Sobre Lo Espiritual En El Arte

by Kandinsky, M. Trento (translator)

Sobre lo espiritual en el arte condensa las premisas fundamentales que conducen al rubo de la representación abstracta. El texto declara la hegemonía del espíritu en el arte y, desde esa certeza, desprende el desmantelamiento de la realidad tangible y positiva. El libro se enuncia como teoría sustentadora de ese movimiento pictórico que deslumbraría al siglo XX: la abstracción como atributo trascendente y expresión auténtica del espíritu. Es un manifiesto intuitivo, tejido por la ebullición que en los albores del siglo predecía los virajes del arte.

Genres: Art, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Art History, Spirituality, Classics, Religion

124 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1912

Reviews

[Luís · Rating 4 out of 5]

You have to read the artists to better look at their paintings.
The links between music and visual arts (on the issue of rhythm management in particular) are fascinating.

[Ridgely · Rating 2 out of 5]

What saves this book is superlative phrase-turning and humor, intended or otherwise. If you've ever been tempted to bronze your subjective aesthetic and mount it in the museum between philosophy and science, this will be there to remind you how nearly impossible it is to pull off. Kandinsky couldn't do it and neither can you. I mean he sets forth to launch a theory of color analogized to harmonics, but what really comes through is an abiding disdain for yellow, coupled with a love letter to blue. His statement of artistic intent- you gotta pat him on the back for that idealistic "whoosh"- appears equally specious. It's not that he's lying. It's just that his sleight of hand skills are pretty amateur so the part where he goes "oh so my plan includes this, this, and that, from this day forward" comes across pretty nakedly as a review of past and current work. It reminds me of having to write artist statements. These are a bitch, which is my thoroughly unscientific perspective. They are a bitch because they are more often than not worded as a request for a statement of artistic intent. Last I checked, "I'm going to pick up this brush and paint until I get lost, and paint some more until I come out the other side. Motherfucker." rarely cuts it. Because that doesn't really translate into anything but maximum snark - it's sort of like getting spattered with paint for asking "what are you doing?" The thing is, that statement is absolutely honest, it just doesn't make sense in any language outside the living craft of painting, and so to write a statement, I have to open the door to that compact structure of dream logic, walk outside, and look in the window and describe what I see. This, however, is not the same thing as writing a grocery list, even if it's written on paper covered with vegetables, as a bullet-list. All I can do is write what I see. I can't predict where process will take me, the most I can do is make preparatory drawings as points of departure. Maybe Kandinsky was a precog. His enthusiasm for the path away from representation, for the synthesis of the arts, for advances of the spirit through science likely conflated observable trends in his existing body of work with future intent. And it's not just a little heart-breaking (but funny, always funny) to encounter his One True Quest towards pure expression conveyed upon such muddy waters.

[Roy Lotz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Theory is the lamp which sheds light on the petrified ideas of yesterday and of the more distant past.

The first time I saw a painting by Kandinsky was in the Guggenheim Museum. Back then, I really didn’t have much appreciation for visual art, least of all abstract paintings. Nevertheless, I remember being intrigued, and finally fascinated by his work. The way he was able to select forms reminiscent of, but not dependent on, real-life objects delighted my eye. Later, I saw a special exhibition of Kandinsky’s work in Madrid. It was divided by place and time, taking me through his Russian, German, and Parisian period, during which he moved from representative art to complete abstraction. I came away from that exhibit with my interest in Kandinsky re-confirmed, and now I can say that he is one of my favorite 20th century artists.

Concerning the Spiritual in Art is a short book (more like an extended essay) by Kandinsky, detailing his personal philosophy of art. For Kandinsky, the artist is like a prophet, able to see farther, think more deeply, and feel more keenly than ordinary people. The great artist’s function is to satisfy the cravings of the spirit. In music this is done through rhythm and melody; in painting through color and form. The spiritual function of art has been hampered by what Kandinsky calls materialism—representative art. The accurate reproduction of an object’s appearance is pointless in itself; what matters is its truth to the inner, not the outer, reality. Then follows a long chapter on Kandinsky’s theory of colors—which colors evoke which emotions, and their relationship to one another.

