Modernism is a movement that emerged during the 20th century; it was not considered a specific style, like other movements, but rather a collection of ideas gleaned from painting that branched out from traditional expectations, particularly representation in a realistic style. This essay will analyze two texts, one written by the art critic Clement Greenberg, on his vision of modernism; the other a chapter by Craig Staff regarding the position of painting in the art world. An artwork by artist Ian Davenport, entitled 'Colourfall Gardens' will then be analyzed and discussed in relation to both texts. Throughout the essay, the ideas of modernism will be revealed, resulting in a better understanding of the term, as well as providing an insight into painting in relation to its development over the years. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay "Modernist Painting" by Clement Greenberg discusses the term modernism and what Greenberg believed it implied. His essay was published in 1961, about 100 years after the author believed Modernism had begun. Interestingly, he did not see it as a movement, limited to a specific period of time, he believed it to be an ongoing practice. In Greenberg's words, he said that modernism would go on “without interruption or interruption” (1961), and he believed that it was not limited to art, but was in fact all around us. Greenberg and art historians agree that the first modernist paintings were those of Manet, due to the way he approached the surface he painted on, however the origin of modernism for Greenberg began with the philosopher Immanuel Kant, who called him the "first true modernist" (1961). His fundamental idea of ​​modernism is that the medium, in this case painting, is used as a method to criticize itself, for example Kant used logic to discover the limits of logic itself; so paint is used to define the limits of what paint can do that doesn't overlap with another medium. The criticism comes from within, looking specifically at the characteristics of the medium, rather than introducing external factors to evaluate the technique. Modernist artwork is a way to make art evident through the use of its medium. For Greenberg it was essential that the art was "pure", meaning that it defined itself and did not possess the qualities you might find in other areas of art. Limited support was shared with theatre, reality shared with photography, three-dimensionality with sculpture; the only specific property of paint was flatness. Although no painting can be completely flat, since the first mark made immediately destroys the complete flatness of the surface, modernist painting began to keep it as flat as possible, leading to unrecognizable images and subsequently the removal of any identifiable or representative object, as all that can be recognized must exist within the three-dimensional plane causing it to possess properties related to photography or sculpture. Modernism discovered that it was possible to remove certain aspects from paintings before they lost their status as a "picture". The further one pushes back, the more closely the work must be observed, but the medium becomes more defined and brings back the idea of ​​"flatness", causing the viewer to focus on what the work offers as a whole. This technique limited what could be done with the medium, but was specific only to painting, securing its place in art. One example Greenberg gives of a modernist piece is Mondrian's rectangles, as opposed to the worksprecedents produced by the masters, he created a space within his work that could only be experienced through the eye. Greenberg makes the point that modernism is all about optical experiences, there is no theory involved, it is strictly practice and artists often do not consider aesthetics, it all comes down to the results and not the method. The second text I read is a chapter called "situating painting" from the book “After modernist painting: the history of a contemporary practice” by Craig Staff. The book was published in 2013, just over 50 years after Clement Greenberg's text, so since then Staff has seen works influenced by different movements such as postmodernism. Greenberg wanted to separate painting and keep its limitations within the confines of what painting alone can do while removing all properties of other art forms. In contrast, Staff discusses the difficulties of organizing painting into a singular category since the work produced can be so broad and difficult to situate. In the text it states that "Morgan Falconer believed that the revival of painting depended on expansion beyond its original mediums", the staff believes that it is not and should not be a restricted method of expression; it should be continually developed, expanding what a painting is. Contrary to what Greenberg believed, Staff explains how painting is not limited to the canvas; in the Renaissance artists painted directly on the walls, in this case the walls act as a support for the painting. Rich people with large walls commissioned large-scale paintings from artists, but the increase in work caused Greenberg to argue that the work was too close to architecture rather than painting. The creation of the easel was somewhat seen as a solution to this problem as it meant that the work could be developed independently. In the text, Staff talks about two artists Katharina Grosse and Jules Olitski, who both used spray guns to produce works of art. Olitski focused primarily on color during his working years, until around the mid-1960s he began to consider the canvas more, limiting his work within the confines of the canvas edge, often leaving them intact or applying only a thin layer of paint. This connects to the properties of painting that Greenberg talked about in relation to modernism. Both Olitski and Grosse's work show the dematerialisation of painting, emphasizing process and experimentation with material, this also links to Greenberg's idea of ​​modernism as their work looks at what painting can do as a medium in itself. Although some aspects of Grosse's work resemble the qualities of modernism, he does not allow supporting edges to limit his work, this is aided by his method of using spray cans; she has no direct contact with the surface, she thinks the brushes are in the way, this automatically creates a certain distance between her and the surface she is working on. His large-scale works and unusual surfaces, for example the walls of random buildings, arise from his desire to separate his works from a specific location and from any identity imposed on the work due to where it is located. In the 80s there was site specific art, the work produced was created to adapt to a specific place, this almost made the place part of the work, setting limits. Since the 1980s, situational artworks have emerged, as they are more to consider when exhibiting a work. Staff makes it clear throughout the text, with the examples of these two artists and their work, that there are too many aspects to consider to fully situate where painting belongs. The work I chose tospeak in relation to the two The texts mentioned above are a piece by Ian Davenport entitled Colourfall Gardens. It is a site-specific work that takes its name from the place where it was created, the Gardens of Venice. The area is a park where an arts organization called the Venice Biennale hosts the Venice Biennale Arts Festival, for which Davenport's 2017 piece was created, commissioned by the well-known watch company Swatch. The painting consists of systematic vertical lines of acrylic that have been carefully poured from the top of an aluminum panel, resulting in a pool of molten colors at the bottom. It is one of the largest works ever created by the artist, 3.8 meters high and 14 meters wide; the pool of colors in which they gather extends about 1 meter from the panel wall. The choice of chromatic colors was inspired by some of the great masterpieces of the following artists: Gustave Klimt, Claude Monet and Pietro Perugino, however Davenport's piece explores much more saturated colours, making the painting bright and bold. There are no recognizable images contained within the work as the results are purely dominated by chance and gravity once the preliminary paint pouring stage is complete. It is difficult to decipher any symbolism as the artwork seems to be more focused on the method than the results produced, therefore relating to both modernism and abstract expressionism as, like Jackson Pollock, Davenport uses a style called action painting; in this case payment is used; other examples include splashes and drips. The piece as a whole is quite pleasant to look at thanks to the combination of beautiful colors with controlled lines, but the transition from lines to swirls in a pool is what makes it so interesting. Not only does it bring two surfaces together and show the result of what the color does when one meets the other, but it also brings the painting closer to the viewer, it occupies the space of the floor, as we do, it occupies the space it would like. don't expect to catch it, distinguishing it from other paintings. The use of both surfaces pushes the artwork into an expanded field, leaving its title of 'painting' in question. It is not simply a painting on canvas placed on a gallery wall. The wall itself serves as a canvas, as does the floor. The uniqueness of the surface used distances the artwork from what some might consider a painting, but that's not exactly what one expects from a sculptural piece. Another example of this would be an artwork by Pinot Gallizio, called Industrial Painting. Ian Davenport's "Colourfall Gardens" has connections to several aspects of both previously discussed texts. The artwork shares qualities of what Greenberg considers the properties of modernism. Davenport's piece depends on paint's ability to be a liquid that dries to a solid form; therefore the characteristics are more important than the promise of an aesthetic result. Modernism in Greenberg's eyes focused on practice rather than producing works with symbolism or theory behind them. Furthermore, Colourfall Gardens contains no identifiable images, nothing that ties it to the three-dimensional plane in which we exist, it is a completely optical experience. The absence of recognizable images maintains the relative flatness of the painting, also aided by the technique used, as the poured paint runs straight along the aluminum panel, highlighting its smooth surface. Despite this, the main characteristic of the work is the collection of color in the lower part, thus making the painting emerge from the edges of the support; something that Greenberg believed painting should be limited to. On the other hand.