Munich – revival in the arts => closest to the grass roots.
- vulgar Jugendstil => how the boom in a new art => adapted to meet
the needs of the bourgeoisie. Lack of respect for the lofty and elevated
=> a democracy in the arts (democratic trend, populist or vernacular)
- The new works of art had popular appeal (simple and pleasing).
- Munich Art Nouveau => was not intellectual BUT not insubstantial
either.
- Roots in the home province – Bavaria (Richard Riemerschmid – folkloric
motifs)
Other places: 1. the youthful rebellion
2. a return to more time-honored forms
Munich: at the same time => the people in Munich were opened to novelty but not overcome by curiosity and the desire to replace the old with the new (the old and the new were combined in Jugendstil)
The conservative open-mindedness => the result of its artistic past.
Munich: escaped the excesses of Wilhelmine historicism; the period
of rapid industrial expansion (late 19th century) – passed without altering
its values; the city had grown at a steady pace.
1830-1840: the city was given a Classicist façade with a gently
romanticized historicist touch => the University + many unpretentious bourgeois
houses.
Munich: an important artistic center during king Ludwig I => German
architects, and painters met in Munich more than in any other German city;
sheltered some of the most important art collections (Wittelsbach Sammlung)
1848-1864: King Maximilian II – a more pragmatic ruler => encouraged
industrialization and turned to England for models (not to ancient Greece)
- modern buildings => made of glass and iron
EX: the Crystal Palace => which was the unofficial cultural center
of Munich until its distruction by fire (1931).
Munich: maintained its equilibrium in economic development and in the
planning and design of the city (despite the onset of industrialization).
? there is no violent disruption, no drastic changes in townscape,
and no visible negative effects.
1864-1886: king Ludwig II => decorative arts received a strong support.
- his whimsical castles (scattered through Bavaria).
Liutpold (Ludwig II successor) – opposed a strong democratic (populist)
trend.
- like Ludwig I => he was a patron of the arts (BUT – the public spirit
had grown more independent in the 1900 => the artistic developments had
natural roots (there were not artificially induced, there were not a matter
of economic necessity).
The Royal Academy of Fine Arts – important role in the artistic life
- founded in 1760s as the only educational institution for painting
and sculpture (even in late 1800s); the Academy organized exhibits until
1863.
1868: exhibits were organized by the Munchener Kunstlergenossenschaft
– a social and professional association of artists.
- it was totally independent from Academy and state
- the goal: the enlightenment of people through art, through Bildung
=> idea that gave the association a strong democratic character.
- Discounted tickets or free tickets for the exhibit => were
offered to visitors from the lower social classes
- The association attached beer gardens to exhibit halls => highly
criticized.
All those concepts => German liberalism
? 1869-1893 and from 1899 on: the Bavarian Parliament was dominated
by the Catholic Center party.
? BUT the Bavarian monarchs – appointed liberal (sometimes Protestant)
ministers to the royal cabinets.
? The ministers => defended the liberal position => the evolution of
the culture (like that of economy) should not be tampered with => Kunstlergenossenschaft
– benefited => received financial support from the state (with few strings
attached).
The artist – had an elevated social position in Munich
? 1871 when the independent states south of the river Main joined the
German Confederation => the beginning of new achievements in science,
technology, art, literature, education, and politics
? BUT: nostalgia for the lost autonomy and the difficult adaptation
to the new national state => had positive consequences for the status of
the artist in Munich.
? Art – viewed as a substitute for political independence.
Thomas Mann: “the very policeman would stand at attention with the passing
of a famous painter”.
Theodor Goering (a theater critic): the painter in Bavaria possessed
“an officer’s position in society…”
1891: the Secession moment in Bavaria => a number of artists disgruntled
by the Kunstlergenossenschaft’s collectivist policies and small profits
=> met in small groups to discuss possible reforms.
? a few changes were made BUT the egalitarian mood remained.
1892: a few artists dissociated from the organization - established
an informal club
April 1892 (the first meeting) – the name of the new group: Verein
Bildender Kunstler Munchens.
The goal: to transcend the provincialism of the Kunstlergenossenschaft
exhibitions => by small annual exhibitions – international in scope and
elite in character.
The exhibitions – should be absolutely artistic
- limited membership => to true or genuine artists.
Theodor Fischer (1862-1938): started out in the traditional style =>
his work the form less of historicism and more of simplicity. He built
bridges and schools – still define the city today
- he was part of the generation of artists who created Jugendstil (his
work shows little signs of the new art).
Franz von Stuck (1863-1928) – from a lower middle class family, the
son of a miller. The particle von – was added in 1905.
- he did not attend the Gymnasium => went to a local trade school in
Passau and to Kunstgewerbeschule in Munich.
- Kunstgewerbeschule – was designed after the English model => an institution
for teaching art and craft based on the copying of historical models.
- Stuck embraced the classical models, he was also attached to Symbolism
=> leading role in organizing the Secessionist group; created the poster
for the first Secessionist exhibit in Munich (1893).
1897-1898: his Villa on the Prinzregentenstasse (Munich) – was traditional,
classical and, simple. Familiar with the gods – used them everywhere throughout
the house (the bathroom).
His goal => to create a setting for himself.
There is no stylistic unity (Empire style, Renaissance rooms etc.)
=> he house is his greatest work
- his furniture in antique style => a gold medal at the Paris Exhibition
(1900).
? Why do you think the Art Nouveau artists designed their houses (amateur
architects)?
- it was almost like an obligation, a proof that one was a master of
all disciplines, was close to the proclaimed ideal of total work of art.
(Peter Behrens, Richard Riemerschmid – farm style house in Pasing (near
Munich) Alfred Walter von Heymel (publisher, writer, and hero of Prince
Cuckoo – a neo-Biedermeier apartment)
1893: the first Secessionist exhibit => Franz Stuck designed the main
poster => he used the image of Pallas Athena (her head in profile crowned
by a helmet and set within an octagonal mosaic pattern) => became the symbol
of the Munich Secession.
1897: the poster of the first joined exhibition of the Secession and
the Genossenschaft => frontalized the goddess.
1898: using the 1897 poster => painted an individual frontal portrait
of Pallas Athena.
- in the posters => he was careful in preserving the classical model.
- In the painting => Athena appears as a real woman, with a real body
depicted in warm hues.
- The use of classical models and mythological figures => the existence
of a strong association of those symbols with an anti-Catholic attitude.
Bavaria: Classicism was used by the monarchs to weaken the power of
clerics and nobility; to mold an educated and politically loyal middle
class => would serve the state (not the Church).
When Stuck painted his Athena => the liberals had been defeated by
political forces supported by the Catholic Church.
Fin de siecle in Munich => the atmosphere was more repressive than
in the previous decades (liberal administration defended artistic freedom
against attacks from the Catholic Church and the Center Party).
Stuck founded a school => students: Kandinsky, Paul Klee and Fritz
Erler.
Hermann Obrist (1862-1927):
- born in Switzerland
1876 – moved to Weimer where he lived with his mother near Goethe’s
former garden pavilion.
- early youth => experienced visions => latter he tried to reproduce
them his art
1886: traveled extensively
1890: Paris
1895: Munich
- build his own house; founded a school (the Munich Teaching and Experimental
Studios for Applied and Free Art)
- he made his mark on Munich => wall hangings, later monumental masonry.
His style => drew freely on nature (bone-like structure, foaming waves
or crystals => shapes and designs from another world) (images from his
inner life)
- His writings (found after his death) – testimony to his struggle
to give material shape to his visionary experience.
- He could not make the transition to total abstraction (one of his
goals)
- His works display a inner movement, an urge to seek and to find
- His work served as a model for other artists (all the Munich Art
Nouveau artists were influenced by him)
Obrist’s art => reflected a monistic worldview
- the zoologist Ernst Haeckel (founder of the German life-reform movement)
promoted the same point of view the Monist League – a proto-Nazi organization
(which took Solvay’s Productivism a step further towards racism).
- Hackel’s monism called for racist social reforms => based on his
study of the active material substrate – the stuff of life present in all
organic bodies.
- Hackel realized that life is essentially the conversion of energy
=> it is only the vital combination of internal and external factors that
leads to life.
- Obrist’s Monument to the Pillar (1898): suggests this relationship.
? from the rough rock rises a smooth column crowned by a capital of
geometric forms
? the pillar (not the human figure) is the subject => it is a symbol
of the transformation of matter, or energy from its chaotic natural state
into one perfectly shaped by humans.
Other cultural personalities shared those ideas => Georg Hirth (editor
of the Jugend – the Youth – the leading Munich arts periodical)
Georg Hirth was co-founder of the Monist League; he dedicated space
in the magazine to romanticized celebrations of Aryan youth and nature.
Hugo Hoppener (Fidus) – illustrator for the Jugend => shared the same
believes => he was living in a rural Volkish commune, practicing free love,
vegetarianism, and nudity, trying to be self-sufficient, wearing reform-dress
made from natural fibers, indulging in occult religions and painting young
men and women, who were always blond and fair skinned, tall and slender,
usually naked (if dressed, than only in Germanic costumes)
=> his graphic art – looks like a promotion of anti-Christian paganism
and the cult of heroic nudity, of a superior race in touch with the rhythms
of the cosmos.
August Endell (1871-1925):
1891: studied philosophy and psychology in Tubingen
1892-1901: lived in Munich, he taught himself craftwork designs and
architecture. He devoted himself to theory.
=> his main principle: stop thinking and start feeling.
1901: went to Berlin (worked on various commissions).
