surfaces in many of his paintings as well) and explored its volume
via flat planar cardboard surfaces. (FIG. 35-18reproduces the ma-
quette, or model. The finished sculpture was to be made of sheet
metal.) By presenting what is essentially a cutaway view of a guitar,
Picasso allowed the viewer to examine both surface and interior
space, both mass and void. This approach, of course, was completely
in keeping with the Cubist program. Some scholars have suggested
that Picasso derived the cylindrical form that serves as the sound
hole on the guitar from the eyes on masks from the Ivory Coast of
Africa. African masks were a continuing and persistent source of in-
spiration for the artist (see “Primitivism,” page 920). Here, however,
Picasso seems to have transformed the anatomical features of African
masks into a part of a musical instrument—dramatic evidence of his
unique, innovative artistic vision. Ironically—and intentionally—the
sound hole, the central void in a real guitar, is, in Picasso’s guitar, the
only solid form.
JACQUES LIPCHITZOne of the most successful sculptors to
adapt into three dimensions the planar, fragmented dissolution of
form central to Analytic Cubist painting was Jacques Lipchitz
(1891–1973). Born in Lithuania, Lipchitz resided for many years in
France and the United States. He worked out his ideas for many of
his sculptures in clay before creating them in bronze or in stone.
Bather (FIG. 35-19) is typical of his Cubist style. Lipchitz broke the
continuous form of the human body into cubic volumes and planes.
The interlocking and gracefully intersecting irregular facets and
curves recall the paintings of Picasso and Braque and represent a
parallel analysis of dynamic form in space. Lipchitz later produced
less volumetric sculptures that included empty spaces outlined by
metal shapes. In these sculptures, Lipchitz pursued even further the
Cubist notion of spatial ambiguity and the relationship between
solid forms and space.
ALEKSANDR ARCHIPENKOThe Russian sculptor Alek-
sandr Archipenko(1887–1964) explored similar ideas, as seen in
Woman Combing Her Hair (FIG. 35-20). In this statuette Archi-
penko introduced, in place of the head, a void with a shape of its
924 Chapter 35 EUROPE AND AMERICA, 1900 TO 194535-19Jacques
Lipchitz,Bather,- Bronze,
2 103 – 4 1 1 –^14
1 1 . Nelson-Atkins
Museum of Art,
Kansas City (gift of
the Friends of Art).
The interlocking
and gracefully
intersecting irreg-
ular facets and
curves of Lipchitz’s
Batherrecall the
Cubist paintings of
Picasso and Braque
and represent a
parallel analysis of
dynamic form in
space.
I
n 1923, Picasso granted an interview to the Mexican-born painter
and critic Marius de Zayas (1880–1961), who had settled in New
York City in 1907 and in 1911 had been instrumental in putting to-
gether the first exhibition in the United States of Picasso’s paintings. In
their conversation, the approved English translation of which appeared
in the journal The Artsunder the title “Picasso Speaks,” the artist set
forth his views about Cubism and the nature of art in general.
We all know that Art is not truth. Art is a lie that makes us realize
truth, at least the truth that is given us to understand. The artist must
know the manner whereby to convince others of the truthfulness of
his lies....They speak of naturalism in opposition to modern paint-
ing. I would like to know if anyone has ever seen a natural work of art.
Nature and art, being two different things, cannot be the same thing.
Through art we express our conception of what nature is not....
Cubism is no different from any other school of painting. The same
principles and the same elements are common to all....Many think
that Cubism is an art of transition, an experiment which is to bringulterior results. Those who think that way have not understood it.
Cubism is not either a seed or a foetus, but an art dealing primarily
with forms, and when a form is realized it is there to live its own
life....Mathematics, trigonometry, chemistry, psychoanalysis,
music, and whatnot, have been related to Cubism to give it an easier
interpretation. All this has been pure literature, not to say nonsense,
...Cubism has kept itself within the limits and limitations of paint-
ing, never pretending to go beyond it. Drawing, design, and color
are understood and practiced in Cubism in the spirit and manner
that they are understood and practiced in all other schools. Our
subjects might be different, as we have introduced into painting
objects and forms that were formerly ignored....[I]n our subjects,
we keep the joy of discovery, the pleasure of the unexpected; our
subject itself must be a source of interest.** Marius de Zayas, “Picasso Speaks,”The Arts(May 1923), 315–326. Reprinted in
Herschel B. Chipp,Theories of Modern Art: A Source Book by Artists and Critics
(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968), 263–266.Picasso on Cubism
ARTISTS ON ART
1 in.