What do you think?
Rate this book
World of Art
Magritte
Through shock and paradox, Rene Magritte sets out to reveal the mysterious nature of thought. His paintings, with their unexpected juxtaposition of objects, are a deliberate defiance of common sense. In this classic study, Suzi Gablik explains how Magritte was never involved in the experimental techniques and stylistic innovations of the other Surrealists, and how, as a result, his work has proved to hold more options for the future. 228 illus., 19 in color.
208 pages, Paperback
Published May 1, 1985
3 people are currently reading
131 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
Read
March 27, 2018More than twenty years ago, I stumbled upon a book with different paintings by Belgium Reneé Magritte. I felt an instant fascination for his paintings. I couldn't stop looking at them, dwelling on the many thoughts they inspired. I found his stone still life paintings captivating. Time, eternity, death, the futility of human activity and what we call progress, all that came to my mind in a jumble, along with the pleasure of enjoying the painting.
About three years ago, I found out that my friend and art teacher Karen McArthur, had an obsession similar to mine, at the same time I did, (when we were in our twenties). She wrote very inspiring book lists at her blog under these categories: Childhood, Coming of Age, College, Adulthood. And in her Adulthood list, I found this book, Magritte, by Suzi Gablik. (I have to say that I've bought and read several of her suggestions, and they've been wonderful. I specially recommend Twelve Months of Monastery Soups.)
Today, I look at this painting, -the stone scene upfront, which opens to what looks like an abyss, and Ecclesiastes comes to mind. Vanity of vanities. Life under the sun is a frustrating and pointless pursue. The bottle of wine, the pleasures implied, the fruit, the book nobody can read anymore, it's all petrified, it's there for nobody. Those are just my own thoughts. And that's the curious quality of Magritte's art. Learning what art meant to him, and what he was trying to accomplish, was never necessary for me to enjoy his paintings. However, the author of this book presented me with knowledge and ideas, which, in turn, begat new ideas and formed a better understanding of not just Magritte or art, but of literature, philosophy, life. When I combined this reading with other pieces of information that I already have, it helped me achieve a new synthesis, a better scheme at my disposition to apply to all areas.
As Ortega said in his Dehumanization of Art, and Rookmaaker, painters always paint 'reality'. But our view or definition of what's real changes. It's also possible that we, the viewers, are stuck in a past interpretation of reality. It could be the case that artists, (not just painters, but also writers, poets, philosophers, and at times scientists, mathematicians, engineers, etc.) are many times poorly understood or lowly regarded because they are ahead of times, or by their doing something other than what we are familiar with and accustomed to, (which happens to be that which we have had for a while, and which we can contemplate with a bit of distance and perspective), -that in the distant or short term past.
But Magritte is, in this sense, 'old news', (as a 20th century painter, I think it's safe to say we all are a bit versed in the art of his time, -surrealism, dadaism, pop art). Let's listen to him telling us the question he's trying to answer with his art:
And this is from the author of the book, pg. 114:
The plural significance of experience, in which spatiotemporal measurement is seen as the relation between observer and phenomena, corresponds to Einstein's theory of relativity in physics, which abolished the 'absolute' space and time of Newtonian theory.
This made me think of the great Marian Petrosyan, author of The Gray House, and what Yuri Masachov, (English translator of the work) said about the book being faithful to a reality understood under the laws of quantum physics. (Gone is the more traditional literature which responded to that Newtonian paradigm.)
Another book quote, page 124:
Which made me think about the switch in literature to unreliable narrators, stream of consciousness, new ways of talking about the world and us.
There's so much more in this book. The paintings are grouped by topics, not necessarily chronological. The author explains that Magritte had a definite set of themes he found early on but that he continued exploring the rest of his life. I particularly love the ones which explore language, meaning, representation. There were some mentions of Wittgenstein, -since philosophy as well became very interested in language in the 20th century. I instantly thought about one of the prevalent themes in Don Quixote.
