Avant-Garde and Kitsch

by Clement Greenberg

Genres: Art, Nonfiction, Essays, Philosophy, American

Unknown Binding

First published January 1, 1939

About the author

American essayist, known mainly as an influential visual art critic closely associated with American Modern art of the mid-20th century.

Reviews

[Lilly Jane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Who wants to do a Thomas Kinkade puzzle?! 🤓🧩😛

[yuefei]

Really insightful and places the avant-garde developments in modern art in context with industrialisation as well as authoritative regimes, giving a convincing explanation for the Nazi denunciation of modern art as degenerate art or cultural bolshevism (something that the contemporary right wing has adopted again, yay!).

I did find Greenberg's essay somewhat elitist and wished that he could have elaborated on the implications of a "superior" culture, how its superiority is determined, and its necessity.

[Corporate Clone · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pretentious trot incapable of appreciating based socialist realism

[Stanimir · Rating 2 out of 5]

Clement Greenberg’s 'Avant-Garde and Kitsch' looms as a manifesto of modernist purity — a passionate diatribe that elevates the self-referential, “pure” art of the avant-garde while denouncing all that is mass-produced and sentimental as kitsch. Yet beneath its grandiose proclamations of aesthetic autonomy lies an ideological artifact as much as an art criticism, one that exposes its own elitist and exclusionary underpinnings.

Greenberg’s argument rests on a rigid binary: the avant-garde, with its abstract, form-focused practices, is portrayed as the only bastion of authentic culture, while kitsch, mechanical and derivative, is relegated to the realm of banal popular culture. This stark dichotomy, however, has not aged well. As Rosalind Krauss incisively observed, Greenberg’s exaltation of formalism is less an objective standard than a projection of his own cultural and political biases. Krauss argued that by celebrating a supposedly “pure” aesthetic that shuns content, Greenberg unwittingly constructs a sterile, self-imposed purity — a purity that, in its exclusion of the social and historical contexts of art, risks turning even the avant-garde into a kind of kitsch, one devoid of the messy, vital engagements with real life.

Moreover, Greenberg’s dismissal of kitsch is provocative in its moralism; it not only devalues popular culture but also betrays a profound anxiety about the democratization of art. In his zeal to separate art from the quotidian, he forgets that the very vibrancy of modern art springs from its interplay with social forces and mass experiences. His formalist framework, while revolutionary in its time, now reads as a nostalgic defense of an ivory-towered aesthetic that is painfully out of touch with the postmodern condition — a condition that Rosalind Krauss helped to articulate by highlighting the inevitable entanglements of art, ideology, and cultural politics.

While 'Avant-Garde and Kitsch' remains a landmark text, its rigid dualism and narrow celebration of formalism ultimately reveal a conservative impulse to guard a high-culture elite — a stance that, as Krauss reminds us, renders even the avant-garde suspect in its claim to transcendence.

[Jakub Brudny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Teza o tym, że ludzie nie zaczną pojmować sztuki dopóki problem pracy nie zostanie rozwiązany zgodnie z duchem socjalizmu wydaje się tezą nieco na wyrost. Myślę, że nasz świat stał się tysiąc razy bardziej skomplikowany od czasów Greenberga - zresztą właśnie dlatego ten esej jest dla mnie tak ciekawy, przez czasy w których go wydano. Przez ostatnie miesiące zacząłem podświadomie wyłapywać nieco dziwne postawy apolityczne badając życiorysy albo analizując procesy twórcze artystów awangardowych zeszłego wieku. Ten esej w pewnym sensie rzuca światło na awangardę, na sposób rozumowania sztuki przez żyjących wówczas artystów. Dziś wszystko jest polityczne. Samo istnienie osób trans jest polityczne, dlaczego więc dane dzieła sztuki miałyby nie być odzwierciedleniem poglądów politycznych ich autora? No właśnie dlatego, ze polityka była w odbiorze artystów awangardowych kiczowata. Bardzo ciekawe to wszystko.

[Santeee]

I disagree with Greenberg’s championing of one side of a self-created duality above the other as he’s often wrong. Even scared, of kitsch and the power it enforces. Despite this and all other criticism, Greenberg’s ideas get to the crux of the 20 and 21st centuries cultural situation in comparison to past centuries. Even then maybe this piece is too dated as it seems like an avant-garde is non-existent today or maybe just not as potent. In the words of the hellp: “Nothing is sexy anymore.” “The hottest band right now would have been nothing yesterday.”

[Miles Stephenson · Rating 5 out of 5]

The groundwork of all art criticism in democratic societies, (Repin as pre-digested art, The New Yorker as kitsch, the evolution of the peasant into the proletariat, the creation of universal literacy) an essential preface for later writers like Dwight Macdonald, Robert Warshow, Susan Sontag, and Theodor Adorno.

[sílvia · Rating 4 out of 5]

molt interessant!! recomenat 100% per veure una oart diferent de les avantguardes jijiji

[Noah · Rating 5 out of 5]

https://cpb-us-e2.wpmucdn.com/sites.u...

[Courtney Mosier Warren · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don’t usually track the academic papers I read. But this one was excellent. So relevant in the social media and Netflix world.

[Andrew Stewart · Rating 3 out of 5]

Yes it’s elitist, almost to the point of comedy at times. But it’s still a good read, if dated.

[Bleh · Rating 4 out of 5]

Its brilkiant

[cherepushka]

i can't deal with people anymore. it's just ... everyone sucks so hard yk everybody is so stupid and they all walk around going nya nya nya nya nya nya nya nya

[Gabriel Marotto · Rating 4 out of 5]

A seemingly elitist view of art but at the same time the phenomenon described is seemingly accurate.

[her ass is not reading · Rating 2 out of 5]

decently written essay, but extremely pretentious. he acts as though a poor person could never able to understand art and constantly claims the US is stealing from Europe (as if Picasso didn’t steal from museums and African culture…). his argument could’ve been more compelling if he didn’t make the reader feel insulted. and the american artists he praises were abstract expressionist… which speaks for itself

[Kimberly · Rating 4 out of 5]

You have to ask yourself why are reading this because this is in the early stages of Greenberg. It is eloquently written, some may object to such pontification, but it is suiting for its subject matter. It is a good short read so why not :)

[astr0 · Rating 2 out of 5]

τον μισώ..