WHAT IS MODERNISM? A Lecture.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ก.ค. 2023
- What is modernism? How can you understand Modernism as a movement? In this episode we take a look at Modernism in the arts. The Modernist movement spans over the areas of painting and sculpture, architecture, classic literature, and music.
This lecture on the tenets or elements of Modernism takes a foundational look at the ideas of Modernism in Art, architecture and then in classic literature.
I hope that you enjoy this fascinating topic.
If you love books and want to dig deeper into classic literature, then be sure to subscribe.
If you would like additional videos or want to support my channel, you can also join my Patreon group where we read one classic a month and also I provide extra videos that cannot be found on here on youtube.
Thanks for taking the time to pull all of this together! Your efforts are appreciated
My pleasure!
In Art History, I was taught that since the invention of photography, the only way for the fine arts to go forward was to go back to the beginning. So impressionism, pointillism, and so on was born since absolute realism was achieved through photos. And I get that. Thanks for explaining how the modernism movement affected literature.
Thanks for this, it's a very valuable addition to the topic.
That was an American Clement Greenberg's belief - " Believing art should be distilled down into its purest, simplest and most poetic properties of line, colour and flat surface, Greenberg's ideas influenced an entire generation, leading them to create some of the most iconic artworks of all time." It was IMO, an over-reaction. Like Modernism generally.
Tristan! I’m trying to watch one of your videos every day. This one was terrific. Even though I understand modernism in literature to a certain extent, your explanation was a very good reminder - especially how you focus on architecture and painting before delving into what modernism is. I appreciate you greatly. My mind is richer because of your ability to explain well. Thanks❤
Well done. Very interesting.
Great explanation, very interesting and easy to follow, I found it so informative about books and paintings I have loved for ages, but never fully understood the deeper meaning. Thank You.
So pleased that you enjoyed it ☺️
Just ordered A Month In The Country, looking forward to that Modern Read, as I count all published in 20th and 21st. I will watch this tomorrow when I'm on the treadmill.😊 Hurray for that St. Louis kid, T.S. Eliot. All Quiet on the Western Front, Erich Maria Remarque, I like the use of writ rather than written and there is an example of my stream of conciousness. Thank you, very fine.
I’ve just read this pearl for the third time
Patty- That was fascinating. I'm going to watch it again because I was listening on the bus coming home. I know I missed something. I'm so glad you're back. Hope you're doing well.
Glad you enjoyed it, Patricia.
This lecture is well worth at least a second listening!!!!
@@maggieattenborrow6725 I'm so pleased you feel that way 😀☺️
Just taking a sec here to say: I appreciate what you put up here. (Further partly unnecessary explanation: I spend a lot of time in YT and lately I was complaining [to myself, of course] that we get a lot of content designed as divulgation, getting the ideas down to the basics, but you take the time to go deeper and, as someone that wants to educate herself in literature, I appreciate it a lot. Addendum: sorry for all the mistakes, yo hablo español).
Thanks for that! There were no mistakes to apologise for 😀 Thank you for taking the time to comment so encouragingly.
I probably understand and learn from your lectures than most of my English teachers.
Thank you Jackie, that's really kind of you and means a lot. 😀
@@tristanandtheclassics6538 I actually benefit from one on one learning, and watching videos like yours is pretty close to that for me.
Thank you very much, I have been learning a lot from your videos. All my best wishes.
Great and awesome Explanation very Interesting
Great presentation!
Photography developed (pun intended) at around the time of the impressionists; so what (they thought) was the point of trying to paint things realistically when the artist could not compete with the photograph for depicting things realistically. Also, paint in tubes became available, along with portable easels, so painters could take their painting equipment outdoors, rather than only being able to paint in a studio. Also, more colors became available; and the new theories about how we see and how our eyes mix colors also developed at around this time. The scientific theories, as well as the new painting technologies available had a vast influence on this changing artform.
Thanks for the awesome lesson. Are you a professor or teacher on top of the channel?
I enjoyed your talk very much. I am also very interested in art and literature and architecture. I am also interested in philosophy and Christianity, and in fact the underlying roots of modernism are I think with the breakdown of medieval scholasticism. The 13th century was the high mark of European Christendom. After this period, people rejected it for less profound, muddled thinking. Modernism pretty much depicts this muddling and lack of soul.
This was so good, Tristan! Listened twice.
Thanks so much, I'm so pleased that you enjoyed it ☺️
Your point on being an atheist in say the 18th Century. The most famous one was the Frenchman Baron d'Holbach who wrote "The System of Nature" among other things. Of course the King banned and burned it, but it had been printed in Holland as well, and of course d'Holbach had published under a pseudonym. David Hume was also an atheist but one who denied it to avoid problems. They knew each other and the BBC made a good series by Jonathan Miller "A Rough History of Disbelief" with an episode about that.
Thanks for pointing me to that. I appreciate it.😀👍
@@tristanandtheclassics6538Your take on Manet was good. One thing I like to do when friends visit me in Paris is to take them to the Musée Orsay. There, Americans should start on the top floor to see the Post-Impressionists, which is what they come for. Then go down to the others with famous painters they probably have never heard of.
I always take them to see Courbet. He has great, even very large, realist paintings. Though I particularly look at their reactions to a small one called "L'Origin du Monde". Difficult to be more realist, and the painting was not presented to the public at the time.
It was good to hear you mention Robert Graves. He was a fantastic writer of both fiction and interpretations of mythology. My favorite autobiography though was by Graham Greene in two or three short books, "A Sort of Life", "Ways of Escape", and maybe "A World of My Own".
Thank you so so much for this great lecture! Much love from Iran!
Thanks for the "enlightenment." M C Escher, I believe, expressed this idea in some of his works too, where he illustrates one form of reality evaporating, so to speak, into another. Thanks for posting.
I have enjoyed this lecture immensely. You differ so much from other people on TH-cam. I could have sworn that you hold your degree on literature .
Big greetings from the Balkans. ✨✨
Wow, thank you! It's so kind of you to watch my videos and also take the time to leave an encouraging comment. Hearty salutations from the UK.😀
Hey Tristan,
Great lecture! It’s fascinating to hear you discuss the parallels between certain movements and the direct or indirect relationship they have had in influencing each other.
I’m curious, have you ever read The Recognitions by William Gaddis? It’s a great example of post world war 2 literature. I feel that like that would be a great lecture, the effects of that war on art.
But anyway, It’s a great mix of high and low art. A doozy of a book but genius in scope. It’s quite long and wasn’t well received when it was published in the 50’s but it’s had quite a boost in popularity recently.
I’d be very interested to see what you think about the classics that have come out post WWII. I’ve heard you touch on 1984 and Fahrenheit 451 but not too many others.
All the best! Thank you for all your hard work and passion that you put into your studies
Great video. Have you read any Imagist poetry? I think it falls into modernism, the way you explained it. They were going in 1913 to the 1920's and wanted to find different ways of expressing the world.
thank sir
appreciate your mind guiding
J M W Turner, father of impressionism.
I really like Turner. The drama of his sea scenes is sublime. He is a good case of how blurred the edges of movements get. Very much a part of the romantic movement, with hid focus on nature and his earlier dramatic, adventuring sea scape scenes, he broadens into works like the Fighting Temeraire, which has a touch of the Monet about it. His techniques were apparently deeply studied by the impressionists and had a big effect on them, as you say. And that focus on technique itself is a particular hallmark, so I understand, of Modernism.
Thanks so much for bringing him up. 😃👍
@@tristanandtheclassics6538
Thanks Tristan, you are doing a great job.
Very interesting video
Always a pleasure to listen to you. Thank you!
P.S.: I'm not sure if it's just me, but I would like it if the sound quality was better.
I mean I hear a kind of room echo.
Thanks, Claudia. I'll look into the sound.d issue for you.😀👍
@@tristanandtheclassics6538 oh ok 😃
By the way, the English exam results came out and I got the highest grade of all candidates, so thank you again for everything I've learnt from your videos 🙂
@claudiamihaela2107 That's amazing, Claudia! Well done you 👏 If anything you heard on this channel helped, I'm so glad. But you deserve all the credit for your results. 😀👍❤️
The concept "form is function" has been a catastrophe for the Western urban built environment.
I agree😀
I've always thought modernist architecture is ugly. At 23:45 , it looks like he's searching for a euphemism to describe ugly architecture.
English Lit and history!? Where do we get this stuff from! I did see a TH-cam vid with a younger woman from the States where she produces the main book where she did indeed obtain all her wrong history from, and there was plenty of it, I can tell you. This video sounds too familiar! "...there was no mobility...you were born noble, you couldn't just become noble... things began to change, you start in the c.17th especially with the merchant class. Things begin to alter, but still things are very distinct, you have aristocratic people, and lower people. And of course all that is brought crashing down in the French Revolution; it happened a century before for the British when there was the civil war." The only part of that that is correct is the last sentence beginning with "And". Tut tut and dear oh dear, and probably deary me! What a muddle.
This is interesting, Richard. I'm not sure I agree with you here. Of course, we might be inadvertently speaking past one another.
Of course, the purpose of the history in the video was not a historical treatise, just a loosely sketched and flimsy framework.
The part about 'no mobility' was in reference to social class mobility from commoner to noble. While it was technically possible to move from commoner to noble pre-17th century, it was so rare as to be almost a rule.
"Born noble, couldn't just become noble." Again, as a broad generalisation, this is true. Noble titles are normally hereditary. One doesn't simply earn them, and one inherits them by virtue of birth. I'm not saying that every son of an Earl becomes an Earl. They would all be classed as of a noble family, though, and would be eligible for marriage within noble circles.
Compare that to someone born a commoner. They can not simply just become a noble. It is not an off the rack item to purchase. Sure, there were ways of becoming ennobled, through services, or through money (the Rothschild's, for instance). However, a commoner couldn't say that by doing xyz, one will definitely become a noble, but if you were born of a Marquis, then you were nobility or born of noble blood.
More significant inroads into the social hierarchy were starting in the 16th to 17th centuries. Of course, the aristocracy were forever trying to hold their distinction from 'new money' (to pinch a phrase). However, the vast wealth being created by common merchants was altering the fabric. I'm not saying there had never been wealthy merchants before, but the world of commerce was creating enormous fortunes for men who wanted to climb socially.
I'm not aware that any of those statements are wrong. Especially not as brief generalisations for the purpose of a quick sketched backdrop.
Hope this clarifies my position for you.😀👍
Given it was off the cuff, I enjoyed his summation that you suggest is wrong. I don't think he is wrong. He is describing the gradual move towards egalitarianism, which began actually with the Reformation in Christianity and with the French Revolution moved into politics and secular society.
@@craigrichardson1050 I can recommend thinking classes bud. They can help. Not necessarily, but they can
@@craigrichardson1050 I also recommend reading classes. Have a careful read through of my comment, carefully. Comprehension...
@@richarddelanetWell you aren't a good example of thinking - you haven't provided any counter argument to back up your criticism.