| | Torres & Kamhi on "Romantic Realism"
-
On an Aristos webpage* providing some information
about Capuletti, Lou Torres refers in passing to the term
"Romantic Realism" as applied by Objectivists -- or, rather,
in his view, as in mine and Jonathan's, misapplied -- to the
visual arts. The context is his listing of Quent Cordair Fine Art
as a source for "a few limited edition prints and other examples
of Capuletti's work, among many items by other artists."
* URL:
http://www.aristos.org/capulett.htm
Torres continues:
"(The gallery unfortunately labels the work it carries
as contemporary "Romantic Realism," a term long misapplied
by Objectivists to the visual arts--based on Rand's
characterization of herself as a 'Romantic Realist' writer,
in her essay 'The Goal of My Writing.' For a discussion
of Rand's concept of 'Romanticism,' see What Art Is:
The Esthetic Theory of Ayn Rand, 31-33.)
Following up on that reference...here's the passage cited:
EXCERPT-
[All ellipses in original.]
Romanticiam and Naturalism
To elucidate her view that "the palce of ethics in any given
work of art" depends on the metaphysical view of the artist,
Rand briefly introduces two concepts--Romanticism and Naturalism.
These concepts figure prominently in her personal esthetic of
literature but are misleading in the context of her theory
of art, and have led to much confusion in the meager Objectivist
literature on her esthetics. (23) Her analysis of these concepts--
both in "The Psycho-Espistemology of Art" and in an essay she wrote
four years later, "What Is Romanticiam?" (as well as in several
other essays reprinted in The Romantic Manifesto)--is almost
exclusively in terms of fiction and drama, and she fails to
indicate how her analysis would apply to other art forms.
Rand argues as follows: If an artist believes that man possesses
volition, his work will be value-oriented; this is the essence of
*Romanticism*. If, on the other hand, an artist is a determinist,
holding that human life is controlled by external forces, his work
will have an "anti-value" focus; Rand identifies this approach with
*Naturalism*. Romantic art, according to Rand, projects "the values
man *is to seek*" and presents "the concretized vision of the life
he *is to achieve*." (23, emphasis ours) In contrast, Naturalistic
art "assert[s] that man's efforts are futile" and presents "the
concretized vision of defeat and despair as his ultimate fate."
Rand's initial focus on the concept of value-orientation as a
defining characteristic of Romanticism is particularly confusing
in the context of her theory of art. As she argues elsewhere,
*all* art (not just Romantic art), necessarily involves values:
"It is inconceivable to have an art divorced from values....
Values cannot be separated from any human activity....It is
impossible...to write a book [for example] without some kind of
selectivity....Every time a man has to exercise a choice,
he is directed by some kind of values, conscious or not."
Delving further into the question in the essay entitled "What Is
Romanticism?," Rand offers the following definition: "*Romanticism
is a category of art based on the recognition of the principle that
man possesses the faculty of volition*." (99, emphasis ours)
Although she employs the generic term "art" in this definition,
her subsequent argument explicitly refers only to "the field of
literature." (99ff.) Moreover, the attributes she regards as
*defining* Romanticism are again specific to fiction and drama
and cannot be validly generalized to other art forms. It is clear
that by the phrase "recognition of the principle that man possesses
the faculty of volition," Rand does not mean simply that the artist
exercises volition during the creative process. As we have just
noted, *all* art-making, in her view, entails volition. What she
means instead is that the principle of volition is objectified
in the art work itself. As Rand herself argued in another context,
the only way the principle of volition can be fully and clearly
objectified is through the presentation of characters engaged in
the choice and pursuit of values over time; that is, through their
purposeful, on-going actions to gain or to keep their values
in the face of obstacles or conflicts, whether internal or
external. The only art forms in which that principle can be
concretized are narrative and dramatic literature--as Peikoff's
previously [on pg. 30] quoted remarks on the "model-building
aspect" of art confirm.
Notwithstanding her numerous references to Romantic "art,"
Rand offers few clues as to what she considers to be the defining
attributes of Romanticism in the visual arts or music. Those she
does offer bear no relation to her own definition of Romantic art
in terms of the "principle of volition." In her early essay
"The Goal of My Writing," for example, she cites a scene from
*The Fountainhead* in which the architect-protagonist Howard
Roark explains to the sculptor Steven Mallory that he wants
Mallory to create a sculpture for the Stoddard Temple because
his figures "have a magnificent respect for the human being"
and represent "the heroic in man." Rand explains that,
in this passage, she "was consciously and deliberately stating
the essential goal of [her] own work" as a "Romantic Realist." (168)
But surely one could attribute "respect for the human being" and a
sense of "the heroic in man" to any number of works predating the
nineteenth century--for example, various classical Greek sculptures,
Renaissance works such as Michelangelo's *David*, or numerous
figures by Bernini and other Baroque sculptors, to cite but a
few. These works could not properly be termed "Romantic,"
however, since Romanticism was an historical phenomenon,
a product of a unique set of forces in the Western world of
the nineteenth century, as Rand herself emphasizes.
Rand's only other reference to Romanticism in the visual arts occurs
in the context of her criticism of the "virulently intense antagonism
of today's esthetic spokesmen to any manifestation of the Romantic
premise in art." (102) She argues not only that they resent plot
structure in literature for its "implicit premise of volition
(and, therefore, of moral values)" but also that
[t]he same reaction, for the same subconscious reason,
is evoked by such elements as heroes or happy endings
or the triumph of virtue, or, in the visual arts,
beauty. Physical beauty is not a moral or volitional
issue--but the *choice* to paint a beautiful human being
rather than an ugly one, implies the existence of
volition: of choice, standards, values. [102, emphasis
in original]
Rand's attribution of "the *choice* to paint a beautiful human
being rather than an ugly one" to "the Romantic premise [of volition]
in art" is mistaken on several counts, however. Most obvious is
that artists long before the Romantic era chose to paint beautiful
subjects. More troubling, however, is Rand's apparent implication
that the choice to paint a physically *ugly* human being necessarily
indicates an *absence* of volition or values. She fails to consider
how the individual artist's context and hierarchy of values might
affect the significance of his depiction of beauty or ugliness
in a given painting. Consider, for example, the insightful
portraits Velazques (1599-1660) painted of the dwarfs of the
Spanish court. Although he realistically depicted their physical
deformity, that aspect is transcended by the depths of character
he captured in each subject--qualities ranging from the serene
confidence of his *Don Diego de Acedo* to the fierce pride
of his *Don Sebastian de Morra*. Here, as elsewhere, meaning
in art resides not merely in the ostensible subject portrayed
but, more crucially, in *how* it is portrayed--a principle
Rand herself recognizes in other contexts (see Chapter 3).
END EXCERPT-
Speaking of her recognizing in other contexts the issue
of *how* a subject is portrayed, a remark she made about
Capuletti's drawings of Flamenco performers is a case
in point.
She writes in her article "Capuletti," *The Objectivist*,
December 1966, pg. 14:
"A different aspect of Capuletti's art, yet the same basic
principle, is shown in the eight portraits of Flamenco
performers (individual artists within a traditional Spanish
school of folk music and singing [and dancing - ES]).
These are a brilliant display of visual characterization,
done in black and white tempera, each presenting the essence
of a personality by means of a face and two hands, with a
mere suggestion of the body. The subjects are aging,
portly, physically unattractive men and women--
yet, catching them in action, Capuletti brings out their
remarkable vitality, their purposeful drive and, above all,
their *dignity*. Degas managed to make ballerinas look
awkward and flat-footed; Capuletti makes middle-aged
peasants look significant and imposing. Such is his
view of man."
The Flamenco drawings can be found at:
http://papertig.com/cpmenu.htm
Ellen
___
|
|
