Page Contents
Modernism in art was not a single style but a sustained cultural project running from approximately 1860 to 1970, united by the conviction that traditional forms of representation, inherited conventions, and the established relationship between art and its audience had all to be questioned and, where necessary, abandoned. Beginning with the Impressionists’ challenge to academic painting and accelerating through Cubism, Abstraction, Dadaism, and Surrealism, modernism progressively dismantled the visual language that European art had developed since the Renaissance. It was driven by intellectual currents — Freudian psychology, Marxist social theory, Einsteinian physics — that together suggested that the stable, orderly world that traditional art had depicted was a fiction. Art had to reflect a reality that was fragmented, subjective, and in constant motion. The result was an art of extraordinary diversity and creative ambition that transformed not only painting and sculpture but architecture, design, film, and music.
What Was Modernism — And When Did It Begin? Modernism is most usefully understood not as a style but as a set of attitudes: a rejection of tradition for its own sake, a commitment to formal experiment, a belief that art must respond to the conditions of modern life rather than offering escapist consolation. Its beginnings are variously dated to Manet’s scandalous Olympia (1865), Cézanne’s structural experiments of the 1880s, or the eruption of Cubism around 1907. All of these were moments of rupture — of art deliberately breaking with what had come before.
The Impact of New Technologies: Modernist art emerged alongside the technologies that transformed modern life: the railway, electricity, the telephone, the aeroplane, cinema. These new speeds and new distances changed how people experienced the world — and art had to change too. Futurists painted the dynamism of machines; Cubists fragmented objects as if seen simultaneously from multiple viewpoints; filmmakers discovered that moving images could create entirely new kinds of narrative time.
Cézanne — The Father of Modernism: Paul Cézanne (1839–1906) is the figure to whom almost every subsequent modernist movement traced its origins. His insistence on “treating nature by the cylinder, the sphere, and the cone” — reducing perceived reality to its underlying geometric structures — pointed the way to Cubism. His equal insistence on the reality of the picture surface, rather than the illusion of depth, pointed the way to abstraction. For Picasso, Matisse, and Braque, Cézanne was simply “the father of us all.”
The Shock of the New — Audiences and Incomprehension: One of the defining features of modernism was the scandal it provoked. The Impressionist exhibitions of the 1870s were greeted with ridicule; the Armory Show of 1913 that brought European modernism to America caused genuine public outrage; Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring provoked a riot at its premiere. This pattern of provocation and rejection became almost a badge of authenticity for modernist artists: incomprehension by the majority was taken as evidence of genuine originality.
Abstraction — The Logical Conclusion: If art was not obliged to represent the visible world, what else could it do? By 1910, Kandinsky, Mondrian, and Malevich had each independently arrived at a fully non-objective art — painting that referred to nothing outside itself. Kandinsky’s early abstractions used colour and line to evoke musical experience; Mondrian reduced painting to primary colours and right angles; Malevich created a Suprematism of pure geometric form. All argued that abstract art could reach deeper truths than representation ever could.
The Death of Modernism — Or Its Transformation: By the 1960s, critics were beginning to detect signs of exhaustion in the modernist project. Pop Art, Minimalism, and Conceptual Art each represented a reaction against the high seriousness and formal purity of modernist abstraction. Postmodernism, emerging in the 1970s and 1980s, rejected modernism’s faith in progress and originality, embracing instead quotation, irony, and the mixing of high and popular culture. Whether this represented the end of modernism or simply its next phase remains one of the most debated questions in contemporary art.
38-01 The 20th Century British Nude
- This video is age-restricted and only available on YouTube: https://youtu.be/pT6OpV3TbAE
38-02 Modernism – Picasso 1932
This talk examines Picasso’s remarkable year of 1932, when he turned fifty, staged his own retrospective, and produced some of his most psychologically charged work. Driven by a secret affair with the teenage Marie-Thérèse Walter, his output moved between sensual exuberance and surrealist darkness. The talk traces his Cubist evolution, his divided domestic life between wife Olga Khokhlova and his hidden lover, and the Boisgeloup sculptures that captured Walter’s form. As Europe moved towards catastrophe, personal crisis deepened into lamentation, prefiguring the anguish of Guernica five years later.
(My YouTube talk will be published on 19 June 2027)
An entertaining conversation about Picasso 1932 created by Google NotebookLM from my notes:
Most of us know Picasso as an icon. Fewer of us know the strange, turbulent machinery behind his greatest work. In 1932, he turned fifty, staged his own retrospective, and produced paintings of almost unbearable psychological intensity — all while conducting a secret affair, managing a crumbling marriage, and watching Europe drift toward catastrophe. Here are the most surprising truths from that extraordinary year.
He Met His Greatest Muse Outside a Department Store — and She’d Never Heard of Him
In 1927, Picasso approached seventeen-year-old Marie-Thérèse Walter outside the Galeries Lafayette in Paris. She was athletic, non-intellectual, and completely indifferent to his fame. He had to point to his name in a newspaper to prove he existed. She remained unmoved by his art. That indifference, apparently, was the point. Their secret affair lasted eight years before anyone knew.
He Deliberately Kept Chaos One Floor Above Respectability
Picasso maintained a spotless bourgeois apartment on the rue La Boétie — controlled entirely by his wife Olga. His response? He rented the identical apartment directly above it as a studio and turned it into total disorder. Order and anarchy, separated by one ceiling.
His Own Retrospective Was a Provocation, Not a Celebration
When asked how he would curate his own show, Picasso replied: “Badly.” He mixed works from different decades, removed all dates, and scattered his newest 1932 paintings throughout — as if to insist that everything he’d ever made was equally alive right now. Then, when fashionable Paris gathered for the opening in evening gowns and tails, Picasso went to the cinema.
“If 1932 began for Picasso under the sign of love, it ended with a premonition of tragedies to come.” — Tate exhibition notes
A Psychiatrist Diagnosed Him Schizophrenic Based Solely on His Paintings
After the retrospective travelled to Zurich, Carl Gustav Jung attended and published a review suggesting Picasso showed signs of schizophrenia because his pictures revealed “alienation from feeling.” The diagnosis reveals rather more about Jung’s anxiety than Picasso’s psychology. Commercially, the show was a total failure: no sales in Paris, one in Zurich.
The Drowning Paintings Foreshadowed Guernica
Late in 1932, Marie-Thérèse contracted a serious infection after swimming in the sewage-contaminated river Marne. She lost her famous blonde hair and spent seven months hospitalised. Picasso responded with a series of anguished drowning images — contorted, screaming figures that would reappear, almost unchanged, in Guernica four years later as symbols of civilian agony.
His Most Celebrated Painting Sold for $150 Million — and No Reproduction Does It Justice
The Dream, painted on 24 January 1932, was built up with a palette knife, its wallpaper thick and vibrating. Scholar T.J. Clark argued that in Marie-Thérèse, Picasso found “a licence to risk everything.” The painting sold in 2013 for $150 million. Those who have stood before it say the same thing: you must see it in person.
The road from those luminous, sensual nudes of early 1932 to the weeping women of 1937 begins precisely in this single year. Which raises a question worth sitting with: can a life lived in deliberate contradiction — between comfort and transgression, between tenderness and possession — actually be the source of the work, rather than its obstacle?
38-03 Auguste Rodin
My notes on 38-03 Auguste Rodin