Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T04:26:31.946Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Element of Play in Twentieth Century Art

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Extract

In approaching contemporary art it is useless to try to determine to what extent it conforms or not to a previously conceived notion of art acquired from past centuries. It is more advisable instead to understand what idea, perhaps even an original one, this art imposes on us. In other words, when faced with a new experience, we should draw from it the original “problematic,” that is, formulate appropriate ideas to explain it. If we limit ourselves to the first years of the twentieth century, we can observe both in its content and style one particular characteristic: the importance of play. Artists have sought in related activities, such as dance or music, an image analogous to their own. They have sometimes looked for it in activities like those that interested Vermeer: The Weigher of Pearls or Lady with a Spinet (in Buckingham Palace), or in this inscription of the artist in one of his paintings relating to music: Musica laetitiae comes, medicina dolorum, which we are tempted to take as a motto and to apply to the activity of the painter himself. The same impression is given by some of the paintings of Watteau, the Musician or the Indifferent, in which we feel that the painter wanted to say something about himself. Through this catalogue of images of music or dance the artist seems to have acquired with particular pleasure an awareness of the possibility of his own art. These somewhat remote images are the ancestors of a family of buffoons, harlequins and clowns, which multiply to an extraordinary extent at the beginning of the twentieth century.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1965 Fédération Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie / International Federation of Philosophical Societies (FISP)

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Huizinga, J., Homo ludens, essai sur la fonction sociale du jeu (Coll. “les Essais”) Paris, 1951.Google Scholar
Caillois, R., “Le Jeu et le sacré,” in: L'homme et le sacré (coll. “les Essais”) Paris, 1960.Google Scholar
Benveniste, E., “Le jeu comme structure,” in Deucalion n. 2, Paris, 1947.Google Scholar
Caillois, R., Les jeux et les hommes, Paris, 1955.Google Scholar
Chastel, A., ”Le jeu et le sacré dans l'art moderne,” in Critique, May (n. 96) and June (n. 97), 1955.Google Scholar
Chastel, A., “L'art moderne et le jeu,” in Arte e Cultura contemporanea, (University lessons of 1963), Venice, 1964.Google Scholar
Ladendorf, H., “Zur Frage der künstlerischen Phantasie,” in Museion, Studien aus Kunst und Geschichte für Otto H. Forster, Cologne, p. 2135 (on the principle of irrealism).Google Scholar
Hoche, G.R., Die Welt als Labyrinth, Manier und Manie in der europaischen Kunst, Hamburg, 1957 (on the value of irrealist and surrealist themes; a very dubious historical interpretation, but a document of twentieth century culture).Google Scholar
Jean, M. & Mezei, A., Histoire de la peinture surréaliste, Paris, 1959.Google Scholar
Dubuffet, J., Prospectus aux amateurs en tout genre, Paris, 1946.Google Scholar