As a work of theory, Kandinsky’s book is somewhat disappointing. It is more of a manifesto than a treatise—a simple declaration of Kandinsky’s opinions. As such, it is more interesting as a look into the mind of a great artist than as a piece of art theory. Kandinsky’s discussion of colors and shapes, for example, is silly as analysis, but fascinating as a peek into Kandinsky’s brain. Triangles, circles, squares; reds, yellows, blues—all these were like characters for Kandinsky, with their own personalities and temperaments. It was a pleasure to get to know him better.

[Quiver · Rating 5 out of 5]

To me, Kandinsky is the Kandinsky from the Bauhaus period, when his paintings were dominated by abstract compositions comprising lines, circles, triangles, and bold colours. Though Concerning the Spiritual in Art was written some ten years prior, the book may as well be about the explorations in artworks such as these.



Part I of the book has one memorable idea: Kandinsky depicts the life of the spirit as a triangle, forever moving gently upwards, or rather, forever moved upwards by artists—the misunderstood souls—who forge the way for the rest of us.

The life of the spirit may be fairly represented in diagram as a large acute-angled triangle divided horizontally into unequal parts with the narrowest segment uppermost. The lower the segment the great it is in breath, depth, and area.

The whole triangle is moving slowly, almost invisibly forwards and upwards. Where the apex was today the second segment is tomorrow; what today can be understood only by the apex and to the rest of the triangle is an incomprehensible gibberish, forms tomorrow the true thought and feeling of the second segment.

…In every segment of the triangle are artists. Each one of them who can see beyond the limits of his segment is a prophet to those about him, and helps the advance of the obstinate whole. But those who are blind, or those who retard the movement of the triangle for baser reasons, are fully understood by their fellows and acclaimed for their genius. … Every segment hungers consciously or, much more often, unconsciously for their corresponding spiritual food.

Part II of the book takes up the principles of painting; specifically, the psychic effect of forms and colours. The former can stand on their own, but the latter are meaningless without boundaries and contrasting shades. To Kandinsky two main division of colour are immediate: into yellow (pulsating, expanding) and blue (cool, withdrawing); and into white (peace pregnant with possibility) and black (profound, deathly pause). Other colours are considered too, and described with pithy statements.

Just as orange is red brought nearer to humanity by yellow, so violet is red withdrawn from humanity by blue.

Much of the book is spent on drawing parallels between music and colour-form: Kandinsky wishes to compose on a painting.

Shades of colour, like those of sound, are of a much finger texture and awake in the soul emotions too fine to be expressed in words.

The parallels were thought-provoking. I could not ask more of book on colour theory: for we can only forge a path ahead by illuminating the past, learning from it, then building upon it.

Theory is the lamp which sheds light on the petrified ideas of yesterday and of the more distant past.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

I hit my artistic peak with my rendering of my uncle’s Conan the Barbarian upper arm tattoo (complete with blood splatter) when I was eight. Truly appreciating art always seemed like the province of finer souls. A secret protected on par with gypsy divination and Shamrock shakes. I guess I always thought art was beyond words. Kandinsky, in his brief book, proves otherwise. Incredibly lucid and articulate, Kandinsky leads the reader to move past an intellectual appreciation of art:

The spectator is too ready to look for a meaning in a picture- i.e., some outward connection between its various parts. Our materialistic age has produced a type of spectator or “connoisseur,” who is not content to put himself opposite a picture and let it say its own message. Instead of allowing the inner value of the picture to work, he worries himself in looking for “closeness to nature,” or “temperament,” or handling,” or “tonality,” or “perspective,” or what not. His eye does not probe the outer expression to arrive at the inner meaning. pg. 49.

With academic discipline, he explains the effects of color and form on the very non-academic soul. He effectively evokes the spiritual response to color through metaphor. It would be easy for Kandinsky to hide behind vague explanations to increase the sense of profundity in abstract art. But he doesn’t. He maps out the themes of abstraction concisely. All in an effort to go beyond meaning and aesthetic. His goal is to attune the soul to the effect of color. It’s all quite sincere and inspiring.

[sofi lira s · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fue un placer leer a Kandinsky.
En específico el tema de la exploración-comprensión interna de los artistas y su motivación por representar lo interno, y cómo esta necesidad del espíritu puede ser expresada por diversos medios artísticos.
En particular me llamó mucho la atención los paralelos que dibuja entre la música, metafísica, y arte (abstracto). Declara que la música, siendo el arte más inmaterial que existe, permite a los artistas expresar con mayor facilidad su vida interior que es por naturaleza no-física. La abstracción en el arte –pasar de lo figurativo a lo geométrico y después abandonar incluso las convenciones de las formas– es la forma en la cual nos podemos acercar más fielmente a esta expresión interna no-material que vibra dentro de cada artista. Utiliza una metáfora muy simple y bella para referirse a esto:

"El color es el teclado, los ojos son las armonías, el alma es el piano con muchas cuerdas. El artista es la mano que toca, tocando una llave u otra, para causar vibraciones en el alma"

Finalmente, a lo largo de su tratado Kandinsky hace un llamado a que todos, sean artistas o no, busquen dentro de sí qué es lo que les llama-gusta-apela-habla, más allá de lo material y finito. Así se practica la sensibilidad que nos es propia como seres humanos, la sensibilidad que nos acerca a lo divino y a lo eterno.

Muy bello.

[Paula Abreu Silva · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Na arte, a teoria nunca precede a prática, mas o contrário.
Na arte tudo pertence aos domínios da sensibilidade, sobretudo nos seus começos. De início, só através da sensibilidade se atinge a verdadeira arte. Ainda que a construção geral possa ser elaborada unicamente a partir da teoria, o elemento que constitui a verdadeira essência da criação jamais se encontra através da teoria; é a intuição que dá a vida à criação. Agindo sobre a sensibilidade, a arte só pode agir através dela."
Página 76

[Spasa Vidljinović]

Kandinski, jedan od glavnih predstavnika apstraktnog slikarstva, napisao je knjigu o načinu percipiranja boja, oblika, stvarnosti, izvora umetnosti, kao i glavnih elemenata potrebnih da bi ona nastala.

Njegovi sinestezični doživljaji boja i oblika formirali su specifičan pogled ka stvaralaštvu uopšte. Svaka boja živi svoj tajantveni život pisao je, pojedinačno, ona ima svoju atmosferu, temperaturu, specifično dejstvo na dušu. Sa promenom nijanse menja se i njen efekat, često i suština. Ukratko o glavnim dvema koje se najviše pominju:
Plava - nebeska boja, dubina, večnost, mir, hladnoća
Žuta – zemaljska boja, toplota, bes

Kandinski je smatrao da u umetnosti ne sme biti ograda, poput Aristotela, da umetnost mora imati slobodan odnos prema stvarnosti bez zabrana. Umetnik NE MORA. Ceo tekst se okreće oko sintagme unutrašnja nužnost, iz koje proističe ono glavno, duhovno lišeno sporednog, materijalističkog.

Ne dotiče se samo slikarstva. U fino tkanje sinestezije upliće i muziku, kao prvu i najvažniju umetnost, književnost, ples, gde pravi distinkciju između njih, u smislu posebnih individualnih moći svake, kasnije ujedinjenih u duhovnu piramidu koja će dosegnuti nebo .

Bio je pod velikim uticajem teozofskih ideja, a lično se i poznavao sa Rudolfom Štajnerom, pa otud su neke provučene kroz knjigu, a teozofija se pominje i direktno na nekim mestima. Ovo delo je oda antimaterijalističkom u umetnosti i životu uopšte.

[Hanieh Sadat Shobeiri · Rating 5 out of 5]

5/5

📜📜📜

هگل: "هنر به پایان رسیده. از اینجا به بعد هنرمندان تنها می‌توانند در غالب پایان‌های بی‌شمار به تولید هنر بپردازند و هرگز چیز جدیدی خلق نمی‌کنند."

کاندینسکی: "هنر امروز، در ابتدای راهی است که مطابق با امکاناتش هنر را از اندیشه انتزاع نموده و روزی نهایتاً به آفرینش هنری ناب دست خواهد یافت."

