embraced by the contemporary art world are bleak.  Highly unlikely.  This is why I consider Turner to be one of the fathers of Modernism. I believe he foretold the creation of abstraction a century before it entered into the mainstream consciousness.  When you look at Turner's paintings, it's as if he so desperately wants to crack open the world of abstraction, but he hesitates.    


Much like a covert operation, the title Snow Storm: Hannibal and His Army Crossing the Alps, grounds the painting and makes it take place in real time and space.  But is this a realistic representation of history?  We know that Hannibal did indeed cross the alps but what use does this image have in our knowledge of that historical fact?  Not much.  This painting plays on it's viewer's emotions, not their ability to recognize historic themes.  I could write on but my fingers are getting tired, and our future subjects will cover the points I want to make.  Please keep Turner's painting in mind as we continue.  


N.B.F.