PABLO PICASSO LET me say at the beginning that I do not
believe in art criticism, and the more especially when it is concerned with
painting.
I grant that everyone bas the right to express their opinion in art matters,
to applaud, or disapprove, according to their own personal way of seeing
and feeling; but I hold that they should do so without assuming any authority,
and without pretending to possess the absolute truth, or even a relative one;
and also that they should not base their judgments on established rules, upon
the pretense th.at they arc consecrated by use, and by the criterion of high
authority.
Between a civil or a penal judge and a critic there is a great difference.
The judge judges according to the law, but does
not make the law.
He has to submit himself to the fetter and the spirit
of the law, though it might conflict with his person.al opinions, because that
law is an absolute rule of conduct, dictated by society, to which all have to
submit.
But art is free, it has never bad, it has not, and will never have a legislature,
in spite of the Academies; and every artist has the right to interpret
nature as he pleases, or as he can, leaving to the public the liberty to applaud
or condemn theoretically.
Every critic is a priest of a dogma, of a system; and condemns implacably
what he finds to be out of his faith, a faith not reasoned but imposed.
He never stops to consider the personality of the artist whose work be is judging,
to investigate what his tendencies are, what his purpose is, or what efforts
he made to attain his object, and to what Point he has realized his program.
I have devoted my life to the study of art, principally fainting an<l sculpture.
I believe I have seen all that is worth seeing, and have never dared
pass sentence on a work declaring it good even if signed by the most renowned
artist; nor declare it bad, though it bears the name of a person totally unknown.
At the most, I dare s-ay that at please.
or displeases me, and to express the personal motives of my impressions.
Scholastic criticism has never profited anyone; on the contrary, it has
always restrained the spirit of a creator; it has always discouraged, humiliated,
and killed those who have bad the weakness to take it into consideration.
Each epoch has had its artists, and must have its art, as each also has its
men of science and its science; and any one who intends to oppose a dike to
the flood-tide of human genius is perverse or a fool.
This love for the dogma, the tendency of the academy to enchain to
suffocate and to vilify, has greatly damaged the countries in which it has
prevailed.
This has been the cause of delay in the progress of art in Spain;
and on account of this system we see the Spanish artists, those of persona
inspiration and haughty spirit, perish there, or emigrate to Pans, looking for a
better atmosphere.
For, though it is true that there is in Paris also an
academic sect that suffocates; one which proclaims
·that outside of itself there is no salvation, nevertheless art bas succeeded
in conquering an independence which permits all sorts of attempts at new
expression.
Art has not died in Spain, or not at least among Spaniards.
What is beginning to die it the old tradition, or
rather the intransigent traditionalism.
And the best proof of it is the notable number of Spanish painters living in
Paris, who prosper there, gaining enviable fame, and who at the end will
figure among the French glories, instead of adding illustrious names to the
already extensive Spanish catalogue.
I intend to make these artists known to the American world, describing
the work of each one of them, not as I see, feel, and understand it, but as each
one of them has conceived it.
I want to tell at present of Pablo Picasso, from Malaga, who finds himself
in the first rank among the innovators, a man who knows what he wants and
wants what he knows, who has broken with all school prejudices, has opened
for himself a wide path, and bas already acquired that notoriety which is the
first step towards glory.
I do not know if he is known in Spain, and if he is, whether they appreciate
his efforts and study his works.
What I know is that be is a Parisian personality, which constitutes a glorious achievement.
I have studied Pitasso, both the artist and his work, which was not
difficult, for he is a sincere and spontaneous man, who makes no mystery of his
ideals nor the method he employs to realize them.
Picasso tries to produce with his work an impression, not with the subject
but the manner in which he expresses it.
He receives a direct impression from external nature, he analyzes, develops, and
translates it, and afterwards executes it in his own particular style, with the intention
that the picture should be the pictorial equivalent of the emotion produced
by nature.
In presenting his work he wants the spectator to look for the
emotion or idea generated from the spectacle and not the spectacle itself.
From this to the psychology of form there is but one step, and the artist
has given it resolutely and deliberately.