1904: founded a Form school (opened until 1914)
Important works: Elvira Studio (1897/98, Munich) Buntes Theater (The
Multicolored Theater) (1901, Berlin)
The Elvira Studio (for Sophia and Mathilde Goudstikker): renovated an
existing building => he invented a gigantic decorative form in plaster
relief to fill the upper space of the façade.
? a combination of a Chinese dragon with Germanic fairy-tale, with
a comet’s tail on a Japanese wave => it was nothing and everything => organic
and fantastic dynamism, abstract and real, vital, aggressive.
? Ornament is not anymore an integral part of architecture BUT architecture
serves only as a neutral background for ornamentation.
- his original design – in the iron work door and in the interior
- the Studio was greeted with rage and delight => the courage of the
two women who commissioned the work surprising => their work was conventional
- Hitler => ordered the destruction of the building => it gave him
nightmares.
Bernhard Pankok (1872-1943)
- trained as a painter => studied at the Kunstakademie in Dusseldorf
and in Berlin(1889)
- 1892: opened his own studio in Munich
- he was a contributor to Jugend
- a versatile artist => designed passenger compartments for zeppelins,
theater sets, installations for the German display at international exhibitions
(turn of the century), a house in Tubingen (functionalism + organic grace
+ rustic romanticism)
Paul Bruno (1874-1968), Richard Riemerschmid (1868-1957), Peter Behrens
– founded (with Pankok) – the Vereinigte Werkstatten fur Kunst im Handverk
(United Workshops for Artists Craftsmanship) (1897) – an enterprise set
up to establish a commercial basis for the new art and a co-operative relationship
between the designer, craftsman, manufacturer, and the consumer.
- the Workshops => modeled on William Morris workshops => the artist
was the entrepreneur.
- => they were invited to take part in the Paris World Exhibition (1900)
– they did not share the space allocated to the official German House (the
spirit of Wilhelm II)
Paul Bruno – contributor to Jugent and Simplicissimus (a satirical
magazine)
- he criticized and made fun of corruption and immorality (state, aristocracy,
military, church, bourgeoisie, workers, women, nationalists, and foreigners.
- His cartoons became a hallmark of Simplicissimus (he drew 500 cartoons)=>
the use of flat and sinuous forms, exaggerated facial expressions, distorted
anatomies, large blocks of monochromatic color and empty space, contrast
of dark and light.
- Able to present complex relationships in simple terms (in his cartoons)
=> later he incorporated this feature in his furniture design and interior
décor.
Richard Riemerschmid – the only Bavarian among the founders of the United
Workshops
- Born in Munich, studied painting at the Academy in Munich => he departed
from a floral, pictoral form of Art Nouveau => toward a rationalist aesthetic
(a functionalist design)
- The Kammerspiele , Munich (1901)
- he worked in wood, glass, ceramic, fabric and wicker furniture.
- Moved into mass production – he was a pragmatic artist, concerned
for quality BUT also affordability => he would work with Dresden Workshops
for Applied Art => he designed model apartments and their furnishings (including
machine made furniture) => its success inspired the foundation in Munich
of Deutscher Werkbund (champion of mechanistic modernism) (1907)
Visual arts:
Maria Makela: points out to a different dimension of the term modern
as it emerged in Munich => she identifies the parodic nature of the visual
arts
Ex: Franz von Stuck, The Guardian of Paradise
Lovis Corinth, The Temptation of Saint
Anthony
Glaudius Dei – from Thomas Mann’s short
story => an unconventional Madonna, eroticized, beautiful, unidealized.
? all those parodic paintings => critique and ridicule the traditional
art and the consumers of this art
? parody => used to critique Catholics and Catholicism
The new critical aesthetic => sociopolitical context: the dying liberalism and the emerging political Catholicism
Visual artists => responded to the Center party which in 1890s => started
their public morality campaign (against the decadent and pornographic avant-garde)
? parody and the new modern aesthetic (fin de siecle) in Munich =>
is rooted in aesthetic persecution.
Imperial Germany => legal and administrative sanctions => could be
used against the artists.
? the German penal code => lese-majeste, blasphemy (166), the distribution
of obscene material (184) => could be used against artists (in a conservative
state).
? Bavaria (police records) => authorities implemented article 184 =>
obscenity.
Obscene = an object that grossly offended the feeling of modesty and
morality in a sexual sense (1883)
- paintings – less dangerous
- reproductions, images that could be largely distributed (could influence
a large population) – considered a violation of 184 article.
Ex: You Little Fisherwoman (1888) => a chromolithograph depicting a
young woman fishing from a pier => the picture contained three holes =>
the buyer could insert his fingers through the holes => the image: of a
young women with exposed legs.
? the police confiscated the pictures and charged the sellers with
violation of article 184.
Max Liebermann – a Jewish artist from Berlin, moved to Munich 1878
(until 1884)
The Twelve Year Old Jesus in the Temple (1878) – presented at the Munch
salon (1879) – a scandal in the Catholic circles.
Was the subject or the style questioned?
The subject was considered noble and divine BUT Jesus was portrayed
in a realistic way => critics: Jesus was portrayed as the ugliest, most
impertinent Jewish boy imaginable
? the painting was unacceptable (Catholic circles) – untraditional,
unidealized representation of Jesus => considered: perverse and sacrilegious
- the painting was not removed from the exhibition (prince regent Luitpold
– visited Libermann)
- 1880: the Catholics in parliament debated the painting when the state’s
grant that financed the Salon came up for renewal.
1886: the cabinet and the ministers – compromise with the Catholic parliament
? the compromise: after Ludwig II was ousted by his ministers (placed
under house arrest) => he tried to escape and drowned => some accused the
liberals => shaken the liberal cabinet agreed to a compromise.
1886: The Center party => its duty: to attack everything that did not
confirm to the traditional values or challenged the traditional values.
? paintings, sculptures, plays, novels – the works of the Munich avant-garde
=> came under direct attack
Subjects: nudity, prostitution, premarital sex, illegitimacy, criminal
activities – were taboo
Styles: naturalism – unacceptable.
? excessive realism (religious and sexual subjects) => blasphemy and
pornography
Max Klinger, The Crucifixion of Christ (1890) – harshly criticized.
- Mary => depicted as an old woman (not young and beautiful), wrinkled,
with red-rimmed eyelids swollen from weeping – an unidealized image of
Madonna
- Christ – half stands, half sits; depicted nude (traditionally – Christ
was partially draped and he was hanging on the cross)
? The Catholic circles => pressured the police to take action => the
artist and the dealer draped part of the painting to avoid criminal charges
(blasphemy and pornography)
The Catholics and the Center party => censor the university professors
? Subversion Bill (the national level) – meant to deal with anarchism,
socialism and trade unionism => against revolutionary tendencies, to provide
public order and state security.
? Bavaria – Catholic politicians => clericalized the bill => by introducing
passages that limited academic freedom (the state could discipline university
professors who questioned the teachings of Christianity) (the law was defeated
in the Reichstag BUT the Catholic politicians used their budgetary powers
to reduce/ eliminate state subventions to programs/ seminars taught by
irreligious professors (philosophy professors, professors who taught Darwin’s
evolutionary theory, Theodor Lipps – aesthetician and psychologist)
? Professors and universities => should self-impose limits to academic
freedom; if not – the state would intervene (1895).
Lex Heinze – revived by the Center party.
- the law originated in Berlin => a night watchman was killed by a
criminal and pimp (Heinze)
- the law (presented to the Reichstag – 1892) => to crack down on criminals,
on pimps, and prostitutes.
Bavaria: Center party => reinterpreted the bill => raised the age of
consent for girls from 16 to 18; obscenity – covered the advertisement
and display of contraceptives. The Bill was defeated but reintroduced in
1897 and defeated again in 1905.
? various versions of the bill included article 184a – the art article.
? Six months in prison or a fine of 600 marks – “offers or hands over
for gin to a person under eighteen, or for purposes of trade, or with the
intention of offending feelings of modesty, displays or posts up in a manner
liable to cause annoyance, writings, pictures or representations which,
without being obscene, grossly offend the sense of modesty and morality.”
(in a sexual sense)
Max Slevogt, Danae (1895) – the picture portrays a modern prostitute
(not the classical story)
Danae – depicted as unattractive (it is not the beauty that is paid)
1899 – the painting was accepted by the Munich Secession for the summer
salon => the minister of culture (Landmann) visited the exhibition => he
was disturbed by the painting => the Secession removed the painting form
the exhibit.
? at the turn of the century the police intervention was not necessary
(the threat of a controversy was sufficient).
Intellectuals, artists, and writers => responded by organizing town
meetings – anticlerical speakers tried to mobilize public opinion against
the Catholic circles and the order imposed by them.
- the visual artist – used art to protest the repressive environment
=> Jugent and Simplicissimus – active => featuring anticlerical work and
publicizing the issues to a large public.
- Bruno Paul’s The Top Hat as Figleaf (Simplicissimus, 1900) – the
curator touring the museum with a group of visitors and pausing in front
of Apollo Belvedere => he hides the statue’s genitalia with his hat =>
he might be accused for displaying works which without being obscene offend
the sense of modesty and morality.
- Richard Gerhardt’s Women’s Bath (Simplicissimus, 1897) – two monks
peeking at the naked women bathing => the virtues of the clergy were in
question.
German Empire
Conflicts:
1. Catholics/Protestants
1. Liberals/Conservatives
1. Capitalists/Socialist
? the cultural conflict on modernity (1887-1902)
1887-1902: German intellectuals: the change in economy, social structure,
patterns of consumption => changing => the nation was in danger of loosing
its traditions and values.
1887-1902: German intellectuals: the change transformed Germany into
the economic leader
Political evolution (1890s):
- Bismarck’s forced resignation => the people of Germany identified
the government with Bismarck => he was like an institution => the father
of Germany was dead (symbolically)
- Wilhelm I => the other father => died two years prior to Bismarck’s
resignation
- Germany => led by two inexperienced leaders: Wilhelm II (31 years
old) and Leo von Caprivi (chancellor and minister president) (experience
in the navy and the army).
1890: the Social Democratic party => became legal (after 12 years underground)
=> popular => 35 seats in the Reichstag.
- the Social Democratic party => subscribed to the Marxist principles
(internationalism => against the German nation state; for socialist revolution
=> against the capitalist system) (Erfurt program, 1891)
Wilhelm II: changed the foreign policy (the (Bismarck) => the empire
turned toward Weltpolitik => committed itself to became a world power (not
only an European power) => the German empire should get out of the isolation
(became a major sea power) => building an oceangoing navy (comparable with
the British navy)
Alfred Friedrich von Tirpitz => the head of the navy => the navy expanded
(the budget for the navy increased at the expense of the army)
German political system:
The constitution for the Northern German Confederation (Bismarck’s work,
1867) – remained in effect (1918)
Germany: a federation BUT Prussia had a predominant position
Why?
Prussia – the largest territory (75% of the Northern German Confederation;
60% of the empire)
Prussia – the largest population
The Constitution – reflected this predominance
Kaiser
Command over
Appoints
//////////////// //////////////
Army
Chancellor
////////////////
leader of
Government president of
////////////////
REICHSTAG
BUNDESRAT
(Federal Council)
(elect)
(represented in)
People
States
Two legislative bodies: Reichstag (the Lower House) and Bundesrat (the upper house)
Reichstag (397 seats)– elected by the people (universal male suffrage
and secret ballot)(represented the people)
Bundesrat – chosen by the governments of the states.
Reichstag – could reject any bill introduced by the government BUT the
government used indirect taxes and long term military bills (did not need
the annual approval or the Reichstag)
- the legislation => went first to the Bundesrat => after approval
=> sent to the Reichstag
- Reichstag – could discuss the foreign policy => BUT it was irrelevant
(secret alliances and treaties – the rule)
The cabinet => the ministers appointed by the Kaiser => owned allegiance
to the emperor.
The Kaiser => could dismiss them (regardless of the parliament) (the
ministers were responsible to the Kaiser not to the parliament).
? if the elections were not satisfactory the Chancellor (did not resign)
BUT call for new elections.
? Three elective classes: - high taxes (2.5)
- moderate taxes (12%)
- commoners (no women) (85.5%)
? there is no secret ballot in Prussia => Prussia was more conservative
=> Prussia would have a conservative majority; the rest of the empire =>
a majority of center and moderate left.
? The cabinet was not appointed from the political party, which won
the election BUT form civil service and military.
Germany => had six political parties (2 conservatives, 2 liberal, one
socialist, and one Catholic) => political fragmentation.
? the emergence of single-issue lobbying groups => organizations/ associations:
- the Farmer’s League (1893) => conservatives failed to impose high
tariffs on the imported grains
- the Pan German League (1890)
- the Navy League (1890) – founded by Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz
- the Colonial League
- the Central Association of Germans of the Jewish Faith (1893) =>
the Progressive party was ineffective in fighting anti-Semitism
? the Farmer’s League => mobilized the rural areas with anti-Semitism
? the Pan German League, the Colonial League, the Navy League => German
expansion in Europe and overseas.
? there was a pattern of crating new institutions (instead of reforming
the old ones) (Secessionist movements – in the arts/culture).
? the traditional institutions => could not accommodate the new generation
(a different view on world and society)
Culturally => Germany was divided (social structure) => four subcultures (Rainer Lepsius):
1. the socialist (in the industrial centers => Ruhr, Saxony,Thuringia,
Berlin)
- the free trade unions and the Social Democratic party - institutions
on which it was centered.
- Marxism => ideology
Conflict within this culture:
- split in the SPD ? 1. Revisionists (Eduard Berenstein)
2. Leftist (Rosa Luxemburg)
2. Leftists => believed that the violent revolution was essential (Marx)
in order to destroy the capitalist society and set the foundations of the
socialist society (against the German national state, for solidarity among
workers everywhere => proletarians unite!).
1. Revisionists => socialism should be build on the foundations of
civil liberties and parliamentary institutions (without a violent revolution)
=> socialism could come through evolution after a fully democratic political
system was established. (they cooperated with the chancellor; were not
against the German national state (they supported the German national state);
they put Germany ahead of the international cooperation among workers).
1. the subculture centered on Catholicism
- in the south, the Rhineland, and the Polish regions of Prussia =>
the small farmers and artisans (36%)
- politically => Catholic leaders were tolerant (opposed Bismarck’s
anti-socialist laws)
- Culturally => on the same side with the conservatives (against avant-garde,
in support of the traditional art and architecture)
1. the cosmopolitan in favor of modernism => based on the commercial
and industrial cities; the educated elite of artists, journalists, lawyers,
bankers
- in politics => liberal
- in culture => international
? appealing to the Jews
1. the conservative subculture => the culture of the Junker elite =>
aristocracy, the military officer corps, the higher civil service, and
the leaders of the Protestant church (Prussia).
- Politically => supported the conservative parties; rejected democracy;
accepted economic development (that would not alter the traditional sectors
of the economy).
- Culturally => rejected cosmopolitanism and modernism; for traditional
art and architecture and historicism.
1890s: The debate about modernism => among academics
Audience: the educated bourgeoisie (primarily)
Academics: civil servants (advisors, secret advisors), Protestant =>
conservative culture
BUT: some were cosmopolitan (admired England and France), liberal =>
audience: the cities educated elite
1890s: in the German universities => shift in prestige from historians
to sociologist and economist
? von Ranke, Droysen, Th. Mommsen => important when the central issue
=> the unification.
? 1871: problems that arouse from urbanization and rapid industrial
grow (social discontent). => concern with the class division, with the
economic polarization of the bourgeoisie vs. the working class.
? 1890s: economists and sociologists => concerned with the farmers/peasants
+ artisans (pressured by centralization of production and consumption)
Lack of unity among academics:
1. some => embraced modernization and the new industrial society
1. others => to preserve the rural, traditional, the small town Germany
of farmers and artisans.
Max Weber (established the discipline of sociology in Germany) => leading
advocate of modernization
- Germany was resting on its laurels (the past victories)
- The decline of the Junkers/ and the immaturity of the bourgeoisie
=> none of them could lead Germany
- The leadership => should be nationalist and aware of the struggle
between the great powers for the division of the world.
? Germany should become a modern industrial and military power
? alternative: economic stagnation and mass emigration
Weber: disliked the Junkers => hired Polish workers => decline of the
ethnic German population in Prussia (the east side).
MW: resented the failure of Germany => to experience a bourgeois revolution
(social structure – immature)
? rapid industrialization (modernization) => shift from the ruling
Junkers to the bourgeoisie. (?)
Modernism and foreign expansion – interconnected (1890s) => Weber –
for the navy and the colonial empire
- successful Weltpolitik => only through internal social cohesion
? Modernism and the necessity to create a powerful nation state – could not be separated.
? the origins of the capitalism in Europe.
Max Weber, Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905)
- the rise of Calvinism => Calvinist theology (stresses austerity and
predestination => led the followers to seek success in this world; investment
and profits – not a sin in the Protestant religion)
- the Protestant countries (Holland, northern Germany, England, and
the American colonies) – the capitalist society emerged => modernized
- the Catholic areas of Europe => remained backward (Catholic theology
– works for the peasant and artisan world)
Is Weber’s theory correct?
The romantics and anti-modernists => interested in the origins of the
capitalism.
Werner Sombart, Modern Capitalism (1902)
The Jews and Modern Capitalism (1911)
- the origins of capitalism => the European Jews => the roots of capitalism
are not western but eastern (its materialistic spirit is alien to medieval
Europe).
- Jewish theology => their religion granted them permission to lend
money (at interest) to non-Jews => their theology was teleological, rational
=> the same qualities found in the capitalist world.
- Migration of the Jews from the Mediterranean area to the north.
- Calvinist – important in the emergence of capitalism => they were
philo-Semitic.
? solution: the removal of the Jews => Germany would return to its natural path.
The Neo-romantic position:
Ferdinand Tonnies, Gemeinshaft und Gesselschaft
Gemeinshaft => the small community (rural and small town Germany); qualities:
the naturalness, feeling, intimacy, tradition; survived in the home and
the church (women – more connected to this type of community)
Gesselschaft => the large community, the large city, the nation; dominated
by business, travel, science => artificial, alien.
Neo-romantics => believed that the rural society – harmonious/ the industrial
society – marked by conflict (class conflict)
Solution: return to the past (compulsory farming) – prevent father
social conflicts.
Why was the German society so polarized in the 1890s?
1. Bismark’s dismissal and the reemergence of the Social Democrats
(Marxist revolutionary program)
1. Von Caprivi trade policy => 1890s trade treaties => Germany more
involved in the world economy => decline of the peasants and artisans
1. 1890 elections => decline of the conservatives/ rise of the socialists.
1. The declining position of the educated bourgeoisie (intellectuals
and academics)/ the rise of the mass parties (the power stood in the number)
1. Urban life and the revolution in consumption (1890s)(=/= provincial
town) => the emergence of the department store
? 1890 Georg Wertheim – opened Warenhaus (Berlin) => 1900: 109 Warenhaus
in Germany.
