The Eiffel Tower As Great Exampke Of Cubism

Developed in the early part of the twentieth century, Cubism introduced a reconstruction of space and the ideas of them (what do you mean here by “them”? can you be more specific) being comprised of geometric and mathematical forms. As a result it was easy for people to reject social changes as there was a new reality being introduced to the world (Is it really as a result? Does not follow. There is no real link between this statement and the one before it). It could be said that rather than introducing qualities of interiority, Cubism examined the notion of space as multi-dimensional and multi-durational (Good!!!!). The qualities of interiority were challenged by Cubism, as people’s sensory experiences also changed visually.

Breaking with the traditional pictorial technique of one-point perspective, the Cubist movement offered a new reality of space; one that was founded by geometric and mathematical figures ( your language here is not clear and suggests the opposite of what I think you are trying to say. For clarity delete this or re-word – traditional perspective was founded on geometry and mathematics. Cubism was based on human experience). As it was the principle of drawing, spatial perceptions were demonstrated through geometric figures, leading to an abstraction of what viewers have been previously taught to see (Good why is this an abstraction/not reral). Perhaps (“Perhaps” is vague and unequivocal. Can you write that “Apollinaire argues that it was…) it was due to the artist’s intention ‘…to find a pleasure other than the one which the spectacle of natural things could just as well provide’ that literal representation was no longer of importance. (This is abrupt. The Eifel tower does not break down traditional ideas of perspective, but simply offers a new vantage point of height) In the new age of the machine, the Eiffel Tower became a sort of monument for the people, giving them a different view of the world, as everything previously had been one-dimensional and at one level. The new age of the machine also meant that there was a significant interest in alternate ways of seeing, which is reflected by Robert Delaunay’s, ‘Windows’ (1912)’ in Figure 1. Inspired by the Eiffel Tower’s light refractions, the painting captures not an ‘actual subject’, but rather, the atmospheric changes in light over time. The notion that space is comprised of multiple moments and views in time emphasises the interactive and ongoing quality of time that can reveal beyond what the eyes already see.

In turn, the dissection of space that the Cubists introduced revealed surfaces and facets that combined to create either a fragmented image, or a composition that became more recognisable to the viewer. (Can you include more about this faceting of space. What do these factes do to space or perspective?) Through this method of arranging space, Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque were able to analyse shape and form further, leaving the final image open to interpretation for the viewer. It is for the viewer, that they left the responsibility of ‘…[preoccupying] themselves with possible new measures of space’. As a result, it could be said that Delaunay’s painting reflects the analytic phase of Cubism, that sees an overlay in views and angles of the Eiffel Tower, in order to capture all sides. Variations in transparency, as well as the intersecting lines suggest that the space is indefinite and encourages alternate readings of the painting. Alternatively, the ambiguity left by the Cubists also results in a lack of understanding towards the endpoint and what the viewer is appreciating. As expressed by critic Pierre Reverdy in 1917, ‘this confusion has now lasted long enough…not only among the public, but among the artists themselves’ , emphasising that the movement was never a coherent one. However, it encouraged the freedom to depict reality however they wanted.

Furthermore, Cubism’s multi-dimensional depiction of space altered the way in which people experienced them (Them? What? Be specific). Guillaume Apollinaire stated that these new ‘painters [offered] us works which are more cerebral than sensual’ , with the implication that Cubist art requires the viewer to make sense of what they’re seeing. In comparison to traditional art, it allows the viewer to feel a certain way. As shown by the complex forms of the Eiffel Tower it challenges the initial thought that art merely evokes emotions. However, once that notion is dismissed, the viewer is better able to experience a different kind of sensory experience that influences thought and reason, over aesthetics.

In a similar way, an interior is a condition that triggers a response from the viewer, rather than one that is being affected by external factors. It could be said that Cubism sought to challenge intangible responses of the viewer so that they were seeing something differently. Rather than just feeling it, ‘…the [Cubist] image both acts as a source of intense visual stimulation, and—like any developing language—stretches the mind in response to its novel and fructifying idioms’ . With reference to Braque’s ‘Mandora’ (1910) in Figure 2, the muddy brown aesthetic encourages the viewer to see things as the eyes see it, but not as the mind processes it. What is initially seen as a musical instrument can also be interpreted as a fragmented series of reverberations created by the mandora and is felt by the viewer. Cubism therefore introduced an embodied experience through viewing art. Rather than creating a physical interior, the movement encouraged sensory experiences which are significant in creating interiority, as intimacy is the physiological factor that can allow people to feel.

Following a closer consideration, the Cubism was less to do with the introduction of new interior designs. Rather, it brought into place the idea of flattening space. However, in turn it created many viewpoints. The next phase of ‘synthetic’ Cubism in 1912 was distinguished by a breaking down of individual elements and reconstructing forms and tactile surfaces through collage. Although it made the subjects and the reading of images clearer, it posed the question of what kind of meaning the artists intended to express. Picasso’s ‘Three Musicians’ (1921) (see note below) in Figure 3 expresses the idea that individual elements come appear to form a sort of collage, whilst also becoming an image. While it introduces the making of new objects from various materials, the collage seems to go against the rearranging of spatial qualities. Rather, it presents itself as a reorganisation of common objects. The differences between the analytic and synthetic phases of cubism may result in confusion as to whether the ultimate goal was to provide realism or abstraction.

This is not a collage but a painting. It is also painted later than the dates that Cubism is generally considered to have existed.

For clarity, consider referencing a painting, or preferably a collage, from 1912-1914. As collage, the materials themselves (paper, wood, cardboard, etc.) suggest readings outside of the artwork, thereby introducing other, worldly associations.

Conclusion

While the movement was fundamental in shaping interiors, Cubism offered new ways of depicting the world and gathering different realities from it. It is clear that the qualities of interiority presented at the time were constantly shifting and therefore it was impossible for people to reach the same conclusion. However there is credibility in the most well known artworks, despite the fact that Cubism was difficult for everyone to comprehend. A barrier was created within the art, as there was a lack of acceptance towards new artists, but ultimately the changes that have shaped the future are more easily understood. (A conclusion should not introduce new material, but should only cover /recap those ideas pertinent to answering the essay question)Perhaps the Cubists were merely working with the conventions given to them, which is what can be expected in today’s society and the future. Ultimately, there will always be a better understanding of how the world functions and evolves, if people are only willing to accept change.