Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Time to rethink Futurism?

nino_savatte said:
There's a manifesto of Futurists programmers out there. I'll try and find it. I'm not sure about Italian Futurism's second coming but I anticipate a centenary celebration of some sort.

I think I know what you are saying now (and in your first post) - but it is a tricky ground, there is a difference between studying the use of elements of a past movement in the present and reconsidering/rewriting a historical movement of the past on the basis of its later uses.
 
Leica said:
I think I know what you are saying now (and in your first post) - but be careful, there is a difference between studying the use of elements of a past movement in the present and reconsidering/rewriting a historical movement of the past on the basis of its later uses.

For sure, a lot of my interest stems from the fact that I have been writing my dissertation on the New Romantics :eek: and the issue of Futurism was raised in the course of my reading. But I shan't be revising them in any way.
 
nino_savatte said:
For sure, a lot of my interest stems from the fact that I have been writing my dissertation on the New Romantics :eek: and the issue of Futurism was raised in the course of my reading. But I shan't be revising them in any way.

I fast-edited my last post to not sound patronising.. but you were quick to quote me...

interesting too that it is italian futurism that has been chosen (despite, or with? its connotations), not russian... it is usually revolutionary tendencies that get appropriated (from very early on, e.g. the "fascist revolution").
 
Leica said:
I fast-edited my last post to not sound patronising.. but you were quick to quote me...

interesting too that it is italian futurism that has been chosen (despite, or with? its connotations), not russian... it is usually revolutionary tendencies that get appropriated (from very early on, e.g. the "fascist revolution").

Yes, I've always found it odd how Italian Futurism became better known. The Italians claimed to be anarchists but all ended up joining the fascist party - though Marinetti quit over a disagreement with Musso (more like a clash of egos!).

Many Italian Futurist elements were appropriated by the electro bands of the late 70's; Adam Ant acknowledged them in the song Animals and Men. But it is very easy to confuse fascist or Nazi modernism for Futurism. What I do find interesting is how bands like Blancmange and Landscape (even Duran Duran) described themselves as "futurist". Were they conscious of Futurism since many of them had attended art school? Or did they accept a name that was given to them by Sounds?

One thing that I do accept is the Futurist idea of painting with sound.
 
nino_savatte said:
though Marinetti quit over a disagreement with Musso (more like a clash of egos!).

well Mussolini started his career as a socialist too...


nino_savatte said:
Yes, I've always found it odd how Italian Futurism became better known.
it may have something to do with how this movement was received by western history (=the discipline) and art history. Perhaps an innocent version, a harmless opposite number to what went on in Russia? Would also be interesting to find out how it is perceived in post war Italy.

nino_savatte said:
One thing that I do accept is the Futurist idea of painting with sound.

What is it about?
the similarities between painting and music have been pointed out by many... after all sound and colour are frequencies on the same spectrum.
how about the other way round, e.g. making music in space... there is an actual instrument played like that, I forget what it's called.
 
Leica said:
well Mussolini started his career as a socialist too...



it may have something to do with how this movement was received by western history (=the discipline) and art history. Perhaps an innocent version, a harmless opposite number to what went on in Russia? Would also be interesting to find out how it is perceived in post war Italy.



What is it about?
the similarities between painting and music have been pointed out by many... after all sound and colour are frequencies on the same spectrum.
how about the other way round, e.g. making music in space... there is an actual instrument played like that, I forget what it's called.

I was thinking more of how Russolo approached it. Russolo's ideas found their way into the works of Stockhausen, Satie and Varese: the use of anvils and machinery to complement the instruments, rather than the pure noise he first advocated.

I'm curious about this instrument you talk about...I like the sound of it though.

Perhaps the time is right for a Russian Futurist celebration!
 
nino_savatte said:
the use of anvils and machinery to complement the instruments
why is this strictly futurist though, unless they specifically stated that's where they got the idea from. It could have been a parallel development in modernist music.

nino_savatte said:
I'm curious about this instrument you talk about...I like the sound of it though.
just remembered, it is called the Theremin... see here www.musicalmuseum.co.uk/theremin.html
 
Leica said:
why is this strictly futurist though, unless they specifically stated that's where they got the idea from. It could have been a parallel development in modernist music.


just remembered, it is called the Theremin... see here www.musicalmuseum.co.uk/theremin.html

Aye I ken the theramin. But afaik, the Futurists were the first to develop the use of noise as music. I'll need to have a look at modernism's contribution.
 
nino_savatte said:
Aye I ken the theramin. But afaik, the Futurists were the first to develop the use of noise as music. I'll need to have a look at modernism's contribution.

how do you define noise?
in my opinion there isn't much point in trying to find who was the first to do what in general (also many people like to exaggerate their achievements in retrospect). I'm sure there have been instances where outside noise (i.e. sound not produced by musical instruments) has been used in music, before futurism. Also there is the issue of recorded music vs performed live...
the use of outside elements in art was a general tendency at the time... cubists stuck cigarette packs on paintings etc.

