Wassily Kandinsky (December 16, 1866 – December 13, 1944) II

Almost Submerged

1930

"Painting is an art, and art is not vague production, transitory
and isolated, but a power which must be directed to the
improvement and refinement of the human soul–to, in fact, the
raising of the spiritual triangle.

If art refrains from doing this work, a chasm remains unbridged,
for no other power can take the place of art in this activity.
And at times when the human soul is gaining greater strength, art
will also grow in power, for the two are inextricably connected
and complementary one to the other. Conversely, at those times
when the soul tends to be choked by material disbelief, art
becomes purposeless and talk is heard that art exists for art's
sake alone."

– Wassily Kandinsky

Park of St. Cloud with Horseman

1906

Park St. Cloud in Autumn

1906 

White Sound

1908 

Binz on Rügen

1901

Kochel - Lady Seated by the Lakeside

1902 

Shallow-Deep

1930 

Moonlit Night

1907 

Kochel Waterfall II

1902 

Otto Dix (December 2, 1891 – July 25, 1969) II

Sylvia von Harden

1927

I decided to do a second post on Otto Dix because of a recent comment on the first. (You can find the first post here.) To begin with, out of all of my posts, the one on Otto Dix has so far been the most popular. Yet the only comment I have received on it is that the work of Dix is not art because it looks demented. While I suppose the person who posted it was a young teen, judging by her skill in writing, the sentiment I think is very common among adults: that is to say, art and clearly perceivable classical beauty go hand-in-hand. To me the question of what defines art has always been rather difficult, and my current theories are a bit too lengthy for a single post, but I want to try to address her comment at least shortly. For me, what I define as art is always beautiful, but it is beautiful by its transformation through the medium and not by the real-world qualities of its parts. That Otto Dix often painted the grotesque does not mean that the painting is just the grotesque mirror of the world, because by many factors, such as subject, symbolism, style, composition and color palette, the objects and ideas are, if you will allow the reference, transubstantiated into something completely new. But I also have to admit that what we accept as art is ultimately subjective. And I can no more successfully argue against a teen's disgust and rejection of Otto Dix than I can of an art critic's rejection of the Avant-garde. 

What do you think?

Grazing Horses

1915

Three Nudes on the Beach

1923 

The Street of Brothels

1914

Prague Street

1920 

Flowers

1923

Portrait of Dr. Fritz Glaser

1921

Prisoners of War

1948

Seated Nude with Blond Hair

1931

David and Saul

1959

Marc Chagall (July 6, 1887 – 28 March 28, 1985)

                                                                                                               

Bella with White Collar

1917

As a quick note, I'm leaving the city for a couple of days and, while I can usually post from away, this time I'll be in a desolate forested area, which will almost certainly have no reception. So, until the end of the weekend keep your expectations low for new posts. 

Now, to Chagall. The influence and stature of Chagall in the artistic community is tremendous, and even those  in the artistic community who take no pleasure in his work recognize him as a great painter. While there is a lot to laud in terms of Chagall's content,–the noted symbolism of which, he claimed to be unintentional and merely a viewer's subjective experience–it his use of color that he is best known for: a development from the Fauvist movement. It's perhaps a viable argument that, aside from Kandinsky, Chagall had the best sense of color in the 20th century. I'll round out this text with one of my favorite quotes by Chagall; "My name is Marc, my emotional life is sensitive and my purse is empty, but they say I have talent."

The Concert

1957

The Praying Jew

1914

Red Nude Sitting Up

1908

Cemetery Gates

1917

Paris Through the Window

1913

The Sun of Paris

1975

The Old Jew

1912

The Comedians

1968

Self-Portrait with White Collar

1914

Joan Miró (April 20, 1893 – December 25, 1983)

                                                                                                     

Standing Nude

1918

Miró is the best known Surrealist after Dalí (interestingly both were Catalan), though some supposed him to be the best. Personally, his most famous periods, which tended towards Surrealism and Abstract Expressionism, are not as interesting to me as his earlier ones. The piece above, which is Fauvist, is absolutely my favorite on this post; I should come clean that I love Fauvism in general, so it tilts my objectivity. As for his Surrealism, I've never heard a better explanation than his; "The spectacle of the sky overwhelms me. I'm overwhelmed when I see, in an immense sky, the crescent of the moon, or the sun. There, in my pictures, tiny forms in huge empty spaces. Empty spaces, empty horizons, empty plains – everything which is bare has always greatly impressed me."

The Tilled Field

1923-1924

Dancer Listening to the Organ Playing in a Gothic Cathedral

1945

The Lane

Man and Woman in Front of a Pile of Excrement

1936

Danger

1925

Self-Portrait

1919

Pablo Picasso (October 25, 1881 – April 8, 1973) II

                                                                                                               

Portrait of the Artist's Father

1896

Following in the wake of my last Picasso post (only his Rose Period), I've decided to continue onto his Blue Period. The period began, according to Picasso, with the death of his friend in 1901; "I started painting in blue when I learned of Casagemas's death." But I think that was a retroactive romanticization. Picasso's periods bled into each other as did his paints. The two works at the top and bottom of this post illustrate a pre-1901 proclivity towards blueness. And several of the paintings here presage his Rose Period. For me, there's something so inhuman about the lot of them, but especially his self-portrait. 

Self-Portrait

1901

Woman on the Stage

1901

The Gourmet

1901

Madonna with Garland

1904

Child with a Dove

1901

Still-Life with Flowers

1901

Pierrot and Dancer

1900 

Mark Tobey (December 11, 1890 – April 24, 1976)

                                                                                                               

Orange Leaves

1965 

Tobey may not be the first person you think of when you muse on Abstraction (it's probably Pollock), but, in my view, Tobey enthused a great deal more spirituality into his works than his contemporaries. In fact, Pollock was somewhat influenced, and not surprisingly when you view his works, by Tobey. Of course, Tobey was one of the eldest Abstractionists about, having been born in the 19th century (thinking about Tobey, I'm a bit reminded of Pissarro, who was the old man of the Impressionist clique, or, if you prefer the Beat Generation writer William Burroughs). I think there's something extremely interesting about those long-lived elder artists that form artistic circles around themselves, because they always tend to have a deep amount of reflection in their works, while working in very modern styles; certainly Tobey seems, to me, to be such an artist. 

Untitled

1957 

Untitled

Edge of August

1953

Untitled

1966

Composition with Yellow Spots

1965

Head

1952

Untitled

1968