The Modern Era: Why History Matters

“To what extent was modernity a process of emulation and borrowing?”           

           “Modern times find themselves with an immense system of institutions, established facts, accredited dogmas, customs, and rules, which have come to [Europe] from times not modern…the awakening of the senses is the awakening of the modern spirit.”[1] By uttering these words, the English poet Matthew Arnold, attempted to illustrate the tumultuous and transitory nature of 19th Century European society. Indeed, between the years 1815-1914, Europe underwent profound, albeit uneven, social, political, and economic transformations. These changes, coupled with altering technologies, rising industrialization, and mass urbanization, prompted many Europeans to not only question their own respective societies, but also to confront the promises and perils of modernization. Surely, the 19th Century was a period fraught with shifting notions of “the city,” and the unforeseen impacts and changes of transforming urban and rural landscapes were met with either disdain or curiosity. While individuals such as William Blake feared the “the dark Satanic Mills,” others such as Johann Fichte believed that urbanization and modernization could both create a civilized German Vaterland. Nevertheless, one must still inquire--what is modernity? Equally important, how and when was the process of modernization undertaken, and how was this trend perceived during this period? Although historians do not all agree on the definitions of modernism, nor do all historians agree when these movements actually came to fruition, Hugo Von Hofmannsthal correctly posits that the spirit or modernism, “can mean analysis, reflection, a mirrored image; or it can mean escape, fantasy, a dream image.”[2] Moreover, emulation, by definition, is an effort or desire to equal or to surpass others, while borrowing is a process by which something is adopted, refined, and/or absorbed.[3] Also, while some historians may claim that modernism was simply a radical philosophical and artistic break with the past, others such as James McFarlane have highlighted the importance of additional cultural factors. Firstly, modernism was not simply a full-scale repudiation of the historical past, and many avant-garde movements inherent within modernism i.e. Impressionism, Post-Impressionism, Cubism, and Futurism, not only reacted to the changing times, but these movements also impacted each other. Secondly, it would be overly simplistic to downplay the influences on modernism exhibited by the forces of Romanticism, World Expositions, Symbolism, Naturalism, and Realism. Thus, although historians are correct that the 19th Century was a period of both emulation and borrowing, the process by which Realism, Romanticism, and Symbolism, served as descriptors toward the creation of modernity was based primarily in the process of emulation. Conversely, Impressionism, Naturalism, Cubism, and Futurism, all served to aid modernism by practices largely steeped in borrowing. The extent to which these differing movements actually affected each other and resultant modernity, varied over time and place.                                                                                                               

           Although Realism, Romanticism, and Symbolism, were participatory trends involving disparate followers and practices over varying times and places, each of these developments endeavored to “equal or to surpass other movements.” Firstly, mid-19th Century French Realism was a movement that advocated accurate, detailed, and unblemished accounts of the nature of contemporary urban and rural life. Moreover, this movement rejected the artificiality of both earlier Classicism and contemporary Romanticism, and stressed that true art should not obfuscate the harshness of life and the importance of reality. Since Europe was becoming increasingly interconnected through trade, the press, and technological development, it was only a matter of time for anti-Romantics in Germany, to inspire French Realists, in Paris. For example, the artist Gustave Courbet rejected the over-idealization of reality inherent within Romanticism, and he, therefore, endeavored to paint his Stonebreakers[4] masterpiece in 1850; a painting that depicts two ordinary men chiseling stone. Although this is true, it would be a mistake to ignore the impact of the earlier Barbizon school, which taught that artists should focus their subject matter on ordinary landscape scenes, and to not simply paint heroic people and/or monuments. Although, the Realists did in fact borrow some tenets from the Barbizon school, they became a recognizable and widespread movement only through their opposition towards Romantic adulation. Lastly, Realism did not just impact the arts, and authors such as Charles Dickens and Leo Tolstoy each attempted to show the callous realities of urban life, in a developing Europe.                     

           While Realists believed that art should depict the stark realities of life in a changing Europe, advocates of Romanticism largely argued that unbounded love, emotions over reason, introspection, and senses over intellect, should be emphasized within literature, painting, music, and architecture. From the late 18th Century to the mid-19th Century, therefore, Romantics attempted to examine “inner” human personalities via art and literature, and many believed that exceptional individuals should be highlighted in these works. Although historians may differ regarding what actually constitutes Romanticism, it is clear that many Romantics such as Johann Von Goethe rejected not only 18th Century Enlightenment rationalism, but also rejected the formalism, traditionalism, orderliness, and harmony, of Classical art—especially in Britain. Although this is true, Romanticism was not a static movement, and from 1805-1830, and beyond, Romanticism acquired a nationalist flavor. For example, Friedrich Schlegel and Heinrich Von Kleist, both, in varying ways, advocated the creation of a strong German culture and Volk. Equally important, Joseph Von Gorres desired to create a new German folk literature titled Die teutschen Volks bucher, while Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm created a series of German-inspired fairy-tales. Clearly, Joseph Gorres and Jacob Grimm both sought to develop a readily discernable German identity by evoking a mythical past.[5] In a similar manner, in Britain, Disraeli believed in the unifying principles of medieval times, and he also attempted to incite a Gothic revivalism within the land. By attempting this feat, therefore, Disraeli hoped to strengthen Britain’s social identity and to placate internal-social and political dissent.[6] Not surprisingly, these Romantic ideals impacted other thinkers and nationalists, such as Wilhelm Wackenroder, who stated that, “true art is in the pointed vaults and ornate edifices of medieval Germany instead of being placed under Mediterranean skies.”[7] Clearly, Wackenroder did not desire to adopt concepts from Mediterranean architecture, but he instead hoped that German architecture would one day transcend the Italian model. Lastly, Romanticism impacted not only nationalist thinkers but also individual authors. For example, both William Blake and Mary Wollstonecraft strived to “express the inexpressible” by writing stories of supernatural and imaginative accounts. Surely, shifting technologies and industrialization gave the literary images, concepts, and tools needed for the creation of Mary Wollstonecraft’s Frankenstein. It is clear from the aforementioned that many advocates of Romanticism, regardless of their national background, all desired to equal or to surpass other prior and contemporary movements e.g. Classicism and Realism. Put simply, whether it was Marry Wollstonecraft who wrote a new and imaginative account on Frankenstein, or whether it was Jacob Grimm who wrote a new series of fairy tales, it is clear that many Romantics did not just borrow from earlier models, but instead created and surpassed old concepts with new ones.           

           Although Romanticism in art was notable for its use of contrasting colors, emotional scenes, and personal insights, the loosely organized movement of Symbolism, from the 1880’s to the 1890’s, was a reaction against Realism, Classicism, and even Romanticism. Although it is true that the Symbolist movement in art borrowed certain precepts from the literary development of Baudelaire’s Les Fleurs du mal, it is irrefutable that Symbolists largely abandoned Romantic notions of art i.e. irrational and spontaneous themes, and instead stressed the need to create evocative art that “captured absolute truths” through symbols and objects. For example, in 1886, Jean Moreas published his Symbolist Manifesto in an attempt to codify the movement’s principles i.e. art’s decorative and symbolic functions and a resistance towards over-romanticizing. For example, Gustave Moreau painted Jupiter and Semele in 1896 in order to create a decadent, symbolically rich, and brightly colored canvas. Surely, Symbolism was a movement that took form by borrowing certain ideological tenets from prior literary events, but advocates of Symbolism also attempted to surpass both Realism and Impressionism in style, functionality, and form.[8]  

