Abdulnasser Gharem

Abdulnasser Gharem

“I want to change that text culture to a visual thing, because the people here they didn’t used to the visual or to the images because it was prohibited”— Abdulnasser Gharem

I am obsessed with artist Abdulnasser Gharem for two reasons. First, he is brave enough to use art to challenge censorship traditions in a culture greatly controlled by its government and second because he lives a double life as a Major in the Saudi Arabian Army.

Whoa.

So I was checking NPR’s recent articles— ’cause I am weird and prefer reading them to listening to them— and I stumbled upon an interview Gharem gave to NPR reporter Renee Montagne. Immediately I am impressed with how boldly Gharem expresses himself in such a censored  and conflicted country. I’ll put the link at the end of my gushing because I am sure you will want to read it.

One of the first questions Montagne asks regards one of his first performances in 2007 delivered in his home town of Khamis Mushait (near Abha) in which he wrapped himself and a tree up in plastic. Performance art was an early solution to the problem of reaching people with his art. He said that there was no art in his city, no museum, no gallery, nothing for him to exhibit in. So Gharem asks himself, “Why should I wait for them? Why don’t I just go to the main street of my city and just do the performance? Just go and connect with a real audience.” I love it! He puts the situation in his control and just strolls on down to the main street of his hometown and wraps himself up with a tree. His performance that day was a criticism of the government; he was challenging their decision to plant a foreign trees that were now sickening native trees. This kind of political criticism is nothing new in the US where we have so many people involved with activism that there we’re bombarded with a “Rights for [any cause]” promotion until we’re apathetic to pleas, but these organizations do not exist in Saudi Arbia. So Gharem’s actions are very radical and possibly dangerous. But he goes further, he is trying to actually begin a tradition of visual art in Saudi Arabia.

You see, even since ancient times  Middle Eastern culture forbade the use of images. In their religion, images are regarded as idols so instead of a culture of imagery what developed was a rich artistic tradition of nonobjective design, such as elaborate floral motifs on tapestries, colorful complicated patterns on walls, beautiful illuminated manuscripts, and of course amazing feats of architectural engineering. But images, short of gods and important political figures in historical and religious texts, are very rare and follow very specific guidelines. Talking about censorship Gharem admits that, “I’m trying to be careful with these things. You know, with the social media, I think no one now can block anyone or not letting anyone to show what he want. But I’m a little bit worried. I can’t do that sort of show — the one I just did in London — in Saudi Arabia. I think it would not be allowed, to be honest.”

So Gharem’s efforts to bring a new art culture Saudi Arbia is as ambitious as it precarious. A lot of his work he has to show outside of the country, such as his instillations and recent exhibition of paintings in London where he is allowed more liberalism. Gharem has achieved international fame for recently becoming the highest selling living Gulf Artist when his instillation “Messege/Messenger” made history at an auction in Dubai by selling at a record price. The artist, staying ever true to his goal of encouraging visual art traditions for his homeland, donated all the proceeds to the art education organization Edge of Arabia, of which he is a founding member.

“Rubber Stamps”

Aside from instillations and performance art, Gahrem also makes art that comments on international events and his duties as a part of a bureaucracy. His three-foot tall stamps are larger-than-life interpretations of the bureaucratic seals he employs in his day job — as a lieutenant colonel in Saudi Arabia’s army. He was inspired by the authority stamps give to documents that receive their marking. In his country, anything that is of importance— birth certificates, licenses, marriage contracts, vacation documents,anything asserting value— gets a stamp marking its importance. He uses stamps often in his work for the army and noticed that the younger generation rebels against the requirement to obtain approval through stamps. This piece illustrates a gap dividing the youth and the elderly, and blames bureaucracy for creating the divide. He also has a painting commemorating the 9/11 attack in America. Bearing the titled “Pause” the painting is very but very moving. It is simplified to the extreme in a very flattened perspective using only graphic shapes, two shades of grey, and a streak of yellow. But it simplicity allows you to immediantly recognize what is happening in the image; literally it forces you to stop to consider the event for a moment. I am just going to paste what he said in the interview right here because I could not summarize what he says about this painting and maintain the same impact:

“Pause”

“That painting, I call it “Pause” because it’s related to 9/11. You know, in that moment, I think the whole world were like someone pushed that button: pause. And the 19 who were in the airplane, most of them are from Saudi Arabia, and two of them, I was studying with them. They were with me in the same schools. … They were with me in the high schools, and I was wondering why did they choose this path while we have the same knowledge. We were in the same school, we were sitting next together, and I don’t know why did they choose that path. It was a crazy thing, to be honest.”

