Between such as, pablo picasso. this style revolutionized

Between the wars, during theprime of De Stijl and Bauhaus asethetics, Cubism came to be considered one ofthe most influential movements of the early twentieth century.  The movement in formal terms was consideredart based soley on its abstract elements, “ the means of constructing a pictureby taking the object as a pictorial element only, quite apart from theanecdotal standpoint”(Leighten, 270). It was given the name Cubism by Frenchart critic Louis Vauxcelles due to seeing geometric shapes he thought of as” cubes” in the work of artists; such as, Pablo Picasso.  This style revolutionized the art world.  No longer did artists use traditionalillusionism in paintings, but instead reduced objects into geometricforms.  While artists; such as, Picassowere credited with creating this new visual style, it was further adopted bymany other painters.

One example beingJuan Gris.  These two artists ended upbeing partners in the development of Cubism in the four or five years leadingup to the first world war.  Despite theirsimilar content, they approached their work differently in their paintingstyles. The focus of this paper will be that difference, and for a betterunderstanding of their styles, this essay will examine Gris’ work Checkerboard and Playing Cards Picasso’sStill Life with a  Bottle of Rum (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2.).     Gris was born José VictorianoCarmelo Carlos González Pérez, in 1887 in Madrid.

He took the pseudonym JuanGris shortly before his relocation to France in 1906, and by fortuitouscircumstances became Picasso’s neighbor in leBateau Lavoir. Gris was at that point a graphic artists, but hisfellow-Spaniard introduced him to the world of writers and painters.  He seriously began to paint in 1910, and by1912 emerged as one of the Cubists, alongside Picasso and Braque (Soby, 12).  By the time Gris created Checkerboardand Playing Cards in 1915, “ he began to simplify his compositions, aimingfor structural clarity and monumentality in the still-lifes he painted withalmost monastic devotion” (Desmond, 15).      Checkerboard and PlayingCards is a typical Cubist still life with objects that include a green andblack checkerboard, and playing cards as the title suggests .  There is also a pipe, a wine glass or two, and a newspaper, Le Journal.  They all appear to be on a round table (Fig. 1).

These are familiar enough things, but are described in an uncommon way. Space is compressed and planes overlap, pressing the objects against thepicture plane.  Mark Rosenthal said thatGris specialized in airless space, and pointed to his “ use of geometry toelevate lowly objects” and his considerable earnestness (46).     Gris had set up the painting to have certain contrasts: from thebrilliant whites and the velvet blacks to the lemon yellows and deep maroons.

Curved shapes are played against each other. To top off the balance of elements is the connection between theindistinct forms and unequivocal detail, such as the markings on the cards (Desmond, 15).       Symmetry transformation is also to be considered whenconsidering this piece of art. Before 1915, Gris had done what the othercubists had done.  He had disassembledstill life objects into disconnected planes and reassembled new and unusualobjects by coming different vantage points.

With this method, though, he added a new way for disassembling not justindividual objects but groups (Kahnweiler 30).      Gris wasn’t enormously gifted, but he was commited toCubism.  He preferred the visualexcitement and the judgement of his eye over Cubist formula and logic.  In 1919, Gris himself said: “ If am sometimesable to push a picture to a successful conclusion, it is due more to myunderstanding of the language of art than to my experience of actual painting”(Kahnweiler 30).  This lack of experiencemeans that even though he has this feelings and thoughts in order, the sameisn’t true of his brush.

Picasso was born on 1881 in Malaga, Spain.  His father who was an art professorintroduced to the arts rather young. Picasso was seen as a prodigy, andfinished his classical training early.  Beforethe age of 20, Picasso had already begun to shift his style away fromtraditional realism (O’Brian, 1976).      When Picasso moved to Paris, he didn’t immediately begin painting in that fragmented, Cubist style.  He hadtwo distinct periods from 1901 to 1906: his BluePeriod and Rose Period. Picasso took his best friend, Casegemus, with him to Paris for companionshipand support, but Casegemus became involved with a Parisian prostitute who shotboth of him and her in a quarrel.  Theprostitute survived, but Casegemus died of his wounds (Kavanaugh, 1995; O’Brian, 1976).

Overcome with grif, Picasso begain to paint the despairingcharacters of what became known as his “ Blue Period”.  Duringthis period, Picasso painted primarily with blues tinged with green, mainlydepicting prostitutes or beggars.  Itwasn’t until 1906 that he had a better state of mind, and introduced warmercolors into his paintings, starting the “ Rose Period” which mainly had clownsand circus performers(Crespelle, 1967). Hisrose period was shorter than his blue period, and soon Picasso beganexperimetnign with other painting styles.

By 1910, he had come upwith something very new: Cubism. It started in 1909, when Picasso was inSpain.  He had brought back with whichGertrude Stein had said, “ were extroardinarily realistic and all the same thebeginnings of Cubism” (7).  It issuggested that he took photos of the landscapes during this time, and thephotos had interested him in trying to recreate the cubic features that wereshown in the landscapes (Tucker, 1982).

