It’s always interesting thinking about how the avant-garde movement really evolved, less as some pre-planned march towards progress, and more as this chaotic series of artistic whims and reactions. You can trace a line, say, from Impressionism to Cubism, and see the logical progression in terms of breaking down depiction, but then you realize that each step was often driven by individual artists just getting *bored* or wanting to shock the establishment.
Like, think about Dadaism. World War I was a huge influence, obviously, but so much of it also seems to stem from a playful rejection of serious artistic conventions. Was it all a profound statement, or were some of them just messing around with nonsense to see what they could get away with? It’s probably a bit of both.
It makes you wonder how much of art history is driven by conscious theoretical advancement, and how much is simply artists experimenting and pushing boundaries based on intuition and personal quirks. Does that make the avant-garde less “serious” if it’s built on subjective whims, or does it make it more human and relatable? What are some examples that come to your mind?