So yeah, I am just kind of obsessed with this man and what he is doing for his country. Sometimes we really do not appreciate the freedom we have to create like we should. We can be artists, we can be writers, we can be performers, and we can be collectors of whatever kind of art we want. This is a great thing and when there is so much in life that we cannot control, at least we have art— in any form— to satisfy our desire for expression of whatever needs to be expressed.

Here’s Gharem’s NPR interview

http://www.npr.org/2013/11/08/243492165/saudi-soldier-questions-authority-with-art-and-plastic-wrap

And here is his awesome website:

http://abdulnassergharem.com

Advertisements

1,400 Works of Degenerate Art Found in Nazi Collector’s Home

This past Monday Germany’s Focus magazine finally released official press information about a  stash of 20th century art that was discovered back in 2011 under the headline “The Nazi Treasure” (Der Nazi-Schatz). German investigators and tax officials discovered a cache of 1,400 pieces of “degenerate art” when they visited  the cluttered apartment of Cornelius Gurlitt in Munich. They found missing paintings, both known and previously unknown, by famous painters such as — it has Picasso, Renoir, Max Beckmann, Henri Matisse, Marc Chagall, Pablo Picasso, Auguste Renoir and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, and other works have never been seen before now!  Gurlitt is the son of a WWII official who, obviously, was also an art collector during this time and probably had to hide his collection of so called “degenerate” art.

So degenerate art, what is that you may be asking? Well first, a little known fact about Hitler is that he a failed art school in Vienna. He was told he was not very talented, and he was rejected by the arts academies.  He held a grudge over the negative criticism, but he still considered himself an “arbitrator” of art. Later when he came into his power he organized the Degenerate Art Exhibition (Die Ausstellung “Entartete Kunst”) in an effort to control Germany’s media and art culture. Hitler commanded Nazi solders to confiscate modern art that, according to him, promoted anti-Nazi ideas. According to the art school flunky, art could be deemed degenerate if it “insulted” German feeling, or destroyed and confused natural form or simply revealed an absence of adequate manual and artistic skill. So basically any art that showed support for free thinking ideologies was labeled degenerate, and that definition includes nearly all modernist art.

The exhibit was designed to promote the idea that modernism was a conspiracy by people who hated and conspired against German decency, also called Jewish-Bolshevist. (Although only six of the 112 artists included in the exhibition were in fact Jewish.) The second purpose of the Degenerate Art show was to identify which artists were considered verboten by the Nazi leadership. The exhibit consisted of 650 works of art by modernists like Marc ChagallGeorg GroszWassily KandinskyErnst Ludwig KirchnerPaul KleeGeorg Kolbe,Wilhelm LehmbruckFranz MarcEmil Nolde, Picasso and others; all of the art was stolen from German museums and galleries. Hitler and the Nazi leadership pulled off of museum walls thousands of pieces of art that were considered “degenerate,” and exhibited them in Berlin. The show ran from July 19 to November 30, 1937 and was hosted in the Institute of Archeology in the Hofgarten. The day before the exhibition started, Hitler delivered a speech declaring “merciless war” on cultural disintegration, attacking “chatterboxes, dilettantes and art swindlers”. One million people attended the exhibition in its first six weeks which is an average of 20,000 people per day!— and the final estimate is that about 2,009,899 visitors attended the show.  Oh and the exhibition was held simultaneously with the Große Deutsche Kunstausstellung (“Great German Art Exhibition”), which served as a counterpoint to the Degenerate show. Its purpose was to example “proper German sensibility” and displayed the classical and “racially pure” type of art advocated by the Nazi regime. That exhibition was hosted near Hofgarten, in the Haus der Deutschen Kunst and was described as mediocre by modern sources; it attracted only about half the numbers of the Degenerate Art show.

So lol at Hitler!

