Project 1: Modernist art: the critic speaks

Part One: Introduction to Visual Studies

Visual studies covers a wider array of cultural objects than traditional Art History as it as a mixture of several of interdisciplinary fields (including: Art History, Anthropology, Film Studies, Philosophy, Literary Criticism and Sociology) Due to its broader scope it focuses on both ‘High’ and ‘Low’ (Popular) Art/Culture.

Unlike traditional Art Theory, Visual Studies focuses on subjects rather than objects. That is so far to say that it looks at the interconnecting cultural meanings and power relationships within art.

Visual studies have its origins in the wide encompassing and interdisciplinary academic movement of Cultural Studies. This developed during the 1950s and 1960s in the United Kingdom, at both ‘red brick’ universities and Polytechnics. Courses taught centered on a small group of texts: The Uses of Literacy, Richard Hoggart; Cultural studies: two Paradigms, Stuart Hall; Culture and Society, Raymond Williams.

From the perspective of Cultural Studies, we all engage in culture; in the construction of symbols, practices of representation and the interconnections throughout society. Cultural Studies was influenced by Marxist cultural analysis and its concern with ideology, power and subjectivity. There was an open interest in the ‘ordinary’ and communities that are marginalized because of race, class, gender and sexual difference.

I believe this course will focus on these cultural epochs: Modernism, Structuralism, Post-structuralism and postmodernism.

Project 1: Modernist art: the critic speaks

This is a brief outline of what I have studied over the past week and my conclusions of Clement Greenberg’s Modernist Painting (1960). Hopefully I have time to explain this further, in a later post. Will read: Avant-Garde and Kitsch (1939: Greenberg).

Clement Greenberg (1909-1994) was an American art critic who is associated with Modern art. A seminal essay of his is, Modernist Painting (1960).

• What is Greenberg talking about in general?

The aesthetics of modern art.

• What are his main arguments?

There is a logical development to Modern Art; there was a self-justification of art following the enlightenment (legitimacy through autonomy); the uniqueness of an artform depends on the specificity of its medium (“Purity”); flatness is the defining feature of painting (Modernism reasserts the two-dimensionality of the picture surface); the historical continuity of pictorial art.

• Who does he mention?

The Philosopher Kant.

• Does he quote others?

Greenberg does not quote explicitly but uses Kant to inform the argument of his essay. Kant explored the philosophy of art (aesthetics) and in his Third Critique, reconciles the subjectivity of the response with the presumed universality of aesthetic judgement.

In the Analytical of the Beautiful, Kant theorised that although judgements of taste are singular they do a have (a priori) universal validity and these refer necessarily (but synthetically) to aesthetic satisfaction, or ‘Transcendental Deduction’.

The ‘Sublime’, discussed in his Analytical of the Sublime, is a different satisfaction which arises from the contemplation of the greatness of human reason and recognition of moral worth.

Though Greenberg is influenced by Kant, it fair to argue from a different perspective as Kant fails to deal with aesthetic disputes; critics perceive the same art works differently.

• Does he make reference to other’s work?

He references other artists work to support his argument.

“Old Masters”: Uccello; Piero; El Greco; Georges de la Tour; Vermeer; Giotto; Leonardo; Raphael; Titian; Rubens; Rembrandt; Watteau

David; Ingres; Corot

Modernism: Impressionism (Manet); Cubism: (Cézanne); Mondrian; Kandinsky

• Personal opinion

Greenberg is persuasive in his argument: the justification of Modernist Art. I understood there was a logical development to Modern Art and this was in part due to the historical continuity of pictorial art. I was unaware that a self-justification of art followed the enlightenment. Though I understand the view point that the uniqueness of art depends on the specificity of its medium, as this is argued by Rudolf Arnheim in Film as Art (this is in relation to Silent Cinema – Film Studies). Hopefully I have recalled the last comment correctly.

Yes I understand what Greenberg is saying but, in a post-modern culture, I do not see the need for “Purity” in art as a justification for its purpose.

Bibliography
D’Alleva, Anne. (2005) Methods & Theories of Art History. London: Laurence King Publishing.

Greenberg, C., 1982. Modernist Painting. [online] Available at: [Accessed 12September 2010]

Harrison-Barbet, A., 1990. Mastering Philosophy. London: Macmillan.

Quigley, T. R., 1996. Summary: Clement Greenberg, "Modernist Painting". [online] Available at: < http://homepage.newschool.edu/~quigleyt/vcs/mp_sum.html> [Accessed 13 September 2010]