Analytical and Synthetic Cubism
The Modern Art movement – Cubism – took two forms that reshaped the way artists approached their artwork; the earlier movement, known as Analytical Cubism, was a break from Renaissance ideals. Synthetic Cubism followed many of the same ideals as Analytical Cubism, but grew into a separate style that not only concerned itself with intellectuality, but also with visual aesthetics. Founded by Pablo Picasso and Georges Braques, Cubism left a mark on the art world still seen today.
Analytical Cubism can be traced back to Pablo Picasso’s Les Demoiselles d’Avignon, the first modern painting of the twentieth century. Although this piece doesn’t encompass all aspects of the movement, it is within this painting that the viewer can begin to see the principles which make up the foundations of both Analytical and Synthetic Cubism.
Girl with a Mandolin, painted by Picasso in 1910, is truly representative of the characteristics of Analytical Cubism. Unlike Les Demoiselles d’Avignon, there is a lack of colour; the painting uses blocks of neutral colour, unlike the delicately modeled renderings of the past.
Colour becomes more prominent in Synthetic Cubism, where a more aesthetically pleasing composition is more important than the intellectual fragmentation of Analytical Cubism. The lack of colour flattens the image and is very characteristic of this period. Without warms and cools to advance and recess, combined with the typically Cubist lack of inferred depth, paintings in this period appear one-dimensional. While Analytical Cubism implies a flatness through the use of colour, Synthetic Cubism goes so far as to collage flat pieces of paper onto an already flat surface, reinforcing a physical reminder of the single dimension of the artwork.
Girl with a Mandolin also exemplifies the use of ordinary object as subject. As is true in this example, many pieces from this time period simply use the name of the subject as the painting’s title. By choosing an everyday object, the viewer is more able to focus on what the artists were truly depicting during this period: the merging of visual perspective with the memory of different angles and perspective that make the object whole. In both examples, the viewer sees not only from the single perspective of what the artist might have seen, but also what the mind knows are other perspectives of the object.
A noticeable difference in the treatment of these objects is the way in which they are contained within the borders of the painting. In Analytical Cubism, the edge of the page does not necessarily represent the end of the painting. Rather, there is suggestion that the object portrayed continues out beyond the perimeter of the paper. Paintings from the Synthetic period are self-contained; that is, the artist often employs an actual border around the painting so the artwork is an object separate and independent of the subject matter. In Picasso’s Still Life with Chair Caning, a rope borders the perimeter of the painting, showing the viewer the definite boundaries in which this object exists.
While Analytical Cubism focuses on the intellectuality of combining perspectives, Synthetic Cubism takes on a much more intellectually playful role. Picasso described this period as being a sort of game, and the viewer can often find clever double meanings within the paintings. Still Life with Chair Caning is a notable example of the double meanings present in paintings from the Synthetic period. The letters “J-O-U” can be found in the upper left hand corner among what appears to be scraps of paper and other found objects. It has been speculated that the meaning here could either represent the word “Journal”, or “Joue”, the French word meaning “game”.
There is also an ambiguous light source in Analytical Cubism, as shown in Still Life with Chair Caning. As is characteristic of Cubism, this piece is depicted as the combination of multiple perspectives, so the light sources never seem to agree with one another. At times it appears as though the light is shining on the right side of the girl’s face because of the way the shadow falls around her neck; however, if this were the only perspective of light source, the right arm would be well-lit instead of hidden in shadow as it is rendered. This ambiguous nature carries over to some extent into Synthetic Cubism, but is not so defined as in the highly fragmented perspective present in paintings from the Analytical period. With the addition of collage elements, the multiple light sources become less apparent.
The modernity of Cubism comes from the boundaries it broke in regards to art of the past. This movement not only broke away from the design principles of the past, it also changed the way in which art was to be viewed. Before Cubism, painting followed many of the same design elements since the Renaissance. While painters of periods leading up to Cubism strayed from some of these elements, Cubism was the first movement to completely break free of Renaissance principles.
One of the most noticeable features of pre-Cubist paintings, beginning with Renaissance period, is the illusion of depth. It is achieved in a number of ways including a difference in proportion and the use of one-point perspective. Cubism broke away from this tradition as is apparent in Les Demoiselles d’Avignon. The different figures seem to lay on top of each other rather than shift in size to suggest to the viewer the spatial relationships. The woman closest to the viewer is proportionately the same as the woman furthest back. Additionally, because of the multiple vantage points represented, there is no recession of form into a single point.
The mindset of these artists also represented something very Modern in comparison to artists of the past. Braques and Picasso, self-described as “mountaineers” of painting, saw themselves as artists struggling to accomplish a difficult goal. Rather than simply portraying that which is in front of them, these artists viewed art-making as a very intellectual process. Conceptualism as opposed to representation was an avant garde idea that came forth in Cubism. The thought process even more so than the visual differences make Cubism a Modern art movement.
As Analytical Cubism developed into Synthetic Cubism, the intellectual nature turned from serious and exploratory to probing and playful. Though significant differences exist between the two, it is the common characteristics that define a period that changed the art world forever.