Many works were displayed without frames and partially covered by derogatory slogans. No catalog was created for it, and it had to be reconstructed by modern scholars from secondary sources. But not all of the stolen art was put on display. Historians estimate that around 20% of great European art was stolen by Nazis during WWII, so there is a great deal of outstanding art to be found. The recently discovered Munich trove is  part of the continent’s seven-decade rediscovery of an artistic heritage that is still recovering from the Nazis’ efforts to wipe it out. This collection of looted art has an estimated value of $1.35 billon. Stolen art is known to be out there in private hands, but this kind of cache of nearly 1,500 works is really just unprecedented. It’s a mind blowing huge collection and I would just LOVE to be one of the historians there to document it.  I am sure that art historians will have their hands full recording it all and museums and dealers will be busy trying to figure out who owns which pieces— apparently there are some outstanding requests to locate some of the art found in this cache. But according to Anne-Marie O’Connor, a Jerusalem-based journalist interviewed for an NPR article, this discovery will probably affect the art market more than the art history, and drive up the price of paintings by these artists that are already privately owned.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/11/06/why-nazi-seized-art-is-only-now-resurfacing-and-how-it-will-change-the-art-world/

A Call to Examine the Ills of Selfies on Men

*I started this as a freelance assignment. I wanted to share a version of it here for you guys. Enjoy!*

A lot of contemporary selfie literature is just fodder for feminist arguments and claim that the selfie phenomenon is simply the latest form of the “male gaze”.  Such arguments accuse selfies of further de-humanizing women into sex objects. Ben Ager describes the trend as “the male gaze gone viral,” and women’s studies professor and anti-porn activist Gail Dines argues that selfies are vehicles for the normalizing of porn culture in our society.  Writer Andrew Kleen thinks this should be of great concern when it comes to girls and women, “unless women don’t care about being transformed into commercial pornography.” All the while insight gathered from selfie studies like these are used to measure the effects on women while claiming men are to blame.

While I do not question conclusions that accuse selfies of pressuring women, I do think that to approach the subject of selfies as though women are the only victims is flawed. In fact I am convinced that selfies are just as bad for men as they are for women. While reading these articles I noticed that the arguments are constructed from one direction and with one purpose in mind: to demonize the contemporary male gaze fueling a porn culture. Andrew Keen, Gail Dines, and Ben Ager have written about how vulnerable women are to feeling pressured to over edit selfies for a socially constructed expectation of perfection. Dines especially has interpreted studies with such a focused agenda— accusing selfies of teaching young women that to be positively received their pictures must meet a man’s expectations— that they overlook the harm selfies could pose to men.

Selfies are not new and have been around since the advent of the camera; even before the social media apps of today made it so easy to snap and share every moment of your day. I was able to find photographs of “selfies” taken by the “mirror” method— posing in front of a mirror and capturing the reflection— as far back as  in the early 1900s. The Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia took one of the first teenage selfies using a mirror and a Kodak Brownie camera to send to a friend in 1914, but even less famous people of Edwardian society have left us with photos of their reflections. This shows us just how much people almost instinctively obsess over how to preserve a present moment to document their lives. And these photos show that since the beginning of our media culture both men and women were active “selfie” takers.

472px-Unidentified_woman_taking_her_own_photograph_using_a_mirror_and_a_box_camera,_roughly_1900 546px-Grand_Duchess_Anastasia_Nikolaevna_self_photographic_portrait 1938 1948

So men take selfies just like women and edit them before sharing. In fact the main appeal of selfie sharing is that anyone with a camera on his or her phone is able to participate, not just women with low self-esteem. Sites like Instagram have premade filters that let users quickly edit lighting, quality, and saturation without having to tediously work photo-editing programs. This instant ability to edit a self-portrait to an acceptable perfection gives users a sense of control over their image, and this extends to believing they can control how they are socially perceived.  And while celebrities take selfies too, Pamela Rutledge, Ph.D., faculty director of the media psychology program at the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology, points out because of selfies, “There are many more photographs available now of real people than models”. Selfies enable us to broadcast to hundreds of people a perception of ourselves that transcends into a definition of character and social relevance. For the “normal” person, posting a selfie through social media feels like an empowering act.

Both women and men are likely to alter photos with filters to “improve” their image. The user’s need to edit their image indicates the precarious balance between feeling empowerment and feeling anxiety over selfie sharing. In reality, control over your image reception is an illusion. According to Andrew Keen points, the user loses all control of reception once the photo is made public. Keen tells Straight, “It’s the opposite of controlling your own image.”  People post pictures of themselves looking attractive to generate more positive feedback. They become obsessed with accruing “likes” and comments on their photos. As a result, the process of making a selfie attractive has become very precise. In Grisham’s USA article he notes it has been shown that women will place the phone at high angles to make their eyes larger, cheekbones more defined, and we all remember the “duck face” trend in which women pulled their cheeks in and made “kissey” faces. And like women, men set up their pictures in very specific ways. Exploring these differences reveals insight into social pressures men possibly feel, and it is not a stretch to assume that a media driven porn culture would cause men to edit photos because they want the same validation women seek from selfie sharing.

