Cloudscapes over the Baltic Sea–Cloud Motifs in Finnish, Swedish, German, Russian, Polish, Lithuanian, and Latvian Symbolic Landscape Painting around 1900

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is a well-researched article. It represents a strong contribution to the study of Symbolist painting in its broad examination of a common motif in the Nordic and Baltic countries. However, there should be a clear explanation of why this is a Baltic phenomenon as opposed to one observable in painting throughout Europe (or America) during this period. 

The quality of English is high. Only minimal editing is needed.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your review. I reshaped the introduction in order to follow your advice.

Reviewer 2 Report

In principle, an insight into cloud painting in the 1890s and early 1900s (of symbolism) in the Baltic See Region, as announced in the title, would be very interesting. The problem of the text, however, already begins with the definition of the object of investigation. Because two of the four depicted paintings are from a later time (Fig.: 1925; Fig. 4: 1943), it would be necessary to clarify the epoch designation "Symbolism" for the region. It would also be appropriate to place the paintings discussed in a broader context, such as Symbolism, informed by research literature. 

The text contains numerous inaccuracies, which I would like to illustrate with just a few examples.

Line 16-17: "Artistic interest in clouds originated either from an interest in spiritual elation or a commitment to scientific specificity."
This is too simplistic. Johannes Stückelberger, for example, has shed light on an autopoietic aesthetics of cloud painting since 1800 (2006) and has presented various functions of painted and photographed clouds in modern times (2010). For the artist Constable, for example, clouds served to convey mood and atmosphere. His cloud images are not naturalistic in the strict sense, but composed under the meteorological knowledge of the time. And Hodler, who gave clouds a quite some pictorial weight in the picture, hoped to express a higher feeling of the human through landscape. With Friedrich, with his pantheistic spirituality, the clouds were primarily about a connection between man and nature, about transience and certainly also, but not solely, about emotionality (as claimed in lines 23-25). All this knowledge can be found in research literature.

Also the formulations are often imprecise, e.g. in line 17-18: "Religious painters tended to associate clouds with gods,..."
Clouds in religious painting usually mark the transit zone between the earthly and the heavenly realm.

Line 25: "And here is where the art historical narrative about cloudscapes usually ends." The author only cites two sources for her/his claim. In view of this strong statement this is somewhat unsatisfactory, since the contribution of art history to the subject of cloud painting is quite larger. In addition to Stückelberger, Anouchka Vasak (Peindre les nuages..., 2020), Christina Storch (Weather, Clouds, and Affects..., 2015), and Inger Gudmundson who focused on Dahl's Cloud Studies (2018; 2020), for example, have focused on cloud painting. There are many more.

Line 352-353: "Clouds began to assume symbolic/evocative meanings when painters departed from Naturalism and endowed their models with fanciful forms." This is false.

The sloppy handling of research literature is also evident in the references. I would like to demonstrate this by the example of the references to Hubert Damisch's "A Theory of /Cloud/...": 

- In Footnote i the Name Damisch is spelled incorrectly as "Damish". The author's book "A Theory of /Cloud/: Toward a History of Painting" (not "Paintings") was originally published in French in 1972 and not in English. Rather the here cited title of the English translation seems to refer to the 2002 edition of Stanford University Press. The bibliography again shows neither the French original nor the English translation but a polish translation of the book from 2011. This is inaccurate scientific work at a very basic level.

- Lines 252-257; Damisch is cited, whereby the author offers his/her own translation. I also cite the context of the quote. The author writes: "Here, the surface of the lake functions less as a mirror that accurately reflects the reality as it does a medium that disturbs the reflection. If we accept the perspective of Hubert Damisch—that the cloud as a natural phenomenon is itself a reflection that “functions in its mass as mirrors that do not reflect figures but send colors back”—we get an increase in reflections and a deeper symbolic value of the motif. In Gallen-Kallela’s work, perception is completely curved; clouds are not only seen as reflections, but the reflection itself is disturbed, illegible."

Here the professional translation from the Stanford University Press edition, page 36: "Cloud, constituted as it is of many more or less dense and aqueous components of minute dimensions, functions in its mass as mirrors that, unlike those that reflect shapes, show only colors:" What follows is a longer quote from James Cahill. 
1) The section at Damisch is not at all about mirrorlakes but about the question if clouds are defined by shape or by color. The quote is thus taken out of context and totally twisted in meaning.
2) In the section at Damisch, cloud is not understood as a reflection, as the author claims, but due to its many "aqueous components" reflects.
3) The author's translation is misleading. There is a great difference in meaning between "mirrors that do not reflect figures but send colors back" and the correct translation "mirrors that, unlike those that reflect shapes, show only colors".

In other places, too, the author has not properly taken care to present the cited titles accurately. In footnote ii "Sigrid" is wrongly in bold. In Footnote iii the name spelled as "Go"ran" has to be "Göran". And so on.

Image credits are missing.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your thorough review. I reshaped the introduction in order to follow your advice and included more research literature that I had omitted before. Your comments were very informative and I hope that my paper is more accurate in its new shape. 

Reviewer 3 Report

The proposed article is well written, its topic is clearly defined, and the text is logically constructed. The author's arguments are clearly and coherently presented, as are the conclusions.

I have no objections to the research and I think that the article can be published in its present form.

I noticed only minor typos, probably caused by text edits - mostly double spaces between words, but line 377 contains a redundant definite article. In "including a the symbolic value" only "a" or "the" should remain. This remark is absolutely formal, and I make it only to assist the author in polishing the details to perfection.

The English language is very good, I have no objections.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your review. I have applied the changes you suggested.