Why Painting Was Considered to Be Irrelevant in the Latter Decades of the Twentieth Century - Essay Example

Name Professor Course Date Why was painting considered to be irrelevant in the latter decades of the twentieth century? Throughout history, one form of art or the other, such as painting, drawing, or sculpturing has been used for artistic expression. Just in the same way that social events are transformed, the perception and acceptability of art has taken different positions in varying times of history. Traditional art forms have been met with modern art forms that have diverted from art traditions in the chase for experimentation (Pooke and Newall 11). It is these diversions, or changes from the usual way of doing things that have brought out reactions to the emerging forms or movements of art. For example, in the latter decades of the twentieth century, paintings were mostly considered irrelevant for several reasons including some art critics felt that the artistic expression was weakened in these paintings. This essay will discuss why painting was considered to be irrelevant in the twentieth century and the discourses that shaped this perception. Two artworks (Marilyn Diptych, Odalique Express) are referred to here to demonstrate the debates for and against the relevancy of painting in the late 20th century. Overview of paintings in the 20th century It is important to find out the attributes that were associated with the evolution of the 20th century painting, in order to understand why this art became disputed as irrelevant in the later decades of the 20th century. Twentieth-century art is at best indefinable, considering the constant state of change that occurred in the period. Debut painters of the 20th century from the Western world include Paul Cezanne, Vincent van Gogh, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, and Georges Seurat (Galenson 112)1. Painting was revolutionized in the early 20th-century to feature wild, brilliant, multi-coloured and expressive figure paintings and landscapes (Galenson 111). Important painting movements that emerged in the first two decades of the 20th century include cubism, futurism, abstract art, Bauhaus, Orphism, synchronism, Suprematism, constructivism, Dada and surrealism among others (Edwards and Wood 4)2. During the decades of the 1950 and 1960, the mainstream form of painting was abstract painting which brought forth movements such as colour field painting, Op art, Post painterly abstraction, Minimal art, hard-edge painting Lyrical Abstraction, shaped canvas painting, and also Abstract expressionism from earlier decades was continued (Galenson 111-13). Throughout the 20th century, painters continued to conduct Realism and use of imagery, figurative painting, and landscape but fused them with contemporary themes and solid technique, which also saw the emergence of unique expressivity (Cole 16)3. Novel painters conducted the use of imagery in not only new, but also radical means. Most of these artists were also mainly self-taught and established representational work despite the ongoing Abstract Expressionist movement (Cole 19). An artist like Fairfield Porter who largely represented in this movement focused on paintings depicting landscapes, family and friend portraits, domestic interiors, as well as portraits of other artists (Pooke and Newall 23)4. The 20th century market the period by which the artists began to experiment with subject matter. The perception of nature by artists, or realism was processed through the painter’s own inner vision. Artists started to find a new freedom to choose and follow their own direction, as well as incorporate new discoveries in their paintings (Gaiger 15)5. Artists with similar perspectives stuck together and formed loosely knit groups that are referred by the movements some of which are already mentioned above. The search for novel subject matter and techniques in the twentieth century caused the artists to take different directions in the paintings (Gaiger 23). However it was not until in the period of 1960s and 1970s, that there was a huge reaction against painting, with most movements being regarded as irrelevant to art (Alberro and Stimson 15). 6 Reactions to painting art in the latter decades of the 20th century New movements of art began to gain mainstream prominence in the later decades of the 20th century. According to Gaiger and Wood (33)7, the thing that makes a description of an art movement to be dubious is that it never fits the deepest artists in the movement. With the proliferation of various styles of painting that hit in the latter decades of the twentieth century, it was difficult to tell whether the artists were honestly into creating new art forms or they were just competing for the sake of it. Artists came up with new ways of depicting art including Postminimalism, Earth art, installation art, video art, body art, mail art, fluxus, and conceptual art among others (Gaiger and Wood 9). Pop art also established new conventions of art making by making acceptable the radical inclusions of unlikely matter as part of the works of art (Gaiger and Wood 21). Several painting works were declared as ‘death of painting’ by art critics, for example, Douglas Crimp who criticized the works of artists like Ad Reinhardt for reducing the creativity in painting (Gaiger 35). Douglas Crimp actually wrote a provocative essay in 1981 with the title “the end of painting” when Land art, Conceptual art, and Performance art as well as other newer forms of art took centre stage at the expense of traditional arts. Even as critics began speaking of the death of painting, new media art, characterized by larger installations and performances, became widespread, and a category in itself in the later 1970s and early 1980s (Gaiger and Wood 41). A growing number of artists began experimenting with technological approaches such as video art. Figurative painting and neo-expressionism became the new modern for art expression (Gaiger and Wood 43). However, a number of art critics and architects began questioning this idea of the modern and created works that will be referred to as the Postmodern towards the end of the 20th century (Alberro and Stimson 11). Although debated on whether it is the most extraordinary innovation of the 20th century art, Pop art that became famous in the latter decades of the 20th century was viewed as mundane by critics as it depicted the everyday happenings of life and hence limited the painter’s imagination. Pop art arose from a rebellion against Abstract Expressionists; an accepted form of art but of which Pop art painters deemed to be over-intense and pretentious (Alberro and Stimson 22). Supporters of Pop art viewed it as a means to bring art to the materialized realities of day-to-day life in which people got most of their visual pleasure from magazines, television, or comics (Gaiger 28). In England, Pop Art emerged in the middle 1950s although it realized its maximum potential in America’s New York City in the 1960s where it shared the attention with Minimalism. The media and advertising were favourite targets for Pop Art’s often witty descriptions of the consumer society (Alberro and Stimson 23). The English critic Lawrence Alloway described Pop Art as paintings that defy the Abstract Expressionism psychology, celebrate the post-war consumerism, and worship the god of materialism (Alberro and Stimson 27). Renowned painters of the Pop Art movement include Andy Warhol, who recreated quasi-photographic paintings of people or everyday scenes or objects (Gaiger 25; Gallenson 111). In 1962, Warhol was celebrated and recognized as one of the innovative artists of the twentieth century for his images that mostly depicted famous images of the pop art movement (Gallenson 112). One of Warhol’s work centred on the famous actress Marilyn Monroe who committed suicide in August of 1962. The work was titled Marilyn Diptych and among others, made Warhol a successfully commercial artist (Gallenson 112). The painting entailed more than twenty silkscreen paintings of Marilyn Manson based on an identical publicity photograph from the film Niagara that was shown in 1953. The painting, from Warhol’s perspective represents a fusion of death and the celebrity cult and by repeating the image, he evoked her unending presence in the media. The contrast of vivid colour with black and white, and the visual effect of waning on the right panel mostly suggested the star’s mortality. Marilyn Diptych, 1962 by Andy Warhol. Source: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/warhol-marilyn-diptych-t03093 This, among many other pop-themed works made Warhol to be quickly recognized as a leader of a dominant new art movement of its time, and the conceptual nature of his art noted (Gallenson 113). Some critics attributed works of the new painting movement as based on the intent of the artist such as what he says, and where he goes, rather than the guidelines set by tradition. Another reason that the latter 20th century painting was considered irrelevant by some sects in the society is because of a deviation from the traditional mode of painting by incorporating other ways to come up with a painting work (Gaiger 17). In the period 1960-1970, the photorealism style of painting emerged from the US and spread to Europe and other parts of the world from 1980s. As an art movement, photorealism evolved from pop art, which had subsequently emerged from traditional art by infixing social culture elements of the time. The evolution of photorealism was encouraged by the advent of photographic art and technology, which allowed the artists to select photos that inspired them and elucidate them into paintings of similar identity (Alberro and Stimson 24). Art critics were harsh on this use of cameras, and implicitly photographs that were translated to paintings. On the other hand, supporters of photorealism argued that photography, as an artistic form of expression has allowed a different way of interpreting the world, and therefore, photorealism painters were expressing it in a unique way. Furthermore, it represented a merger between the art and science worlds where through technological methods evolved for photography, artists could use the photos as an information source and documentation that would enable even further experimentation of new forms of artistic expression (Alberro and Stimson 26). Nevertheless, art critics still perceived pop art and photorealism as to having weakened artistic character (Gaiger 12). This is because these painting styles concentrated on enhancing visual arts for purposes of the media and press. Supporters of photorealism maintained that there is beauty in depicting paintings from photographs that they had already created. Most photorealism paintings depicted very common objects as landscapes, interesting places, and sometimes portraits. The extraordinary attributes of the paintings relied on their artistic visions because they relayed the mundane moments of day-to-day life in the society. Successful photorealist painters paid attention to details and it was required that the painter reproduces on canvas even the tiniest detail observed in the photo (Alberro and Stimson 29). A Photorealist painter makes use of a photograph or several photographs to develop their work of art and one of the arguments was that the use of cameras and photographs was accepted in the Modernism era. However, photorealism was met with intense criticism just by the admittance that a camera or photograph was used in the work. Photographs were used as aid and also source of material but artists would deny this fact on the fear that their work would be misunderstood as imitations. Indeed, most photorealism works were criticized because of being imitations rather than truly authentic works (Alberro and Stimson 25). Tom Blackwell is one of the original photorealist painters. The image below demonstrates one of his works in which a photograph was translated to an oil on linen painting. Odalisque Express, 1992, by Tom Blackwell Source: http://www.seavestcollection.org/html/Detail.asp?WorkInvNum=563&whatpage=artist Some works were regarded as irrelevant because some critics perceived that they were motivated by profits from large commercial galleries (Bell 101)8. These were works that were labelled under the neo-expressionism movement of the late 1970s. The neo-expressionism movement emerged in the late 1970s and early 1980s. This movement also extended to come-back painting that included movements such as Transavantguardia, Fuguration Libre, Neue Wilde, and Stuckists that occurred simultaneously in Italy, France, Germany and Britain. The paintings in these movements were characterized by big-size formats, free expressive mark-marking, myth, figuration, and imagination (Bell 98). The works in these movements experienced an art crash in the late 1980s although they started to garner popularity in the 21st century. Neo-expressionism as a style of modern painting at the time gained popularity in the late 1970s and was first developed in Europe as a reaction against the minimalistic and conceptual art of the 1960s and 1970s (Alberro and Stimson 18). According to Elkins (113)9 the later twentieth century was the epitome of postmodernism in art that also saw the introductions of hoaxes in art. There was subsequent decline of the painting technique and craftsmanship, and copying as a teaching method enhances forgery of old art works (Elkins 114). As much as forgery is undesirable, some artists still found a way to justify it in the twentieth century and made a lot of money from other artists’ works or ideas. Even when there was no outright forgery, painters began to prefer appropriation to creating entirely new pieces (Elkins (114). The concept of authenticity quickly faded into the later years of the twentieth century, as with the wake of post-modernism, many artists began preferring appropriation to producing original works. Avant-garde artists mostly tried to conceal or purge the derivatives from other artists’ paintings (Edwards and Wood 44). Avant-gardism entailed a progression of new and original ideas or styles from the previous one (Edwards and Wood 45). What mostly happened is that the idea of collage was followed, where artists borrowed ideas from various works and emerged into one in their own. There were a lot of borrowings and this definitely made concerned art critics to watch the creativity in painting fade away. Novelty was no longer considered as a primary value in art. During the period, art critics took positions for or against styles incorporating avant-garde for example colour-field or gestural painting, assemblage, environments and events, minimal earth, pop, and conceptual art among others (Edwards and Wood 53). The arguments were targeted and art critical approaches, for example Rosenberg’s existentialism versus Greenberg’s formalism, or Robert Smithson’s minimalism advocacy versus Michael Fried’s retention of colour-field abstraction. The death of painting was also considered to be a reality back then because the art world discourses became undramatic and unfocused, with sometimes critiques levelling down to whether or not someone liked a particular painter (Bell 67). George Kubler explained this changes as the ‘birth of an art’, the ‘life of a style’, and the ‘death of a school’ which was also expressed as of ‘flowering’, ‘maturity’, and ‘fading’ (Perry and Wood 104). Some critics teased the postmodern art mentality as an aspect of local provisional economies in which painters are merely attempting to justify their own right to work having been and continue to be more significant than trials to define grand abstractions, for example, cultural value and the nature of knowledge (Bell 98). Prior to painting being considered irrelevant in the late twentieth century, the future of painting looked not only viable, but of also interesting and demanding possibilities (Llewelyn 15)10. Some critics, such as Thomas McEvilley even wrote with some confidence that painting would, in the aftermath of the exclusivist Kantian aesthetics breakdown relevant in high modernism, will now focus on recombining elements directed at the aesthetic, ethical, and cognitive faculties together (Llewelyn 49). The analysis seemed to illustrate that painters were working with these possibilities in modes that permitted both an open dialogue with previous painting traditions, and maintained lines out in contemporary discourses about art nature and function (Llewelyn 51). However, by 1997, a very different mindset seemed to rule the thinking of those concerned with painting. Painting was either viewed increasingly as the lowly handmaiden of the progressive neo-formalist theory which was a trend that can be associated with a growing influence of books such as Painting as Model by Yve-Alain Bois; or it was being viewed from a revisionist perspective such that it was not central (Llewelyn 51-53). The revisionist perspective was best put in the book the Pursuit of Painting by Stephen McKenna in 1997, in which the author identifies the basic elements in determining the kind of painting an artist will make, as the ability of the painter to recognise his own cultural temperament, as well as knowing that he needs to, and is able to depict a particular perspective of the world (Llewelyn 54). The latter decades of the twentieth century depict an era where there was massive art critique, of which the discourses mainly centred on clarity and purity claims of the paintings, especially of the conceptual forms (Alberro and Stimson 15). Nevertheless, proponents of these form of arts at the time argued that barring these conceptual art forms in the name of clarity and purity was highly paradoxical. This is because as with Modernism movements like the avante-garde, conceptual art was the outcome of complicated processes of selection, fusion and rejection of previous forms and strategies (Alberro and Stimson 16). Thus, criticism against this art form should be met with scepticism, for their confusing, limiting, and explicit constructions just for the sake of promoting a specific partial legacy. Some of the art-historical genealogies that are claimed to have influenced conceptualization art practices from the 1960s include self-reflexivity of modernist painting that systematically finds problems and dismantles the integral elements of the traditional artwork structure (Alberro and Stimson 17). One of the recurring features in such art that makes it referred to as conceptual, is the taking into consideration each of the constituting components of the artworks as equal elements. In the process, the valuation of technical manual skill is entirely abandoned, similar to the notion of an original and cohesive work (Alberro and Stimson 16). Consequently, serial and extremely schematic structures result, placing the inherently regarded concept of quality under stress. Next, the component of reductivism pushed the traditional objectness of the artwork toward the limit of an entire dematerialization. Increasingly, in works operating in the conceptualization practices of the 1960s and beyond, the visual elements of an artwork are harshly challenged, the prominence of text expanded, and the degree to which viewing is dependent upon the integration of contingent and contextual elements becomes a meeting point (Gaiger 10). The next criticism by which conceptualism has received negation is based on aesthetic content. This antecedent can ultimately be traced back to the work of Marcel Duchamp and which, by way of a series of mediations throughout the twentieth century, places art at the enigma of information (Alberro and Stimson 17). The fourth trajectory that leads to conceptual art being negated is one that focuses on the problem of placement. Here, the subject or theme of the work becomes both a reflection on the conventions that will frame or situate it, and a self-introspection of how it will be displayed or communicated. In the midst of the results of this lineage will be the melding of the work with the immediate architectural environment, and its integration within the context of publicity such as books, newspapers, magazines, and even advertisement billboards (Alberro and Stimson 17). In its broadest definition possible, then, the conceptual in art depicts an expanded critique of the materiality and cohesiveness of the painted object, a heightened fatigue toward definitions of artistic practice as purely visual, or a fusion of the work with its site and context of display, as well as an increased emphasis on the possibilities of mainstream publicity and distribution. Some critics assert that while remaining in the boundaries of traditional categories of painting obstructs such inquiry since these artistic divisions are conventional and their legitimacy is sometimes taken for granted (Alberro and Stimson 18). Critics supporting the expression of painting in whichever way that could be including conceptualizing claim that the traditional categories should be dismantled, disavowed, and regarded as useless, anachronistic, and detrimental to artists (Alberro and Stimson 18). Conclusion In history, painting has evolved through various schools and movements. The modernism era that started from the late 19th century to the around 1950s was adorned by various movements such as the Fauvism, Cubism, Surrealism, Symbolism, Futurism, Orphism and Abstract art among others. Painting was revered for the painters’ ability to share their imagination of the world and events in a unique authentic way. However, in the latter decades of the 20th –century, especially beginning from 1960s, painting took a new turn into the post-modernism. Most painters seem to deviate from the traditional approaches to painting, and most of the works seem to depict the usual mundane events in life, especially through pop-art. Painting seemed to merge with other disciplines such as photography such that there were new support systems for painting. Postmodern painting such as photorealism, pop art, neo-expressionism, conceptual art postminimalism, installation art, and fluxus among others generated a sharp reaction among the critic. Whereas some critics supported their discourse with the need to appreciate postmodern painting because of being bold enough to experiment with new styles, others criticized the lifeless component that painting was quickly becoming. After looking at various discourses concerning painting in the latter decades of the twentieth-century, the following seem to be the reason for painting to be considered irrelevant during the period: First, critics felt that paintings in this period were out of touch with authenticity. The movements that emerged during this time relied heavily on the concept of appropriation where elements or techniques from other art works could merely be merged without improvisation of novel ways of painting. Second, paintings at this time depicted a restriction of the painters’ imagination. Most artists depicted events and scenes of day to day life as detected by popular culture and this seem to have restricted the magic of images produced by a wild imagination. Third, most artists at this time greatly adhered to the notion of being mainstream and will introduce any dramatic movement more for the sake of being recognized rather than truly reflecting their cultural perspectives. Fourth, most painters seem to rely on academic and taught art to mix up concepts that will be brought to the masses rather than have an inherent ability to produce art in their own way. Works Cited: Alberro, Alexander and Stimson, Blake. Conceptual art: A critical anthology. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1999. Print. Bell, Julian. What is Painting? Representation and Modern Art. London: Thames and Hudson, 1999. Print. Cole, Bruce. Art of the western world: From ancient Greece to post modernism. UK: Simon & Schuster, 1991. Print. Edwards, Steve and Wood, Paul. Art of the avant-gardes. London: Yale University Press, 2004. Print. Elkins, James. “From original to copy and back again.” The British Journal of Aesthetics, 33.2 (1993): 113-120. Gaiger, Jason. Frameworks for modern art. London: Yale University Press. Print. Gaiger, Jason and Wood, Paul. Art of the twentieth century: A reader. London: Yale University Press, 2003. Print. Galenson, David. “Analyzing artistic innovation: The greatest breakthrough of the twentieth century.” Historical Methods 41.3 (2008): 111-120. Llewelyn, John. The Hypocritical imagination: Between Kant and Levinas. London & New York: Routledge, 2000. Print. Perry, Gillian & Wood, Paul. Themes in contemporary art, vol. 4. Cambridge: Yale University in Association with the Open University Pooke, Grant and Newall, Diana. Art history: The basics. UK: Routledge, 2008. Print. Read More

Artists started to find a new freedom to choose and follow their own direction, as well as incorporate new discoveries in their paintings (Gaiger 15)5. Artists with similar perspectives stuck together and formed loosely knit groups that are referred by the movements some of which are already mentioned above. The search for novel subject matter and techniques in the twentieth century caused the artists to take different directions in the paintings (Gaiger 23). However it was not until in the period of 1960s and 1970s, that there was a huge reaction against painting, with most movements being regarded as irrelevant to art (Alberro and Stimson 15).

6 Reactions to painting art in the latter decades of the 20th century New movements of art began to gain mainstream prominence in the later decades of the 20th century. According to Gaiger and Wood (33)7, the thing that makes a description of an art movement to be dubious is that it never fits the deepest artists in the movement. With the proliferation of various styles of painting that hit in the latter decades of the twentieth century, it was difficult to tell whether the artists were honestly into creating new art forms or they were just competing for the sake of it.

Artists came up with new ways of depicting art including Postminimalism, Earth art, installation art, video art, body art, mail art, fluxus, and conceptual art among others (Gaiger and Wood 9). Pop art also established new conventions of art making by making acceptable the radical inclusions of unlikely matter as part of the works of art (Gaiger and Wood 21). Several painting works were declared as ‘death of painting’ by art critics, for example, Douglas Crimp who criticized the works of artists like Ad Reinhardt for reducing the creativity in painting (Gaiger 35).

Douglas Crimp actually wrote a provocative essay in 1981 with the title “the end of painting” when Land art, Conceptual art, and Performance art as well as other newer forms of art took centre stage at the expense of traditional arts. Even as critics began speaking of the death of painting, new media art, characterized by larger installations and performances, became widespread, and a category in itself in the later 1970s and early 1980s (Gaiger and Wood 41). A growing number of artists began experimenting with technological approaches such as video art.

Figurative painting and neo-expressionism became the new modern for art expression (Gaiger and Wood 43). However, a number of art critics and architects began questioning this idea of the modern and created works that will be referred to as the Postmodern towards the end of the 20th century (Alberro and Stimson 11). Although debated on whether it is the most extraordinary innovation of the 20th century art, Pop art that became famous in the latter decades of the 20th century was viewed as mundane by critics as it depicted the everyday happenings of life and hence limited the painter’s imagination.

Pop art arose from a rebellion against Abstract Expressionists; an accepted form of art but of which Pop art painters deemed to be over-intense and pretentious (Alberro and Stimson 22). Supporters of Pop art viewed it as a means to bring art to the materialized realities of day-to-day life in which people got most of their visual pleasure from magazines, television, or comics (Gaiger 28). In England, Pop Art emerged in the middle 1950s although it realized its maximum potential in America’s New York City in the 1960s where it shared the attention with Minimalism.

The media and advertising were favourite targets for Pop Art’s often witty descriptions of the consumer society (Alberro and Stimson 23). The English critic Lawrence Alloway described Pop Art as paintings that defy the Abstract Expressionism psychology, celebrate the post-war consumerism, and worship the god of materialism (Alberro and Stimson 27). Renowned painters of the Pop Art movement include Andy Warhol, who recreated quasi-photographic paintings of people or everyday scenes or objects (Gaiger 25; Gallenson 111).

Read More