The Guggenheim makes an attempt to recenter and redeem a largely uncared for creative second in a brand new exhibition, Concord and Dissonance: Orphism in Paris, 1910 to 1930. On condition that “Orphist” was not a reputation these artists gave themselves, and even essentially recognized with, it’s a tough promote.
In 1912 or 1913, the poet Guillaume Apollinaire coined the time period “Orphic Cubism” (the title alludes to the mythic poet Orpheus) to explain work with no apparent root within the seen world; that was much less jarringly angular than its Cubist forebears; that was influenced by music; and targeted on “pure aesthetic pleasure” and shade and motion up to now abstracted it turned, in Apollinaire’s phrases, chic. He named the works of Robert Delaunay, Francis Picabia, Fernand Léger, and Marcel Duchamp (and a few by Picasso) as exemplars. On the Guggenheim, Delaunay’s work opens the present, adopted intently by that of Sonia Delaunay, Picabia, and František Kupka, all identified for his or her vibrantly colourful summary work.
None of those artists, nonetheless, had been self-described Orphists: The Delaunays most well-liked to name their work “Simultaneist”; Picabia is greatest identified for his connections to Dada and Surrealism; and Kupka rejected any labels. Duchamp is current via a handful of darkish, fragmented works that really feel odd and misplaced with Orphism’s supposed curiosity in shade, with barely any effort made by the exhibition to include them into its narrative. Certainly, the present struggles to outline the time period it’s centered round: It’s about capturing “multiple moments in single compositions,” in response to the wall textual content, however so is Futurism. It’s a celebration of sunshine and modernity, however so is Rayism (which is represented within the present by a shocking Natalia Goncharova work, “The Electric Lamp” (1913)). It connects portray to sound via vibrant shade and rippling, flowing summary shapes, however that was additionally the aim of Synchromism, a motion of American artists shaped in Paris across the identical time. The Synchromists, represented right here by Stanton Macdonald-Wright and Morgan Russell, claimed of their 1913 manifesto that to confuse their work for Orphism was “to mistake a tiger for a zebra” — a truth included within the wall textual content — but the curators of Concord and Dissonance have struggled to create any clear divide between them, in the end leaving the impression that the one actual distinction was the nationality of their members.
Robert Delaunay, “Red Eiffel Tower (La tour rouge)” (1911–12), oil on canvas, 49 1/4 x 35 3/8 inches (125 x 90.3 cm)
The issue with Concord and Dissonance is that its narrative is neither harmonious nor dissonant, however reasonably fragmented and obscure. These artists had their friendships and rivalries, private conflicts and group exhibitions, however for essentially the most half they merely existed within the free constellations of the Paris artwork world. Inside that world, Orphism was not a lot a motion as a mode, and as such, the classes of what’s and isn’t Orphist work inside the present are frustratingly contradictory.
The gallery textual content that accompanies Léger’s “Les Fumeurs” (1911–12) is typical. It’s a panorama of bushes and homes, seen via the suggestion of a window, framed by the titular people who smoke and their plumes of cigarette smoke. I used to be instantly reminded of Georges Braque’s 1908 work of L’Estaque, fractured landscapes from a number of views which can be thought-about among the first Cubist works to be exhibited. However within the curiosity of advancing Orphism as its personal distinctive model, the curators have made a unique comparability, linking it to 2 Robert Delaunay work of the Eiffel Tower additionally made round 1911. Calling Delaunay’s Eiffel Tower work “dynamic” is ok — the landmark is damaged into dizzying, clashing shapes and painted in an brisk crimson — however then dismissing Braque’s Cubist work as “static” feels compelled and a bit of clumsy, particularly when Léger’s portray is usually a reasonably quiet, rural, panorama painted years after Braque’s first experiments. Léger and Delaunay’s work are nonetheless essentially figurative: They’re starting to maneuver away from illustration, however are nonetheless not precisely purely aesthetic pleasures.
Which brings us to the circles. Robert and Sonia Delaunay each used round motifs of their work, as did Kupka, Albert Gleizes, Eduardo Viana, and a number of other of the opposite artists featured right here. Circles aren’t inherent or unique to Orphism, however their prominence within the work of the Delaunays has made them a form of simple shorthand for non-Cubist abstraction. The consequence right here is dizzying, and irritating. Marc Chagall’s work is described as having “Orphist tendencies” — suggesting he was influenced by his friends’ overlapping planes and complementary colours is compelling, however pointing solely to “colored disks and circles” as proof of that is remarkably reductive.
There’s something soothing about all of the circles. They give the impression of being fantastically at residence within the Guggenheim, completely suited to the gallery’s gradual upward spiral. It’s nice, looping gently previous all these curves and colours, although it rapidly begins to really feel repetitive. We’re transferring, however barely: These works cowl a 20-year time span, however there’s little stylistic change or development. Attempting to reclaim Orphism as a particular motion doesn’t work — it’s at most an adjective, borrowed from a poet. The ensuing present is fairly — pleasurable, even — and positively pure and apolitical in its aesthetics. Sadly, that makes for an uninspiringly one-note exhibition.
Francis Picabia, “Edtaonisl (Ecclesiastic)” (1913), oil on canvas, ~9 9/10 x ~9 9/10 ft (300.4 x 300.7 cm)
Stanton Macdonald-Wright, “Conception Life- Cycle Series No. II: Tinted Sketch for Synchromy in Blue-Violet” (1914), watercolor and ink on paper, 23 × 17 5⁄8 inches (58.4 × 44.8 cm) (© Property of Stanton Macdonald-Wright; photograph by Vilcek Basis)
František Kupka, “Disks of Newton (Study for “Fugue in Two Colors”) (Disques de Newton [Étude pour ‘La fugue à 2 couleurs’])” (1912), oil on canvas, 39 1/2 × 29 inches (100.3 × 73.7 cm) (© 2024 Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York / ADAGP, Paris; photograph by the Philadelphia Museum of Artwork)
Concord and Dissonance: Orphism in Paris, 1910–1930 continues on the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum (1071 fifth Avenue, Higher East Facet, Manhattan) via March 9, 2025.