📜📜📜

این کتاب دقیقا همون چیزی بود که موقع خوندن فلسفه (به ویژه فلسفه هنر) انتظار دارم باهاش روبه‌رو بشم.
نویسنده به جای این‌که تلاش کنه دورِ ذهن خواننده رو چارچوب بکشه، سعی می‌کنه به تخیلش پر و بال بده و احتمالات جدید رو در نظر بگیره؛ و به جای تقسیم‌بندی‌های عجیب و غریب و قاعده‌مند، این رو در نظر می‌گیره که هنر اونقدر گسترده‌ست که خیلی وقت‌ها توی قاعده‌ها جای نمی‌گیره؛ و به جای حکم به مرگ هنر دادن، تولد دوباره‌ی یک وجود جدید رو نوید می‌ده.
این‌جاست که تفاوت یک ذهن آکادمیک با یک ذهن هنرمند مشخص می‌شه!
هنرمند به دنبال چارچوب بستن به دور ذهنش نیست، چون می‌دونه این کار خلاقتیش رو می‌کشه! هنرمند به دنبال خلق دوباره‌ی شکوه و عظمت دوران باستان نیست، بلکه به دنبال کشف ابعاد جدیدی از روح و ذهن خودش با استفاده از زبان هنره!
هنرمند، امیدوارانه به دنبال خلق و آفرینشه. هنرمند می‌دونه که تا وقتی انسان هست، تا وقتی روح هست و تا وقتی عطش برای کشف و ابراز هست، هنر هم هست و هنری که از تمایلات انسان برای آفرینش و کشف و ابراز سرچشمه می‌گیره، هرگز نمرده و نخواهد مرد.

📜📜📜

پ.ن: این کتاب یه گنج ارزشمنده و خوندنش بر هر هنرمند و هنردوست و هنرپروری واجبه!

[Mel · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was worth reading. Some of the language was a little flowery so I will probably read it again at some point. It makes some interesting points. I wish the art was in color and not black and white since he talks so much about the significance of color especially red. It was a fast read and interesting so it was worth my time to read this one.

[Reza Gharibi · Rating 4 out of 5]

کاندینسکی یک نقاش و نظریه‌پرداز هنری روس بود. از آن‌جا که او نخستین نقاشی‌های مدرن اِنتزاعی را خلق کرده‌است، یکی از معروفترین و اثرگذارترین هنرمندان سده بیستم به‌شمار می‌آید. (ويكيپديا)

كتاب دو بخشه، بخش اول راجع به خود هنر و هنرمند ها صحبت ميكنه، بخش دوم يكم تخصصي وارد هنر نقاشي ميشه.
بخش اول جذابيتش برام بيشتر بود
مخصوصا سر فصل "جنش سه ضلعي" رو خيلي دوس داشتم.
كسايي كه به نقاشي علاقه مندن بخونن كتاب خوبيه

[Vladys Kovsky · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am going to don my T-shirt with a print of Kandinsky's Upward and write a short review for his essay.

[Maricarmen Estrada M · Rating 4 out of 5]

Un tratado sobre arte creado por el grandioso Kandinsky. Muy recomendable para quienes quieren aprender sobre color, forma y el arte como expresión del alma.

[Frank Baugh · Rating 2 out of 5]

Kandinsky declares himself to be in the uppermost segment of a proprietary invisible gyrating spirit triangle from which he proceeds to piss on the cubists’ cornflakes

[Murat Dural · Rating 4 out of 5]

Zorlanacağımı düşünürken beni benden alan bir kitap oldu. Kısa ama büyük bir ressamın özellikle sanatların çarpazlanması üzerine yazdığı çok kafa açıcı makalelerden oluşuyor. Ses, renk, form üzerine yazdıkları, içsellik, dışsallık, yönelim üzerine düşünceleri gerçekten zihin açıcı. Okurken "Bir an evvel bunlarla bir öykü kurmalıyım!" dediğim yerler oldu. Sanat ve karşılıklı etkileşim, sentez üzerine olumlu fikirleri olanlara önemle öneriyorum :)

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was given this by my high school girlfriend over 50 years ago. I couldn't make heads nor tails of it. She was far brighter than me and an artist herself. I continue to dive in now and again, especially with the recent great Kandinsky show at the Guggenheim New York (written 3/22). It's beginning to make sense.

[Bill · Rating 3 out of 5]

In some ways I enjoyed the two rather lengthy introductions to the book (not by Kandinsky himself) -- which put his career and ideas in a historical perspective -- more than the book itself. I read the following review from an Amazon reader. I agree with most of it, and he brings out some of the more important points Kandinsky offers in his book. I especially like this insight from the reviewer: "His spirituality is not an incarnational one, where the Spirit interpenetrates and quickens matter, but a dualistic one, where they can be separated or "abstracted". His purpose is laudable. It is to reveal the spiritual and make it visible anew "towards the close of our already dying epoch" (p. 47). But the problem is that he seeks to do this by abstraction, separation."

