It is precisely when
abstract art began to be recognized in Paris that the circle of abstract
painters, critics, etc. was involved in a fierce controversy.
The quarrel was aggravated by its opponents, some journalists fond
of simplifications and easy labels and by all the hardworking epigones,
newly converted to abstract art by opportunism, rigid and dogmatic
mainly because of their inability to use something else than processes
- They would change their " style ", when the abstract " wave " was
outdated.
Painters, sculptors, critics, galleries, magazines
were labelled as belonging either to the " warm " group (" lyrical
" abstraction) or to the " cold " group (" geometrical " abstraction).
J.D. could not be labelled under any of these reducing names,
since he was at the same time controlled and gestural. |
Léon
Degand, a scrupulous and methodical art critic (hence belonging
to the " cold " group ?) tried to demonstrate how absurd the quarrel
was:
| " ... Naturally, there are cold and warm
paintings in both abstract and figurative art. The outward
and conventional signs of cold (given by geometrical forms or
the " finished " aspect of the technique) do not necessarily
convey the notion of cold, nor the typical ones of warm (" free
" forms, impression of unfinished) the notion of warm.
We must not revive in abstract painting the futile quarrel between
the supporters of Ingres and Delacroix. " [Language
and meaning of painting, published by l'Architecture d'Aujourd'hui,
1956.] |
| " Don't trust appearances : Bemin's painting
is cold athough its vocabulary is rather warm, whereas Seurat's
painting based on a cold language is warm. Don't tune
either your degree of admiration on the degree of temperature
: Rubens and Mondrian do not annihilate each other. For
instance, a very mellow Juli6nas is not antagonistic to a very
dry Sancerre. The devil take bars ! Long live the greedy
ones [Art d'aujourdhui, January
1953]. |
|