Instead of the physical manifestation he seeks in form the psychic one, and on account
of his peculiar temperament, his physical manifestations inspire him with
geometrical sensations.
When he paints he does not limit himself to taking from an object only
those planes which the eye perceive&, but deals with all those which, according
to him, constitute the individuality of form; and with his peculiar fantasy he
develops and transforms them.
And this suggests to him new impressions, which he manifests with new forms, because
from the idea of the representation of a being; a new being is born, perhaps different
from the first one, and this becomes the represented being.
Each one of his paintings is the coefficient of the impressions that form
bas performed in his spirit, and in these paintings the public must see the
realization of an artistic ideal, and must judge them by the ab$tl'3ct sensation
they produce, without trying to look for the factors that entered into the composition
of the final result.
As it is not his purpose to perpetuate on the canvas
an aspect of external nature, by which to produce an artistic impression,
but to represent with the brush the impression he has directly received from
nature., synthesized by his fantasy, he does not put on the canvas the remembrance
of a past sensation.
but describes a present sensation.
Picasso has a different conception of perspective from that in use by the
traditionalists.
According to his way of thinking and painting, form must be
represented in its intrinsic value, and not in relation to other objects.
He does not think it right to paint a child in size
far larger than that of a man, just because the child is in the foreground and
one wants to indicate that the man is some distance away from it.
The painting of distance, to which the academic school subordinates everything, seem.t to
him an element which might be of great importance in a topographical plan or
in a geographical map, but false and useless in a work of art.
In his paintings perspective does not exist: in them there are nothing but
harmonies suggested by form, and registers which succeed themselves, to compose
a general harmony which fills the rectangle that constitutes the picture.
Following the same philosophical system in dealing with light, as the
one he follows in regard to form, to him color does not exist, but only the
effects of light.
This produces in matter certain vibrations, which produce in
the individual certain impressions.
From this it results, that Picasso's painting presents to us the evolution by which light
and form have operated in developing themselves in his brain to produce
the idea, and his composition is nothing but the synthetic expression of
his emotions.
Those who have studied Egyptian art without Greco-Roman prejudices,
know that the sons of the Nile and the desert sought in their works the realization
of an ideal conceived by meditation before the mysterious river and by
ecstasy before the imposing solitude, and that is why they transformed matter
into form and gave to substance the reflection of that which exists only in
essence.
Something of this sort happens in Picasso's work, which is the artistic
representation of a psychology of form in which he tries to represent in essence
what seems to exist only in substance.
And, likewise, just as when we contemplate part of a Gothic cathedral we
feel an abstract sensation, produced by an ensemble of geometrical figures,
whose significance we do not perceive and whose real form we do not understand
immediately, so the paintings of Picasso have the tendency to produce
a similar effect, they compel the spectator to forget the beings and objects which
are the base of the picture, and whose representation is the highest state to
which his fantasy has been able to carry them through a geometrical
evolution.
According to his judgment, all the races as represented in their artistic
exponents, have tried to represent form through a fantastic aspect, modifying
it to adapt it to the idea they wanted to express.
And at the bottom, all of them have pursued the same artistic ideal, with
a tendency similar to his own technique.
Marius De Zayas
For more infomation >> ANALISANDO O INGLÊS DE Gisele Bündchen, Anitta e Joel Santana - Duration: 14:30. 
For more infomation >> LLEGAMOS AL SIGUIENTE NIVEL DE NUESTRA AMISTAD! - Duration: 10:01. 
For more infomation >> El alta exprés de Kate Middleton tras dar a luz aviva la polémica - Duration: 5:09. 
For more infomation >> El encuentro casual con Puigdemont de los - Duration: 2:10. 
For more infomation >> Los duques de Cambridge piden 1,5 millones por las fotos en 'topless' de Kate. - Duration: 2:00. 
For more infomation >> Ford Ka StreetKa 1.6 Staat in de Krim - Duration: 1:09. 
For more infomation >> Los duques de Cambridge conocen al osito Paddington. - Duration: 2:51. 
For more infomation >> Puigdemont aprovecha la sentencia de - Duration: 2:47. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét