The period between the close of the nineteenth century to the outbreak of World War Two was characterised by a widespread sense of crisis, for Western society. The feeling of crisis was brought about by the immense technological advances and political upheavals during the period that welcomed in a new age, leaving behind the old familiar structure of society, the replacements of which were not always fully apparent. The amalgamation of destruction, innovation and enormous cultural, politcal and social change created an unknown future and (for some) created a feeling of fear and despondency, others however welcomed the future and were invigorated by inspiration. These two juxtaposing responses to the feeling of crisis are represented in the art of the nations affected, in Europe.
In Britain movements such as Unit One wanted to break free from tradition and pursue new forms of representation. Comparatively in the Netherlands the De Stijl movement sort to understand philosophical fundamentals, with such political freedoms in both countries it is understandable that these movements took a turn into the psyche rather than problems in their current environment.
In Germany however with the rising popularity of the Nazi party art was seen as a threat and another area of society that needed to be tethered down into the party line. Likewise Russia’s confusing political map created an environment where art was being used as a tool to create and help discover what the new country should be culturally.
Britain and The Netherlands.
Some artists saw art as an ontological quest, such philosophical pursuits could only be explored in an environment in which there were societal freedoms, for example Britain and The Netherlands. The First World War was a battle of unprecedented destruction, compared to all the wars of the two preceding centuries combined the First World War had twice as many casualties. Coming from this total dissemination of society the pubic were left in a state of utter loss. Soldiers returning from the war also added to the messy situation, some were injured and unemployable and those able to work came back to an already saturated market where the previous positions had been filled. By 1921 the figure of unemployed British people receiving benefit payments reached over 2 million. Economic stress was however relieved through programs including unemployment insurance, old age pensions, and subsidising housing. Before the Labour Party came to power in 1924 and in 1929, Britain had adopted a welfare state to ensure there was no decline in the standard of living for British Workers.
The Labour Party rose as the second of the two great parties of Britain displacing the Liberal Party after the election of 1922 and opposed the conservatives as official opposition. Mostly founded from the trade and labour unions who struggled to maintain the wage gains received in wartime. Strikes from British unions broke out over welfare policies and the government had to implement change. With this societal shift away from the Victorian laissez-faire approach, towards the support and the growth of social welfare there was a greater focus on the power of the individual, the average citizen was beginning to have a voice, therefore art in Britain was freer. A focus on the individual can also be seen in the Dutch art of the De Stijl movement, this could be due to the fact that the Netherlands had a similar financial and political situation as Britain. In The Netherlands there was a growing interference of the state with almost all aspects of public life; for example with unemployment insurance. The Netherlands however remained Liberal, especially financially seen with their retention of the gold standard.
In ‘Neo-Plasticism in Painting’ (1917) Piet Mondrian expresses his interpretation of the ideals followed by De Stijl, the artistic movement that he was a part of. Mondrian states that if we see man’s consciousness growing toward determination, if we see it – in time – developing from individual to universal then logically the new art can never return to form – or to natural colour. Then, logically, the consistent growth and development of abstract plastic must progress to its culmination. These beliefs that abstraction is the true form of representation can be seen to culminate in his aptly named ‘Compositions’.
Composition with Yellow, Red, Blue, Black, Gray (1920) is a painting purely consisting of coloured squares and rectangles focusing upon the interplay of line and colour, a harmony is brought by the masterful arrangement creating a balance and one whole. The Compositions represent the philosophy of De Stijl, the followers for example believed in the social role of art, design and architecture and that art had a transformative power to change the future and people’s lives. Mondrian also believed in collaboration amongst artists and creation of a total work of art. Mondrian also believed that the main aim in life is balance between the universal and collective and the specific and the individual. It is interesting to point out however that those in the movement saw no links to politics. Artists such as Mondrian and Van Doesburg saw politics as a lowly field in comparison to art and their ‘universal’ ideas. A complete contrast to Britain and the Netherlands can be seen in Russian and Germany understandably the politics of these two countries were contrastingly very tumultuous during the interwar period.
Bolshevik Russia
Russian artists were used to make a representative culture and in by doing so pure abstraction would be a hard pursuit as specific political and culture ideas were trying to be expressed. Artists were utilised as tools to help present the new Soviet culture that was being created, Art was used by Lenin to represent the ideals of the Soviet Union, away from those of the previous Romanov Dynasty that ruled Russia. Despite being used however the response to a political crisis can be seen as a positive revitalising one for artist, as they were incorporated and encouraged to explore forms of representation, this is shown in works such as Vladimir Tatlin’s Monument to the 3rd International created in 1919. The sculpture communicates the idea of movement to a more progressive place.
Germany
Nazi Germany however was less a feeling of creativity and innovation as artists were specifically controlled and restrained seen best in the history of The Bauhaus design school. The Bauhaus was formed in 1919 under the directorship of Walter Gropius in Weimar Germany and epitomises the impact of politics on artist and architectural design. Historian John V Maciuika asserts that the Weimer Republic emerged from the ashes of a shattering military defeat and claims that The Bauhaus is a classic example of an institution that grew out of the post-war era – a unique circumstance. Like in many European countries there were strands of artistc movements that looked back to a form of classicism. The Bauhaus’ purpose was to revive the crafts, Gropius saw the best approach would be a “craft-oriented practical approach”
Marcel Breur (1922) – Cherrywood with horsehair and cotton upholstery
The growth of Nationalism in Germany however led the school to be seen as a menace to German culture, by not resting in traditional forms, despite using traditional crafting skills.
In the schools’ early history it was a part of a freer society and so the members were allowed to explore craft – by the 1930s however cabinet making, metal and mural painting workshops were amalgamated into a single ‘interior design’ The students also had to sign a declaration., any reference to Communism was gravely punished and in fact some members were fired or pushed to leave
Hannes Meyer who was director 1928-1930 stated ‘I am going to the USSR in order to work where a truly proletarian culture is coming into being, where that society already exists for which we here under capitalism have been fighting.’
Meyer also claimed:
“The Dessau Bauhaus is not an artistic, but a social phenomenon as gestalter our activities are determined by society, and the scope of our task is set by society. Does not our present society in Germany call for thousands of people’s schools, people’s parks, people’s houses?”
Meyer was later replaced by Mies van der Rohe. Meyer was seen as aligning too closely with Communist ideals, here the political make-up of the country can be seen to be influencing the arts. It was closed down by Nazi regime in 1933, here the threat of the creative minds can be seen to be directly targeted by politics.
Carl Schmitt asserts that political actions and motives can be condensed to distinctions between friend and enemy as all life is based on the distinctions between fundamental opposites “good and evil in aesthetics beautiful and ugly, in economics profitable and unprofitable” Art was used as a reply to that fundamental dialectic.
Past Times 