expression theory of art essay

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.3: What is the Connection between Artworks and Emotions?

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 169073
• Pierre Fasula

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

There are many connections between artworks and emotions, and this chapter aims at describing the ones that are philosophically significant. For this reason, it will focus on the Expression Theory of Art and its main alternatives.

We can describe artworks as sad or cheerful for instance, and more generally as expressing emotions such as enthusiasm, admiration, and desperation. To take famous examples, Edvard Munch’s painting The Scream expresses anxiety; Ravel’s Pavane for a Dead Infanta the sadness of mourning; George Miller’s movie Mad Max the rage in front of the loss of kinship. But how are we supposed to understand and explain this connection between artworks and emotions in terms of expression? And is expression the only relation between artworks and emotions? In this chapter, we will explore three main alternatives: the first section develops the idea that artworks express the artist’s emotions; the second that art elicits and represents emotions independently of the artist’s emotions; and the third that art can be said to express emotions by themselves.

Let’s present these alternatives more closely. The first one is generally termed the Expression Theory of Art: if artworks can be described with the vocabulary of emotions, as expressing emotions, it is because they express the artist’s emotions. An additional feature is that this expression of the artist enables the audience to experience these emotions. But it seems necessary to assess such a theory: is it legitimate to explain the sadness of a poem by saying that it actually expresses the sadness of its creator? The second theory involves no reference to the artist’s emotions. A more central relation lies between the artwork and the audience, as the former is made to elicit emotions in the latter or represent emotions for the latter. However, what is the difference between elicitation and representation? And what is the connection between representing and expressing emotions? The third alternative defends precisely the idea that artworks can be said to express emotions themselves, without being necessarily connected to the artist’s emotions or those of the audience.

A historical remark must first be made in order to bring out the specificity of this issue. That artworks express the artist’s emotions is an idea that appears with romanticism, at the beginning of the 19 th century. [1] Before this period, another conception of artworks is predominant: they were considered as representations of reality. [2] This concept of representation can be understood in many ways and raises issues, but the most important for this chapter is that this concept of representation was more or less supplanted by the concept of expression, as can be seen for instance in the famous claim of the English romantic poet William Wordsworth (1770–1850) in his preface to Lyrical Ballads : “all good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings” (Wordsworth and Coleridge [1800] 1991, 237). Even if, according to Wordsworth, “our continued influxes of feeling are modified and directed by our thoughts” (237) and his aim was to describe and colour ordinary life, the expression of emotions became central, a criterion not only for judging but also defining poetry, and later any kind of art.

The Expression Theory of Art

In this section, we will begin with a description of the Expression Theory of Art, following the path of two famous defenders of it: Leo Tolstoy (1828–1910) in What is Art? and R.G. Collingwood (1889–1943) in The Principles of Art. Then we’ll consider several criticisms that can be addressed to this theory.

Suppose you find and describe such or such poem as expressing anger; it is rather natural to try to explain it by saying that the poem expresses the artist’s anger. More precisely, the mention of the artist’s anger functions here both as a justification of our description, and as an explanation of the poem itself, in the sense that the poet is supposed to have experienced such a feeling and produced the poem according to his feeling. However, it is possible to refine this ordinary explanation using literary and philosophical resources.

Tolstoy presents the Expression Theory of Art in the 5 th chapter of What Is Art? Its first four chapters are devoted to beauty, insofar as beauty is very often considered as a criterion to distinguish between art and non-art. Tolstoy criticises such a use of the idea of beauty in order to propose another measure: the expression of emotions. The idea of beauty is particularly contentious, and as such it can’t provide a definition of art. This is why Tolstoy considers another option, shifting art into a more general framework: “the conditions of human life” (Tolstoy 1904, 47). Art is supposed to be one of these conditions of human life, or more precisely, “one of the means of intercourse between man and man” (47). Tolstoy then defines art in this way:

To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colours, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling—this is the activity of art. Art is a human activity, consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings, and also experience them. (Tolstoy 1904, 50)

This definition implies, firstly, the presence of an artist, an audience, and an emotion; secondly, that the transfer of emotion from the artist to the audience is intentional (“consciously”); thirdly, that this requires an inward evocation and a clarification of what is experienced; fourthly, that the expression is based on specific artistic media (movements, lines, colours, sounds, words).

Thus Tolstoy puts together the elements of a dynamic model of art, emphasizing agents, action, and the means entailed in the experience and practice of art. Such a model is for Tolstoy more appropriate than the criterion of beauty insofar as it grasps the nature of art via its practice.

Collingwood similarly highlights these aspects of art, using the concept of expression to define art in his own version of the Expression Theory. However, his relevance and added value in comparison with Tolstoy lies in the distinction he draws between bringing out emotions and artistic expression:

When a man is said to express emotion, what is being said about him comes to this. At first, he is conscious of having an emotion, but not conscious of what this emotion is. All he is conscious of is a perturbation or excitement which he feels going on within him, but of whose nature he is ignorant. While in this state, all he can say about his emotion is: “I feel … I don’t know what I feel.” From this helpless and oppressed condition he extricates himself by doing something which we call expressing himself. This is an activity which has something to do with the thing we call language: he expresses himself by speaking. It has also something to do with consciousness: the emotion expressed is an emotion of whose nature the person who feels it is no longer unconscious. It also has something to do with the way in which he feels the emotion. As unexpressed, he feels it in what we called a helpless and oppressed way; as expressed, he feels in a way from which this sense of oppression has vanished. His mind is somehow lightened and eased. (Collingwood 1960, 109–10)

At the beginning of the process of creation, there isn’t an identified “ready-made” emotion waiting for its expression, but what Collingwood calls a perturbation, an excitement; that is to say, an internal feeling, the nature and the cause of which are still undetermined. An activity, the expression of oneself (the paradigm of which is language) clarifies, makes the perturbation conscious, and transforms it into an emotion, while alleviating the individual’s perturbation. Thus, Collingwood considers the expression of the emotions in a deeper and a more subtle way, describing more precisely its actions and effects in individuals, but leaving aside other dimensions taken into account by Tolstoy, such as the necessity of an audience and the means of artistic expression. This provides the starting point of the next section.

The audience, the identity, and the existence of emotions in artistic creation

The expression theory of art by both Tolstoy and Collingwood are questionable, and we’ll raise objections corresponding to their main elements.

The first objection deals with the necessity of an audience to which to communicate the emotions. An interesting feature of Collingwood’s (1960) version of this theory is that “the expression of an emotion by speech may be addressed to someone; but if so it is not done with the intention of arousing a like emotion in him” (110, italics mine). This introduces a difference with Tolstoy’s version. According to the latter, art consists, as an activity, in passing on emotions to other people; whereas, according to the former, the relation of art to an audience is only a possibility, not a necessity. The consequence is that there are actually two versions of Expression Theory of art, named by Noël Carroll in Philosophy of Art respectively the “transmission theory” and the “solo theory” (Carroll 1999, 65).

What is the issue? The objection to the transmission theory is that “one can make a work of art for oneself” without trying to publish it (e.g., literature) or to exhibit it (e.g., painting, sculpture) (Carroll 1999, 67). Someone else who would read or see it would deem it as an artwork, but if the artist hides it, the work is still an artwork. The rejoinder is that the mere fact of writing a poem, or producing a painting, or creating a piece of music, is a use of public media that makes the emotions public, which “indicate[s] an intention to communicate to others” (67).

A solution can be developed from two similar remarks. Firstly, there is a distinction between an actual and a potential audience. An artist may not want to address such or such audience, but create an artwork designed to communicate to a potential audience. Secondly, one can question the intention to communicate to others, without questioning the communication itself. Even if it is not the intention of an artist to communicate emotions to others, an artwork can nevertheless communicate emotions. These two remarks converge in the idea that communication is a potentiality, not necessarily an intention nor even a fact. This potentiality is actualised if the artwork is presented to a public. This idea preserves both the idea that one can make a work of art for oneself, and that the medium used is publicly accessible.

There is a second objection one can make against the transmission version. It deals with the identity of the emotion supposed to be communicated from the artist to the audience. “Identity” means firstly that the audience experiences the same emotion as the artist, which implies that the artist experienced this emotion and transmits it. But is this necessarily the case? A poet can express a feeling of sorrow, but the audience feels admiration for this expression. Let’s take for instance Victor Hugo’s poem “Tomorrow, At Dawn” (1856), related to the death of his daughter:

At dawn tomorrow, when the plains grow bright, I’ll go. You wait for me: I know you do. I’ll cross the woods, I’ll cross the mountain-height. No longer can I keep away from you. I’ll walk along with eyes fixed on my mind— The world around I’ll neither hear nor see— Alone, unknown, hands crossed, and back inclined; And day and night will be alike to me. I’ll see neither the gold of evening gloom Nor the sails off to Harfleur far away; And when I come, I’ll place upon your tomb Some flowering heather and a holly spray. (Hugo 2004, 199)

The emotion expressed and the emotion experienced may not be the same: Hugo expresses sadness, annihilation, and isolation, whereas the audience may well feel sadness, but also compassion, and perhaps more generally admiration, in response to such an expression of love.

“Identity” also refers to the identification of the emotions. Is the audience supposed to experience “these” emotions, as if it were possible to clearly identify our emotions? One can highlight the generality and vagueness of certain emotions. They are not necessarily individualised, but general, shared, and they are not necessarily clearly defined, but vague. In the example above, emotions overlap, and some of them are explicitly mentioned, others only suggested. It is true that this could be precisely the function of artworks to individualise and define our emotions. But such an idea fits only with a part of artistic practice: e.g., poetry is only sometimes an evocation of entangled emotions.

Ultimately, the Expression Theory of Art assumes the artist’s experience of emotions. However it is not at all certain that she must experience this emotion herself. Does a writer of a thriller experience fear, so that the thriller expresses and produces fear in the audience? It is likely they experience excitement in trying to produce fear. This objection does not deal anymore with the identity of the emotion, but with its very existence, at the roots of the potential relation between the artist and the audience. Why should an artist even experience any emotion? Of course, it would be difficult to defend the idea of artists experiencing no emotion at all. But it does not mean that emotions are the cause, the reason, or the object of creation. In this sense, emotions are not always necessary to creation.

Eliciting and Representing Emotions

These criticisms do not imply the rejection of expression of/and emotions in art, but only of the idea that art must be defined as an expression of the artist’s emotions to an audience by certain means. Moreover, such a criticism allows other possible descriptions of the relation between artworks and emotions, such as elicitation and representation, which we consider in this section.

It is a classical idea of the rhetorical approach to literary works that they elicit emotions. Rhetoric describes the techniques by which one is able to produce reactions in an audience according to context. In the judicial field, the lawyer has to convince judges regarding past facts in order to win the case. In the political field, politicians and ordinary citizens have to convince each other to make a decision about the future, according to what is useful or detrimental to the country. In the field of public eulogies, the speaker has to praise or comfort. In all these cases, the rhetoric provides non-linguistic means such as advice about posture, gestures, etc., and linguistic means such as patterns of arguments (for instance, enthymemes) and figures of speech, that both play on and elicit emotional reactions, in order to convince and persuade.

Beyond these specific fields, literary criticism and more generally aesthetics use (among other things) the figures of speech studied and systematised by rhetoric. They do so in order not only to describe literary artworks and the style of artworks, but also to show the way artists and literary writers use these figures of speech as means to elicit emotions. Let’s consider the first stanza of Rimbaud’s “Orphans’ New Year Gifts” (1870):

The room is full of shadow and the sad Faint whispering of two little ones, Heads still heavy with dreams Beneath the long white curtain, stirring slightly … Outside, birds cluster for warmth, Wings drooping against the grey sky. And the New Year, dragging mist, Trailing its snow-dress on the ground, Smiles through tears, and shivers a song … (Rimbaud 2001, 3)

A significant feature is its general structure, organised around the contrast of two locations, a room and the outside, but also the continuity established between them by the echo of the shadow of the room in the sad whispering of the orphans, on one hand, and the mist of the New year and its “smile through tears,” on the other. But more important is the personification of the New Year, which drags mist, trails a snow-dress, smiles through tears, and shivers a song, as a presence outside that echoes the orphans’ sadness within. This figure of speech contributes to the eliciting of visual and emotional impressions, as a picture materialises gradually and a feeling of sadness arises, one that then envelops the whole stanza.

An alternative way to describe this elicitation of emotions can be found in T.S. Eliot’s essay on “Hamlet and His Problems,” under the label of “objective correlative.” There he tries to explain what is, according to him, Hamlet ’s failure. A starting point is his agreement with the idea that “the essential emotion of the play is the feeling of a son [Hamlet] towards a guilty mother” (Eliot 1939, 144). If there is a failure, though, it lies in that “Hamlet is dominated by an emotion which is inexpressible, . . . that Hamlet’s bafflement at the absence of objective equivalent to his feelings is a prolongation of the bafflement of his creator in the face of his artistic problem” (145). By contrast, here is the rule T.S. Eliot defends:

The only way of expressing emotion in the form of art is by finding an “objective correlative”; in other words, a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion; such that when the external facts, which must terminate in sensory experience, are given, the emotion is immediately evoked. (Eliot 1939, 145)

The emotion of the play and, more generally, of a literary work is to be found in an objective correlative, which is an “exact equivalent” characterised by a “complete adequacy of the external to the emotion.” That’s to say, more concretely, the emotion is found in a description of situations, events, characters, reactions, that shows this emotion, and therefore in a full representation of the emotion that elicits it in the audience. According to T.S. Eliot one finds a good example of objective correlative in Macbeth :

You will find that the state of mind of Lady Macbeth walking in her sleep has been communicated to you by a skilful accumulation of imagined sensory impressions; the words of Macbeth on hearing of his wife’s death strike us as if, given the sequence of events, these words were automatically released by the last events in the series. (Eliot 1939, 145)

Nevertheless, it would be superficial to present the elicitation of emotions as a causal production of emotion by means of figures of speech. As Danto puts it in his discussion of Aristotle and rhetoric in the last part of The Transfiguration of the Common place ,

if it be anger they [rhetoricians] intend to arouse, they will know how to characterize the intended object of the anger in such a way that anger toward that object is the only justifiable response. . . . After all, like beliefs and actions–in contrast with bare perceptions and mere bodily movements–emotions–in contrast perhaps with bare feelings–are embedded in structures of justification. There are things we know we ought to feel given a certain characterization of the conditions we are under. (Danto 1981, 169)

To elicit emotions for a (literary) artwork is not merely a matter of causal relation: the artwork, its figures of speech, or its style, if successful, are such that one should have a determinate emotional response. In other words, not any emotion is admissible but only some of them are justifiable in front of a particular artwork.

To conclude this section, it is possible to argue that, even though artworks do not necessarily express the artist’s emotions, they elicit emotions in the audience by artistic means such as figures of speech in literary artworks, or representation of emotions in the choice of a certain “correlated” objectivity, such as a series of actions in a play or a set of forms and colours in a painting.

An Autonomous Expression

The idea defended in the last section, according to which artworks can represent emotions, allows us to come back to the notion of expression, but in a different way to the Expression Theory of Art elaborated in the first section. T.S. Eliot uses “representation” and “expression” almost indistinguishably, but these terms should be refined. What does it mean for artworks not only to represent but also to express emotions by themselves? A closer analysis of the notion of expression is needed here.

In our ordinary judgments, we talk about the sadness of a poem, the fact that a certain piece of music is described as joyful and another one as desperate, or that a particular style for a building is cold. Hence, the question: Can artworks be said to express emotions themselves? And why would it be a problem? As Oets K. Bouwsma explains in “The Expression Theory of Art,”

The use of emotional terms—sad, gay, joyous, calm, restless, hopeful, playful, etc.—in describing music, poems, pictures, etc., is indeed common. So long as such descriptions are accepted and understood in innocence, there will be, of course, no puzzle. But nearly everyone can understand the motives of [the] question “How can music be sad?” and of his impulsive “It can’t, of course.” (Bouswma 1959, 74)

How can we explain such a paradoxical use of emotional terms, which seems to be at the same time accepted and impossible? What is assumed in “Music can’t be sad” is “… as someone can be sad.” It is the reason why, according to Bouswma, it is interesting to consider and compare several uses of “sad,” such as: “Cassie is sad,” “Cassie’s dog is sad,” “Cassie’s book is sad,” and “Cassie’s face is sad.” In the first case, one can imagine Cassie learning the death of a next of kin and crying, or reading a wonderful but sad poem, and becoming sad herself, crying or not. In the second case, it makes sense to say that the dog can be sad, but could it cry? One does not expect the dog to express sadness in all the ways human beings do (a dog does not restrain its howls). One can paraphrase the third case saying that this book makes Cassie sad. And in the last case, one can easily describe obvious signs of sadness, however there is no guarantee that she is really sad.

What conclusion can we draw now as regards to the assertion “the music is sad”? This assertion is similar neither to Cassie being sad and crying because of a death in her family, nor to Cassie being sad but not crying, nor to her dog being sad but not crying: a song is neither crying nor holding back tears! It is much more similar to “the book is sad,” understood as producing sadness, but particularly as being sad in itself, as a face can be sad, be it a real face or a drawing: the book, the music, and the face express sadness themselves but in a specific way.

How can one account for this expression? Are these examples really on the same level? One can find an answer in Nelson Goodman’s theory of expression in Languages of Art , which is based on the concepts of exemplification and metaphor.

An expression can be considered as a kind of exemplification. Exemplification refers to a certain relation of something to some properties. For instance, a sample of fabric exemplifies cashmere, in that (1) it is made of cashmere and therefore possesses this property to be made of cashmere, (2) qua sample, it refers to this property. Indeed, something can refer to cashmere without possessing this property of being made of cashmere, as it is the case in a description of this fabric.

However, such a definition of exemplification is not enough to account for the description of an artwork as expressing such or such emotion. It is true that a sad poem possesses this property of being sad, and refers to sadness in general, but how could a sad poem be “made of sadness” or be described literally as sad? The poem is not described literally as sad but metaphorically; the possession of the property is not literal but metaphorical. [3] Therefore, a poem exemplifies sadness in that (1) it refers to sadness and (2) possesses sadness (3) metaphorically.

One could object that this idea of metaphorical possession is obscure, as if only literal possession were without difficulty (for instance, in “this stone is hard”). However, among the different ways of describing things, events, people, etc., it is possible to attribute properties in a metaphorical way (and then to see in this possession an exemplification of the property in question). One could reply that, because it is a metaphor, the sadness is not “really” in the poem. However, the fact is that such a metaphorical description is sometimes far more objectively true than a literal one. To describe someone as a “Don Quixote” or a “Don Giovanni” (which means that this person possesses metaphorically and exemplifies the properties of Don Quixote or Don Giovanni) does not necessarily raise a question, whereas to describe literally such or such entity as a virus or an organism raises sometimes real difficulties and disagreements between scientists. In this sense, that a song or a poem expresses such or such emotion can be perfectly objective.

To conclude, there is certainly something right in the ordinary claim that artworks express emotions. This means that the issue lies somewhere else, in the philosophical accounts of such a claim. While a number of accounts can be found in contemporary philosophy, not all of them are likely to make sense of the ordinary claim about artwork’s expression of emotions.

More precisely, all the elements mentioned by Tolstoy are interesting for those who are passionate about arts: the relation of an artist and audience, the sharing of emotions, and the means used to do this. They all belong to our experience and practice of art, and one virtue of Tolstoy’s analysis is precisely to consider artworks in this broader context: our practices and experiences. At the same time, it raises a philosophical issue about what is essential in this general description if one wants to understand artworks’ specific feature regarding emotions: expressivity.

This chapter aims at showing the intrinsic expressivity of artworks, in addition to their capacity to elicit and represent emotions, ultimately leaving aside the artist’s and audience’s experience of emotions. The idea is neither to deny the reality of such an experience, nor its importance for the artist and the audience, but to highlight how artworks’ expressivity can be found in themselves, because they are themselves describable as expressing such or such emotion. To go further in this direction, one could say that the key to expressivity can be found in the functioning of works of art, for instance, the way a painting describes a landscape, possesses such or such characteristics (colours or lines), and refers to sadness or joy. What it is (characteristics) and what it does (description and reference) are central to understand how an artwork finally expresses emotions. The next step would be to come back to our experience and practice: How do they shape our ability to grasp the emotions expressed in artworks? What is the role of experience and practice in the understanding of the artwork’s expressivity?

Bouswma, Oets K. 1959. “The Expression Theory of Art.” In Aesthetics and Language , edited by William Elton, 73–99. Oxford: Blackwell.

Carroll, Noël. 1999. Philosophy of Art . London and New York: Routledge.

Collingwood, Robin G. 1960. The Principles of Art . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Danto, Arthur. 1981. The Transfiguration of the Commplace . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Eliot, Thomas Stearns. 1939. Selected Essays . London: Faber and Faber Limited.

Hugo, Victor. 2004. Selected Poems of Victor Hugo . Translated by E. H. and A. M. Blackmore. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Goodman, Nelson. 1968. Languages of Art . Indianapolis: The Bobs-Merrill Company.

Rimbaud, Arthur. 2001. Collected Poems . Edited by Martin Sorrell. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tolstoy, Leo. 1904. What is Art? Translated by Aylmer Maude. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.

Wordsworth, William and Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. [1800] 1991. Lyrical Ballads . Edited by R. L. Brett and A. R. Jones. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

• Particularly in Great Britain with William Wordsworth’s poetry, for instance his Lyrical Ballads (1798), or in Germany with Caspar David Friedrich’s paintings, for instance “Wanderer above the Sea of Fog” (1818). ↵
• The main representative works of this tradition are Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Poetics , even if the overlapping of their concept of imitation and the concept of representation is problematic. The question is indeed: Do artworks have to imitate reality? If so, what does "imitate" mean here? And what is the reality that would have to be imitated? ↵
• Goodman (1968) draws a distinction between literal and metaphorical descriptions as follows. A description is literal when the words are used in their ordinary, routine way (e.g., to use “green” to describe the grass). But it becomes metaphorical when the words are applied to new things that first of all resist such a description and then accept it (e.g., to use a word of colour in order to describe a mood). ↵

Visiting Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion?

You must join the virtual exhibition queue when you arrive. If capacity has been reached for the day, the queue will close early.

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Abstract expressionism.

Number 28, 1950

Jackson Pollock

The Glazier

Willem de Kooning

No. 13 (White, Red on Yellow)

Mark Rothko

The Flesh Eaters

William Baziotes

Black Reflections

Franz Kline

Clyfford Still

Symphony No. 1, The Transcendental

Richard Pousette-Dart

David Smith

Elegy to the Spanish Republic No. 70

Robert Motherwell

Black Untitled

Barnett Newman

Autumn Rhythm (Number 30)

Night Creatures

Lee Krasner

Stella Paul Department of Education, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

October 2004

A new vanguard emerged in the early 1940s, primarily in New York, where a small group of loosely affiliated artists created a stylistically diverse body of work that introduced radical new directions in art—and shifted the art world’s focus. Never a formal association, the artists known as “Abstract Expressionists” or “The New York School” did, however, share some common assumptions. Among others, artists such as Jackson Pollock (1912–1956), Willem de Kooning (1904–1997), Franz Kline (1910–1962), Lee Krasner (1908–1984), Robert Motherwell (1915–1991), William Baziotes (1912–1963), Mark Rothko (1903–1970), Barnett Newman (1905–1970), Adolph Gottlieb (1903–1974), Richard Pousette-Dart (1916–1992), and Clyfford Still (1904–1980) advanced audacious formal inventions in a search for significant content. Breaking away from accepted conventions in both technique and subject matter, the artists made monumentally scaled works that stood as reflections of their individual psyches—and in doing so, attempted to tap into universal inner sources. These artists valued spontaneity and improvisation, and they accorded the highest importance to process. Their work resists stylistic categorization, but it can be clustered around two basic inclinations: an emphasis on dynamic, energetic gesture, in contrast to a reflective, cerebral focus on more open fields of color. In either case, the imagery was primarily abstract. Even when depicting images based on visual realities, the Abstract Expressionists favored a highly abstracted mode.

Context Abstract Expressionism developed in the context of diverse, overlapping sources and inspirations. Many of the young artists had made their start in the 1930s. The Great Depression yielded two popular art movements, Regionalism and Social Realism, neither of which satisfied this group of artists’ desire to find a content rich with meaning and redolent of social responsibility, yet free of provincialism and explicit politics. The Great Depression also spurred the development of government relief programs, including the Works Progress Administration (WPA), a jobs program for unemployed Americans in which many of the group participated, and which allowed so many artists to establish a career path.

But it was the exposure to and assimilation of European modernism that set the stage for the most advanced American art. There were several venues in New York for seeing avant-garde art from Europe. The Museum of Modern Art had opened in 1929, and there artists saw a rapidly growing collection acquired by director Alfred H. Barr, Jr. They were also exposed to groundbreaking temporary exhibitions of new work, including Cubism and Abstract Art (1936), Fantastic Art, Dada, Surrealism (1936–37), and retrospectives of Matisse , Léger , and Picasso , among others. Another forum for viewing the most advanced art was Albert Gallatin’s Museum of Living Art, which was housed at New York University from 1927 to 1943. There the Abstract Expressionists saw the work of Mondrian, Gabo, El Lissitzky, and others. The forerunner of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum—the Museum of Non-Objective Painting—opened in 1939. Even prior to that date, its collection of Kandinskys had been publicly exhibited several times. The lessons of European modernism were also disseminated through teaching. The German expatriate Hans Hofmann (1880–1966) became the most influential teacher of modern art in the United States, and his impact reached both artists and critics.

The crisis of war and its aftermath are key to understanding the concerns of the Abstract Expressionists. These young artists, troubled by man’s dark side and anxiously aware of human irrationality and vulnerability, wanted to express their concerns in a new art of meaning and substance. Direct contact with European artists increased as a result of World War II, which caused so many—including Dalí, Ernst, Masson, Breton, Mondrian, and Léger—to seek refuge in the U.S. The Surrealists opened up new possibilities with their emphasis on tapping the unconscious. One Surrealist device for breaking free of the conscious mind was psychic automatism—in which automatic gesture and improvisation gain free rein.

Early Work Early on, the Abstract Expressionists, in seeking a timeless and powerful subject matter, turned to primitive myth and archaic art for inspiration. Rothko, Pollock, Motherwell, Gottlieb, Newman, and Baziotes all looked to ancient or primitive cultures for expression. Their early works feature pictographic and biomorphic elements transformed into personal code. Jungian psychology was compelling, too, in its assertion of the collective unconscious. Directness of expression was paramount, best achieved through lack of premeditation. In a famous letter to the New York Times (June 1943), Gottlieb and Rothko, with the assistance of Newman, wrote: “To us, art is an adventure into an unknown world of the imagination which is fancy-free and violently opposed to common sense. There is no such thing as a good painting about nothing. We assert that the subject is critical.”

Mature Abstract Expressionism: Gesture In 1947, Pollock developed a radical new technique, pouring and dripping thinned paint onto raw canvas laid on the ground (instead of traditional methods of painting in which pigment is applied by brush to primed, stretched canvas positioned on an easel). The paintings were entirely nonobjective. In their subject matter (or seeming lack of one), scale (huge), and technique (no brush, no stretcher bars, no easel), the works were shocking to many viewers. De Kooning, too, was developing his own version of a highly charged, gestural style, alternating between abstract work and powerful iconic figurative images. Other colleagues, including Krasner and Kline, were equally engaged in creating an art of dynamic gesture in which every inch of a picture is fully charged. For Abstract Expressionists, the authenticity or value of a work lay in its directness and immediacy of expression. A painting is meant to be a revelation of the artist’s authentic identity. The gesture, the artist’s “signature,” is evidence of the actual process of the work’s creation. It is in reference to this aspect of the work that critic Harold Rosenberg coined the term “action painting” in 1952: “At a certain moment the canvas began to appear to one American painter after another as an arena in which to act—rather than as a space in which to reproduce, re-design, analyze, or ‘express’ an object, actual or imagined. What was to go on the canvas was not a picture but an event.”

Mature Abstract Expressionism: Color Field Another path lay in the expressive potential of color. Rothko, Newman, and Still, for instance, created art based on simplified, large-format, color-dominated fields. The impulse was, in general, reflective and cerebral, with pictorial means simplified in order to create a kind of elemental impact. Rothko and Newman, among others, spoke of a goal to achieve the “sublime” rather than the “beautiful,” harkening back to Edmund Burke in a drive for the grand, heroic vision in opposition to a calming or comforting effect. Newman described his reductivism as one means of “freeing ourselves of the obsolete props of an outmoded and antiquated legend … freeing ourselves from the impediments of memory, association, nostalgia, legend, and myth that have been the devices of Western European painting.” For Rothko, his glowing, soft-edged rectangles of luminescent color should provoke in viewers a quasi-religious experience, even eliciting tears. As with Pollock and the others, scale contributed to the meaning. For the time, the works were vast in scale. And they were meant to be seen in relatively close environments, so that the viewer was virtually enveloped by the experience of confronting the work. Rothko said, “I paint big to be intimate.” The notion is toward the personal (authentic expression of the individual) rather than the grandiose.

The Aftermath The first generation of Abstract Expressionism flourished between 1943 and the mid-1950s. The movement effectively shifted the art world’s focus from Europe (specifically Paris) to New York in the postwar years. The paintings were seen widely in traveling exhibitions and through publications. In the wake of Abstract Expressionism, new generations of artists—both American and European—were profoundly marked by the breakthroughs made by the first generation, and went on to create their own important expressions based on, but not imitative of, those who forged the way.

Paul, Stella. “Abstract Expressionism.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/abex/hd_abex.htm (October 2004)

Further Reading

Messinger, Lisa Mintz Abstract Expressionism: Works on Paper. Selections from The Metropolitan Museum of Art . New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992. See on MetPublications

Thaw, Eugene Victor "The Abstract Expressionist." The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin , v. 44, no. 3 (Winter, 1986–87). See on MetPublications

Tinterow, Gary, Lisa Mintz Messinger, and Nan Rosenthal, eds. Abstract Expressionism and Other Modern Works: The Muriel Kallis Steinberg Newman Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art . New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2007. See on MetPublications

Additional Essays by Stella Paul

• Paul, Stella. “ Modern Storytellers: Romare Bearden, Jacob Lawrence, Faith Ringgold .” (October 2004)

Related Essays

• Fernand Léger (1881–1955)
• Henri Matisse (1869–1954)
• Pablo Picasso (1881–1973)
• School of Paris
• African Influences in Modern Art
• Georgia O’Keeffe (1887–1986)
• Jasper Johns (born 1930)
• Modern Storytellers: Romare Bearden, Jacob Lawrence, Faith Ringgold
• Paul Klee (1879–1940)
• The United States and Canada, 1900 A.D.–present
• 20th Century A.D.
• Abstract Art
• Action Painting / Gestural Painting
• Beat Movement
• Color Field
• Modern and Contemporary Art
• North America
• Nouveau Realisme
• Oil on Canvas
• Regionalism
• Sculpture in the Round
• Stainless Steel
• Tachism / Art Informel / Lyrical Abstraction
• United States

Artist or Maker

• Albers, Josef
• Baziotes, William
• Booth, Peter
• De Kooning, Willem
• Gorky, Arshile
• Kline, Franz
• Krasner, Lee
• Motherwell, Robert
• Newman, Barnett
• Pollock, Jackson
• Pousette-Dart, Richard
• Rothko, Mark
• Smith, David
• Still, Clyfford

Online Features

• 82nd & Fifth: “Deciphering the Flowers” by Sheena Wagstaff
• 82nd & Fifth: “Gesture” by Nicholas Cullinan
• The Artist Project: “Mark Bradford on Clyfford Still”
• The Artist Project: “Robert Longo on Jackson Pollock’s Autumn Rhythm (Number 30) “
• The Artist Project: “Wenda Gu on Robert Motherwell’s Lyric Suite “

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Croce’s Aesthetics

The Neapolitan Benedetto Croce (1860–1952) was a dominant figure in the first half of the twentieth century in aesthetics and literary criticism, and to lesser but not inconsiderable extent in philosophy generally. But his fame did not last, either in Italy or in the English speaking world. He did not lack promulgators and willing translators into English: H. Carr was an early example of the former, R. G. Collingwood was perhaps both, and D. Ainslie did the latter service for most of Croce’s principal works. But his star rapidly declined after the Second World War. Indeed it is hard to find a figure whose reputation has fallen so far and so quickly; this is somewhat unfair not least because Collingwood’s aesthetics is still studied, when its many of its main ideas are often thought to have been borrowed from Croce. The causes are a matter for speculation, but two are likely. First, Croce’s general philosophy was very much of the preceding century. As the idealistic and historicist systems of Bradley, Green, and Joachim were in Britain superseded by Russell, Moore and Ayer, and analytical philosophy in general, Croce’s system was swept away by new ideas on the continent—from Heidegger and Sartre on the one hand to deconstructionism on the other. Second, Croce’s manner of presentation in his famous early works now seems, not to put too fine a point on it, dismissively dogmatic; it is full of the youthful conviction and fury that seldom wears well. On certain key points, opposing positions are characterized as foolish, or as confused expressions of simple truths that only waited upon Croce to articulate properly (yet his later exchange with John Dewey—see Croce 1952, Douglas 1970, Vittorio 2012—finds him more earnestly accountable). Of course, these dismissals carry some weight—Croce’s reading is prodigious and there is far more insight beneath the words than initially meets the eye—but unless the reader were already convinced that here at last is the truth, their sheer number and vehemence will arouse mistrust. And since the early works, along with his long running editorship of the journal La Critica , rocketed him to such fame and admiration, whereas later years were devoted among other things to battling with while being tolerated by fascists, it’s not surprising that he never quite lost this habit.

Nevertheless, Croce’s signal contribution to aesthetics—an interesting new angle on the idea that art is expression—can be more or less be detached from the surrounding philosophy and polemics. In what follows, we will first see the doctrine as connected to its original philosophical context, then we will attempt to snip the connections.

1. The Four Domains of Spirit (or Mind)

2. the primacy of the aesthetic, 3. art and aesthetics, 4.1 the double ideality of the work of art, 4.2 the role of feeling, 4.3 feeling, expression and the commonplace, 5. natural expression, beauty and hedonic theory, 6. externalization, 7. judgement, criticism and taste, 8. the identity of art and language, 9. later developments, 10.1 acting versus contemplation, 10.2 privacy, 10.3 the view of language, 11. conclusion, primary sources, secondary sources, other internet resources, related entries.

We are confining ourselves to Croce’s aesthetics, but it will help to have at least the most rudimentary sketch in view of his rather complex general philosophy.

In Italy at the beginning of the twentieth century, the prevailing philosophy or ‘world-view’ was not, as in England, post-Hegelian Idealism as already mentioned, but the early forms of empiricist positivism associated with such figures as Comte and Mach. Partly out of distaste for the mechanism and enshrinement of matter of such views, and partly out of his reaction, both positive and negative, to the philosophy of Hegel, Croce espoused what he called ‘Absolute Idealism’ or ‘Absolute Historicism’. A constant theme in Croce’s philosophy is that he sought a path between the Scylla of ‘transcendentalism’ and the Charybdis of ‘sensationalism’, which for most purposes may be thought of as co-extensive with rationalism and empiricism. For Croce, they are bottom the same error, the error of abstracting from ordinary experience to something not literally experienceable. Transcendentalism regards the world of sense to be unreal, confused or second-rate, and it is the philosopher, reflecting on the world in a priori way from his armchair, who sees beyond it, to reality. What Croce called ‘Sensationalism’, on the other hand, regards only instantaneous impressions of colour and the like as existing, the rest being in some sense a mere logical construction out of it, of no independent reality. The right path is what Croce calls immanentism : All but only lived human experience, taking place concretely and without reduction, is real. Therefore all Philosophy, properly so-called, is Philosophy of Spirit (or Mind), and is inseparable from history. And thus Croce’s favoured designations, ‘Absolute Idealism’ or ‘Absolute Historicism’.

