There is far from those which have applauds the Cubism, as one applauds a new spectacle, with those which in one makes. It was necessary for principal of them, i.e. with those which created properly the school of painting cubist, assimilating the precepts suggested by Apollinaire, to seize essence at least of it, without what they could not have given each other to themselves the certainty which they made a work.
Although Apollinaire was the organizer of the Cubism, he is not the inventor, in the sense that the ideas that it put in precepts were in the air and constituted an important current: Italian Marinetti, about 1910, lance in Italy Futurism which are connected with the Cubism by the bottom of the ideas.
As long as one will regard art as a form of worship to nature, it is obvious that one will understand nothing with works cubists.
It should well be seen opposite the revolution cubist, before being an aesthetic revolution, is a religious revolution.
The essential idea of Apollinaire, expressed in his small book "the painters cubists", is the need for the destruction of the concept of creative God replaced by the concept that each man is God himself, insofar as it becomes aware of his divinity, and that consequently, men do not have any reason to dedicate a worship with the nature, which is not whereas a tiny, momentary and perishable aspect of the Universe.
We cannot be unaware of that Apollinaire left a reputation of Mystifier to which itself voluntarily contributed since it was entitled professional volontier "of mystification". It does not follow that there was place in its spirit only for mystification; the designs which it expresses in "the painters cubists" are certainly serious, and it is as such as we will examine them with an aim of not ensuring us of their sincerity, of which we do not doubt, but of their validity, and for any statement, finally, to ensure us if they are sincere and false ideas brilliantly expressed or insufficiently shown right ideas.
The possibility of a revolution which frightens the directions because of the upheavals violent one that it involves however does not shock the spirit, as would do it, for example, a call with the revolution when the need for the revolution is not highlighted at the same time. This is why the designs of Guillaume Apollinaire should not be examined relative with their revolutionary character but relative so that they offer the valid one to the spirit.
- v -
Although one has some, we should recognize our limits and the mystery of the things. Said Apollinaire, as if the mystery were our invention, that "one accustoms oneself quickly with the slavery of the mystery". Our slavery of the mystery is only one resignation reasonable in front of what exceeds us. The mystery is not, as much believe it naively, invented by the priests to maintain our spirit in an ignorance favourable with its assujetissement by the church, but there exists spontaneously. If certain enigmas were bored, certain fables, called mysteries for the needs for the cause, it would remain still the true mystery, Master of our destiny and all ici-bas.
This mystery wants that what is called error is a properly human phenomenon, the error being defined like an action having contrary consequences, in the final analysis, with human happiness.
For our misfortune, the characteristic of the errors is food, to go, build, allure, resemble the truth for a long time before one realizes that they are errors, and to generate thus tough illusions, networks, sequences of errors long-lived, powerful and organized whose exits are fatal, violent and catastrophic.
Some worships of the scientific nature of order, for example, are obviously only one form of the worship of oneself and the desire of control of the world to oneself. Nature, while appearing to deliver its secrecies often tightens appalling traps, and there is difference only in the words between the alleged love for the nature - love which devastates, confusion - of some people, and the frenzy of the others to "crush" it.
Obviously, nature is avenged also cruelly for those which like it of a covetous and insatiable curiosity that those which scorn it. If it is thought, with some appearance of reason, that nature, as large as it is, is not the absolute, it as should be thought as we, creatures of nature, can consider the absolute only through nature while going up with his creator.
One must conclude from it that, not only the admiration of nature is article of faith, but still that there is not an other way which can carry out towards the absolute.
- VI -
The governing idea of Guillaume Apollinaire being that the worship of nature is the only obstacle which is opposed to the conquest absolute, it follows that if it is obvious that the true obstacle with the conquest of the absolute is not the worship of nature, its theory is cancelled. Its anathemas with nature, for eloquent that they are, give us the capacity neither of us to pass some, nor not to be of it. It spreads out immense mistaken for the things mortals in what they are ridiculous in front of eternity: "on this side of eternity", he writes, dance the mortals forms of the love and the name of nature summarizes their cursed discipline ". Its contempt, which is a higher bid of the Fathers of the Church, goes beyond truth, because the importance of the forms mortals is contestable only insofar as she wants to be the first.
