These experiences led to Kandinsky’s decision to leave the academic legal path and follow his heart by becoming a painter. In 1896 at the age of 30, he left Moscow for Munich leaving a job as the director of a printing works specializing in art reproductions.
Munich – a New Beginning
Munich had become a rising artistic city, with a number of new and innovative art movements for example, founded in 1892 the Munich Secession gave a platform for progressive artists to showcase their artworks. Embracing a wide range of stylistic movements such as academic historicism and naturalism to Impressionism to Symbolism, the Secession allowed its students to break free from the traditional Academy exhibitions, bringing a new and fresh element to the Munich art scene.
Jugendstil was another rising contemporary movement in Munich. Based on the Arts and Crafts Movement in England and the German version of Art Nouveau in France and Belgium, Jugendstil was founded in Munich in 1896 and tried to create a new awareness of form opposed to the obsessive detail of the 19th-century traditions. Characteristics of this style were the use of strong surging lines with decorative ornament abstracted entirely from the representational world.
Accompanied by his wife and cousin Anya Chimikian, Kandinsky arrived in Munich and quickly began his studies at a popular art school run by Anton Ažbè. But after a number of life classes drawing “expressionless, characterless” models he found he felt more at home with colour than with drawing and found himself completing a number of private studies painting vibrantly coloured landscapes. These works led Kandinskys classmates to nickname him the “colourist” and a “landscape painter”. After a second application, Kandinsky was accepted into the painting class run by Academy professor Franz von Stuck, co-founder of the Munich Secession. Here, Kandinskys “extravagant use of colour” was controlled as he was advised to work only in black and white for a while “so as to study form by itself”. Eventually after a year, Kandinsky left Stuck’s class, but brought with him valuable lessons as Stuck had taught him to how to integrate his spontaneous creative ideas into the overall composition.
Kandinsky now wanted the freedom to explore his own artistic creativity, and in May 1901 he co-founded the exhibition group Phalanx and later the Phalanx school of painting. Their goal was not only to exhibit their own and other French Impressionist and Neo-Impressionist art but to also to give other underrepresented artists the platform to exhibit their work. Here Kandinsky met Gabriele Munter, who became his close companion and critic throughout his years in Munich, closely following him as he journeyed to abstraction.
A Period of Experimentation
After the closing of the Phalanx school of painting in 1903, Kandinsky and Gabriele travelled extensively throughout Europe for the next 5 years. This was a period of experimentation for Kandinsky as he explored new means of artistic expression. Much of his work completed in this time harks back to his homeland Russia as he picks out themes from Russian folksong and legend recalled from childhood memories. In Couple Riding (1906/07) (see Appendix 1, fig. 1) Kandinsky depicts a scene from a Russian fairytale; the beautiful Helena is carried home by a knight after being rescued from the evil firebird. Here by the use of his shimmering palette and impressionistic application of paint, Kandinsky manages to create a romantic atmospheric scene, derived purely from the world of the imaginary and completely symbolic in character. In future works, Kandinsky would continue to draw on Russian imagery, as the symbolic nature of folk art and its freedom of expression were separate to that of well-known art. Kandinsky understood that it’s unskilled traditions represented a true spiritual art and he attempted to include this into his own work.
However, upon his return to Munich in 1908, Kandinsky was finding his search for a non-representational art arduous. In spite of this, his discovery of the small town Murnau in the foothills of the Bavarian Alps provided him with the quiet, undisturbed inspiration that he so desired. It’s picturesque landscape reminded him of the beauty of Russia and here he embarked upon an undisturbed period of creative activity, with frequent exchanges with fellow Russian art colleagues, Alexei von Jawlensky and Marianne von Werefkin.
The Early Murnau years
Kandinsky’s work from this time shows similarities to the work of Paul Cézanne, who believed that the artist should look beyond the surface of the external reality and focus on what lies beneath. Although they both believed one should look upon an object without prejudice, Cézanne was only thinking in terms of our experience with colour, whereas Kandinsky broadened this theory to incorporate our entire sensual perception.
During his Murnau period, Kandinskys work starts off as seeming somewhat conventional, with obvious links and influences to Impressionist painting and especially Fauve paintings. Whilst exhibiting with the Fauves at the Salon d’Automne in 1905 Kandinsky admired the expressive use of colour by such artists as Matisse and Vlaminck and adopted this as he searched for the pure, spiritual, abstract art.
This goal was reached in a number of ways. Some pictures show a realistic sense of space as he has visibly created a clear foreground, middle space and background, but specific elements of nature have been melted into luminous blocks of colour. Although we still read these paintings as landscapes, their realism is weakened by his use of an unnatural palette and strong expressive brush strokes.
Kandinsky – The Master of Colour
Visiting the exhibition “Masters of Colour: Derain to Kandinsky” in November 2002 at the Royal Academy of Arts, I had a chance to witness at first hand in a very intimate setting the power of Kandinsky’s paintings. There, with only three of his paintings they managed to provide insights into a dramatic development that turned out to be pivotal for twentieth-century painting. One of which, Murnau – The Garden II (1910) (see Appendix 1, fig. 2) shows clearly how Kandinsky developed a pictorial language derived (or abstracted) from nature in the landscapes of Murnau. Here, certain aspects of the landscape are still visible i.e. the cloud, the row of houses on a steep incline and the foreground sunflowers. Instead of representation, Kandinsky gives us the strength and quality of the colours – the bright yellow sunflowers and the solid bold blue sky, juxtaposed with the energetic rhythms set up by the relationship between forms, and the expressive ‘handwriting’ of the brushstrokes. Conventional perspective has here given way to a more two-dimensional manner of representation. The undefined outline of each element and blurring colour zones show he was already moving away from figurative art and beginning to play around with the distortion of the object.
“On the Spiritual in Art”
In 1909, Kandinsky wrote the essay On the Spiritual in Art (Über das Geistige in der Kunst) a treatise containing his ideas and theories about a new modern art. This book, along with the Blaue Reiter Almanac has been ranked as one of the most influential upon twentieth-century art. In it he emphasizes the importance of the “internal necessity”, the idea that painting should grow from the internal voice of the painter, therefore the picture would be released from external subjectivity and instead based on our inner impressions. The book is comprised of two sections, the first containing a series of philosophical reflections on art, and the second is a thesis on colour and the power he believed it held. He begins the first section by debating the different artistic principles of past eras, how its need for imitation could create only at best soulless works empty of any internal meaning. Kandinsky recognised that there were some artists who “seek the internal in the world of the external”, such as Rossetti and English painter and poet Dante Gabriel. Although Kandinsky praised Matisse as a colourist, Kandinsky determined that he couldn’t free himself from conventional beauty. Picasso on the other hand adopted a more logical approach in his attempt to hide the object, by breaking it up into its individual parts and scattering them across the canvas. However, Picasso never sought to dissolve the object completely, as he always maintains some type of resemblance to the material object in his art. This chapter is concluded with the words “Matisse – colour. Picasso – form. Two great pointers toward one great goal.”
In the second part of On the Spiritual in Art Kandinsky discusses the physical and psychological effects of colour on the viewer. Kandinsky believed colour had no lasting physical effects as they were superficial, but psychologically, colour was capable of calling forth “a vibration from the soul.” As well as different colours having certain associations with the emotions they evoke, Kandinsky also believed that colour had a direct influence on the soul.
“Colour is the keyboard. The eye is the hammer. The soul is the piano, with its many strings.”
The artist is therefore the hand, which has the capability of setting the soul vibrating. Kandinsky then goes on to explain that colour unlike form cannot exist by itself, instead when the put together certain colours are reinforced by certain forms. And, as well as their physical effects, colours also hold spiritual qualities. Yellow for example is stimulating and unsettling with a shrill sound, whereas blue is a typically calming colour, with connotations of purity and heaven. Musically, dark blue can be compared to the deep notes of the organ.
Despite the books highly intellectual content, Kandinsky’s main point is quite clearly put forward. He constantly refers to the importance of the “inner necessity”, something which is present in everyone – a spiritual domain capable of producing art as true, pure and as personal as nature. Kandinsky saw that for years artists had responded only to materialistic objectives, and attempted to reproduce what they could see and not what they could feel, resulting in what he felt the abandonment of the spiritual and natural creativity in art in favour of technique. Since the development of photography pictures could now record all events, situations, or people, the skill of the artist had now been freed from reproduction by hand, therefore enabling him to develop a higher stage in artistic expression. Music for Kandinsky encompassed all the freedom of creativity and spirituality that art should aspire to. The composer Arnold Schoenberg was the creator of atonal music, and Kandinsky was looking in painting for what Schoenberg had already achieved in music: a new harmony based on laws immanent in art.
Impressions, Improvisations & Compositions
Between the years of the publication of the Blaue Reiter Almanac and the outbreak of the First World War, Kandinsky had now moved away from naturalism and was slowly freeing himself from the object. Since 1909, Kandinsky had been naming his works “Impression”, “Improvisation” or “Composition” depending on how they were inspired. An “impression” was the result of a direct impression of external nature and an “improvisation” the direct impression of internal nature. Whereas a “composition” was deliberate and often arose from a number of studies. Kandinsky viewed the compositions as major statements of his artistic ideas. They share several characteristics that express this monumentality: the impressively large format, the conscious, deliberate planning of the composition, and the transcendence of representation by increasingly abstract imagery. Just as symphonies define milestones in the career of a composer, Kandinsky's compositions represented the culmination of his artistic vision at a given moment in his career.
In Composition IV (1911) (see Appendix 1, fig. 3) Kandinsky paints his perception of a battle scene, so unlike traditional depictions, we are presented with a canvas full of seemingly unfamiliar forms and soaring lines juxtaposed with bright swirling colours. My first introduction to Composition IV was seeing its preparatory oil study painted in 1910 at the Tate Modern in London (see Appendix 1, fig. 4). Concentrating on the left half of the final composition, the structure of the linear elements is more intricate and complex than the final version. His simplification and distortion of figures and lack of any realistic sense of back-, middle- or foreground clearly illustrates his move towards abstraction. However, after much decoding the subject matter is still recognisable; the two mounted Cossacks engaged in battle with their sweeping swords and the groups of lance carrying Cossacks on foot all set against a sweetly coloured setting with a rainbow and birds in the sky.
In the final version of Composition IV Kandinsky irons out all the intricacies found in the preliminary oil study which gave too much clarity to viewer as to the object of the painting, such as the birds and the more descriptive black outlines of certain forms. Kandinsky hoped by doing this he would achieve his goal – that our attention isn’t distracted by the object from the harmonious combination of colours and forms. The painting is divided abruptly in the centre by two thick, black vertical lines. On the left, a violent motion is expressed through the profusion of sharp, jagged and entangled lines. On the right, all is calm, with sweeping forms and colour harmonies. We have followed Kandinsky's intention that our initial reaction should result from the emotional impact of the pictorial forms and colours. However, upon closer inspection the apparent abstraction of this work proves illusory. The dividing lines are actually two lances held by red-hatted Cossacks. Next to them, a third, white-bearded Cossack leans on his violet sword. They stand before a blue mountain crowned by a castle. In the lower left, two boats are depicted. Above them, two mounted Cossacks are joined in battle, brandishing violet sabres. On the lower right, two lovers recline, while above them two robed figures observe from the hillside. Kandinsky has reduced representation to pictographic signs in order to obtain the flexibility to express a higher, cosmic vision. The deciphering of these signs is the key to understanding the theme of the work. An awareness of Kandinsky's philosophy leads to a reading of Composition IV as expressing the apocalyptic battle that will end in eternal peace. Composition IV works on multiple levels: initially, the colours and forms exercise an emotional impact over the viewer, without need to consider the representational aspects. Then, the decoding of the representational signs involves the viewer on an intellectual level. I find that I can no longer view Composition IV without automatically translating the imagery to representational forms. Yet, this solving of the work's mysteries does not draw the life from it; rather, the original emotional impact is strengthened in a new way.