Philosophy admits of the following divisions, corresponding to the different modes of mental or spiritual activity. Mental activity is either theoretic (it understands or contemplates) or it is practical (it wills actions). These in turn divide: The theoretic divides into the aesthetic, which deals in particulars (individuals or intuitions), and logic or the intellectual domain, which deals in concepts and relations, or universals. The practical divides into the economic—by which Croce means all manner of utilitarian calculation—and the ethical or moral. Each of the four domains are subject to a characteristic norm or value: aesthetic is subject to beauty, logic is subject to truth, economic is subject to the useful (or vitality), and the moral is subject to the good. Croce devoted three lengthy books written between 1901 and 1909 to this overall scheme of the ‘Philosophy of Spirit’: Aesthetic (1901) and (1907) (revised), Logic (1909) and the Philosophy of the Practical (1908), the latter containing both the economic and ethics (in today’s use of term you might call the overall scheme Croce’s metaphysics , but Croce himself distanced himself from that appellation; there is also some sense in calling it philosophy of mind ).

Philosophers since Kant customarily distinguish intuitions or representations from concepts or universals. In one sense Croce follows this tradition, but another sense his view departs radically. For intuitions are not blind without concepts; an intuitive presentation (an ‘intuition’) is a complete conscious manifestation just as it is, in advance of applying concepts (and all that is true a priori of them is that they have a particular character or individual physiognomy—they are not necessarily spatial or temporal, contra Kant). To account for this, Croce supposes that the modes of mental activity are in turn arranged at different levels. The intellect presupposes the intuitive mode—which just is the aesthetic—but the intuitive mode does not presuppose the intellect. The intellect—issuing in particular judgements—in turn is presupposed by the practical, which issues among other things in empirical laws. And morality tells the practical sciences what ends in particular they should pursue. Thus Croce regarded this as one of his key insights: All mental activity, which means the whole of reality, is founded on the aesthetic, which has no end or purpose of its own, and of course no concepts or judgements. This includes the concept of existence or reality: the intuition plus the judgement of existence is what Croce calls perception, but itself is innocent of it.

To say the world is essentially history is to say that at the lowest level it is aesthetic experiences woven into a single fabric, a world-narrative, with the added judgement that it is real, that it exists. Croce takes this to be inevitable: the subjective present is real and has duration; but any attempt to determine its exact size is surely arbitrary. Therefore the only rigorous view is that the past is no less real than the present. History then represents, by definition, the only all-encompassing account of reality. What we call the natural sciences then are impure, second-rate. Consider for example the concept of a space-time point . Plainly it is not something anyone has ever met with in experience; it is an abstraction, postulated as a limit of certain operations for the convenience of a ‘theory’. Croce would call it a pseudo-concept, and would not call the so-called ‘empirical laws’ in which it figures to be fit subjects for truth and knowledge. Its significance, like that of other pseudo-concepts, is pragmatic.

In fact the vast majority of concepts—house, reptile, tree—are mere adventitious collections of things that are formulated in response to practical needs, and thus cannot, however exact the results of the corresponding science, attain to truth or knowledge. Nor do the concepts of mathematics escape the ‘pseudo’ tag. What Croce calls pure concepts, in contrast, are characterised by their possession of expressiveness, universality and concreteness, and they perform their office by a priori synthesis (this accounts for character mentioned above). What this means it that everything we can perceive or imagine—every representation or intuition—will necessarily have all three: there is no possible experience that is not of something concrete, universal in the sense of being an instance of something absolutely general, and expressive, that is, admitting of verbal enunciation. Empirical concepts, then, like heat , are concrete but not universal; mathematical concepts, like number , are universal but not concrete. Examples of pure concepts are rare, but those recognized by Croce are finality, quality and beauty . Such is the domain of Logic, in Croce’s scheme.

A critical difference, for our purposes, between Croce’s ideas and those of his apparent follower Collingwood, emerges when we ask: what are the constituents of the intuition? For Collingwood—writing in the mid-1930s—intuitions are built up out of sense-data, the only significant elaboration of Russell’s doctrine being that sense-data are never simple, comprising what analysis reveals as sensory and affective constituents. For Croce the intuition is an organic whole, such that to analyze it into atoms is always a false abstraction: the intuition could never be re-built with such elements. (Although a deadly opponent of formal logic, Croce did share Frege’s insight that the truly meaningful bit of language is the sentence; ‘only in the context of sentence does a word have a meaning’, wrote Frege in 1884).

With such an account of ‘the aesthetic’ in view, one might think that Croce intends to cover roughly the same ground as Kant’s Transcendental Aesthetic, and like Kant will think of art as a comparatively narrow if profound region of experience. But Croce takes the opposite line (and finds Kant’s theory of beauty and art to have failed at precisely this point): art is everywhere, and the difference between ordinary intuition and that of ‘works of art’ is only a quantitative difference ( Aes. 13). This principle has for Croce a profound significance:

We must hold firmly to our identification, because among the principal reasons which have prevented Aesthetic, the science of art, from revealing the true nature of art, its real roots in human nature, has been its separation from the general spiritual life, the having made of it a sort of special function or aristocratic club…. There is not … a special chemical theory of stones as distinct from mountains. In the same way, there is not a science of lesser intuition as distinct from a science of greater intuition, nor one of ordinary intuition as distinct from artistic intuition. ( Aes. 14)

But the point is not that every object is to some degree a work of art. The point is that every intuition has to some degree the qualities of the intuition of a work of art; it’s just that the intuition of a work of art has them in much greater degree.

4. Intuition and Expression

We now reach the most famous and notorious Crocean doctrine concerning art. ‘To intuit’, he writes, ‘is to express’ ( Aes. 11); ‘intuitive knowledge is expressive knowledge’. There are several points that have to be in place in order to understand what Croce means by this, because it obviously does not strike one as initially plausible.

For our purposes, it is simplest to regard Croce as an idealist, for whom there is nothing besides the mind. So in that sense, the work of art is an ideal or mental object along with everything else; no surprise there, but no interest either. But he still maintains the ordinary commonplace distinction between mental things—thoughts, hopes and dreams—and physical things—tables and trees. And on this divide, the work of art, for Croce, is still a mental thing. In other words, the work of art in doubly ideal; to put it another way, even if Croce were a dualist —or a physicalist with some means of reconstructing the physical-mental distinction—the work of art would remain mental. In what follows, then, except where otherwise noted, we shall treat Croce is being agnostic as between idealism, physicalism, or dualism (see PPH 227).

This claim about the ontological status of works of art means that a spectator ‘of’ a work of art—a sonata, a poem, a painting—is actually creating the work of art in his mind. Croce’s main argument for this is the same as, therefore no better but no worse than, Russell’s argument from the relativity of perception to sense-data. The perceived aesthetic qualities of anything vary with the states of the perceiver; therefore in speaking of the former we are really speaking of the latter ( Aes. 106; Croce does not, it seems, consider the possibility that certain states of the perceiver might be privileged, but it is evident that he would discount this possibility). Now the Crocean formulation—to intuit is to express—perhaps begins to make sense. For ‘intuition’ is in some sense a mental act , along with its near-cognates ‘representation’, ‘imagination’, ‘invention’,‘vision’, and ‘contemplation.’ Being a mental act, something we do, it is not a mere external object.

Feeling, for Croce, is necessarily part of any (mental) activity, including bare perception—indeed, feeling is a form of mental activity (it is part of his philosophy that there is never literally present to consciousness anything passive). We are accustomed to thinking of ‘artistic expression’ as concerned with specific emotions that are relatively rare in the mental life, but again, Croce points out that strictly speaking, we are thinking of a quantitative distinction as qualitative. In fact feeling is nothing but the will in mental activity, with all its varieties of thought, desire and action, its varieties of frustration and satisfaction ( Aes. 74–6). The only criterion of ‘art’ is coherence of expression, of the movement of the will (for a comparison with Collingwood’s similar doctrine, see Kemp 2003: 173–9).

Because of this, Croce discounts certain aesthetic applications of the distinction between form and content as confused. The distinction only applies at a theoretical level, to a posited a priori synthesis ( EA 39–40). At that level, the irruption of an intuition just is the emergence of a form (we are right to speak of the formation of intuition, that intuitions are formed ). At the aesthetic level—one might say at the phenomenological level—there is no identification of content independently of the forms in which we meet it, and none of form independently of content. It makes no sense to speak of a work of art’s being good on form but poor on content, or good on content but poor on form.

When Croce says that intuition and expression are the same phenomenon, we are likely to think: what does this mean for a person who cannot draw or paint, for example? Even if we allow Croce his widened notion of feeling, surely the distinction between a man who looks at a bowl of fruit but cannot draw or paint it, and the man who does draw or paint it, is precisely that of a man with a Crocean intuition but who cannot express it, and one who has both. How then can expression be intuition?

Croce comes at this concern from both sides. On one side, there is ‘the illusion or prejudice that we possess a more complete intuition of reality than we really do’ ( Aes. 9). We have, most of the time, only fleeting, transitory intuitions amidst the bustle of our practical lives. ‘The world which as rule we intuit is a small thing’, he writes; ‘It consists of small expressions … it is a medley of light and colour’ ( Aes. 9). On the other side, if our man is seriously focussed on the bowl of fruit, it is only a prejudice to deny that then he is to that extent expressing himself—although, according to Croce, ordinary direct perception of things, as glimpsed in photography, will generally be lacking the ‘lyrical’ quality that genuine artists give to their works (though this particular twist is a later addition; see section 9 below).

There is another respect in which Croce’s notion of expression as intuition departs from what we ordinarily think of in connection with the word ‘expression’. For example we think unreflectively of wailing as a natural expression of pain or grief; generally, we think of expressive behaviour or gestures as being caused, at least paradigmatically, by the underlying emotion or feelings. But Croce joins a long line of aestheticians in attempting a sharp distinction between this phenomenon and expression in art. Whereas the latter is the subject of aesthetics, the former is a topic for the natural sciences—‘for instance in Darwin’s enquiries into the expression of feeling in man and in the animals’ ( PPH 265; cf. Aes. 21, 94–7). In an article he wrote for the Encyclopaedia Britannica , speaking of such ‘psychophysical phenomena’, he writes:

…such ‘expression’, albeit conscious, can rank as expression only by metaphorical licence, when compared with the spiritual or aesthetic expression which alone expresses, that is to say gives to the feeling a theoretical form and converts into language, song, shape. It is in the difference between feeling as contemplated (poetry, in fact), and feeling as enacted or undergone, that lies the catharsis, the liberation from the affections, the calming property which has been attributed to art; and to this corresponds the aesthetic condemnation of works of art if, or in so far as, immediate feeling breaks into them or uses them as an outlet. ( PPH 219).

Croce is no doubt right to want to distinguish these things, but whether his official position—that expression is identical to intuition—will let him do so is another matter; he does not actually analyze the phenomena in such a way as to deduce, with the help of his account of expression, the result. He simply asserts it. But we will wait for our final section to articulate criticisms.

Croce’s wish to divorce artistic expression from natural expression is partly driven by his horror at naturalistic theories of art. The same goes for his refusal to rank pleasure as the aim, or at least an aim, of art ( Aes. 82–6). He does not of course deny that aesthetic pleasures (and pains) exist, but they are ‘the practical echo of aesthetic value and disvalue’ ( Aes. 94). Strictly speaking, they are dealt with in the Philosophy of the Practical, that is, in the theory of the will, and do not enter into the theory of art. That is, if the defining value of the Aesthetic is beauty , the defining value of the Practical is usefulness . In the Essence of Aesthetic ( EA 11–13) Croce points out that the pleasure is much wider than the domain of art, so a definition of art as ‘what causes pleasure’ will not do. Croce does speak of the ‘truly aesthetic pleasure’ had in beholding the ‘aesthetic fact’ ( Aes. 80). But perhaps he is being consistent. The pragmatic pleasure had in beholding beauty is only contingently aroused, but in point of fact it always is aroused by such beholding, because the having of an intuition is an act of mind, and therefore the will is brought into play.

The painting of pictures, the scrape of the bow upon strings, the chanting or inscription of a poem are, for Croce, only contingently related to the work of art, that is, to the expressed intuition. By this Croce does not mean to say that for example the painter could get by without paint in point of fact; the impossibility of say the existence of Leonardo’s Last Supper without his having put paint on the wall of Santa Maria delle Grazie not an impossibility in principle, but it is a factual impossibility, like that of a man jumping to the Moon. What he is doing is always driven by the intuition, and thereby making it possible for others to have the intuition (or rather, an intuition). First, the memory—though only contingently—often requires the physical work to sustain or develop the intuition. Second, the physical work is necessary for the practical business of the communication of the intuition.

For example the process of painting is a closely interwoven operation of positive feedback between the intuitive faculty and the practical or technical capacity to manipulate the brush, mix paint and so on:

Likewise with the painter, who paints upon canvas or upon wood, but could not paint at all, did not the intuited image, the line and colour as they have taken shape in the fancy, precede , at every stage of the work, from the first stroke of the brush or sketch of the outline to the finishing touches, the manual actions. And when it happens that some stroke of the brush runs ahead of the image, the artist, in his final revision, erases and corrects it.

It is, no doubt, very difficult to perceive the frontier between expression and communication in actual fact, for the two processes usually alternate rapidly and are almost intermingled . But the distinction is ideally clear and must be strongly maintained… The technical does not enter into art, but pertains to the concept of communication. ( PPH 227–8, emphasis added; cf. Aes . 50–1, 96–7, 103, 111–17; EA 41–7)

He also defines technique as ‘knowledge at the service of the practical activity directed to producing stimuli to aesthetic reproduction’ ( Aes. 111). Again, we defer criticism to the conclusion.

The first task of the spectator of the work of art—the critic—is for Croce simple: one is to reproduce the intuition, or perhaps better, one is to realize the intuition, which is the work of art. One may fail, and Croce is well aware that one may be mistaken ; ‘haste, vanity, want of reflexion, theoretic prejudices’ may bring it about that one finds beautiful what is not, or fail to find beautiful what is ( Aes. 120). But given the foregoing strict distinction between practical technique and artistic activity properly so-called, his task is the same as that of the artist :

How could that which is produced by a given activity be judged a different activity? The critic may be a small genius, the artist a great one … but the nature of both must remain the same. To judge Dante, we must raise ourselves to his level: let it be well understood that empirically we are not Dante, nor Dante we; but in that moment of contemplation and judgement, our spirit is one with that of the poet, and in that moment we and he are one thing. ( Aes. 121)

Leave aside the remark that we become identical with the poet. If by taste we mean the capacity for aesthetic judgement—that is, the capacity to find beauty—and by genius we mean the capacity to produce beauty, then they are the same: the capacity to realize intuitions.

In Croce’s overall philosophy, the aesthetic stands alone: in having an intuition, one has succeeded entirely insofar as aesthetic value is concerned. Therefore there cannot be a real question of a ‘standard’ of beauty which an object might or might not satisfy. Thus Croce says:

…the criterion of taste is absolute, but absolute in a different way from that of the intellect, which expresses itself in ratiocination. The criterion of taste is absolute, with the intuitive absoluteness of the imagination. ( Aes. 122)

Of course there is as a matter of fact a great deal of variability in critical verdicts. But Croce believes this is largely due to variances in the ‘psychological conditions’ and the physical circumstance of spectators ( Aes. 124). Much of this can be offset by ‘historical interpretation’ ( Aes. 126); the rest, one presumes, are due to disturbances already mentioned: ‘haste, vanity, want of reflexion, theoretic prejudices’ ( Aes. 120). Also one must realize that for Croce, all that Sibley famously characterized as aesthetic concepts—not just gracefulness, delicacy and so on but only aesthetically negative concepts like ugliness—are really variations on the over-arching master-concept beauty .

The title of the first great book of Croce’s career was ‘Aesthetic as a Science of expression and general linguistic ’ (emphasis added). There are several interconnected aspects to this.

Croce claims that drawing, sculpting, writing of music and so on are just as much ‘language’ as poetry, and all language is poetic; therefore ‘ Philosophy of language and philosophy of art are the same thing ’ ( Aes. 142; author’s emphasis). The reason for this is that language is to be understood as expressive; ‘an emission of sounds which expresses nothing is not language’ ( Aes. 143). From our perspective, we might regard Croce as arguing thus: (1) Referential semantics—scarcely mentioned by Croce—necessarily involves parts of speech. (2) However:

It is false to say that a verb or noun is expressed in definite words, truly distinguishable from others. Expression is an indivisible whole. Noun and verb do not exist in it, but are abstractions made by us, destroying the sole linguistic reality, which is the sentence . ( Aes. 146)

If we take this as asserting the primacy of sentence meaning—glossing over the anti-abstraction remark which is tantamount to a denial of syntactic compositionality—then together with (3) a denial of what in modern terms would be distinction between semantic and expressive meaning, or perhaps in Fregean terms sense and tone, then it is not obvious that the resulting picture of language would not apply equally to, for example, drawing. In that case, just as drawings cannot be translated, so linguistic translation is impossible (though for certain purposes, naturally, we can translate ‘relatively’; Aes. 68).

Interestingly, Croce does not think of all signs as natural signs, as lightning is a sign of thunder; on the contrary, he thinks of ‘pictures, poetry and all works of art’ as equally conventional—as ‘ historically conditioned ’ ( Aes. 125; authors emphasis).

There is no doubt that on this point Croce was inspired by his great precursor, the Neapolitan Giambattista Vico (1668–1744). According to Croce ( Aes. 220–34) Vico was the first to recognise the aesthetic as a self-sufficient and non-conceptual mode of knowledge, and famously he held that all language is substantially poetry. The only serious mistake in this that Croce found was Vico’s belief in an actual historical period when all language was poetry; it was the mistake of substituting a concrete history for ‘ideal history’ ( Aes. 232).

As he became older, there was one aspect of his aesthetics that he was uneasy with. In the Aesthetic of 1901 ( Aes. 82–7, 114), and again in Essence of Aesthetic of 1913 ( EA 13–16) , he had been happy to deduce from his theory that art cannot have an ethical purpose. The only value in art is beauty. But by 1917, in the essay The Totality of Artistic Expression ( PPH 261–73), his attitude towards the moral content of art is more nuanced. This may have been only a shift of emphasis, or, charitably perhaps, drawing out a previously unnoticed implication: ‘If the ethical principle is a cosmic [universal] force (as it certainly is) and queen of the world, the world of liberty, she reigns in her own right, while art, in proportion to the purity with which she re-enacts and expresses the motions of reality, is herself perfect’ ( PPH 267). In other words, he still holds that to speak of a moral work of art would not impinge upon it aesthetically; likewise to speak of an immoral work, for the values of the aesthetic and moral domains are absolutely incommensurable. It is not merely an assertion that within the domain of pure intuition, the concepts simply don’t apply; that would merely beg the question. He means that a pure work of art cannot be subject to moral praise or blame because the Aesthetic domain exists independently of and prior, in the Philosophy of Spirit, to the Ethical.

In the Encyclopaedia article of 1928, Croce asserts positively that the moral sensibility is a necessary condition of the artist:

The foundation of all poetry is therefore the human personality, and since the human personality fulfills itself morally, the foundation of all poetry is the moral conscience. ( PPH 221)

Still it’s possible to read him as not having changed his view. For instance, Shakespeare could not have been Shakespeare without seeing into the moral heart of man, for morality is the highest domain of spirit. But we have to distinguish between the moral sensibility—the capacity to perceive and feel moral emotions—and the capacity to act morally. Croce’s position is that only the first is relevant to art.

The early emphasis on beauty is downplayed in subsequent writing in favour of the successful work art as expression, as constituting a ‘lyrical intuition’. In Essence of Aesthetic he writes:

…what gives coherence and unity to the intuition is feeling: the intuition is really such because it represents a feeling, and can only appear from and upon that. Not the idea, but the feeling, is what confers upon art the airy lightness of a symbol: an aspiration enclosed in the circle of a representation—that is art; and in it the aspiration alone stands for the representation, and the representation alone for the aspiration. ( EA 30)

Croce still holds that art is intuitive, a-logical or nonconceptual, and therefore by ‘it represents a feeling’ he does not mean that our aesthetic mode of engagement involves that concept, and he does not mean that art is to be understood as symbolic, implying a relation which would require an intellectual act of mind to apprehend. Both would imply that our mode of aesthetic engagement would be something more, or something other than, the aesthetic, which is as always the intuitive capacity. The point is simply that our awareness of the form of the intuition in nothing but our awareness of the unifying currents of feeling running through it. It is a claim about what it is that unifies an intuition, distinguishes it from the surrounding, relatively discontinuous or confused intuition. This is, in effect, a claim about the nature of beauty:

An appropriate expression, if appropriate, is also beautiful, beauty being nothing but the precision of the image, and therefore of the expression. …( EA 48).

Expression and beauty are not two concepts, but a single concept, which it is permissible to designate with either synonymous word … ( EA 49).

Genuinely new in the 1917 essay was Croce’s appealing but enigmatic claim that art is in a sense ‘universal’, is concerned with the ‘totality’:

To give artistic form to a content of feeling means, then, impressing upon it the character of totality, breathing into it the breath of the cosmos. Thus understood, universality and artistic form are not two things but one. ( PPH 263).

In intuition, the single pulsates with the life of the whole, and the whole is in the life of the single. Every genuine artistic representation is itself and is the universe, the universe in that individual form, and that individual form as the universe. In every utterance, every fanciful [imaginative] creation, of the poet, there lies the whole of human destiny, all human hope, illusions, griefs, joys, human grandeurs and miseries, the whole drama of reality perpetually evolving and growing out of itself in suffering and joy. ( PPH 262)

Croce—and undoubtedly the political situation in Italy in 1917 played a role in this—was anxious to assert the importance of art for humanity, and his assertion of it is full of feeling. And the claim marks a decisive break from earlier doctrine: form is now linked with universality rather that with particular feelings. But it is difficult to see beyond such metaphors as ‘impressing upon it the character of totality’ (not even with the help of Croce’s Logic ). One is reminded of the Kantian dictum that in aesthetics we ‘demand universality’ in our judgements, but there are no explicit indications of such. There is one piece of Crocean philosophy behind it: Since art takes place prior to the intellect, so the logical distinction between subject and predicate collapses; therefore perhaps at least one barrier is removed from speaking of the ‘universality of art’. But that does not indicate what, positively, it means. It obvious that there is something right about speaking of the ‘universal character’ of a Beethoven or a Michelangelo as opposed to the pitiful, narrow little spectacle of this month’s pop band, but Croce doesn’t tell us what justifies or explains such talk (various others have reached a similar conclusion; see Orsini p. 214). Still, that doesn’t mean that he had no right to proclaim it, and perhaps not to count his readers as agreeing to it.

10. Problems

There is a lot of Croce’s aesthetics that we have not discussed, including his criticisms of the discipline of Rhetoric (Aes. 67–73; PPH 233–35), his disparagement of ‘genre criticism’—that is, his doctrine that there are ultimately no aesthetic differences amongst different kinds of art (Aes. 111–17, EA 53–60, PPH 229–33)—and his condemnation of psychological and other naturalistic views of art ( Aes. 87–93; EA 41–7). There is also his magnificent if contentious précis of the history of aesthetics ( Aes. 155–474). But these are points of relative detail; the theory is whole is sufficiently well before us now to conclude by mentioning some general lines of criticism.

The equation of intuition with expression as at section 4.3 simply is not, in end, plausible. C. J. Ducasse (1929) put his finger on it. When we look at a vase full of flowers, it simply does not matter how closely or in what manner we attend to it; we do not create a ‘work of art’ unless we draw or paint it. Croce has lost sight of the ordinary sense of passively contemplating and doing something; between reading and writing, looking and drawing, listening and playing, dancing and watching. Of course all the first members of these pairs involve a mental action of a kind, and there are important connections between the first members and the corresponding seconds—perhaps in terms of what Berenson calls ideated sensations —but that is not to say that there are not philosophically crucial distinctions between them.

The equation also defeats the purpose of art criticism or interpretation, and indeed of the very notion of an aesthetic community, of an audience. To say that the work of art is identical with the intuition is to say that it is necessarily private. It is to say, for example, that since one man’s intuition of Botticelli’s Venus is necessarily different from any one else’s, there is no such thing as Botticelli’s Venus , understood not as a material painting but as a work of art; there is only Botticelli’s- Venus -for-A, Botticelli’s- Venus -for-B, and so on. But these intuitions cannot be compared, and there is no higher standard; thus they cannot be said to agree or disagree, since any such comparison would be logically impossible (see Tilghman 1971, Ch. 1, for further discussion; for at attempt at saving Croce, see Schusterman 1983). The position is perhaps not contradictory, but it is exceedingly unattractive; it renders art a diversion away from reality, when as Freud emphasized—to invoke a figure who is Croce’s opposite in almost every respect—the artist’s struggle with the medium is the attempt to conquer reality. Although Croce disowned this consequence, it’s hard not to conclude that on this view art is a domain of fancy (in the bad sense), without any check upon vanity (see Aes. 122 for a point at which Croce almost sees the point). If we bring back the material painted object into the picture, of course, then there is no such difficulty: ones ‘intuition’ will be accurate, or one’s interpretation will be correct, just in case it corresponds to the picture (of course the notion of ‘corresponds to the picture’ is only a placeholder for a great deal to be supplied by theories of representation, perspective, expression and other parts of aesthetics; but the one thing that plausible theories will share is a commitment to the object, the material painting).

It’s worth emphasizing again that Croce’s claim that intuition is expression, and consequently that works art are mental objects, is not just an application of his general idealism. It is independent of it. In the Encyclopaedia Britannica article, for example, he allows himself to speak for convenience of the ‘spiritual’ and ‘physical’, in order to make the point that the physical object is only of practical, and not of aesthetic significance ( PPH 227–8).

Undoubtedly Croce was influenced by his lifelong immersion in literature in his proclamation that all language is poetry. And perhaps it is true that all language has some poetic qualities, and perhaps it is true that language ‘in its actuality’ consists of sentential utterances. But as Bosanquet pointed out in 1919, this does not mean that language is only poetry, or that the referential dimension of language does not exist. It must have something that distinguishes a scientific treatise from a tune—in fact it must be the same thing, which we are calling the referential dimension, that serves to distinguish poetry from a tune (it has to have sound and sense , as we say). So to say that drawings and tunes are equally good examples of language seems, at best, strained. Perhaps Croce would have said that the referential dimension does not exist, or is a false abstraction; but his general philosophical views may be forcing him down an unprepossessing path. More promising would be a formalist endeavor to try to isolate the pure sonic aspect of poetry—comprising metre, alliteration and so on—and then to search for instantiations or at least analogies in the other arts.

Suppose Croce were to give up the idea that art is intuition, and agree that the work of art is identical with the material work—remember this would not prevent him being an idealist in his general philosophy—and suppose he allowed that he was wrong about language. What would remain of his theory would arguably be its essence: that art is expression, and we engage with it via the intuitive capacity. It remains individual, and perhaps pre-conceptual.

In closing, the reader may find it useful if we summarize the major differences—narrowly on matters of aesthetics—between Croce and Collingwood, who is often thought of as Croce’s follower. (Indeed the question of whether, how, and to what extent Croce ‘influenced’ Collingwood, not only in aesthetics but in wider matters of metaphysics and history, are vexed questions. According to a careful study Rik Peters, the influence was perhaps pervasive insofar as Croce influenced the questions that Collingwood posed for himself, but Peters concludes that the answers given were of Collingwood’s own making; see Peters 2011 for more; for the matter specifically about art and aesthetics, see also Hospers 1956, Donagan 1962, and Jones 1972.) First, Collingwood seems to agree with Croce that art, so to speak, is everywhere—there no self-conscious perception that lacks expressive and aesthetic qualities—whereas Croce’s theory does not tend to regard the expressive content of work of art as something ‘in the artist’, emphasizing instead its form and later its ‘universality’, Collingwood tries to explain expressive content in terms of a detailed theory of the emotions. Second, although Croce does devote some energy to discrediting the ‘technical’ theory of art, Collingwood offers a more organized and detailed analysis of why art is not ‘craft’, though arguably the main points are Croce’s. Finally, Collingwood devotes his final sections to a topic left unaddressed by Croce: the problem of whether or in what way the responses of the audience can constrain the object presented by the artist.

Works by Croce:

• 1902. Estetica come scienza dell’espressione e linguistica generale , Florence: Sandron.
• 1909 [1922]. Aesthetic: As science of expression and general linguistic , translated by Douglas Ainslie, New York: Noonday. Cited as Aes .
• 1909. Logica come scienza del concetto puro , Florence: Sandron.
• 1909. Filosofia della practica, economica ed etica , Florence: Sandron.
• 1913. Breviario di estetica , Naples: Laterza.
• 1917. Logic as the Science of the Pure Concept , translated by Douglas Ainslie, London: Macmillan.
• 1917. Philosophy of the Practical, Economic and Ethic , translated by Douglas Ainslie, London: Macmillan.
• 1921. The Essence of Aesthetic , translated by Douglas Ainslie, London: Heinemann. Noted as EA . (Likely to be superseded by the 1992 translation below.)
• 1952. ‘Dewey’s Aesthetics and Theory of Knowledge, translated by F. Simoni, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 11(1): 1–6.
• 1995 [1965]. Guide to Aesthetics , translated by Patrick Romanell, Indianopolis: Hackett.
• 1966. Philosophy, Poetry, History: An Anthology of Essays , translated and introduced by Cecil Sprigge, London: Oxford University Press. Noted as PPH
• 1992. The Aesthetic as the Science of Expression and of the Linguistic in General Part I: Theory , translated by Colin Lyas, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• 2007. Breviary of Aesthetics: Four Lectures , translated by Hiroko Fudemoto, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
• 2017. A Croce Reader: Aesthetics, Philosophy, History, and Literary Criticism , edited and translated by Massimo Verdicchio, Ontario: University of Toronto Press.
• Bosanquet, B., 1919. ‘Croce’s Aesthetic’, Proceedings of the British Academy , IX: 261–288.
• –––, 1920. ‘Reply to Carr’, Mind , XXIX(2): 212–15.
• Carr, H. W., 1917. The Philosophy of Benedetto Croce , London: Macmillan.
• Donagan, A., 1962. The Later Philosophy of R.G. Collingwood , Oxford: Clarendon.
• Douglas, G. H., 1970. A Reconsideration of the Dewey-Croce Exchange, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 28(4): 497–504.
• Ducasse, C., 1929. The Philosophy of Art , New York: Dial.
• de Gennaro, A. 1968. ‘Benedetto Croce and Herbert Read’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 26(3): 307–310.
• Hospers, J. 1956. ‘The Croce-Collingwood Theory of Art’, Philosophy , 31(119): 291–308.
• Jones, P. 1972. ‘A Critical Outline of Collingwood’s Philosophy of Art’, in Critical Essays on the Philosophy of R.G. Collingwood , edited by Michael Krausz, Oxford: Clarendon: 42–65.
• Kemp, G. 2003. ‘The Croce-Collingwood Theory as Theory’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 61(2): 171–193.
• Moss, M. E., 1987. Benedetto Croce reconsidered: truth and error in theories of art, literature, and history , London: University of New England Press.
• Orsini, G., 1961. Benedetto Croce: Philosophy of Art and Literary Critic , Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
• Patankar R. B., 1962. ‘What Does Croce Mean by ‘Expression’?’, The British Journal of Aesthetics , 2(2): 112–125.
• Paton, M., 1985. ‘Getting Croce Straight’, The Brit Journal of Aesthetics , 25(3): 252–265.
• Peters, R., 2011. History as Thought and Action: The Philosophies of Croce, Gentile, de Ruggiero and Collingwood , Exeter: Imprint Academic.
• Scaglione, A., 1959. ‘Croce’s Definition of Literary Criticism’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , 17(4): 447–456.
• Shusterman, R., 1988. ‘Croce on Interpretation: Deconstruction and Pragmatism’, New Literary History , 20(1): 199–216.
• Tilghman B., 1970. The Expression of Emotion in the Visual Arts: A Philosophical Inquiry , The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Vittorio M., 2012. ‘Reflections on the Croce–Dewey exchange’, Modern Italy , 17(1): 31–49. [ available online ].

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Bendetto Croce Archive

art, definition of | Collingwood, Robin George: aesthetics | Dewey, John: aesthetics | Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich: aesthetics | idealism | intuition | privacy | Vico, Giambattista

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Dr. Martine Lejeune of the Department for Applied Linguistics, College Ghent, for bibliographical help and for pointing out certain errors in the original entry. The SEP editors would like to thank Filippo Contesi for notifying us of a number of typographical infelicities in this entry.

Copyright © 2021 by Gary Kemp < gary . kemp @ glasgow . ac . uk >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Means of Expression in Collingwood's Theory of Art

Related Papers

Gabriella Berettoni

The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication

Chinatsu Kobayashi

Donald Landes

In a recent defense of Collingwood's theory of art and expression as it appears in The Principles of Art, Aaron Ridley nonetheless attempts to scale back Collingwood's claim that every human gesture or utterance is a work of art. Although Ridley's defense of Collingwood against the charges of naïve idealism or a naïve " expression " theory is flawless, his rejection of Collingwood's generalization of the theory of expression to language and gestures threatens Collingwood's underlying ethical point against the " corruption of consciousness. " In this paper, I argue that accepting Collingwood's account of the process of expression entails accepting his difficult ethical position. If Collingwood is correct in his account of artistic expression, then we cannot escape his ultimate, if difficult, conclusions about responsibility in all matters of language and communication.

Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

Jose Juan Gonzalez

It is a common statement in the most traditional views of the history of the philosophy of art to consider the nineteenth century as the moment of birth of the expression theory of art, a theory that ended pushing aside the already declining imitation theory of art. It is also usually understood that the expressionist theory defended that the essence of art was to express emotion, that the artist aim was to translate somehow emotions into artworks, and that these emotions ended in some way reaching the audience or the public of the work of art that was contemplated, listened to, or read... This explanation of art received a further development during the first half of the twentieth century by R. G. Collingwood among others, but was soon replaced by other theories that moved in a wider scope. Nevertheless Collingwood's approach to art continues being a reference for the reflection of many contemporary philosophers, although the general sense of their approach to his philosophy of art is mainly negative: it is more worried about criticizing Collingwood's view than about understanding it. The aim of this exposition is not to defend Collingwood's explanation of art, but to show important errors of interpretation that have become a common place in the objections that are made against his proposal. To accomplish it, I pretend to take a close look to the criticisms to his theory made by one of the most important exponents of the aesthetics of the analytical tradition, George Dickie. I have chosen him because he both summarizes and has contributed to extend quite well the general tone of the objections against Collingwood's account of art. These mainly focus on the understanding of art as imagination, on the definition of art as expression of emotion, and on the relation between these two approaches to art. By their analysis, I hope to give some clues to help in a better understanding of these concepts in Collingwood's philosophy of art, not only because of the historical value that this might have, but because of the light that Collingwood's approach to art can throw upon contemporary reflections on the relation between art, emotion and value.

