Norman Rockwell vs. Old Masters: Why Does One Artistry Outshine the Other?

Norman Rockwell's artworks are not as prominently displayed in the world's greatest museums as those of revered artists such as Rembrandt and Velázquez. One may question whether his art holds the same level of prestige. This article delves into the reasons behind Rockwell's relative obscurity in major art institutions and explores the intrinsic differences between his work and that of the old masters.

Context and Legacy

Rockwell was a skilled commercial illustrator whose primary focus was to create images that appealed to the masses and resonated with the cultural zeitgeist. Many of his paintings, such as 'Rosie the Riveter,' which references Michaelangelo’s 'Isaiah,' exemplify the dual purpose of his work: to sell magazines and to tell compelling narratives.

The prominence of his artworks in private collections, rather than major museums, suggests that collectors were more interested in his commercial success than in his contributions to fine art. Private collectors who invested in Rockwell's work were typically supporting his commercial ventures rather than museum-quality art.

Comparing Techniques and Purpose

Rockwell's art differs significantly from that of the old masters, not only in technique but also in purpose. While old masters like Rembrandt and Velázquez sought to explore and convey profound societal themes and transcendental beauty, Rockwell’s paintings were more focused on capturing the idiosyncrasies and anecdotes of American life during his era.

For instance, let’s consider the artwork 'Rosie the Riveter,' which pays homage to the spirit of the times during World War II. This painting serves more of a nostalgic and cultural purpose rather than the artistic discourse that distinguishes old masterpieces.

Techniques and Legacy

Rockwell wasn't just a commercial illustrator; he was an exceptionally skilled artist. However, his work often serves a very different function from that of old masters. For example, his early works were designed to fit the layout of magazines and often included space for logos.

The technical proficiency of Rockwell's work is undeniable; his facial expressions, for example, are as expressive as those created by the likes of Velázquez. But the comparison with Rembrandt, who was a master of chiaroscuro and emotional depth, or Van Gogh, who revolutionized the way we view everyday objects, highlights the inherent differences in their artistic approaches and legacies.

A modern viewer might appreciate Rockwell's wit and populist appeal, but their work lacks the enduring impact and originality that define the art of the old masters. Consider, for instance, the difference between a Rockwell painting and a masterpiece like Velázquez’s 'Las Meninas,' where every brushstroke tells a story of human experience and artistic exploration.

Collecting and Perception

The modern art market tends to value works that resonate with contemporary tastes and cultural movements. While Rockwell’s appeal remains strong, it is often tied to specific periods in American history and popular culture. Contemporary collectors may find more appeal in his work, but it is unlikely to displace the works of Rembrandt and Velázquez in the grand pantheon of fine art.

Moreover, the rise of American illustration and the appreciation for vernacular art have made Rockwell more accessible and even reinvented in a modern context. His place in the development of visual storytelling and the cultural significance of his work in American art history is secure. However, whether museums such as the Louvre, Rijkmuseum, or the National Gallery would prioritize his work is another matter.

Conclusion

While Norman Rockwell was a prolific and talented artist, his work should not be compared to the verticals of masterpieces created by old masters like Rembrandt and Velázquez. Rockwell's contributions to American art are immeasurable, but they are best appreciated in the context of their time and purpose.

Let’s revisit the question: Would you rate Norman Rockwell’s work as highly as Rembrandt’s or Velázquez’s? While his subjects capture the spirit of a particular era and are highly technical, they lack the depth and complexity that define the art of the old masters. The debate surrounding Rockwell’s place in the world of fine art is a reflection of changing tastes and the evolving nature of what is considered ‘art’ in contemporary times.