What I have observed is that men are far more likely to take a selfie at eye level showing their chests and arms than women. Typically, men photograph themselves at least from the torso up flexing their arms or abs to show muscle. Often they are shirtless while flexing, there is far less emphasis on their faces and much more so on their bodies which could reveal a desire to appear strong and play up their physical abilities. On a tumblr site titled “Selfie Boys” men, many of whom are gay (another category of selfie takers that has been marginalized), post pictures of their penis or in poses that allude to sexual acts. Looking at photo after photo of a penis with the “#selfie” tag makes it clear that men are suffering from powerful feelings of insecurity. It is evident from these photos that the porn culture we live in puts extreme sexual pressure on men, straight or gay, to the point that they would rather share an image of their a penis than of their face. How is that any less disturbing than a woman filtering her face? These men are hiding behind their “manhood” feeling so insecure and invaluable they chose to identify themselves only as a penis. Perhaps these men are just trying to send images that they believe others want to see?

But thus far no one has thoroughly explored the ill effects of selfies or of porn culture on men. Scholars, especially Gail Dines, have only generated a lot of persuasive buzz blaming men for creating a porn culture, not considering whether they too are victims of it. This could be because of the belief, extolled by Dines, that masturbation and pornography are men’s primary experience viscerally and bodily with the Internet. Dines argument proposes that women and girls only have one way of visibility, and that way is “fuckabilty”. But I am woman and selfie taker myself, I know that when I am framing a pose that I am thinking more about how my friends, both male and female, will receive my photo. I am not thinking about just my male peers and I think the same would apply to most women also. I just want to take a goofy picture and send it to a few friends because I wish they could be there with me. Additionally, this model perpetuates a prejudice that women are less sexual than men. I think it is shocking that many writers still draw their conclusions from gender distinctions founded on assuming that men have an inherently higher desire for sex than women. Biased assumptions like Dine’s lead to more assumptions, particularly that women take selfies only for men, which limit the scope of the selfie problem. After browsing the Selfie Boys website for only a few minutes I am persuaded to argue strongly that there are men who similarly feel that their only way to acceptance is through their fuckabilty.

When we acknowledge that men are also sensitive we can understand that there are some men only feel valuable when they are perceived as sexual, and selfies reveal that. It is a mistake to approach the study of selfies assuming that only half the population would suffer harmful effects of the social phenomenon. We live in a society in which, according to a Samsung survey, selfies account for 30 percent of all photos among people ages 18 to 24.  And 91 percent of teenagers admit to posting photos online. And with the staggering popularity of selfies, I ask how could selfies not engender similar abuse on men by pressuring them to take socially acceptable, or sexual pictures as well? Yet, because of gender biases we have assumed that women are more likely to suffer insecurity over their images than men, so thus far selfie criticism only enlightens us to the problems they pose for women.  I argue that men do have similar concerns about acceptance and it is worth exploring selfies because these sexualized portraits are equally troublesome. Perhaps cultural scholars will similarly find that men are sharing selfies to satisfy the demands of perceived masculinity, similar to women taking them for perceived femininity.

—Sharon Singletary

Sources

 Bussel, K. Rachel. “Dear Mrs. Hall: Boys and Men Can See Sexy Selfies and Still Respect
Women.” Medium.com https://medium.com/boinkology-101/e775d466b17c

Keen, Andrew. the author of Digital Vertigo: How Today’s Online Social Revolution Is Dividing,

             Diminishing, and Disorienting Us, disagrees.

