New Objectivity (Neue Sachlichkeit)

The New Objectivity, also known as Die Neue Sachlichkeit, was an arts movement in Weimar Germany (1919–1935) that arose as a countermovement to German expressionism and as a reaction to the horrors and aftermath of war. The movement offered a vision of unsentimental reality and an objective focus on the world, as opposed to other expressionist tendencies that branched into abstract, ideal, positive, and romantic representations. The movement showed a preference for portraiture, self-portraiture, urban landscapes and detailed depictions of the marginal, the quotidian, the common, and the overlooked. It was spearheaded by Otto Dix and Georg Grosz, who infused it with a critical and satiric attitude. The merciless realistic renderings, according to some scholars, often followed the detailed technique of the Old Masters. Other art scholars question the formation of New Objectivity as an art current or movement, labeling it as a "pseudo" or false German expressionist movement.

Brief History

The history of the New Objectivity is inextricably linked to that of the Weimar Republic. The term Neue Sachlichkeit was coined by museum director Gustav Hartlaub for a 1923 exhibition shown at the Stadtische Kunsthalle in Mannheim. Hartlaub found that the new art works represented a starkly unsentimental, satirical, and objective view of reality, a clear break with expressionism. In the early 1920s, the modern art world was dominated by futurism and expressionism, which were optimistic, exultant movements. The New Objectivity emerged as an encompassing concept that included a variety of works showcasing a new sensibility. Artists associated with the movement sought to depict the corruption and demoralization rampant in the Weimar Republic and the rise of the Nazi regime in the 1930s.

Scholars identify two general branches of the New Objectivity, which in turn became identified with either left wing or right wing political ideologies. The verists, or left wing, branch included Otto Dix (1891–1969), George Grosz (1893–1959), and Max Beckmann (1884–1950). These artists critiqued and satirized the evils of society and the depravity of the powerful. They also produced raw depictions of the devastating effects of World War I and the harsh impact of poverty and destitution.

The second branch was known as the classicist, or conservative branch, sometimes also called magic realism. This was represented by a wide array of artists, including Heinrich Maria Davringhausen (1894–1970), Alexander Kanoldt (1881–1939), Christian Schad (1894–1982), Giorgio de Chirico (1888–1978), George Schrimpf (1889–1938), and others. These covered a wide variety of styles, and their work was seen as a positive reaction to the intense subjectivity of German expressionist art.

In general, the New Objectivity showed marked differences with German expressionism; the latter is usually extravagant, expressive, emotionally warm, rhythmic and gestural, whereas New Objectivity is usually detailed, severe, quiet, cold, and static.

Other artists included Conrad Felixmuller (1897–1977), Albert Carel Willink (1900–83), and Kathe Kollwitz (1867–1845). Kollwitz, a painter and sculptor, is an important representative of the New Objectivity. Her imagery is both depressive and compassionate, depicting with severe clarity the suffering of the poor and the ill. The New Objectivity ended when many artists fled Nazi Germany during the war, where their art was classified as "degenerate" by the authorities. Others, such as Kollwitz, remained even though their art was banned. During the dark years of Nazi rule, all artwork that did not follow the official aesthetic was proscribed, and its creators persecuted and oppressed.

Overview

The followers of New Objectivity turned a critical eye towards Weimar Germany, which at the time suffered from the aftermath of World War I and financially crippling war reparation policies. Under these circumstances, a decadent underworld developed, as well as a weak political leadership and corrupt economic elite. Poverty and illness abounded, and it seemed that everything was for sale in a morally degraded world. All of this and more was mercilessly rendered, coldly and in detail, by New Objectivity artists.

Because they focused on producing representations of the poor, the ill, criminals, and other marginal members of society, and moved away from the symbolic, the optimistic and the visionary stances of other movements, critics often accused New Objectivists of focusing on the ugly and on a deformed view of society. Supporters of the New Objectivists, on the other hand, argued that they illuminated what is hidden, casting a critical eye upon the evils of war, profiteering, shallowness, and injustice. In other words, New Objectivists artists—as well as writers, playwrights and others—acted as social commentators who were mentally engaged with the reality of the world around them—a world they saw as traumatized and dislocated.

New Objectivity became an umbrella term for a wide variety of modernist styles, yet they all tend to share the following elements: (1) a carefully detailed rendering of objects, which contrasted with the more gestural style of expressionism; (2) topics that tended to veer towards insignificant or everyday objects and scenes; (3) an objective, emotionless gaze; (4) avoidance of gestural elements, dynamism, and movement; and a privileging of (5) static, isolated objectification, (6) fragmentation or collage-like compositions, and (7) sharp lines and techniques, similar to the Old Masters. It is important to note that the classicist and verist tendencies of the movement, often identified as right wing and left wing, cannot, according to some scholars, always be strictly identified and divided. The term magic realism associated with New Objectivity is often also associated with surrealism, so that the parameters that define New Objectivity are not always very clearly delineated. In other words, New Objectivity is not a unified art style or current.

New Objectivity was an encompassing movement that also included architects, writers, filmmakers, photographers, actors, and playwrights, most of whom sought to critically represent the world around them, free from romantic visions and idealism. Architects associated with this movement are Mies van der Rohe (1886–1969) and Walter Gropius (1883–1969), who produced simple, straightforward designs that represented a sort of social commentary. Photographers such as August Sander (1876–1964), whose seminal work objectively documents the realities of workers, landscapes, and street life in Weimar Germany, were also associated with the movement.

After the Nazi regime established a campaign against what it termed "degenerate art," New Objectivity artists, many of them in exile, continued to exert a strong influence in regional art circles of divided postwar East and West Germany, however, into the 1980s. In fact, New Objectivity enjoyed an incipient revival in the first decades of the twenty-first century.

Bibliography

Barron, Stephanie. New Objectivity: Modern German Art in the Weimar Republic, 1919–1933. London: Prestel, 2015. Print.

Bulk, Julia, and Nils Büttner. Otto Dix and New Objectivity. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz, 2013. Print.

Crocket, Dennis. German Post-Expressionism: The Art of the Great Disorder. University Park: Pennsylvania State UP, 1999. Print.

Kollwitz, Kathe. Prints and Drawings of Kathe Kollwitz. Mineola: Dover, 2012. Print.

Lewis, Beth Irwin. George Grosz: Art and Politics in the Weimar Republic. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1991. Print.

McElligott, Anthony. Rethinking the Weimar Republic: Authority and Authoritarianism, 1916–1936. London: Bloomsbury, 2014. Print.

"Neue Sachlichkeit." Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2015. Web. 15 July 2015.

Peters, Olaf. Degenerate Art: The Attack on Modern Art in Nazi Germany, 1937. London: Prestel, 2014. Print.

Schick, Karin, Hubertus Gassner, Anna Heinze, Simon Kelly, and Barbel Kustler. Max Beckmann: The Still Life. London: Prestel, 2014. Print.

Walther, Ingo F. Art of the 20th Century. Cologne: Taschen, 2012. Print.