Forskjell mellom versjoner av «Rosenberg, H. "The fall of Paris" 1»
| Linje 9: | Linje 9: | ||
This intellectual mileu gave birth to "international culture" : the influences received from that international crowd were visible not only in cafes, clothes, street life, but came out also, and especially in Visual art. This art was not Parisian, not European but International. The definition for this sort of Development in a city's look and culture is what Rosenberg defines as "the Modern"<ref name=":0" />. Consequently this concept of Modern started inherently to be associated with Paris, and therefore to create a style which became largely criticised by the conservative and patriotic crowd .<ref>Rosenberg, ''Tradition of the New'', 211</ref> | This intellectual mileu gave birth to "international culture" : the influences received from that international crowd were visible not only in cafes, clothes, street life, but came out also, and especially in Visual art. This art was not Parisian, not European but International. The definition for this sort of Development in a city's look and culture is what Rosenberg defines as "the Modern"<ref name=":0" />. Consequently this concept of Modern started inherently to be associated with Paris, and therefore to create a style which became largely criticised by the conservative and patriotic crowd .<ref>Rosenberg, ''Tradition of the New'', 211</ref> | ||
| − | The modern artist tried very hard to push the limit to what was acceptable, in order to come out from the deadness of the real world<ref>Rosenberg, ''Tradition and New'', 212</ref>. What this meant was that the modern artists community in Paris gathered together as an international milieu | + | The modern artist tried very hard to push the limit to what was acceptable, in order to come out from the deadness of the real world and search for freedom<ref>Rosenberg, ''Tradition and New'', 212</ref>. What this meant was that the modern artists community in Paris gathered together as an individualistic international milieu, getting in a way estranged from the present time they were living in. This estrangement, second to Rosenberg, is what made of Modernism a sentiment more than an historical movement. A sentiment for eternity, outside of time boundaries<ref>Rosenberg, ''Tradition of the New'', 213</ref> |
| − | the | + | As This genreration managed to established the perspective of the immediate and not of time. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
==== '''The Intellectual Form of Defeat''' ==== | ==== '''The Intellectual Form of Defeat''' ==== | ||
= litteraturliste = | = litteraturliste = | ||
| − | Harrison & Wood | + | Harrison & Wood. "The Fall of Paris" Modernism as Critique. ''Art in Theory 1900-2000''. Malden: Blackwell,2003 |
Rosenberg, Harold. ''Tradition of the New,'' London and New York, 1962, pp.209-20 | Rosenberg, Harold. ''Tradition of the New,'' London and New York, 1962, pp.209-20 | ||
Revisjonen fra 27. sep. 2017 kl. 18:56
Innhold
Harold Rosenberg: The Fall of Paris 1940
In this article Harold Rosenberg highlights Paris' great position in the international Modernism during the first decades of the twentieth Century. However he also shows us how the city's greatness will come to an end, due to the new future modernist city: New York.
The Style of Today
During the course of the twenthieth Century, some "exuberant" artistic mouvements too place in Europe and in particular in Paris, described as the Holy Place for artists [1].
Paris was described by Rosenberg as a "passive" city which could be possessed and owned by artists. This passivity was seen by Rosenberg as the success of the city, and which led Paris to become an art Capital. This was a good pretext for international artists, students and refugees to settle in, and therefore it became a pioneer for culture in the same way that America was for economy[2].
This intellectual mileu gave birth to "international culture" : the influences received from that international crowd were visible not only in cafes, clothes, street life, but came out also, and especially in Visual art. This art was not Parisian, not European but International. The definition for this sort of Development in a city's look and culture is what Rosenberg defines as "the Modern"[2]. Consequently this concept of Modern started inherently to be associated with Paris, and therefore to create a style which became largely criticised by the conservative and patriotic crowd .[3]
The modern artist tried very hard to push the limit to what was acceptable, in order to come out from the deadness of the real world and search for freedom[4]. What this meant was that the modern artists community in Paris gathered together as an individualistic international milieu, getting in a way estranged from the present time they were living in. This estrangement, second to Rosenberg, is what made of Modernism a sentiment more than an historical movement. A sentiment for eternity, outside of time boundaries[5]
As This genreration managed to established the perspective of the immediate and not of time.
The Intellectual Form of Defeat
litteraturliste
Harrison & Wood. "The Fall of Paris" Modernism as Critique. Art in Theory 1900-2000. Malden: Blackwell,2003
Rosenberg, Harold. Tradition of the New, London and New York, 1962, pp.209-20
