Neoplasticism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Neo-Plasticism
Piet Mondriaan: Composition in Colour A, 1917
Years active1917–1924
LocationThe Netherlands
Major figuresPiet Mondriaan, Theo van Doesburg, Vilmos Huszár, Georges Vantongerloo, Robert van 't Hoff, Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud
Influences
Influenced

Neo-plasticism, known in Dutch as Nieuwe Beelding, is an avant-garde art theory that arose in 1917 and was employed by Dutch De Stijl artists. The most notable advocates of the theory were the painters Theo van Doesburg and Piet Mondriaan.[1] Neo-plasticism advocated for a purified abstract art, by applying the most elementary principles through rational means. Thus, a painting that adhered to neo-plastic theory would typically consist of simple geometric shapes, right-angled relationships and primary colors.[2]

Terminology[edit]

Historically, the term plastic arts pre-dates neo-plasticism, denoting the visual arts (painting, sculpture, ceramics), as opposed to the art of writing (literature, music). [3]

Marty Bax points out that the theosophist Helena Blavatsky used the word 'plastic' several times in her 1888 book The Secret Doctrine where, for example, she writes "Svabhavat, the 'Plastic Essence' that fills the Universe, is the root of all things." [4][5]

Kenneth Frampton believes the term 'neo-plasticism' is derived from the term 'nieuwe beelding', which Mathieu Schoenmaekers used in his 1915 book Het Nieuwe Wereldbeeld [6][7] Copies of books by Blavatsky and Schoenmaekers were found in Mondrian's library.

The term "nieuwe beelding" appears in the first issue of the journal De Stijl (October 1917), with an introduction by Van Doesburg, and the first of a series of articles by Mondriaan entitled De Nieuwe Beelding in de schilderkunst. [8]

In 1921, Mondrian (after changing the spelling of his surname) published, in French, the pamphlet Le Néo-Plasticisme [9], translated into English as "Neo-Plasticism".

What does neo-plasticism mean? Mondrian uses the Dutch word beelding (plasticism) to mean a vision of reality, and niewe beelding (neo-plasticism) to mean a "true vision of reality". Therefore, neo-plasticists create a "pure reality" by applying neo-plastic theory to mould the 'plastic' of their artistic medium. [10][11]

Neo-plastic theory[edit]

Nicolas Poussin: Et in arcadia Ego. Ca. 1638-1640. Louvre.
Horus (Egyptian): Expressive of idea
Diadumenos (Greek): Expressive of matter


According to neo-plasticism, the artist (painter, sculptor, architect, musician, writer, etc.,) is concerned with the expression or depiction of all facets of life. However, this never happens by chance. Every work of art (painting, sculpture, building, piece of music, book, etc.,) is created intentionally. It is the product of the artist and, to a lesser extent, of what it represents. For example, the depiction in the painting Et in arcadia Ego, by Nicolas Poussin, never took place. Even though the postures of the figures are unnatural, yet it is convincing and forms a harmonious whole.

Every artist manipulates reality to produce an aesthetically and artistically pleasing harmony. The most realistic painters, such as Johannes Vermeer or Rembrandt van Rijn, use all kinds of artistic means to achieve the greatest possible degree of harmony.

The artists of De Stijl called these media "beeldend" (plastic). However, the artist determines to what extent he allows these plastic means to dominate or whether he remains as close as possible to his subject. There is therefore a duality in painting and sculpture - and to a lesser extent in architecture, music and literature - between the idea of the artist and the matter of the world around us. [12]

The Dutch neo-plasticists, imbued with Calvinism, emphasised the universal over the nominal, the spiritual over the material, the abstract over the natural, the non-figurative over the figurative, the objective over the subjective, the rational over the intuitive; summarised as the pure plastic over the plastic. The neo-plasticists of De Stijl expressed their vision (plastic) in terms of "pure" elements, not found in nature: straight lines, right angles, primary colours and precise relationships. This disassociation from nature created a new art, whose essential qualities were spiritual, entirely abstract, and rational. [13]

Idea versus matter[edit]

In his Principles of Neo-Plastic Art [12], Van Doesburg establishes that two types of works of art can be distinguished in art history: works of art that arise from the idea (ideo-plastic art) and works of art that arise from matter (physio-plastic art). [14] He demonstrates this with an image of the Egyptian god Horus and a Diadumenos. Van Doesburg, but especially Mondriaan, predicted that all arts in the future would become 'symbolised' and would only arise from ideas. The result of this was that the representation (the object, nature) was of secondary importance. The final stage of this process was abstract art. However, the artists of De Stijl went one step further and tried to rationally purify their work of everything that was still somewhat reminiscent of nature.

Theo van Doesburg. Fundamental element of painting. 1922.

Visual resources[edit]

According to the new visual art, every work of art consists of a number of basic elements, which were called visual media. According to the artists of De Stijl, these visual means, unlike representation, are entirely inherent to art. If one wanted to produce a work of art 'according to art', one had to use only these basic elements. Mondriaan wrote the following about this:

If the correct processing of the visual means and their application, the composition, lies in the only purely visual expression of art, the visual means must be completely in accordance with what they have to represent. If they must be a direct expression of the universal, they cannot be anything other than universal, ie abstract.

While Mondriaan limited himself to painting, Van Doesburg believed in the collaboration of all arts to achieve a new Gesamtkunstwerk. To achieve this, it was necessary to establish its own visual means for each art form. Only then was the independence of each art form guaranteed.[15] In 1920 he arrived at the following definition:

The painter, the architect, the sculptor and the furniture maker each realize that they have only one essential visual value: harmony through proportion. And everyone expresses this one essential and universal of visual art with his or her art medium. One and the same in a different way. The painter: through colour ratio. The sculptor: by volume ratio. The architect: by ratio of enclosed spaces. The furniture designer: through unenclosed (= open) space relationship.

Synthesis[edit]

Theo van Doesburg (color design) and Gerrit Rietveld (furniture). Interior. 1919. Colorized black and white photo.

The artists of De Stijl strove for more and better cooperation between the arts without each art form losing its independence. The reason for this was what they saw as the architect's role being too great. The greatest results were expected from the collaboration between the architect and the painter. It was then the painter's task to 'recapture' the flat surface of architecture. Van Doesburg wrote about this:

Architecture provides constructive, therefore closed, plastic. In this she is neutral towards painting, which provides open plasticity through flat color representation. In this respect, painting is neutral towards architecture. Architecture joins together, binds together. Painting loosens, dissolves. Because they essentially have to perform a different function, a harmonious connection is possible.

In 1923, following the De Stijl architectural exhibition in Paris, Van Doesburg also involved the 'unenclosed (= open) space relationship' of furniture art on architecture. He subsequently regarded architecture as a 'synthesis of new visual expression'. 'In the new architecture, architecture is understood as a part, the summary of all the arts, in its most elementary appearance, as its essence', according to Van Doesburg.[16]

Wallpapers[edit]

Theo van Doesburg and Piet Mondriaan[edit]

Although countless artists embraced and applied the ideas of the new visual arts during the interwar period, its origins can mainly be attributed to Theo van Doesburg and Piet Mondriaan. They have worked to publicize their ideas through a stream of publications, exhibitions and lectures. Moreover, from 1917 to 1924 they were the constant factors in the otherwise quite turbulent history of the Style Movement. Their views on art were so close that some works by Van Doesburg and Mondriaan are almost completely interchangeable. In 1971, Van Doesburg's widow, Nelly van Doesburg, commented:

I further remember that Mondriaan and Does once made a painting together, with the express intention that all traces of the individual share would be removed

Theosophy[edit]

When Van Doesburg and Mondriaan first made public their ideas about the new visual arts, both painters were very interested in theosophy.[17] Mondriaan wrote his first theoretical treatises in his then hometown Laren, North Holland. Here he met the theosophist-author Mathieu Schoenmaekers. Mondriaan adopted some of Schoenmaekers' terminology, including the Dutch term ‘beeldend’.[18] Van Doesburg and Mondriaan's ideas about the spiritual come from Kandinsky's autobiography Über das geistige in der Kunst (On the spiritual in art) published in 1911. Mondriaan remained interested in theosophy until his death. Van Doesburg distanced himself from theosophy around 1920 and focused on quasi-scientific theories such as the fourth dimension and what he called 'mechanical aesthetics' (design by mechanical means). However, he continued to use the term 'spiritual' in his articles.[17]

Philosophy[edit]

But even before Van Doesburg distanced himself from theosophy, he leaned more on the philosophical tradition of, for example, Hegel. Unlike Mondriaan, Van Doesburg was better informed of the latest developments in theory and adopted many ideas from other theorists, including Wilhelm Worringer. But although Worringer regarded abstraction as the opposite of naturalism, according to Van Doesburg, art history as a whole developed towards abstraction. Van Doesburg borrowed the idea that art and architecture was composed of separate elements from Wölfflins Kunstgeschichtliche Grundbegriffe from 1915. In his lecture Classical- Baroque-Modern (1918), Van Doesburg elaborated on Wölfflin's concept of the contrast between the classical and the baroque, using Hegel's idea of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, where the classical is the thesis, baroque is the antithesis, and modern is the synthesis.[19]

Evolutionary thinking[edit]

Schematic overview of the balance between the spiritual and the natural in the different art periods. Frnl: E = Egyptians , G = Greeks, R = Romans, M = Middle Ages, R = Renaissance, B = Baroque, B = Biedermeier, IR = Idealism-Reformation, NG = Neue Gestaltung (New Image)

Within the Nieuwe Beelding, evolutionary thinking plays an important role. From 1915 onwards, through lectures and publications, Van Doesburg worked to demonstrate that art slowly developed as a means of expression from the natural to a means of expression of the spiritual.[20] According to him, the spiritual and the natural in art were not always in balance in the past and the Nieuwe Beelding would restore this balance. The diagram reproduced here, which Van Doesburg probably drew up as a result of the lectures he gave in Jena, Weimar and Berlin in 1921, clearly indicates the extent to which Van Doesburg thought how nature and spirit were related in the various Western European cultural periods. . He 'begins' on the far right with the ancient Egyptians and Greeks, where nature and spirit were still in balance. The ancient Romans focused on the natural, while in the Middle Ages the spiritual predominated. In the Renaissance, art again turned towards the natural, only to be surpassed by the Baroque. The Biedermeier and the 'Idealism Reformation' in the nineteenth century restored the balance somewhat, ending in the time of the New Plastics, in which the polarity between nature and spirit was completely abolished. However, Van Doesburg did not see 'his' Nieuwe Beelding as an ideal final stage or as a utopia - as is often claimed - but, as he states in the same lecture: 'Nowhere and never is there an end. It always goes on'.[21]

Fourth dimension[edit]

A number of contributors to De Stijl mention the fourth dimension several times in passing – for example Gino Severini, 'Mesuration de l'espace et 4e dimension',[22] These types of passages also occur in other avant-garde movements and have never really led to concrete results – except for the tesseractical studies by Theo van Doesburg from 1924. Joost Baljeu wrote in 1968 that the fourth dimension can be compared to the expansion or contraction of objects due to the action of universal forces (temperature) and that thus the four-dimensional view is nothing other than the conclusion that all things are constantly on the move. 'Reality is not static, but a dynamic process in space and time. [...] When one uses the term spatio-temporal, one says nothing more than that an object form changes spatially during a certain period of time as a result of the action of some universal force'.[23]

Neo-plasticism in painting[edit]

The elementary means of expression of painting.
Left: visual plane (passive).
Right: color (active).

The new image assumes that when the painter tries to shape reality (or truth), he never does this from what he sees (object, matter, the physical), but from what originates from himself (subject, idea, the spiritual),[24] or as Georges Vantongerloo puts it: "La grande vérité, ou la vérité absolu, se rend visible à notre esprit par l'invisible".[25] Mondriaan calls this process 'internalization'.[8] In addition, no painting is created by chance. Each painting is an interplay of space, plane, line and color. These are the visual (plastic) means in painting. If the artist wants to approach the truth as closely as possible, he dissolves the natural form into these most elementary visual means. In this way the painter achieves universal harmony. The role of the artist (the individual or the subjective) is limited to determining the relationship between these visual means (the composition). The artist thus becomes a mediator between the spectator and the absolute (the absolute, the objective).[26] Following Schoenmaekers, who combines the physical with the horizontal and the spiritual to the vertical alliance, the new visual painters exclusively applied horizontal and vertical lines and rectangular areas of color.[27] The purpose of this radical simplification of painting was to purify art of elements that, according to the new visual artists, were not directly related to painting.

Neo-plasticism in sculpture[edit]

According to Van Doesburg, the sculptor is concerned with 'volume ratio'.[28] He applied a similar principle to architecture, concluding that the sculptor is concerned with 'volume ratio' and the architect with 'ratio of enclosed spaces'.[29] In his 1925 book "Grundbegriffe der neuen gestaltenden Kunst", Van Doesburg distinguished two elements for sculpture: a positive element (volume) and a negative element (void).

Neo-plasticism in architecture[edit]

Theo van Doesburg. Architecture Analysis. 1923.

Architecture, unlike painting, has less 'burden' of meaning. Architectural beauty, according to Van Doesburg, is mainly determined by mass ratio, rhythm and tension between the vertical and horizontal (to name just a few visual means in architecture). Many of these ideas come from the German architect Gottfried Semper, for example the great emphasis on walls as a plane and as a divider of space and the principle of 'unity in the multiplicity' (the realization that buildings, furniture, sculptures and paintings can be seen not only as units, but also as assemblages of separate elements).[30] Semper's ideas were spread in the Netherlands by Berlage, the spiritual father of modern architecture in the Netherlands. It was also Berlage who, after a visit to the United States in 1911, introduced the Netherlands to the work of the American architect Frank Lloyd Wright. Wright's ideas found favor with the architects of De Stijl, not least because of 'his mystical contrast between the horizontal and vertical, the external and internal, nature and culture'.[31]

Van Doesburg's first definition of architecture comes from his series of articles 'The new movement in painting' from 1916, in which he writes that 'for the architect, space is the first conditions for composition' and that the architect 'breaks up space'. ] through size proportions realized in stone'. He added two elements to this starting point in 1925: an active element (mass) and a passive element (space). He then divides the visual media of architecture into positive elements (line, plane, volume, space and time) and negative elements (void and material).[32]

The architect Oud talks about the primary means of representation and, like Van Doesburg, sees a strong similarity with modern painting in that respect. According to Oud, the secondary visual means, decoration, do not contribute to a harmonious architecture. Moreover, he is of the opinion that material must be used in a pure manner (reinforced concrete as reinforced concrete, brick as brick, wood as wood) and that the architect should not be guilty of seeking effect.[33] Restrictions were also imposed in architecture, so that a symbolic or decorative application of the visual means was virtually impossible.[34]

Neo-plasticism in film[edit]

In 1920 Van Doesburg met the filmmakers Hans Richter and Viking Eggeling. They worked on short, abstract films, based on the relationship of shapes, and the development of shapes over time. After this he made films that consisted of moving compositions with squares and rectangles, which were in line with the principles of neo-plasticism. In 1923 Van Doesburg wrote that film should not be seen as a two-dimensional art form, but has its own visual means: light, movement and space.[35]

I.K. Bonset. Letter Sound Images (1921).

Neo-plasticism in poetry[edit]

According to Van Doesburg, poetry, just like painting, was also 'visual'.[36] According to him, poetry is not only about the meaning of the word, but also about the sound. Just as in painting, Van Doesburg strove for a poetry that was not narrative. The New Visual poet used the word directly, without associations with the world around us. This resulted in a series of sound poem and typographical poems. Through typography he created sonority and rhythm, which draws the reader's attention to a particular word. Van Doesburg also published so-called Lettersound Images under the pseudonym I.K. Bonset; poems that consist only of letters.[37]

Neo-plasticism in music[edit]

The De Stijl artists also strove for a balanced portrayal of proportion in music. Just as these were determined in painting by size, color and non-color, neo-plastic music is determined by size, tone and non-tone. Mondriaan was of the opinion that music, like painting, should be purified of natural influences by, among other things, tightening the rhythm.[38] The non-tone replaces the old rest, but to be 'visual' it must consist of sound; Mondriaan suggests using noise for this. Just as in painting, tone and non-tone follow each other directly. This creates a 'flat, pure, sharply defined' music.[39]

Neo-plasticism in philosophy[edit]

The supporters of the new visual art thought that if neo-plasticism was consistently implemented, art would cease to exist. The composer Jacob van Domselaer wrote this:

Later there will be no need for art; then all images, all sounds will be superfluous

Theo van Doesburg saw neo-plasticism as a total vision, which he summarized in an article in De Stijl entitled "Tot een Nieuwe Wereldbeelding" [40]:

Neo-plasticism would not only change the face of the world, but it would also usher in a new way of thinking. With the understanding of the aesthetics of the material, a life-changing experience results in the development of knowledge and wisdom.

List of neo-plasticists[edit]

Sources[edit]

  • Bax, Marty (2001) Complete Mondrian, V+K Publishing, ISBN 0-85331-803-4.
  • Bock, Manfred, Vincent van Rossem en Kees Somer (2001) Cornelis van Eesteren, architect, urbanist [deel 1], Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, Den Haag: EFL Stichting, ISBN 90-7246-962-3.
  • Bonset, I.K. (juli 1922) ‘Beeldende verskunst en hare verhouding tot de andere kunsten’, De Stijl, jrg. 5, nr. 6, pp. 88-89.
  • De Stijl (1917-1921) [Volumes 1-4]
  • Doesburg, Theo van (oktober 1917) ‘Ter inleiding’, De Stijl, 1ste jaargang, nummer 1, pp. 1-2.
  • Doesburg, Theo van (november 1918) ‘Aanteekeningen over monumentale kunst’, De Stijl, 2e jaargang, nummer 1, pp. 10-12.
  • Doesburg, Theo van (1919) Drie voordrachten over de nieuwe beeldende kunst, Amsterdam: Maatschappij voor goede en goedkoope lectuur.
  • Doesburg, Theo van (maart 1920) ‘Aanteekeningen bij de Bijlagen VI en VII’, De Stijl, 3e jaargang, nummer 5, pp. 44-46.
  • Doesburg, Theo van (februari 1922) ‘Der Wille zum Stil (Neugestaltung von Leben, Kunst und Technik)’, De Stijl, 5e jaargang, nummer 2, pp. 23-32.
  • Doesburg, Theo van (maart 1922) 'Von den neuen Ästhetik zur materiellen Verwirklichung', De Stijl, 6e jaargang, nummer 1, pp. 10-14.
  • Engel, Henk (2009) “Theo van Doesburg & the destruction of architectural theory”, in: Gladys Fabre en Doris Wintgens Hötte (red.), Van Doesburg & the international avant-garde. Constructing a new world, [London]: Tate Publishing, ISBN 978-1-85437-872-9, pp. 36-45.
  • Fabre, Gladys (2009) “A universal language for the arts: interdisciplinarity as a practice, film as a model”, in: Gladys Fabre en Doris Wintgens Hötte (red.), Van Doesburg & the international avant-garde. Constructing a new world, [London]: Tate Publishing, ISBN 978-1-85437-872-9, pp. 46-57.
  • Frampton, Kenneth (1982) "Neoplasticisme en architectuur: formatie en transformatie", in Mildred Friedman (red.) De Stijl: 1917-1931, Amsterdam: Meulenhoff/Landshoff, ISBN 90-2908-052-3.
  • Huszàr, Vilmos (maart 1918) ‘Aesthetische beschouwingen III (bij bijlagen 9 en 10)’, De Stijl, jrg. 1, nr. 5, pp. 54-57. Zie Digital Dada Archive.
  • Jaffé, H.L.C. (1983) Theo van Doesburg, [Amsterdam]: Meulenhoff/Landshoff, ISBN 90-290-8272-0.
  • Overy, Paul ([1991] 2000) De Stijl, London: Thames and Hudson, ISBN 0-500-20240-0.
  • Mondriaan, Piet (October 1917) The Neo-plasticism in Painting (De nieuwe beelding in de schilderkunst), De Stijl, Volume 1, Number 1, pp. 2-6.

