The central metaphor of art is transformation. Transforming a formless block of stone, or a few puddles of colored oil, into an illusion of a living person, or a vivid scene, is central. Turning one thing into another is where art starts.
But how does making the art transform the artist? For instance, did painting the Sistine Chapel Ceiling make Michelangelo more venerable of Christianity? How did painting The Death of Marat affect David’s views of the French Revolution? However, in those older times, the artist, and the personality of the artist, was not seen as central to the meaning of an artwork. The viewer was expected to see the meaning directly in the artwork, not in the biography of the artist.
But, since the early 20th century, probably starting with the DADA artists, the story and history of the artist as a person, has become inextricably tied up in the metaphor in the artwork. Art today is considered to be an expression of the life and ideas of the particular artist. Countless movements and school are thought of as coalescing around the times in question, and the pervasive ideas of the period. DADA is thought of, side-by-side, with the slaughter of WWI, and of the artists’ exile in Switzerland. When Surrealism is considered, the ideas of Freud, and the impulses of the unconscious, get a mention. The Abstract Expressionists are always considered against the backdrop of the atomic bomb, and the post-war consumer culture. Warhol is discussed in terms of fame and celebrity; Damien Hirst in terms of manufactured and insincere outrage.
In other words, artists reflect the mood of their times.
But, I can think of one artist who runs strongly counter to this theme: Joseph Cornell. Through his work, he imaginatively transformed himself from an ordinary suburban American into a sophisticated fin de siècle Parisian! He imagined himself as entirely different from what he was, and then made artwork to complete this transformation. Using the homely materials of old books, glue, and rough wood, he built curious hermetic monuments to his fantasy life as a character out of Proust.
Mondrian’s work has been a big influence on me, and my approach to art. When I first encountered his paintings, I was struck by how spare, flat, and organized they were.
When I first encountered Kandinsky, it was the German Expressionist style he worked in when he was part of the German Expressionist group Der Blaue Reiter.
Joseph Cornell
The central metaphor of art is transformation. Transforming a formless block of stone, or a few puddles of colored oil, into an illusion of a living person, or a vivid scene, is central. Turning one thing into another is where art starts.
But how does making the art transform the artist? For instance, did painting the Sistine Chapel Ceiling make Michelangelo more venerable of Christianity? How did painting The Death of Marat affect David’s views of the French Revolution? However, in those older times, the artist, and the personality of the artist, was not seen as central to the meaning of an artwork. The viewer was expected to see the meaning directly in the artwork, not in the biography of the artist.
But, since the early 20th century, probably starting with the DADA artists, the story and history of the artist as a person, has become inextricably tied up in the metaphor in the artwork. Art today is considered to be an expression of the life and ideas of the particular artist. Countless movements and school are thought of as coalescing around the times in question, and the pervasive ideas of the period. DADA is thought of, side-by-side, with the slaughter of WWI, and of the artists’ exile in Switzerland. When Surrealism is considered, the ideas of Freud, and the impulses of the unconscious, get a mention. The Abstract Expressionists are always considered against the backdrop of the atomic bomb, and the post-war consumer culture. Warhol is discussed in terms of fame and celebrity; Damien Hirst in terms of manufactured and insincere outrage.
In other words, artists reflect the mood of their times.
But, I can think of one artist who runs strongly counter to this theme: Joseph Cornell. Through his work, he imaginatively transformed himself from an ordinary suburban American into a sophisticated fin de siècle Parisian! He imagined himself as entirely different from what he was, and then made artwork to complete this transformation. Using the homely materials of old books, glue, and rough wood, he built curious hermetic monuments to his fantasy life as a character out of Proust.
Share this:
Like this:
Related
Related Posts
Piet Mondrian
Mondrian’s work has been a big influence on me, and my approach to art. When I first encountered his paintings, I was struck by how spare, flat, and organized they were.
Share this:
Like this:
Wassily Kandinsky
When I first encountered Kandinsky, it was the German Expressionist style he worked in when he was part of the German Expressionist group Der Blaue Reiter.
Share this:
Like this:
Paul Klee
The artwork of Paul Klee is so imaginative and playful, I think of him as just floating along on a cloud of pure inspiration!
Share this:
Like this:
Hilma af Klint
Like a lot of people in the artworld, I first became aware of the painter Wilma Af Klint in the last few years.
Share this:
Like this: