Differences between Kitsch, Architecture, and Design - Essay Example

? KITSCH Introduction Kitsch has been regarded inferior and tasteless copy of extant art style and a worthless and fake reproduction of any art piece having recognized value. Kitsch is mostly made using chap mass produced and unoriginal objects (Crow, 1996). Along with time there has been difference in the approach towards Kitsch and now it has been viewed as derogatory work that is produced purely for commercial purpose (Solomon, 1991). These gaudy and insubstantial works often have popular appeal but they remain inferior because these are not the real efforts of the artists. It is also considered that Kitsch is closely linked with the sentimental art evolved during the nineteenth century that dominantly conveyed melodrama and exaggerated sentimentality. The essay aims to examine the relationship between kitsch, art and design. In this regard the essay presents concise overview of the evolution of kitsch in order to find evidences about its roots inside arts. The essay analyzes the art and kitsch relationship in the light of arguments and explanation of these concepts presented by different artists, experts and theorists. It has been unveiled from the discussion that art and kitsch are two different and opposite things. The relationship between art, kitsch and design could only be studies from the perspective that kitsch sometimes presents a bad parody of art piece otherwise kitsch could not be indisputably regarded as a form of art (Solomon, 1991). The design however, tends to be essential element of both art and kitsch because the art pieces are also created using some designs, ideas and thoughts whereas kitsch are also created using particular design and style. The elements like reflection of concept, transmission of message, depth and meaningfulness lacks in kitsch however, supposed to be imperative elements of an art piece. How Kitsch Evolved The origin of Kitsch could be traced back to 1860s and 70s when it appeared as a market content as cheap, popular and marketable pictures and sketches. However, many of the art historians still question the origin of the kitsch (Kundera, 1984). There is one thought that Kitsch is derived from English word sketch as these are the professional expressions created by the artists. Hans Reimann in his book Das Buch Vom (The book of Kitsch) writes that the kitsch is also an artistic attempt to address the demands and taste of people using some ordinary and cheap objects. However, another art expert and writer Edward Koelwel insisted that Kitsch has no link with the sketch because the Kitsch are not sketches but finished painting and objects (Crow, 1996). In this way the relationship of kitsch with art in term of sketches is doubtful and kitsch could not be regarded as an accepted form of art. The word kitsch became popular in 1930s when different art experts and theorists started referring to the term Kitsch for the description of some specific types of objects and creations. Some evidences from the history also prove that kitsch was characteristic of Spanish middle class during the first half of the nineteenth century and they view it as response of the modernity (Walker, 2006). It is also believed that kitsch has its origin inside the German language where it entered in the mid nineteen century and was used as a synonym for trash. It has been unveiled by the experts that the word kitsch has been derives from the German word kitschen that means collecting rubbish from the stress or verkitshcen that means to making cheap. In oxford English the word kitsch has been defined as a worthless object characterized by worthless pretentiousness. There are no authentic audience about the correct origin of the word kitsch however, it is a commonly agreed fact that it has been widely used to donate cheap artistic stuff due to lack of originality and genius (Sontag, 1969). Kitschy garden gnomes and lawn arnoments In the twentieth century there was change observed in the general perception of the word kitsch when it for the attention of the international community and got theoretical momentum. It was then widely used for describing the objects and life styles supported by urbanization and mass production of industrial revolution. During this time the term proved its aesthetic and political implication and became center point for the debates conducted around the issues of mass culture and evolving trend of commercialization in the society. Kitsch have been designed and introduced for the public use from time to time. During different time periods kitsch has been produced and thus kitsch could also be studies in reference to the particular era or time period. For instance, in Norman Rockwell Saturday Port magazine, the American kitsch was studies and presented with reference to World War I. the kitsch are often placed in the tourist places in order to provide amusement to the people (Sontag, 1969). Greenberg also presented the idea about the evolution of kitsch and explains that kitsch is nothing else but the outcome and reflection of a world where money and desires have become much widespread as compared with taste and knowledge. He also regarded it as a product of industrial revolution during which the western nations established universal literacy and preserved the formal culture of the education people having money and leisure (Greenberg, 1939). On the other hand, the peasants with less money and leisure lost the taste and realization for their traditional folk culture and then the society provide them with a kind of culture suitable and fit for their own consumption. This trend generated new demands in the society and in order to meet these demands kitsch was invented for the people who have little or no sense for the value of genuine culture (Dorfles, 1968). Discourse about Kitsch relationship with Arts and design The relationship of kitsch with fine art is an enduring debate because many of the art experts are not agreed to give kitsch space in the sphere of art work however, some experts still argue about the relationship between art design and kitsch. Theodore Adorno, Hermann Broch and Clement Greenburg explain that kitsch is something different from the art and it could not be placed in the realm of art. These theorists argue that avant-garde and kitsch are opposite to each other because art is an integral element of the culture whereas kitsch could be viewed as threat to the culture. The popularity of kitsch during the early 1930s was also widely regarded as threatening progression within society and culture because kitsch never deserves to be viewed in relation with arts. They believe that unlike art, kitsch is a type of false consciousness that could never be deem as art form (Calinescu, 1987). Kitsch scluptured by Jeff Koons Theodore Adorno believes that art is something that must be challenging, subjective and oriented against the oppressiveness and dominance of the power structure. However, In the culture industry when art is controlled and marketed keeping in view the needs and demands of the market in order to assure the provision of acceptable art to the population then it could not meet the basic criterion of an art piece. Art has to serves the purpose of providing leisure to the audience and keeping something in front of them that they could watch or observe (Adorno, 1941). At the same time, it is also important that though art the artist puts the ideas and thoughts in front of the audiences. From this perspective kitsch could not be regarded as art but it is a non-challenging and formally incoherent work piece that could not be regarded as parody of catharsis and aesthetic experience (Adorno, 1941). Hence, from the standpoint of Adorno kitsch is not an art form and the only relationship between art and kitsch is that kitsch is a parody of art that is basically meant to fulfill the needs and desires of the power structure and not to present open ideas and thoughts in front of the people (Kundera, 1984). Greenlady by Viladimir Hermann Broch also provided a deep insight to the concept of art and kitsch. Broch explains the status of kitsch in relation with arts and says that kitsch is the evil within the value system of art. He want to propose the idea that art is something positive whereas kitsch is something entirely opposite to it because kitsch is a negative expression and could be deem as evil (Broch, 1933). Like Adorno, Broch also believes that art and kitsch are two opposite things that could not be viewed in relation with each other. Broch also thinks that art is a creative activity but kitsch is dependent and limited to the conventions and demands of the power structure (Walker, 2006). Kitsch is not created with the freedom of mind and thoughts but they just adopt the formulas from art and develop them according to the totalitarianism of the conventions of the society. Kitsch has nothing to do with the development of art because it mainly looks at the past rather focusing upon creativity and development of new ideas. Broch also clarifies that kitsch could not be regarded as bad art but it is important to realize that kitsch has a system of its own that could not be understood from artistic point of view. Kitsch is meant to achieve and show beauty and not intend to explore and present the truth to the audiences. Hence, the explanation of Broch also affirms that art and kitsch are two different processes that are conducted with different thinking and for attaining different objectives (Broch, 1933). Another viewpoint about relationship of art and kitsch has been presented by Greenberg. He also views kitsch something less creative and challenging than art. He believes that art maintains the taste of the society whereas kitsch is no concerned with the depiction and expression of truth, beauty, message and awareness. The thoughts of these theorists imply that art and kitsch are two opposite things and there is no other working relationship between these that kitsch has been viewed as a bad parody of art that has nothing to do with the real essence or soul of the art (Greenberg, 1939). The conception of Greenberg was further explored by another art expert Immanuel Kant. He threw light upon the relationship of kitsch and art while taking forward the concept of art and kitsch presented by Greenberg. He defines the philosophical definition of arts and sets the values that could be used for the identification and explanation of kitsch in relation with arts (Benjamin, 1968). Kant describes fine and arts as genius with originality where there is no room for sentimentality or pathos. Kitsch on the other hand is mainly concerned with sensationalism that has no implication in the art sphere. Kitsch unlike art is not something genuine or based upon any original idea and has nothing much to do with the social or cultural progression of the time (Calinescu, 1987). Most of the art theorists agree with each other over the matter of kitsch’s place in the art field. By the end of the nineteenth century all the theorists came towards a common point of agreement that kitsch is something false and unoriginal that could not be deem as a form of art work. The theorists rejected kitsch due to lack of originality and presence of sentiment in it (Kulka, 1996). Micheal Jackson with his pet by Jeff Koons However, it is also a fact that there is another school of thought that believes that kitsch is very popular among the people and if one will consider the popularity of kitsch among the masses it would be found that kitsch is most liked by the people as compared with all its competitors. The art expert Thomas Kulka presented the thought that kitsch is rejected by the art experts but it is widely accepted and appraised by the people due to which it would not be fair to completely reject kitsch as an art form. He however accepts that kitsch has been considered as a negative product because it reaffirms rather challenging the collective norms like art and act as source of pleasure and sheer entertainment for the people (Kulka, 1996). Kitsch – critical Analysis of Kitsch status in art sphere The theories and concepts regarding the definition of art allows understanding the concept of art is details and it has been found that there are some necessary elements and features that must be possessed by a work piece to qualify for the category of art. The definition, purpose and examples of kitsch clarify that the basic elements of art work are not present in kitsch due to which kitsch could not be given any place in the art sphere. In fact, the art theorists have clearly described that kitsch is opposite to art and thus the relationship between art and kitsch are also inverse (Kulka, 1996). Art and kitsch could be related from the standpoint that kitsch is reproduction of the unique ideas already presented in the art work. However the copy of the original work has been done in a manner that it could not be resembled to its original form. The sense of reality present in the actual art work could not be found in its copy due to which kitsch and art appears to be quite different pieces of work. Lack of originality in the kitsch makes them lower class work and they are not expected to play a constructive role in the society like art. It has been found from the above theories and views of the art experts that the main intention of kitsch is supposed to be the production of real sensory experience among the audience. It is supposed to be something that engages the eyes of the people drawing no impacts upon their minds or thinking. The emotions of the people are targeting by kitsch because these produce stimulation through highly charges images, language or music. The deep messages are conveyed through art piece and kitsch has no ability to perform any such function. Due to this fact, the kitsch has no role to play in the social, political and cultural progression of the nation whereas art plays vital role in determining the dimensions of the social, cultural and political growth of the nations. These developments are also reflected through the art work and kitsch has no function of the depiction of social picture of its time (Tavia. 2002). The theories of art also clearly explain that art has to perform an active role in the society and it is very important that the art pieces must provoke the thinking of the people and convey the ideas of the artist to the people. Art could also take part in the revolution by motivating and encouraging people towards revolution however kitsch works to propagate the ideas of the ruling elite without any sense of criticism and truth. The reality could never be revealed with the help of kitsch. The art piece however is meant to unfold the realities by acting as mirror of the society. From this perspective, art occupies a higher place in society whereas kitsch has no capability of performing any high level role in the society. Conclusion It has been unveiled from the above discussion and analysis of the theories and conceptions presented by different artists and theorists that kitsch could not be regarded as an art form. The relationship between kitsch design and art is only that kitsch followed the patterns of the art work and develop a design however the necessary elements of art are never present in the kitsch due to which it could not be said that kitsch could be studies in reference to art neither the relationship between art and kitsch could be deem as working relations. It is also found that kitsch is a source of transmitting the ideas and propositions of the controlling body whereas art is a free activity that requires the creation of work piece with full freedom of mind. Moreover, the art work in directed by the motive of creating awareness among the masses by transmitting particular message. Kitsch however, lacks the motivation and intention of creating awareness among the masses. The entire discussion could be sum up with the conclusion that kitsch is a term not exactly an art form. This term has been applied to artifacts that are mainly characterized by vulgarity, fakeness, sensationalism and pretentious bad taste. The art and kitsch could not be relate to each other in any positive or construction type of relationship because the caliber of these creations use to be different from one other and kitsch could not reach the level of maturity and originality of art. References Adorno, T. "On Popular Music." Studies in Philosophy and Social Science 9 :( 1941). Pp17-48. Benjamin, W. "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." In Illuminations, edited by Hannah Arendt. Translated by Harry Zohn. (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1968) Broch, H. "Kitsch" and "Notes on the Problem of Kitsch". In Kitsch: The World of Bad Taste, edited by Gillo Dorfles. (New York: Universe Books, 1968) Calinescu, M. Five Phases of Modernity: Modernism, Avant-Garde, Decadence, Kitsch, Postmodernism. Durham, (North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1987) Crow, T. Modern Art and the Common Culture. (New Haven: Yale U Press, 1996) Dorfles, G. Kitsch: The World of Bad Taste. (New York: Universe Books, 1968) Greenberg, C. "Avant-Garde and Kitsch." Partisan Review 6: (1939) pp34-49. Kulka, T. Kitsch and Art. University Park, (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania University Press, 1996) Kundera, Milan. The Unbearable Lightness of Being, translated by Michael Henry Heim. (New York: Harper and Row, 1984) Solomon, R. "On Kitsch and Sentimentality." Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 49 (Winter 1991): 1-14. Sontag, S. "Notes on Camp" (1961). In Against Interpretation. (New York: Dell Laurel Edition, 1969) Tavia. N. Racial Kitsch and Black Performance, the Yale Journal of Criticism, Volume 15, Number 2, (Fall 2002), pp. 371-391 Walker, D. J. The Culture of Cursileria: Bad Taste, Kitsch, and Class in Modern Spain (review), MLN - Volume 121, Number 2, March 2006 (Hispanic Issue), pp. 500-503 Read More