By the time Picasso discovered this new art style, it was WorldWar I. Picasso had retired his complex and allusive prewar project, and insteadreduced it to “ a game of line, color , and form devoid of social critique andprogrammatic animus towards the past or any other engagement with theiconography of contemporary life” (Leighton 270). Upon usingCubism, Picasso sabotaged the traditional properties of painting. He introducedmaterials considered “ unworthy” to be considered art and demonstrated a totalindifference to technique (Desmond 15).     While a majority of Picasso’s works werepaintings, Cubism led him to create stunning created prints, etchings, lithographs, and linocuts in the style of Cubism.  Picasso also “ incorporated pochoir, orhand-applied watercolor, to the majority of his Cubist prints furthercontributing a sense of texture and color” (Rewald 2000).  These prints were considered rare and areoften created after Still Life with aBottle of Rum (Fig.

2).         Picasso’s Still Life witha  Bottle of Rum (Fig. 2) was paintedin Céret, a small town in the foothills of the French Pyrenees as he worked alongsideGeorges Braque (Castre 56). It was made during the abstract stage of Cubism, known as Analytic Cubism.

WithAnalytical Cubism, Picasso used a muted color palette which had browns, grays, and blacks and chose to convey unemotional subject matters such as still lifesand landscapes. “ He placed an emphasis on open figuration and abstraction, butdid not yet incorporate elements of texture and collage” (Fry 296).      In this painting, there is a round tabletop with a stemmedglass painted on the left side of the painting. Upon a closer look there is a bottle of rum at the center and a pipetowards the right.  It is considered thefirst of Picasso’s work that includes letters.      To understand these contrasting works wemust consider the attitudes of these colleagues who had opposing views onalmost everything.  For instance, in 1921Gris had said he works with a combination of elements: intellect andimagination. “ I proceed from thegeneral to the particular, by which I mean that I start with an abstraction inorder to arrive at a true fact.

Mine is an art of synthesis, of deduction”(Kahnweiler 193).     Incontrast, Picasso had said that researching for a painting often makes the artistlose himself in his thoughts.  He felt that a picture is not meant to bethought out and settled beforehand.

Forit can change as easily as one changes their thoughts (Green 52).      AgainGris, trying to be logical, said, “ I try to make concrete that which isabstract…Cézanne turns a bottle into a cylinder, but I…make a bottle – aparticular bottle – out of a cylinder” (Kahnweiler 193). Picasso having heardof Gris’ remark about the bottle of cylinder had a romantic response.  He said he could start off with a head, butend up with an egg. He doesn’t know what to expect but is interested in all thepossible ways “ between the things I want to speak about…Reality must be tornapart in every sense of the word” (Gilot & Lake 51–52).

Anotherexample of their opposing thoughts is Gris’ words in 1921.  He said, “ I consider that the architecturalelement in painting is mathematics, the abstract side” (Kahnweiler 193).  Picasso upon hearing these words said thatmath, psychoanalysis, music, and what not, has been related to Cubism to makeit easier to understand.  “ All this havebeen pure literature, not to say nonsense, which brought bad results, blindingpeople with theories” (Chipp 265).        Itseems the start of their disagreement started after Gris had won Picasso’sfriendship.  Gris wanted to show histalent as an artist was capable of true painting, and painted a portrait ofPicasso.

The portrait helped solidifyhis own place within the Paris art world, but did not promote their friendship, though.  The black and white outlinesshown in the portrait made Picasso look rather gray which gave him a coldexpression to his face.  Gris had wantedthe painting to be a way to confirm his commitment to cubism, but Picasso wasfar from flattered.  He was actuallyextremely irritated and Gris was mortified (Richardson 178).  What solidified it was Picasso finding outKahnweiler had signed both him and Gris for his gallery.

Picasso was furious, became merciless towardsGris. For the rest of Gris’ life, he would pay the price of this rivalry (Richardson269).  Despite this, though, it stilldidn’t stop them from learning from each other.      Itis unfortunate for Gris to be compared to someone as great as Picasso.

Picasso was someone you would never knowwhere his ideas were going to lead.  Acollage could most likely end up as a sculpture.  By comparison Gris was veryconservative.  Gris’ work confronted theunpredictable with the logical.

He wasstuck in a comfortable space while Picasso took risks, using whatever was athand, and the result would look anything but easy to understand (Green20).       Peoplenormally have disagreements as how to characterize Gris’ work.  If they chose to say cool it is usually inderogatory terms.  Clearly, all those whomention commenting on both artists, people have expressed a strong personalpreference for Picasso’s work over Gris.

For example, Gertrude Stein, after the First World War, continued tocollect works by Gris, but never bought another painting done by Picasso.  Or how Roger Dutilleuls, the Parisiancollector, never bought anything by Gris, “ regarding him as too cerebralcompared with the raw, instinctive and intense works of Picasso” (Richardson302).      Therewas never the same answer twice towards Gris and Picasso’s art.  Each person had their own thoughts andopinions.

Maurice Raynal, for example, had good things to say about both artists. In 1922, he described Picasso as “ unceasingly re-juvenated,” and Gris ashaving “ engaging austerity” (Green 21). Then there is John Olsen who approached both of their work with muchdistaste.  He found that Cubism waspointless.  There was no moral meaningfor any of it (Green 21).       Despitethe feedback, whether positive or negative upon seeing the different stylestowards the movement, Cubism still survived.

It was born in France, emigrated across Europe, and integrated withinthe artistic world.  Not onlyrevolutionizing traditional styles towards art, but several major design andarchitectural styles.  Thus, impactingthe twentieth century, and prevailing to this day as a mode of expression inart.