I'm sure there's people on here who know a lot more about all this than me.
 
Great thread.

Futurism has just about the best on-line resource for any of the twentieth century 'isms' that I've seen- http://www.futurism.org.uk The bloke does it all in his own time and it's pretty comprehensive.

The students that I teach are still fairly compelled by Futurism too- as much for its propagandising/marketing techniques as anything else. Marinetti was the first in the European 'avant-garde' to grap the possibility of a trans-national propaganda campaign; his relentless proselytising took him across Europe from London to Moscow and most places in between. By c. 1915 most European countries had a Futurist hiding somewhere or other thanks to this tremendous effort.

The two here were 1. CRW Nevinson in England, who went on to modify Futurist aestheitcs in WW1 to produce his celebrated images from the war, and 2. in Scotland, Stanley Cursiter, who saw Severini in London in 1913 and the Fry/Rutter mass exhbitions in London in 1912-13. he made about a dozen Futurist paintings before the start of the war.

Dubversion asked about Vorticism which I did loads of work on as an undergrad....Basically Vorticism was an odd fusion of three titanic egos: Lewis, Ezra Pound, and Henri Gaudier-Brzeska. The ideas of Vorticism developed to their fullest extent in the BLAST manifesto but had been brewing for several years in Lewis' mind. It was a fusion of Nietzsche, early Cubist aestheitcs and a Futurist narcissism/controvertialism. In the few weeks before the outbreak of WW1, BLAST was a very 'fashionable' thing for folk to be carrying around London.

Ultimately Vorticism was a radical right movement, concerned with militarism, a skepticism as to the potential for human improvement, the outworking of Wilhelm Worringer's Abstraction & Empathy through the unpleasant filter of TE Hulme, and, in art-politics terms, violent opposition to the fey aestheticism and emotional self indulgence of Bloomsbury.

It's hard to grasp now how polarised the London art world was before 1914- and how much these differing groups hated one another. Hulme and Lewis squabbled over the affections of a mutual girlfirend, with the burly philiosopher leaving Lewis hung upside down by his trouser cuffs from the railings on Bedford Square. Lewis spat at Bloomsbury critic and artist Roger Fry in the street. Lewis led a Voriticst delegation to the launch of the manifesto of English Futurists, fucking up the launch of said manifesto by Nevinson and Marinetti through a heady admixture of vulgar trolling and cowardly personal abuse from the audience.

Butchers' has already mentioned that great Hemingway quote about Lewis, but the best quote of all is in Lewis' autobiography, Blasting and Bombardiering, when he said that in the run up to WW1 'Life was one giant bloodless brawl, before the great bloodletting'.
 
Just in case yo're wondering, 'who the fuck was Stanley Cursiter'...

The colour is much more washed out in this image than in the real painting, but this is one of Cursiter's Scottish Futurist works, The Sensation of crossing the Street: The West End, Edinburgh from 1913.

image001.jpg
 
steeplejack said:
Great thread.

Futurism has just about the best on-line resource for any of the twentieth century 'isms' that I've seen- http://www.futurism.org.uk The bloke does it all in his own time and it's pretty comprehensive.

The students that I teach are still fairly compelled by Futurism too- as much for its propagandising/marketing techniques as anything else. Marinetti was the first in the European 'avant-garde' to grap the possibility of a trans-national propaganda campaign; his relentless proselytising took him across Europe from London to Moscow and most places in between. By c. 1915 most European countries had a Futurist hiding somewhere or other thanks to this tremendous effort.

The two here were 1. CRW Nevinson in England, who went on to modify Futurist aestheitcs in WW1 to produce his celebrated images from the war, and 2. in Scotland, Stanley Cursiter, who saw Severini in London in 1913 and the Fry/Rutter mass exhbitions in London in 1912-13. he made about a dozen Futurist paintings before the start of the war.

Dubversion asked about Vorticism which I did loads of work on as an undergrad....Basically Vorticism was an odd fusion of three titanic egos: Lewis, Ezra Pound, and Henri Gaudier-Brzeska. The ideas of Vorticism developed to their fullest extent in the BLAST manifesto but had been brewing for several years in Lewis' mind. It was a fusion of Nietzsche, early Cubist aestheitcs and a Futurist narcissism/controvertialism. In the few weeks before the outbreak of WW1, BLAST was a very 'fashionable' thing for folk to be carrying around London.

Ultimately Vorticism was a radical right movement, concerned with militarism, a skepticism as to the potential for human improvement, the outworking of Wilhelm Worringer's Abstraction & Empathy through the unpleasant filter of TE Hulme, and, in art-politics terms, violent opposition to the fey aestheticism and emotional self indulgence of Bloomsbury.

