Bernie Michalik's posterous site

I went through the house now and switched off all the lights. Or I tried
to: there are too many LEDs scattered throughout the house, barely noticed,
though still on. All that remains are these two candles.

They are surprisingly bright. And before industrialization, likely the only
light I would have had to read from at night, save burning fuels, either
oils or paper or wood. But in the late 19th century and through the 20th,
we've gone through a range of light sources, from oil lights to gas to
electric of all sorts (tungsten, halogen, fluorescent, sodium).

One of my favorite painters, Gerhart Richter, does studies of candles
reminiscent of the great artist Georges de la Tour. That artist did superb
works illustrating the effects of candlelight in compositions. Richter's
candle paintings are almost an homage to de la Tour and not so much a study
of candle light. However where he does bring in light well is in paintings
lit by artificial light. The harshness of the light, how it floods the
subject, is captured well.

It is good to see artists capture light like this, for such light will soon
by gone. 19th century nocturne paintings of London with their smog and
their gaslight have a look never to come again. Likewise I don't know if
any artists ever captured sodium lighting outdoors in a painting, but I do
recall it being widely used in the 70s. Now I think it is restricted to
highways. Eventually it will be gone. Just like tungsten light will be
gone, replaced with other artificial light sources.

There is something comforting and constant about candlelight. And pure too.
It has a warmth and brightness that artificial light cannot capture. But is
is impractical and relatively dangerous. Even then, I can't imagine us ever
not having it.
The nights are long, especially in winter, and light and warmth are dear.
We need our light at night to comfort us and to guide us, be we 6 or 96.
-----------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Handheld.