Here is the full review (w/ a few parts omitted):

Kandinsky, who was one of the founders of modern art, sets out to confront the crass materialism of his era and the trite art that it was producing. He understands "spirituality" as being the interiority of things, their inner source of meaning and life. He attacks artistic narcissism, saying, "This neglect of inner meanings, which is the life of colours, this vain squandering of artistic power is called 'art for art's sake'." (p. 3).

Consistent with his Russian Orthodox background, Kandinsky says, "We are seeking today for the road which is to lead us away from the outer to the inner basis. The spirit, like the body, can be strengthened and developed by frequent exercise. Just as the body, if neglected, grows weaker and finally impotent, so the spirit perishes if untended. And for this reason it is necessary for the artist to know the starting point for the exercise of his spirit. The starting point is the study of colour and its effects on men." (pp. 35-6).

And I love his honesty in a footnote where he says, of his colour schema, "These statements have no scientific basis, but are founded purely on spiritual experience." (p. 37). If only we saw more awareness in the world of the importance of not confusing categories of thought between scientific evidence and artistic perception.

To Kandinsky, Art's function is to reveal the spiritual. It "must learn from music that every harmony and every discord which springs from the inner spirit is beautiful, but that it is essential that they spring from the inner spirit and from that alone." (p. 51).

This has a social function, for "each period of culture produces an art of its own which can never be repeated". (p. 1) As such, "Painting is an art, and art is not vague production, transitory and isolated, but a power which must be directed to the improvement and refinement of the human soul." (p. 54).

Ultimately, "If the artist be priest of beauty", then she has "a triple responsibility to the non-artist: (1) He must repay the talent which he has; (2) his deeds, feelings, and thoughts, as those of every man, create a spiritual atmosphere which is either pure or poisonous. (3) These deeds and thoughts are materials for his creations, which themselves exercise influence on the spiritual atmosphere. The artist is not only as king, as Peladan says, because he has great power, but also because he has great duties." (pp. 54-55).

And the bottom line? "That is beautiful which is produced by the inner need, which springs from the soul." He concludes: "this property of the soul is the oil which facilitates the slow, scarcely visible but irresistable movement of [the human condition] onwards and upwards."

As will be apparent, this sense of spiritual progress may be modern thinking, but it is decidedly not postmodern. How strange, then, that Kandkindy is seen as a progenitor of "modern" art and its seamless, to my eye, drift into the incohate abstractions of postmodernity.

It is here that my criticism of Kandinsky takes effect. Kandinsky's mindset is, at the same time, premodern in its perception of the spiritual essence, but postmodern deconstructive in its artistic articulation. His spirituality is not an incarnational one, where the Spirit interpenetrates and quickens matter, but a dualistic one, where they can be separated or "abstracted". His purpose is laudable. It is to reveal the spiritual and make it visible anew "towards the close of our already dying epoch" (p. 47). But the problem is that he seeks to do this by abstraction, separation.

This takes us into a world that predicates the transcendent, but implicitly denigrates the immanent. Thus, "The more abstract is form, the more clear and direct its appeal. In any composition the material side may be more or less omitted in proportion as the forms used are more or less material, and for them substituted pure abstractions, or largely dematerialised objects. The more an artist uses these abstracted forms, the deeper and more confidently will he advance into the kingdom of the abstract." (p.32).

And for Kandinsky such abstraction becomes a crusading obsession: "Taking the work of Henri Rousseau as a starting point, I go on to prove that the new naturalism will not only be equivalent to but even identical with abstraction." (p. 52).

In his wonderful Introduction to the text, Michael Sadler suggests that this extreme abandonment of representation of the real world is why, "The question most generally asked about Kandinsky's art is: 'What is he trying to do?'" Saddler suggests, "this book will do something towards answering the question. But it will not do everything." (p. xviii). In contrast, he says, Cezanne "saw in a tree, a heap of apples, a human face, a group of bathing men or women, something more abiding than either photography or impressionist painting could present. He painted the 'treeness' of the tree.... But in everything he did he showed the architectural mind of the true Frenchman. His landscape studies were based on a profound sense of the structure of rocks and hills, and being structural, his art depends on reality.... The material of which his art was composed was drawn from the huge stores of actual nature." (p.xvii).

Where does all this leave us today, in 2010, 99 years after first publication of Kandinsky's little book in German?

When I look at the nihilism of Britart, or the sheer inability to draw and express beauty in what seems to be coming out of some of our contemporary art schools (the students tell me they are discouraged by their tutors from trying to express beauty!), then it is clear that abstraction has gone too far. Like postmodern deconstruction generally, it is all very well to deconstruct, but what about the grace of reconstruction? Kandinsky's aim to reveal the spiritual was laudable. That is the true meaning of the word "apocalypse" - to unveil and reveal that which has been hidden. But abstraction on its own and as the highest ideal is like pulling up a plant to see how the roots are growing. It causes disincarnation, which is another word for death, and so both the material and the spiritual wither.

The art that we need for these our troubled times needs to be an apocalyptic art of incarnation. It needs to reveal the spiritual, but not separate it off from the material world. This will be a new art of the sacred. And here is where we need a debate to start, and artistic action around that debate.

A resource that I would suggest is a book by the theologian Walter Wink, Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination - especially the Introduction on pp. 3 - 10.

Wink argues that we must reject the dualistic idea of Heaven being separate from Earth. We need what he calls an "integral worldview", what is also sometimes called an incarnational spirituality. Here Heaven and Earth are interfused in a single reality (Christians can read Luke 17:20-21; Hindus the Bhagavad Gita; Taoists the Tao te Ching, etc.).

And we need art, in the full artistic and theological senses of these words, to "magnify" and "illuminate" what incarnational spirituality looks like. To open the mind and the heart, and give fresh hope to the world.

Sadler's remarks on Cezanne are a pointer in this direction. Kandinsky's little book provides a crucial intellectual stepping stone. We have lived through a century of dying and dead "modern" art. We cannot go on like that. It is time to call back the soul.

[Hesam]

به طور خلاصه، تاثیر نیاز درونی و توسعه هنر، جلوه بیانی همواره در حال پیشرفت جاودانگی و ذهنیت بر حسب دوره های زمانی و عینیت است
چون ذهنیت همواره در حال تبادل بیان عینی امروز با بیان عینی آینده است، هرگونه گسترش بیشتر آزادی در استفاده از فرم بیرونی همانند فضیلی بزرگ مورد استقبال قرار می گیرد. در حال حاضر می توانیم بگوییم هنرمند تنها مادامی که در تماس با طبیعت باقی بماند می تواند از هر فرمی که بخواهد استفاده کند. ولی این محدودیت، مانند همه پیشینیانش، کاملا موقتی است. از نقطه نظر نیاز درونی نباید هیچ محدودیتی وجود داشته باشد. هنرمند از هر فرمی که بیان اقتضا کند، می تواند بهره گیرد، زیرا محرک درونی وی باید بیان ظاهری مناسب را بیابد
بنابراین می بینیم که جستجوی آگاهانه، به دنبال شخصیت و "سبک" نه تنها غیرممکن بلکه نسبتا بی اهمیت نیز می باشد. رابطه نزدیک هنر در سراسر دوران ها نه رابطه ای در فرم ظاهری بلکه در معنای درونی است. و بنابراین صحبت از مکاتب، سیر "پیشرفت"، "اصول هنر" و غیره مبتنی بر درکی غلط است و تنها به اغتشاش منجر می گردد

یکی از قسمت های "خیلی خوب" از متن کتاب
و در ضمن راهکارها و پیشنهاد های جالبی برای هنرمند مطرح میکنه، که در مقابل تئوری های آکادمیک قرار میگیره

[Ellis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Picked this short treatise up used for cheap. Kandinsky has a lot of very interesting ideas about the relation of art and music and poetry, with some discussion of social status/interpersonal relationships (just a dash). He is a modernist through and through. The introduction is enough to get you excited to read it and I just love his description about what art is and ought to be. Dense and could be a better translation, I think. Takes some concentration to understand it all and follow the metaphors he carries through several chapters, but I really did enjoy it.

[Alexander H. Ellis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A brillian manifesto of modernist thought by an early abstract painter. Simply put, if you have an interest in abstract, non-representational art and want to understand one early innovator's theories, read this!

--Also, its largely a book on theory so beware. Reading with a historical background in 20th c. art history is advised.

