Talk:De Stijl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
To-do list for De Stijl: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Add In-line citations and footnotes
  • Convert book citations to {{cite book}}
  • Convert web citations to {{cite web}}
  • Add more references
  • Add section on Poetry
  • Use Mondrian quotation in article

Contents

[edit] De Stijl or Neoplasticism?

On en-wiki shouldn't this article be under the English Neoplasticism rather than the Dutch De Stijl. -- Solipsist 19:40, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Neoplasticism is a translation of the Dutch "nieuwe beelding," not De Stijl. It is probably best to consider Neoplasticism as the art "movement" and De Stijl as the loose association of contributors to the journal of that name. English art historians refer to "De Stijl" without translating it (as they do with the Bauhaus, the Fauves, etc.)
Plus, De Stijl is the more familiar term (from first year art history). Freshacconci 19:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I had always thought that De Stijl and Neo-Plasticism were not synonymous. Most of the De Stijl works that people are familiar with are going to be Mondrian's works, and he was a Neo-Plasticist, but De Stijl was broader than that. Whether the article is based at one, the other, or separated into two, I don't think it should be identified as "also called neoplasticism." superlusertc 2008 January 17, 19:42 (UTC)

[edit] Lines? Terminology unclear

"In many of the works under this movement, the vertical and the horizontal lines slide past each other and do not intersect." Sorry, I don't follow this 'sliding' concept. Any chance of an illustrative pic? Or is it that there are lines in only two perpendicular directions as in the pic in the articles? RMoloney 02:36, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think perhaps what it's trying to express is that when one line is on the x-axis, another on the y axis, while the lines may be on the same x and y points, they are not on the same z-axis; they build on top of each other but do not form an intersection that exists in precisely the same space. I would not have possibly reached this understanding from the words the article currently uses to express it but only from looking at the examples cited. The fact that one of the key stylistic features of Mondrian is his use of intersecting perpendicular lines probably takes away from the statement as a general one. Unless there are examples of this "sliding" in 2d art it should be mentioned that this is characteristic of only De Stijl 3d art—namely, sculpture and architecture. Also, are there counterexamples? And is there any real significance to this aspect? Theshibboleth 07:05, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
It is like the lines of this Rietveld lamp. MH 20:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Is it appropriate to put illustrations on the talk page? I'm just asking, I really do not know what the "rules" are in this regard. --Charles 20:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
A way to remember how this works is that de stijl permits squares, but not crosses; i.e. intersections must be two (very stretched, line-like) squares in front of each other, not one cross-like shape in single z-space. Sunnan 23:47, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article incomplete?

I agree some of the things in the article aren't detailed enough to understand, and there are other things that are missing from the article like information about their theories, and poetry etc. produced by the group and printed in their journal. I guess it's a bit bold to ask for it to be expanded when the Dutch WP article for this Dutch group is pretty short too, but it would be excellent for more info to be added anyway. Шизомби 03:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I am in the process of translating the Dutch article, for merging into the English one. It isn't really that impressive either, but it has more historical context. Radioflux 11:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have basically taken the Dutch article, translated it into English, and merged relevant information from the original English entry back into the translation. Then I restructured it, and expanded on some points. We're far from complete yet, though. I don't know if something should be said about Stijl-influenced poetry, for example. Should we make a list of missing topics? Would WikiProject:Architecture be the right place to do so? --Radioflux 22:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Perhaps the best way to do this is to create a 'to do' list using {{todo}}. This creates a subpage which we can then bring into the wikiproject page as shown here. This has 2 advantages -
  1. People who come to this page who are unaware of the project can still see what needs to be done.
  2. The wikiproject can be automatically updated.

I've just gone through the process of translating and converting a German FA to an English FA - not easy. See IG Farben Building. There was quite a bit of confusion about referencing. In the end the original German references were relegated to a Further Reading section. I had to find a bunch of english references for the article which one reviewer asked to be put into Footnotes and another into References; I ended up with them in references. I've got some books that mention de stijl so I'll have a look at improving the architecture side of the movement.--Mcginnly | Natter 16:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quotation

The artists…provided an exact explanation of the nature of this plan to bridge the traditional gap between art and technology.

The environment and man's everyday life are lacking, by virture of their imperfect state and their barren necessity. And so art becomes a means of escape. In art man seeks the beauty, the harmony, which is lacking or which he pursues vainly in his life and his environment.
Tomorrow, however, the realization of a plastic equilibrium within the concrete reality of our environment will take the place of works of art. Then there will be no need for paintings and sculptures, because we will be living in a realization of art. Art is only a substitute for when there is not enough beauty in life; it will vanish as life regains its equilibrium.

—Mondrian[1]

Art and technology are indivisible, and the pure plastic invention will always conform to practical exigencies, because they are both questions of balance. Our times demand this equilibrium and it can never be achieves in only one way.

—Mondrian[1]

[edit] Trivia

Trivia section mentions: "Australian band Silverchair's 5th album Young Modern has artwork based on De Stijl". Would we really want to list every instance of artwork based on De Stijl? --Radioflux 23:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we should axe the entire section - the limited value it adds to the article far outweighs the damage done by inviting cruft. --Mcginnly | Natter 10:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

  1. ^ a b Benevolo, Leonardo (1980). in Geoffrey Culverwell (transl.): The History of the City. MIT Press, page 846. ISBN 0262021463.