stephenp
I see there is no discussion on Arno Breker, no doubt a figure no longer of interest, and yet he puzzles me and I would appreciate the viewpoints of others.
I have only seen pictures of his work, but they seem on the whole pretentious and flatulent...I mean they are LARGE in size but small in spirit. I can see why Hitler and fellow fascists would be drawn to the external qualities of conventional nobility as expressing the spirituality of the German people, but how could fellow contemporary artists find value in his work? That puzzles me. How could an artist exposed to the exciting aesthetic transformations of the early 20th century, working even in the art capital of Paris, be so dead to them?
Kind reviewers do note the mannerist/baroque aspects of his sculpture, and it does lend itself to 19th Century French Romanticism, but his work seems so literal and conventional, as if he is copying emotion....
The puzzle and mystery is not in the art but in the man.
I have only seen pictures of his work, but they seem on the whole pretentious and flatulent...I mean they are LARGE in size but small in spirit. I can see why Hitler and fellow fascists would be drawn to the external qualities of conventional nobility as expressing the spirituality of the German people, but how could fellow contemporary artists find value in his work? That puzzles me. How could an artist exposed to the exciting aesthetic transformations of the early 20th century, working even in the art capital of Paris, be so dead to them?
Kind reviewers do note the mannerist/baroque aspects of his sculpture, and it does lend itself to 19th Century French Romanticism, but his work seems so literal and conventional, as if he is copying emotion....
The puzzle and mystery is not in the art but in the man.