Neoplasticism


Neoplasticism or neo-plasticism, originating from the Dutch Nieuwe Beelding, is an avant-garde art theory proposed by Piet Mondrian in 1917 and initially employed by the De Stijl art movement. The most notable proponents of this theory were Mondrian and another Dutch artist, Theo van Doesburg. Neoplasticism advocated for a purified abstract art, by applying a set of elementary art principles. Thus, a painting that adhered to neoplastic art theory would typically consist of a balanced composition of simple geometric shapes, right-angled relationships and primary colors.

Terminology

Mondrian, Van der Leck and Van Doesburg first set out the philosophical basis for the art theory known originally as "Nieuwe Beelding", but known today as "Neoplasticism", in a new art journal named De Stijl . The term appears in an editorial by Van Doesburg in the first issue of the journal and in the first of a series of articles by Mondrian entitled De Nieuwe Beelding in de schilderkunst. The expression "nieuwe beelding" is believed to derive from the work of Mathieu Schoenmaekers, who used the term in his 1915 book Het Nieuwe Wereldbeeld,; copies of books by Schoenmaekers were found in Mondrian's library.
Introducing their translation of Mondrian's publications, Holtzman and James wrote:
Some authors have translated nieuwe beelding as new art.
The term néo-plasticisme first appeared in Mondrian's Le Néo-plasticisme: Principe Général de l'Equivalence Plastique, . Mondrian described the essay as a "condensed adaptation of the ideas in his Trialogue". The book was translated into French with the help of Mondrian's old friend, Dr Rinus Ritsema van Eck. In the 1925 German edition – the fifth in the Bauhaus Bauhausbücher series – the term néo-plasticisme is translated as Neue Gestaltung .
Between 1935 and 1936, Mondrian wrote an essay in French, translated into English with the help of Winifred Nicholson and published in the book Circle: International Survey of Constructive Art as "Plastic Art and Pure Plastic Art ". After moving to the United States, Mondrian wrote several articles in English with the help of Harry Holtzman and Charmion von Wiegand, in which he maintained the use of the term 'plastic'.
In his book "De Stijl", Paul Overy reflects on the confusing terminology for English readers:
Notwithstanding this critique, Victoria George provides a succinct explanation of Mondrian's terminology:

Neoplastic theory

According to neoplastic principles, every work of art is created intentionally. It is the product of a series of aesthetic choices and, to a lesser extent, of what the work of art represents. For example, the event depicted in the painting Et in Arcadia ego, by Nicolas Poussin, never took place. Even though the postures of the figures are unnatural, it is convincing and forms a harmonious whole.
Every artist manipulates reality to produce an aesthetically and artistically pleasing harmony. The most realistic painters, such as Johannes Vermeer or Rembrandt van Rijn, use all kinds of artistic means to achieve the greatest possible degree of harmony.
The artists of De Stijl called these 'visual means' "beeldend". However, the artist determines to what extent he allows these 'plastic means' to dominate or whether he remains as close as possible to his subject. There is therefore a duality in painting and sculptureand to a lesser extent in architecture, music and literaturebetween the idea of the artist and the matter of the world around us.
The Dutch neo-plasticists, imbued with Calvinism and Theosophy, preferred the universal over the individual, the spiritual over the natural, the abstract over the real, the non-figurative over the figurative, the intuitive over the rational; all of which were summarised by Mondrian as the superiority of pure plastic over the plastic. The neo-plasticists of De Stijl expressed their vision in terms of 'pure' elements, not found in nature: straight lines, right angles, primary colours and precise relationships. This disassociation from nature created a new art, whose essential qualities were spiritual, entirely abstract, and rational.

Idea versus Matter

In his Principles of Neo-Plastic Art, Van Doesburg distinguishes between two types of visual art in art history: works that arise from an internal idea, and works that arise from external matter. He demonstrates this with an abstract model of the Egyptian god Horus and a realistic statue of a Diadumenos respectively. When an artist experiences reality, his aesthetic experience can be expressed as either a material depiction, or an abstract formation. Van Doesburg regards depiction as an 'indirect' form of artistic expression; only abstract formation based on an artist's true aesthetic experience of reality represents a pure form of artistic expression, as expressed by Mondrian in all his essays.

Visual resources

According to the new visual art, every work of art consists of a number of basic elements, which they called 'visual means'. According to the artists of De Stijl, these 'visual means', unlike representation, are entirely inherent to art. If one wanted to produce a work of art 'according to art', one had to use only these basic elements. Mondrian wrote:
While Mondrian limited himself to painting, Van Doesburg believed in the collaboration of all arts to achieve a new Gesamtkunstwerk . To achieve this, it was necessary for each art form to establish its own 'visual means'. Only then was the independence of each art form guaranteed. In 1920 he arrived at the following definition:

Synthesis

The artists of De Stijl strove for more and better cooperation between the arts without each art form losing its independence. The reason for this was what they saw as the architect's role being too great. The greatest results were expected from the collaboration between the architect and the painter. It was then the painter's task to 'recapture' the flat surface of architecture. Van Doesburg wrote about this:
In 1923, following the De Stijl architectural exhibition in Paris, Van Doesburg also involved the 'unenclosed space relationship' of furniture art on architecture. He subsequently regarded architecture as a 'synthesis of new visual expression'. 'In the new architecture, architecture is understood as a part, the summary of all the arts, in its most elementary appearance, as its essence', according to Van Doesburg.

Background

Theo van Doesburg and Piet Mondrian

Although countless artists embraced and applied the ideas of neoplasticism during the interwar period, its origins can mainly be attributed to Theo van Doesburg and Piet Mondrian. They have worked to publicize their ideas through a stream of publications, exhibitions and lectures. Moreover, from 1917 to 1924 they were the constant factors in the otherwise quite turbulent history of the Style Movement. Their views on art were so close that some works by Van Doesburg and Mondrian are almost completely interchangeable. Van Doesburg's widow, Nelly van Doesburg, commented: "I also remember that Mondrian and Does once jointly created a painting with the explicit intention that all traces of individual contribution would be removed. However, this does not mean that both men did not possess a strongly developed personal character. In fact, each had a completely individual temperament, and one can feel that the reason for their friendship lay in the so-called law that 'opposites attract.'".
However, differences of opinion appeared between the two as early as 1919, and in 1922 there was a rift in their relationship over the application of neo-plastic principles to architecture, and Van Doesburg's integration of the element of time into Mondrian's neo-plastic theory.

Theosophy

When Van Doesburg and Mondrian first made public their ideas about the New Plastic art, both painters were influenced by theosophy. Mondrian wrote the first theoretical treatise in his then hometown Laren, North Holland. Here he met the theosophist-author Mathieu Schoenmaekers. Mondrian adopted some of Schoenmaekers' terminology, including the Dutch term beeldend. Van Doesburg and Mondrian's ideas about the spiritual come from Kandinsky's autobiography Über das geistige in der Kunst published in 1911. Mondrian remained interested in theosophy until his death. Van Doesburg distanced himself from theosophy around 1920 and focused on quasi-scientific theories such as the fourth dimension and what he called 'mechanical aesthetics'. However, he continued to use the term 'spiritual' in his articles.

Philosophy

Although Van Doesburg was influenced by Theosophy, his writings were more in the Hegelian philosophical tradition. Unlike Mondrian, Van Doesburg was better informed of the latest developments in theory and adopted many ideas from other theorists, including Wilhelm Worringer. But although Worringer regarded abstraction as the opposite of naturalism, according to Van Doesburg, art history as a whole developed towards abstraction. Van Doesburg borrowed the idea that art and architecture was composed of separate elements from Wölfflins Kunstgeschichtliche Grundbegriffe from 1915. In his lecture Klassiek-Barok-Modern '''', Van Doesburg elaborated on Wölfflin's concept of the contrast between the classical and the baroque, using Hegel's idea of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, where the classical is the thesis, baroque is the antithesis, and modern is the synthesis.

Evolutionary thinking

Van Doesburg developed the theory of neoplasticism to include an evolutionary and therefore temporal element. From 1919 onwards, through lectures and publications, Van Doesburg worked to demonstrate that art slowly developed as a means of expression from the natural to a means of expression of the spiritual. According to him, the spiritual and the natural in art were not always in balance in the past and neoplasticism would restore this balance. The diagram reproduced here, which Van Doesburg probably drew up as a result of the lectures he gave in Jena, Weimar and Berlin in 1921, clearly indicates the extent to which Van Doesburg thought how nature and spirit were related in the various Western European cultural periods. He begins on the far right with the ancient Egyptians and Greeks, where nature and spirit were still in balance. The ancient Romans focused on the natural, while in the Middle Ages the spiritual predominated. In the Renaissance, art again turned towards the natural, only to be surpassed by the Baroque. The Biedermeier and the Idealism and Reform in the nineteenth century restored the balance somewhat, ending in the time of Neoplasticism, in which the polarity between the natural and spiritual was completely abolished. However, Van Doesburg did not see his version of neoplasticism as an ideal final stage or as a utopia. As he states in the same lecture: "Never, anywhere is there an ending. The process is unceasing."