Cézanne falls short

A tiny bit of unpainted canvas

The portrait of Ambroise Vollard by Cézanne, now located in the Petit Palais in Paris, took one hundred and five intense, emotion packed sittings to produce. At first sight, it seems complete. But on closer inspection, we find that, even after all those hours of concentrated effort, there is a tiny patch of unpainted canvas, situated in the area where a knuckle should normally be.


Figure 1 : Ambroise Vollard by Cézanne


To assess its significance, let us place scarcely visible area of raw canvas in the context of Antonio Tapies’ comment on Van Gogh’s chair. In the Spanish artist’s view, such an everyday object as a chair would be “hardly worth looking at”, if it were not for the richness of its associations and connotations. What made it such a rich subject for a  painting was that it meant so much for Van Gogh, and because it resonated with our mental picture of him. Similarly, we might be inclined to think that nothing could be less interesting than a tiny patch of bare canvas. How could something so minuscule be seen as anything but a blemish? How could an absence of paint be worth looking at?


Figure 2 : Ambroise Vollard’s knuckle


Cézanne asks for forgiveness

Nor would there be any question of excusing the artist on the grounds of it being a deliberate mistake, analogous to the Allah-placating deviations from symmetry found in the designs of the Islamic carpet makers. In a contrite letter to Ambroise Vollard, sent from his home situated hundreds of miles away in the South of France, Cézanne explained why he had not turned up to his Paris studio for the 106th sitting.  Hoping that his patron would understand and forgive him, he admitted that he had fled from the Paris because even he could not face the 100 or more additional sittings that it might take to rectify matters.

Error of judgement

The simple truth that Cézanne had to face up to was that he had committed a serious error of judgement. By leaving this patch to last, he had painted himself into a corner: He would not longer be able to produce a colour for it that would be the right degree of colour/lightness difference relative to the immediately neighbours. The only way of rectifying the situation would  require him to have change these. But that would not be all.  He would then have to change all the colours adjacent to them. Indeed, he would have to continue modifying until every single one of the colours on the picture-surface had been given the right relationship with all the other colours. Only by dong so would he be able to meet his self-imposed criteria of never repeating a colour.

A new significance

As well as being a very human story, Cezanne’s failure to complete his painting provides an insight into the degree of perfectionism and rigour which he brought to his work. When we realise this, the patch of bare canvas takes on a new significance. It becomes a doorway into the artist’s mind and a telltale sign of his lofty ambition. In these ways, it reveals itself one of the most telling and significant patches of colour in the history of painting. Surely Tapies would have seen it in this light?


Other Posts from “Having Fun with Creativity”, Chapter 10 of “Fresh Perspectives on Creativity”

Other Posts from “Fresh Insights into Creativity”

Click here for list of all currently available Posts

Go to top



10 thoughts on “Cézanne falls short”

    1. Thank you Sarah, you have made an important comment. Unless, they leave a record, we can never be sure of an artist’s motivations. However, the example of Ambroise Vollard’s knuckle opens up the possibility that even far-from-completed works by Cézanne were abandoned because the artist realised, at quite an early stage, that he had painted himself in an situation that could only be resolved by massive repainting. We might even suspect much bitter experience of past failures of this nature behind his decision to quit on the portrait of Ambroise Vollard.

  1. merci de ce partage sur l’exigence de la recherche de Cezanne dans cette oeuvre. N’est-ce pas aussi la sensibilité et la pratique qui permettent de juger de la justesse de la relation d’une couleur avec les autres couleurs? Je me demande aussi quelle est la valeur du sentiment exprimé dans : “j’aime” ou “je n’aime pas” devant un arrangement de couleurs, par le peintre lui-même ou par un spectateur.

  2. Insightful. Thanks for pointing out this significant detail and why it is significant. I am usually so impressed by what he has on the canvas that I don’t usually think about what is not….which is everything else there is available to be there! Choices…his agonized choices!

  3. Thanks for these insights into the work of Cézanne. I find this to be a good example of the interplay of colors within a work of art.
    As an aside, I keyed in on Cézanne’s retreat to Paris and now allow myself a ‘time out’ when frustrated with my relationship to my ‘art space.’

  4. What is left unfinished becomes an entirely new point of interpretation? Sometimes seriousness and determination gives way to justification and surrender. Thanks Cezanne for inspiring these insights.

  5. Thank you for this. I just spent about an hour in the Cezanne room of the National Gallery of Art here in Washington, D.C. I stared and took photos. And, stared again. Why, I kept asking myself, are these paintings so transporting? So satisfying? Why can I not reach an end of looking at them with so much pleasure? I don’t have the answer. But, after reading this post I feel I have some understanding of the painter’s passionate integrity. Again, thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.