Pans, art, and architecture. Theo van Doesburg and the question of the "Aesthetic Unity of all the Arts"

PANS, ART, AND ARCHITECTURE

Theo van Doesburg and the Question of the "Aesthetic Unity of all the Arts"

Matthias Noell

Tue research of pasr decades has ofren counred ehe Durch De Srijl group of arrisrs and Theo van Doesburg, ehe group's founder and sole unabared advocare, as being among rhose arrisrs who were inreresred in crearing a synrhesis of ehe arrs. Under ehe new auspices of ehe European avanr-gardes of ehe lnrerwar period, ehe allied arrisrs presumably srrove co resolve ehe separarion of individual arr forms in favor of a higher-ranking whole. In his seminal 1988 book on Theo van Doesburg, Everr van rraaren explicirly commenred on rhis goal, whose rrue ideal was "ehe unifica­

rion of all arrs co form a 'Gesamrkunsrwerk."'¹ Bur rhis aspecr has also been raken up several rimes in more recenr research, broadening ehe synrhesis of ehe arrs eo include ehe norion of synesrhesia. The works of ehe De Srijl arrisrs "were not just supposed ro cross-ferrilize; De Stijl's vision ulrimarely called for rheir synaesrheric fusion."² Building on ehe ideas of ehe Wiener Werkstätte, De Srijl and ehe Bauhaus were boeh ineeresred in abolishing ehe divisions berween ehe various arriseic disci­

plines as weil as berween rhe applied and fine ares.³

Originalveröffentlichung in: Ruhl, Carsten ; Dähne, Chris ; Hoekstra, Rixt (Hrsgg.): The death and life of the total work of art : Henry van de Velde and the legacy of a modern concept, Berlin 2015, S. 79-93

1 'Theo van Doesburg, self-porcrair in front of his easel (1902).

A reading of ehe eexes from ehe magazine De Stijl-especially ehose written by Van Doesburg-is not encirely so clear-cut in exactly rhis regard. Indeed, ehe publi­

carion De Stijl-which, in the ab ence of direct connections among ehe artisrs, consrirured ehe group's actual meeting place-covered all ehe various secrors wirhin ehe visual, applied, and performing arrs, and al o included thoroughly liecrary or

80 Pans, Art, and Architccturc

sciencifically orienced rexrs. Van Doesburg did not explicidy commenr on the sub­

ject of ehe total work of arr, however, and did not draw a connecrion between it and the work of ehe De Srijl group, either-which is, eo my mind, a basic problem wich any historically sound use of ehe rerm and wich ehe projecrion of ehe concept onco artistic working methods. In point of fact, rerms like "communal art" ( Gemeen­

schapskunst), "collective," "supraindividual," and "universal" art are used in De Stijl.

In

individual aspeces, these each appear to indicate that ehe objeccive was an arcistic synehesis, of some kind whaesoever, of rhe arrs in one locarion or one work. Such a reading is problematic, however, not only because of the ambiguicy of ehe terms or pairs of terms used by ehe De Srijl artises-bue also because of ehe vagueness of ehe concepr of a ''total work of art." Bur in pinning things down, difficulties arise, primarily from d1e shift rhat occurs in the ineeresrs and cheoretical posieions thac Van Doesburg held over ehe years.

Consequendy, we should not concern ourselves wich applying various theories of a total work of art eo ehe work and eheory ofTheo van Doesburg, bur inseead exam­

ine his writings in order to pursue his idea of an aesehetic unicy of ehe arrs, which appears to be closely allied with me idea of ehe total work of arc.⁴

1923-Unity/Synthesis

In a manifesro written eogeeher wich his arcist friend Cornelis van Eesteren in 1923/1924, Theo van Doesburg had spoken of ehe searring poinc of archieeccure as being an aescheeic unity of all rhe arrs, rhereby apparently suggesring an affin­

iry wich ehe eherne of a total work of arc.⁵ Even ehe facr rhae ehe eexe was published rhree times wich slighe shifts in wording and wich generally imprecise French and German, as weil choroughly idiosyncraric Durch, harbors problems-beyond irs incorrect and confusing comma placemenc. Thae's because even chough rhe rexr of ehe undated Ayer, subrided "Manifesco V," initially consolidaced ehe three fields of arr, indusrry, and cechnology, ehe subsequent version in De Stijl wich ehe enigmaric tirle "-D+=R/ reverses rhis by separacing ehe latter two back out. The inscrucable eitle of rhis brief rext is also outstandingly weil suited to putting a real damper on ehe will for sciencific claricy in interprering artisric manifestos. Thac's because in their cexc, Van Doesburg and Van Eesceren do not explain ehe meaning of rheir seemingly machemarical formula. Elsewhere, in rhe aphorisms to his "sur-human­

isr" novel, The Other Face, Van Doesburg srared rhat R₄ meanc "a superphysically­

excended-I (R4-I)" char develops "from point-1 . . . to line-1, from line-1 to plane-!, from plane-! eo body-1, from body-I ro rhe superphysically-exrended-1."⁶ Bur do ehe rwo insrance of R4-which occur in highly specific eexts on complerely different

subjeccs-even mean ehe same ching? Can unresolved issues from one ofVan Does­

burg's cexcs really be explained by whac appear eo be percinent parcs of anocher?

In ocher, nearly concemporaneous cexcs, ehe prolific Ducch writer declares, wichouc furcher direcc commencs, chac archiceccure is ehe "synchesis of a new design." Buc specifically in ehe cexcs from ehe early 1920s, one can accually filcer out a consiscenc accicude on ehe subject of "synchesis": For Van Doesburg, archiceccure is ehe collec­

cive art form in which-wichouc individual arc forms like painting and sculpture, which are now superfluous, buc necessarily wich ehe enliscmenc of individual spe­

cialized artistic skills-a harmonious chree-dimensional whole comes into being:

"a consiscenc design of our surroundings."⁷ Van Doesburg sees ehe archicecc as a

"conduccor" who orchescraces "ehe macerials and ehe colors as well as ehe objeccs in ehe space as a kind of overall scruccure [ Gesamtkonstruktion] ."⁸ Buc even if chis now reads like a declaracion of incenc focusing on ehe total work of arc, here again ic is simply a matter of forming a pure analogy. For Van Doesburg's underscanding of archiceccure, in which color, space, and time conscicuce ehe key faccors, ehe concepc of ehe total work of an is not relevant ac chis poinc.

Hence in ehe face of chis sicuacion, which is ambiguous in decail, we shall firsc concentrate once again on ehe aspecc repeacedly mencioned in conneccion wich ehe total work of an for boch ehe Bauhaus and De Scijl in equal measure: chac archiceccure is ehe sice of ehe synchesis of ehe arcs. On exaccly chis poinc, ic appears chac concemporaneous choughcs of ocher arciscs appear eo have an affinity wich Van Doesburg's remarks. Tue "Bauhaus Manifesco" of 1919, formulared by Walter Gropius, cook a racher unambiguous position on ehe role of architeccure in ehe incerplay of ehe arts: "11,e ulcimate aim of all visual ans is ehe complece building!

To embellish buildings was once ehe noblesc function of ehe fine arcs; chey were ehe indispensable componencs of greac architecture. Today ehe arcs exist in isolacion, from which chey can be rescued only chrough ehe conscious, cooperative efforc of all craftsmen." Tue ensuing program goes on eo say: "Tue Bauhaus strives eo bring cogether all creacive efforc inco one whole, eo reunify all ehe disciplines of praccical arc-sculpcure, paincing, handicrafts, and ehe crafts-as inseparable componencs of a new architecture. Tue ultimace, if diseanc, aim of ehe Bauhaus is ehe unified work of an-ehe great structure-in which there is no discinction becween monumental and decoraeive arc."⁹

One of ehe possible direct starcing poines for chis program is found in Henry van de Velde's essay on ehe "Synthese der Kunst" (Synchesis of Are) from 1899: "Before paincing and sculpcure split apart from archiceccure in order eo lead cheir separate lives as paincings and sracues . . . chey belonged eo chac crinity which, cogecher wich archicecture, conscicuced ehe unity of art."¹⁰ Here, van de Velde idencified uniry or

82 Pans, Art, and Arc.hitecture

ehe synchesis of all ehe arts as ehe goal eo scrive for, wich explicit inclusion of "ehe induscrial applied arcs." He did not, however, really mean a specific place where everyching must work cogeeher, buc was referring inscead eo "similar aspiracions," eo ehe uncondicional recognition and equal treacmenc of all art forms as weil as cheir shared creaeive direceion. These aspeces are also likely eo have been familiar eo Theo van Doesburg, who refers, afcer all, eo van de Velde in several of his cexcs as a kind of forefacher of modern design.

Beyond whae are certainly also pertinenc theories of ehe total work of art, however, Victor Hugo's passage from Notre Dame de Paris from 1831 also bears a resem­

blance eo ehe aforemencioned posieions.¹¹ Here one finds ehe widely read precursor for ehe idea and ehe concepc of an inceraccion of all ehe arcs and arciscs under ehe umbrella of medieval archiceccure chac had already been lose ehrough ehe media revolucion of ehe fifteench cencury: ''All ehe material forces, all ehe incelleccual forces of sociecy converged cowards ehe same point: archiceccure . .. All ocher arcs obeyed, and placed chemselves under ehe discipline of archiceccure. They were ehe workmen of ehe greac work."¹² In ehe French original, Hugo used ehe term "grand oeuvre."

In

cheir writings afcer ehe First World War, Walter Gropius as well as Bruno Taue andAdolfBehne refer numerous cimes eo chis "greac building" (Gropius), ehe "greac archicecture" and ehe "great cachedral" (Taut), a "greac will" or even direccly as ehe

"great work" (Adolf Behne).

