Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:26:06.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The New Reality in Art and Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

E. M. Hafner
Affiliation:
Hampshire College

Extract

We are often told, and it is easy to believe, that the images of abstract art are not drawn from the real world. In the most conventional view of the modern school, abstract painting is a search for free expression of the artist's own vision. The non-representational painter works as he pleases and is pleased by little that he sees. A humorous drawing in a sophisticated magazine shows a studio full of wild canvases, with the artist gazing through the window at a magnificent sunset. He says to a friend, ‘Yes, old man, I admit that it's beautiful. Sometimes I'm sorry it's not the sort of thing I do.’ Authority for the establishment of a public attitude that makes such a joke possible is to be found in the writings of many critics and in the words of artists themselves. Harold Rosenberg: ‘The big moment [in art] came when it was decided to paint—just to paint. The gesture on the canvas was a gesture of liberation from value, political, aesthetic, moral.’ André Malraux: ‘What then was painting becoming, now that it no longer imitated or transfigured? Simply—painting.’ Sheldon Cheney: ‘I cannot do better, in trying to help you to an understanding of modernism, than to point out the devastating effect the realistic movement had on the arts as a whole.‘ Piet Mondrian: ‘In order that art … should not represent relations with the natural aspect of things, the law of the denaturalization of matter is of fundamental importance.’ Clive Bell: ‘Creating a work of art is so tremendous a business that it leaves no leisure for catching likenesses.’ Kasimir Malevich: ‘From the supremist point of view, the appearances of natural objects are in themselves meaningless. … The representation of an object … is something that has nothing to do with art.’ Laurence Binyon, in 1911: ‘The theory that art is, above all things, imitative and representative, no longer holds the field with thinking minds.’ Ortega y Gasset: ‘Painting completely reversed its function and, instead of putting us within what is outside, endeavored to pour out upon the canvas what is within: ideal invented objects.’

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cheney, Sheldon, A Primer of Modern Art (New York: Liveright, 1958), p. 159.Google Scholar

2 Hiller, L. A. and Baker, R. A., ‘Computer Cantata: A Study in Compositional Method’, Perspectives of New Music, Fall 1964, p.65.Google Scholar

3 Hindemith, Paul, A Composer's World (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1953), p. 43.Google Scholar

4 Kepes, Gyorgy, ‘The Visual Arts and the Sciences’, in Science and Culture (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1965), p. 148.Google Scholar

5 Paraphrase from Seuphor, Michel, Abstract Painting (New York: Dell Publishing Company, 1964), p. 7.Google Scholar

6 Koestler, Arthur, The Sleepwalkers (New York: Macmillan, 1959), p. 531.Google Scholar

7 Jeans, James, The Mysterious Universe (Cambridge, 1930), p. 146.Google Scholar

8 Eddington, A. S., Space, Time and Gravitation (Cambridge, 1953).Google Scholar

9 Gabo, Naum, ‘Art and Science’, in The New Landscape (Chicago: Paul Theobald, 1956).Google Scholar

10 Schmidt, Georg and Schenk, Robert, eds., Kunst und Naturform (Basel: Basilius Presse, 1958).Google Scholar

11 Paraphrase from Kuhn, T. S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962).Google Scholar

12 Klee, Paul, 1924 speech at Jena, reprinted in Modern Artists on Art (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.; Prentice-Hall, 1964), p. 88.Google Scholar

13 Steinberg, Leo, ‘The Eye is a Part of the Mind’, Partisan Review, 20, 194 (1953), p. 194.Google Scholar

14 Gabo, Naum, ‘The Constructive Idea in Art’, in Modern Artists on Art, op. cit, p. 105.Google Scholar

15 See note 4.

16 Gyorgy Kepes in The New Landscape, op. cit.

17 Robert Schenk in Kunst und Naturform.

18 From a 1957 conversation with Pevsner, Antoine, published in Aspects of Modern Art (New York: Reynal and Co., n.d.).Google Scholar

19 See note 10.

21 Translation of a letter from Camille Graser. I am indebted to Susan Presswood Wright for her assistance in soliciting this statement.

22 See note 17.

24 Feynman, R. P., ‘The Feynman Lectures on Physics’, Vol. I (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1963).Google Scholar