Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
SITE FOR POSTING CLASS READING RESPONSES AS COMMENTS. FEEL FREE TO COMMENT ON OTHER POSTS. History of Art, U.C. Berkeley. Instructor Sarah Hamill
FUR-LINED CUP, MERET OPPENHEIM, 1936
Students
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(17)
-
▼
January
(17)
- No title
- Minimalism: For Class 3/31
- Warhol and Pop: For Class 3/19
- Johns, Rauschenberg, Frank: For Class 3/17
- Abstract Expressionism: For Class 3/12
- Modernist Sculpture: For Class 3/5
- Surrealism and Gender: For Class 2/19
- Modernism and Mass Culture: For Class 3/3
- Modern Objects and Things: For Class 2/10
- Primitivism: For class 2/5
- Cezanne and after: For Class 2/3
- Impressionism and Science: For class 1/29
- Response #3
- Kathryn A. Tuma
- What is Analysis? For class 1/27
- Octave Tassaert’s ‘Ne fais pas la cruelle!’ (Don’t...
- Defining the Modern: for class January 22
-
▼
January
(17)
The March 5 response blog is blank, so Im responding to it here instead.
ReplyDeleteErik Narhi
HA R1B
3/5/09
Greenberg contrasts modern sculpture with the “monolithic” sculptures of the past, describing how the two modes of sculpture appear different despite the constant view of sculpture as a more allusionistic media. His take on how these sculptures are viewed is quite direct—since they are viewed in three dimensions, sculptures are intrinsically more representative of actual living objects, and as a result they lose their artistic meaning. However, this loss of meaning can be reversed and made into an extension of meaning if the sculptures are portrayed purely from what is perceived with the eye, ignoring the monolithic realistic representations that were so common in the past.
He begins by describing past sculpture. It is immediately apparent that Greenberg’s main gripe regarding past sculpture regards its subject matter; repeated “representation of animate forms” (Greenberg, 57) makes “sculpture seem too literal” (57), since it is so similar to how real-life objects appear. Greenberg clearly opposes the loss of artistic traits in sculpture. He mentions light, surface, and other common features of such media as painting that are wholly lost in these older sculptures.
In contrast to these old sculptures, modernist sculptures such as those by Picasso make a newfound attempt to combine these unique aspects of painting with sculpture. By exploring these properties, Greenberg argues that sculpture can transcend its intrinsic literalism by removing the monolith from the sculpture altogether and replacing it with a flexible three-dimensional representation of divided and shaped forms. Here, the whole is removed, with the importance of the individual part becoming primary—each form that slashes through space or blocks space to create the sensation of the subject matter carries far more significance than a massing of the shape itself. As a result, the three-dimensional aspect of sculpture can be used as a means of further exploration of Cubist properties, rather than a naturally literalizing feature that flirts too closely with the bounds of reality.
Jenny Zhang
ReplyDeleteHA R1B Section 6
Reading Response 10
Abstract Expressionist painting refers to a group of American modern painters that are known for using quick “painting” movements in order to convey a sublime experience. A sublime experience, as defined by Caroline A. Jones, is an experience that originates from feelings of terror, the most passionate and responsive emotion. Terror eventually subsides and “produces a delight when it does not press to close.” However, because of the minimal time elapse of terror, the sublime experience is difficult to capture. This temporary emotion probably explains why Jackson Pollock’s technique for painting is so direct, requiring no drawing, and quick. Furthermore, he explains that when he is painting, he is no longer aware of what he is doing (Jones 47), because so much of his energy and mind is focused on his means of expressing sublimity. He has to capture the emotion that momentarily inspires him before it is gone. Paintings that capture the sublime tended to massive (size), rough and solid-often giving a sense of greatness. There appears to be no beginning or ending and the dimensions are seemingly infiniteness due to the large size proportions of the paintings. Furthermore, abstract expressionist paintings are decentralized—lacking a focused subject matter.