But there is at Apollinaire a tendency more dangerous than the idolatry: it is the tendency to the spiritual deification of the man, tendency which does not want to hold account of the animality of the human creature. Our Pascal, who was however not a materialist, said: "which wants to make the angel makes the animal", indicating by there that the man is mistaken coarsely by forgetting that it is an animal.
There is at the man a fatal tendency denounced many times by the moralists: it is to be unaware of, always excuse its own defects or to reject the responsibility for it on others. There is another more fatal tendency still because activates, and which is so to speak the positive element of the preceding one. This tendency, even more than to over-estimate its intelligence and its capacity, is not to admit the possibility of an intelligence higher than his, and to fall finally into the belief in its own divinity, belief which implies necessarily the inversion of what is: it is an illusory species of racism there.
- VII -
One cannot deny that Apollinaire does not show this tendency: "We have rights on the words which form and demolish the universe", he writes while speaking about the poets. Moreover, it encourages ausi there the artists in particular in the following sentence: "the painter must above all give himself the spectacle of his own divinity. And in this other: " each divinity creates with her image; thus painters."
Apollinaire thus thinks that not only the pride pushed to the extreme is not a fault, but still which it is essential to the man to get rid of the prejudices and to arrive at the plenitude of his genius. Like it noted the same leaning one at many human beings, it seeks to become the obstetrician by translating it into stated principles, and to group in school the scattered individuals about it.
Betting for the pride of the men in general, there was no reason so that artists were not allured by its call. It gives this arbitrary definition of the artists, which could be as well definition of the proud men: "above all, the artists are men who want to become inhuman", i.e. more and others that human.
According to this definition, the artist who does not see himself as a divinity is thus not a true artist.
It was impossible that such a definition of the artist récoltat of many adhesions: if the first requirement to be a true artist is to feel a divinity, there is little of it which does not authorize to so brilliant and if not very expensive acquisition. The definition has, moreover, this advantage which it puts in bad posture the artists who refuse to place themselves so high: they have against them the modesty of the place which they assign them-even, the weakness of their small number (modest truths are always rare) and finally, the contempt whose this news and many divinities water them.
In short, the capital means of persuasion of Apollinaire being to cultivate at the men the admiration of oneself, it was inevitable that these calls tended to judge legitimates all that puts obstacle at the constraints and the disciplines. Each one of its reflexions being a postulate with the divinity, in favour of people hitherto modest by force, contains obligatorily a call with the rebellion.
It is understood that these ideas applied to the art of painting caused works such as the Cubism in conceived. Tables cubists are the faithful reflection of the suggestions of Apollinaire: rupture with the respect of nature, rupture with old painting and of all times, deformation without terminal, not figuratism, etc.
From where one must conclude that the Cubism is defined as painting a being which places itself, itself and first of all, in the field of the divinity.
- VIII -
That Guillaume APOLLINAIRE wanted that, it is the obviousness even, and it is logical that it rents with enthusiasm the artists who listened to it.
But our intention is to examine whether its reasons to want it are valid.
We have just checked that its reasons metaphysics to scorn nature are insupportable since they is not appropriate to the man to scorn the man, since its wills, its actions, its adhesions, its refusal, and until its obsession to rise with "the inhuman one", all that is located, good liking badly liking, in the human hierarchy, and is incorporated in this nature which one would like to make close-cropped table.
But, in addition to the arguments metaphysics, Apollinaire gives plastic arguments which endeavour to justify the Cubism negatively, in the sense that it aims more at discrediting the old designs of the art of painting that to be explained on the news. These arguments want to show that the love for nature prevented the pictorial designs former to the Cubism from reaching the plastic ideal, but of nothing informs us on this plastic ideal itself: they say well of what it does not consist; they do not say of what it consists.
The aphorisms of Apollinaire were used much for Cubistes and to their friends to get rid cavalierly of the most usual objections than one makes them.
For example, when one addresses to a painting cubist the reproach which one does not see what it represents, the defenders of the Cubism hasten to retort by an aphorism of Apollinaire: "the photographers alone manufacture the reproduction of nature." This aphorism however does not rest on nothing solid nor exact. Photography being very posterior with painting it is necessary, or to declare that the true problem of painting was posed only starting from photography, which would have made understand that art is other thing that the imitation of nature, or to recognize that before photography there were artists who imitated the nature and whose works nevertheless were not made null and void by the appearance of photography, in which case the artist imitating nature and the photographer are distinct characters. Apollinaire, finally, lines up implicitly with this last opinion, which is careful for a revolutionist but makes his argumentation incoherent: "this art of pure painting, if it manages to be released from the old painting, will not cause necessarily the disappearance of this one..." (1) Whatever the cause of this contradiction of Apollinaire, pure failure of logic, or respect towards the traders in old art, it should not about it less be retained in what it recognizes that the works of art produced under the reign of the imitation of nature do not lose their value because of appearance of "pure" painting.
As for photography, with his artificial eye which interpret nature with many imperfections, values, plans, prospect, matter, and finally colors, one notes that it does not cause any financial operation as a work of art, which proves that it is not regarded as such, and cannot claim to take seat beside the works carried out by the artists imitating nature.
- IX -
It rises from this fact that two works of painting imitating very accurately nature, but different authors, can offer néammoins capital differences by this infinitesimal element from which we come to speak.
Apollinaire involuntarily says it while proposing to prove anything else (artistic eloquence of the abstract feature), by the history which it tells of Apelle and Protogène, two famous Greek painters, that one distinguished only by their subtle way to trace a feature: he recognizes by there that in drawing, in painting it is many infinitesimal differences which constitute the decisive differences and not, consequently, the conspicuous differences of the deformations or the forms ever seen.
However, the copy of nature, by the variety of the forms, modelled, the colors, lightings being the exercise which requires at the same time the most subtlety, of force and depth and maitrise of oneself, which is obligatorily that makes it possible to an artist to best show his force and its originality.
It follows that the imitation of nature being the kind of painting which clarifies best qualities of the various geniuses of the artists, gets a kind of pleasure that does not get, as opposed to what known as Apollinaire, the spectacle of the natural things.
Then, whatever large that is nature and whatever weak that that is to say, compared to it, the best copy than one can about it make, it moves and passes; the copy remains and fixes the moment forever disappeared.
Lastly, the imitation of nature is one of the forms of the research of the truth, and it research of the truth is not a negligible thing
- X -
The inferiority and the uselessness of the painting of imitation of nature are thus not obvious.
Does Apollinaire show the superiority of the painting of not-imitation, i.e. the superiority of the Cubism?
We should draw aside the vague terms of "purity", "unit", "truth", advanced by Apollinaire. Let us retain, on the contrary, the term of "odd construction", which seems to aim to the precision. Although he does not say to us with which laws obeys this odd construction, the formula has this of precis which it indicates an indivisible work. Unfortunately, the precision of the term is only apparent, because, not relating to essence, it does not define anything. Actually, this "odd construction" is ultimately only the unit, previously suggested like criterium, and nondefined in what one does not know of which unit it acts.
The unit, indeed, is not a virtue in oneself, but only insofar as it is the unit of a beautiful thing. For example, the unit in the absence of beauty is not a beauty. It follows that there cannot be pleasure resulting from the only odd construction, and that the unit cannot bring by itself of artistic element, and finally, that if the unit in the beauty is preferable with fragments of beauty, these same fragments of beauty are higher than the unit in the absence of beauty.
Consequently of what, the unit is nothing, the beauty is all.
- XI -
If it is admitted that, in any case, some opinion that one has on art, and whatever the direction which one gives to the word beauty, research of art must lead to the beauty, it should be admitted also that the problem of the beauty orders all the others and, in the final analysis, for Apollinaire as for everyone that it is the beauty which makes the masterpieces and not another thing.
However if we seek in "the Cubistes painters" of Apollinaire, the place where it identifies the beauty, we do not find it because it is not there.
- XI -
On the other hand, we find a passage where, faithful to its negative method, Apollinaire endeavours to destroy the notion of the traditional beauty by defining this one as a perishable monster: "this monster of the beauty is not eternal", writes he.
To deny the old beauty does not solve therefore the problem of the news. By condemning what the men named beauty, Apollinaire condemns only what the men thought up to now of the beauty and not the principle of the beauty, i.e. the higher expression of the things, and if it condemned the beauty until in his possibility of becoming, it would have to condemn the Cubism itself.
The beauty being rejected by Apollinaire only in his old form and not in its news, this one will have to show on what it rests, as that one showed it.
The old form of beauty offered by nature and judged by Apollinaire a "monster" which "is not eternal", however recommends one of our paramount instincts, namely: the visual instinct, father of the visual arts, emanating from the eye, forms natural, terrestrial and perishable. On the other hand, the new beauty desired (though nondefinite by Apollinaire) realizable by the Cubism, contradicts the visual instinct, which while rising against the natural forms is opposed to the visual instinct.
It follows that Apollinaire who condemns a form of definite beauty being based on a paramount plastic instinct, recommends a new beauty which it does not define and which is opposed to a paramount plastic instinct.
- XII -
The movement rising against the members, the taste rising against the palate, the voice rising against the larynx, the thought rising against the brain, give an image of the Cubism which employs the eye with work contradicting the visual system.
The Cubism, which disavowing the beauty of the natural things while carrying out the work conceived by the eye and appreciable by the eye, falls into a contradiction which carries the judgment of its own work.
Necessarily, the Cubism, not proceeding of the visual instinct is installed in the plastic range only by one paradox.
It thus remains to find the instinct whose Cubism proceeds primarily.
At the beginning of this study, we noted that the major means to persuade of Apollinaire were to flatter the feeling of admiration of the men for them-even.
The admiration of oneself counts among the instincts. Like all the instincts, it contains a bottom of truth: relative with its smallness and its weakness, it appears obvious that the made man of the admirable and singular things, that only can make him.
Like all the instincts still, the admiration of the man for itself is prone to be canted. Legitimate self-esteem, i.e. of the conscience of the size of the man and desire of it to be worthy, one can slip with the conviction that nothing, in the universe, is above the man, that, moreover, among the men one belongs to the most raised category. It is obviously the position of Apollinaire who writes: "poets, we have rights on the words which form and demolish the universe." At his place, the self-esteem turns to this kind of virulent pride which normally causes the deterioration or the imbalance of a certain number of faculties.
- XIII -
If it is admitted that a virulent pride normally causes the deterioration or the imbalance of certain faculties, it is allowed to think that Apollinaire did not judge all things completely, many thoughts of him indicating the empire of this virulent pride on its spirit.
With the self-esteem, other instincts could still be disturbed at his place.
Was the visual instinct, father of the visual arts, intact at Apollinaire?
We had to conclude that there is discrepancy between the Cubism and the visual instinct because this one, emanating from the eye, forms natural, cannot approve a conventional vision which poses for principle of disavowing the natural forms.
If the visual instinct at Apollinaire had had some force it would thus be opposed to the Cubism: since it did not obstruct of anything its blossoming nor its development, it was obviously weak.
Among faculties that virulent pride unbalanced or deteriorated at Apollinaire it is probably necessary to count the visual instinct.
The same kind of virulent pride sought and cultivated by Apollinaire in those which it considered called to become followers of the Cubism, was logically to be accompanied by the same weakness of the visual instinct at those which answered its call.
It follows that, generally, Cubistes must be characterized by a weakness of the visual instinct which prevents them from being shocked by the nonsenses that they introduce into the natural forms, or even by the suppression of this one, just as a weakness of thought prevents from being shocked by the nonsense of a reasoning.
XIV
If, of agreement with the fact that the psychologists always observed, we recognize that the pride pushed to the extreme normally causes the deterioration or the imbalance of a certain number of faculties, it is conceived that the judgement in various matters can about it be deteriorated or unbalanced, and that it is seen badly or not things which are, or which one believes to see of the things which are not.