I was reading one of the chapters that talks about Don Quixote's claims that a barber's basin is the helmet of the renowned knight Mambrino. The culminating chapter finds the barber whose basin and ass's mount was stolen, at the same inn than Don Quixote, Sancho, and a lot more others, some who are privy to Don Quixote's mad views, and some who aren't. The fight that arises when some (in conspiracy, to prank the barber) claim the basin is truly a helmet, and the simple donkey's mount the most splendid horse's saddle, and when others not in the joke defend things are what they 'truly' are, results in the most hysteric episode ever recorded in literature. It'll be Don Quixote the one bringing things back to peace and order. The irony!
This is one of the reasons why 16th century literature appears to be very modern. Across the centuries, it comes closer to our preoccupations, while it still maintains a more approachable and straightforward style, (despite the language choices being obviously older). In the case of Don Quixote, the language works for me, though, since it injects his talk with a solemn and a bit rancid style, proper of the knights of old he is trying to emulate.
About three years ago, I found out that my friend and art teacher Karen McArthur, had an obsession similar to mine, at the same time I did, (when we were in our twenties). She wrote very inspiring book lists at her blog under these categories: Childhood, Coming of Age, College, Adulthood. And in her Adulthood list, I found this book, Magritte, by Suzi Gablik. (I have to say that I've bought and read several of her suggestions, and they've been wonderful. I specially recommend Twelve Months of Monastery Soups.)
Today, I look at this painting, -the stone scene upfront, which opens to what looks like an abyss, and Ecclesiastes comes to mind. Vanity of vanities. Life under the sun is a frustrating and pointless pursue. The bottle of wine, the pleasures implied, the fruit, the book nobody can read anymore, it's all petrified, it's there for nobody. Those are just my own thoughts. And that's the curious quality of Magritte's art. Learning what art meant to him, and what he was trying to accomplish, was never necessary for me to enjoy his paintings. However, the author of this book presented me with knowledge and ideas, which, in turn, begat new ideas and formed a better understanding of not just Magritte or art, but of literature, philosophy, life. When I combined this reading with other pieces of information that I already have, it helped me achieve a new synthesis, a better scheme at my disposition to apply to all areas.
As Ortega said in his Dehumanization of Art, and Rookmaaker, painters always paint 'reality'. But our view or definition of what's real changes. It's also possible that we, the viewers, are stuck in a past interpretation of reality. It could be the case that artists, (not just painters, but also writers, poets, philosophers, and at times scientists, mathematicians, engineers, etc.) are many times poorly understood or lowly regarded because they are ahead of times, or by their doing something other than what we are familiar with and accustomed to, (which happens to be that which we have had for a while, and which we can contemplate with a bit of distance and perspective), -that in the distant or short term past.
But Magritte is, in this sense, 'old news', (as a 20th century painter, I think it's safe to say we all are a bit versed in the art of his time, -surrealism, dadaism, pop art). Let's listen to him telling us the question he's trying to answer with his art:
My latest painting began with the question: how to show a glass of water in a painting in such a way that it would not be indifferent? Or whimsical, or arbitrary, or weak — but, allow us to use the word, with genius? (Without false modesty.) I began by drawing many glasses of water, always with a linear mark on the glass. This line, after the 100th or 150th drawing, widened out and finally took the form of an umbrella. The umbrella was then put into the glass, and to conclude, underneath the glass. Which is the exact solution to the initial question: how to paint a glass of water with genius. I then thought that Hegel (another genius) would have been very sensitive to this object which has two opposing functions: at the same time not to admit any water (repelling it) and to admit it (containing it). He would have been delighted, I think, or amused (as on a vacation) and I call the painting Hegel's Holiday.
And this is from the author of the book, pg. 114:
Just as with the ambiguity of 'inside' and 'outside', Magritte avoids any absolute finality of placement by playing on the bipolarity of 'here' and 'there'. As in The Empire of Lights, where he has used two apparently irreconcilable events (night and day) observed from a single point of view to disrupt our sense of time, in paintings like The Battle of the Argonne Magritte has similarly disrupted our sense of space.