In her essay, Jones describes her version of the abstract expressionist painter as one who is isolated (from society), (living in) solitude, hermit-like and dark. Often times, they are locked in their own studio, forced to use art as their expression of sublimity. This makes sense because I believe isolation from society and life puts people in a situation in which they have all the time to think; often this leads to a cynical perception of life and people. Left along with their dark thoughts, the artists’ minds must be filled with terror and hence, leads to their amazing creations. As a result, the ending products are not “pretty” or beautiful.” Moreover, because of the requirement to be secluded from society, sublimity is an individual experience. Recall the mentioning of abstract expressionist paintings being larger in size than other modern paintings. The purpose of these proportions is to allow the artist and individual viewer to immerse themselves within the infinite space of the painting. Compared to working on a small painting, the artist has more control of their artistic movements but you are less included in the making of the painting. When working on large scale painting, the painter is no longer in control and let the motions and paint to take control of him or her. In the same sense, the individual who enjoys the painting will also feel encapsulated in the painting, alone from the world, just as the painter felt when he was creating the painting in the emptiness of his/her studio; hence, delivering the sublime experience to the viewer.
One of the struggles I had with understanding sublimity is why it is not available to women. I thought that this point of view was the opposite of the surrealism movement in which the subconscious thoughts of the mind are more tangible to women. Abstract expressionist promotes the opposite saying that the subconscious is not a beautiful quality and excludes women. I would like to know were this is coming from. I think that by making that claim, there must be an assumption that women are just beautiful creatures and lack deep understanding.
Julia Herron
ReplyDeleteResponse for 3/12/09
Abstract Expressionist painters sought “the elimination of all obstacles between the painter and the idea and between the idea and the observer” (Jones, 490). Painting became the direct means of communication between painter and observer, and the best way for artists to convey complete and pure ideas. There is no pretense, no trickery in Abstract Expressionism, and the artist assumes the viewer is ready to receive the “idea” he or she wants to convey. But, in reality, most Abstract Expressionists were male. Femininity served as a subject, not as a viewpoint. Artists believed that females had a “beautiful understanding” rather than a “deep understanding” when it came to expressing the sublime (Jones, 483).
The sublime, as defined by Jones, is a reaction to terror, the strongest emotion the mind is capable of feeling. Once the terror subsides, the brain produces delight and enjoyment, but this feeling so closely follows the terror that the entire experience combines to create the sublime, the ultimate goal of Abstract Expressionist artists.
Abstract Expressionism was reserved for male artists as a means of expressing their internal emotions through representations of the egotistical sublime. The fruition of this goal often creates unintelligible art that is personal to the artist but attempts to connect with something personal in the viewer. For example, Pollock’s art cannot be read as figures or scenery, but serves only to reveal Pollock’s energy, movements, and intentions as a painter.
Abstract Expressionists worked away from cities and so-called civilization. They chose isolated studios, and it was noted that Pollock only came in from the country once every Tuesday. There was a great desire for artists “wanting to get out there alone in the woods and do their stuff” (Jones, 486). Artists became consumed by their thoughts, egos, and ideas, and created works that distilled their individual aims and viewpoints.
Abstract Expressionism is an American movement that gained worldwide popularity. Surrealism was an important predecessor of the movement, as it allowed for the depiction of the subconscious. Unlike Impressionism, Abstract Expressionism does not attempt to recreate an exterior event; rather, it focuses on transmitting a single idea from the mind of the artist.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAbstract expressionist painting is a specific art movement that took place post-World War II. This form of art proclaims to hold terror as its sublime resource, (481). In this way, it is a speedy process given that the feeling of terror resides for a minimal time period. Abstract expressionist painting is based upon a natural sublime and individualism. The aspect of individualism was heavily rooted in abstract expressionist painting due to the European foreground of the war and its “sins against authority”, (484). This form of art attempts to exclude aspects of femininity and beauty, arguing that terror reflected the construction of masculinity’s relation to sublimity.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, Abstract expressionist painting was a movement focused on the subconscious. This form of art was driven by action—such as Pollock’s artwork. The energy as well as the mental forces of the artist guided his work. The paintings were seen as irrational and a mere moment of instance.
Abstract expressionist painting varies from the paintings that we have been studying in that the paintings we have been studying embrace both beauty and femininity. In addition, the paintings we have been studying are not “action paintings” and are painted in calmer environments. Furthermore, the paintings that we have previously studied tend to use people as its focal point.
I know this is a little off topic, but looking at the artwork by Pollock makes me question exactly how much skill is needed in order to create one of his “master pieces”. I have come to understand that this form of art was a masculine area of practice, but I do not understand why. I believe any woman can have just as much energy and oomph as a man in order to create an abstract expressionist painting. I must admit that I am somewhat shocked that the aspect of femininity was taking out of this form—especially since the art is driver by terror. Traditionally, it has been sad that females have lower panic thresholds and are therefore terrified more often. In this way, I believe that perhaps female could have done a better job.
Danielle Lee
ReplyDeleteAbstract expressionism is a form of artwork that sought to remove “obstacles between the painter and the observer (Jones 51).” The artists would handle this theme through the incorporation of “the sublime.” The sublime, according to Caroline Jones is an essence found in the individual. This essence is a passion or feeling of pleasure that steers away from society and instead lies within the artist. According to Jones, “the purest form of the sublime, and the one most operative in the arts, was the natural sublime” which she later goes on to describe as a state linked or associated with some degree of astonishment or terror (Jones 42). Abstract expressionist sought after this sublime and they often find it through isolation. Jones mentions that artists would isolate themselves in the wilderness, which produced a “terrifying solitude” which they would then reproduce in an isolated studio. This idea of isolation and solitude creates that degree of terror, which is the main theme behind “the sublime.”(Jones 43) According to Edmund Burke, the feeling of terror lies behind “the isolation of existentialist struggle, figured by the solitary individual under an empty American sky or the towering caverns of Manhattan (Jones 44).” This feeling of utter lonesomeness reflects back on the solitude that was enforced within society after the wars. Abstract expressionism also characterizes itself as a form of artwork that steered away from the feminine. Artists excluded the feminine and beautiful in their artworks to maintain a masculine tone. They believed that a beautiful understanding and a profound understanding were mutually exclusive. Abstract expressionism steered away from the traditional arts in that it excluded the presence of a barrier between the artist and the viewer.
Abstract expressionism differs from previous artwork we have studied in that it is much more personalized and individualized. IN previous artworks, especially impressionist or still life paintings by Monet or Manet, there is the inclusion of another object or image that presents a meaning to the viewer. For example, in Monet’s “Impression,” he paints a landscape of the sea. This inclusion of nature presents an obstacle between himself and the viewer. Abstract expressionists remove the landscape and instead paint themselves in their artwork. Barnett Newman puts this idea best by stating that Abstract Expressionism is unique in that “instead of making cathedrals out of Christ, man or ‘life,’ we are making it out of ourselves, out of our own feelings.” This new art form reduced the subject of the artwork from a symbolic gesture, landscape or portrait to an “individual phenomenon.” (Jones 45) Artwork of this time is also different in that it excluded the idea of beauty and the feminine. The artists wanted to maintain a masculine and deep understanding, and they approached this goal by ridding their artwork of feminine aspects. Abandoning the romantic styles of European artists, they excluded womanly portraits from their artwork as seen in Titian’s works. They abandoned this once preserved sense of beauty in order to create their representation of the sublime as a solitary idea. The environment, which includes the people, they were around of the settings they saw, were not the subjects of their artwork. Instead, abstract expressionists found themselves painting about themselves. In doing so, they eliminate “all obstacles between the painter and the idea between the idea and the painter (Jones 51).”
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFelby Chen
ReplyDeleteHA R1B
Section 6
Abstract expressionist painting conveys ideas through enormous representations of abstract art. These large portrayals, in other words, are done on “field[s] so large that the painting[s], as whole image[s] or configuration[s], could not be seen from the position [from] which [it] was work[ed] on” (490). After all, abstract expressionist painting focuses on the idea that the artist wishes to convey, rather than on the specifics and details of the painting itself. In Caroline A. Jones’ excerpt called “Machine in the Studio: Constructing the Postwar American Artist”, she mentions that “abstract expressionist painters sought the elimination of all obstacles between the painter and the idea and between the idea and the observer” (490). These words encapsulate abstract expressionist painting well, contrasting abstract expressionist painting from many of the paintings we have studied.
In abstract expressionist painting, one must step away from the painting itself to understand the concept behind the painting. In the paintings we have studied, one can immediately look at the paintings and understand the concepts behind them. The need for distance from an abstract expressionist painting for one to understand it occurs because abstract expressionist painting is moving from a simple “gesture toward[s] more contemplative fields of pigment” (489). No longer is the big picture presented to one right away, but one must analyze the painting as a whole. It is as if one is part of the painting because of one’s size in comparison to the painting’s size. No longer is the “voluptuous goal of beauty” (482) worked towards; rather, modern artists strive for the characteristics of “obscurity, greatness of size, and power” (481). Modern artists stray away from the focus on the immediate result of beauty and details and move towards creating paintings more conceptual. The other paintings we have studied definitely pay attention to detail and beauty, and how the pictures look as a whole, for right away one is able to understand what the paintings portray. Simply by referring to one of the paintings we have analyzed before, such as William-Adophe Bouguereau’s Mother and Children, one can immediately see the mother and children in the picture. Had this artwork been an abstract expressionist painting, one would not be able to see the mother and children right away, but would have had to step back and take a moment to see the concept behind the painting.
Brendan Cronshaw
ReplyDeleteHA R1B Section 6
Response 10
3.11.09
Abstractionist painting is unlike anything else that we have seen in our class so far in that it not only differs in what is represented by it, but in the way that it is completed and its overall appearance and scale. The main goal of Abstractionist painting was to represent or express the notion of the “sublime”, often the “purest form of the sublime…the natural sublime” (481). The natural sublime, as described by Edmund Burke, included “obscurity, greatness of size, and power; in creating the artificial sublime” (481). All of these apply to the works discussed in the two latter papers, by Thomas Crow and Michael Fried, as Pollock’s works were massive in size, extremely obscure, and did not at first glance or even further inspection, illicit complete or even partial understanding of what this “sublime” thing was. This new type of art, done almost exclusively by American painters, due to the fact that they were “free from the weight of European culture” (482), differs largely from art we have previously seen in two ways.
First, paint, and other liquid materials, are applied (at least by Pollock) via “pouring, spattering, drizzling, trailing, splashing, stabbing, lashing” (494). These techniques may at first glance appear familiar, and they are to some extent, however we have never seen them applied in such quantity, scale, and magnitude; the entire canvas is deluged in these strokes, or rather techniques, which often spans over eighteen feet in width. This can be referred back to Burke’s description of “greatness of size” in that the painting made one feel “in” the work, as one’s line of sight cannot escape the size and magnitude of the painting. It seems to enthrall the viewer and leave no room for them to relate or mingle, in both vision and thought with anything else around the painting.
Secondly, what the painting is meant to represent or mean or symbolize is extremely obscure and ambiguous. This is due in part to the fact that Pollock’s and many others’ techniques, simultaneously did away with lines, and as Crow says “unshackle line from the tasks of bounding and defining middle forms” (495). This is immediately obvious when one looks at Pollock’s paintings in that there are no true figures. All that we see is an amalgamation of strokes, or rather casting motions in which painted is splattered and applied to the canvas, without the brush ever actually coming in contact with it. Even after all of the strokes and different colors are applied, often with apparent regularity and form, still no figure or overarching theme appears. Nothing is distinguishable within the piece, save for the ridges and valleys of the overlapping paint and the differences in color. There are noticeable “lines” however they are not purposefully done, nor is the paint applied side by side; this effect is only created via overlapping of paint.
It is not necessarily the scale and size or the techniques used in Abstractionist painting that makes it confusing and tough to comprehend, it is the image or rather experience as a whole that is tough to decipher and pinpoint. The fact that there are not distinguishable figures or objects in the paintings makes it even more perplexing, although when one thinks it an experience it is less cumbersome to get ones head around.
Danielle Beeve
ReplyDeleteHistory of Art R1B
Section 6
Abstract Expressionism was a complex term that involved a certain dimension called “the sublime,” which was defined by Jones to be “a category of experience…always located by the individual.” (480) Abstract Expressionists were constantly imagined as being alone in their solitary studios hard at work, ignoring the rest of the world. They could be thought of as having “individual experiences” through their artwork.
Edmund Burke defines the sublime as:
Whatever is fitted in any sort to excite the ideas of pain and danger…or operates in a manner analogous to terror, is a source of the sublime; that is, it is productive of the strongest emotion which the mind is capable of feeling…terror is a passion which always produces a delight when it does not press too close;….terror is in all cases whatsoever, either more openly or latently, the ruling principle of the sublime. (481)
According to Burke and Jones then, the sublime is defined by terror and individuality in painting. Burke then further defines qualities of the sublime as: obscurity, greatness of size, and power. Jason Pollock was a famous Abstract Expressionist painter, and his works fit these three criteria perfectly: his works are extremely large, very obscure and also produce quite powerful emotions when viewed.
Abstract Expressionism also incorporates the idea of the complete exclusion of the feminine. This idea ties back to Karl Marx, who wrote: “The fair sex has just as much understanding as the male, but it is a beautiful understanding, whereas ours should be a deep understanding, an expression that signifies identity with the sublime.” (483) Femininity was excluded from abstract painting then because women couldn’t truly understand the terror inherent in the sublime, possibly because they see too much beauty in the world.
Another aspect of Abstract Expressionist painting was a desire to create such large and interactive pieces that the viewer can feel engulfed in and one with the painting. When describing Pollock’s Cathedral Jones states, “In Pollock’s Cathedral, we lose ourselves in a boundless and infinitely interesting space.” (487) Clement Greenberg then argues that paintings such as this offer “a strictly pictorial, strictly optical third dimension…[one that] can be traveled through, literally or figuratively, only with the eye.” (487) These paintings then are supposed to be vast enough that you feel like you can be in the paintings themselves, almost one with the canvas.
The paintings differ in many respects to those we’ve previously studied. For one thing, women and the feminine were the subjects of many Impressionist and Classical painters alike. Also, these new Abstract Expressionist paintings are enormous, much larger than any we have seen so far, spanning to eighteen feet at times (according to Jones). Finally, terror was never before a common subject matter for paintings. All of these differences amount to a completely different visual art experience; these new Abstract Expressionist paintings are exciting and vibrant to me, especially Pollock’s.
Caroline A. Jones’ article The Abstract Expressionist Sublime entails that the artists seclude themselves in order to reach the pure form of the sublime. The artist studio’s were reminiscent of “a cell in a monastery,” living in utter solitude to the point where some forced requests in order to visit. To me, the ideologies of such a movement feel dramatic to the point of torturing of the human psyche.
ReplyDeleteIt feels like the concept behind abstract expressionism is to break down the psychological misnomers created by society. By putting oneself out of reach from the industrial world, or in fact any world in general, that world becomes fuzzy and distant, as if it was an influence that had its place before in your life but it has lost that place now. By putting yourself in that perpetual state of nothingness, anything you do come across becomes heightened.
No other movements we have seen before emphasizes about taking yourself outside of your external surroundings in order to create art. In fact, the rest almost incorporate the surrounding environment into the creation of any art, whether it’s through viewing a landscape or letting the external forces funnel through a subconscious portion of your psyche. Abstract expressionism in a sense is like Primitivism. Primitivism focused upon the natural human emotion, how people truly react rather than what society told them to act (although it’s not entirely true because it was more of how “uncivilized society” reacts in comparison to “civilized society”). Similarly, Abstract Expressionism is about excluding the external forces, throwing them away, and creating what your psyche and only your bare essential psyche is telling you to do. It’s natural in the sense that it’s what we would think a human reacts in our own world, but isn’t that in itself inhuman? Nobody lives in total isolation. It feels more of a sacrifice to do so rather than enlightenment.
To be abstract is to be independent. Authors we previously have read mention a modern theme of striving for this independence. The illusion in painting is denounced, and sculpture too strives to reach two dimensions. The supposed reasoning behind this is complex. However, to state it simply, art which breaks free from representation and any other connections is a piece of art which comes closest to the purity of art. Through this reasoning, it can be said that abstract expressionist painting strives for this ideal.
ReplyDeleteHighly connected to abstract expressionism is the idea of the sublime. Perhaps a better understanding of what it means to be sublime, could better suit an understanding of abstract expressionism in general. In Jones’ article, she quotes Edmund Burke as contrasting sublime to beauty when stating, “the one great, the other small; the one rough, the other smooth; the one solid and massive, the other light and delicate.” In other words, sublime seems far from beauty. Another sense of the sublime is through the “idea of the isolated artist in the wilderness, a terrifying solitude reproduced in the isolated studio where the encounter with sublimity would be given artist form.”(42) Thus, it is seen that a strong emphasis is placed on individuality. To transmit this individuality into art is seen as the transmission of the sublime. There was a strong emphasis on this reality. Rothko desired to be “intimate and human” with his audience, which is why he constructed such obnoxiously large paintings. Rothko, wished to accomplish this by putting form to his movement or activity. He states he feels as if he were inside the painting as he creates it. This transcendental feeling is precisely what he and other abstract expressionist artists wished to convey. The interesting aspect of this ideology is its ties with America. America was relatively new, and free from centuries of culture and tradition, which turned out to be a luscious setting for this movement.
The closest we have come thus far to abstract expressionist painting is impressionism. Artists such as Courbet and Manet, have implemented a specific artistic style to transmit a usually sensuous feeling. The detail seems to vary in these paintings, from slightly blurry, to overly blurry, yet regardless it can be said that they always strove to represent the emotional intertwining of the physical. Their methodology of representation usually relied on activated colors, as well as blatant brushstrokes. Additionally, it can also be noted that the subconscious emphasis of Surrealism is also present in abstract expressionism. However, the manifestation of this was that of the individual, or the artist.
Within this realm of representation, Polluck would certainly be opposite to the impressionists. The main differences appear to be a complete neglect of depiction whatsoever. Fried said of Polluck, “He couldn’t draw, had no deep feeling for color, and never developed a painter’s touch in the usual sense of the term.”(97) What set Polluck as unique was also what set him against artists before him. The beauty of Polluck’s paintings can be seen through the lens of the abstract. As previously stated, he wished to convey his creative feeling through his creation. However, the audience is forced to view the painting as color in and of itself, and thus the manifestation of this feeling occurs on purely abstract grounds.
Erik Narhi
ReplyDeleteHAR1B
3/12/09
Abstract expressionist painting was a movement that attempted to eliminate the many complications of former art in favor of a simplified notion of the sublime. The ultimate goal was to create paintings that could be directly related to by the viewer, skipping the interpretive steps of analysis to more directly assert the painter’s idea to the viewer. These abstract expressionists painted under unique circumstances, commonly isolated. Their studios were solemn cells, a sharp contrast to the lively studios and communities of prior art movements. This is reflected in the art they produced—art derived from dark colors, with subtle undertones on gender and politics masked in simplicity.
As Jones describes, the “feminine had to be barred from the forms of representation that codified that encounter”. As such, the sublime was a purely male essence, revealing a stark gender propriety that eliminates feminine qualities from the realms of sublimity. The role of the male individual therefore was the sole driver of the abstract expressionism bus. The only influence beyond this was that of the economy, which Jones describes, stating “sublimity is supportable only by an economy (spiritual, libidinal, political) that can generate such an aesthetic of excess.” Aside from this, the movement focused far more on the individual and specified gender than any other art we have studied thus far.
Abstract Expressionism is a form of painting that primarily tries to channel the unconscious, as in Jackson Pollock's painting. Generally, these painters tried to create an experience of the sublime through a direct visual contact of symbol, color and contrast between the painting and the viewer. As Greenberg mentioned with sculpture, abstract expressionists painted with purity in mind. If we look at Jackson Pollocks action paintings, it is easy to see that they are devoid of representation, thus, they lack what Greenberg said was inextricably tied to painting, illusion.
ReplyDeleteGreenberg identifies the possibilities of “purity” as necessarily tied to “pure” sensory perception. In this way, a work of art can reach abstraction. It is self-contained and evokes complete subjectivity and therefore becomes an experience within the medium, referential to nothing but itself.
In this way, abstract expressionism differs from its predecessors because it doesnt represent, it IS. A lot of critics like Michael Leja argue that it is representation of the unconscious, but the painting was as much an expereince of the sublime for the artists (Rothko,etc..) as it was intended to be for the viewer...and even if intentions werent met every time, the viewer still expereinces the constrasts and colors apart from any predetermined notions.