The British Journal of Aesthetics

John Dilworth

According to RG Collingwood in The Principles of Art, art is the expression of emotion—a much-criticized view. I attempt to provide some groundwork for a defensible modern version of such a theory via some novel further criticisms of Collingwood, including the exposure ...

The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

Tom Cochrane

I share Aaron Ridley's1 enthusiasm for that part of Collingwood's theory of art (Aaron Ridley, "Not Ideal: Collingwood's Expression Theory," The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 55 (1997): 263-272) which concentrates on Expression in relation to the physical involvements (manipulation of paint and canvases, etc.) which are an integral part of what most artists do. Nevertheless Ridley's overall strategy for defending Collingwood's general theory (though undeniably stimulating) leaves me somewhat puzzled. In my comments I'll concentrate on these areas of perplexity and possible disagreement, in hopes of producing further clarification from him.

Michelle Burdine

Burdine, Michelle Marie. M.H. Master of Humanities Program, Wright State University, 2013. Value Perspective: A Necessary Condition for Photographic Art. The conjoined relationship photography has with technology complicates conversations about photography as art because this relationship allows photography to be used interchangeably for practical, social, and commercial purposes, as well as for art. A theory of art for photography is needed in order to accurately separate photographic art from vernacular photography. I show that photography has a unique relationship with technology, which has served to promote the rapid democratization of photography, and that the photographic arts have been treated differently from the greater fine arts. This is especially evident when photographic portraiture is compared with painted portraiture. I offer my own “value perspective” theory as a solution to the problem and show why photography cannot accept existing theories of art by George Dickie,...

Ulrich de Balbian

RELATED PAPERS

Stephen Davies

BRENDA ZOAR LARA

Veronika Fedorova

Rivista di Estetica

Filippo Focosi

Paisley Livingston , Mikael Pettersson

Jenefer Robinson

danny shorkend

Marta Benenti

Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement

Sebastian Gardner

Philosophia

Ioana Cazan-Tufescu

Christopher Bennett

Sümeyye Taşdelen

Dijo Mathews

Amany Elnahhas

Jonathan Langseth

Art, Emotion and Value Proceedings of the 5th …

Wolfram Bergande

Sharon Bailin

Elisa Galgut

Romain Boonen

Francisca Pérez-Carreño

Gary Shapiro

Journal of the Philosophy of History

Parysa Mostajir

Paisley Livingston , Paisley Livingston

Journal of the Institute of Engineering

Julie C Van Camp

Estetika: The European Journal of Aesthetics

Rob van Gerwen

Robert Stecker

Berat Akgül

Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 19 (2013) 2

Michael O'Sullivan

janice mills wordpress

Janice Mills

Philip Stanfield

Natasha Mayo

Sarah Frances Dias

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Emotion Theory in Art: The Affective Power of Artistic Expression

Table of Contents

Have you ever found yourself moved by a painting, or felt a surge of emotion while listening to a piece of music? Art has a mysterious power to evoke feelings within us, a phenomenon that philosophers and aesthetic ians have sought to understand for centuries. One compelling explanation is the Emotion Theory of art , which suggests that the primary function of art is to express and elicit emotions. Let’s dive into this fascinating concept and explore how art becomes a bridge between the artist’s internal world and our own emotional experiences.

Art as the language of emotions

At the heart of the Emotion Theory is the idea that art is fundamentally a means of communication, but instead of conveying facts or information, it communicates feelings. The artist embeds their emotional experiences into their creations, which are then ‘decoded’ by the viewer through their own emotional responses. This process can forge a deep, invisible connection between the creator and the audience, often transcending words and direct interactions.

The historical roots of Emotion Theory

The notion that art is intimately linked with emotion is not new. Philosophers like Benedetto Croce and R\.G\. Collingwood placed significant emphasis on this relationship. Croce believed that art is the intuitive expression of human emotions, while Collingwood saw art as the outward expression of the artist’s emotional life. Their thoughts laid the groundwork for understanding why art can have such a profound impact on us, emotionally speaking.

Understanding the artist’s perspective

From the artist’s point of view, creating art is often a cathartic experience. It is a way for them to process and externalize their internal emotional states. When an artist feels joy, sorrow, anger, or love, these emotions can be channeled into their work—through brushstrokes, melodies, or the rhythm of words. As audiences, we may not know the specific circumstances that gave rise to these emotions, but we can feel their intensity and sincerity in the finished piece.

Expressionism and beyond

The Expressionist movement in art vividly illustrates the Emotion Theory. Expressionist artists sought to depict not the reality of the external world, but rather the subjective emotions and responses that objects and events evoke within a person. However, emotional expression in art is not confined to any single movement—it is a thread that runs through all forms of artistic endeavor, from classical music to contemporary installations.

The audience’s emotional journey

As viewers or listeners, we bring our own emotional histories to our encounters with art. This personal context can shape our interpretations and emotional reactions. A song might remind you of a loved one, or a painting could evoke a sense of nostalgia for a place you’ve never been. These personal connections are what make art so universally powerful yet individually unique in its impact.

Emotional contagion in art

One fascinating aspect of the Emotion Theory is the concept of emotional contagion —whereby the emotions conveyed by a work of art can ‘infect’ the viewer. This phenomenon can occur even when the emotion expressed is not directly related to the viewer’s personal experience. It is a testament to the universal language of emotions that art so effectively speaks.

Art, emotion, and empathy

Engaging with art can also foster empathy. By immersing ourselves in the emotional world of another—be it the artist or a character in a story—we expand our own capacity for understanding and compassion. Art encourages us to step into the shoes of others and view the world from perspectives other than our own.

The therapeutic potential of art

Given its emotional potency, art can be used therapeutically. Art therapy is a field that harnesses the expressive and emotive aspects of art-making to help individuals explore and manage their feelings. It’s a testament to the power of art to not only reflect emotions but also to aid in healing them.

Challenges to the Emotion Theory

While the Emotion Theory offers a compelling lens through which to view art, it is not without its critics. Some argue that reducing art to mere emotional expression oversimplifies the rich complexity of artistic creation and experience. Others point out that art can also serve intellectual , moral, or social functions that are not primarily emotional in nature.

A multifaceted understanding of art

Indeed, art is multifaceted and can be appreciated on many levels—emotional, intellectual, aesthetic, and more. It’s important to recognize that while emotion may be a central aspect of many artistic experiences, it is not the sole purpose or function of all art.

The Emotion Theory of art underscores the idea that art is a deeply human endeavor, tied intrinsically to our emotional lives. Whether as a creator or a spectator, our engagement with art is often a dance of feelings—a complex interplay between the emotions embedded in the work and those it evokes within us.

What do you think? Have you ever experienced a strong emotional reaction to a piece of art? Do you believe that the primary purpose of art should be to evoke emotions, or is there more to the story? Share your thoughts and let’s explore the affective power of artistic expression together.

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating / 5. Vote count:

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

1 Philosophy of Art

• A Unified Experience
• Existential Possibilities
• Relation Between Art and Epistemology
• Enjoyment of Beauty in Art
• Beauty as Meant by Different Thinkers

2 Rasa – Definition, Nature and Scope

• Poetry as Emotive Meaning
• The Validity of Rasa as a Theoretical Concept

3 Aesthetics – Definition, Nature and Scope

• Definition of Aesthetics
• Nature of Aesthetics
• Three Approaches to Aesthetics
• The Aesthetic Recipient
• The Aesthetic Experience
• Scope of Aesthetics

4 Aesthetic Objects

• Aesthetics in Ancient Greek
• Indian Aesthetics
• Aesthetics in Medieval Period
• Eighteenth Century German Aesthetics
• Aesthetics Judgment

5 Bharata on Rasa

• The Natyasastra – a Curtain Raiser
• The term Rasa
• The Rasa Sutra
• The Key Concepts of Rasa Theory
• Bharata’s Rasa Theory

6 Theories of Rasa

• Bhatta Lollata and his Utpattivada
• Sri Sankuka and his Anumitivada
• Bhatta Nayaka and his Bhuktivada
• Sadharnikarana

7 Indian Aestheticians

• Concerns of Indian Aestheticians
• Bharata’s Contribution
• Abhinavagupta’s Contribution
• The Concept of Dhvani

8 Abhinavagupta’s Philosophy of Rasa

• Rasa as Sui generis
• Rasa Dhvani
• Alaukika Rasa

9 Ancient Theory of Aesthetics

• Pre-Socratic Artists
• Socrates on Art and Artists
• Plato’s Theory of Imitation
• Aristotle’s Doctrine of Katharsis
• Plotinus on Intellectual Beauty

10 Medieval Theory of Aesthetics

• St. Augustine and Pseudo-Dionysius
• St. Thomas Aquinas
• Renaissance Movement
• Transition – Rene Descartes

11 Modern Theory of Aesthetics

• Earl of Shaftesbury (1671-1713)
• Joseph Addison (1672-1719)
• Hutcheson (1694-1747)
• David Hume (1711-1776)
• Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

12 Postmodern Theory of Aesthetics

• Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
• Hegel (1770-1831)
• Aesthetic Thought: A Historical Summary
• Benedetto Croce (1866-1952)

13 Ontology of Art

• Etymological Meaning of ‘Ontology’ and ‘Art’
• Art as Process
• Mimetic Theory of Art
• Emotion Theory
• Intuitionist Theory of Art
• Physicality / Content Theory
• Triptych Theory of Art
• Performance Theory of Art
• Institutional Theory of Art
• Formalistic Theory of Art
• Representation Theory
• Art as Interpretation

14 Applied Rasa – Indian Persepctive

• Rasa in Tradition
• Rasa in Classical Indian Aesthetics
• Rasa in Contemporary Thinking
• Categories of Rasas

15 Applied Aesthetics – Western Perspective

• World of Music/ Applied Aesthetics of Musicology
• Applied Aesthetics in Mathematical Domains
• Application of Aesthetics in Information Field
• Applied Aesthetics related to Digital Art and a Host of varied fields
• Application of Aesthetics in Other Fields

16 Art Experience

• Hiriyanna on ‘Art Experience’
• Rasa Theory as Art Experience: In Context of Poetry
• Art Experience: A Practical Approach
• Art Experience in Vedantic Context
• Art Experience and Samkhya
• Art Contemplation
• Art Experience and Morality

Share on Mastodon

Expressive Theory of Art

Expressionism Art – A History of the Expressionist Movement

Expressionism existed as a period within art that abandoned realistic and accurate representations of scenes and subjects in an attempt to capture the subjective perspective of the artists. Seen as a modernist movement, Expressionism art emerged in Germany just before World War I, before spreading across the world. This broad movement developed into a niche exploration of art known as German Expressionism, which went on to define the Expressionist movement throughout its reign. In this article, we will introduce you to the style and characteristics of Expressionism, as well as its development through German Expressionism and a few famous artists who shaped it. Keep reading for more about this fascinating art movement! 

Table of Contents

• 1.1 Precursors of the Expressionism Movement
• 1.2 Coining the Name of the Movement
• 1.3 Exploring an Expressionism Art Definition
• 1.4 The Development of German Expressionism
• 2.1 Important Groups Within German Expressionism
• 2.2 Die Brücke
• 2.3 Der Blaue Reiter
• 3.1 Edvard Munch (1863 – 1944)
• 3.2 Wassily Kandinsky (1866 – 1944)
• 3.3 Franz Marc (1880 – 1916)
• 3.4 Ernst Ludwig Kirchner (1880 – 1938)
• 3.5 Karl Schmidt-Rottluff (1884 – 1976)
• 3.6 Oskar Kokoschka (1886 – 1980)
• 3.7 Egon Schiele (1890 – 1918)
• 4 The Legacy of Expressionism Art
• 6.1 What Is Expressionism?
• 6.2 What Is a Suitable Expressionism Art Definition?
• 6.3 Which Painters Were Well-Known Within the Expressionism Art Movement?
• 6.4 What Artistic Groups Developed in Response to Expressionism?

An Introduction to Expressionism Art

Arising in Germany in 1905, the Expressionism years encompassed an Avant-Garde movement that leveraged exaggerations and distortions within artworks to accurately depict 20th-century life from a subjective perspective. This style of art developed before the start of the First World War and was popular during the Weimar Republic in Germany, before its decline in 1920. In addition to Expressionist painting, the movement extended itself to a wide range of artistic categories, including literature, drama, and cinema.

Seen to exist as essentially a modernist movement , Expressionism originated during a period of intense change and upheaval across Europe. During this time, society was developing at a rapid rate due to the industrialization, which took the continent by storm, as well as the chaotic state of the world that was present within countries leading up to World War I. This led to German artists responding to these two important events through the artworks they created.

The inventions within the production and communication sphere brought about a sense of apprehension among the general public. This was due to the expansion in technology in addition to the radical urban development of major cities, which resulted in intense feelings of isolation and detachment from the natural world.

These vivid emotions began filtering into art production at the time, as artists expressed their anxieties through a heightened use of color, jagged angles, flattened forms, and heavily distorted figures.

As the beginning of the First World War loomed, themes related to the grotesque appeared in Expressionist art. Artists began to experiment with printmaking, as it was an efficient way to quickly distribute their work to a larger audience. Additionally, Expressionism art tackled political and social causes, which spread far and wide, and helped carry the emotional significance present in Expressionist artists’ works beyond traditional artistic styles.

Initially, many of the Expressionist artists supported the idea of war, as they believed that it would lead to the defeat of the middle-class society, along with its widespread materialistic tendencies and cultural limitations. However, as the artists joined the cause and were recruited, their personal experience of the war destroyed their previous feelings of optimism and hope. This led to many artists experiencing mental breakdowns, with these emotions being channeled into the works they created.

Subsequently, artworks of the Expressionism movement indicated the broken minds and bodies of the artists who were affected, which gave viewers a personal insight into the gruesome world that existed on the battle lines. Thus, Expressionist art presented a distorted view of the world for an emotional effect as opposed to portraying the grim reality of war. This was done to express the emotional experiences of the artists, in addition to their raw and truthful feelings and ideas about the reality in which they lived.

In their quest for authenticity, Expressionist painters depicted the world exactly as it felt rather than how it looked, taking inspiration from the bold, vibrant, and introspective paintings that were created in the Post-Impressionist era. Artists dismissed the predominant stylistic conventions that had dictated visual creation at the turn of the 20 th century in an attempt to reinvigorate art with conviction and an expressive force.

Precursors of the Expressionism Movement

The origins of the Expressionism movement can be linked to artists such as Edvard Munch, Emil Nolde, Vincent van Gogh, and Henri Matisse . Each artist began to display signs of a departure from lifelike portrayals in their later works, as they preferred to capture the personal thoughts and outlooks of their subjects.

Thus, the style of Expressionism made subjective thoughts a defining aspect of the movement, as artists rejected realistic and precise representations in favor of exaggerations and distortions that they believed to carry a greater impact.

Out of the artists who were thought to influence the development of Expressionism, Munch and Van Gogh existed as the leading pioneers of movement, as it was their artwork that held the most influence over the movement’s distinct characteristics. Both artists made use of unnatural colors, dynamic brushstrokes, and overstated textures within their works, which went on to become essential characteristics of Expressionism art. This resulted in artworks that offered a subjective view of the current reality that existed, as the works gave a glimpse into the mind of the artists at the time.

Munch’s The Scream , painted in 1893, exists as a prominent example of the beginning of Expressionism. Very little attention was given to an accurate portrayal of the subject and the landscape, as a ghoulish figure is seen standing in a background of whirling lines and harsh, contrasting colors. In doing so, Munch managed to convey the deep pain and intense anguish of the figure, which was seen as more important than the actual style and composition of the work.

Coining the Name of the Movement

The term “Expressionism” was popularized by several writers in 1910 but was supposedly coined by Czech art historian Antonin Matějček, who intended the term to mean the opposite of Impressionism. Where Impressionist artists were thought to look externally to the real world when capturing instances such as nature and the human form, Expressionists were said to search inwards for a deeper meaning, so as to accurately express the landscape of their inner lives.

This distinction in style was created through the harsh subject matter that was depicted, as well as the unrestrictive brushwork, jagged forms, and intense colors. While some artists refused to refer to themselves as “Expressionists”, the notion of the movement was so revolutionary at the time that the term “Expressionism” came to represent many styles of Contemporary art . The movement also sparked the Neue Sachlichkeit movement, also recognized as the New Objectivity movement as a response to the emotional intensity of Expressionism. 

Exploring an Expressionism Art Definition

Expressionism as an art movement was very broad and thus, was difficult to define. This was because it overlapped with other major movements within the modernist period, such as Vorticism, Cubism, Futurism , Surrealism, and Dadaism. Expressionism also spanned across different countries, mediums, and periods, meaning that it could not be defined by a strict set of aesthetic principles.

Rather, Expressionism was viewed as a tool of expression and social critique. While the term mainly applied to artworks that were created in the 20 th century, it encompassed all works that were made in reaction to the dehumanizing impact of industrial development and the expansion of cities.

The label “Expressionism” sometimes conjured up feelings of angst, as depicted by the artwork that was created, as the movement existed as an artistic style that sought to portray subjective emotions and responses of ordinary people.

The Development of German Expressionism

As industrialization continued to grow in Europe, artists who started the Expressionism movement migrated to larger cities, bringing with them their ideas surrounding art creation. This led to other artists breaking away to form the subsequent German Expressionism movement , which was characterized by two notable groups known as Die Brücke and Der Blaue Reiter .

Die Brücke , which formed in 1905, was seen as the founding group of the German Expressionist movement, with Der Blaue Reiter only forming in 1911. Although both groups did not refer to themselves as German Expressionist groups, they shared studios, exhibited alongside each other, and went on to publish their works and texts together.

The Expressionism art movement emerged in various cities across Germany in response to the widespread anxiety that arose as an after-effect of industrialization. Artworks portrayed the increasingly despondent relationship that individuals held with both society and nature in the chaos that existed before and during World War I. Due to its success, Expressionism went on to inform other movements like Abstract Expressionism and Neo-Expressionism, and as such, it can be argued that the style continues to thrive today.

