Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
In ‘Modernist Painting’ (1960), Clement Greenberg famously wrote that ‘flatness alone was unique and exclusive to pictorial art’. However, in a less cited passage, he admitted to exaggeration: there ‘can never be an absolute flatness’, and an artist like Mondrian pursued ‘a pictorial, strictly optical third dimension’, a perceived turn to opticality for which the critic was later faulted. Closer readings of drafts for this and other seminal texts such as ‘Towards a Newer Laocoon’ (1940) show that Greenberg was himself a close reader or connoisseur of the spatial and optical (i.e. ‘plastic’) modalities of Mondrian’s ‘Neo-Plasticism’. An underlying tension thus emerges between the familiar Greenberg as ideologue-theorist and a lesser-known Greenberg as connoisseur-critic. The former constructed powerful dogmas of modernism that constituted his primary, lasting influence, yet his greatest contribution may lie precisely in his close readings of specific artists, above all within the orbit of Mondrian’s space.
Netherlands Yearbook for History of Art / Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek Online – Brill
Published: May 20, 2020
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.