REQ: Kandinsky's ideas
Mitch Cooper
I wonder if anyone can offer some thoughts on an art paper I'm trying
to write. It's about Wassily Kandinsky, the father of non-objective
art.
I'm trying to find and angle on how successful he was translating his
spiritual ideas into his paintings. As a member of the utility school
of art, I'm having a tough time discussing his work without
criticizing abstract, or indeed, all art.
I want to be both fair and thorough but I feel a little out of my
league.
Any thoughts would be appreciated. Post or email me.
mjco...@awinc.com
Chris J Sorg
Mitch Cooper <mjco...@awinc.com> wrote:
>
>I wonder if anyone can offer some thoughts on an art paper I'm trying
>to write. It's about Wassily Kandinsky, the father of non-objective
>art.
>
>I'm trying to find and angle on how successful he was translating his
>spiritual ideas into his paintings. As a member of the utility school
>of art, I'm having a tough time discussing his work without
>criticizing abstract, or indeed, all art.
First off, I have no idea what you know or don't know about Kandinsky,
so I'm going to hit you with everything I can. If you haven't read
"Concerning the Spiritual in Art" by Kandinsky that is a great beginning.
It breaks down the initial thoughts he had on producing a purely abstract art,
and the reasons behind doing so. There were both social and spiritual roles
that he wanted to fulfill as an artist.
"Point and Line to Plane" is a later work of his, which he thought was
a great leap from his original ideas. There are (I feel) extremely valid ideas
in this book, as well as some personal 'fashions' of the day.
In a nutshell, Kandinsky was attempting to access the memories, the
spirit, of the observer of a painting as directly as music seems to. He had a
close relationship at one time with the composer Stravinsky (I'm pretty sure
that's who it was). Stravinsky had attempted at one time to create a color
organ, translating orchestrated sound into colors and shapes. I believe that
he even performed this, details I do not know. However, this idea was somewhat
popular, that there was some sort of universal link between a tone and a color,
that there were links between the senses. This is important to consider in
Kandinsky's work. Even the titles of his some of his works are naming style of
music.
Not only that, but I believe that Kandinsky was a synesthete. This is a
biological condition occuring in about 1/1,000,000 people, in which two or more
of the senses are linked. For example, a person will hear a sound and see a
color shape, or taste something and feel shapes. The condition is present from
birth, and has become more noticeable in this century due to population
increase. A well-known case is a Russian mnemonist of the last century. A great
book about synesthesia is "The Man Who Tasted Shapes" by Robert Cytowic. To
really understand this condition, you should check it out.
While synesthesia suggests that Kandinsky, Stravinsky, and a part of
past European culture was correct about the links between the senses, the links
are not universal. When a sythesthete hears a sound, he/she may experience a
color shape. Throughout the person's life, when that sound is heard, the same
shape is seen. From person to person, however, the reactions will be different.
While this does seem to negate Kandinsky's theories on abstract art, it has
been suggested that the synesthete's observations are more primal. The
hallucinations of LSD users and patients with high fevers are similar to the
experiences of the synesthete.
There is a lot of interesting area to explore
here, and I have spent considerable time doing so. It is my belief that
Kandinsky's hope for abstract art is quite possible, albeit perhaps he wanted
too much from it. While the elements of abstract art are not universally 'read'
and experienced, it's direct link with the senses cannot be ignored. In fact,
I think Kandinsky was ahead of his time in his understanding of vision and
seeing.
Just to give mention to another excellent book, "Digital Mantras" by
an author whose name escapes me. This discusses the many languages in which
artists of all types employ in their work. Included is a discussion of
Kandinsky's abstract language.
You suggested that you had difficulty discussing his work without
criticizing his or all art. IMHO, art requires from us not only the
observation of the artist's paintings, compositions, movements, but also the
recognition of the life and times of the artist. It is part of an entire
package. Without looking at Kandinsky's writing, his life, and the time he
existed in, we can barely get a clue about his work. You may call this a
limitation of the artist, or you may call it change. When you look at a
frescoe from the Renaissance can you describe all it's religious symbols? Can
you look at a High Renaissance church and recognize the scenes reenacted from
the bible?
I didn't intend for this discussion to turn towards looking at art. So
enjoy exploring Kandinsky, there is a LOT there to explore.
Christopher J.