The plural significance of experience, in which spatiotemporal measurement is seen as the relation between observer and phenomena, corresponds to Einstein's theory of relativity in physics, which abolished the 'absolute' space and time of Newtonian theory.
This made me think of the great Marian Petrosyan, author of The Gray House, and what Yuri Masachov, (English translator of the work) said about the book being faithful to a reality understood under the laws of quantum physics. (Gone is the more traditional literature which responded to that Newtonian paradigm.)
Another book quote, page 124:
What appears inevitably true in one sense, because it has been endorsed by reason, is an oversimplified and limited notion of the possibilities of experience, since it does not take into account the ambivalent, paradoxical nature of reality. In Magritte's paintings, everything is directed towards a specific crisis in consciousness, through which the limited evidence of the common-sense world can be transcended.
Which made me think about the switch in literature to unreliable narrators, stream of consciousness, new ways of talking about the world and us.
There's so much more in this book. The paintings are grouped by topics, not necessarily chronological. The author explains that Magritte had a definite set of themes he found early on but that he continued exploring the rest of his life. I particularly love the ones which explore language, meaning, representation. There were some mentions of Wittgenstein, -since philosophy as well became very interested in language in the 20th century. I instantly thought about one of the prevalent themes in Don Quixote.
I was reading one of the chapters that talks about Don Quixote's claims that a barber's basin is the helmet of the renowned knight Mambrino. The culminating chapter finds the barber whose basin and ass's mount was stolen, at the same inn than Don Quixote, Sancho, and a lot more others, some who are privy to Don Quixote's mad views, and some who aren't. The fight that arises when some (in conspiracy, to prank the barber) claim the basin is truly a helmet, and the simple donkey's mount the most splendid horse's saddle, and when others not in the joke defend things are what they 'truly' are, results in the most hysteric episode ever recorded in literature. It'll be Don Quixote the one bringing things back to peace and order. The irony!
This is one of the reasons why 16th century literature appears to be very modern. Across the centuries, it comes closer to our preoccupations, while it still maintains a more approachable and straightforward style, (despite the language choices being obviously older). In the case of Don Quixote, the language works for me, though, since it injects his talk with a solemn and a bit rancid style, proper of the knights of old he is trying to emulate.
May 4, 2023
11/2010
This book is old, written by someone who actually knew Magritte. It gives a nice overview of his themes, styles and habits, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.
This book is old, written by someone who actually knew Magritte. It gives a nice overview of his themes, styles and habits, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.
June 17, 2019
"Art soon exalted the incongruous and unpredictable as being more true to nature than causality, and irrationality as being more authentic to the mind than reason. [...] surrealists mistrusted the banal and the conventional, preferring to explore the frontier between the internal and the external worlds, between the conscious and the unconscious. They systematically sought out that 'spontaneous, extra-lucid insolent relationship which occurs under certain conditions between one thing and another', and which normally common sense prevents us from apprehending." (p. 70)
I found this artistic biography quite charming and learned a great deal its author writes in a clear and lucid prose. Magritte viewed painting as a way of expressing an idea and not as picturing something actual in the world. For the surrealists, which Magritte was a part of for a while, the following held true:
"[...] an image is born, not of a comparison. but though the bringing together by chance of two more of less remote realities." (p.45)
This represents a great shift in modern art and one which has led to what Adorno called the autonomy of art. Art is not forced to represent reality in the same way as a photograph is but can instead express the individual genius of its creator. As a stand up comedian and theatre director I was very much inspired by this biography as it managed to express some of my own artistic intuitions. Art is not a servant of whatever most people think of as normal, but can explore avenues of philosophical thought hidden to most people.
"[Magritte was] suddenly free of the stereotyped mental habits he considered as belonging to those artists who were 'trapped by their own talent, virtuosity, and little aesthetic specialties'" (p. 25)
I was also amazed at how far beyond the ordinary he managed to go. Even though I certainly don't like all of his paintings and indeed find some of them too 'intellectual', I respect Magrittes ability to follow his own line of thought where that lead him.
I found this artistic biography quite charming and learned a great deal its author writes in a clear and lucid prose. Magritte viewed painting as a way of expressing an idea and not as picturing something actual in the world. For the surrealists, which Magritte was a part of for a while, the following held true:
"[...] an image is born, not of a comparison. but though the bringing together by chance of two more of less remote realities." (p.45)
This represents a great shift in modern art and one which has led to what Adorno called the autonomy of art. Art is not forced to represent reality in the same way as a photograph is but can instead express the individual genius of its creator. As a stand up comedian and theatre director I was very much inspired by this biography as it managed to express some of my own artistic intuitions. Art is not a servant of whatever most people think of as normal, but can explore avenues of philosophical thought hidden to most people.
"[Magritte was] suddenly free of the stereotyped mental habits he considered as belonging to those artists who were 'trapped by their own talent, virtuosity, and little aesthetic specialties'" (p. 25)
I was also amazed at how far beyond the ordinary he managed to go. Even though I certainly don't like all of his paintings and indeed find some of them too 'intellectual', I respect Magrittes ability to follow his own line of thought where that lead him.
March 1, 2013
years ago i saw a pretty much awesome exhibit of magritte's work at los angeles county museum of art (lacma). prior to that i knew next to nothing about magritte, other than that he was the guy who painted the guy in the bowler hat with a green apple in front of his face. also, the "this is not a pipe" series of pipe paintings. yeah, so, weird guy but kinda cool.
but that exhibit has stuck with me, to the point of being an inspiration for at least two of the short stories i've written (although only one actually completed--if by "completed" you mean, "the ending totally sucks but at least there's an ending").
ANYway, according to gablik, magritte didn't think of himself so much as an artist as a thinker who just happened to use paint and visual images to wrestle with philosophical problems. i like that. and gablik's book helped me get a better understanding of just what magritte was trying to do when he painted (for example) a water glass atop an umbrella and called it "hegel's holiday". what a joker, that magritte! or how about a jockey riding a galloping horse atop a model T that is (presumably) going somewhere, although where exactly remains something of a mystery.
see what i mean? fascinating.
oh but one caveat. if you're really into lots of full-color plates in an art book, this may not be the one for you. there are other books about magritte that include better (and more) images of his work. but in my opinion gablik's book is not really about art so much as it is about a philosopher who made paintings. so, it worked for me.
but that exhibit has stuck with me, to the point of being an inspiration for at least two of the short stories i've written (although only one actually completed--if by "completed" you mean, "the ending totally sucks but at least there's an ending").
ANYway, according to gablik, magritte didn't think of himself so much as an artist as a thinker who just happened to use paint and visual images to wrestle with philosophical problems. i like that. and gablik's book helped me get a better understanding of just what magritte was trying to do when he painted (for example) a water glass atop an umbrella and called it "hegel's holiday". what a joker, that magritte! or how about a jockey riding a galloping horse atop a model T that is (presumably) going somewhere, although where exactly remains something of a mystery.
see what i mean? fascinating.
oh but one caveat. if you're really into lots of full-color plates in an art book, this may not be the one for you. there are other books about magritte that include better (and more) images of his work. but in my opinion gablik's book is not really about art so much as it is about a philosopher who made paintings. so, it worked for me.
March 8, 2013
I fell for Magritte's work when researching Adrian Noble's film version of A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, believe it or not, and I still can't get enough. The best things in this book are the illustrations, but the text is also very informative. Worthwhile.
July 26, 2015
How little did I know about this book, when I bought it january 1986 in an Amsterdam book store. So last month I started reading and observing fairly unprejudiced. How little did I know about Wittgenstein and Heisenberg – read a few pages about both, that’s it.
I found out that this book is the outcome of a thorough study of Magritte’s work and his philosophy behind it. And that there is quite a lot of philosophy needed to understand Magritte.
For me, a possible resumé is that most of Magritte’s paintings mirror the conjunction of two seemingly opposite representations of reality. The next citation might offer a verbal illustration of one of the aspects of how Magritte dealt with forms of reality.
(It comes from the fifth printing, 1976, by the NY Graphic Society in Boston.)
Page 96: “It has already been pointed out how Magritte had tried to define, within the parameters of a single picture, the ambiguity which exists between a real object, one’s mental image of it, and the painted representation, of which the most lucid example is The human condition. As with most of Magritte’s key works, there is a series of variations which form a complex system of cross-references, incorporating and superimposing related elements. The ‘painting-within-a-painting’ theme is a stunning contraposition to the Renaissance concept of painting as a ‘window on reality’. Is the landscape we see one which is painted on the canvas inside the room, or is it one which is outside the window? In The human condition we are observing the correlation of two phenomena which occurs at the interface between subjective and objective – a diffusion of identities between inside and outside worlds.”
So I had a good time with this one.
My favourite from this book? Might be plate 66 ‘Le plagiat’ (Plagiarism), 1960. JM
I found out that this book is the outcome of a thorough study of Magritte’s work and his philosophy behind it. And that there is quite a lot of philosophy needed to understand Magritte.
For me, a possible resumé is that most of Magritte’s paintings mirror the conjunction of two seemingly opposite representations of reality. The next citation might offer a verbal illustration of one of the aspects of how Magritte dealt with forms of reality.
(It comes from the fifth printing, 1976, by the NY Graphic Society in Boston.)
Page 96: “It has already been pointed out how Magritte had tried to define, within the parameters of a single picture, the ambiguity which exists between a real object, one’s mental image of it, and the painted representation, of which the most lucid example is The human condition. As with most of Magritte’s key works, there is a series of variations which form a complex system of cross-references, incorporating and superimposing related elements. The ‘painting-within-a-painting’ theme is a stunning contraposition to the Renaissance concept of painting as a ‘window on reality’. Is the landscape we see one which is painted on the canvas inside the room, or is it one which is outside the window? In The human condition we are observing the correlation of two phenomena which occurs at the interface between subjective and objective – a diffusion of identities between inside and outside worlds.”
So I had a good time with this one.
My favourite from this book? Might be plate 66 ‘Le plagiat’ (Plagiarism), 1960. JM
June 24, 2016
An overview consisting mainly of the usual Magritte talking points-but Gablik offers some details, insights, and comparisons that were new to me. Plus, it was nice to see someone explicitly discuss the connections between many of his paintings and the work of Wittgenstein (and to discover that they seem to have had no knowledge of one another).
Going back to Magritte always feels creatively rejuvenating. He somehow depicts mysterious little scenes of new poetic strangeness that allow for genuine philosophical revelation.
Going back to Magritte always feels creatively rejuvenating. He somehow depicts mysterious little scenes of new poetic strangeness that allow for genuine philosophical revelation.
May 31, 2019
wonderful book!
October 14, 2017
Interesting book on an interesting artist. Will make you want to become a surrealist painter.
November 23, 2012
Well written, concise and informative. A bit too zealous in the appreciation of Magritte.
August 1, 2013
Delightful book. Many pictures. Well written and exhaustive.
March 12, 2015
Pretty basic, satisfactory intro to Magritte. Leaves out a few of his important pieces. If you like the paintings and ideas here, you should definitely explore his other things too.
Read
June 16, 2017759.4 M212g 1970
May 28, 2023
Sometimes a bit haughty in language, but generally this book gives a good picture of Magritte as a painter, his influences and his thought processes. Lots of beautiful paintings accompany.
April 26, 2025
'Sometimes an image can place its spectator under serious accusation.'
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews