Introduction
Whistler’s excerpts is an article on Whistler’s style of expression and his art direction. The purpose of the article is to provide insight into Whistler’s style of painting and the art collection commonly referred to as the nocturnes. It commences with an explanation of the birth of the style which ultimately led to the comments by Ruskin about Whistler’s art that resulted in a lawsuit from the latter. The article further emphasizes that art is a form of self-expression that should not be confined by rules defined by anyone and how respect for other people’s work is important. This paper shall focus on the reasons why Whistler sued Ruskin, the outcome of the trial, and the effects of the trial.
Why did Whistler sue Ruskin? What was the outcome of the trial?
The appeal of any product is based on the reputation it commands as a brand and this is universal for all products meant for trade and art is no exception. Any tarnishing of a brand’s reputation negatively affects its appeal and demand. Ruskin made some unsavory comments about Whistler’s style of art and his collection. The comments that Ruskin published in letters titled ForsClavigera which were ultimately shared by other national media were derogatory and adversely impacted Whistler’s credibility as an artist. He sued Ruskin for libel and ultimately the trial was ruled in his favor.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
What were the trial’s: 1) immediate 2) long-term effects?
The trial had both immediate and long-term effects. First, immediately the trial began, the art world was divided into two groups with those who supported Ruskin’s views about Whistler’s work and those against it. This division went as far as pit Ruskin against one of his mentees and friends. Secondly, the trial and the debate that ensued brought about a deeper understanding and appreciation of art. The victory served as an approval of advancement in the art by accepting Whistler’s style of painting. Lastly, at first, the comments by Ruskin tarnished Whistler’s reputation, however, the trial brought him into the spotlight which ultimately granted him a platform to fame.
Conclusion
The opinions shared by Ruskin were true in his own eyes. He regarded Whistler’s work as something short of what art should be about and spoke out on it. However. Since one’s words can be held against them in the court of law, it is important to watch what and how we speak about others in order to avoid possible backlash.
