Название: Cubism
Автор: Guillaume Apollinaire
Издательство: Parkstone International Publishing
Жанр: Иностранные языки
Серия: Art of Century
isbn: 978-1-78310-387-4
isbn:
The Delaunays did not, like other artists, use this term to mean dynamism. They did not refer to the “élan vital” (“vital force”) as Bergson did, but rather to Chevreul’s theory of the law of simultaneous contrast. This theory, which dated from 1839 and had already played a role with the Impressionists, related colours and the relationship of objects to one another. Chevreul’s work was republished in 1890 and thus more present in the collective knowledge of artists. Sonia Delaunay, in her work Contrastes Simultanés (Simultaneous Contrasts) dared to jump directly into the abstract. Her painting was already a formal reference system of colour rhythms at a time when her husband Robert and artists Klee, Kandinsky, Mondrian and Picasso were still slowly making their way towards detaching themselves from objects.
Robert Delaunay founded Orphism, also known as Orphic Cubism. On account of the orchestration of colour, Guillaume Apollinaire named Delaunay’s painting style after Orpheus, the singer of Greek mythology. The origins of his painting style derived from Impressionism, Analytical Cubism and from Cézanne. The new landmark of Paris, the Eiffel Tower, built in 1898, fascinated him. Its elegant design became the subject of the Windows series. He painted it again and again, in new variations and refractions, using light and bright colour harmonies based on the colour values of light separated by a prism. Emphasising the delicate construction, he ceaselessly offered new perspectives of the monument, showing it in new lights and refractions, and always from a different viewpoint.
Sonia Delaunay, Electric Prisms, 1914.
Oil on canvas, 250 × 250 cm.
Musée National d’Art Moderne, Centre Georges-Pompidou, Paris.
III. Picasso and Cubism
Pablo Picasso, Three Women, 1908.
Oil on canvas, 200 × 178 cm.
The State Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg.
Les Demoiselles d’Avignon: Breaking with the Past
The young artists of the early twentieth century undoubtedly demonstrated an avant-garde spirit of aesthetic radicalism. Yet even the leader of the Fauves, Matisse, was scandalised when he visited Picasso and saw his masterpiece; to him the painting was an abuse of modern art, as he could find no aesthetically justified explanation for it. Could the work indeed be classified (at least in those days) as modern art? Many of its first viewers, at any rate, saw it as “something Assyrian” (that is how Wilhelm Uhde presented it to Kahnweiler). Douanier Rousseau, we know, noted in 1908 that Picasso worked in the Egyptian genre. It has now been proven that during his work on Les Demoiselles d’Avignon, Picasso had two Iberian stone sculptures with which he “took counsel” in his experiments. Of course, there was certainly Matisse’s Blue Nude and Derain’s Bathers, but essentially, Picasso was always a solitary artist: “He was always free, owing nothing to anyone but himself” (Kahnweiler). From the distance of over four decades, here is how the artist himself explained the reasons and essence of the creative breakthrough of 1907: “I saw that everything had been done. One had to break, to make one’s revolution and to start at zero.”[1]
That break, however, that revolution, was neither instantaneously nor easily achieved. It was carried out amid the conditions of a new spiritual and creative crisis – one far more profound and all-embracing than ever before, because it touched on the technical, spiritual and pictorial possibilities open to the artist (“I saw that everything had been done”). It affected Picasso’s future as an artist and, therefore, his existence as an individual. This was a solitary, internal revolution, and perhaps nobody ever understood it as well as Apollinaire, who went through the same kind of rupture and revolution one year later. In The Cubist Painters (1913) Apollinaire summed up both his own and Picasso’s experience in a theory of artistic creation based on a somewhat surprising criterion: weariness.
While following the conceptual and compositional stages of the painting Les Demoiselles d’Avignon and observing the development of its separate images and the parallel appearance of ideas and pictures, we see how Picasso “formulates what he wishes to express”, critically studies the creative process itself, stubbornly forces his hand to learn anew and to discard habitual virtuosity and an almost “automatic mastery”. “Never was labour less well paid with joys,” wrote Salmon,[2] who observed Picasso in his oppressed, troubled, agitated state of mind. Derain did not exclude the possibility of suicide.[3] Yet Picasso’s solitude and seclusion were not demoralising. Recalling that period, he said that work had saved him; indeed, will-power helped to overcome the vagueness of his goal as he laboured over the simplest studies and academic models. Each consecutive stage was a new step into the unknown; every step was a violation of the status quo, a transcendence of given limits, a broadening of possibilities. “But what fatigue, imperfection, crudeness!”
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
Примечания
1
A. Liberman, The Artist in His Studio, London, 1969, p. 113.
2
A. Salmon, La Jeune peinture française, Paris, 1912, p. 42.
3
D.-H. Kahnweiler, My Galleries and Painters, New York, 1971, p. 39.
Примечания
1
A. Liberman,
2
A. Salmon,
3
D.-H СКАЧАТЬ
1
A. Liberman,
2
A. Salmon,
3
D.-H. Kahnweiler,