It's hard to grasp now how polarised the London art world was before 1914- and how much these differing groups hated one another. Hulme and Lewis squabbled over the affections of a mutual girlfirend, with the burly philiosopher leaving Lewis hung upside down by his trouser cuffs from the railings on Bedford Square. Lewis spat at Bloomsbury critic and artist Roger Fry in the street. Lewis led a Voriticst delegation to the launch of the manifesto of English Futurists, fucking up the launch of said manifesto by Nevinson and Marinetti through a heady admixture of vulgar trolling and cowardly personal abuse from the audience.

Butchers' has already mentioned that great Hemingway quote about Lewis, but the best quote of all is in Lewis' autobiography, Blasting and Bombardiering, when he said that in the run up to WW1 'Life was one giant bloodless brawl, before the great bloodletting'.

That is a good site isn't it? I've made a lot of use of it. I remember reading somewhere on that site, a manifesto, which mentions Pound and the others.

Didn't Pratella's manifesto appear in 1912/13? Or am I thinking of The Art Of Noises (there's another topic).
 
Leica said:
how do you define noise?
in my opinion there isn't much point in trying to find who was the first to do what in general (also many people like to exaggerate their achievements in retrospect). I'm sure there have been instances where outside noise (i.e. sound not produced by musical instruments) has been used in music, before futurism. Also there is the issue of recorded music vs performed live...
the use of outside elements in art was a general tendency at the time... cubists stuck cigarette packs on paintings etc.

I'm sure there's people on here who know a lot more about all this than me.

I would define noise by the 6 families identified by Russolo, which are still in operation today!!!! Russolo origianlly made use of something he called Intonomuri (noise intoners).http://fusionanomaly.net/luigirussolo.html
He only managed to perfect three or four sounds.

I am not entirely sure if noise was used in music or on its own before the arrival of the Futurists. They were, as steeplejack points out, massive self-publicists, so this needs to be borne in mind. After all, oin order to place a full front page advert/manifesto on the front page of La Figaro, costs a lot of money. Marinetti had loads.
 
^^Indeed. it should be remembered that in Futurism, the theory came before the practice. Marinetti's founding manifesto appeared in early 1909, but it was late 1910 before he had found the artists he wanted, and they had singed up and begun to work towards producing Futurist images. Most were working in a kind of hesitant Post-Impressionist style when the manifesto appeared, other than Severini, who was experimenting with a kind of flat, decorative Cubism which was pretty much his own.
 
IIRC there are one or two very crackly recordings- everything else from R.s time is an approximation of what it might have been like.
 
nino_savatte said:
I am not entirely sure if noise was used in music or on its own before the arrival of the Futurists.

well Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture contains actual cannon blasts, for example.
But as I said, I don't think there is a point in hunting "firsts". It is more important to recognise tendencies.
 
nino_savatte said:
Sure it does. But the art of the Italian Futurists, together with the love of technology and noise have found their way in to cultural products. Indeed the first NME front cover of the 1980's was a homage to Balla (iirc).

Actually if you're going to be like that you could say Saul Bass was a futurist imho.
 
nino_savatte said:
There's a manifesto of Futurists programmers out there. I'll try and find it. I'm not sure about Italian Futurism's second coming but I anticipate a centenary celebration of some sort.


AAhhhhhh I getcha now :)
 
Leica said:
well Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture contains actual cannon blasts, for example.
But as I said, I don't think there is a point in hunting "firsts". It is more important to recognise tendencies.

I think where Tchaikovsky differs from the Futurists is in their political inclinations. Did Tchaikovsky use other sounds? His music was composed at a time when technology wasn't quite as advanced. What the Futurists did was to celebrate modernity and the novelty of new technology. There was a clear reason for the use of cannon in the 1812 Overture. Whereas the Futurists just wanted to turn the noise of machinery into music.
 
Firky said:
AAhhhhhh I getcha now :)

I am concerned that any celebration of the Futurists will gloss over their less savoury characteristics. This is probably another reson I started this thread. While the art looks great, it is nearly impossible to disentangle the politics from the movement.
 
nino_savatte said:
I think where Tchaikovsky differs from the Futurists is in their political inclinations. Did Tchaikovsky use other sounds? His music was composed at a time when technology wasn't quite as advanced. What the Futurists did was to celebrate modernity and the novelty of new technology. There was a clear reason for the use of cannon in the 1812 Overture. Whereas the Futurists just wanted to turn the noise of machinery into music.

They differ because they lived in different times, different contexts.
This is why there is little point in saying that someone was the "first" - you can't compare dissimilar things.
 
Back
Top Bottom