The history of art goes back more than 20 centuries, which is a very long time. This knowledge has been passed down from generation to generation and is still relevant in today's society even though it uses more advanced technology. This essay is concerned with the arts of the 20th century and compares the two best artists, David Smith and Raymond Duchamp-Villon, by focusing on their well-known pieces, Tanktotem I, 1952, and The Horse, 1914. The paper will employ the block comparison technique as this will help the reader to understand each artist deeply without any interrupting information from the other artist. It starts by looking at the sculpturing techniques employed by Raymond Duchamp-Villon in his work The Horse, 1914 and the themes he addresses and then turning attention to David Smith work.
Raymond Duchamp-Villon, Horse, 1914
20th century exhibited a tremendous change with industrialization taking center stage; each country was striving for economic growth and development. The world was calm, and there was the rapid evolution of machines of different types and abilities. The automobiles and building constructions were leading the race. It was this industrialization paradigm that Raymond Duchamp-Villon tapped in to come up with his The Horse, sculpture of 1914 stressing on the mechanization of the world (Moffltt et al. 339). Raymond Duchamp-Villon, a member of the French army during World War I started his work in 1914 but did not complete well due to his untimely demise in 1918 (Moffltt et al. 339). He, therefore, left it for his brothers Jacques Villon and Marcel Duchamp to fine tune the details of the sculpture (Kim and Han 79). From his letter to a friend Historian Walter Pach in America, Raymond Duchamp-Villon stated the driving force behind the art saying that; “The power of the machine itself imposes upon us, and we can scarcely conceive living bodies without it.” By this statement, he was showing how a human being has become so dependent on machines to run their lives (Kim and Han 79). Moreover, Raymond Duchamp-Villon explains the need to develop a correlation between the new objects precisely the devices amongst themselves instead of adopting their characteristics.Raymond Duchamp-Villon in his work The Horse expresses his science of expression by striving to achieve a precision of relationship. In this job, he employs more of a naturalistic approach in literature to bring out the relationship between the horse and the machine. The sculpture brings out two images at the same time that of a horse and a machine (Moffltt et al. 339). Naturally, the horse was used as transport vessel in the early years until when the cars (engines) took over and became the most commonly used vessels for carriage in the 20th century. Raymond Duchamp-Villon successfully employs metaphor in The Horse using these objects to show the power that human beings have achieved by the use of objects they have (Kim and Han 79). However, as the sculpture depicts the theme of power, it portrays that man has become so dependent on these items for survival. Despite creating the things, human people will end up being enslaved by them to the extent of not surviving in their absence. Raymond Duchamp-Villon indicated the abstraction nature of his work in The Horse which applied the Cubist principle by combining the horse image with that of a machine (Moffltt et al. 339). The machine aspect was meant to prepare the world for the transition into the modern art work. Considering that the literature addresses the current issues in the community, The Horse depicts the future which is forecasted to be more machine dependent. Currently, most of the artists align their work with the advancing technology and contemporary issues such as homosexuals and terrorism.David Smith, Tanktotem I, 1952
David Smith was a renowned American artist of the 20th century, and he lived between 1906 and 1965. This was a period in which the world was reaping the fruits of industrialization when the various machines were produced. Steel was a key material in the manufacture of weapons and other industrial machines (Hamill 536). David Smith becomes the first American artist to use steel to smolder art objects, and this can be evident in his work Tanktotem I, 1952. In this item, David Smith indicated his style of sculpture to be significantly embedded in the cubism. This form of expression was widely used by most sculptors of this error. However, David integrated other approaches in his work including the surrealism and Constructivism (Hamill 536). When focusing on the Tanktotem I, 1952, it was the first item of the newly found David’s work of welded metal of the 1950s in art work. David in this work decided to combine the various metals parts into an anthropomorphic and totemic stature which he used to bring out the universal nature of humanity. He used totemism to put out the relationship among the human beings. He also employed abstract expressions since from his work Tanktotem I, 1952 it was not clear whether images are of people or birds. He seemed to have created two human beings or birds joined at the neck but looking towards different directions. This sculpture is argued to be a way of discouraging people from practicing incest by staying away from the relatives as far as intimacy is concerned.David was working at a manufacturing plant during the time he was developing Tanktotem I, and, therefore, he was using the experiences he had acquired at the