![]() ![]() ![]() This essay re-examines the case of Possibilities as one of the last presentations, with its strengths and flaws, of such a mythopoeic aesthetics. The positivist Greenberg quickly made known his resistance to the mythopoeic position of Possibilities Rosenberg's existential position consolidated in 1949 the mythopoeic position, with its interest in art as a mediation of the individual and a larger collectivity, was submerged. The full complexity of this collage is important to resuscitate, as the voice of the mythopoeic, as it had earlier been espoused by the Surrealists and the Art of this Century circle and advanced in Possibilities especially by Andrea Caffi, Paul Goodman, Lionel Abel, and Jackson Pollock, was shortly to be muted, in what Motherwell later called, as noted by Martica Sawin, a conspiracy of silence. Both an existential/nihilistic and what I want to call a mythopoetic/sacralized aesthetics coexisted. Its editorial policy was self-consciously a "collage" of approaches to artistic freedom, as Ann Gibson has noted. In its very openness it served as a site from which, and in response to which, the post-war art critical establishment was generated. In the short lived periodical Possibilities 1947-48, co-edited by Motherwell and Rosenberg, the issue being negotiated was artistic freedom and community at the close of World War II and the commencement of the Cold War. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |