In other words, the rationality and logic of machine technology could be compared to the logic of classical French tradition in the arts and a post-war congruency was fused for the understanding of Cubism. The logic and rational construction of Cubism was constructed as both “classical” and modern. The post-war discourse was largely the work of Rosenberg’s Bulletin de l’Effort Moderne, a significant site for the creation of the post-war discourse re-evaluating Cubism. Now that the movement had been valorized as “historical” and had become part of the fabric of French art, it could be re-defined as that which was quintessentially modern, related to the new machine.
The pre-war discourse on Cubism had been written by artists, such as Gleizes and Metzinger, and by art critics, like Guillaume Apollinaire, and this pre-war body of work was developed from the perspective of those “present at the creation.” The seeds of the linking of Cubism to tradition in France can be traced back to the pre-war work of Gleizes and Metzinger, who sough to place Cubism in a classical French lineage.
0 kommentar(er)