[Monica · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’ve meant to read this book for years—it’s short; I read it in one sitting. Kandinsky wanted his paintings to be like music, and in this short treatise he lays out what he sees to purpose of art in the lives of both artists and audiences is. At times he seems to anticipate Teilhard de Chardin. I definitely think this provides some perspective to reading O’Connor.

[Mack · Rating 3 out of 5]

i retained none of this, don’t ask

something about colors……

[Iliyan Garnev · Rating 3 out of 5]

"There is no 'must' in art, because art is free," says Kandinsky—only to use the word must 61 more times in this book.

It's a solid read, but there were sections I struggled to fully grasp. The abundance of analogies, often didn't serve the purpose of clarifying, but the opposite. That said, the parts I did understand felt profound. For any fan of Kandinsky, this book offers a deeper understanding of him as an artist. His descriptions of colors as musical instruments and his exploration of rhythm in art add new dimensions to appreciating his work.

Read this and go stare at Composition VII for 30 minutes.

Overall, 3.5.

[Michelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm finally getting around to reading Wassily Kandinsky's Concerning the Spiritual in Art. In it, the artist explains his plans for the ascent of spiritually fulfilling and expressive art that surpasses mere replication of natural form. This is not to say that Kandinsky is in favor of pure abstraction. He faults cubism as too intellectual and spiritually lacking, as opposed to inspired abstractions.
I most enjoyed his breakdown of color theory, setting antitheses of white and black (obvi), yellow and blue, orange and purple, and green and red. There are even diagrams. As someone who grew up with the color wheel (also diagramed in the book), it was interesting that he deviated from the complementary/contrasting colors that are directly across from each other on the wheel, the creating an antithesis of yellow and blue, two primary colors.
That's not to say that he doesn't also go into simple composition and form versus complex. And of course, there are the comparisons to music that are to be expected of a painter, and probable synesthete, who gave his works titles like "Composition" and "Improvisation" and "Symphony". In any case, he makes a clear, personal case against the popular "art pour l'art", not because he has an especial dislike of it, but because he imagines a greater, more satisfying art to come. This book isn't quite as satisfying as one of Kandinsky's paintings, but I did enjoy it.

[Chandler · Rating 4 out of 5]

this is basically "we paint in a society", the treatise.

he's more condescending than I would imagine, his spiritualism isn't, well, material enough, and it all smacks of "bourgeois nonsense." honestly, even with the interesting discussion of the "spiritual value" of the different basic colors and how they interact this is probably worth three stars. what saves it is just how much this really mattered to him -- looking at his work you can really tell that he thought everything he wrote down. as such, it gives a really good window into the processes that helped birth abstract art and lets you understand the cornerstone for modern art throughout the rest of the century.

it's also pretty short.

and funny?

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

A professional artist/teacher friend of mine gave me a copy of Kandinsky's book at a recent workshop she was leading. Consider the long period of the 20th Century during which Kandinsky practiced what he preached as a "Spiritual Revolution" in art. Spiritual Revolution was a popular theme throughout the century. A Baha'i pamphlet with that title was published in the 1970's. Being an activist artist in that revolution now is as important as ever.

[Benjamin Valentine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kadinsky on art for arts sake: "The artist seeks for material reward for his dexterity, his power of vision and experience. His purpose becomes the satisfaction of vanity and greed. In place of the steady co-operation of artists is a scramble for good things. There are complaints of excessive competition, of over-production. Hatred, partisanship, cliques, jealousy, intrigues are the natural consequences of this aimless, materialist art."

[Laia Terré · Rating 5 out of 5]

M'agrada i m'ajuda, especialment tota la primera part de "Notes generals". S'haurà de tornar a llegir, mínim un cop a l'any. Em reconnecta amb el propòsit i la raó de tot plegat, d'aquesta vida (jo ja m'entenc).
Per cert, em sorprèn d'aquesta edició les nombroses faltes ortogràfiques i gramaticals que hi he trobat, una llàstima.

[Narjes Dorzade · Rating 5 out of 5]

.
از زیباترین کتاب ها در مورد هنر .
تمام این صفحات سرشار از جذبه در هنری انسانی ست .

.
ممنونم آقای " واسیلی کاندینسکی "
و البته مترجم درست ؛ اعظم نوراله خانی

[Chiara · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Il colore è il tasto. L'occhio è il martelletto. L'anima è un pianoforte con molte corde. L'artista è la mano che, toccando questo o quel tasto, fa vibrare l'anima."