Topic: ArtArtists

Last updated: August 13, 2019

The idea that art’s purposeis to “transmit that feeling that others may experience the samefeeling” is a concept that many artists have explored within their work.Many argue that the purpose of art has varied depending on the movement or timeperiod, and comparing expressionism with contemporary art can be a insight intowhether Tolstoy’s belief is a valid claim for all art. To many, expressionismaimed to evoke emotions, moods or ideas, implying that a ‘feeling’ may be amongthese objectives, however, it is debatable to what extent this is the main oronly aim, how context affects this and how expressionism compares withcontemporary art, and whether there are similar objectives despite the  difference in time period. This essay willfocus on the work of Edvard Munch and Tino Sehgal, one being a member of theexpressionist movement, and one being a contemporary performance artist. It isimportant to discuss how difference in medium affects the artists’ aim, andwhether Tolstoy was correct in his claim. Edvard Munch was an artistwho greatly influenced German expressionism from the late 19th to the early20th century. Many aspects of his work provide evidence that the ‘actuality’ ofart is indeed to convey a feeling to the viewer.

His work can be said to behighly emotive as, ‘he suffered, and depicted the condition of modern man’.1This implies he used his own pain to create art discussing the state ofhumanity, and his own mental health, suggesting he aimed for a communicationand a conversation between the art and the viewer, allowing the audience toperhaps relate to his pain. Additionally, ‘he (Munch) proclaimed’ this aim tobe ‘the content and meaning of his art’.

2If one were to view Munch as one of the most significant members of theexpressionist art movement, it is reasonable to argue that transmitting afeeling was both a vital and consistent objective in his work, and therefore acommon theme in expressionism, supporting Tolstoy’s claim. However, it isimportant to acknowledge the content of Munch’s work assessing whether this aimwas reflected in his work. Munch’s piece ‘Death and the Maiden’ (1895) (below)deals with two foundations of humanity: Death and love. A woman tightlyembraces a skeletal figure creating the illusion of love refusing to separateon the account of life and death. This suggests a spiritual aim to Munch’swork, commenting on an afterlife, and the eternal nature of love. Death is apart of life and always has been, and so to Munch’s audience, the feeling thatMunch is projecting can easily be transmitted onto the viewer as it issomething that every person has dealt with. Therefore it is reasonable to arguethat Munch uses both content and composition to ‘transmit that feeling so thatothers may experience the same feeling’.

         Fig.1 Edvard Munch, Deathand the Maiden, 1894,Dry point etching, 23.20 x16.70, Private collection Tino Sehgal is a British-German contemporary artistwho’s main practice is performance art, or ‘constructed situations’. LikeMunch, Sehgal’s art can be used to support Tolstoy’s claim. Many view ‘Tino Sehgal asconstructing situations that challenge conventional art-and-spectatorrelationships’.3 Already thissuggests that Sehgal’s aim is to communicate something with his work, byexploring the relationship between the art, artist and spectator, thereforesomething must be transmitted to form that relationship.

The structure of hiswork involves ‘players’ who enact all manner of  ‘conversational or choreographic activities.’4This creates a scene, or a narrative, which is not dissimilar to the way apainter paints subjects depicting a story or scene. This highlights asimilarity between Munch’s and Sehgal’s practice. ‘Kiss’ (2002) (below), for instance,’involves two dancers in a gallery whose movements allude to various amorousscenes from throughout art history’.5This suggests that Sehgal and Munch both use their subjects as characters whoemit a certain emotion. The amorous scenes reflect a sexual desire, allowingthe audience to relate to the feelings being transmitted. Their gentle, almostslow motion movements give the impression of a deep love and feeling, as wellas a lust, which is then communicated to the audience as they observe thesemovements. Both artists use the relatable theme of love and lust, therefore onecan argue that both Sehgal and Munch use the content and theme of their art totransmit a feeling to the audience, supporting Tolstoy’s claim is indeed validfor all art, regardless of the movement or time period.

         Fig 2,  Tino Sehgal, Kiss, 2003, Liveperformance, Museum of contemporary art, Chicago  Context and current events happeningplay a large part in how the art is received by the audience, and what the artis saying in the first place. The time we live in now is significantlydifferent to the late 19th/early 20th century, therefore it is important toanalyse how this might change the actuality of art. ‘Expressionism’ is said tobe a movement ‘which appeared in times of great spiritual tension’.

6The 1800s saw the rise of Darwin and his ideas about science and evolution,which conflicted many people’s views on religion. People began to valuemathematical and scientific evidence and theories over religion and faith.Munch’s art often depicted an afterlife, which are shown prominently throughhis project ‘The Frieze of life’. Death and the Maiden (see above, page 3)offers many spiritual connotations such as the use of a skeleton, which issymbolic of an afterlife, and the idea that love goes beyond death, representedby the ‘maiden’ kissing the figure. One can argue this is a response to thechanging ideas and theories of the time, therefore his aim for his art was not to communicatea feeling, but to make a stand for his own beliefs regarding religion and spirituality,arguing against Tolstoy’s claim. This can be both compared and contrasted withthe emergence of performance art. Many argue that performance artists’ aim isto ‘shock the audience’7to keep performance art relevant in today’s art world.

Sehgal’s “Kiss”(see above page 4) displayed an honest and direct interpretation of love andlust. Through out history, love and lust, in the form that Sehgal’s work takes,is not always appropriate to display so openly to the public, particularly inthe context of a live performance in a public art gallery. To shock anaudience, it can be argued that it is vital something must being transmittedfrom art to viewer, however it is reasonable to argue that this was notnecessarily a feeling, but a message, seeking to challenge the audience’thinking, which is similar to Munch’s intentions with spirituality andreligion.

However, one can argue that the word ‘feeling’ can include messages,warnings and beliefs. The way that both artists choose to communicate theirmessage is through a feeling, such as Munch using the universal ‘feeling’ oflove and lust, and even grief. This is comparable to the way that Sehgal usedlust and sexual desire to communicate with his audience, shocking the audiencewith a truth that is usually kept behind closed doors. This argues both for andagainst Tolstoy’s claim. On one hand, current events have impacted on the waythat both artists have chosen to communicate with their audience, yet with bothcases there is something being transmitted from art to the viewer.

On the otherhand, one may not consider a belief, or the aim to shock the viewer ‘afeeling’, and that this is not the actuality of art.           Fig 3, Edvard Munch, TheScream, 1893, Oil, tempera, pastel and crayon on cardboard91 x 73.5cm, NationalGallery, Oslo, Norway One can argue that claiming the entire purpose ofart is to transmit a feeling to the viewer cannot account for the variety ofmaterials used in fine art and how they can be used to convey differentmotives. While with some art it is clear that emotion is the key topic whichtheir art conveys, it is unfair to say that this is the case for others. It canbe argued there is a difference in how significant communicating a feeling isto both Munch and Sehgal with regards to their choice of medium, questioningwhether more traditional methods of creating art such as painting and etchingare used more to transmit a feeling than more contemporary methods, such asperformance art.  Many believe EdvardMunch used traditional mediums in a way that ‘secured for European art a newvitality, a new truthfulness’ 8.Munch conveyed the ‘truthfulness’ using his own pain and troubled childhood,particularly in works such as ‘The Scream’ (1893) (above). This painting wasbased on Munch’s own experience of a piercing scream while on a walk with twoother companions, although the protagonist of the painting does not resembleMunch himself.

The seemingly genderless, almost creature like figure suggeststhe agony that Munch was experiencing, as this could be interpreted that Munchfelt depersonalised and detached from reality, while his pain takes over. Theway the figure blends in with the background through use of similar tones andexpressive brush marks could represent Munch fading from himself as human,becoming attached to the power and grasp of nature, reflecting a loss ofcontrol. These are things that can easily be transmitted through a traditionalmedium, such as painting, as they are first interpreted through the mind of theartist, and then realised in an image that the artist creates entirely. This isa clear example of the artist conveying a feeling, allowing the audience toalso feel and understand his emotions through observation of the piece. Thissuggests Tolstoy’s claim is most certainly valid for expressionism and Munch’swork.

However, Sehgal’s art and use of performance could suggest that not allart has this same aim, and some mediums are better to imply an alternativemotive. One can argue that Sehgal’s performance art actually aimed to bringforth questions about the actuality of art and its purpose, which causes aconflict with Tolstoy’s claim. Perhaps Sehgal aimed to ‘engage hisaudience and challenge their thinking’,9which is argued to be a common motif with performance artists.

‘ThisSituation’ (Tino Sehgal, This Situation, 2007, Live performance,Marian Goodman, New York)  forexample, takes the ‘form of a salon in which six people enact a conversationgame in which each point begins with a statement from the history of politicaland social thought.’ 10Visitors are encouraged to participate in the discussion, which thereforehelped create the on going philosophical thinking and conversation that thework generated. Topics include racism in the united states, and samesex-marriage. In this context, performance art was used to create aconversation and allowed the audience to be a part of the work, rather thaninterpreting an understanding from it. In addition, rather than an emotionalreaction being the focal point, it became a philosophical and politicalreaction. Therefore it can be argued that Tolstoy’s claim is invalid, as somemediums work better to communicate something other than a feeling, making the’actuality of art’ more open and inclusive of other objectives.

 In conclusion,  Leo Tolstoy’s claim has become less valid over time. Whiletransmitting a feeling is and has certainly been a very popular intent, withemotion being the focus of many artworks, it is not true for all art. There hasbeen a shift over time from the expressionist movement to contemporary art,particularly comparing painting and etching to performance art, that has showna number or new aims and motives for artists’ work. Munch used his pain andspirituality in his art, conveying this to the audience, while although Sehgalused emotion in  ‘Kiss”, he alsoaimed to shock the audience, and challenge their thinking with works such as’This situation’ (Sehgal, This Situation, ) which overrides the aim totransmit just a feeling. Therefore the actuality of art in his case was verymuch different to Munch’s. However, it is reasonable to acknowledge that a’feeling’ may be interpreted as anything that can be transmitted though art.Even if the artist does not wish to convey an emotion, it may be a message, awarning, or a belief.

This allows for a grey area, as it can depend on how oneinterprets ‘a feeling’. Overall, there are too many variables with regards towhether the actuality of art is to ‘transmit that feeling that others mayexperience the same feeling’, to properly conclude a definitive answer as towhether the statement is true. The claim is too exclusive however for theartwork of today’s society, therefore, invalid. 1 Hodin, J(1972). Edvard Munch, London: Thames and Hudson, page 72 Hodin, J(1972).

Edvard Munch, London: Thames and Hudson, page 73 Collection Online, (2017),Tino Sehgal. Online Guggemheim, available at:https://www.guggenheim.org/artwork/artist/tino-sehgal Accessed 28 Dec. 20174 CollectionOnline, (2017), Tino Sehgal. Online Guggemheim, available at:https://www.

guggenheim.org/artwork/artist/tino-sehgal Accessed 28 Dec. 20175 CollectionOnline, (2017), Tino Sehgal. Online Guggemheim, available at:https://www.guggenheim.org/artwork/artist/tino-sehgal Accessed 28 Dec. 20176 Hodin, J(1972).

Edvard Munch, London: Thames and Hudson, page 97  Bernstein, L. 2016, ‘Perfomance Art’, SalemPress Encyclopaedia, Research Starters, EBSCOhost, viewed 8 January 2018 8 Hodin, J(1972). Edvard Munch, London: Thames and Hudson, pages 29 to 309 Bernstein,L. 2016, ‘Perfomance Art’, Salem Press Encyclopaedia, Research Starters,EBSCOhost, viewed 8 January 201810 Collection Online, (2017), Tino Sehgal.

OnlineGuggemheim, available at:https://www.guggenheim.org/artwork/artist/tino-sehgalAccessed 28 Dec. 2017

x

Hi!
I'm Erick!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out