Cubism and Ireland - Crawford Art Gallery

Analysing Cubism: Cubism and Ireland, 1920s – 30s
Cubism
The start of the 20th century saw the development of a radically new painting style in
Paris called Cubism. This style was heavily influenced by both African and Native
American art, and used geometric shapes, lines, and colour to break-up and abstract
an image. Geometric shapes, like circles, ovals, and triangles, do not often appear in
nature. Cubists rejected the idea that art should reflect nature, and instead, they
aimed to represent several perspectives of a composition at once, eliminating
traditional methods of linear perspective.
The term “Cubism” was not created by the early Cubist painters, like Pablo Picasso
or Georges Braque. The style was named by the French art critic, Louis Vauxcelles
in 1908, after seeing an early Cubist painting. Vauxcelles described the geometric
shapes used to abstract the image as “cubes”, and the term “Cubism” was created.
The Cubist style evolved rapidly, and art historians have separated the movement
into sections to better understand the development of the style. These “phases” were
not divided intentionally by the artists, but were named afterwards to help explain the
movement. Art historians still argue over the specific dates of these phases, but
these divisions are helpful for understanding the movement:
Early Cubism (c. 1906-1908): Cubism is developed by Pablo
Picasso and Georges Braque in Paris. These early works contain a
clear subject, but they are highly abstracted using geometric shapes.
(left: Pablo Picasso, Les Demoiselles d’Avignon, 1907, MOMA, Museum of Modern Art, New York)
High Cubism (or Analytic Cubism) (c. 1908-1912): Paintings were
abstracted to the point that they became a series of overlapping
shapes, removing most reference to a subject.
(left: Georges Braque, Violin and Candlestick, 1910, San Francisco of Modern Art)
Late Cubism (or Synthetic Cubism) (c. 1912-1921): Picasso and
Braque began experimenting with pasting coloured paper and
collage. While this technique may seem child-like now, using everyday materials in art was revolutionary at this time.
(left: Pablo Picasso, Still Life with Chair Caning, 1912, Musée Picasso, Paris. This work uses woven rope
lattice from a chair in the bottom left corner, and a large piece of rope that imitates a frame)
Cubism and World War I
This new abstract style was revolutionary, but with the outbreak of World War I
(1914-1918) the key members of the Cubist movement became physically separated.
Many Cubist artists had been conscripted into the war, while others had left Paris in
an attempt to avoid battle. This separation of the main Cubists made it impossible for
the style to keep to developing steadily.
The outbreak of war also saw artists shift to new styles as they searched for ways of
coming to grips with the war, and the world’s new understanding of human nature.
The result was various post-war styles, like the fast and dynamic painting and
sculpture of Futurism, the Dada rejection of structure and traditional art-making
materials, and the Surrealist interpretation of human subconscious through poetry,
drawing, and painting.
Cubism in the 1920s
As a result of World War I, and the natural evolution of the style, Cubism of the
1920s was quite different from what had begun in the 1910s. The time for pure
innovation had passed, and the style had developed past its first experiments with
shape and form. By the time Irish artists Mainie Jellett and Evie Hone travelled to
Paris in 1921, Cubism had been an established style for over a decade.
In 1923 the French Cubist Albert Gleizes wrote La Peinture et
ses Lois (Painting and its Laws), his fourth book on Cubism.
This new book theorized his academic method for creating
abstract art. Gleizes sought to explain his method of creating
abstract paintings, through rotating and shifting (or
“translating”) the planes within a composition (foreground,
background, etc.) This method of rotating and translating
planes became a model for Cubist work, and would have a
major effect on Jellett, Hone, and the nature of Cubism itself.
(Albert Gleizes, Abstract Composition, 1923, Private Collection)
Below are examples of how Gleizes described this process. He explained that you
must separate a composition into its various planes, and then translate and rotate
those planes to simulate three dimensional space and movement. Translating and
rotating the planes gives the impression that the shapes are moving, instead of
laying flat on the canvas.
Diagrams from La Peinture et ses Lois by Albert Gleizes, Paris, 1923, reprinted in Mainie Jellett 1897-1944, The Irish
Museum of Modern Art, 1991, Gill Tipton, 31
Ireland, 1900- 1923
To understand the impact of Cubism in Ireland, it is important to imagine what Irish
life was like in the early 1900s. This was a very violent time, and Ireland spent the
first part of the century at war. Europe was entrenched in World War I, Ireland was
also in the grips of the Easter Rising of 1916, followed by the War of Independence
from 1919-1921, and then the Civil War from 1922-1923.
When Jellett and Hone left Ireland to for the relative safety of
Paris in 1921, the Irish War of Independence was just coming to
an end. Their studies kept them away from Ireland for two years,
and neither Jellett, Hone, nor Mary Swanzy were living in Ireland
for any of the events leading up to the Civil War. It was only
months after the call for peace that Jellett returned to Ireland and
exhibited Decoration (left) in Dublin in 1923.
(Mainie Jellett, Decoration, 1923, National Gallery of Ireland)
In the 1920s Ireland became increasingly conservative, both
politically and socially. The nation was overwhelmed by issues of national identity,
politics, and religion, and had little connection with the Modern Art developments in
Europe and abroad. By 1929, the Censorship of Publications Act was passed, and
gave the government power to censor any book they the deemed “indecent and
obscene.” This caused writers, poets, and artists alike to fear government censorship
and reconsider their ability to work in Ireland.
Irish reaction to Cubism
When Jellett and Hone returned to Ireland in 1923, they received harsh criticism for
their work. Artists, critics, and the public were accustomed to the figurative works of
Séan Keating (left) and William Orpen, and were
shocked by this new abstract style. The first
exhibition of Jellett’s Decoration was met with a
review by the Irish Times titled: “Two Freak
Pictures”, which described her work as an “insoluble
puzzle,” and compared it to a photograph of an
onion. Her first exhibition sparked a debate about
Modernism in Ireland that would last for decades.
Séan Keating, An Allegory, 1924, National Gallery of Ireland
While public reaction to Jellett’s painting was fierce, it was not the first Modern
artwork to be exhibited in Ireland. Since 1884, a small but steady series of exhibitions
brought Modern Art from overseas. During this time, Impressionist and PostImpressionist paintings were shown in Dublin, as well as some Cubist works in 1912.
At the time, Irish viewers were increasingly protective of Irish traditions and
nationalism, and were fearful that introducing foreign Modern Art would overwhelm
traditional Irish art. The effect of these exhibitions was short lived, and the abstract
works of Jellett, Hone, and others, would hit Ireland seemingly out of nowhere.
Traditionally, art that centred on Christian themes was well accepted in Ireland, and
Jellett and Hone’s artwork evolved to embrace religious themes. It is important to
note that use of religious subjects was unusual for Modern artists. Most avant-garde
artists rejected religion. The result is a unique and significant collection of religious,
Cubist works.