You are on page 1of 1

Each of these readings takes a different methodological approach to the art, issue, or artists being analyzed.

Compare and constract HOW and WHY they interpret the art the way they do. What is their goal, purpose, etc.? How do they link art and socio-political history? Read all of the essays assigned to your group, and meet outside of class to discuss and prepare a short presentation/facilitation (15 minutes)

ill be talking about progression, from ks introduction to anarchism/occult, to its impact on his life, and finally to the ideas it synthesized in him. I. russian. students protest against institution; kandinsky there. - 1st exposure to radicalism, predicted future ideological viewpoint/change in his artistic representation - realized wanted to change societal direction loathed institution structured rules - do this, paint this, be this. changed how he did his art: wall murals/unification of fine and decorative art thought anarchy to have a structure that was not intentional, that developed without any attempt to develop defended anarchism; communal spirit; landauer = anarchist theorist; quote tells a lot about kandinskys mindset - spoke to him bc he believed artists to be able to lead people - wanted his art to be communal. spiritual. bodily experience and conceptual combined - interested in communal power of theatre II. intro to occult (ie. medieval, mystical) through artistes brought to summer home. explored thematic elements such as apocalypse (playing w/ idea of societal apocalypse) led to different artistic methods/styles. folk/medieval became present. making modern ornament from past references. eventually (perhaps) led to combination of painting + architecture, 2 things valued highly by kandinsky. (bodily + conceptual: spiritual) - (unsure if intentional/kandinskys doing) societal medieval spirituality didnt exist, implemented in bauhaus at first by doing a throwback to medieval guilds through the hierarchy of apprentice/journeyman/master occult/medieval = derogatory terms used by critics (largely abstract art/abstraction) III. 2 publications, blaue reiter (we talked about) in bauhaus almanac -suggested alt. to contemp. life, prob. brought on by visit to remote russia -inspired by law of peasants which was intuitive rather than centralized (aka it was natural not artificial): ties into anarchy bc he thought an. to have natural structure. prob reinforced dislike of structure in life. - contemp.art = spiritual force, force for change - thought artists were able to bring about change, attempted this by defying convention in art: combining mediums (painting/architecture), using new motifs (apocalypse 4 Kandinsky), reinstating fold/medieval/primitive ornaments in contemp. art conclusion: believed artist to have great power/responsibility in the realm of social change, important to bridge gap of bodily/conceptual to create spiritual art. a trancendental experience. believed abstraction to be universal/trancendental art form. all this (potentially) came about through exposure to radical ideals and occult.