Post-Impressionism

In Cezanne and the End of Impressionism, Shiff introduces the struggle to define and name Post-Impressionism. Unlike its partial namesake, Post-Impressionism did not represent a radical shift from its contemporaries. It was, according to Shiff, “an awkward invention, a new whole substituted for its disparate parts (156).” Although its name implies a dramatic rejection of Impressionism, Post-Impressionism also seeks to create representations based in emotion and expression. So what exactly is the difference between the two?

To Shiff, the difference is Cezanne. He believes the works of Cezanne represent the shift from Impressionism to Post-Impressionism. Cezanne’s work places expression and symbolism above accurate representation. Shiff writes, “the artist struggled so directly to express his sensation, refusing to follow any conventional formulations, his painting of nature became as distorted and awkward as that of a primitive (166).” Cezanne’s strokes appear sketch-like or rushed like a primitive painting, and slightly abstract. He also makes abrupt color changes in his paintings.

Shiff goes to great lengths (literally) to establish a definite contrast between Impressionism and Post-Impressionism, but I really don’t see much of a difference between the two. Yes, technically one can distinguish Impressionism from Post-Impressionism; however, I’m not convinced that these minute technicalities call for a different name.