Nouveau & Deco
mdeli
Deco. It is nothing more than design, mostly nothing-special-design.
There were many Nouveau and Deco painters. Many were very fine
artists. Most of the best were superior to any Impressionist or
abstractionist..
Nouveau and Deco are the last grand styles They are really the styles
that influenced Modern Academic art, realistic and abstract. Their
influenced is almost entirely overlooked.
Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later stuff
is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its influence.
Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
Dali defended the N. style at a time when it was considered obscene by
the Avant Garde. When I first visited Barcelona in the 60's, Gaudi was
considered a nothing. You could purchase N. bronzes and Tiffiney
lamps, Nouveau furniture, for near nothing. While attending school one
of my teachers complained that my drawings looked like Beardsley. I
bought his originals at auctions with the little money I had and owned
his best books.
Today in spite of our idiot art historians and critics who still give
it a scant mention, N. and D. are fast regaining popularity.
N. and D. have gone thru their out-of-fashion transition. The best of
these periods is thoroughly admired today, without the benefit of
Artspeak or even the names of most of the artists.
These periods also produced the finest architecture, crafts and
industrial arts. Today all we have, if the critics are the are to be
believed, is Bauhaus abstract ersatz, no skill realism and cheap crap
municipal architecture, designed by minimalists who are dependent on
a silent engineer. All this is occasionally decorated with Moore style
mega-klunks and incompetent abstract minimal giganticism designed for
a fifteen second glance by the man in a rush.
The continuum of N. and D are with us in spite of this.
The main problem with N. and D styles is that they are not
presented as art. Europe and US cities have whole N and D sections.
Furniture, stain glass, moldings paintings etc all integrated. Many of
the finest buildings in NYC are N. or D. I recall when all this was
totally ignored and occasionally roundly pooh poohed by critics. Deco
even influenced the Bauhaus stuff when a bit of decoration had to be
added. The Trade Centers are Deco-ized. People are getting tired of
modern erzatz-minimal-nothing.
Mani DeLi
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
...no skill no art
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
Walter Idema
craftsmanship with a sort of grand aesthetic quality. It was most
definately and obviously meant to signify the advent of new technology. It
is still present in today's design, though hardly recognizable due to the
fact that it has so much evolved to incorporate curves and rounded edges to
it's smooth, flat planes. A lecture on art deco would be more appropriate
in an industrial history lesson as I see it. Since I am interested in
subjects of industrial history, I find the art deco era an almost
fascinating turning point in American life. However, as my interests do
fall primarily in painting, an instruction session based on art deco style
would be an excrutiating bore. Concepts are moving so far beyond the deco
era that the premise no longer applies as an approach. There are aspects
that do share the fundamental beauties, but it is not necessary to emphasize
any correlation any more than to redirect our views as if the art deco
movement is superior to today's graphic design techniques and approaches.
The cutting edge of early man was sharp stones. Later he learned to make
steel blades. While some of the old sharp stones may have been interesting
to look at, the steel blade was better all around. Moreover, he didn't need
to copy the stone design, he carried the original sharp edge concept over
and disregarded the stone. And so goes the beauty of visual planes in art
and design. We don't need to revisit art deco, (although it can be
interesting), because ideas used in it are carried over from much deeper
origins.
mdeli <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:39541db4...@news.psi.ca...
dym...@ripco.com
mdeli wrote:
>
> All modern Academic Abstraction is really a downhill continuum of Art
> Deco. It is nothing more than design, mostly nothing-special-design.
>
> There were many Nouveau and Deco painters. Many were very fine
> artists. Most of the best were superior to any Impressionist or
> abstractionist..
>
> Nouveau and Deco are the last grand styles They are really the styles
> that influenced Modern Academic art, realistic and abstract. Their
> influenced is almost entirely overlooked.
>
> Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
> paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later stuff
> is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its influence.
> Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
>
This is really historically ignorant. The term "Art Deco"
comes from the Exposition Internationale des Arts
Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes, held in Paris in 1925.
Bauhaus influenced Deco, not the other way around.