Lang, Ian. “Selfies: Why Taking Selfies is the Least Manly Thing You Can Do.” AskMen.com.
http://www.askmen.com/entertainment/austin/selfies.html

Murphy, Meghan. (April 3, 2013) “Putting the Selfie under a feminist lens.” Straight.com.
http://www.straight.com/life/368086/putting-selfies-under-feminist-lens

Nimrod Kamer. “Thinkfluencer Episode 1: Selfies video.” (August 29, 2013)
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/video/2013/aug/29/thinkfluencer-episode-1-
selfies-video

Seville, Rachel. (July 23, 2013) “Can Men Take Selfies?” Four-Pins.com http://four-
pins.com/style/can-men-take-selfies/

Walker, Melissa. (August 2013).“The Good, the Bad, and the Unexpected Consequences of
Selfie Obsession.” Teen Vogue http://www.teenvogue.com/advice/2013-08/selfie-obsession

400 Years Later, Pieter Brueghel the Younger Painting Will Debut at Frieze Masters | In the Air: Art News & Gossip | ARTINFO.com

400 Years Later, Pieter Brueghel the Younger Painting Will Debut at Frieze Masters | In the Air: Art News & Gossip | ARTINFO.com.

Hey guys! Long time no see! I went on an extended vacay and I was away from my computer for far too long. I hope you all forgive me. I thought I woudl come back with some awesome news about the potential, recent rediscovery of a Peiter Brueghel the Younger painting.

Johnny Van Haeften, London Based dealer of 17th century works, discovered the lost painting “The Census at Bethlehem” in Africa. He traced its journey from Antwerp in 1611 to the Delamere faimly in Africa in 1940, the last source of its known where a bouts.

It will debut this week at Frieze Masters in London.

The Art of Altering Women: Thigh Gaps

Today I became aware of a horrifying social media trend taking instagram, tumblr,  twitter, and other image blogs by storm. It is the #thighgap trend. Teen girls and young women take photos of their thigh gap and up load them to their platform of choice to celebrate the achievement of gaining a thigh gap by starving themselves, exercising to the extreme, and self loathing. I am appalled. It is bad enough that girls feel pressure from advertisers to engage in extreme behavior to achieve a culturally lauded homogeneous and exclusive “perfection,” but now they have the means to make their own depraving imagery. You can also read the disturbing wishes that these girls post alongside these photos as motivation:

“With those ankle boots I would also like:

A nice pair of legs with a thigh gap

A flat stomach

My collar bones to stop hiding away

To be able to fit my hand round my arm”

  • “Me: I want to lose weight
  • Friend: You aren’t fat?! If you’re fat then I must be obese
  • Me: You’re not fat though and I never said I was ‘fat
  • Friend: If you want to lose weight then you obviously think you’re fat
  • Me: You wouldn’t understand.”

“Today I ate an actual meal. It felt as though I just drank lead that immediately hardened at the bottom of my stomach. The aftermath felt as though I was twisting a dagger from behind my rib cage.”

 “im currently fasting and im on day three i plan to go as long as possible which will probably be a week to twelve days then ill start adding some liquids like soup and broth so if any one else is fasting or dieting and needs support my kik is : stolenangelz”
and my favorite: “What you eat in private you wear in public.”
Artists have not always been considerate to the wants and realities of a being a woman when it comes to recreating them. In fact the topic of women in art is

Diego Velázquez The Toilet of Venus (“The Rokeby Venus”) 1647–51

so long I could not cover it in this small post, in fact I should probably make a blog just for discussing the appropriation of women’s bodies in art. But for now let’s just take the Rokeby Venus for example. Diego Velázquez decided that the model wasn’t curvy enough in reality so he “fixed” the problem by removing her rib. He altered her anatomy to achieve a compositional balance that would be impossible to replicate in reality. And of course he is not the only one, just go google “Venus of Urbino” or “Madonna paintings.” Back in the Renaissance, Baroque and Rococo periods, artists were mostly men and so paintings of women were created to engage the male viewer. Later feminist views of the paintings deemed this perception the “male gaze” and rightfully accused it of being biased and objectifying woman as a man’s sex object. Artists were creating long and large bodies of impossibly voluptuous and languid women. Also  impossible— especially when they removed ribs, lengthened legs, and other editing of the anatomy— and of course not healthily to aspire to.

And today women are still surrounded by ads that constantly tell them they are ideal enough. Ads are not altered by paint brush any longer, now they use  photoshop to create eerily hyper real photographs of unreal subjects. These images of altered women are powerful— they are created to be so. They speak to the viewer in a direct and personal way. Only now it is to the opposite extreme , we are told we should be smaller.  And women have responded  with tumblers dedicated to thigh gaps and thinspo support that validate a sick obsession with obtaining a shape that is impossible, dangerous, and small.
I think that is what gets me the most riled up. Women live a dichotomous culture in which they are told they can be strong and smart but all of the imagery of women reinforces the idea that to gain acceptance they need to appear weak and frail. It is almost like they are pressured because somewhere along the way they got the idea that they shouldn’t take up any room in the world. Everything about the women appearing in these sites is small, weak, frail and delicate. And boney… These women struggle to control their appearance, and to feel loved by themselves and others. To have this control they harm themselves, and each other, and  they are creating a cult of imagery that supports abusive dieting and exercising behavior; all in the hopes of having a gap between their legs or to see their chest bones. Some women are still ashamed to have a figures, they still are convinced that being natural is not enough and that they have to suffer work towards “perfection” and give up being strong in the process.
But if art can cause harm, perhaps it can heal too. Below is an image of my no thigh gap. Please share a picture of what you love about yourself. I know this strays off topic a little from what the blog is about, but I am so very upset by this and I needed to somehow work it into a post. We need to use art to make images that make people better, sometimes that does mean asking us to digest information that we don’t want to hear, and disturb and shock, or just confuse us, but these thinspo blogs and thigh gap pictures are not “art;” they seem to me to be tools of self hate and of abuse towards women. Art should in the end empower us to think more or do more. I am sharing this photo to remind girls that real women don’t just take up space, they force others to make room for them ’cause they are strong and proud and beautiful in more than one dimension, and they deserve that place.
My Thighs Touch and it is awesome

VAN GOGH is a POST-Impressionism painter, NOT an Expressionism Painter

Van Gogh self portrait in the POST-IMPRESSIONIST style

So, dear readers, I am getting ready for an episode of Face Off I have been excited to watch, right? The theme is art movements so I am thinking that I will love this, right? Well I am half way through the episode and I am already angered and wound up in a tizzy.

First, one girl thinks Constructivism is a movement based on construction. And another contestant is creating a design for Constructivism using a construction worker!

But what really ticks me off is that no one is correcting the idiot who keeps saying that he chose the Expressionism theme because Van Gogh is his idol or something.

hello— WHAT?

Van Gogh is POST-Impressionism, NOT Expressionism. And yes there is a difference.

Expressionist paintings are characterized by distortion and exaggeration in order to create an emotional effect. The paintings are full of vivid imagery and emotion and are often described as showing a touch of the dark side of human nature. Other characteristics of the expressionist style are intense color, disjointed spaces, and agitated brushstrokes that portray subjective reality rather than realism. Artists who paint in this style might incorporate fantasy and violence in their subject matter in order to show the extremes of emotion, often they express their own thoughts and opinions.

The Expressionist movement existed in both Germany and France from 1905 to 1925. Some of the artists closely associated with the movement are Marc Chagall (1887-1985), Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944), Paul Klee (1879-1940), August Macke (1887-1914), Franz Marc (1880-1916), Henri Matisse (1869-1964), and Edvard Munch (1863-1944). NOT Van Gogh.

Impressionism is generally considered to be a spontaneous method of painting in which an artist attempts to capture the impression of light in a scene. The Impressionists broke from the traditional painting methods of their day by applying paint in small touches of pure color, rather than mix the paint before applying it, and using broad strokes and sometimes a palette knife instead of a brush. This method allowed the artists to emphasize the impression of their subject matter rather than paint the object in a realistic manner, enabling the artist to paint an image in the way that someone might see it if they only caught a quick glimpse of the subject. Most impressionist paintings are outdoor scenes painted in vibrant colors without an emphasis on detail and emotion.

The Impressionist movement, which originated in France, lasted from 1867 to 1886. Among the artists most closely associated with the movement are Mary Cassatt (1844-1926), Edgar Degas (1834-1917), Claude Monet (1840-1926), Camille Pissaro (1830-1903), Pierre-Auguste Renoir (1841-1919), and Alfred Sisley (1839-1899). NOT Van Gogh.

Post-Impressionism came a little later ( the term was invented by Roger Fry in 1910) and was started by artists responding to Impressionism by exploring pointillism methods, because they felt all of the potential of Impressionism was exhausted. Post-Impressionists pushed the ideas of the Impressionists into new directions, but Post-Impressionists were an eclectic bunch of individuals, so there were no broad, unifying characteristics. Each artist took an aspect of Impressionism and exaggerated it. Artists of Post-Impressionsim include Paul Cézanne, Paul Gauguin, George Seurat, André Derain, Maurice de Vlaminck and Othon Friesz, plus the sculptor Aristide Maillol and VINCENT VAN GOGH!

So now hopefully you see that there is a difference between these three art movements.