By 1912, the degree of abstraction in his paintings was quite advanced. The painting Improvisation 26 (Rowing) 1912 best shows Kandinsky’s progression at that time into non-figurative art (see Appendix 1, fig. 5). Those familiar with Kandinsky’s simplified formal language would see that the black curving lines above the oars are three figures, the red line which scoops beneath them is a boat and the red line crossing through them is the surface of the water. However, the large and small fields of colour that lie behind these graphic elements seem to ignore the linear boundaries that they suggest. This creates a canvas made up of two pictorial planes: the first graphic, made up of harsh diagonal oars which instil a sense of tension into the painting, and the second, a plane filled with luminous colour zones, floating free, which determine the paintings tone. The large area of yellow, which draws our eye in first, is tensely combined with a patch of blue. Used sparingly, the warmth of the red contrasts with the blue and yellow, creating as Kandinsky wrote in On the Spiritual in Art “Harmony out of opposites and contradictions.” To an average viewer Improvisation 26 could perhaps be seen only as a canvas composed of blotches of colour thrown together in a seemingly unplanned manner, without any thought behind it. To the untrained eye it is exceptionally difficult to determine any connections to the real world in this painting, so instead of looking for something which isn’t necessarily there, we can only appreciate what we can see – a harmonious combination of colour and abstract forms.
Conclusion
During this exploration of Kandinsky’s career, I feel not only to have gained a deeper understanding into his art, but also into his mind, which although very complex, contained the fundamental beliefs of which all his artistic endeavours were based upon.
Secondary to his artistic career, Kandinsky will always be known as an influential theorist. When he joined the faculty at the Bauhaus in 1922, Kandinsky taught his ideas of a pure, spiritual art to his students, showing them the importance of the relationship between colour and form. His book On the Spiritual in Art is still regarded as one of the documents most influential upon twentieth-century art, showing that those who may not have been fond of Kandinsky as an artist would have respected him as a theorist.
However, despite now understanding why Kandinsky chose to take such a revolutionary stance in creating a new pictorial language, when encountered with one of his more abstract paintings, I am still slightly bewildered. My artistic eye is still very much untrained therefore cannot easily deconstruct and analyse a painting filled with complex abstract forms and an unnatural use of colour which denies all traditional laws of perspective. Nevertheless, regardless of this, I still hold a particular enjoyment in Kandinsky’s art, as to me, it represents a true freedom of expression spoken from the heart and brought to life only by colour and form. Kandinsky hoped that by gradually concealing the object, the painting would subsequently become infused by colour and form grown from the internal necessity, producing a psychological effect on the soul of the viewer. He wanted not for his paintings to be deciphered for content but for each form reinforced by a corresponding colour, to come alive in the eyes of the viewer thus creating its own content. Having taken this on board, I now realize that it can be pointless looking for a meaning behind Kandinsky’s paintings as it won’t necessarily be found. But I believe it is possible for everyone to love and appreciate his paintings for what we can see – a canvas filled with a poetic arrangement of colour and abstract forms, only then can we truly feel the possible emotional effects which they evoke.
Illustrations Appendix 1
Fig. 1
Couple Riding, 1906/07
Reitendes Paar, Oil on canvas, 55 x 50.5
Munich, Stadtische Galerie im Lenbachhaus
Fig. 2
Murnau – The Garden II, 1910
Murnau – Der Garten II
Oil on board, 67 x 51 cm
Mr and Mrs Merzbacher, the Merzbacher Foundation
Illustrations Appendix 1
Fig. 3
Composition IV, 1911
Komposition IV, Oil on canvas, 159.5 x 250.5 cm
Düsseldorf, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen
Fig. 4
Section for Composition IV, 1910
Komposition IV, Oil Study, 94.5 x 130 cm
London, Tate Gallery
Illustrations Appendix 1
Fig. 5
Improvisation 26 (Rowing), 1912
Improvisation 26 (Rudern), Oil on canvas, 97 x 107.5 cm
Munich, Stadtische Galerie im Lenbachhaus
Cover:
Composition VII, 1913
Komposition VII, Oil on canvas, 200 x 300 cm
Moscow, State Tretyakov Gallery
Bibliography
- Kandinsky – The Masterworks
Edited by Ramon Tio Bellido
Bracken Books, 1988
Kandinsky – The Journey to Abstraction
Edited by Karen Williams, Low Barns
Taschen, 1999
Wassilly Kandinsky Point and Line to Plane
Edited by Kandinsky
Dover Books
- http://www.glyphs.com/art/kandinsky
