search  current discussion  categories  philosophy 

question about form for mel

updated thu 12 apr 01


Brian Molanphy on wed 11 apr 01

vince wrote:

'But if instead you
> say that modern art is Modernism, beginning with the Post Impressionists,
> Expressionists and Fauvists, maturing with the Cubists, Futurists, and
> Constructivists, then you would have to say that they definitely began to
> turn away from the history of art, and that the Abstract Expressionists,
> Color Field painters, Pop artists, Op artists, and Minimalists all
> followed
> through and really turned their backs on art tradition. '
i would not say generally that these movements turned their backs on
the history of art. the most famous modern artist, picasso, produced work
fully steeped in art history. other celebrated artists, such as abstract
expressionist willem de kooning and color field painters ad reinhardt,
barnett newman, and richard diebenkorn, habitually referenced precedent.

perhaps my disagreement with vince is semantic. 'art tradition' can
probably be understood in myriad ways. when i consider the relationship
between, for example, encaustic painting in ptolemy egypt (early christian
era, i think), velasquez (17th c.), manet (19th c.), and giacometti (20th
c.), i look at the way the material is used, physically. to my eye, the
thread continues uninterrupted.