The postulate with the divinity, i.e. unlimited pride, being the characteristic of Cubistes, one understands that they have a judgement suitable for evil to see, or not to see what is, finally, to believe to see what is not.
XV
We knew that Cubistes have plastic role only paradoxically, because their design contradicts the visual instinct, which is the father of the visual art.
We thus wanted to seek by which other instinct that the visual instinct Cubistes were directed, and in consequence which real role they played.
We found on their premises the omnipotence of the instinct of the admiration of oneself. However, the human spirit being made coexistence of several instincts it is important to know how the omnipotence of the one can be put up with the company of the others.
To have an idea of the right balance of the instincts one must ensure oneself if the instincts are equal between them, or if there is a hierarchy of the instincts.
XVI
All the human feelings without exception having their source in the instinct, it is not any problem which one can consider without considering the instincts initially: this need to consider the instincts initially is an instinct itself which is the need for the truth.
Since it is universally recognized that there are noble inclinations and low inclinations. It follows that one universally recognizes the existence of a hierarchy of the instincts.
, indeed, various instincts are observed. One distinguishes the instincts commanders, in the absolute deprivation of which the others, which one can call subordinated instincts, are not viable.
It is necessary to place, for example, among the instincts commanders of the physical order: sight, balance, and the instincts commanders of the moral order: wisdom, the good direction. A lack of visual instinct, indeed, dissimulates us partially or completely the physical aspect of the things, a lack of balance makes us fall, and, in the moral order, a lack of good direction pushes us in a false conviction.
The instincts commanders never failed by exaggeration since their specific quality is to avoid us slipping beyond or in-on this side truth. One is never too clear, one is never balanced too much, one never has too much good direction.
On the other hand, the instincts subordinates are recognized in what they are prone to the exaggerations, either in more or in less: one can be too sharp or too slackness, cold or carried, indifferent or too impassioned, timid or bold, weak or obstinate, miserly or spendthrift.
According to these data, it seems that it is necessary to place among the instincts subordinates the instinct of admiration of oneself which, when it is unbalanced, loses the clearness of the judgement by nonchalance, and when it swells the clearness of the judgement by excess of insurance loses.
There is inflation of the admiration of oneself when written Apollinaire: " we have rights to the words which form and demolish the universe "? They push the artists with the inflation of the admiration of oneself when he says to them: " the painter must above all give himself the spectacle of his own divinity "
If so, works of people who adopt these principles must fatally suffer from a lack of clearness
If so, the role of the cubists was practically to bring in the design of the art of painting, and art in general, a lack of clearness proportioned with the inflation of their admiration for themselves.
If so, the Cubism is a false idea.
If the Cubism is a false idea, its rather considerable and rather long material success obliges to conclude that it is a constant false idea with skill.
SOME NAMES
The structure of Guillaume Apollinaire, " the Cubistes painters " supports a subtitle, " Meditations aesthetic ", which indicates the substance even book, doctrines. These meditations are followed of an apologetic study of the principal artists who had adopted the Cubism. It did not require there to in general take again in connection with each one of these artists the arguments previously presented on the Cubism, and which apply automatically to each one of them.
It is however not useless to quote their name, of which some, although known, are not always, as it right, would be identified with the Cubism, because people do not see cubes in their works, which, we said it in the introduction, does not prove anything, the Cubism being only one accidental and inadequate name requiring only one revolutionary position.
Here some names which Apollinaire like those of the artists placing himself under the banner cubist gives:
Derain, Picasso, Direct, Metzinger, Gleizes, Delaunay, Marie Laurencin, the Falconer, Leger, Juan Gris, Picabia, Duchamp, Duchamp-Villon, Jaques Villon, Marcoussis, Henri-Matisse, Rouault, Raoul Dufy, Jean Puy, Van Dongen, etc... (1)
Well of other painters, Of which some extremely known, were gained since with the theories of Apollinaire.
(1) Apollinaire does not quote Vlaminick, at least in this work. However Vlaminick belonged a moment to the cubist group well: its tables between 1910 in 1914 carry an obvious trace of the Cubism. Its estrangement engraves with Picasso and the cubist group often makes forget this first print
