After the rain. Paris 1897

Editor: Standing before us is Konstantin Korovin's "After the Rain. Paris," created in 1897 using oil paints. The canvas evokes a very somber mood with its dark palette. I’m struck by how the reflections blur the lines between the architecture and the street. What’s your take on this work, looking at it through a historical lens? Curator: Korovin painted this at a fascinating moment in Paris. Impressionism was in full swing, shaping perceptions of urban life, moving away from purely academic paintings to scenes reflecting more everyday realities, captured in fleeting moments. Consider the title itself; it’s not a grand historical subject, but something utterly ordinary. The painting doesn't present an idealized Paris, it highlights something of modern life, fleeting moments and weather. Editor: So, you're suggesting Korovin aimed to capture not just what Paris looked like but also how it felt? Like, the sensation of a city slicked with rain? Curator: Precisely! Look at the rough brushstrokes, and the indistinct figures. Does it look documentary to you? Or does it seek something else? The loose application mirrored a sense of the city being alive but indifferent to any individual drama. Think about what art institutions deemed important back then. He certainly presented another point of view through painting. It is like modern, urban existence is now something worth contemplating aesthetically and culturally. Editor: I see what you mean. The more I look at the painting the more I get that feel of that ordinary moments in a big city. It is like that very experience itself is elevated into art. Thanks. I now have a greater understanding of the piece! Curator: Indeed, and that’s often the power of art, especially paintings such as this: making us see significance where we least expect it, reflecting our values back at us through aesthetic representation.