Characteristics and Influences of Expressionism Art

When considering this movement, it can be easy to wonder “What is Expressionism?” The style of Expression originally began in Germany and Austria, where a group of artists began creating artworks that made use of certain characteristics. These were works that centered around capturing emotions and feelings as opposed to what subjects looked like.

Striking colors and bold brushstrokes were used to emphasize the emotions that were present, which highlighted the importance of emotional expression over a realistic interpretation.

The Expressionist art movement demonstrated a heavy influence from other early 20 th century movements such as post-Impressionism, Fauvism , and Symbolism. Artists made use of characteristics belonging to other movements when creating Expressionist art, which can be seen in their inclination to make use of arbitrary colors and discordant compositions, as inspired by the Fauves in Paris.

A primary characteristic of the Expressionism art movement was the exaggeration of subject matter. This, combined with swirling and swaying brushstrokes, managed to accurately express the turbulent emotional state that artists found themselves in, as a response to their anxieties about the modern world. Through their stark confrontation with the early-20 th century urban world, artists were able to powerfully insert social critique into their work, which existed as an important characteristic.

This frank depiction of subject matter effectively demonstrated the new principles that existed when art was created and judged. Art was now meant to portray the inner worlds of the artists themselves rather than drawing from a mere depiction of the visual world. The artist’s feelings became more important when assessing the quality of an artwork, as an evaluation of the compositional aspects was no longer regarded as important.

Thus, the representations of the modern city were sinister, as artists created alienated figural interpretations of individuals. These detached renderings were said to represent the turmoil and chaos that was present within their psyche at the time due to the growing emotional distance that existed in society. This separation, which became an ever-present characteristic within Expressionism artworks, was seen as a major consequence of the rapid urbanization that had occurred.

Important Groups Within German Expressionism

Once the Expressionism movement had started, two distinct groups were formed by artists, which encompassed the different styles and characteristics that were used. These groups, known as Die Brücke and Der Blaue Reiter, led to the specific production of German Expressionism art during the movement’s existence. Below, we will discuss the different groups of German Expressionism that will inform your broader understanding of Expressionism. 

Founded by artists Ernst Ludwig-Kirchner, Karl Schmidt-Rottluff, Erich Heckel, and Fritz Bleyl, the Die Brücke group was formed in Dresden in 1905. Existing as a non-conformist collective of Expressionist artists, the Die Brücke group was influenced by the works of Vincent van Gogh and Edvard Munch, and went on to create art that went against the conservative social order of Germany. However, all four founding members were only architecture students at the time, with none of them ever receiving any formal art education.

The name of the group, Die Brücke, was chosen to emphasize their shared desire to create a bridge connecting the past and the present, as the word brücke simply translates to “bridge.” Additionally, the name was inspired by a passage of writing from German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, whose writing was considered a fundamental influence on the development of Expressionism.

The artists within Die Brücke sought to escape the boundaries of contemporary middle-class life by experimenting with a heightened sense of color within their works, which was thought to represent the raw emotion that existed within society. Additionally, the direct and simplified approach that was taken when rendering form produced provocative representations of modern society and demonstrated the freedom of sexuality that was experienced.

While artists portrayed city inhabitants, bolder works went on to depict prostitutes and dancers working in the city’s streets and nightclubs. This daring portrayal created artworks that introduced “the degenerate underbelly” of German society at the time. Unlike the pastoral scenes that were created by Impressionists, members of Die Brücke purposefully sought to distort forms through the use of artificial colors in order to elicit a visceral and emotional response from viewers. Die Brücke collaborated and exhibited works until the group was dissolved in 1913. This was due to a writing piece of Kirschner, titled Chronik der Brücke (Brücke Chronicle) , which signaled the ending of the group within the same year as the article.

Der Blaue Reiter

Coming into existence after Die Brücke, Der Blaue Reiter was formed in 1911 by artists Wassily Kandinsky, August Macke , Paul Klee, and Franz Marc. Due to the increasing separation they experienced within the ever-modernizing world, the artists of Der Blaue Reiter attempted to surpass the ordinary within art through pursuing the spiritual worth of art instead. The artists of Der Blaue Reiter demonstrated a tendency to portray abstraction, symbolic content, and spiritual reference within their works, as they aimed to convey emotional aspects of being through their highly symbolic and vividly colored depictions.

Despite never publishing a manifesto, the group was unified through their aesthetic developments, which were influenced by Primitivism and Medieval art forms, including Fauvism and Cubism. The name of the group, Der Blaue Reiter, arose from the symbol of a horse and rider, which was derived from one of Kandinsky’s paintings. Thus, the group was related to the recurring theme of a rider on horseback taken from Kandinsky’s period of Munich artworks. For Kandinsky, the rider was thought to represent the transition from the real world into the spiritual one, as it acted as a metaphor for the group’s artistic techniques. The name also symbolized Kandinsky and Marc’s love for the color blue, which they believed to possess spiritual qualities.

Kandinsky believed that simple colors and shapes could help viewers to better perceive the moods and feelings that were present within the paintings, with this theory further encouraging him towards increased use of abstraction in his works. For other members of the group, the symbolism of the name became a central tenet when delving deeper into the world of abstraction within the artworks they created.

Unfortunately, just like Die Brücke, Der Blaue Reiter was a short-lived group. Due to the start of World War I in 1914, both Marc and Macke were drafted into the German military and shortly killed in battle. This forced the remaining members of the group to return home, which led to the immediate dissolution of the group. Despite both groups existing for a brief period, each had a tremendous influence on the Expressionism movement within Germany. Expressionism continued as the dominant artistic style in Germany following the end of the war, with its popularity beginning to fade around 1920.

The movement was later revived during the 1970s in the form of Neo-Expressionism, which spread to the United States and led to the development of Figurative Expressionism and Abstract Expressionism.

Famous Expressionist Artists and Their Artworks

Throughout the lifespan of the Expressionism movement, many significant artworks were made notable artists, which went on to define the trajectory of the movement. A few of these important artists have been listed below, along with their Expressionism painting that remains iconic today.

Edvard Munch (1863 – 1944)

Seen as one of the greatest influences and principal precursors of the Expressionism movement, Norwegian artist Edvard Munch created frenzied artworks that expressed the anxiety of European individuals due to the recent modernization of society. The late 19th-century painter emerged as a prominent source of inspiration for other Expressionist artists, as his energetic and emotion-filled artworks created new potential for introspective expression within art.

Before Expressionism, Munch was part of the Symbolist movement and created artworks that were heavily influenced by Impressionism and post-Impressionism . Throughout his career, which spanned almost 60 years, Munch targeted scenes of agony, death, and anxiety within his works. He achieved this through creating deformed and emotionally charged portraits, with this style going on to inform the primary characteristics of Expressionism.

The Scream , painted in 1893, exists as his most notable work, as well as one of the most iconic Modern artworks in the world. Within his work, Munch depicted the conflict that existed between spirituality and modernity at the time, which became a central theme in his works. This work is based on Munch himself, as it recounts his experience of being left behind by two of his friends and hearing a shrill scream of nature. Thus, the work portrays the battle that existed between the individual and society within the Modern era.

This work was inspired by a fleeting moment and was celebrated for its ability to represent the profound feelings of angst and anxiety that filtered into early modernist society. Munch recalled walking across a bridge in Oslo when the sky turned blood red, which filled him with fear and secured him to the spot before he heard an infinite scream. When viewing the work, one can see that the scream was felt by the figure, as it immerses him completely while simultaneously piercing both the environment and his soul.

The portrayal of Munch’s emotional response to a scene would go on to form the foundation of the works produced by Expressionists. By the start of 1905, Munch was spending a lot of time in Germany, which put him into direct contact with the movement. There, his themes of alienation in his work developed, which fascinated Expressionist painters and became a central feature within Contemporary art. Today, two versions of The Scream exist, with one located at the Munch Museum in Oslo and the other at the Oslo National Gallery.

Wassily Kandinsky (1866 – 1944)

An important figure of the Der Blaue Reiter group was the Russian painter Wassily Kandinsky, who founded the group and produced the German Expressionism art piece that gave the group its name. A pioneer in abstraction within Modern art, Kandinsky went on to create artworks that acted as a bridge between the post-Impressionism and Expressionism movements. Due to this, his work went encountered some stylistic changes, as it developed from realistic and natural to geometric and abstracted.

Kandinsky’s first and most important Expressionist work was painted in 1903 and was titled Der Blaue Reiter (The Blue Rider) , which was used as the name for the Expressionist group. This artwork exists as an excellent example of Kandinsky’s shift between artistic movements and styles since it demonstrates both his Impressionist and Expressionist influences. Impressionism is shown through the techniques and style, while Expressionism is seen through the thick and bold colors, as well as the rough brushstrokes.

Der Blaue Reiter shows a misleadingly simple image, as a lone horseback rider dressed in blue is depicted galloping through the fields. However, it represents a critical moment in Kandinsky’s growing pictorial language, as the sun-streaked hillside reveals his interest in contrasting lightness and darkness, in addition to him capturing both stillness and movement within the same image.

The work’s abstracted character invites viewers to interpret the scene, with this canvas becoming the symbol of the expressive possibilities that were welcomed by the Expressionism artists.

Franz Marc (1880 – 1916)

Another founding member of Der Blaue Reiter was German artist Franz Marc, who was fascinated with animals and known for his use of animal symbolism within his artworks. Practicing art as a painter, printmaker, and watercolorist, Marc was a key member of the Expressionist group who gave a deep emotional and psychological meaning to the colors he used within his works. Marc made use of the color blue within his most well-known works, as he believed it to symbolize potent masculinity and spirituality.

Marc depicted his animal subjects in a profoundly emotional way, with his work utilizing vivid colors in an attempt to move away from realistic depictions towards a more spiritual and authentic portrayal of his subjects. Due to the symbolism within color, Marc carefully selected his palette to accurately convey the emotive qualities he aimed to express, so as to correctly convey his vision.

His most well-known work, painted in 1911, was titled Large Blue Horses and was shown in the first exhibition put on by Der Blaue Reiter. This artwork featured many vivid and contrasting primary colors encompassing the main subject, which includes three blue horses. The color of the horses, which was seen as symbolic, along with the soft curvature depicted within their bodies, established feelings of harmony, serenity, and balance against the harsh red hue of the background and hills.

Marc stated that this noticeable difference demonstrated the contrast that existed between peaceful spirituality and violence, with his serene artwork evoking a sense of superiority. This artwork, which made more use of bright colors and cubist techniques than some other artworks at the time, belonged to a series of works that centered around the theme of horses. Marc regarded horses to be symbols of spiritual renewal, hence their prominence within the series.

Ernst Ludwig Kirchner (1880 – 1938)

A notable artist belonging to Die Brücke was Ernst Ludwig Kirchner , whose work was typically defined by bold and blocking colors, wide and conflicting brushstrokes, and sharp-edged angular forms. Kirchner took inspiration from the works of post-Impressionist artists such as Edvard Munch , who influenced his use of expressive colors.

Kirchner was most famous for his numerous depictions of Berlin street scenes, with these scenes becoming the most famous within his catalog of work. Additionally, his most notable artwork, painted in 1913, came from this street scene category and was titled Street, Berlin . This artwork depicted Kirchner’s disdainful outlook on life in Berlin, demonstrated by the extremely sharp brushstrokes and unsettling color contrasts used.

Within this artwork, the faces of the subjects are indistinguishable from each other, which emphasized the empty superficiality of the high life in Berlin. A sense of claustrophobia and confusion is created from the way the figures are standing, as the titled ground implies that they are possibly falling out of the painting itself. In doing this, Kirchner created a remarkable portrayal of the alienation that existed in urban settings, which was emphasized through the interchangeability of the figures.

Without regard for a realistic interpretation of the form of the figures, Kirchner made a bold choice in positioning two prostitutes as the painting’s focal point . These two women, also unidentifiable except for their plumbed hats, add to the confusion and alienation that was innate to modern society due to the sudden loss of spiritual fellowship.

Kirchner emphasized the rapid development of urban culture by depicting individuals who were seen as “simple commodities” and prostitutes, who were considered worthy subjects.

As a founding member of Die Brücke, Kirchner established a new way of painting that visibly rejected Impressionistic inclinations and the need to accurately portray figures within paintings. This was demonstrated through his use of sharp colors, jagged brushstrokes, and lengthened forms that were adopted by members of Die Brücke to change the stylistic traditions of painting.

Karl Schmidt-Rottluff (1884 – 1976)

An additional co-founder of Die Brücke was Karl Schmidt-Rottluff, whose paintings represented the urban alienation and turmoil that existed within contemporary life at the time. His artworks were often exaggerated and sharp as he reduced the figures and scenes within his works to their simplest forms to produce what he viewed to be “authentic” expressions.

After Die Brücke began, Schmidt-Rottluff moved to Berlin where he began to paint scenes of the city. His most well-known work, titled Houses at Night was created in 1912 and depicted an abstract city block. Within this artwork, Schmidt-Rottluff depicted an unsettling empty street with buildings that staggered apart from each other at alarming angles. This was said to demonstrate the the alienation that was present in modern urban society.

The glowing colors of the buildings give off an intensity and energy that seems to seep away within the composition, creating an uncomfortable juxtaposition between the bright blocks and the empty street. Additionally, the primitive shape of the buildings permeates the canvas with a pervasive unease and alienation, which was depicted as the essence of modern life within this Expressionist painting.

Oskar Kokoschka (1886 – 1980)

A notable Austrian artist within the Expressionism movement was Oskar Kokoschka, who was best known for his intense landscapes and portraits. While Kokoschka refrained from adopting the techniques and ideologies that trademarked as German Expressionism art, he greatly admired the sense of community that was established between group members in their rebellion against traditional art.

His most iconic work was Hans Tietze and Erica Tietze-Conrat , which was commissioned by the esteemed art historians themselves and painted in 1909. Kokoschka focused on the inner drama that he observed in his subjects, as demonstrated by the nervous hands that were made into the central point of their anxiety within this work.

Kokoschka stated that his depiction of the couple was based on how he perceived their psyche as opposed to their physical attributes.

The colorful background and concentrated brushstrokes of the figures were representative of the techniques used within Expressionism, as well as the heightened emotion that Kokoschka included. Additionally, the swirling and abstracted colors obscured the background and enclosed the subjects in a frenzied and depthless depiction of space within the painting.

Egon Schiele (1890 – 1918)

Egon Schiele was another central figure of Austrian Expressionism. Schiele was known for his harsh and often grotesque depictions of sexuality within his artworks, as he was influenced by the controversial artistic manner of Gustav Klimt and his iconic painting, The Kiss (1907-1908). Displaying such overt eroticism as a major theme within his works often led Schiele to the scrutiny of harsh critics and he was even imprisoned for promoting “indecency” in his paintings in 1912.

However, his altercations with the law did not seem to deter him from his erotic depictions, as he continued to produce paintings with this central theme. Accordingly, Schiele’s most well-known work, painted in 1917, portrayed this theme and was titled Sitting Woman with Legs Drawn Up . Within this artwork, Schiele drew his wife, Edith, who was partially dressed and sitting on the floor with her body in an unusual position.

Her intense expression assuredly confronted viewers and contradicted the traditional standards of submissive feminine beauty. Due to this, the portrait is bold and suggestive, displaying definite themes of eroticism. Edith’s fiery red hair created a striking contrast with her vibrant green shirt, adding to the confidence she seemingly possessed. Additionally, her casual pose established an intimate moment with viewers, demonstrating the emotionality within the work.

Despite being blatantly controversial throughout his artistic career, Schiele is nevertheless recognized for the skills he possessed and the emotive quality of his line work and color choice, which placed him decidedly in the Expressionist movement. Thus, Schiele portrayed images exactly as he saw them as opposed to how they appeared to the outside world.

The Legacy of Expressionism Art

The Expressionism art movement was indeed revolutionary and wide-ranging, as it went on to inspire various offshoot movements and influence the development of Contemporary art. The Expressionist movement was not a discrete one since artists practicing this style experimented with techniques from other movements. This experimentation went on to affect several artistic genres which followed Expressionism, including Futurism, Cubism, Dadaism , and Surrealism.

Several Expressionists also lost their lives during World War I, either from fighting, trauma, or illness as a result of the war. Due to this, the movement fell out of favor within the immediate post-war period and was indefinitely closed by the Nazi dictatorship in 1933. Expressionist artists were labeled as degenerates by Nazis and their artworks were taken out of galleries and seized.

However, Expressionist art paved the way for the development of later art movements with its characteristics still existing in artistic practices today.

An important avant-garde development of Expressionism was Abstract Expressionism, which originated in the post-war era in the United States, between the 1940s and 1950s. In this style, artists explored powerful emotions through the use of striking colors and aesthetic brushstrokes, as demonstrated in the works of Jackson Pollock . After this, Neo-Expressionism started to develop in the late 1970s and 1980s as a reaction to the Conceptual art and Minimalist art movements that existed at the time, displaying the far-reaching influence of Expressionism.

Expressionism Art in Other Forms

Due to the rapid expansion of Expressionism art, this style influenced the development of a variety of other art forms. Of these different forms, the most notable artistic spheres, where characteristics of Expressionism can be seen includes cinema and drama.

Within the German Expressionist movement, an important art form that developed was German Expressionist Cinema. The reason for its importance is because it was one of the first artistic genres that had a significant impact on the expansion of modern filmmaking, which allowed the development of numerous Avant-Garde styles that have taken place since then.

Initially, most Expressionist films were developed due to the alienation that Germany experienced leading up to the start of World War I, however, a demand for this experimental film genre soon began to grow and by the early 1920s, German Expressionist Cinema had reached an international audience. This led to many European filmmakers playing around with the techniques of Expressionist cinema when producing various films.

After experiencing the horrors caused by the war, Expressionist cinema began to blossom. Notable examples of this type of cinema include The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari , produced in 1920, The Golem: How He Came into the World , produced in 1920, and Metropolis , produced in 1927. All three films have a sinister and unsettling undertone, which was said to represent the turmoil and horror that existed within society after the war had ended.

