Skip to main content

On Sculpture

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Nature, Artforms, and the World Around Us
  • 335 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter we consider sculpture, which was originally made to fit into an architectural environment but later became freestanding and monumental. It occupies space through its external form and sets up tensions in the surrounding space. The work proceeds by modelling (perhaps followed by casting), carving, and constructing, depending upon the medium. One has to move away from the expectations produced by Greek and Roman styles in order to appreciate the entirely different mode of treatment in other sculptural traditions. The chapter concludes with a more extended treatment of Rodin.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Rainer Maria Rilke, Auguste Rodin (Mineola, New York: Dover, 2006), 6 (henceforth AR).

  2. 2.

    Henry Moore , “A View of Sculpture,” in Henry Moore (New York: George Wittenborn, 1968), xxxiii, b (henceforth HM). Plato made the same observation about the indeterminate number of perspectives involved in sculpture in his Laws, II, 668D.

  3. 3.

    Moore, “Mesopotamian Art,” HM, xxxiii, a.

  4. 4.

    “Notes on Sculpture,” HM, xxxiv, a.

  5. 5.

    Cf. R. H. Wilenski , MMS, 95 and 101.

  6. 6.

    “Notes,” HM, xxxv, b.

  7. 7.

    “Manifesto ,” in Art and Its Significance, S. Ross ed. (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984), 537 (henceforth AS).

  8. 8.

    Ibid.

  9. 9.

    The Problem of Form in Painting and Sculpture, R. Meyer and R. Ogden, trans. (New York: Stechert, 1907), 14, 32, 49 (henceforth PF).

  10. 10.

    Modern Art: Painting, Sculpture Architecture, S. Hunter and J. Jacobus (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1985), 67a (henceforth MA), 240. See also Chap. 2.

  11. 11.

    “Notes,” HM, xxxiv, b.

  12. 12.

    Cf. Naum Gabo , “Sculpture: Carving and construction in space” (1937), Theories of Modern Art: A Sourcebook by Artists and Critics, Hershel B. Chipp ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 332 (henceforth TMA).

  13. 13.

    Cf. Gabo, TMA, p. 336; Moore , “Notes,” HM, xxxv, b.

  14. 14.

    Cf. Sigfried Giedion , Space, Time, and Architecture: The Growth of a Tradition (Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press, 1980), xlvii–lvi.

  15. 15.

    Wilenski , MMS, 25 and 92–106. For a comparison of stone and clay as media, see also von Hildebrand, 124–36.

  16. 16.

    The Christus Africanus on the cover of my Placing Aesthetics appeared with sharper detail in the negative than in the positive; so in the second printing, the publisher presented the negative.

  17. 17.

    MMS, 100.

  18. 18.

    “A View of Sculpture,” (henceforth “A View”) (1930) in HM, xxx.

  19. 19.

    Herbert Read , A Concise History of Modern Sculpture (New York: Praeger, 1964), 176ff (henceforth CHMS). Read has a more extended work devoted entirely to this interpretation of Moore: Henry Moore (London: Zwemmer, 1934).

  20. 20.

    “A View,” HM, xxxi, a. Cf. Naum Gabo (“Sculpture,” TMA, p. 331) on the emotional value of materials deriving from our own belonging to the material order.

  21. 21.

    CHMS, 167.

  22. 22.

    AE, 218.

  23. 23.

    “A View,” HM, xxx, a.

  24. 24.

    Boccioni, “Technical Manifesto of Futurist Sculpture,” AS, 537–8.

  25. 25.

    “Mesopotamian Art,” in HM, xxxii, a.

  26. 26.

    “Primitive Art,” (1941) in HM, xxxvi, a. In this observation Moore roughly follows a tradition represented by Winckelmann for whom sculpture passes through several more primitive phases until it enters upon a classical culmination followed by decline, although he completely changes the evaluative perspective represented by Winckelmann who had little sympathy for anything less than perfect idealized representation. Cf. Johann Joachim Winckelmann , History of the Art of Antiquity, Introduction by Alex Potts, Harry Francis Mallgrave, trans. (Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 2006).

  27. 27.

    “Primitive Art,” in HM, xxxvii, b.

  28. 28.

    Cited in H & J, p. 77a–78b.

  29. 29.

    MA, 67a.

  30. 30.

    “The Sculptor’s Aims,” in HM, xxxi, b. Cf. Herbert Read , CHMS, 163. Cf. also R. H. Wilenski , MMS, 162.

  31. 31.

    “A View,” in HM, xxx.

  32. 32.

    Enneads, IV, 3, 30. Plotinus holds that there are two faces of imagination , a reproductive and a creative . In the latter case, surface form is modified to give expression to understanding and ultimately to the Presence of Beauty Itself as the Face of the Beloved appearing in sensorily given things.

  33. 33.

    In an easily overlooked passage in his Republic, Plato’s critique of painting as holding up a mirror to the visual environment has to be compared with his claim that paintings should have certain aesthetic properties involved in composition (400D).

  34. 34.

    “Notes,” in HM, xxxiv, a.

  35. 35.

    See Nicholas Penny, The Materials of Sculpture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993), for a detailed discussion of the significance of the use of various materials for sculpturing employed throughout history .

  36. 36.

    AR, 6.

  37. 37.

    John Ruskin , Seven Lamps of Architecture (New York: Dover, 1989), 135.

  38. 38.

    Ibid. 131–2.

  39. 39.

    Arthur Schopenhauer , WWR II, Supplement to Book 3, ch. XXXIV, 408. For a treatment of his aesthetics within his overall conceptual scheme, see the Schopenhauer chapter in my Placing Aesthetics: Reflections on the Philosophic Tradition (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1999). Consult it also for a comprehensive treatment of the overall conceptual system and the place of aesthetics in it for each of the major thinkers treated here.

  40. 40.

    PF, 79, 12, 58.

  41. 41.

    Von Hildebrand included waxworks realism as the execution of “artistic crudities.” PF, 113. A friend of mine, visiting Madame Tussauds, was speaking with a guard, until he realized that the guard was waxen! In the Stuttgart Museum I almost said “Pardon me” to the Cleaning Lady on the floor with her bucket, until I noticed she did not move!.

  42. 42.

    Immanuel Kant , Critique of Judgment. W. Pluhar, trans. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1987), §42, 166 (henceforth CJ). For a treatment of his aesthetics within his overall conceptual scheme, see the chapter on Kant in my PA.

  43. 43.

    PF, 58.

  44. 44.

    PF, 75.

  45. 45.

    OWA, PLT, 58.

  46. 46.

    For a perceptive treatment of Rodin’s career as a sculptor, see William Tucker’s chapter on Rodin in The Language of Sculpture (New York: Thames and Hudson, 1985) (henceforth LS).

  47. 47.

    Auguste Rodin (as related by Paul Gsell), On Art and Artists (New York: Philosophical Library, 1957), 202, 225 (henceforth OAA). Heidegger made a similar claim about thinkers and poets.

  48. 48.

    OAA, 207–12.

  49. 49.

    On the sublime, see Critique of Judgment, W. Pluhar trans. (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishers, 1987), §§23–9.

  50. 50.

    AR, 62.

  51. 51.

    Maurice Merleau-Ponty , “The Eye and the Mind ,” (henceforth EM), trans. C. Dallery, in The Primacy of Perception (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1964), 185 (henceforth PrP).

  52. 52.

    Dewey , AE, 218.

  53. 53.

    For von Hildebrand , this parallels scientific observation, which abstracts from the expressiveness of nature and thus kills the artistic spirit whose aim is “to saturate each object with our bodily feelings.” PF, 106, 104.

  54. 54.

    AE, 7, 12.

  55. 55.

    AR, 30.

  56. 56.

    AR, 50–1.

  57. 57.

    AR, 15.

  58. 58.

    AR, 28.

  59. 59.

    LS, 23.

  60. 60.

    See the Appendix to this chapter.

  61. 61.

    Translation mine.

  62. 62.

    Peter Sloterdijk , You Must Change Your Life, Wieland Hoban trans. (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013), 21–8 presents his interpretation of the poem.

  63. 63.

    The original myth has a 100-eyed Argus; Hegel multiplies it by 10 for the work of art.

Bibliography

  • Boccione, Umberto. 1984. “Manifesto,” in Art and Its Significance, S. Ross ed. Albany: State University of New York Press, 537 (henceforth AS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chipp, Hershel B. ed. 193. Theories of Modern Art: A Sourcebook by Artists and Critics. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, John. 1934. Art as Experience. New York: Capricorn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabo, Naum. 1937. “Sculpture: Carving and Construction in Space” in Chipp, Theories of Modern Art.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giedion, Sigfried. 1980. Space, Time, and Architecture: The Growth of a Tradition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gsell, Paul. 1957. On Art and Artists. New York: Philosophical Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin. 1971. “Origin of the Work of Art,” In Poetry, Language, and Thought. A. Hofstadter trans. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, Sam and J. Jacobus. 1985. Modern Art: Painting, Sculpture, Architecture. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, Immanuel. 1987. Critique of Judgment. W. Pluhar, trans. Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1964. “The Eye and the Mind.” C. Dallery trans. The Primacy of Perception. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Henry. 1968. Henry Moore. New York: George Wittenborn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penny, Nicholas. 1993. The Materials of Sculpture. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato. Laws. 1926. A. H. Armstrong trans. Two Volumes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. Republic. 1969. P. Shorey trans. 2 volumes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plotinus. Enneads. 1989. A. H. Armstrong trans. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, Herbert. 1934. Henry Moore. London: Zwemmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1964. A Concise History of Modern Sculpture. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rilke, Rainer Maria. 1989. “Ancient Torso of Apollo” in Select Poetry of Rainer Marie Rilke. S. Mitchell trans. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Auguste Rodin. New York: Mineola.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruskin, John. 1989. Seven Lamps of Architecture. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schopenhauer, Arthur. 1966. The World as Will and Representation. Two volumes. E. Payne, trans. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sloterdijk, Peter. 2013. You Must Change Your Life. Wieland Hoban trans. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, William. 1985. The Language of Sculpture. New York: Thames and Hudson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hildebrand, Alolph. 1907. The Problem of Form in Painting and Sculpture. R. Meyer and R. Ogden, trans. New York: Stechert.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilenski, R. H. 1964. The Meaning of Modern Sculpture. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winckelmann, Johann Joachim. 2006. History of the Art of Antiquity. Harry Francis Mallgrave, trans. Los Angeles: Getty Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, Robert. 1999. Placing Aesthetics: Reflections on the Philosophic Tradition. Athens: Ohio University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert E. Wood .

Appendix

Appendix

THE ARCHAIC TORSO OF APOLLO

By Rainer Marie Rilke

Verse

Verse We cannot know his astonishing and silent head, its eyes ripened like fruit.

Verse

Verse But its torso glows like a street lamp which, its gaze turned down, maintains itself and glows.

Verse

Verse Otherwise the curve of his breast could not dazzle you and the soft twisting of the loins could not go smiling to that center which bears procreation.

Verse

Verse Otherwise the stone would be stunted, cut short under the pellucid plunge of the shoulders and not shimmer like a wild beast’s coat nor break out of its boundaries like a star. For there is no place which does not see you. You must change your life.

Footnote 61

The last line contains enigmatic words indeed. Peter Sloterdijk named his 2009 book You Must Change Your Life, after that last line and devotes the first chapter to its discussion. He says (Fig. 5.5):

Fig. 5.5
figure 5

Torso of Apollo. Credit Prisma Archivo/Alamy Stock Photo

One does not have to be an enthusiast to understand why those closing lines have developed a life of their own. In their dignified brevity and mystical simplicity , they radiate an art-evangelical energy that can scarcely be found in any other passage from recent language art .

Here, being itself is understood as having more power to speak and transmit and more potent authority than God, the ruling idol of religions .

Only their verticality is beyond doubt.Footnote 62

The last sentence of the poem seems to come from nowhere and follows on from a startling claim that the torso itself not only sees the observer, but sees from every spot. It repeats Hegel’s description of the work of art as “a thousand-eyed Argus.”Footnote 63 Sloterdijk continues: “In the position where the object usually appears, I now ‘recognize’ a subject with its ability to look and return gazes.” The sense that non-conscious things seem to look out at the artist is reported by several artists. The piece radiates brilliance from the inside, and from that inside it is said to look out from every spot. The image of the turned-down street lamp near the beginning qualifies the gaze that glows within the torso, forecasting the lines where it bursts forth like a star and looks out at you. This at least parallels Martin Buber’s notion that in a great work of art we are being addressed by the Eternal Thou , called to transform our lives.

Sloterdijk , claiming that “Rilke had read his Nietzsche,” reads the phrase “glistening as a wild beast’s fur” as a Dionysian moment in the Apollonian whole. He links the emergence of athleticism at the turn of the century with the cultivated body of the athlete that was the exemplar of the god that the ancient sculptor chose. Even now, the body in perfect shape is a call to those of us who are out of shape to change our lives. But according to Sloterdijk, attributing the source of the experience to the divine has thankfully been superseded by “anthropotechnics,” the formation of one’s life as a whole, and not simply one’s body, by practice. Changing one’s life through cultivation is a life imperative, whatever further interpretation the poem may allow.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wood, R.E. (2017). On Sculpture. In: Nature, Artforms, and the World Around Us. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57090-7_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics