ideas on modernism...
In Modernist Painting by Clement Greenberg there is one underlying point to be made. Greenberg believes that Modernist art is the only pure art, and that the history of art has always been leading to it. He summarizes his reasons for this in three main ideas. The idea that modernism has come about by questioning its history, and by questioning itself from the inside rather than the outside. The idea that this has led to understanding the uniqueness of the medium and the formal elements of what modernism is. And this again leading to art itself being pure, and the whole experience of the aesthetic as pure.
Greenberg makes the point that certain periods of art (realistic, illusionist art) have used illusionism or forms of it, to conceal the actual art. Or to create a picture. Greenberg says that, originally, the artist wanted you to see the imagery and ideas before he wanted you to see what the picture truly is. That of course being an illusion created inside a frame, hanging on a wall, inside of a gallery. He believes that Modernism is making and seeing art for exactly what it is. Art. The artists themselves are seeing the art for the aesthetic value. The fact that Modernist artists are very literal about this idea also leads again into the art becoming purer.
The Modernist artist is forced to look at the space in which they are painting. Greenberg explains that they are taking the reality of the flat surface and making it obvious. They are not seeing it as a limitation. Just as they are embracing the reality of the brush stroke, the color that is taken directly from a tube, and again, the idea that the picture is contained within a two dimensional space. The formal line and shape being used in Modernism is the only way to achieve this. Anything figurative begins to suggest three dimensional space. Greenberg states that understanding the absolute reality of these elements is what allows for purity.
The term modernism itself means something new and current. Greenberg is suggesting that by understanding the limits of the art, we are able to see it for what it is. Art as Art. The history of art has led to the aesthetic experience being the only constant within itself. Greenberg compares Modernist art to the assimilation of religion. While religion had to prove the value of itself, Modernist art must do the same. Modernist art does this through criticism of itself. While this is still a relatively new concept, Greenberg admits that Modernism would be utterly impossible without the art of the past.
In summary Greenberg is suggesting that Modernism is art in its absolute purest form. It has come to be this way throughout the history of art. Greenberg explains that art has led itself to purity. The Modernist artist embraces the idea of purity and the absolute reality of art. The artist does so by questioning the foundation of art, and understanding the uniqueness of the medium. And this is what brings art and the aesthetic experience to its truest form. Art as Art.
In After Modern Art, David Hopkins criticizes the basis and Greenberg’s understanding of Modernism. Hopkins suggests that Greenberg’s ideas of Modernism were a direct result of his capitalism. Hopkins notes his belief that subject matter itself had little or nothing to do with the aesthetic experience. This idea is a direct contradiction of what Modernist painters like Pollock worked for. The definition of Modernism through Greenberg also diminishes the other practices of abstraction, or of the other periods of art throughout history. Hopkins suggests that Greenberg is also only representing Modernism and its artists in selective parts.
A completely different definition of Modernism can be found in When was Modernism? By Raymond Williams. Williams states that Modernism defines a divide in politics. Williams explains that the actual term Modernism provides a problem because Modernism means what is actually here and happening. Meaning there is nothing beyond it. Another problem posed by Williams is that Modernism set itself up to become integrated into Capitalism. Doing so by trying to be a universal language. Modernism contradicted itself, according to Williams, by becoming commercial. Commercial in the fact that it became iconography, and shifted in styles similar to fashion.
Both Williams and Hopkins are responding to the basis of Greenberg’s definition of Modernism, providing new evidence on the possibility that Modernism is more than purification of art.
by j.m.
Greenberg makes the point that certain periods of art (realistic, illusionist art) have used illusionism or forms of it, to conceal the actual art. Or to create a picture. Greenberg says that, originally, the artist wanted you to see the imagery and ideas before he wanted you to see what the picture truly is. That of course being an illusion created inside a frame, hanging on a wall, inside of a gallery. He believes that Modernism is making and seeing art for exactly what it is. Art. The artists themselves are seeing the art for the aesthetic value. The fact that Modernist artists are very literal about this idea also leads again into the art becoming purer.
The Modernist artist is forced to look at the space in which they are painting. Greenberg explains that they are taking the reality of the flat surface and making it obvious. They are not seeing it as a limitation. Just as they are embracing the reality of the brush stroke, the color that is taken directly from a tube, and again, the idea that the picture is contained within a two dimensional space. The formal line and shape being used in Modernism is the only way to achieve this. Anything figurative begins to suggest three dimensional space. Greenberg states that understanding the absolute reality of these elements is what allows for purity.
The term modernism itself means something new and current. Greenberg is suggesting that by understanding the limits of the art, we are able to see it for what it is. Art as Art. The history of art has led to the aesthetic experience being the only constant within itself. Greenberg compares Modernist art to the assimilation of religion. While religion had to prove the value of itself, Modernist art must do the same. Modernist art does this through criticism of itself. While this is still a relatively new concept, Greenberg admits that Modernism would be utterly impossible without the art of the past.
In summary Greenberg is suggesting that Modernism is art in its absolute purest form. It has come to be this way throughout the history of art. Greenberg explains that art has led itself to purity. The Modernist artist embraces the idea of purity and the absolute reality of art. The artist does so by questioning the foundation of art, and understanding the uniqueness of the medium. And this is what brings art and the aesthetic experience to its truest form. Art as Art.
In After Modern Art, David Hopkins criticizes the basis and Greenberg’s understanding of Modernism. Hopkins suggests that Greenberg’s ideas of Modernism were a direct result of his capitalism. Hopkins notes his belief that subject matter itself had little or nothing to do with the aesthetic experience. This idea is a direct contradiction of what Modernist painters like Pollock worked for. The definition of Modernism through Greenberg also diminishes the other practices of abstraction, or of the other periods of art throughout history. Hopkins suggests that Greenberg is also only representing Modernism and its artists in selective parts.
A completely different definition of Modernism can be found in When was Modernism? By Raymond Williams. Williams states that Modernism defines a divide in politics. Williams explains that the actual term Modernism provides a problem because Modernism means what is actually here and happening. Meaning there is nothing beyond it. Another problem posed by Williams is that Modernism set itself up to become integrated into Capitalism. Doing so by trying to be a universal language. Modernism contradicted itself, according to Williams, by becoming commercial. Commercial in the fact that it became iconography, and shifted in styles similar to fashion.
Both Williams and Hopkins are responding to the basis of Greenberg’s definition of Modernism, providing new evidence on the possibility that Modernism is more than purification of art.
by j.m.