Through the Lens: Kirby Sattler and Edward Curtis
Edward Curtis was born in rural Wisconsin in 1868. He lived the majority of his life in poverty and when his father died it was up to him and his older brother to take care of the rest of the family. At this time they were living in Seattle. Curtis then risked all of his family’s income to invest in a photography studio. It was his passion ever since he was a little kid and at that time taking a risk like that was huge. That just goes to show how much confidence and dedication he had towards photography. It was also in the Pacific Northwest where he found his passion for photographing Native Americans. He always looked for those tribes who preserved as much culture as they were able, and those became the majority of his subject matter.
Kirby Sattler is entirely different than Curtis in the biographical aspect. He is virtually unknown, except through his art. He lives in the mountains of Mexico, away from most civilization. By looking at his portraits you really get a spiritual aspect from each and every one of them. In some of his paintings he even morphs certain animals to his subject’s body to show the spiritual connection between the two.
Although Edward Curtis was a photographer and Kirby Sattler is a painter, they both had a lot in common. One of the main similarities between the two is their choice for subject matter. Despite the fact that neither one of them are Native American, they chose the Native people to portray in their portraits. There are similar themes throughout the portraits, but their styles are really unique to their own personalities. Curtis has a softer, more natural and realistic style to his photographs, while Sattler chooses bold colors and contrasts in a lot of his paintings to send a more powerful, spiritual message.
Prompts
Kirby Sattler is entirely different than Curtis in the biographical aspect. He is virtually unknown, except through his art. He lives in the mountains of Mexico, away from most civilization. By looking at his portraits you really get a spiritual aspect from each and every one of them. In some of his paintings he even morphs certain animals to his subject’s body to show the spiritual connection between the two.
Although Edward Curtis was a photographer and Kirby Sattler is a painter, they both had a lot in common. One of the main similarities between the two is their choice for subject matter. Despite the fact that neither one of them are Native American, they chose the Native people to portray in their portraits. There are similar themes throughout the portraits, but their styles are really unique to their own personalities. Curtis has a softer, more natural and realistic style to his photographs, while Sattler chooses bold colors and contrasts in a lot of his paintings to send a more powerful, spiritual message.
Prompts
- Considering both men were Caucasian, what do you think caused this interest in a culture that is not their own?
- Other than similar subject matter, what do you feel were some common traits in both Curtis’s and Sattler’s portraits?
- Do you feel that by taking a deeper look at Edward Curtis you can get a sense of who Kirby Sattler is? Explain.
- Why do you think that an artist like Kirby Sattler chose to keep to himself more than other artists? Do you think that it might be because he is alive and the majority of artists people are familiar with are deceased?
- Which artist do you think has the most powerful imagery in their portraits?
Prompt 4
ReplyDelete“Artists can only become famous after death” is a statement we have all heard before but is it an accurate depiction of what really happens? I do not necessarily agree with this assumption because there have been enough artists who have become famous while still living that this generalization cannot be made. I feel the difference between becoming famous before or after death is due to the artist’s personality and how much media attention they receive. Extraverted people such as Frida Khalo, Diego Rivera, and Pablo Picasso were constantly in the news and relished the attention. They are examples of artists that were famous prior to death and I believe it to be because they gave a face to their art and allowed the public to invade their private lives. Kirby Sattler appears to have an introverted personality and does not share much about his personal life. Strictly from a career standpoint, if Sattler’s primary goal is to sell his art then he should show himself to the public a little more often so that people will remember his face and he will gain so more popularity. I personally had not heard of Kirby Sattler before this presentation. However, if Sattler is not worried about his painting sales then I can understand why he chooses to keep to himself. Some people do not enjoy being in the spotlight and hate having every action they make become a discussion for others. Few people want their personal life exposed and put under the microscope for the public to scrutinize and judge. It could also be that Sattler wants his artwork to speak for itself and let it stand independent from him. I admire Sattler’s choice to stay out of the media because it also shows that he is not interested in fame but rather just wants to express himself through his works of art. Maybe Sattler is another case of an artist becoming famous after death but only time will tell.
Prompt 3 and 5
Kirby Sattler and Edward Curtis are two very unique individuals with different styles and approaches when it comes to art. While both men used Native American subjects for their work, I feel that they are mostly different. I do not feel that one can look at Curtis and understand or learn about Sattler. First, these two grew up and lived in very different time period and second, their imagery is very unique from one another.
Solely comparing Curtis and Sattler based on the images shown on the powerpoint presentation, I feel that Sattler has more powerful imagery since he paints his images and can manipulate reality. Curtis photographed Native American subjects and while photography can be an expressive media, I did not feel strong emotions when I viewed his work. The backgrounds were plain and his subjects did not seem very expressive with emotions. Sattler, on the other hand, uses bold colors and his subjects have personality and a life-like quality to them that was not found in Curtis’ images. Sattler’s subject’s eyes have strong emotions in them and, in particular, the painting with the crow fused with the man has a clear feeling of strength to those who view it. Sattler adds symbolism to his paintings and that gives his artwork another dimension for people to interpret and discuss which in turn leads to a more powerful paintings and imagery.
Stunning. That single word kept coming to mind as the paintings by Kirby Sattler were presented. Cheyenne, this was an excellent and interesting topic. I had some former knowledge on the subject, as my grandmother collects Native American art, including one portrait by Kirby Sattler (I believe it was called Blue Fire, but I could be mistaken). Anyway, I was interested to see your juxtaposition between Sattler and this photographer, Edward Curtis, whom I was not aware of.
ReplyDeleteOne question you pose deals with the fact that both men were Caucasian, but spent time creating art that portrayed Native American culture. I feel that sometimes people are far more fascinated by things they rarely see. Painting the mundane or superficial world would most likely not hold as much appeal. I am sure there were also formative experiences at play, though with Sattler’s hidden life, these would be hard to find. Finally, there is no doubt in my mind that Native American culture holds a dash of mystique, especially to those of us who occupy their former lands.
While the subject matter is an obvious connection between Curtis and Sattler, I really see the similarities run deeper. The messages conveyed by the portraits, most prominently regarding the strength of the Native American people, are tied together. Also, there seems to be a running theme for both of them that downplay the importance of the Native American’s surroundings. This could perhaps be symbolic of the native people’s struggle for geographical identity in today’s culture, or even how they leave little impact on nature.
I have a difficult time getting a clear picture of Kirby Sattler, even with the clues given to us by Edward Curtis. The fact that you actually got into contact with your artist was impressive, and your personal stories about his reclusive nature just vex my curiosity further. I wonder what he is hiding from. Has his work given him the feeling that he too must live without disturbing nature? All of this would be interesting to know. You bring up the idea that it may be due to fact that he is alive, while most popular artists are dead, but I do not see that as an issue. Some very prominent painters have been flamboyant and a public spectacle, so why not him? My guess would boil down to Sattler having an introverted nature about him. But once again, we may never know the formative events that could have shaped this behavioral pattern.
I would be lying if I said I was not biased towards Sattler’s work. As such, answering which artist has more powerful imagery is similarly biased. Even so, I will still assert that Sattler has more powerful work. To me, there is something about painting a subject, rather than photographing it, that gives an artist a greater connection. What Curtis shows us is the true depiction, whereas Sattler gives us something more, something surreal. And oftentimes, it is the less tangible that bears more power over our feelings.
• Considering both men were Caucasian, what do you think caused this interest in a culture that is not their own?
ReplyDeleteKnowing that Sattler and Curtis were Caucasian and were interested in Native American culture seems fascinating. Sometimes I think general Caucasian culture is uninteresting and practically nonexistent. So many other cultures are deep rooted and have such a rich history that it is hard for them to go unnoticed. Native American culture in particular is unique and fascinating. It does not surprise me that Sattler and Curtis took a vested interest in this culture. This makes even more sense when you consider that they were not necessarily looking to be historians of the culture. Instead they wanted to create art that included the Natives. From an artist’s point of view I can understand that they had a vision for their art and maybe their own cultures did not fit in with their artistic goals.
• Why do you think that an artist like Kirby Sattler chose to keep to himself more than other artists? Do you think that it might be because he is alive and the majority of artists people are familiar with are deceased?
During Cheyenne’s presentation, she mentioned that Kirby Sattler was difficult to research because he was not very open to the public. I think this has a lot to do with his personality. Maybe he does not want the fame to overshadow his artwork. Cheyenne also said that he doesn’t even show up for his art shows. I think this is really intriguing because you know he is proud of his artwork, but it looks like he does not care when he is not there. Perhaps, he is just an introverted person and wants his artwork to stand alone. I think his artwork is almost stronger when the viewer is not tying the character between the subject and to Sattler. Another reason for the lack of information regarding Sattler’s life could come from him being alive. However, research is done on artists that are still living all the time. I think he will be just as difficult to research when he is dead because he keeps to himself so much. Realistically, Cheyenne went straight to the source when she emailed Sattler and she did not get very far with the artist himself. This makes me think that biographers will have a difficult time no matter what because Sattler has chosen to keep his life and experiences to himself.
• Which artist do you think has the most powerful imagery in their portraits?
The portraits from Sattler and Curtis seem very different to me. I prefer Kirby Sattler’s paintings to Edward Curtis’ photographs. In my eyes, Sattler conveys much more powerful imagery than Curtis. In the portrait with the crow there is so much feeling and symbolism that shows even though I do not know what the crow actually symbolizes. The Native American man in the painting is looking right at the viewer and he looks strong and determined to accomplish anything. Another reason that Sattler’s portraits convey more powerful imagery is because he painted as opposed to photographed. In his paintings I think people get a sense of the subject’s character, but the artist’s as well. In photographs it seems the artist is much more detached and cannot intertwine their character as much into the picture. While I recognize that photography and painting are each arts in their own way, painting takes more time and leaves a lot more room for error. Photography is all in the shot, but it does not take artists years to put out a photograph. I just think that Sattler puts a lot more of himself into his portraits which allows him to create such moving pictures. This is not to say that Curtis does not do great work because he does, but when comparing the two I think Sattler creates more influential pictures.