Bur it is only Adolf Behne who, in Bruno Tauc's book Die Stadtkrone (City Crown), uses ehe already well-worn idea of ehe total work of arc, and in so doing, does not so much emphasize ehe primacy of archicecture as he does ehe higher unicy of ehe inceraccion of ehe arts: "Despite all ehe misunderscandings, ehe total work of arc is ehe goal-noc, of course, chac which is assembled of parcs, chac which never gecs beyond ehe sum of ics parcs-buc inscead chat which, regardless of which and how rnany resources it draws upon, nevercheless scrikes a chord of resonance, because it scarcs from a heighc in which everyching is a collecced encicy. Thus Weber's 'Oberon' emerges from unicy, whereas ehe work of Richard Wagner strives for unicy."¹³ Let us momencarily consider: ehe aforemencioned protagoniscs are convinced of ehe necessicy for a synchesis of ehe arts and ehe abolicion of arc forms and artiscs chac, in cheir view, work in isolacion. Alchough a precise elaboracion in aeschecic, social, or formal cerms is lacking for ehe superordinace archiceccural end producc, ic is concordancly indicaeed, even chough ehe concepc of ehe total work of arc is not mencioned-if one disregards ehe pacendy divergent passage by ehe arc hiscorian Adolf Behne.

Van Doe burg's choughcs inicially seem similar. In his inAuencial cexc "Der Wille zum Seil" (Tue Will eo cyle)-which had ics beginnings as leceures held in 1922

in Jena, Weimar, and Berlin-he summed up by sraring rhat the goal of ehe efforrs is to develop a new style wich modern means, and in accordance wich advances in rechnology: "Wich ehe new art plastic expression becomes more profound, abstract, and related to architecture. The scriving for an elementary style based on elemen­

tary means .. . runs parallel to a progressive development of form in rechnology."

According ro Van Doesburg, ehe new style promores ehe "impersonal combinarion of all arts which will achieve a harmonic unicy," bur it can only rake place in an art form rhat brings color, space, and time into harmony-"in ehe scenic composition of rhree-dimensional space"-in ocher words: in archirecrure. As ehe overriding goal, however, he does not idenrify ehe emergence of an ideal, ler alone ehe ideal of a "grear" work as propagared by Behne. Nevertheless, "monumental synrhesis rhrough exclusively artistic means" occurs wich and in archirecrure. Instead, he launches a frontal arrack against medieval carhedrals and Greek remples: "Neicher ehe transcendencalism of ehe Middle Ages, nor ehe reconsrruction of Olympus as advertised by several arr hisrorians can provide us wich a solurion." And even when ehe call for "unity of art and life" sounds like ic comes from ehe Darmstadt Anises' Colony in Machildenhöhe, Van Doesburg's stared context of "a reconstruction of European inrellecrual life" has indeed moved far away from ehe bourgeois uropia of ehe reform movements from ehe turn of ehe cenrury.¹⁴ Borh Van Doesburg and Pier Mondrian ulcimarely imagined a time in which arc would be unnecessary because it will have dispersed inro real life. The universal harmony rhar borh men dreamc of chus exiscs in a utopian-conceptual form in ehe dissolurion of ehe work and in a uropian-pracrical form in the creacion of a bercer living environment for people-rhrough urban planning, archirecrure, arc, or even rhrough furnirure, which would, as a commodiry, replace "individual sculptures."¹⁵

Even in 1925, at a time when Van Doesburg had long since been engaged wich purely theorecical archirecrural consideracions, he still idenrified ehe "harmoni­

ous whole" as ehe goal of artistic creation. Under ehe labe] "Archicecrure as ehe Synchesis of a New Design," he compulsively unired all arrists in his notion of a new archiceceure in which auronomous, individual works of art are no longer necessary. This new archiceccure has "ehe rask of being ehe total expression of all of our physical and spiritual needs."¹⁶ Despite differences wich ehe aforementioned German-speaking represencatives, Van Doesburg also ascribes eminent impor­

rance eo archirecrure, and chis srance culminares in his arr-cheorecical assertion rhac "painring, wichour architectural construction (rhar is, easel painting), has no furrher reason for exisrence."¹⁷ Here, at ehe very latest, Pier Mondrian saw himself compelled ro take a posirion. In his article "Muss [die] Malerei der Architektur gegenüber als minderwertig gelten?" (Muse painting be regarded as inferior to

84 Pans, Art, and Architccturc

archicecture?) of ehe same year (1923), Mondrian propagaced ehe equivalence of archicecture and paincing, buc also ehe possible encwined developmenc of ehe cwo arc forms.¹⁸

1930-Absolute Clarity

Just seven years lacer, in 1930, a few monchs prior co his uncimely deach, Van Does­

burg had reached a fundamencally different posieion in his ehoughts about ehe rela­

cionship of ehe arc forms. In April, ehe firse and only issue of Art concret, a magazine chac would do more chan just laseingly define ehe cerm "concrece arr" for ehe firsc time, was publ ished. In addi cion, Art concret also represenced ehe final radicalization ofVan Doesburg's an cheory, in which he now pleaded for an auconomous position for paincing wich respecc co all ocher forms of areistic expression. Art concret called for a rejection of emotional and intuiLive arcistic work, demanding instead chat it should be based on concepcual work and thac it not permit any happenscance whac­

soever in ehe process of creating a painting. Van Doesburg and his allies called for

"darre absolu"-absoluce claricy in every respecc. This demand for pure, indepen­

denc painting-archicecrure, design, or ocher art forms were not even mencioned in his new magazine-did not, however, scop Van Doesburg from concluding his radical pamphlec wich a Dadaist inviration co purchase airships, embellished wich a piccure of ehe LZ 127 Graf Zeppelin.

Van Doesburg wroee ehe manifesco for ehe Are concret group while still complecing bis own hou e in Meudon, and closer examinaeion reveals rhac his idea of concrece arc is borrowed in parcs from archicecrural design processes: "Most paincers work like pasery-cooks and milliners. In concrast we use machemacical daca (whether Eu­

clidean or not) and science, rhac is eo say, incelleccual means."¹⁹ If van Doesburg's archiceccural design as weil as his archirectural rheory both emanated from paincing and ics e encial arciscic means, ehe painterly premises abouc ehe rigor of ehe archi­

reccural design were now sharpened: "Tue work of art must be encirely conceived and formed by ehe mind before its execution. Ir must receive noching from nature's given forms, or from sensualicy, or sencimencalicy. We wish eo exclude lyricism, dramaricism, symbolism, etc .... A piccorial element has no ocher meaning rhan 'irself."'20

Van Doesburg's "concrete arc" arose in direcr correspondence wich his archicecrur­

al design accivicies, which can be illustrared by comparing his painting Arithmetic Composition from 1930 wich an axonomerric drawing of his house. In addition eo an easily seen formal analogy of rwo diagonally offser quares on an underlying grid­

as ehe accual basic scruccure in one and implied as a planning grid for ehe eile Boor in

2 'foeo van Ooesburg, self-portrait in front of Simulta11eous Compositio11 XXII, 1929/ 1930.

ehe ocher-che basic idea behind ehe cwo different arciscic expressions is one of pro­

gression, or a "shifc" "from surface co space," as Van Doesburg called chis "space-cime conscruccion" in a publicacion on abscrace film, which he illuscraced wich ehe design scheme for ehe Arithmetic Composition.²¹ Tue facc ehac ehe Arithmetic Composition was placed on ehe very scudio wall of ehe house in Meudon, which is feacured in ehe axonomerric's archiceccural progression, consolidaces chis sicuacion even more and serves co illusrrace Doesburg's concepc of a universal, non-arciscic form:

in contrast with all previous styles, the new architectural method does not recognize any se/f­

contained type, any basic form. 7he subdivision of the fimctionaf spaces is strictfy determined by rectangular planes, which possess no individual Jorrns in themselves, since, afthottgh th_ey are limited {the one plane by the other), th_ey cttn be imagi11ed extended into infinity, thereby Jorming a system of coordinates, the different points of which would correspond to an equttf number of points in universal, open space. From this it fo!!ows that the planes possess tt direct tensile relationship with open {exterior) spttce. ²²

86 Pans, Art, and Architccturc

A universal form is concrollable, as Van Doesburg clarified in a leerer co his friend, ehe poet Anchony Kok, because ic is calculaced machemacically.²³ In ehe wake ofVan Doesburg's archiceccural experiences, concrete arc becomes a planned, construcced art. Are creaced chis way is concemporary and more like a product of engineering­

such as ehe Zeppelin-than romanric individualized arr.

Thus, boch in his work and in his cexcs, we can observe chat Van Doesburg's differ­

ent fields of accivicy-spanning ehe real ms of paincing, archiceccure, graphic design, and producc design-are closely incerrwined, yer rhis relacionship does not lead eo syneschetic concepts or superordinate ideals in terms of a total work of arr, bur manifesrs icself inscead in ehe use of analogous design principles.

1927-Wrong Tracks

We cherefore cake aim ac ehe chronological middle of ehe problem, which, upon closer inspecrion, also curns out co be ehe subscancive cencer berween ehe rwo poles described, and in which a sharpening ofTheo van Doesburg's cheory can be found.

In ehe anniversary issue of De Stijf, which celebraced ics ten-year exiscence in 1927, Van Doesburg summed up by sracing that now an elemencary design musc be ehe goal of cheir efforrs, and no longer ehe search for scyliscic unicy: "To incerpret it in a paradoxical way: ehe De Scijl idea as ehe idea of a new scyle ... is meaningless and anachronistic. The De Scijl idea as ehe dissolucion of all scyles wich in one el­

emencary plascicism is significanc, spiriwally alive, and in advance of ics cime."¹⁴ Ac nearly ehe same time, he also relacivized ehe imporcance of architeccure as ehe sice of a synchesis of ehe arcs, now suggesring exactly ehe opposice, namely chac ehe rwo arc forms could not come cogerher: "Elemenrarism complerely excludes archiceccure as arr. From years of experimenr and research ir has been found rhac arc and archirec­

wre are complerely different and incomparible faccors. Elementarism is consciously rriving for ehe end of arcs and crafts."²⁵

Ir seems prudenc eo rake Doesburg's radical reassessmenc and new rejeccion of pre­

viously held views and reconcile ehem wirh his work, because precisely ar ehe time he formulared rhese as ertions, Van Doesburg, cogerher wich his friends Sophie Taeuber-Arp and Hans Arp, was planning his firsr major inrerior: ehe redesign and refurbishmenr of afe de l'Aubecce in Srrasbourg, curning it into an encerrain­

menr complex wich a movie eheacer and dance hall, as well as bar and cafe spaces.

L'Auberre was again characcerized just a few years ago as a synchesis of ehe arcs and a total work of art. ²⁶

Doesburg conceived a "barimenc de passage" (place of passage), as he himself dubbed joinc work, forming a conciguous sequence of parial paincings.27 Two rooms each

3 1l1eo van Doesburg, self-porcrait wich his dog Dada in frone of Contra-composition XVI, 1925.

by Van Doesburg and Taeuber-Arp were realized, along wich one by Hans Arp and a collectively designed staircase. The spatial painting chat Van Doesburg soughc cencers around moving people:

The track of man in space {from the Left to the right, Jrom front to back, Jrom above to beLow) has become of fundamental importance Jor painting in architecture . . . . In this painting the idea is not to Lead man aLong a painted surface of a waLL, in order to Let him observe the pictoriaL deveLopment of space from one waLL to the othe,� but the probLem is to evoke the simultaneous ejfect of painting and architecture .. . . The whoLe should be treated as a fixed body. ²⁸

The cypography and signage were also designed by Van Doesburg, and some of ehe furnishings, such as ehe cables, were cuscom designed or available Standard produccs were modified slightly-a common procedure at ehe time. Some of his designs, such as chose for cwo bencwood chairs (Aubecce 162 and Aubette 141), were not realized, probably for reasons of cosc. Instead, phocographs showed ehe Thonet

88 Pans, Art, and Architecturc

chair No. 18 as weli as oeher mass-produced wooden chairs. Van Doesburg him­

self wroce abouc chese furnishings: "no arciscic effecc was soughc" -in oeher words, rejeccing applied arc in favor of induscrial produccion. ²⁹ Ir is not difficulc eo siruace Van Doesburg's design eheory as an oucgrowch of ehe ideas of Adolf Loos and Le Corbusier, wich their rejeccion of arcistic and artisanal designs for mass production.

4 Theo van Doesburg, self-porrrair in fronr of Contra­

rornposition XIII, 1926.

Van Doesburg summarized rhe elemencarism he used here as a "universal meehod"

ehac applies eo ehe arrs as weil as induscrial produccion and could cherefore imparc a designed unity upon boch. Whereas in 1925 archiceccure still meant "ehe total expression of our l.ives" and of our "needs,"³⁰ he wrore in a now considerably more

ober tone chat archiceccure synchesizes all ehe functions of human life.³¹

Tue conservative Strasbourg public did not take a liking to the collective work of the three friends, meaning the Aubette was a flop wich the local audience. In 1928, Van Doesburg wrote in frustration to Adolf Behne: "Constant values are created only by 100% an. That is now my firm conviction. Archicecture is on ehe wrong crack, as is applied art."³² And in his journal he added: ''.Architecture must be neutral, formless."³³ Thus by the end of 1928 at the latesc, Theo van Doesburg had reached a point where he excluded architecture from his reflections on arc and escablished a clear dividing line becween fine art and ocher, applied fields of design, to which he included applied arc, (whac we today call) induscrial design, and, above all, archicecture. This notion-that ehe free and ehe applied ans should be cwo discincc areas of human creacion wich different end products-ultimately pervades Theo van Doesburg's theory and he found an abundantly clear way to express it in ehe anniversary issue of De Stijl: ''A chair becomes a chair, a table be­

comes a table, a house becomes a house, thac is, a utilitarian objecc and nothing more; an advertisement, an ordinary advertisement, like a pan, will never be arc."³⁴ Poignantly formulated and applied to the Aubette, however, this means that Theo van Doesburg's ashtrays, chairs, and typography are pans, not arc, and ehe Aubetce is a utilitarian object-according eo its chief designer's concept-whose spatial se­

quences are formed of spario-temporal arcworks, but which nevercheless does not constitute a total work of art.

1923-Separation

In a stricc sense, however, chis was simply ehe final radicalization of Doesburg's long-expressed belief chat a difference exists becween art and other forms of design.

This separation of genres had frequently been a subject, especially since develop­

ing his key art-theoretical notion of ehe basic elements of modern art ( Generalbass/

Grondelement). In ehe July 1923 inaugural issue of ehe magazine G: Material zur elementaren Gestaltung (G: Material for Elemental Form-Creation), Van Doesburg firsc promulgated ehe chree basic elements of archiceccure, sculpture, and paincing, explicitly targecing a "generalizacion of means" and an "elemencal expressive means"

for the visual arts as well as archicecture:

As earLy as 1916 we set the first and most important requisite: sepamtio11 of the different realms of formation. In contrast to a still-rampant baroque (even in modern art), we have held that the formative arts must be separated from each other. Without this sharp division (sculpture from painting; p11i11tingfrom architecture, etc.) it is impossible to create order out of the chaos or to become acquainted with the elementaf means of formation. ³⁵

90 Pans, Art, and Architecture

.t,

1...

⁴

0

�

u

\1\ - _:l

J\

� �

"(o v-r

'/

\ 1-,.

'\\\ ₀

2

lSl

m

5 Theo van Docsburg, self-porrrair as 1. K. Bonser: "Je suis concre cour er cous," 1921.

Ir would be of inreresr ar rhis poinr co make a comparison co a sequence rhar was published exacrly ten years larer, in which rhe art hiscorian Emil Kaufmann com­

ments on the subject of the baroque and total works of art in his book \,0n Ledoux bis Le Corbusie,: "Tue interacrion of rhe rwo motifs of aesrheric merger and social differentiarion results in an overall form, which has irs beginnings in the Renais­

sance, but only reaches its purest form in the Baroque, hence we call it baroque

association. Tue final consequence of rhis associative rhought is ehe 'total work of art' rhat emerges from an interaction of ehe arts."³⁶

Theo van Doesburg's guiding idea, which is clearly found 111 his wrirings, aimed chieAy at esrablishing consistent and sysrematic basic principles of art, and also rook aim at a way for all art forms eo scrive for universal content wich a universally ap­

plicable design. He was not much interested in an all-encompassing final product in ehe form of a total work of art rhat, in his opinion, opposes an analysis of the design medium. One could also rry eo express it more abstracrly-or better, more univer­

sally: whereas advocates of a total work of arr have, as rheir ideal, ehe goal of joinrly realizing an all-embracing synrhesis, for Theo van Doesburg, ehe common artisric basis is ehe srarting point of modern art. Even though these rwo concepts mighr actually seem similar in some aspects, ulrimarely they can scarcely be equated wich each orher. Tue particularities of the Doesburgian rheories are in danger of being lost in a historically imprecise model of the total work of art, just as generalized use of ehe concept harbors ehe risk of hyporheses like those defined by Laurence Sterne rhrough his proragonist, Trisrram Shandy: "lt is in ehe nature of an hyporhesis, when once a man has conceived it, chac ic assimilares every ching eo itself as proper nourishment; and, from rhe first momenc of your begetting ic, it generally grows ehe scronger by every ching you see, hear, read, or understand. This is of great use."³⁷ Notes

Everc van Scraaten, Theo vnn Doesb11rg: Pninter 1111d Archi1ec1 (The I laguc: DU Pub!., 1988), 104. Sec also Matthias Nocll, Im lt1bom1ori11m der Modeme. Das A1elien110/mhnu.s von 7heo vnn Doesb111g in Meudon, Architektur zwischt11 Abs1rnk1ion und Rhetorik (Zürich: Gra, 2011 ).

2 Mauhias Mühling, "De Stijl and d,e Integration of ehe Ans," in Mont/rinn: De Sri)/, ed. 1 lelrnur Friede! / Manhias Mühling (Ostfildern: Hatje Canrz, 2011 ), 78-94, 79.

3 See for exarnple Ralf Beil, "'For Me There is No Orher 'Work of Are': lhe Expressionist Total Arrwork-Utopia and Practice," in 77,e Total Artwork in Expmsionism: Art, Film, litemture, Theater, Dnnce, nnd Architecture 1905- 1925, ed.

Ralf Beil / Claudia Dillmann (Ostfildern: l lacje Canrz, 2011 ), 26-45.

4 For ehe concept and its application, see, inter alia, Jürgen Söring, "Gesamtkunstwerk," in Ren/Lexikon ^der deutschen Uternt11rwisst11schnft, ed. Klaus Weimar, vol. 1. (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1997), 710-712.

5 Cf. d,e leaAec rnanifesto: Theo van Doesburg / Cornelis van Eesteren, "Vers une construction collective" (Manifeste V du groupe 'De Stijl'), Paris 1923/ l 924: "unite creee de cous les arcs, industrie, ccchnique, etc." or ehe manifesco: Theo van Doesburg / Cornelis van Eesceren, " -D+�R,." De Stijl 6, no. 6/7 ( 1923/ 1925) ldated 1923. published 1924):

91 f.: "unice plastique de cous !es arcs, exclusivemenr, cechnique, industrie." Regarding thc dating of the manifestos and cexts around 1923/ l 924, see Bois / Reichlin. The assenion ,hat ehe leaAec was first distributed at the second exhibition in 1924 is not presented there in an enrirely conclusive manner.

6 1. K. Bonset (i.e., "11,eo van Doesburg), " l let andere Ge-,icht" [11,e Orher Face]. De Stijl 3 (1919/1920), no. 10, 84-86; no. 11, 90-92; 4 ( 1921 ), no. 4, 49-51, ciration no. 10, 85: "Leven1rnarhematica . ... Willen wij ... van uit her pum-ik (een roesrand van geheel in 1.ichzelf afgeslocen individualisme) tol lijn-ik, van lijn"ik tot vlak-ik, van vlak-ik Lot lichaam-ik, van lichaam-ik rot overlicharnelijk"uirgcbrcid"ik, te onrwikkelen." Engli,h translation from: l luberc F. van den Berg, The !111porrof Not hing: How Dadn Cnme, Snw nnd Vnnished i11 1he low Co11111ries (1915-1929) (New York: G. K. Hall, 2003), 125.

7 Theo van Doesburg, "De archicectuur als synrhese der nieuwe beelding." De Stijl 6, no. 6/7 ( 1924): 82. Also similar in: "Die neue Archicekrur und ihre Folgen," Wnsm111hs Monntshefle flir ßa11k1111s1 9 ( 1925), 11. 12, 502-518.

8 Theo van Doesburg, "Neue Architektur," 517.

9 Walter Gropius, Manifest ond Progrnm of the St1tn1liclm Ba11ho11s (Weimar 1919), as translated by Wolfgang Jabs and Basil Gilben in Hans M. Wingler, 771e Bnuhnw (Cunbridge: MIT Press, 1973) 31-33, 32.

10 Henry van de Velde, "Allgemeine Bemerkungen zu einer Synthese der Kunst," Pnu 5. no. 4 (1899/1900): 261-270, 262.

11 Cf. Bruno Taut, D1eS111d1krone: Mit Beitriigen von P111dScheerb11r1, h-ich 8//ro11, lldo/fBeh11e, Ucna: Diederichs, 1919).

12 Victor Hugo, Narre-Dome de Pnm, book V /chapt. 2, (Paris: Eugene Renduel, 1832), ci1ed here from ,he translarion by lsabel F. Hapgood (n. 1�: CreateSpace, 2013), 148. In his .micle "Wiedergeburt der Baukunst" [Rcbinh of Ar-

92 Pans, Art, and Architeclure

chitecture], in Taur, Stndrkrone, 115-131, 120, Behne seems eo direcdy object eo Hugo's view of time as rhe creacor and builder of cathedrals, without mentioning it, however.

13 Behne, "Wiedergeburt," 1 1 5.

14 All quotations raken from: Joo>t Baljeu, 77,eo van Doesburg (New York: Macmillan, 1974), originally appearing a.s:

ll1co van Doesburg, "Der Wille zum Sri) (Neugesraltung von Leben, Kunst und Technik)," (11,e Will eo Sryle (Re­

design of Life, Art and Technology) J De Stijl 5, 110. 2 ( 1922): 23-32 and no. 3, 33-41, lisced here in ehe order cited:

no. 3, 33; no. 3, 40; no. 3.39; no. 3, 40; no. 2, 24;no.3, 40.

15 Doesburg, "Neue Architektur", 5 l l-512.

16 lbid., 503.

17 Doesburg / Eesceren, "Vers une construction collecrive," Modem Archi 1ect1tre: A Criticnl Histo1y, rrans. Kenneth Frampton (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1980), 147.

18 Pier Mondrian, "Muss [die] Malerei der Architektur gegenüber als minderwertig gelten?," in idem, Neue Gestnlumg, (Munich: L·1.11gen, 1925). Neue Bauhausbücher 5, 65-66, 66: "^ll1e new aeschecic of architecrure is ehe same as chac of painr(,ng .... llirough ehe uniry of ehe new aescheric, archicecture and painting can form one art and develop in tandem.

19 (11,eo van Doesburgl, "Commemaires sur la base de la peinrure concrere," An concret 1 ( 1930), numero d'incroduccion, 2-4, 3. English translacion from: Jonneke Jobse, De Stijl Cominued· The }ournnl Stmrt1tre (/958-1964}; An Artists' Debau (Rotterdam: 010 Publishers, 2005). 220. "La plupart des peincres travaillenr 11 la maniere des p,irissiers et des modisres. Au conrraire, nous cravaillons avec des donnecs des machematiques (euclidiennes ou non euclidiennes) et de la science, c'est-a-dire avec des moycm incellectuels."

20 Carlsund, Doesbourg, Helion, Turundjian, Wane-,, "Base de la peincure concrece," Art concret 1 (1930), numero d'introduccion, l: "I.:oeuvre d'art doic etre entierement con�ue et formee par l'esprit avant son execucion. Elle ne doit rien recevoir des donnees formelles de la nature, ni de la sensualite, ni de 1a sentimencalite. Nous voulons exclure le lyrisme, Je dramacisme, le symbolisme, etc .... Un element pictural n'a pas d'aucre significarion que 'lui-meme'."

English translalion as: "Basis of Concrete Painting," in: Manifesco: A Century of lsms, ed. Mary Ann Caws (Lincoln, NE: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 2001), 520.

21 Compare ehe reproduction of his drawings for Arithmetischen Ko111posi1io11: Theo van Doesburg, "Film als reine Ge­

staltung," Die Form: Zeitschrift fiirgest11!tende Arbeit 4, no. 10 (1929): 241-249. English translation as: "Film as Pure Form," trans. Standish D. Lawder, Form 1 (Summer 1966), 5-11.

22 '11,eo van Doesburg, "Tot ecn bceltlende archicecruur" [Towards a Plastic Archicecture], De Stijl 6, no. 6/7 ( 1924):

78-83, 82. Shonly rhereafter appcared: "De nieuwe architectuur," Bouwkrmdig weekblnd 45, 110. 20 (1924): 200-204.

Quoced here from ehe English cranslarion by Hans L. C. Jaffe in: De Stijl (New York: Abrarns, 1971 ).

23 Letter from l11eo van Doesburg eo Anthony Kok, as cited in: Hans Ludwig C. Jaffe, De Stijl 1911-193 I: 77,e Dutch Co111ribruio11 10 Modem Ar1 (Leiden: dbnl, 2008), 172.

24 Theo van Doesburg, "10 jaren Stijl. Algemeene inleiding" [ 10 Years of De Stijl: General lnrroduccion], De Stij/7, no.

79/84 (1926/27): 2-9, 3: "De stijli<lec als opheAing aller stijlen in een elemenraire bcelding, is zinvol, spiri,ueel en op den tijd vooruic."

25 Theo van Doesburg, "Schilderkunst en plasciek: Elemenrarisme (Manifesc-fragmenr)," De S1ijl 7, no. 78 (1926/27):

82-87, 83: "Her Elemencarisme schakelr de architeccuur als kunsr geheel uit. Uit jarenlange ervaring en onderzoek is gebleken, dat kun;c en architecruur roraal andere onvereenigb,tre facroren zijn. Het Elementarismus srreefr bewust naar her einde der kunscnijverheid [ ... ]." Quoced here from ehe English translarion by Hans L. C. Jaffe in: De Stijl (1971 ).

26 l'Aubme 011 In co11/e111· dnm lirrchitecture: Une 11!ttvre de Hn11s Arp. Sophie 7neuber-Arp, Theo v1111 Doesburg, ed. Em­

manud Guigon / Ham van der Werf / Mariet Willinge (Srrasbourg: Musees de Srra,bourg, 2006), 84. Cf. also ibid., Orakar Macel, 164.

27 Theo van Doesburg, "Nocices wr l'Aubetteil Strasbourg," De Stijl 8, no. 87/89 (1928): 1-18, 4.

28 Theo van Doe;burg, "Farben im Raum und Zeit," De Stijl 8, no. 87/89 (1928): 26-36, 34. Quoced here from ehe English cransl.1tion by Hans L. C. Jaffe in: De Stijl 1911-1931 (2008), 171.

29 Doesburg, "Aubcnc", 6: '"Les cables. les chaises, les canapes et aurres uscensiles onc ece fabriques en serie; dans ces rneubles, comme dans les buffecs, etc. on n'a recherche aucun effet artistique."

30 lneo van Doesburg, "Neue Architektur", 503.

31 Theo van Doesburg. 'TElementarisme et son origine," De Stijl 8, no. 87 /89 ( 1928): 24. Elemencarism is "une merho­

de universelle, soit pour l'art, soic pour Ja produccion industrielle"; architecture "synchetise touces les fonctions de Ja vie humaine" and implies an "absence de srylc."

32 Lener of 7 November 1928 from Theo van Doesburg to AdolfBehnc, transbted from "Tendenzen der Zwanziger Jah­

re: Ein Konvolut versrreuter, schwer rngänglicher oder noch unveröffentlichter Briefe, Glossen, Kritiken zum Neuen Bauen," Bnml!elt 68, no. 33 ( 1977): 1 100. Van Doesburg used this passage from bis letter vircually without change in

"Vers la pcinture blanche," Art concm 1 ( 1930), numero d'introducrion, 11.

33 Theo van Doesburg, "Uit de dagboeknotiries van Theo van Doesburg," De Stijl dernier numero ( 1932), 19-24, 20 (May l, 1928): "de archiceccuur moet ncutraal zijn, beeldingslos."

34 "Een scocl wordt een ;rod, ecn rafel wordc een tafel, en huis wordt een huis, ecn gebruiksproducr zondcr meer, een reclame een doodgewone rccl,une, evenals een braadpan geen kunsc." Doesburg, '"I O jaren Stijl," 9.

35 Theo van Docsburg, "Zur elementaren Gestaltung,'' G: A1nterin/ zur elementaren Ges1nlt1111g I (1923), n. p. English cranslacion from: 77,e Tradition of Co11srr11crivis111, cd. Stephan Bann (New York: Da Capo Press, 1974). See also ehe simulared facsimile: "G: Marerial for Elemenral Form-Creation," in G: An A,,n111-g111-de }oumnl of Art, Architecture, Design, ,md hlm, 1913-1926, cd. Detlef Menins / Michael William Jennings (Los Angeles: Gerry Publicacions, 2010), 102. Compare also rhe tcxts of Bart van <ler Leck, including: "De plaats van he, moderne schilderen in de archiccccuur," DeStijl I, 110. 1 (1917): 6-7, and: "Over schilderen en bouwen," DeStijl I, no. 4, (1918): 37-38.

36 Emil Kaufmann, 14,11 Ledoux bis Le Corbmur: Ursprung und Entwickbmg der 1111ro11omen Architektur, Vienna / Leipzig:

Passcr, 193.3), 14.

37 l.aurence Sterne, ll,e Uft 1111d Opiniom ofTristmm Sh,111dy. Gentleman, (York: Ann Ward, London: J. Dodsley / T.

Becker & P. A. Dehondt, 1759 1767), vol. 2, chapt. XIX, quotc<l hcre from rhe 4th ed. (London: R. & J. Dodsley, 1760). 175.