           Although the artist Edouard Manet was notable because he was the founding father of the highly influential French school of Impressionism [1867-1886], he is even more noteworthy because he influenced and impacted other artists such as Camille Pissarro, and Claude Monet. Surely, Manet’s rejection of historical and mythological subject matter, and his distaste for academic-styled painting, can be interpreted as an attempt to “surpass” other schools of art such as Classicism, and Realism. However, Manet’s impact upon artists such as Pissarro and Monet witnessed a period of almost two decades of technique adaptations and skill-set borrowing. Firstly, Manet’s work in the 1860’s directly impacted his followers by stressing the need to downgrade the importance of the artist’s subject matter, by increasing the significance of tone, color, and texture. By doing this, Manet attempted to accurately record the transient effects of light and color, in nature. In fact, throughout the 1860’s, Manet, Monet, Pissarro, and Renoir, all abandoned traditional forms of capturing light and set out to paint river scenes, at different times of the day. Equally important, in 1863, Manet borrowed Titian’s subject theme from the Venus of Urbino from 1538, in order to create his own masterpiece, Olympia. In short, although Manet borrowed from Titian, Manet still created an entirely new artistic creation, and in the process, he was able to recreate differing ways of representing the nude female form. Equally important, Manet’s symbolic manifestations within the painting of Olympia shocked audiences. For example, Manet replaced Titian’s dog with a black cat, which was considered by many viewers as a symbol of open decadence and prostitution.[9] Although Manet borrowed his subject matter from earlier Renaissance paintings, Pissarro painted his View of Rouen, in 1898, and adopted contemporary Naturalist’s subject matter by depicting factories in the countryside. Surely, the school of Impressionism was fraught with both the practices of borrowing and of emulation.           

           Undoubtedly, Impressionism was a radical departure from traditionalist notions of academic Realism, and Post-Impressionism would not have come to fruition without the earlier works of Manet, Pissarro, and Monet. Although this is true, Post-Impressionists and Expressionists such as Vincent Van Gogh began to use vivid colors, and increasingly applied thicker amounts of paint. In short, Van Gogh was more inclined to use fiery colors and to distort the human form for an expressive effect, in contrast to his predecessors, a half century earlier. Equally important, following the Meiji Restoration of 1868, the Empire of Japan began to export artistic principles to the capital cities of the West. As such, Van Gogh borrowed numerous Japanese artistic motifs, models, and forms. For example, in his 1887 work Le Pere Tanguy, Van Gogh attempted to borrow and, in some cases, managed to recreate Japanese styled Hiroshige prints. This fact is significant, because while Western art was considered by Van Gogh to be overly focused on exterior appearances, Japanese art was seen as superior in its emphasis of the inner-spirit. Moreover, in 1888, another important artists by the name of Henri Riviere, completed a series of 36 Views of the Eiffel Tower, which combined Japanese style prints with modern architectural views of France’s modern and iconic structure; the Eiffel Tower.[10] From the aforementioned, it is clear that Post-Impressionists such as Van Gogh not only borrowed techniques from earlier Impressionists and contemporary Japanese print-makers, but Post-Impressionists also created their own significant, and unique, works of art.

           While Impressionism under Manet, can be seen as a unique development in artistic history, Naturalism directly borrowed earlier concepts and values from scientific thinkers and discoveries e.g. Darwinism. Thus, while Impressionists attempted to surpass and to overcome competing schools such as the school of Realism, Naturalists, usually did not develop their own singularly unique concepts. Firstly, late-19th Century Naturalism stressed scientific determinism and emphasized man’s relationship to his/her changing environment. Since the middle to late 19th Century was fraught with ideas of evolution, environmental determinism, and new discoveries in science, it was only natural for certain art schools to adopt these respective principles. For example, even Post-Impressionists such as Van Gogh adopted and modified Naturalist principles, which emphasized man’s malleable and imperfect physiological nature. In fact, in 1885, Van Gogh painted The Potato Eaters, which depicts a family of sunburned and “rugged” peasants gathered around a simple table for dinner.         In short, Van Gogh desired to show peasant life in a non-Romantic manner. Equally important, in the world of literature, Emile Zola, in 1880, created her “experimental” novel, which placed the novelist no longer as an observer but instead situated the novelist as a “scientific experimenter.” In a sense, readers no longer had to assume a pre-determined role, but readers were instead able to take on new roles and to experience new ideas. Surely, Van Gogh was influenced, to some extent, by Naturalist ideology, but Naturalist values exhibited by Emile Zola were borrowed from earlier ideas of scientific determinism.           

           Although shifting technologies, Darwinian theories regarding survival of the fittest, and environmental determinism, all impacted and influenced Naturalist thought, in varying ways, science and technology also influenced nation-states and World-Fair Committees. Since the 19th Century was a period of rampant state building, shifting statecraft, and Imperial competition, governmental elites and businessmen strived to not only compete with their rivals, but also to inspire their own citizens and subjects. According to one observer, “a world’s fair was a fresh and fascinating idea; for here, after the appearance of so many marvelous mechanical devices, was the device of bringing them all together…[a scene] of unparalleled progress in increasing production, and in extending communication.”[11] In short, ruling elites and government officials were fully aware of the political, social, and economic, benefits of hosting World Fairs. Even though the Society for The Encouragement of Arts, Manufacturers, and Commerce, was established earlier in the 18th Century, in Britain, World Fairs grew increasingly elaborate and more complicated, in makeup in order to attract larger crowds. For example, one participant noticed that, “within the space of a few hundred meters one might engage in a debate between rationalists and historicists, view a collection of Impressionist paintings, ride a Ferris wheel, drink coffee in a Turkish bar, and examine a life-size elephant constructed entirely out of peanuts.”[12] Put simply, World Fairs such as the Chicago Columbian Exposition of 1893 were established in order to display the modern qualities of a given society and organized in order to, “be the greatest shows on Earth.”[13]    In order to garner these benefits, however, World Fair committees needed to compete with, and to borrow from, other national and international events. Although this is true, 19th Century British displays were largely geared towards celebrating Imperialism. For example, throughout the 19th Century, British society became increasingly interconnected with her outer-Empire. As such, the British government deemed it necessary to bolster popular support for Empire by circulating propaganda, and by hosting displays of Imperial pageantry. From the aforementioned, it is clear that a desire to be perceived as modern pervaded many political and business elites of the 19th Century. From the urban spaces of America to the capital cities of Europe, World Fair committees, therefore, all attempted to borrow and to emulate other events in order to create a semblance of modernity, for both viewers and participants alike.  

           Since technology was instrumental in inspiring organizations to establish large and extravagant World Fairs, then it is certainly true that shifting technologies and rising urbanization were also important by impacting both the artistic schools of Cubism and Futurism. Firstly, in a similar manner to earlier styles, Cubism rejected traditional and Classical perspectives by instead relying upon two-dimensional flat images. Moreover, many early Cubists such as Paul Cezanne (a former-Impressionist) practiced foreshortening techniques by downplaying the importance of the imitation of nature; a key tenet of Realism and other earlier schools. Surely, without the influence and impact of Cezanne, other later artists and architects such as Picasso, Le Corbusier, and Braque would not have borrowed nor would they have developed their own respective Cubist styles. For instance, in an age of shifting values and technologies, Picasso revised the traditional nude female form into geometric and disjointed shapes, by painting his 1907 Les Demoiselles d’Avignon. Instead of painting innocent cherub-like faces, however, Picasso painted geometric, disfigured, and discolored ones. Secondly, Le Corbusier adopted Cubist forms and styles into his own architecturally modern structures, such as the Villa Fallet, in Switzerland. Completed in 1905, this building was radically modern in style and, consequently, many of Le Corbusier’s traditionalist contemporaries frowned upon his modern creation. Conversely, while Cubists often painted still lifes and portraiture, Italian Futurists preferred to paint and to sculpt speeding automobiles, moving machines, and modern structures. Since the French were considered superior in producing cutting edge and “modern art,” many late 19th and early 20th Century Italian artists and thinkers, such as Marinetti, strived to “break down the mysterious doors of the impossible”[14] and believed that “the divorce between the modern and the old must be absolute.”[15] In order to accomplish this task, however, Futurists implemented new and innovative advertising and propaganda schemes in order to spread the movement’s message. Moreover, by placing the spectator in the center of the picture, Futurists attempted to convey that, “all things move, all things run, all things are rapidly changing, [and stressed] that a profile is never motionless before [a viewers] eyes.”[16] For example, Robert Delaunay’s 1911 Eiffel Tower and Giacomo Balla’s 1909 Street Lamp both sought to convey to the onlooker a sense of speed, technological innovation, excitement, and societal change. Certainly, both Cubism and Futurism were influenced by the changing times, but Futurism directly borrowed many “modern” artistic concepts from the earlier school of Cezanne.                                 

           The 19th Century was a time of immense and uneven societal change. With rising urbanization and new scientific/philosophical, developments, many European thinkers, writers, and artists, reacted to the turbulent times. Although historians do not all agree regarding what constitutes modernism, it is clear that many Europeans attempted to reassess traditional notions and values, in favor of new ideas. Clearly, despite definitional differences among historians, Christopher Butler correctly posits that the 19th Century witnessed a new and “modern spirit.” Moreover, although historians are indeed correct that the 19th Century was a period of both emulation and borrowing, the process by which Realism, Romanticism, and Symbolism, served as descriptors toward the creation of modernity was based primarily in the process of emulation. In contrast, the schools of Impressionism, Naturalism, Cubism, and Futurism, all served to aid modernism by practices largely steeped in borrowing.        The extent to which these differing movements actually affected each other and modernity, however, varied across time and place. Perhaps Carl Shorske highlighted the situation best by stating that, “if we locate ourselves in history’s stream, we can begin to look at ourselves and our mental life, whether personal or collective, as conditioned by the historical present as it defines itself out of—or against the past.”[17] Surely, whether an artist was a strict traditionalist or a new-age Futurist is irrelevant. What is significant, however, is that both types of individuals attempted to analyze and to assess their own respective societies, in a time of immense change.     

Bibliography            

Secondary Sources

Bradbury, M. Modernism. A Guide to European Literature, 1890-1930. London: Penguin Books, 1991.                    

Butler, C. Early Modernism. Literature, Music and Painting in Europe, 1900-1916. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.

Cranston, M. The Romantic Movement. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

Frascina F. Modernity and Modernism. French Painting in the Nineteenth Century. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993.

Greenhalgh, P. Ephemeral Vistas. The Expositions Universelles, Great Exhibitions and World Fairs, 1851-1939. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993.

Porter, R. Romanticism in National Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Schorske, C. Thinking with History. Explorations in the Passage to Modernism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.

Stromberg, R. Realism, Naturalism and Symbolism: Modes of Thought and Expression in Europe, 1848-1914. London: Macmillan, 1968.

Tisdall, C. Futurism. London: Thames and Hudson, 1977.

Lecture

General IV Lecture: The Painting of Modern Life-Friday 26th of February, 2010.

Pocket Dictionary (New Lanark: Geddes & Grosset, 1992). 

[1] C. Butler, Early Modernism. Literature, Music and Painting in Europe, 1900-1916 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), 2.  

[2] M. Bradbury, Modernism. A Guide to European Literature, 1890-1930 (London: Penguin Books, 1991), 71.

[3] Pocket Dictionary (New Lanark: Geddes & Grosset, 1992).

[4] General IV Lecture: The Painting of Modern Life-Friday 26th of February, 2010.

[5] Cranston, M. The Romantic Movement (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994), 21.

[6] C. Schorske, Thinking with History. Explorations in the Passage to Modernism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 8.

[7] Cranston, M. The Romantic Movement (Oxford: Blackwell, 1994), 22.

[8] R. Stromberg, Realism, Naturalism and Symbolism: Modes of Thought and Expression in Europe, 1848-1914 (London: Macmillan, 1968), 120.

[9] F. Frascina, Modernity and Modernism. French Painting in the Nineteenth Century (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993), 13.

[10] General IV Lecture: The Painting of Modern Life-Friday 26th of February, 2010.

[11] P. Greenhalgh, Ephemeral Vistas. The Expositions Universelles, Great Exhibitions and World Fairs, 1851-1939 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993), 1. 

[12] Ibid. 42.

[13] Ibid. 42.

[14] C. Tisdall, Futurism (London: Thames and Hudson, 1977), 6.

[15] Ibid. 23.

[16] Ibid. 31.

[17] C. Schorske, Thinking with History. Explorations in the Passage to Modernism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 1.