References[edit]

  1. ^ Starasta, Leslie (July 2004). "The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (3rd edition)". Reference Reviews. 18 (5): 16–17. doi:10.1108/09504120410542931. ISSN 0950-4125. (book review)
  2. ^ "Neo-plasticism". Tate. Retrieved 13 April 2024.
  3. ^ Kyle, Jill Anderson (2009). Staviydky; Rothkoff (eds.). Cezanne and American Modernism (First ed.). Yale University Press. pp. 67, 68. ISBN 9780300147155.
  4. ^ Bax (2001): p. 13.
  5. ^ Blavatsky, Helena (1888). The Secret Doctrine. Theosophical Society. pp. V1, P1, SII, 5a.
  6. ^ Schoenmaekers, Mathieu H. J. "Het nieuwe wereldbeeld". Internet Archive. Bussum C.A.J.v. Dishoeck. Retrieved 13 May 2024.
  7. ^ Frampton (1982): p. 99.
  8. ^ a b Mondriaan (Vol.1, No.1 October 1917): pp. 2-6.
  9. ^ Mondrian, Piet. "Le Neo-Plasticisme". Internet Archive. Retrieved 13 May 2024.
  10. ^ Mondrian, Piet (1969). Two Mondrian Sketchbooks 1912-1914. Meulenhoff International, Amsterdam.
  11. ^ Threlfall, Timothy. "Piet Mondrian: his life's work and evolution 1872 to 1944". Internet Archive. Univeristy of Warwick. p. 49. Retrieved 13 May 2024.
  12. ^ a b van Doesburg, Theo (1925). Grundbegriffe der neuen gestaltenden Kunst. Internet Archive: Albert Langen Verlag, München. Retrieved 16 May 2024.
  13. ^ Jaffé, H.L.C. "De Stijl 1917-1931: The Dutch Contribution to Modern Art". Internet Archive. Retrieved 13 May 2024.
  14. ^ See Van Doesburg (1919): p. 54.
  15. ^ Engel (2009): pp. 37-39.
  16. ^ Engel (2009): p. 43.
  17. ^ a b Overy (2000): p. 36.
  18. ^ Overy (2000): pp. 41-42.
  19. ^ Overy (2000): pp. 42-43.
  20. ^ Overy (2000): p. 43.
  21. ^ Doesburg (February 1922): pp. 23-32.
  22. ^ Gino Severini, 'La peinture d'avant-garde. IV', De Stijl, 1st volume, number 4 (January 1918): p. 46. See Digital Dada Library.
  23. ^ Joost Baljeu, 'Die vierte Dimension', Theo van Doesburg 1883-1931 [exhibition catalogue]. Eindhoven, [1968], p. 9.
  24. ^ Theo van Doesburg. The New Movement in Painting. Delft: J. Waltman, 1917. See Digital Dada Library.
  25. ^ Georges Vantongerloo, 'Réflexions', De Stijl , 1st volume, number 9 (July 1918): p. 100.
  26. ^ Theo van Doesburg. 'Fragments. I', De Stijl, 1st volume, number 4 (February 1918): p. 47-48. See Digital Dada Library.
  27. ^ Friedman (1982; ISBN 9029080523): p. 111.
  28. ^ Van Doesburg (March 1920): p. 46.
  29. ^ Engel (2009): pp. 39-40.
  30. ^ Overy (2000): 25.
  31. ^ Overy (2000): p. 27.
  32. ^ Engel (2009): p. 37.
  33. ^ JJP Oud, 'Architectural consideration at Appendix VIII ', De Stijl, 1st volume, number 4 (February 1918): p. 39-41. See Digital Dada Library.
  34. ^ Bock, Van Rossem and Somer (2001): p. 80.
  35. ^ Fabre (2009): pp. 47-54.
  36. ^ See Bonset (July 1922): pp. 88-89.
  37. ^ Fabre (2009): p. 47.
  38. ^ P. Mondrian, 'The “Bruiteurs Futuristes Italiens” and “the” new in music', De Stijl, 4th volume, number 8 (August 1921): p. 114-118.
  39. ^ P. Mondrian, 'Neo-Plasticism (the New Plasticism) and its (its) realization in music (final)', De Stijl, 5th volume, number 2 (February 1922): p. 17-21.
  40. ^ Van Doesburg (March 1922): p. 14.


Category:De Stijl Category:Art movements in Europe

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neoplasticism&oldid=1224184571"