How was the German city altered by the revolution in consumption?
1. the architectural style – alien, not traditional (glass and iron/
=/= brick and stone) => modern in function and design
1. electrical lighting => a dream world
1. the display windows (lit up at night) => an art form => replaced
the church altars (the baroque church display was emulated in the department
store windows)
1. the middle class joined the wealthy in consumption of luxury goods
(obsession with the products coming from Paris) => Bon Marche advertised
in the German newspapers => offered catalogs, samples, free shipping, money
back guarantees
1. the department store altered the fabric of the society => the small
retailer and the artisans => out of business.
? 80% of the department stores => owned by German Jews
? the decline of the artisans and small retailers => weaken the patriotic
forces against Marxists.
? the revolution in consumption => the German society was polarized over Germany’s future => the polarization engulfed not only the academe BUT the general population.
Educational reform:
- the need to inculcate into the German students a modern and German
nationalist spirit (to replace the reverence for classical antiquity)
1890: Wilhelm II called for a conference of civil servants and educators
=> to reform the German schools.
How can one create modern citizens/ loyal subjects, respected historicity?
What is modernism?
There is no clear definition of modernism.
Modernists = progressive (?)
BUT not all the modernists were progressive; traditionalists – could also embrace modernism.
Wilhelm II => a modern ruler (he presided over innovations in educational
and cultural institutions => elevated the level of German science and scholarship
on the international stage) => although he discouraged innovations in the
arts.
? he patronized grandiose historicizing works of art.
Large art exhibitions and the new museums => could be used to represent
the nation (its industrial and cultural status)
? the government could manipulate the display of art; could educate
the citizens, transform them in members of the same community
Art and museum exhibits => important not only for setting esthetic
trends BUT also for forging a national identity, setting up a political
agenda (there is a message in art, the selection of artifacts, and way
artifacts are displayed => a political message).
The German empire (Wilhelm II) => searching for a common German identity.
Nationalgalerie (Berlin) – inaugurated on the emperor’s birthday (Wilhelm I) – March 21, 1876.
Concept: a national shrine (=/= not a museum of contemporary German and international art)
The construction – started after 1866 (victory over Austria) => Prussian
artists – invited to submit works on the military campaigns (1866) – to
became part of the museum
1871 => after the victory over France – new historical scenes were
commissioned – the complete the history of building the empire
Wilhelm I: portraits of Prussian generals and statesmen should complement
the battle scenes
Leopold von Ranke (1873): the national portrait gallery should include
paintings of Brandenburg history (back to 15th century)
Modernism parallels the display of history paintings (1870s)
Modern artist: Adolph Menzel => paintings on Friederich II => purchased by the state for the National Gallery (Wilhelm II and the Art Commission – tried to organize the National Gallery as a Prussian Hall of Fame)
Mentzel’s paintings of Frederich II – were initially criticized for trivializing Frederich II
BUT in 1870s – the paintings would be perceived differently => elevated from simple historical paintings to nationalistic glorification of Prussia’s past. => their inclusion in the gallery provided a continuous historical narrative from Frederich II to the German empire (Ferdinand Keller’s, Emperor Wilhelm I, Victorious Founder of the German Empire)
In subject: it was a historical painting
In style: it was modern => indirectly modernism was accepted
in the National Gallery.
Menzel, The Balcony Room (1845) – one of his early paintings => on
display from 1903
“Mentzel has never been more modern’ - the painting complemented
the French impressionist art exhibit => modernism was not entirely French
(impressionism before impressionism could be claimed for the Prussian tradition)
Hostility toward modernism – association of modernism with the French culture (Francophobia – anti-modernist position)
Mentzel’s work:
- modernism was perceived as a German (even Prussian) invention.
- Prussia was presented as the precursor of the empire
? modernism and a new national identity => rooted in the Prussian tradition.
? The conflict between international modernism and German national
tradition => reconciled in Mentzel
Paris World’s Fair (1878): The German art exhibit – through the display
of art was used for purely political purposes.
- organized by Anton von Werner (director of the Academy)
- shaped by Bismarck’s Realpolitik => exhibition was organized as a
diplomatic gesture of détente (von Werner => a diplomat => the interests
of the German government prevailed (over the interests of the German artists)
- political strategies => determined the content and the organization
of the exhibition
- historical works (especially military depictions of the Franco-Prussian
war) – excluded
- the works on display had the outside the competition status (the
Reich requirement) => the defeated nation could not have the privilege
of decorating the artists of the victor.
- Salon-like bourgeois interior – with neo-Renaissance architectural
elements and traditional furniture (the attraction – a table that displayed
German illustrated books) => the private setting => to communicate the
Reich’s intention of appeasement.
Paris World’s Fair (1889) => German art exhibition => the work of independent
and progressive artist (leader: Max Liebermann)
1889: the French-German relations – at a low point.
Herbert von Bismarck (secretary of state in Otto von Bismarck’s Foreign
Ministry) => France is the most inhospitable of all civilized nations,
at least with regard to Germany
- the German exhibition => not an official venture (privately
financed by some of Berlin’s Jewish collectors and bankers)/ Liebermann’s
project came in direct contradiction with Bismarck’s policy.
- Liebermann => accused of antipatriotism , lack of national pride;
anti-Semitic insults – addressed to Liebermann included attacks on modernism
(associated with the Jewish spirit)
- Attacks => a group of Berlin society (the Jewish collectors, gallery
owners, and critics) – supporters of the modern art.
- The government intervened in the preparation => forbade the artists
(Prussian civil servants) to participate.
- The Foreign Minister asked the German embassy from Paris – to compile
lists of artist who exhibited and collectors who sent artifacts.
- Liebermann (Prussian citizen) – prevented to accept the medal of
honor offered by the French Republic
- Liebermann => selected only works of the younger generation of artists
=> the “new German art”
? the German government had to cope with two problems:
1. an art exhibition they did not sanctioned => undermined its foreign
policy
2. the presentation of the new German art on the international stage
=> art that the government forcefully opposed.
Paris World’s Fair (1900): a new political and cultural situation
1900: German empire appeared on the international stage as a “world
power … one of the strongest nations in international trade” the development
should be presented “without evoking unpleasant memories in France”
1878 exhibition => tradition and historicism
1889 exhibition => modernism
1900: the coexistence between a conservative and a modernist vocabulary
Frantz von Lenbach (in charge with the organization) – avoided all the
extreme statements
- an official venture => the government used the international setting
for political propaganda
- the Pavilion de L’Empereur (Deutsches Haus) – designed as a Renaissance
town hall (housed a beer and wine restaurant and art from the royal collection)
- the artifacts => selected by Wilhelm II => 18th century French decorative
arts and paintings by Antoine Watteau (the original collection of Frederich
II ) => the exhibition of French rococo paintings and decorative arts =>
portray the refined imperial taste (become le clou de l’Exposition)
- exhibition of machinery => the Reich’s economic power, industrial
progress, scientific innovations.
Why rococo paintings and decorative arts?
- Paris could learn that many of those collector’s items (highly desired
in France) Prussia has owned.
- It was a tribute to the memory of Frederich the Great – with an understanding
for the nation where literature and arts of his time had found the highest
expression
- It was a tribute to the French people
=> a gesture of peace linked with German nationalism (Frederich II
– the ruler who forged Prussia’s hegemony => prepared the road for the
empire); a symbol of German national traditions – dressed up in rococo
finery
- Palace of the Army => the exhibition of life-size wax figures – in
German military uniform (typical for Wilhelm II) / corresponded to a similar
French exhibit
? the German exhibit => retrospective (a historical survey of
military uniforms from 1680 to 1863)
? the French – a realistic show with scenes form the 1870-1871war.
? the world exhibit => a peaceful celebration => quite offensive through
the display of modern weaponry and military power and less offensive but
still quite political in the display of art.
St. Louis World Fair
The German art exhibit from St. Louis World Fair => coordinated by
Theodor Lewald
- tried to include the Secession in the official exhibit => negotiated
with cultural officials of the various German states.
- Wilhelm II: reversed the policy and excluded the Berlin Secession
? the emperor => on the same side with the traditional art groups =>
at Saint Louis, German art should convey a national image free of modernism.
? Wilhelm’s partisan position => polarized the German society => he
was criticized (Reichstag)
? The left, moderates, and conservatives => imperial power should not
be used against the artists (many had a national reputation)
? the history of art and culture has shown that art will go its own
way, despite kings and emperors who want to enchain it
? his position => in matters of art as in politics and foreign affairs
=> diminished the respect in which he was held.
Berlin Secession
- the annual salon (1898) => the jury rejected Walter Leistikow’s painting
Grunewald Lake (a landscape which was not aggressively revolutionary in
subject and style)
- The decision => the wish to embarrass one of the leading modernists
from Berlin
Leistikow – artists who opposed the policies of the Verein should resign
and organize their own shows.
May 1898 => a secessionist group was formed (within the Verein as a
semi-independent branch) => the group became completely independent and
Max Liebermann – was elected president.
? the other Secession movements (Munich, Weimar) => met with opposition
BUT they were accepted by the cultural bureaucracy. Munich and Weimar secessions
=> received financial support from the state.
? Berlin => cultural and political climate => more complex.
? The Secession had supporters/ opponents in the government and the
cultural bureaucracy.
? The emperor – was openly antagonistic => attached to the idealized
realism => he believed that art should celebrate the beauty of life; art
became negative if it addressed the unfortunate side of life => could turn
into a politically destructive force
? The secessionists – remained apolitical BUT they held selective exhibitions,
gave lectures and published articles => the emergence of a more knowledgeable
art public; fostered private patronage and reduced the artist’s dependence
on the state.
? Economically => the Secessionist were a free-market force (they were
political)
Modernism and the Alien Element (Anti-Semitism)
1913: Philipp Stauff, Biographical dictionary of Jews and their gentile
associates, friends, and supporters in Germany.
Introduction: denaunced the Jewish threat to German culture – expressed
in the art world.
“ The Alien Element in the Fine Arts in Germany, or Paul Cassirer,
Max Liebermann, etc.”
Cassirer – art dealer and publisher
Max Liebermann – the best known German painter
Staff: they were the Jewish enemy within => the cause of the cultural
crises => driven by the Hebrew motives of greed and cultural hate => they
want to became rich and penetrate the upper levels of the German society
=> they intend to destroy the native values.
Stauff => criticized van Gogh – as childish, the French imprssionist
– produced some good works BUT only the very bad Renoirs and Monet were
in Germany
? attacked the Germans => who gave in to Jewish seduction.
Who was considered a Jew?
- anyone whose great-grandfather converted to Christianity and married
a gentile => still a Jew (more dangerous => could pass for a German)
- denounced gentiles => married Jews (Lovis Corinth) or who had Jewish
relatives through marriage (a sibling or other relation) (Henry van de
Velde)
- denounced gentiles => who worked for Jews (the publisher Karl Scheffler);
who had Jewish friends (the collector Harry Count Kessler, museum director
Hugo von Tschudi)
? they belonged to a vast conspiracy => in art this propagated a diseased
modernism => that expressed international =/= national values.
BUT: most of the modernist artists and their supporters => not Jews
Stauff => pointed out => the Jewish assimilation (more important in
the fine arts, literature and music than in the other areas of German life;
modernism – with its rejection of tradition => the ground for this assimilation).
The Literature and the visual arts:
- writing about experiences with art and the artists – a preoccupation
of many German writers (Moses Mendelssohn, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe,
Friederich Schiller => wrote about painting, sculpture, graphic arts, aesthetic
theories – in various literary forms.
- Fin de siecle => breakup of Wilhelmine culture and the emergence
of new artistic and literary trends => the interaction of the arts reached
a high point.
* Impressionism, art nouveau, futurism, cubism, and expressionism
– aligned with similar movements in literature (the avant-garde artists
shared an artistic consciousness – for the first time in history)
? writers – turned their attention to visual artist => Thomas Mann
on Max Liebermann; Hugo von Hofmannsthal on Vincent van Gogh; Else Lasker-Schuleron
Oskar Kokoschka; Rainer Maria Rilke – Worpswede artists, A. Rodin, and
Cezanne.
? Lasker-Schuler and Kokoschka – produced impressive works in
visual and literary arts => a distinct trend in fin de siecle Germany.
? Rilke (1875-1926) – interested in visual arts since childhood; he
published his first poems at 16 and he continued to draw and paint until
20 when he started his university studies (Prague).
? Rilke studied => literature, philosophy and art history
? 1896 => moved to Munich and then (1897) to Berlin => he continued
his studies (focus: art history)
? 1900 – dropped out => he hoped to finish his studies with a degree
in art history.
? He was a visual person => his poetry and prose – filled with descriptions and allusions to paintings, sculpture, and graphic works; wrote art critical essays and monographs devoted to the fine arts.
? Rilke – pointed out to artists like Max Klinger, Fritz von Uhde, Emil Orlik, Henry van der Velde, Heinrich Vogeler. He embraced Jugendstil or der neue Stil
? As an art critic he viewed the works of art as timeless Kunst-Dinge
(art things) – isolated and removed from the flow of time (they belonged
to the future not to the present); his lack of negative criticism => love:
love doesn’t make one blind, but rather makes one see!
Politics in Freud’s Interpretations of Dreams
Born in Frieberg, Moravia (1856) => moved to Vienna (age: four) where
he lived and worked until 1937 (the last year of his life)
1937: he moved to England => he died of cancer
His father – a wool merchant; his mother – his father’s second
wife (20 years younger)
Freud => founded the 'first Viennese school' of psychoanalysis, from
which, psychoanalysis as a movement and all subsequent developments in
this field flowed
Freud's interests, and of his professional training - very broad =>
he considered himself => a scientist
His goal => to extend the compass of human knowledge (rather than to
the practice of medicine).
1873: University of Vienna in 1873.
Focus: on biology (research in physiology for six years under Ernst
Brücke – the director of the Physiology Laboratory at the University)
He specialized in neurology.
1881: He received his medical degree
1882: he engaged to be married and took up a more secure and
financially rewarding work as a doctor at Vienna General Hospital.
1885-86: Freud spent the greater part of a year in Paris, where he studied
with Jean Charcot (who was at that time using hypnotism to treat hysteria
and other abnormal mental conditions).
1886: he marries and sets up his private practice in the treatment
of psychological disorders, which gave him much of the clinical material
on which he based his theories and his pioneering techniques.
After his internship in Paris => Freud experimented with hypnosis
Concluded that its beneficial effects did not last. He adopted a method
suggested by the work of Joseph Breuer (an older Viennese colleague and
friend)
Joseph Breuer => discovered that when he encouraged a hysterical patient
to talk uninhibitedly about the earliest occurrences of the symptoms, the
latter sometimes gradually abated.
Freud (and Breuer) formulated and developed the idea that many neuroses
(phobias, hysterical paralyses and pains, some forms of paranoia, etc.)
had their origins in deeply traumatic experiences, which originated in
the past life of the patient. Those experiences were now forgotten, suppressed,
hidden from consciousness.
Treatment: to enable the patient to recall the experience to
consciousness, to confront it intellectually and emotionally, and in thus
discharging it, to remove the underlying psychological causes of the neurotic
symptoms. This technique, and the theory from which it is derived => presented
in Studies in Hysteria, published by Freud and Breuer in 1895.
After 1895: Freud and Breuer parted (Breuer could not agree with Freud’s
excessive emphasis on the sexual origins and content of neuroses) Freud
continued to work alone => to develop and refine the theory and practice
of psychoanalysis.
1900: he published The Interpretation of Dreams (his greatest work)(after
a protracted period of self-analysis)
1901: The Psychopathology of Everyday Life 1905: Three Essays on the
Theory of Sexuality
Historically, what is the significance of the Interpretation of Dreams?
- gives us an inside perspective (Freud’s perspective) on the struggle
with the Austrian socio-political reality => as a Jew, as a citizen, and
a son.
- By following the dreams => one could distinguish between the three
layers of the Austrian society (Freud’s life):
? professional
? political
? personal
In Freud’s case:
The professional life => lies in his present
The political => in the period of youth and childhood
The personal life (the deepest of all – in time and in psychic space)
=> leads back to infancy and into unconscious.
Freud’s desire => to became a scientist => ended up a physician => he
won the fellowship to Paris and the appointment at the Vienna General Hospital
(an university hospital)
He wished to become a professor in the University teaching clinic =>
the wait (17 years instead of 8) => led to feelings of intellectual isolation,
and professional frustration.
The Habsburg Empire => going through social and political disintegration
(division on national lines and on class and ideological lines)
Before 1890s: the political forces => the liberals and the conservative.
BUT: the lower social strata => contested the power of the old elites.
Freud felt the crisis on three levels:
? Karl Lueger’s victory => the rise of anti-Semitism => affected him
in his professional life
? After 1897: academic promotions of Jews became more difficult =>
he stepped down the social ladder from the upper medical and academic intelligentsia
=> to the stratum of an ordinary Jewish doctors and businessmen.
? The personal crisis => his father’s death (1896)
“ The most important event, the most poignant loss of a man’s life”.
? the loss => reinforced Freud’s other difficulties => his psychological
crisis over his father’s death unfolded as a crisis of professional failure
and political guilt.
Freud’s crisis and his scientific work were interconnected => Freud’s
basic analytic principle: the dream is the fulfillment of a wish => “A
dream is a disguised fulfillment of a suppressed wish” => used his own
dreams to demonstrate the validity of his principles
Professional problems => Dream of the Uncle with the Yellow Beard =>
points out to the deep connections between politics and professional life
=> the dream contained the political wish to “step into the minister’s
shoes” eliminate his competitors and promote himself to a professorship.
Another wish => not to be Jewish or to eliminate Jewish rivals
His political opinions => molded during his childhood => he recalls
his father's enthusiasm for the liberal ministers (1867) “We illuminated
the house in their honor”
- looking back he remembers how “every industrious Jewish schoolboy
carried a minister’s portfolio in his knapsack.”
Gymnasium – Freud planned to study law => the road to a political career.
During his childhood (mid –century liberalism) Freud acquired the political
values => partisanship for Napoleon, contempt for royalty and aristocracy,
admiration for England and Oliver Cromwell, hostility to religion (especially
to Rome)
What did Rome symbolize?
- the organization of the Catholic Church and the Habsburg regime that supported it.
Freud had five dreams about Rome => all suggest redemption or fulfillment that is never quite achieved.
1. Rome appears as the Promised Land => implies that Freud is in the
same relation to Rome as Moses/ Israel => the wish to assimilate into the
gentile world.
2. Rome is identified with Carlsbad (spa from Bohemia) => an earthly
city of recreation and resurrection.