Mondrian was working out his "Neo-Plasticism" long
before Deco. Jeez.
Although I do agree with you that these two styles
are undervalued. I think, though, that it is because
decorative arts tend to be given short shrift in
academia. It's changing now.
--
Kerry
mdeli
>
>
>mdeli wrote:
>> Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
>> paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later stuff
>> is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its influence.
>> Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
>>
>
>This is really historically ignorant. The term "Art Deco"
>comes from the Exposition Internationale des Arts
>Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes, held in Paris in 1925.
>Bauhaus influenced Deco, not the other way around.
Check article below.
When the term was first used is unimportant. Deco themes evolved from
nouveau. Check the work of continental and American architecture and
painting of the 1890's for the change in Nouveau.
>Mondrian was working out his "Neo-Plasticism" long
>before Deco. Jeez.
Mondrian isn't even original. Check out the Scottish architect and
designer Charles Rennie Mackintosh, (also a really fine artist
essentially ignored) who specialized in a predominantly geometric line
and Malevich.
>
>Although I do agree with you that these two styles
>are undervalued. I think, though, that it is because
>decorative arts tend to be given short shrift in
>academia. It's changing now.
>
From encyclopedia Britannica:
"In the decade following the Exposition Internationale des Arts
Décoratifs et Industriels Modernes, held at Paris in 1925, progressive
Western design was influenced principally by the less radical
productions of the French luxury crafts, based on a modified Art
Nouveau, and by the Swedish success in combining and developing craft
traditions in cooperation with industry. These influences, which
developed the Art Deco style, were, however, confined to relatively
small and semiprofessional coteries, while the market as a whole
continued to concentrate on traditional forms, producing and adapting
them at various levels of quality and taste.
By 1935 the Functionalist movement, led by the disciples of the
Bauhaus program, had gained a substantial following among the younger
architects and designers. "
and
"In collaboration with three other students, one of whom, Margaret
Macdonald, became his wife in 1900, Mackintosh achieved an
international reputation in the 1890s as a designer of unorthodox
posters, craftwork, and furniture. In contrast to contemporary fashion
his work was light, elegant, and original, as exemplified by four
remarkable tearooms he designed in Glasgow (1896-1904) and other
domestic interiors of the early 1900s."
Mani Deli
Deco. It is nothing more than design, mostly nothing-special-design.
There were many Nouveau and Deco painters. Many were very fine
artists. Most of the best were superior to any Impressionist or
abstractionist. Their influenced is almost entirely overlooked.
Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later stuff
is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its influence.
Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
Dali defended the Nouveau style at a time when it was considered
obscene by
the Avant Garde. When I first visited Barcelona in the 60's, Gaudi was
considered a nothing. You could purchase N. bronzes and Tiffiney
lamps, Nouveau furniture, for near nothing. While attending school one
of my teachers complained that my drawings looked like Beardsley. I
bought his originals at auctions with the little money I had and owned
his best books.
Today in spite of our idiot art historians and critics who still give
it a scant mention, N. and D. have regained popularity.
N. and D. have gone thru their out-of-fashion transition. The best of
these periods is thoroughly admired today, without the benefit of
Artspeak or even the names of most of the artists.
These periods also produced the finest architecture, crafts and
industrial arts. Today all we have, if the critics are to be
Mani Deli
>Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>
>> Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
>> paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later stuff
>> is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its influence.
>> Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
>
>Van Gogh influenced by Deco? ROTFL! The Art Deco period began around
>1900 and ended around 1930. Van Gogh died in 1890.
>
> Mani, by all means, take an art history course! Your ignorance is
> colossal. And very funny.
>
>(He wont respond to this . . . . )
Wishful thinking!
>
>Biljo
Van Gogh was influenced by art nouveau. Care to contest that?
CB
"Mani Deli" <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:sg21b2d28nt1esba1...@4ax.com...
It would probably be fairer to say that van Gogh and the Art Nouveau
movement shared common antecedents, for example in the Style Nouille and
Japonisme. As a coherent movement (as Biljo points out), Art Nouveau didn't
really coalesce until after van Gogh's death, although van Gogh apparently
did have work in Samuel Bing's gallery (the one that eventually lent it's
name to the movement) and read his publications. (Although rather slighted
by history, Bing was one of the most significant forces in bringing Japanese
work to the attention of Parisian art circles). Off hand though I don't
remember seeing any reference to the style or its practitioners in his
letters (in which he discusses his own methods extensively), and his
philosophical considerations would definitely put him at odds with the
movement, which put a strong emphasis on decorative elements. OTOH, I think
one could make a strong argument that van Gogh - particularly w/r to the
Romantic-style legend surrounding his life, and his ventures into
cloissonisme - strongly influenced Art Nouveau. But I would be curious as to
how you see the movement shaping his work.
Cheers;
CB
Mani Deli
wrote:
>
>"Mani Deli" <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>news:sg21b2d28nt1esba1...@4ax.com...
>> On 08 Jun 2006 13:51:38 GMT, biljo...@yahoo.com(Biljo White) wrote:
>>
>> >Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
>> >> paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later stuff
>> >> is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its influence.
>> >> Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
>> >
>> >Van Gogh influenced by Deco? ROTFL! The Art Deco period began around
>> >1900 and ended around 1930. Van Gogh died in 1890.
>> >
>> > Mani, by all means, take an art history course! Your ignorance is
>> > colossal. And very funny.
>> >
>> >(He wont respond to this . . . . )
>>
>> Wishful thinking!
>> >
>> >Biljo
Bimbo is a lazy lump who doesn't verify anything before he spouts his
drivel.
>> Van Gogh was influenced by art nouveau. Care to contest that?
>
>It would probably be fairer to say that van Gogh and the Art Nouveau
>movement shared common antecedents, for example in the Style Nouille and
>Japonisme.
The height of art nouveau was between 1880 to 1890
Van Gogh did his finest work during that period . He was influenced by
many things nouveau among them. He died in 1890.
> As a coherent movement (as Biljo points out), Art Nouveau didn't
>really coalesce until after van Gogh's death,
You can check the dates and artists in a good short article in the
Bulfinch guide to art history,
> I think
>one could make a strong argument that van Gogh - particularly w/r to the
>Romantic-style legend surrounding his life, and his ventures into
>cloissonisme - strongly influenced Art Nouveau.
?
The major names of the nouveau style have nothing to do with Van
Gogh. I doubt that any ever even heard of him.
> But I would be curious as to
>how you see the movement shaping his work.
>
I see strong nouveau design elements in Van Gogh.
Mani Deli
>Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>[RH]: Interesting discussion. My comments are interleaved below --
>
>> >> >> Bauhaus is Deco. When Picasso came to Paris he painted schlock
>> >> >> paintings in the fashionable Nouveau style and some of his later
>> >> >> stuff is pure Deco.. Van Gogh and Dali etc. came under its
>> >> >> influence. Mondrian is pure Deco and not original in any sense.
>> >> >
>> >> >Van Gogh influenced by Deco? ROTFL! The Art Deco period began around
>> >> >1900 and ended around 1930. Van Gogh died in 1890.
>
>[RH]: Your statement above appears to declare that Van Gogh was influenced
>by Deco. If you meant Nouveau your sentence structure is ambiguous. I
>thought you meant Deco, too, on my first reading.
Sorry, Van Gogh was influenced by art nouveau.
>[RH]: I have studied Van Gogh extensively over a period of many years and
>have never seen any reference whatever to him with respect to Nouveau. I
>went back over my texts and still see no reference. It appears that your
>sole ground for stating that Van Gogh was influenced by Nouveau is your own
>interpretation of his work.
It is.
>I believe you are alone in this interpretation,
>but I would be very interested in your citing specific works and pointing
>out the Nouveau elements in them. Would you do that?
>
>Regards,
>
>Ray Hall
"starry Night and his late work containing flame forms. Also some of
the decorative detail as in some of this portraits. The prevailing
opinion is that its all Japanese.. I find this only partially true.
Nouveau, like so many styles is a fusion which resulted in very
original distinct style.