Friday, March 30, 2012

What is "Avant Garde"? And Manet.

          To me, avant-garde represents the foward thinking and openness to new ideas that occur as generations progress. Just as Manet's "Luncheon" seemed radical and new at the time it was done, the same work could now seem traditional or "old fashioned" to someone of our generation who is not familiar with Manet's work. A new idea or perspective which progresses us and improves us on any scale is, or once was avant-garde.  Avant-garde allows us to re-evaluate ourselves and our world. It gives us another point of view and is often thought provoking. I believe getting people to think for themselves is incredibly important.
          Avant garde, in a sense, can survive on its own as a kind of theory or way in which to live by. It manifests itself in the arts since art often directly reflects changes to our world and our cultures. It reflects our species' remarkable adaptation to build off the knowledge and experiences of generations, both present and ancient, to help us better understand our world. Think about all the things we wouldn't know if our parents hadn't known it first.
         On the other hand, Manet, whose work has been described as avant-garde,  is very famous for his work "Luncheon on the Grass". At a second glance, it makes little sense at all. It seems as though Manet is attempting to baffle his audience, to make them critically think about his work and how it may relate to realms outside of the painting. As its content was controversial and new, it challenged its viewers. People didn't know what to think of the painting and it became a scandal. It was so disliked that no one would buy it. And yet "Luncheon" is a celebrated work of art today. This is the spirit of Avant Garde. Manet is challenging his audience to think about his work and to challenge their everyday perspectives on life.


1 comment:

  1. I think that Manet is attempting to baffle his audience in a lot of ways. For example, the nude female is sitting next to two clothed gentlemen (who wear 19th century clothing). All of the sudden, this nude is not a "timeless" nude that suggests some type of classical goddess. Manet is depicting a contemporary nude, thus "challenging" the viewer to think about the conventions associated with depictions of the female figure.

    I also think that Manet baffles his audience with his disinterest in illusionism. At the time, it was traditional for paintings to be illusionistic (and give the suggestion of depth). Manet goes against that convention by deliberately suggesting that his painting is, in fact, just a painting (and not an actual piece of real life).

    -Prof. Bowen

    ReplyDelete