place of work to improve his art (Hamill 565). The fact that he was using steel instead of the commonly used clay and wood is an indication of his surrealist approach to expressing his ideas. Steel being the primary material used in the industries and construction, David was demonstrating its importance to human being in that error. The fact that steel was also used in making weapons during this period, David tries to advise people to stay out of each other’s path to minimize conflicts in the world. He used symbolism by sculpturing the birds to represent a human being. Another aspect of art that comes out from David’s Tanktotem I, 1952 is cubism. He is expressing the message using possibly two different creatures of birds and human being (Hamill 565). The bird’s image shows the ability the use of steel brings to the world, on the other hand, the human image depicted in the sculpture is an indication of the beneficiary of industrialization process. Therefore, when these two in images are interpreted jointly, they illustrate the power that steel has brought to human that makes them be able to fly like birds (Getsy 75). However, this doe does not go without a warning of the implications of misusing such powers to avoid conflicts (Hamill 565). David had also given a forecast of what was likely to happen in the future which is the current world. Despite being a modest artist, David was concerned with the expression of trauma. His use of totems indicates the world that is driven by violence and this predicted the current world that is full of violence (Getsy 76). Nations are focusing on the production of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism is taking a toll on the world’s peace. He, therefore, prepared a way for the modern artists who are currently addressing the contemporary issues such as terrorism, diseases, and infringement of human rights in their works.After critically looking at the approaches that the two artists used in the works and their main themes, it is imperative to draw the differences and similarities between them. Starting with differences, it is clear that the two gentlemen came from varying fields as Raymond Duchamp-Villon was a French soldier while David Smith was from the American manufacturing sector. Raymond Duchamp-Villon was more concerned with the machines and the correlation between them while David Smith focused on the steel (materials) and its influence on the world peace. Another difference is observed in the approaches employed by these artists. On the one hand, Raymond Duchamp-Villon was more of cubists and constructed his work around this technique of expression of ideas and feelings. On the contrary, David Smith was surrealist but still integrated a bit of cubism and constructivism in his work (Getsy 75). Finally, it is evident from The Horse that Raymond Duchamp-Villon did not dwell on the adoption of the machines by human beings but was just drawing the viewers’ attention into the interrelationship between various devices in different periods of time (Getsy 88). On the contrary, David’s Tanktotem I, 1952 depicted human beings' adoption of the devices and the fear of its implications to the world’s peace.Despite the two sculptures belonging to different periods of time and geographical locations, some similarities can be derived from them. First of all, both sculptures show the changes taking place in the world, which have been stimulated by industrialization. Both works are concerned with the consequences of the use of these machines, with David’s Tanktotem I, 1952 warning of the possible misuse of the steel products and urges humans to maintain peace and avoid conflicts. Raymond Duchamp-Villon, on the other hand, warns that continued use of machines has made human beings more dependent on these items and therefore cannot survive without them as the tools define human power. Despite Raymond Duchamp-Villon not completing his work on The Horse, 1914, the artists delve into abstraction and cubism. Finally, both artists start with objects that were natural, which are later envisioned in human-made structures such as machines and steel.ConclusionIn conclusion, it is evident that despite having some differences between their works, David Smith and Raymond Duchamp-Villon have exhibited various similarities in Tanktotem I, 1952, and The Horse, 1914. The most notable similarities are drawn from the approaches as both artists seem to apply abstraction and cubism in expressing their ideas in the sculptures. Both David Smith and Raymond Duchamp-Villon address the change brought about by industrialization and their possible impact on the nature of human beings in the future. Both these sculptures tend to prepare a way for the modern sculptors who are being projected to focus on contemporary issues resulting from the industrialization process, which started in the 20th century.Works Cited
Getsy, David. “Tactility or Opticality, Henry Moore or David Smith: Herbert Read and Clement Greenberg On the Art of Sculpture, 1956.” Sculpture Journal 17.2 (2008): 75-88. Web.
Hamill, Sarah. “Picturing Autonomy: David Smith, Photography, and Sculpture.” Art History37.3 (2014): 536-565. Web.
Kim, In Sook, and Hye Jin Han. “Multidisciplinary Study about Correlation between Cubism and Marcel Duchamp.” Korea Science & Art Forum 27 (2017): 79. Web.
Moffltt, John F. et al. “The Brothers Duchamp: Jacques Villon, Raymond Duchamp-Villon, and Marcel Duchamp.” Leonardo 11.4 (1978): 339. Web.
