Article/Publication Details
Views: 5309

THE INTERTWINING OF PHENOMENOLOGY AND CUBISM — IN THE ANALYSES AND WORKS OF ART OF CZECH ARTISTS AND THEORETICIANS

Abstract
This study derives from the genealogy of phenomenological and cubistic aims and their thematic interests at the beginning of the 20th century in the Central-European milieu. In the first part, we observe common and close questions of Husserl’s philosophy on the one side and the new artistic initiative of cubists on the other. This level of observation and comparison is in the second part recognized and deepened thanks to the analyses of Czech philosophers (Bayerová, Patočka, Mathauser), theoreticians (Vlček, Kramář, Lamač and others) and works of cubists themselves (Kubišta, Filla, Hofman and others). The philosophical scope of the consideration also opens the principal question — which is the topic of the third part of the study — of the intertwining of phenomenological and cubistic methods (epoché, reduction and pictorial elaboration). Because it is not one unitary style, Cubism brings with it a complicated interpretative task: in relation to this, we present the polemic concerning the use of polyperspectivity and geometrisation; thanks to phenomenology, their deeper meaning can be revealed. We identify as phenomenological tendencies in cubistic works of art, their claim to liberate perception, to create pure forms and to refuse the symbolic, representative and imitative function of art. We analyse these questions with respect to the creative possibilities of the subject/artist as well as the pictorial/ perceptive character of the world.

Key words
Husserl, Czech cubism, Central-European philosophy, phenomenological method, perception, object, work of art.

References

• Bayerová, M. (1995). Die Bedeutung der Intentionalität für die Bestimmung der Kategorie Beziehung. In J. Bloss, W. Stróżewski, & J. Zumr (Eds.), Intentionalität – Werte – Kunst. Husserl – Ingarden – Patočka (84-96). Prague: Filosofia.
• Bayerová, M., & Vlček, T. (1991). Kubismus, věda a filozofie – vztahy a inspirace [Cubism, Science and Philosophy – Relations and Inspirations]. In J. Švestka, & T. Vlček (Eds.), Český kubismus 1909 – 1925 [Czech Cubism 1909 – 1925] (44-53). Düsseldorf - Stuttgart. (in Czech).
• Blecha, I. (2007). Proměny fenomenologie [Transformations of Phenomenology]. Olomouc: Triton. (in Czech).
• Breuer, I. (2015). Die haptisch korrelative Genesis von Raum/Ort und eigener bzw. “intersubjektiver” Leiblichkeit an den Rändern der Phänomenologie Husserls: Die originäre Entstehung der Ur-präsenzen an den Grenzen der Gegebenheit. In J. Trajtelová (Ed.), The Yearbook on History and Interpretation of Phenomenology: New Generative Aspects in Contemporary Phenomenology: Vol. 3 (95-116). Frankfurt a. Main: Peter Lang Edition.
• Didi-Huberman, G. (2006). Pred časom. Dejiny umenia a anachronizmus obrazov [Facing Time. History of Art and Anachronism of Images]. Bratislava: Kalligram.(in Slovak).
• Didi-Huberman, G. (2010). Devant le temps. Histoire de l’art et anachronisme des images. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit.
• Dufourcq, A. (2015). Merleau-Pontyho estetika [Merleau-Ponty’s Aesthetics]. Filozofia, 70 (9), 748-758. (in Slovak).
• Fabritius, H., & Hagedorn, L. (Eds.). (2005). Frühling in Prag oder Wege des Kubismus. München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.
• Filla, E. (1968). Práce oka [Work of the Eye]. In M. Lamač, Myšlenky moderních malířů [Ideas of Modern Painters] (341-342). Prague: Nakladatelství československých výtvarných umělců [Publishing House of Czechoslovak Artists]. (in Czech).
• Francastel, P. (1977). Peinture et société. Œuvres I. Paris: Denoël.
• Francastel, P. (2003). Malířství a společnosť [Painting and Society]. Brno: Barrister&Principal. (in Czech).
• Hofman, V. (2005). Die prosaische Schönheit der modernen Kunst. In H. Fabritius, & L. Hagedorn (Eds.), Frühling in Prag oder Wege des Kubismus (59-71). München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.
• Husserl, E. (1973). Ding und Raum. (Hua XVI). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Husserl, E. (1983). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy I. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Karul, R. (2015). Paradigmou súčasného umenia je neautenticita [Non-Authenticity: The Paradigm of Contemporary Art]. Filozofia, 70 (9), 736-747. (in Slovak).
• Kramář, V. (1958). Otázky moderního umění. K problémům umění první poloviny 20 století [Issues of Modern Art. On the Problems of Art in the first half of 20th Century]. Prague: Nakladatelství československých výtvarných umělců [Publishing House of Czechoslovak Artists]. (in Czech).
• Kramář, V. (2005). Der Kubismus. In H. Fabritius, & L. Hagedorn (Eds.), Frühling in Prag oder Wege des Kubismus (207-336). München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.
• Kubišta, B. (2005). Die zweite Ausstellung der Gruppe bildender Künstler im Obecní dům. In H. Fabritius, & L. Hagedorn (Eds.), Frühling in Prag oder Wege des Kubismus (39-44). München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.
• Lahoda, V. (2014). Cubist Territories. Ars, 47 (2), 109-112.
• Lamač, M. (1968). Myšlenky moderních malířů [Ideas of Modern Painters]. Prague: Nakladatelství československých výtvarných umělců [Publishing House of Czechoslovak Artists]. (in Czech).
• Lamač, M. (1988). Osma a Skupina výtvarných umělců 1907 – 1917 [The Eight Group and the Group of Fine Artists 1907 – 1917]. Prague: Odeon. (in Czech).
• Mathauser, Z. (1995). Mezi filozofií a poezií [Between Philosophy and Poetry]. Prague: Filosofia. (in Czech).
• Mathauser, Z. (2006). Básnivé nápovědi Husserlovy fenomenologie [Hints of Poetry in Husserl’s Phenomenology]. Prague: Filosofia. (in Czech).
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (2005). Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge.
• Patočka, J. (2004). Poznámky k polyperspektivě u Picassa [Notes on Picasso’s Polypespectivity by W. Biemel]. In J. Patočka, Umění a čas II [Art and Time] (30-34, 412-413). Prague: OIKOYMENH. (in Czech).
• Pinotti, A. (2010). Cubism. In H. R. Sepp, & L. Embree (Eds.), Handbook of Phenomenological Esthetics. Dordrecht: Springer.
• Sepp, H. R. (1995). Der Kubismus als phänomenologisches Problem. In E. G. Valdés, & R. Zimmerling (Eds.), Facetten der Wahrheit (295-321). München: Karl Alber.
• Sepp, H. R. (1988). Annäherungen an die Wirklichkeit. Phänomenologie und Malerei nach 1900. In H. R. Sepp (Ed.), Edmund Husserl und die phänomenologische Bewegung: Zeugnisse in Text und Bild (77-93). München: Karl Alber.
• Sepp, H. R. (Ed.). (2004). Art & fenomen. Philosophie in Kunst. Prague: OIKOYMENH, DenkMal Verlag Bonn.
• Švestka, J., & Vlček, T. (Eds.). (1991). Český kubismus 1909–1925 [Czech Cubism 1909 – 1925]. Düsseldorf, Stuttgart. (in Czech).
• Vydrová, J. (2015). Fenomenológia a kubizmus – možnosti zblíženia [Phenomenology and Cubism: Possible Rapprochements]. Filozofia, 70 (10), 831-841. (in Slovak).