Freud’s identifies himself with Hanibal
? Hanibal’s father made his boy swear before the household altar to
take vengeance on the Romans => a pledge and a project/ political and filial
? Unlike Hanibal’s father => Freud’s father had been publicly humiliated
by an anti-Semitic hooligan and never protested => Freud chose to define
his oedipal stance not by rejection of liberalism BUT by realizing the
liberal creed his professed but failed to defend. => Freud (like Hanibal)
as a Semitic –general would take vengeance on the Romans (i.e. anti-Semites
and the Habsburg regime).
A revolutionary dream (August 1898) => after a season of violence between Czechs and Germans (the language right problem – unsolved), the Parliament was paralyzed => the German parties resorted to obstructionist practices => the Government should revoke the language ordinances favoring the Czechs, the anti-Semitic wave in Galicia (June 1898)
? Freud found himself at a student gathering, where count Thun was discounting German nationalism (the German student militancy was so much wind). Freud rose in angry response to the minister’s remarks. After his outburst, Freud fled the political scene and retreated through the halls of the University. He escaped into the street, tried to get out of town. The final scene was at the railroad station. Freud found himself on the platform in the company of a blind man, whom he recognized as his dying father. Freud was holding a urinary for the old man.
? all politics is reducible to the primary conflict between father and son
(from political encounter, through flight into academia, to the conquest of the father who has replaced count Thun => patricide replaces regicide; psychoanalysis overcomes history. Politics is neutralized by counterpolitical psychology.
? Freud: by reducing his own political past and present to primary conflict between father and son => gave the liberals an a-historical theory of man and society that could make bearable a political world beyond control.
BUT: the liberals – were rational
Freud – irrational
The Viennese Secession
1. Academy of Fine Arts
2. Kunstlerhausgenossenschaft – the exhibition society (1861)
Academy =/= Austrian Museum for Art and Industry => established its School of Applied Arts (Kunstgewerbeschule) (1868)
The Austrian Museum of Art and Industry and Kunstgewerbeschule – equivalent of the South Kensington Museum (London) and its school.
Kunstlerhaus and the Academy => conservative
Main criticism (Gustav Klimt, Josef Hoffmann, Joseph Maria Olbrich, Kolo Moser) => the Kunstlehause did not expose the Viennese artists to foreign art => the Viennese art was narrow and parochial.
1894: exhibit of English and Scottish painters (Kunstlerhaus)
Pattern of geographical connections:
Vienna – Glasgow – London
Vienna – Brussels
Vienna – Munich
BUT NOT: Vienna – Berlin – Paris
Klimt’s criticism => the number of artists was too small
1896: conspiratorial meetings to reform the Kunstlerhaus
1897 (March): Klimt and his friends => group to urge change (Austrian Association of Visual Arts/Secession)
1897 (May): the Secessionists separated
Secession’s aims:
- to provide young, unconventional artists with opportunities to exhibit
their work
- to bring to Vienna works by the best foreign artists (+ purchase
some of them for public collections)
- to publish its own magazine
The Secession – not a salon des refuses BUT a new Roman secessio plebis (plebs rejected the patricians)
Secession’s goals:
- regenerate the arts and culture and publish its own magazine => Ver
Sacrum (Sacred Spring)
- the art should provide asylum from the modern life => the House of
the Secession (Josef Olbrich)
- the aim of the Secession => inscribed over the entrance: TO THE AGE
ITS ART,
TO ART ITS FREEDOM.
1898: the first Secession exhibition => the Emperor attended
Modern art – no controversies and scandals
Why do you think the government supported the Secession?
What was the attitude of other European governments toward Modernism?
Austria – was a fragmented state (multinational)
Austria – searched for ways of uniting its people
Secession in Austria – part of the supra-national policy => had the
power to transcend national conflicts => create a sense of unity
Support for Secession in Austria => creates the impression of liberalism
Support for modernization – in culture and economy (at a time of political crisis).
The leader of the Secession => Gustav Klimt
Education:
- technical school
- Kunsgewerbeschule (1876) => he emerged from school as an architectural
decorator as the Ringstrasse project was entering its final phase.
Worked on:
- Burgtheater
- Museum of Art History (Kunsthistorisches Museum) => with Ernst Klimt
and Franz Matsch
? Kunstlerkompanie – a joint enterprise => worked as a team, displaying
an unusual stylistic homogeneity.
Klimt’s work (evolution, themes and stylistic developments) => mirror
the crisis of the Austrian society (the crisis of liberalism)
The Burgtheater paintings => each mural celebrated the unity of theater
and society
The series => represented the absorption of the theaters of the past
into the rich eclecticism of Viennese culture (liberal)
1891: Kunsthistorisches Museum => a series of female figures representing
each era of art
Athena => represented the Hellenic culture
Another representation of Athena => the poster for the first Secession exhibition (1897)
The poster => proclaimed the generational revolt => Klimt’s vehicle in this revolt was the myth of Theseus.
Athena => was appropriated by Klimt to sponsor the liberation of the arts
What are the stylistic differences between the first Athena and the Athena from the poster?
- two dimensional vs. three dimensional (body and form) => this was Klimt’s way of depicting an abstraction => the liberation of the arts is not yet realized (she is treated as disembodied, allegorical, on a stage).
Klimt => gave visual representation to another important aim of the
Secession ideology – the Secession was to speak truth about modern man,
“to show the modern man his true face” (Otto Wagner)
Klimt’s vision => Nuda Veritas (published in the first issue of Ver
Sacrum)
Similarities between Nuda Veritas and Athena (?)
- depicted two-dimensional (just a concept, not a concrete realization)
=> she holds an empty mirror up to the modern man
The question for his contemporaries was => what would the artist see
in it?
Politics and Politicians
“Time was moving faster…. but no one knew what it was moving towards … no one could distinguish between what was above and what was below, between what was moving forward and what backward.” (Robert Musil on Austrian fin de siecle)
What were the principles and programs of the liberals?
- constitutional monarchy (to replace aristocratic absolutism)
- parliamentary centralism (replaced aristocratic federalism)
- science (replaced religion)
- the Germans => would become the teacher for the other people => bring
them up from the bondage (feudals kept them)
- nationality => the principle of popular cohesion in a multinational
state
? to what kind of hegemony were the Germans aspiring?
? Political or cultural?
? The Germans => should carry culture to the east, transmit the German
science, humanism.
- laissez faire => would brake the rule of privilege in the economic
sphere => make merit the base of economic reward.
How did the Austro-liberals position themselves in the larger social body?
- they were combating the socially superior and the historically anterior
(the aristocracy, the feudals)
- leaders of those who were below => moving the society forward against
what was above and backward.
What was the Austro-liberal conception about the people (the below)?
- could not be trusted. Why?
? they could not understand the political process => the rational culture
would provide the prerequisite for a broadly democratic order (popular
culture and rational responsibility were linked).
How did the liberals stay in power (1860s –1890s)?
- limiting the franchise and denying access to the political life of
those from below.
Consequences of the implementation of the liberal program:
- the masses exploded not against the upper classes BUT against the
liberals
- the German nationalism (to combat the aristocratic cosmopolitans)
=> answered by Slavic patriots (for autonomy)
? gave birth to the nationalism of anti-liberal petite bourgeoisie.
- laissez faire => rid the economy of old practices => led to the Marxist
revolutionaries of the 20th century.
- Catholicism => eliminated from the schools and the courthouse =>
returned as the ideology of the artisans and peasant (liberalism = capitalism;
capitalism = Jew)
- The Jews => for whom liberalism => emancipation, opportunity, assimilation
to modernity => the failure of liberalism transformed the Jew into a victim
=> the birth of Zionism => flight to the national home
Anti-liberal mass movements:
- Czech nationalism (the dualism exacerbated the national problem).
- Pan-Germanism
- Christian Socialism
- Social Democracy
- Zionism =? all rose from below => challenged the liberals,
undermined the confidence in the rational structure of history.
Rational vs. irrational
Social Democrats (Victor Adler) (1889) => rational => unlimited faith
in education
Liberals => labeled them as: utopians (absurd demands in welfare state
before political enlightenment was achieved) as unreasonable but not irrational
? the liberals and social democrats could reason.
The irrational political forces: the Pan-Germanism, the Christian Socialist
and the Zionist movement (their rhetoric was satisfying to the life of
feeling, grasping a social-psychological reality in which the liberals
could not see)
? a secessionist movement in politics (from the liberal political tradition)
=> they rebelled against reason and law.
Political personalities:
1. Georg von Schonerer (Pan-Germans)
2. Karl Lueger (Christian Socials)
3. Theodor Herzl (Zionism)
What is the common denominator?
- they all started their careers as political liberals => attempted to organize masses neglected or rejected by the liberals.
Georg von Schonerer (1842-1921)
1882: organized the German nationalists => not a powerful political
party BUT a major force in the Austrian political life
- appeal to the students, the lower middle class, and the artisan class.
von Schonerer => aristocrat?
- by title (not blood) => came from the new industrial class => his
father was ennobled for his service as an engineer and railway administrator
- Matthias Schonerer => bought a feudal holding (the manor of Rosenau
- a 14th century estate with a castle from Maria Theresa (18th century))
- Young Georg => studied agriculture => prepared to take science and
the entrepreneurial spirit to the land as a modern lord of the manor.
- From this honest and noble position => he would start his rebellion
against Habsburg loyalty, capitalism, interracial tolerance, and financial
speculations (the values on which his father build his life and fortune).
- His political career started in his home district => he financed
agricultural-improvements associations and volunteer fire departments.
- His model (?) => Joseph II (the Kaiser of the people – Volkskaiser)
(plaques showing emperor Joseph II with his hand over the plow)
Was he anti-liberal by taking Joseph II as his model?
Joseph II was the champion of the modern liberalism => von Schonerer
was still within the liberal framework.
- 1873 => elected to the Reichsrat (joined the left democratic wing
of the liberal camp)
- dissatisfied in parliament over:
1. indifference to social problems
2. inadequate response in combating Slavic nationalism.
The nationality question => divided the liberals
1. concessions to the Czechs => break the German middle class hold
on Bohemia and Moravia (hurt the liberals)
2. not making concession => drive the Slavic people into sharper reaction
=> threaten the Empire.
The liberal solution (?)
- maintain the restricted suffrage system => to keep the nationalist
masses away from the polls.
1882: the Linz program (Schonerer and young university intellectuals)
=> placed the principles of democracy and German nationalism ahead of imperial
stability and middle class oligarchy.
- combined radical democracy, social reform, and nationalism.
- Support for home industries and honest labor, a compulsory training
certificate for artisans, prohibition of house to house peddling (Jewish
peddler) => it was not directly anti-Semitic.
- Demands for a customs union and stronger treaty arrangements with
the German Empire => Schonerer => believed in the greater Germany
Where does the idea of a greater Germany come from?
- Grossdeutsch ideal vs. Kleinedeutsch of 1848 => the liberals aimed
=> Pan-German republic
- Schonerer => aimed at the break-up of the “pro-Slav” Habsburg monarchy
that would led to the unification of the western portion with the Bismarkian
monarchy
Schonerer anti-Semitic position:
1879: linked aristocracy and the people (the interests of landed property
and of productive hands) against the privileged interests of mobile capital
and the Semitic rule of money and the word (i.e. the press)
- against the industrial magnates => Rothschilds
- against the Jewish department store owner
- against the Jewish peddler => ruined the traditional shopkeeper
1880s: tried to restrict Jewish immigration from Russia (the pogroms)
(United States => Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882).
- the Jews => the supra-national people of the multi-national state
(like the earlier aristocracy) => when the nationalists tried to weaken
the monarchy in their interest => should attack the Jews in the name of
every nation.
Schonerer => was a total nationalist, against the imperial state =>
he was against every principle of integration that could hold the empire
together: liberalism, socialism, Catholicism, and imperial authority.
Anti-Semitism => brought him down
Neues Winer Tagblatt (Moritz Szeps, editor) => broke up into the offices
of the newspaper => to beat up the staff of the Jewish rag => he lost his
title, was sentenced to a short prison term, and a suspension of his political
rights for five years.
What were the components of his ideology?
His ideology was based on contradictions:
- aristocratic elitism and enlightened despotism
- anti-Semitism and democracy
- 1848 grossdeutsch democracy and Bismarkian nationalism
- medieval chivalry and anti-Catholicism
- guild restrictions and state ownership of public utilities
? the binding element of his ideology => his total negation of the liberal elite and its values.
Karl Lueger (1844-1910)
- coming from the petite bourgeoisie => he studied in the Theresianum
(one of the most exclusive schools in Vienna)
- later he studied law => in his final exam he defended theses which
revealed him as an Austro-democrat, an advocate of universal suffrage with
concern for the social problem
- rejected national orientations => the nationality idea is destructive
and an obstacle to the progress of mankind
- led the campaign which demanded extension of the suffrage => achieved
in 1884 (the 5 gulden taxpayers were accorded the franchise) => the resistance
of some of the liberals increased the anti-liberal mood of the lower classes
=> democracy and liberalism became contradictory terms
- 1882-1887: Lueger considered himself a Democrat => but understood
that he should follow the little folk as they moved from anti-corruption
to anti-capitalism, and from anti-capitalism to anti-Semitism
- started as a liberal => moved from the politics of reason to the
politics of fantasy
- he was slow in moving toward anti-Semitism => 1884: he was still
for the principle of equality of all denominations (the Democratic party
program)
- 1885: he ran for a seat in the Reichsrat => he was endorsed by the
anti-Semitic Reform Union
- 1887: von Schonerer brought to the floor his legislation to restrict
Jewish immigration => Lueger supported him BUT he never embraced Pan-Germanism
and nationalism
Why?
- He was a Viennese politician => the representative of the imperial
capital => he maintained a fundamental allegiance to the Habsburg monarchy
In the absence of nationalism what could be his integrating ideology?
- Catholicism
- he transformed an ideology of the Old Right – Austrian political
Catholicism into an ideology of the New Left, Christian Socialism
- he started his political career in the city, and organized a party
the - Christian Social party with its base in the countryside.
- His election as the mayor of Vienna (1895) (ratified in 1897 by the
emperor) put an end to the liberal ascendancy in Austria => at the time
when Lueger entered the Rathaus in triumph the Austrian government entered
the crisis over the language ordinances in the Czech lands => as the Vienna
– the bastion of liberalism fell to the Christian anti-Semites, the Reichsrat
fell into discord => the emperor had to dissolve it and establish government
by decree.
Lueger => succeeded in mobilizing the students and the artisans, in
producing an alliance of aristocrats and democrats, artisans and ecclesiastics
How?
- using his racist slogans against the liberals.
Theodor Herzl (1860-1904)
- the father of Zionism
- he started from an assimilationist ideal => he saw the Jewish problem
as peripheral to the social question, an aspect of the problems of modern
society
- Born in Budapest => in a family that adopted German culture and the
German language; economically established, religiously enlightened, politically
liberal => their Judaism was “un pieux souvenir de famille”
- His father => realized social mobility by economic activity and religious
secularization; Theodor => acquired aesthetic culture => he went up the
ladder of the spirit (a social ladder as well).
? assimilation through culture (the second stage in Jewish assimilation)
=> from economic to intellectual vocations.
Theodor Herzl => started his career as a writer and a journalist
- sent to Paris as a correspondent of Neue Freie Presse => observed
the French political and social life (4 years) => transformed Herzl from
an aesthete to a liberal, from a liberal to a Jew, and from a Jewish liberal
to a Zionist crusader.
? the republic had suffered all the social diseases of the time: aristocratic
decadence, parliamentary corruption, socialist class warfare, anti-Semitic
barbarism
? he lost his confidence in the viability of political liberalism (it
was breaking down even on its native ground, France)
? Anti-Semitism => another sign of the liberalism crisis => culminated
in the condemnation of Captain Dreyfus.
1893: the Jews were pressed against the wall => his main concern was
to save the gentile society => the Jewish problem would take care of itself.
? he tried to help Austrian liberalism to overcome its own social limitations
(recommended positive social action and universal suffrage before the democratic
populace would turn against the liberalism).
? As Lueger was wining supporters => the Jewish question was transformed
(in his mind) from a symptom of European social malaise into a life and
death question for the victims.
How could the Jews be saved?
- brutal force => personal duels => he would challenge the leaders of
anti-Semitism (Schonerer, Lueger) to duel
- assimilation (not through liberalism but through the Christian vision
=> mass conversion)
- Zionism (May1895: he witnessed interpellations in the French chamber
directed toward preventing Jewish “infiltration” into France / similar
to the Jewish exclusion legislation from Austria (1887/88). Two days later,
Karl Lueger won the majority in the Vienna city council). => devoted
himself to creating the Jewish state.
The Viennese Secession
(in the last decade of the 19th century the visual arts in Vienna were dominated by two important institutions)
1. Academy of Fine Arts
(were most of the painters/ visual artists in general were educated)
2. Kunstlerhausgenossenschaft – the exhibition society (1861)
(a private institution – which was able to pursue its own course unopposed
by virtue of owning the only city’s exhibition building
The association organized exhibitions and sold the work of its members,
protected their interests and acted as an intermediary between the artists
and the public
Membership in the association was essential to every artist willing
to make a name and a living)
Academy =/= Austrian Museum for Art and Industry => established its School of Applied Arts (Kunstgewerbeschule) (1868)
The Austrian Museum of Art and Industry and Kunstgewerbeschule – equivalent of the South Kensington Museum (London) and its school.
Kunstlerhaus and the Academy => conservative
(as I mentioned the Kunstlerhaus owned the only exhibit hall
in Vienna before the 1890s)
What do you think this meant for the artistic environment?
- the association was in a position to influence not only government policy with regard to arts but also the formation of public taste )
Main criticism (Gustav Klimt, Josef Hoffmann, Joseph Maria Olbrich,
Kolo Moser) => the Kunstlehause did not expose the Viennese artists to
foreign art => the Viennese art was narrow and parochial.
( This was the institution to blame for the state of the arts
in Vienna at the end of the 19th century)
(to quite down the criticism Kunstlerhaus organized)
1894: exhibit of English and Scottish painters (Kunstlerhouse)
(which reveals an unusual pattern of geographical connections. The
strongest artistic links were not between Vienna and Berlin or Paris, but
between Vienna, Glasgow and London. Close connections existed between Vienna
and Brussels and less surprisingly between Vienna and Munich)
Pattern of geographical connections:
Vienna – Glasgow – London
Vienna – Brussels
Vienna – Munich
BUT NOT: Vienna – Berlin – Paris
(Gustav Klimt and his friends believed that the number of artists exhibiting was too small)
Klimt’s criticism => the number of artists was too small
1896: conspiratorial meetings to reform the Kunstlerhaus
1897 (March): Klimt and his friends => group to urge change (the Austrian
Association of Visual Arts/ Secession)
(Could you give me an example of a similar effort to reform the main
association of artist rather than separate from the beginning?
- another group which believed that reformation rather than separation
was the way to go
They took their lead from the Munich Kunstlerhaus)
1897 (May): the Secessionists separated
(they walked out of the Kunslterhaus meeting when the committee censured
them)
Secession’s aims:
- to provide young, unconventional artists with opportunities to exhibit
their work
- to bring to Vienna works by the best foreign artists (+ purchase
some of them for public collections)
- to publish its own magazine
(What do you think is missing?
- there is nothing clear about the kind of art the new association
wanted to encourage and support
- there was never a Secession manifesto and its members never aspired
to a group style
- In this case what do you think brought them together?
- The dissatisfaction with the Kunslerhaus and with the more entrenched
forms of academic art)
The Secession – defined itself not as a salon des refuses but as a new Roman secessio plebis => in which the plebs rejected the misrule of the patricians by withdrawing from the republic
Secession’s goal => to regenerate the arts and culture => they called
their magazine Ver Sacrum (Sacred Spring)
The title was based on a Roman ritual of consecration of youth in times
of national danger (the elders pledged their children to a divine mission
to save society) In Vienna – the young pledged themselves to save culture
from their elders.
Another important goal of the Secession => the art should provide for
modern man asylum from the pressure of modern life
This idea found its ultimate expression in the House of the Secession
(designed by Josef Olbrich)
His goal was “to erect a temple of art which would offer the art-lover
a quite, elegant place of refuge”
- the 19th century museums were modeled after palaces; Olbrich – found
his inspiration in a pagan temple (the unfinished sanctuary of Segesta)
- the Secession museum space pioneered the use of movable partitions
=> the space should be movable => since this was the nature of modern life.
- The dome –gilded leafs – seems to flow above the building.
- The aim of the Secession was inscribed in stone, over the entrance:
TO THE AGE ITS ART,
TO ART ITS FREEDOM.
1898: the first Secession exhibition => the Emperor attended
(he was quite impressed – that despite his conservative views)
(Modern art – was introduced to the Viennese public (to a conservative
city) without the scandals and conflicts - that surrounded its advent
in France or Germany)
(The first exhibit – demonstrated that it was possible to be non-conformist
without being revolutionary)
Modern art – no controversies and scandals
Why do you think the government supported the Secession?
What was the attitude of other European governments toward Modernism?
(Austria was a fragmented state, the only remaining great power that
was multinational. It was repeatedly threatened by minority’s demands for
national self-determination.
Austria searched for ways of uniting its racially, linguistically and
culturally disparate peoples. – the Secession and the modern art
might contribute to it)
Within the framework of supra-national policy state encouragement of
the Secessionist movement made sense. Its artists were cosmopolitan in
spirit. At a time when nationalist groups were developing separate ethnic
arts – the Viennese Secession was taken the opposite road – opening Austria
to European currents and reaffirming in a modern spirit the traditional
universalism of the Empire)
Secession – could have the potential to transcend national conflicts
=> and create a sense of unity
1897- 1900: the nationality problem (with its conflicts over language
for administration and schooling) paralyzed the government.
(the national government and the city governments sometimes – supported
the Secession to demonstrate solidarity with the new – and create the impression
of liberalism)
It is interesting to notice that the government was eager to support
modernization not only in culture but also in economy – in a moment of
political crisis.
The leader of the Secession => Gustav Klimt
- he did not attend Gymnasium instead he went to a technical school
and latter to Kunsgewerbeschule (1876) => he emerged from school as an
architectural decorator as the Ringstrasse project was entering its final
phase.
- He worked on the Burgtheater and the Museum of Art History (together
with his brother Ernst and Franz Matsch => Ernst Klimt, Gustav Klimt and
Franz Matsch => studied together under the same professors and latter they
formed the so called Kunstlerkompanie – a joint enterprise => they
worked as a team, displaying an unusual stylistic homogeneity – allegories
in the academic style) (early 1880s)
Klimt’s work, his evolution, the themes and stylistic developments
=> mirror the crisis of the Austrian society – caused by the crisis of
liberalism
The Burgtheater paintings – Klimt, Ernst and Franz Matsch decorated the grand stairway and the ceiling => the panels show how closely the liberal fathers had integrated the theatrical and historical outlooks => each mural celebrated the unity of theater and society; taken together the series => represented the triumphant absorption of the theaters of the past into the rich eclecticism of Viennese culture
1891: decorated the main lobby of Kunsthistorisches Museum => with a
series of female figures representing each era of art
Athena => represented the Hellenic culture
? depicted in a realistic three-dimensional way, holding her winged
Nike and her spear => she poses like a young Viennese lady.
Another representation of Athena – comes in the form of a poster for
the first Secession exhibition.
? the poster proclaimed the generational revolt => his vehicle in this
revolt was the myth of Theseus
? What was this myth about?
? Theseus killed the monster (the Minotaur) to liberate and save the youth of Athens.
? Athena – the goddess of wisdom, protector of the polis (which in Vienna was chosen by the Parliament as its symbol) => was appropriated by Klimt to sponsor the liberation of the arts
What are the stylistic differences between the first Athena and the Athena from the poster?
=> this Athena is two dimensional (the first one has body and form) => this was Klimt’s way of depicting an abstraction => she sponsors the liberation of the arts and since the liberation of the arts is not yet realized – she is treated as disembodied, allegorical, on a stage.
Klimt => gave visual representation to another important aim of the
Secession ideology – the Secession (the Secessionist artists) were to speak
truth about modern man, “to show the modern man his true face” (Otto Wagner)
Klimt’s vision materialized in Nuda Veritas => published in the first
issue of Ver Sacrum
? do you see any stylistic similarities between Nuda Veritas and Athena?
- depicted two-dimensional (again, just a concept, not a concrete
realization) => she holds an empty mirror up to the modern man
- The question for his contemporaries was => what would the artist
see in it?
Next time we will talk about what exactly Klimt saw in the mirror.
Gustav Klimt
1897: Klimt found his own style => a experimental search for a new message
and a new language => led him to the exploration of the instinctual life
(the inner life)
? went back to the pre-Classical Greek symbols, to the Egyptian, Assyrian,
and Byzantine art.
1.Schubert at the Piano, 1899
2.Music I, 1898
1. Schubert at the piano => recalling the Biedermeier era (less politics,
attention to family and interior space, a secure and ordered interior)
=> represent Hausmusik (warm candlelight, soft outlines =>figures are blended
into social harmony)
Klimt => moved from historical reconstruction to nostalgic evocation
=> employing the Impressionistic techniques => his painting =>like a dream
=> he recalls the gracious simple age of Schubert => the Biedermeier Paradise
lost (1848: the liberal revolutionaries => took it down)
2. a Greek priestess with a kithera => the canvas is full of Greek
symbols (in a realistically style)
? symbols that are taken from Nietzsche and Schopenhauer (important
– crises of rationalism;
? the realistically interpretation – form his studies => replicas of
the museum artifacts
? on the tomb => two figures: Silenius (the symbol of the sexual omnipotence
of nature and companion of the sufferings of god) the Sphinx (child eating
mother => symbol of relationship between animal and men
? Silenius and Sphinx => the buried instinctual forces
The gentle paradise of Schubert vs. the symbols of instinctual energies
1898: Athena => the transformation => from the three dimensional protector
of the art in the Hellenic time to the abstract symbol of the Secession
to Athena impassive and enigmatic (looks: Austrian woman => hair and eyes),
a modern Athena => instead of Nike/ Nuda Veritas holding up her mirror
to the man.
Nuda veritas – changed => three dimensional, full red hair, sexy
? a turning point: a new culture is emerging from the old => classical
symbols are used in the exploration of the instinctual, erotic life
1898: the angelic female replaced by the sensual woman (pleasure and
pain, life and death)
? the woman – is dangerous for the man (Judith and Salome)
? the freedom (sexual freedom – emerging from a previously moralistic
culture) – turning into a nightmare.
? in Klimt’s shifting style (from naturalistical representation => to abstract and geometrical => the need for orientation in a world without secure coordinates
Klimt’s vision of the human condition => in the University paintings
1894: the Ministry of Culture commissioned Klimt => the clients: The
triumph of light over darkness
Klimt => Medicine, Philosophy, and Jurisprudence
None => reflect the triumph of light over darkness => focus on the struggle, on the limits of the human beings, on the aimless existence.
Philosophy (1900) => Schopenhauer’s vision of the world => as blind energy in an endless round of meaningless birth, love and death.
? only the figure at the bottom => suggests the existence of a conscious
mind.
? the view => from the pit (tangled bodies, suffering mankind)
Philosophy and Medicine (1901)=> mankind is lost in space
Jurisprudence (1903-1907) => the space is divided between the upper
world/ the world bellow (underground or underwater, an inferno)
The upper world => the three allegorical figures => Truth, Justice,
and Law => distant, abandoning the humankind to the realm of terror
The heads (without bodies) => the judges
The three women => preside over the execution (there is no crime recorded
only punishment) of the male victim.
Klimt vision => the three graces of justice above and the three furies of instinct below =>proclaimed the primacy of darkness as he exposed the power of instinct that underlay the political world of law and justice (see Freud).
Beethoven Frieze (1902) => 14th Secession Exhibition => too free, challenging, obscene
Klimt and his circle => gave the Jugendstil – a distinctive character
(rejecting the free curved, floral motifs => a new language of clear, geometrical
forms (the pinnacle of the Viennese Art Nouveau)
Budapest:
Hungary – Magyars, Romanians, Germans, Slovakians, Croatians, Slovenians, Jews and gypsies
1900: shift toward the city + burst of building and artistic activity => changed the face of Hungarian material culture
1846 on => expansion of the railway system + development of banking and food processing => 1900 => Budapest – the second largest city in central European Habsburg lands and the seventh in Europe.
1860s: public buildings
-