The Expressionism movement was a powerful influence on the development of early 20th-century German theatre, with the most notable playwrights including Ernst Toller and Georg Kaiser. During the 1920s, Expressionism found its way to the United States, where it also had a significant influence over theater, with its influence extending into the development of early modernist plays.

In addition to producing visual art, Austrian Oskar Kokoschka was a playwright who wrote what has often been described as the first Expressionist drama. This play, titled Murderer, The Hope of Women , was written in 1909 and follows the story of an anonymous man and woman who struggle for dominance. Both individuals cause pain, with the man burning the woman while she stabs and imprisons him. He later frees himself and she dies at his touch. The man then murders everyone around him and the play ends on an unsettling note.

Expressionist plays often dramatized the spiritual awakenings and sufferings of their protagonists, with some playwrights using an episodic dramatic structure to heighten these emotions which were modeled according to the suffering and death of Jesus. Expressionist dramas also exaggerated the struggle against upper-class values and traditional authority, which was frequently embodied by the father figure within the plays.

Characters within Expressionist plays were simplified to mythic types, choral effects, theatrical dialogue that was rhapsodic yet clipped and elevated the emotional intensities of the story. These attributes became characteristics of later Expressionist plays. Additionally, the staging was an important element within these dramas, as directors chose to forgo the illusion of reality and lock actors in a two-dimensional space. Notable Expressionist playwrights to emerge from these developments include Tennessee Williams, Arthur Miller, and Samuel Beckett.

At the beginning of the 20th century, vast shifts in artistic styles and ideas broke out in response to the major changes that occurred within the structure of modern society. Due to the urbanization that occurred, as well as the outbreak of World War I, the perspective of individuals shifted significantly, with many artists reflecting on the landscape of their inner turmoil. Thus, artists tapped into incredibly raw and true emotions in an attempt to portray how the events of the world had affected society.

Take a look at our Expressionism webstory here!

Frequently Asked Questions

What is expressionism.

The Expressionism art movement refers to artworks that focused on interpreting the intense inner emotions that were experienced by artists and society at the time, as opposed to physical reality. Artists focused their works on depicting these emotions accurately, which were in response to the mass urbanization that had occurred, as well as the beginning of World War I. The Expressionism years spanned from 1905 to around 1920.

What Is a Suitable Expressionism Art Definition?

Due to the Expressionism art movement being so broad, it was somewhat difficult to accurately define. Expressionism overlapped with a variety of other art movements, with some of these techniques making their way into Expressionism art. Thus, an appropriate definition encompasses art that valued emotional expression over the depiction of Realism. 

Which Painters Were Well-Known Within the Expressionism Art Movement?

Important artists of the Expressionism art movement included Wassily Kandinsky , Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Franz Marc, Karl Schmidt-Rottluff, Oskar Kokoschka, and Egon Schiele. Additionally, two important precursors to the movement were Edvard Munch and Vincent van Gogh .

What Artistic Groups Developed in Response to Expressionism?

Within the Expressionism movement, German Expressionism was a significant development in Berlin. The two groups falling under this movement were classified as Die Brücke (1905-1913) and Der Blaue Reiter (1911-1914).

Isabella studied at the University of Cape Town in South Africa and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts majoring in English Literature & Language and Psychology. Throughout her undergraduate years, she took Art History as an additional subject and absolutely loved it. Building on from her art history knowledge that began in high school, art has always been a particular area of fascination for her. From learning about artworks previously unknown to her, or sharpening her existing understanding of specific works, the ability to continue learning within this interesting sphere excites her greatly.

Her focal points of interest in art history encompass profiling specific artists and art movements, as it is these areas where she is able to really dig deep into the rich narrative of the art world. Additionally, she particularly enjoys exploring the different artistic styles of the 20 th century, as well as the important impact that female artists have had on the development of art history.

Learn more about Isabella Meyer and the Art in Context Team .

Cite this Article

Isabella, Meyer, “Expressionism Art – A History of the Expressionist Movement.” Art in Context. April 13, 2021. URL: https://artincontext.org/expressionism-art/

Meyer, I. (2021, 13 April). Expressionism Art – A History of the Expressionist Movement. Art in Context. https://artincontext.org/expressionism-art/

Meyer, Isabella. “Expressionism Art – A History of the Expressionist Movement.” Art in Context , April 13, 2021. https://artincontext.org/expressionism-art/ .

Similar Posts

Pointillism – The Neo-Impressionist Dot Painting Technique

Der Blaue Reiter – The Birth of Modern European Art

Etruscan Art – The History of Etruscan Painting

Lucrezia de’ Medici – A Notable Figure in Renaissance Patronage

Lithography – Understanding the Art of Lithography Printmaking

Principles of Art – Understanding the Principles of Design in Art

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The Most Famous Artists and Artworks

Discover the most famous artists, paintings, sculptors…in all of history! 

MOST FAMOUS ARTISTS AND ARTWORKS

Discover the most famous artists, paintings, sculptors!

Expressionism as an Art Form Essay (Article)

Expressionism has been viewed as one of the greatest puzzles of its epoch for quite long. It has once again posed a timeless question of the meaning of art, seemingly containing an immediate answer to it. However, considering Expressionist art solely from the ars gratia artis perspective would be unfair to the numerous artistic influences that the given movement owes its identity to. Apart from the concept of self-expression, which clearly makes the bulk of the given artistic phenomenon, expressionism also lends some of its features to the concept of feminism (Nochlin 2). Indeed, according to what Carolyn Korsmeyer’s major work, Gender and Aesthetics , says, the people who are located “outside the mandate of patriarchal society” (Korsmeyer 142) are especially inclined to demanding “their own expression” (Korsmeyer 142).

Seeing how such people are traditionally ostracized in the realm of political, economical and social life, the field of art remains the only refuge for such people. The given way to look at expressionist art both broadens the definition and narrows it down in that it stretches the concept to the idea of art being used as a tool for creating the basis for equal rights – and deprives an artist of an opportunity to express anything else. Instead, the concept of expressionism seems to be more than an attempt of an artist to draw the line between his/her own world vision and the one of his/her audience.

Another possible means to define the phenomenon of expressionism, weirdly enough, come from the same source as the one that was mentioned early, yet offer an entirely different way to look at art in general and Expressionism in particular. Instead of trying to tie in the concepts of self-expression, fighting for rights, and social isolation, the given definition touches upon the phenomenon of art in general. By making people ponder over what the origins of art are per se, the given definition allows spotting the point at which the idea of Expressionist art form was born. Thus, a more exact definition based on the reasons for the given art movement to be created appears:

Definitions based upon these approaches are attempts to delineate the features of genuine art from other things that may be similar, such as entertainment, but which lack some pertinent defining features, features that also separate artistic excellence from mediocrity. (Korsmeyer 112)

Glorifying the phenomenon of pure art as opposed to “artistic mediocrity” (Korsmeyer 112), the given attempt at defining Expressionism might seem somewhat unfocused. While it is hard to argue that the adepts of the given artistic movement consider self-expression their top priority, considering the rest of artistic styles les genuine simply because of a difference in their focus will be quite a stretch. Therefore, Korsmeyer’s idea of incorporating the psychology of an individual and the society vs. individual conflict into the definition of the given artistic movement only represents one side of the phenomenon.

Addressing the fact that Expressionism was, in fact, aimed at offering the audience a chance to catch a glimpse of an artist’s unique vision of reality, one must note that the very concept of the movement aligns with the key postulates of the expression theory. Created and expanded by a number of prominent psychologists and other researchers, including Sigmund Freud, the given theory allows envisioning art as expression in a much wider context. Freeland makes her readers see art as an expression of the subconscious in accordance with the key postulates of the Feudist theory (Freeland 157), she addresses the ideas of Francis Bacon by interpreting art as a means to communicate emotions (Freeland 154), she connects the idea of Expressionism with the principles of the cognitive theory, recalling the key ideas communicated be Dewey (Freeland 88) – the ideas that the author lists are too many to count.

What every single theory listed above seems to agree on, however, is that art, primarily Expressionism, is the means to get the artist’s vision of the world across. The given definition definitely rubs elbows with the one provided by Korsmeyer; while Freeland defines art as the means of projecting one’s personal convictions and ideas onto material in order to create an artwork, Freeland goes further and limits the number of Expressionist artists to those who are considered marginalized and whose works do not fit into the traditional definition of a standard.

Therefore, from what Freeland offers to consider, Expressionism can be defined as an instrument that allows an artist to convey particular ideas to his/her audience, both on a conscious and a subconscious level. In many ways, the given definition aligns with the one provided by Dewey, who claimed that “Art is a source of knowledge” (Freeland 167). Art is, indeed, a source of knowledge about the artist’s personality, his/her own unique world and the numerous ideas that the author has developed over decades about the society and his/her place in it.

Some definitions of Expressionism, however, see the given movement as not the means to green-light any means of artistic expression as an opportunity for an artist to explore his/her own world of the subconscious. Quite on the contrary, some of the existing definitions suggest that the concept of Expressionism has killed the very possibility of self-expression in art. Mallarme, for instance, specified that “the hand, cut off from any voice, borne by a pure gesture of inscription (and not of expression), traces a field without origin—or which, at least, has no other origin than language itself, language which ceaselessly calls into question all origins” (Barthes 2).

Thus, the art movement in question cannot be defined as expression for the sake of expression, either. There seems to be more to the movement of Expressionism than an attempt to wash the phenomenon down to “the polar opposites of classical ‘imitation’ and romantic expression” (Wimsatt and Beardsley 468). Therefore, it can be concluded that Expressionism should be defined based on the theory of the subconscious as the manifestation of an artist’s subliminal ideas, provided by Freud in Freeland’s paper.

Though not embracing every single aspect of Expressionism as art form, it gives an idea about the given type of art and outlines its key distinctive feature. Despite its age, the idea of expressing one’s deepest fears or strongest convictions through art is rather valid, seeing how art is nearly the only field where the author can create his/her own rules and create really unique artworks. One of the greatest mysteries of its time, Expressionism has left a lot of questions for the XXI century artists and spectators; however, it has also provided future artists with inspiration and room for thoughts.

Works Cited

Barlach, Ernst. The Avenger 64 . 1992. Web.

Barthes, Roland, n. d., The Death of the Author . Web.

Freeland, Cyntia. But Is It Art? An Introduction to Art Theory, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2001. Print.

Korsmeyer, Carolyn. Gender and Aesthetics: An Introduction , New York, NY: Routledge, 2004. Print.

Munch, Edward. The Scream . 1983. Web.

Nochlin, Linda, n. d., Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists? Web.

Van Gogh, Vincent. Starry Night . 1889. Web.

Wimsatt, Willam K., and Monroe C. Beardsley. “The Intentional Fallacy.” The Sewanee Review 54.3 (1946): 468-488. Print.

• Expressionist Movement Art and Schoenberg Music
• Expressionism in Architecture: The Late 19th and the Early 20th Century
• Expressionism: Breakthrough in Self-Knowledge
• Artistic Modernism and Art Nouveau
• How Three-Dimensionality Conveys a Precise Relationship Between the Viewer and the Divine
• Serenissima Trend: Spring-Summer 2016
• Art in Modern Times
• Political Implications of Commedia Dell’Arte
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, May 30). Expressionism as an Art Form. https://ivypanda.com/essays/expressionism-art-concept/

"Expressionism as an Art Form." IvyPanda , 30 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/expressionism-art-concept/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Expressionism as an Art Form'. 30 May.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Expressionism as an Art Form." May 30, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/expressionism-art-concept/.

1. IvyPanda . "Expressionism as an Art Form." May 30, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/expressionism-art-concept/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Expressionism as an Art Form." May 30, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/expressionism-art-concept/.

• Corrections

“Without Art Mankind Could Not Exist”: Leo Tolstoy’s Essay What is Art

In his essay “What is Art?” Leo Tolstoy, the author of War and Peace, defines art as a way to communicate emotion with the ultimate goal of uniting humanity.

How can we define art? What is authentic art and what is good art? Leo Tolstoy answered these questions in “What is Art?” (1897), his most comprehensive essay on the theory of art. Tolstoy’s theory has a lot of charming aspects. He believes that art is a means of communicating emotion, with the aim of promoting mutual understanding. By gaining awareness of each other’s feelings we can successfully practice empathy and ultimately unite to further mankind’s collective well-being. 

Furthermore, Tolstoy firmly denies that pleasure is art’s sole purpose. Instead, he supports a moral-based art able to appeal to everyone and not just the privileged few. Although he takes a clear stance in favor of Christianity as a valid foundation for morality, his definition of religious perception is flexible. As a result, it is possible to easily replace it with all sorts of different ideological schemes.

Personally, I do not approach Tolstoy’s theory as a set of laws for understanding art. More than anything, “What is art?” is a piece of art itself. A work about the meaning of art and a fertile foundation on which truly beautiful ideas can flourish.

Most of the paintings used for this article were drawn by realist painter Ilya Repin. The Russian painter created a series of portraits of Tolstoy, which were exhibited together at the 2019 exhibition “Repin: The Myth of Tolstoy” at the State Museum L.N. Tolstoy. More information regarding the relationship between Tolstoy and Repin can be found in this article . 

Who was Tolstoy?

Get the latest articles delivered to your inbox

Please check your inbox to activate your subscription.

Leo Tolstoy ( Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy) was born in 1828 in his family estate of Yasnaya Polyana, some 200km from Moscow. His family belonged in the Russian aristocracy and thus Leo inherited the title of count. In 1851 he joined the tsarist army to pay off his accumulated debt but quickly regretted this decision. Eventually, he left the army right after the end of the Crimean War in 1856. 

After traveling Europe and witnessing the suffering and cruelty of the world, Tolstoy was transformed. From a privileged aristocrat, he became a Christian anarchist arguing against the State and propagating non-violence. This was the doctrine that inspired Gandhi and was expressed as non-resistance to evil. This means that evil cannot be fought with evil means and one should neither accept nor resist it.  

Tolstoy’s writing made him famous around the world and he is justly considered among the four giants of Russian Literature next to Dostoevsky, Chekhov, and Turgenev. His most famous novels are War and Peace (1869) and Anna Karenina (1877). However, he also wrote multiple philosophical and theological texts as well as theatrical plays and short stories. Upon completing his masterpiece Anna Karenina , Tolstoy fell into a state of insufferable existential despair.

Charmed by the faith of the common people, he turned to Christianity. Eventually, he dismissed the Russian Church and every other Church as corrupted and looked for his own answers. His theological explorations led to the formulation of his own version of Christianity, which deeply influenced his social vision.  He died in 1910 at the age of 82 after suffering from pneumonia.

Art Based On Beauty And Taste 

Tolstoy wrote “What is art?” in 1897. There, he laid down his opinions on several art-related issues. Throughout this essay , he remains confident that he is the first to provide an exact definition for art:

“…however strange it may seem to say so, in spite of the mountains of books written about art, no exact definition of art has been constructed. And the reason of this is that the conception of art has been based on the conception of beauty.”  

So, what is art for Tolstoy? Before answering the question, the Russian novelist seeks a proper basis for his definition. Examining works of other philosophers and artists, he notices that they usually assume that beauty is art’s foundation. For them beauty is either that which provides a certain kind of pleasure or that which is perfect according to objective, universal laws.

Tolstoy thinks that both cases lead to subjective definitions of beauty and in turn to subjective definitions of art. Those who realize the impossibility of objectively defining beauty, turn to a study of taste asking why a thing pleases. Again, Tolstoy sees no point in this, as taste is also subjective. There is no way of explaining why one thing pleases someone but displeases someone else, he concludes. 

Theories that Justify the Canon

Theories of art based on beauty or taste inescapably include only that type of art that appeals to certain people:

“First acknowledging a certain set of productions to be art (because they please us) and then framing such a theory of art that all those productions which please a certain circle of people should fit into it.”

These theories are made to justify the existing art canon which covers anything from Greek art to Shakespeare and Beethoven. In reality, the canon is nothing more than the artworks appreciated by the upper classes. To justify new productions that please the elites, new theories that expand and reaffirm the canon are constantly created: 

“No matter what insanities appear in art, when once they find acceptance among the upper classes of our society, a theory is quickly invented to explain and sanction them; just as if there had never been periods in history when certain special circles of people recognized and approved false, deformed, and insensate art which subsequently left no trace and has been utterly forgotten.”  

The true definition of art, according to Tolstoy, should be based on moral principles. Before anything, we need to question if a work of art is moral. If it is moral, then it is good art. If it is not moral, it is bad. This rationale leads Tolstoy to a very bizarre idea. At one point in his essay, he states that Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliette, Goethe’s Wilhelm Meister, and his own War and Peace are immoral and therefore bad art. But what does Tolstoy exactly mean when he says that something is good or bad art? And what is the nature of the morality he uses for his artistic judgments?

What is Art?

Art is a means of communicating feelings the same way words transmit thoughts. In art, someone transmits a feeling and “infects” others with what he/she feels. Tolstoy encapsulates his definition of art in the following passages:

“To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling – this is the activity of art. Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hand on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and also experience them.”

In its essence, art is a means of union among men brought together by commonly experienced feelings. It facilitates access to the psychology of others fostering empathy and understanding by tearing down the walls of the Subject. This function of art is not only useful but also necessary for the progress and wellbeing of humanity.

The innumerable feelings experienced by humans both in past and present are available to us only through art. The loss of such a unique ability would be a catastrophe. “Men would be like beasts”, says Tolstoy, and even goes as far as to claim that without art, mankind could not exist. This is a bold declaration, which recalls the Nietzschean aphorism that human existence is justified only as an aesthetic phenomenon.

