Vasily Kandinsky. Improvisation No. 30 (War Like Theme) 1913
oil on canvas 43 x 43" Chicago AI |
Form: Oil on canvas. The picture is conceived of as a vibrant arrangement
of rapidly moving color areas that make no reference to a storyline or
object in external reality.
Iconography: "One of Kandinsky's Improvisations, which carries a subtitle
(unusual for him at this period, especially because the subtitle does make
an association with external reality). The only way to account for this
is to realize the time period: one year before the outbreak of WWI. This
image, perhapps more than any others by Kandinsky, expresses the theme
of impending apocalypse. A reference to a firing cannon and buildings toppling
over foreshadow the war and destruction to come. The drama here is backed
up by the explosive formal dynamics, which act out his theme. Opposed to
the orderly construction and restricted color range of Cubism and other
hard-edge geometric abstraction; did not trust an art that evolved out
of logic or the rationale; trusted only internal feelings and intuition.
His art, thus, has a mystical core that takes form at this time in dreamy
improvisations that are not earthbound. Space is conceived of as an unbounded,
energy field; he has no interest in illusionistic one-point perspective.
Line, shape, and color all have their own autonomy and function freely
within the unbounded field. Note how the color bleeds here and suggests
a slippage beyond any boundaries that would attempt to contain it.
The picture has its own reality, though this image does make reference
to an external reality. Significantly, though, that external world is being
destroyed; for Kandinsky it is the spirit that will rule in the end.
Germany in the years leading up to WWI where "joie de vivre" (joy of life)
was not the atmosphere. In his desire to make abstraction spiritual, Kandinsky
expresses the growing spiritual crisis of Germany, which moved abruptly
from an agricultural society (close to nature) to a technological society
(factories and German efficiency) due to the Industrial Revolution."
Context: German Expressionist artists picked up on the apocalypse to
come in the tense years leading up to war (1910-1914); the theme that they
continually express or try to overcome is angst: an alienated anxiety.
What they want to do is give visual form to inner life; they are, thus,
against Mimesis. The art is highly subjective and they do not hesitate
to exaggerate or abstract to express internal, felt reality. It is an art
born out of inner necessity. There are two groups of German Expressionists:
Die Brucke (the bridge) and Der Blaue Rieter (the Blue Rider). Kandinsky
belongs to Der Blaue Reiter, which is an art that stresses intuition and
a metaphysical projection beyond the world of matter through color and
forms that push away from description and towards non-objectivity. The
movement is typically more lyrical and romantic than the sharpened tensions
and jagged edges of Die Brucke. Kandinsky had trouble letting go of
the object in the beginning for fear people would mistake his abstractions
for formal decoration. This canvas was painted one year after he published
his book, "Concerning the Spiritual in Art" and one year before the outbreak
of WWI. In its reference to a cannon and the destruction of cities, Kandinsky
is perhaps expressing the "apocalyptic enthusiasm" that showed up in Franz
Marc's work of 1913, as well (see "Fate of the Animals"). From 1910-12,
Kandinsky had struggled to make a complete break with the objective world,
realizing in the end that "the object harms my painting." Though
trained in the logic of law, Kandinsky wants only to be guided by creative
intuition. In a scientific age, intuition is often looked on as fuzzy thinking;
Kandinsky's book is an important theoretical text for making an argument
that the intuitive is a valid position of knowledge in its own right.
Kandinsky would return to Russia, his homeland, during the war. When Russia
has its own revolution in 1917, Kandinsky becomes the director of
the Russian museum system; during this short-lived period--the Heroic Period
of Communism--Russia will emerge as the most progressive country for abstract
art in all the world. In the 1920s, Kandinsky returns to Germany and joins
the faculty at the Bauhaus, where his work begins to take on more of a
geometric hard-edge; the book he writes in 1926, "Point and Line to Plane,"
suggests a different logic than the earlier "Concerning the Spiritual in
Art," but Kandinsky's art will remain mystical and abstractly directed
his whole career. He ends up in Paris where he dies in 1944."
(taken entirely from http://www.csulb.edu/~karenk/20thcwebsite/438mid/ah438mid-Info.00061.html)
"His inclination to spirituality must have seemed outdated, as must
have his great reluctance to embrace the political and ideological project
of the Bolshevik party as his own. For Malevich, Kandinsky was just a refined
and uninteresting German. For young and fiercely Bolshevik constructivists,
like the multitalented Rodchenko and his energetic wife, Varvara Stepanova,
who were both working with Kandinsky at the Institute for Artistic Culture,
he was an old man, still an artist only in a very outmoded sense. Rodchenko
and Stepanova wanted to create in the social space rather than on the canvas.
They even banned the word that was sacred to Kandinsky: “composition.”
For them, the idea of composition was an anathema: a contemplative approach
that they planned to abolish in favor of more active and ideological constructivism.
And they succeeded.
In late 1921, Kandinsky was forced to resign from his post as the director
of the Institute of Artistic Culture. Very soon, he departed for Germany.
By 1920, the first monograph about him was published in Germany; and in
1922, Walter Gropius appointed him to his faculty in Bauhaus. Kandinsky
was almost sure that art in Russia had gone a way that was not exactly
his own. There was no Moscow any more, just the USSR. But Kandinsky did
not emigrate, far from it, at least originally. For a long time he was
considered a representative – the representative, in fact – of the Soviet
avant-garde, the one that worked abroad. And that was how he thought of
himself, until 1927, when he had to take German citizenship: as a Soviet
citizen, he would no longer be allowed to stay abroad or travel. For the
same reason he took a French passport in 1939: to maintain his cosmopolitanism.
“National anthems have now been sung in almost all the countries, but I
am content not to be a singer,” he wrote in 1938, six years before
he died in his French exile. Still, Moscow remained at the core of his
universalism, of his synthetic ideology opposed to artificial separation.
“Moscow,” he wrote, is defined by “the duality, the complexity, the
extreme agitation, the conflict, and the confusion that mark its external
appearance and in the end constitute a unified, individual countenance.”
(www.capitalperspective.ru) |