Art in the Extended and Limited Sense of the Word

Tolstoy’s definition expands to almost every aspect of human activity way beyond the fine arts. Even a boy telling the story of how he met a wolf can be art. That is, however, only if the boy succeeds in making the listeners feel the fear and anguish of the encounter. Works of art are everywhere, according to this view. Cradlesong, jest, mimicry, house ornamentation, dress and utensils, even triumphal processions are all works of art. 

This is, in my view, the strongest point of Tolstoy’s theory. Namely, that it considers almost the totality of human activity as art. However, there is a distinction between this expanded art, and art in the limited sense of the word. The latter corresponds to the fine arts and is the area that Tolstoy investigates further in his essay.  A weak point of the theory is that it never examines the act of creation and art that is not shared with others. 

Real and Counterfeit Art

The distinction between real and counterfeit, good and bad art is Tolstoy’s contribution to the field of art criticism. Despite its many weaknesses, this system offers an interesting alternative to judging and appreciating art.

Tolstoy names real art (i.e. authentic, true to itself) the one resulting from an honest, internal need for expression. The product of this internal urge becomes a real work of art, if it successfully evokes feelings to other people. In this process, the receiver of the artistic impression becomes so united with the artist’s experience, that he/she feels like the artwork is his/her own. Therefore, real art removes the barrier between Subject and Object, and between receiver and sender of an artistic impression. In addition, it removes the barrier between the receivers who experience unity through a common feeling.

“In this freeing of our personality from its separation and isolation, in this uniting of it with others, lies the chief characteristic and the great attractive force of art.” Furthermore, a work that does not evoke feelings and spiritual union with others is counterfeit art. No matter how poetical, realistic, effectful, or interesting it is, it must meet these conditions to succeed. Otherwise it is just a counterfeit posing as real art.  

Emotional Infectiousness

Emotional infectiousness is a necessary quality of a work of art. The degree of infectiousness is not always the same but varies according to three conditions:

• The individuality of the feeling transmitted: the more specific to a person the feeling, the more successful the artwork.
• The clearness of the feeling transmitted: the clearness of expression assists the transition of feelings and increases the pleasure derived from art.
• The sincerity of the artist: the force with which the artist feels the emotion he/she transmits through his/her art. 

Out of all three, sincerity is the most important. Without it, the other two conditions cannot exist. Worth noting is that Tolstoy finds sincerity almost always present in “peasant art” but almost always absent in “upper-class art”. If a work lacks even one of the three qualities, it is counterfeit art. In contrast, it is real if it possesses all three. In that case, it only remains to judge whether this real artwork is good or bad, more or less successful. The success of an artwork is based firstly on the degree of its infectiousness. The more infectious the artwork, the better.  

The Religious Perception of Art

Tolstoy believes that art is a means of progress towards perfection. With time, art evolves rendering accessible the experience of humanity for humanity’s sake. This is a process of moral realization and results in society becoming kinder and more compassionate. A genuinely good artwork ought to make accessible these good feelings that move humanity closer to its moral completion. Within this framework, a good work of art must also be moral. 

But how can we judge what feelings are morally good? Tolstoy’s answer lies in what he calls “the religious perception of the age”. This is defined as the understanding of the meaning of life as conceived by a group of people. This understanding is the moral compass of a society and always points towards certain values. For Tolstoy, the religious perception of his time is found in Christianity. As a result, all good art must carry the foundational message of this religion understood as brotherhood among all people. This union of man aiming at his collective well-being, argues Tolstoy, must be revered as the highest value of all. 

Although it relates to religion, religious perception is not the same with religious cult. In fact, the definition of religious perception is so wide, that it describes ideology in general. To this interpretation leads Tolstoy’s view that, even if a society recognizes no religion, it always has a religious morality. This can be compared with the direction of a flowing river:

If the river flows at all, it must have a direction. If a society lives, there must be a religious perception indicating the direction in which, more or less consciously, all its members tend.

It is safe to say that more than a century after Tolstoy’s death, “What is Art?” retains its appeal. We should not easily dismiss the idea that (good) art communicates feelings and promotes unity through universal understanding. This is especially the case in our time where many question art’s importance and see it as a source of confusion and division. 

• Tolstoy, L.N. 1902. What is Art? In the Novels and Other Works of Lyof N. Tolstoy . translated by Aline Delano. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. pp. 328-527. Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43409
• Jahn, G.R. 1975. ‘The Aesthetic Theory of Leo Tolstoy’s What Is Art?’. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism , Vol. 34, No. 1. pp. 59-65. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/428645
• Morson, G.S. 2019. ‘Leo Tolstoy’. Encyclopædia Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Leo-Tolstoy

Theodor Adorno on the Essay: An Antidote to Modernity

By Antonis Chaliakopoulos MSc Museum Studies, BA History & Archaeology Antonis is an archaeologist with a passion for museums and heritage and a keen interest in aesthetics and the reception of classical art. He holds an MSc in Museum Studies from the University of Glasgow and a BA in History and Archaeology from the University of Athens (NKUA) where he is currently working on his PhD.

Frequently Read Together

Timeline of Ancient Greek Art & Sculpture

Related Topics

• Research Methods
• Mathematics
• Anthropology
• Scientific method
• Ethnography
• Computer Science

What Is The Expression Theory Of Art Essay

Academic anxiety?

Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task

124 experts online

Art has evolved and regenerated itself many times during our human existence. These differences are defined through changes in styles under various theories. During the nineteenth and early twentieth century, a style known as Expressionism became popular. During this movement the artists were trying to use their artwork as a tool of expression toward life. It was mainly dominant in the nonrepresentational arts, such as abstract visual arts and music. It also was probably one of the most difficult movements to understand because the whole point of the piece lay within the artist.

Not only was it a movement, it defined the act of art as a whole. From the beginning of time, each work of art, excluding replicas, show a way of expressing one’s self. Every artist puts a piece of his or herself into their artwork. Who really is to determine what that work of art was meant to express? One might ask, “Since most artwork is used as a way for an artist to express him or herself, what makes this expression period anything special? ” On the general level “Expressionistic art, whether literature, painting, music, or cinema, often involves intense psychic disturbance and distortion in the perspective adopted by the artwork.

“It is remote from the objective or realistic portrayals of the world, as well as from the happier emotions. ” To bring a more defined meaning to the overall theory of expressionism, two philosophers play a large role. The first notarized expressionistic philosopher was the Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy who was followed by his counterpart R. G. Collingwood: a twentieth-century English philosopher. Together they hold the two best known expositions of the expression theory. What make these two analyzers important is not what they agreed on, but rather on how they contrasted.

They both conclude that during the expression theory, the main concern was to express emotion. The one question that draws the two apart is “What does it mean to express an emotion? ” They attempt to conclude this question, by providing the answers to a few others. What the nature of art is? Why we make and appreciate art? Why the arts are so valuable? The best way to go about describing their thoughts is to state one of the thinkers discoveries followed by a thorough investigation of the second’s, beginning with Leo Tolstoy.

He begins his argument by trying to decide what is the value of art? How do we determine its value to the public, since art is a social aspect of life? For Tolstoy, the value of art comes from the function art serves in society and in human historical development. Art appears in everything that lives and should have the force to bring people together as a community. For him expressionism in art is a means of communication, in such as a language. Therefore, language can be described as a form of art under the theory of expressionism.

Speech transmits the thoughts and experiences of mankind, serving as a means of expression among them; art also acts in a similar manner by sharing emotions. If people could not be affected by art, we would still be in the era of savagery. Referring back to the author of our book, John Fisher, emotional communication is essential to art. Fisher also states that too much harnessed emotion will tend to lower the value of art. What can we define as art and what can we exclude? For Tolstoy, a piece to be considered art must surpass a few requirements.

First, the piece of work must express deep and unique feeling and emotion. Second, the artist must intentionally produce an external artwork, which transmits feeling and emotions to the audience. Finally, the artwork must portray the same emotions that the author intended. The only one of these that can fall short of being perfect, is the final one, for which in this case, the artwork is just considered unsuccessful. Here the objective reality is the inner feelings of the artist to be communicated to the external receptor through the piece of art.

It all centralizes to emotions vs. non-art. Using the chain link format, fitted with Tolstoy’s theory, the Nature of Art can be split into extending categories. Under Tolstoy’s theory, the immediate Nature of Art would be the intuitive expression impact the work has over the audience. Following, would be the artist’s feelings and the art’s universality. Here the value of art is in its enrichment of man culturally. If you view this all in a combined sense, art equals language, which equals the sharing of our emotional lives.

Therefore there is an external objective that needs to be viewed by our senses unintentionally. This is how the artist and the audience becomes one. An example of this could be shown through music. If you put music into a three stage event, you would have the musician (who is expressing the externalized formulation), then the music as reflective emotions (the artwork), and finally the audience (the expressive emotion). Tolstoy views the arousal view as requiring prior knowledge of their own emotions before expressing them, not spontaneous.

This leads to emotional understanding vs. ntellectual understanding. Collingwood’s theory on the other hand states sees the expression of art in the exploration of disposition and emotional experience from a particular perspective; the experience of art is neither the calculated arousal of emotion in an audience nor the pre-established formulization of culture. Collingwood sees real emotion as individual and contextual. This concept conflicts with the arousal methods that are planned. For him, both the artist and the audience are equals. For Tolstoy the audience is essential to expression.

Collingwood sees expression as a relationship between the artist’s feelings and the artwork. The audience is not necessary for the artist to express his or her emotions. Collingwood has a theory of his own, which he calls Corruption’s of Consciousness. Here the emotion is not honest and understood as a statement by the artist or with the audience that does not want to willingly experience the emotion. Art can also be individualistic, where any gesture or efforts by anyone at any given time if conceived and understood in a correct manner can be considered art.

Are emotions the creator of art? For a piece of artwork to be successful, does everyone in the audience have to feel the same emotions? Can one have negative emotions toward a work and it still be considered art? For Collingwood the same artwork can have different expressive qualities. For example, the same work of art can share expressive qualities of gaiety, melancholy, and anxiety. It can be forceful and even portray serenity. These different emotions are necessary in order to make moral assessments of the world.

For this art acts as a metaphor, which needs not express deep feelings in order to be successful. Feelings are relative to emotions, which are either true or false. As Jerrold Levingson points out, ” there is a paradox in supposing that we experience real emotions when we experience artworks. ” “Many of the emotions identified with artworks are unpleasant. ” “Why would we seek out these emotions in art if we avoid them in real life? “” “Yet we do seek out artworks that involve negative emotions. “This paradox constitutes an objection to Tolstoy’s version of expression theory since Tolstoy does propose that genuine art actually moves the audience to feel the emotions that the artist attempts to convey.

” You can divide Levinson’s emotional theory into two separate components: the cognitive and the effectual. The cognitive would be initiated with belief, followed by one’s attitude and desire and then finally evaluated. The effectual components are the comprehensive feelings that occur; these are correspondent real life events. If the music does not evoke a real emotional response in a listener, according to this school of thought, this response should be considered inappropriate. ” No matter whose view you take they all have their faults. Making a theory on art is not the same as making a theory in science. With science you have guidelines that can be proven. There are very few guidelines in art that can be backed up by fact. The ideal of defining a theory in art is based on emotions as well. Both Tolstoy and Collingwood are using their emotions in order to judge other emotions.

If I were forced to pick a philosopher to side with, I would probably lean toward Collingwood, since he leaves more area for variety. He places more of the wealth of the emotional art within the artist themselves rather than a third party. If it were totally up to me I would leave the decision on whether a work is good or not between the artist and whomever was viewing it at that time. What I might think as a good piece of work and what might evoke emotions in me might not do the same for another who might consider themselves experts, but does that really make my opinion less valuable?

This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly . Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

Need custom essay sample written special for your assignment?

Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

What Is The Expression Theory Of Art Essay. (2018, Aug 28). Retrieved from https://artscolumbia.org/what-is-the-expression-theory-of-art-57025/

More related essays

Music Appreciation Flashcard

• Words 15854

AP Art History 250 Required Images

Art History, Online

Arts flashcard section 6

History of Costume exam 2

BCS Renaissance

MUS 101 – Test 1 Answers

• Words 18304

Art Renaissance to Modern

Fashion 120

Hi, my name is Amy 👋

In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

Emotion Regulation

Art as emotion regulation, how does art defy extensive research findings on emotion regulation.

Posted May 18, 2024 | Reviewed by Ray Parker

• What Is Emotion Regulation?
• Find a therapist near me
• Much emotion regulation research has focused on two strategies: suppression or reappraisal.
• Suppressing emotions is related to negative outcomes (e.g., depression, anxiety), and reappraisal positive.
• People use art to regulate emotions in three ways: avoiding, approaching, and self-development.
• Art for avoiding emotions isn't related to suppression, and art for self-development is healthy regulation.

Art helps us deal with our emotions. Expressing yourself, exploring your inner world, and creating something new changes our emotional experiences. Research has explored the ways that art allows us to regulate our emotions. But before I explain what was found about art and emotion regulation , I need to discuss the big findings from the last generation of emotion regulation research.

There is rich scientific literature examining two different ways of regulating emotions: expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal. These are not the only ways to regulate emotions. There are many different strategies for influencing our feelings. These are just two common ways of dealing with emotions.

Expressive Suppression means not showing what you’re feeling. This is what people might describe as “stuffing it down” or “swallowing it.” It effectively ignores emotional responses so they don’t interfere with what you want to do.

Cognitive Reappraisal means reinterpreting your situation to try to change how you feel. This might mean “looking for silver linings” or “finding the opportunity” in a negative situation. It shifts your perspective in the hopes of shifting your feelings.

The well-researched and validated emotion regulation questionnaire asks about these two strategies. Someone who uses expressive suppression would agree strongly with statements like these:

• I keep my emotions to myself.
• I control my emotions by not expressing them.

Someone who uses cognitive reappraisal would agree strongly with statements like these:

• When I’m faced with a stressful situation, I make myself think about it in a way that helps me stay calm.
• I control my emotions by changing the way I think about the situation I’m in.

The big takeaway from the last generation of emotion regulation research is that cognitive reappraisal tends to be related to better outcomes than expressive suppression. By that, I mean that people who use suppression more tend to report more depressed mood, lower self-esteem , lower satisfaction with life, and feeling more distant and less accepted by others. In contrast, people who use reappraisals more tend to be less depressed, anxious, and stressed.

Further, these two emotion regulation styles have different effects on our bodies. People who use suppression tend to experience more activation of their sympathetic nervous system during stressful situations. This is the “fight-or-flight” system, and activation can often leave people feeling uncomfortable and keyed up. In contrast, reappraisal does not lead to this sympathetic activation. So not only do these emotion regulation strategies change how we feel (e.g., depressed, anxious), but they also affect our physiology, potentially contributing to health risks or burnout .

This is the context in which a team of researchers from London led by Daisy Fancourt developed the emotion regulation strategies for artistic creative activities scale (ERS-ACA). This team wanted to understand the ways in which people use art to regulate their emotions. They did this by reviewing previous research on how art can regulate emotions and developing a set of 170 questions. Each question asked about an aspect of emotion regulation in art. Through discussion and evaluation, they reduced this to 45. Then, based on two large-scale studies (one of which recruited almost 48,000 people to take the survey), they identified three core themes.

One way people use art to regulate their emotions is through avoiding feelings . People who use art this way would agree strongly with statements like this:

• When I’m making art, I can block out any unwanted thoughts or feelings.
• Art helps me forget about my worries.

Another way people use art for emotion regulation is through approaching feelings . People who use art this way would agree strongly with statements like this:

• Art makes me reflect on my emotions.
• When I make art, I can contemplate what is going on in my life with a clear mind.

The third way they found that people use art for emotion regulation is through self-development . People who use art this way would agree strongly with statements like this:

• When I make art, I feel more confident in myself.
• When I make art, it reaffirms my identity .

All people who use art to help them deal with their emotions use a mix or combination of these strategies. For example, they might use it both to avoid feelings and for self-development.

What’s interesting is how these strategies relate to the well-studied expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal strategies. People who use art to avoid emotions aren’t suppressing their emotions. They’re also not likely to experience the negative effects of suppression. They’re finding a healthy way to step away from their emotions.

People who use art to approach their feelings are more likely to use cognitive reappraisal. The art itself seems to be one way to help reinterpret their experiences. They are likely to see the benefits of the cognitive reappraisal strategy—reduced depression , anxiety , and stress.

Using art for self-development was related to less expressive suppression and more cognitive reappraisal. Using art to help understand who you are more deeply may both eliminate the need to suppress your emotions and help you reinterpret your experiences and integrate them into your understanding of who you really are. This may be the most beneficial way that art can affect our emotional lives. It both helps us express ourselves and helps us turn difficult experiences into a part of our own stories.

In my current role working at a mental health facility, I regularly lead improv workshops with individuals who have experienced trauma . I find that giving people a safe place to be imaginative, playful, and expressive helps to break through the negative emotions people can find themselves stuck in. It also opens up a side of people that is curious and expressive, where they can explore associations within themselves. These classes are often a source of joy. The research on using art to deal with our emotions suggests that it can go even deeper and help people more fully process their emotions and understand themselves.

Fancourt, D., Garnett, C., Spiro, N., West, R., & Müllensiefen, D. (2019). How do artistic creative activities regulate our emotions? Validation of the Emotion Regulation Strategies for Artistic Creative Activities Scale (ERS-ACA). PloS one, 14(2), e0211362.

Cameron, L. D., & Overall, N. C. (2018). Suppression and expression as distinct emotion-regulation processes in daily interactions: Longitudinal and meta-analyses. Emotion, 18(4), 465.

Sörman, K., Garke, M. Å., Isacsson, N. H., Jangard, S., Bjureberg, J., Hellner, C., ... & Jayaram‐Lindström, N. (2022). Measures of emotion regulation: Convergence and psychometric properties of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale and emotion regulation questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 78(2), 201-217.

Alexander Danvers, Ph.D. , is a social psychologist by training with an interdisciplinary approach to research. Currently, he works on measuring and improving mental health outcomes.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience