Talk:De Stijl

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

De Stijl or Neoplasticism?[edit]

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

Neoplasticism is a translation of the Dutch "nieuwe beelding," not De Stijl. It is probably best to consider Neoplasticism as the art "movement" and De Stijl as the loose association of contributors to the journal of that name. English art historians refer to "De Stijl" without translating it (as they do with the Bauhaus, the Fauves, etc.)
Plus, De Stijl is the more familiar term (from first year art history). Freshacconci 19:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I had always thought that De Stijl and Neo-Plasticism were not synonymous. Most of the De Stijl works that people are familiar with are going to be Mondrian's works, and he was a Neo-Plasticist, but De Stijl was broader than that. Whether the article is based at one, the other, or separated into two, I don't think it should be identified as "also called neoplasticism." superlusertc 2008 January 17, 19:42 (UTC)
You're absolutely correct. Neo-plasticism links here, but I think this glosses over an important distinction. Even one of the references makes this distinction: look at the Tate glossary link.
Van Doesburg squeezed publicity out of the (more talented) Mondrian by officiously placing him under his umbrella of De Stijl. He aped Mondrian and put words in his mouth, until van Doesburg felt he (or Art itself, for which he would presume to speak) had "moved beyond" neo-plasticism. Mondrian disagreed and continued with his own mode of working until he himself made a change in New York, near his death. So, while De Stijl and Neoplasticism were closely associated for a time, De Stijl was a wider umbrella, and Neoplasticism had its own tenets and practice beyond the self-proclaimed "official sanction" of van Doesburg. Of course nothing so opinionated can go in the article :) but I do think it's unfair to simply have neo-plasticism redirect here.--96.242.191.15 (talk) 22:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This chair is one of the hardest pieces of mood bord resurh i have ever done for dt a level —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.6.23.47 (talk) 22:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lines? Terminology unclear[edit]

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

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

Article incomplete?[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

Quotation[edit]

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

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

—Mondrian[1]

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

—Mondrian[1]

Trivia[edit]

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

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

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b Benevolo, Leonardo (1980). Geoffrey Culverwell (transl.) (ed.). The History of the City. MIT Press. pp. page 846. ISBN 0262021463. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)

Pronunciation guides[edit]

The beginning of the article shows two contradicting Dutch pronunciation guides: [də ˈstɛɪl] and [dɛ ˈstiːl]. Which is correct? Hangfromthefloor (talk) 05:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Theo van Doesburg Counter-CompositionV (1924).jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Theo van Doesburg Counter-CompositionV (1924).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Influencing music[edit]

The article only sources one person as being influenced by de stijl to create music but in a blatant homage to the movement the White Stripes wrote an entire album of the same name that works on the same principals of de stijl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.239.148.85 (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History Section Misleading?[edit]

I'm just a student and don't have much specific knowledge about the Netherlands during WWI or De Stijl, however the Early History section seems to take the perspective that the artists of De Stijl couldn't leave the netherlands as a result of the war, as if no Dutch citizens could leave, where all history seems to indicate very much the opposite and that the Dutch were not only able to move around Europe freely, but that it was a great benefit for the warring countries as Dutch citizens made excellent spies.

While the whole section is uncited it seems that this source (cited for reference), would be an excellent background and seems to lineup with the information in the section. Although there are differences. The book translates De Nieuwe Beelding in de schilderkunst as ("Neo-Plasticism in the art of painting")[1] which is different than the current translation ("Neo-Plasticism in Painting"). Not to mention some capitalization differences.

modwizcode (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on De Stijl. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. AtticTapestry (talk) 15:46, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Jaffé, H.L.C. (1986). De Stijl, 1917-1931 : the Dutch contribution to modern art. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. p. 16. ISBN 0674199723. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)

De Stijl, International Style and Cubist architecture[edit]

@Leuk2:, I was wondering, what is your source for this paragraph? I've removed it from the article pending the source:

In Modern architecture of the 1920s are three notable movements: Cubist, Expressionist and Constructivist architecture. The magazine "De Stijl" (first issue October 1917) was influential on Cubist architecture of the International Style. The other Dutch magazine "Wendingen" (first issue January 1918) was influential on international Expressionist architecture.

Coldcreation (talk) 18:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


1920, poster by Theo van Doesburg, "Cubists" and "Neocubists"

@Coldcreation:

In the article Modern architecture (29 October 2017) are three notable movements mentioned:

1. Cubist architecture

2. Expressionist architecture

3. Constructivist architecture

Sources for Cubist architecture: The notion International Style is introduced in the US in 1932. Professionals in Europe don't like this notion. CUBIST ARCHITECTURE gives more information about the architectural form and is more familiar to the other two notions. / Theo van Doesburg used the term CUBISTS on his poster in 1920 (see ill.) and in articles. - Leuk2 (talk) 23:45, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


@Leuk2: I'm not asking what these types of architecture are. I'm asking you what your source is for your claim that: "The magazine "De Stijl" (first issue October 1917) was influential on Cubist architecture of the International Style. The other Dutch magazine "Wendingen" (first issue January 1918) was influential on international Expressionist architecture." Please provide the author, title, publisher, date and page number(s) so I can verify these assertions. Thanks in advance. Coldcreation (talk) 03:33, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Marinus Jan Granpré Molière, "Cubist" architecture (video 00:35)

@Coldcreation:

Three dominant styles: In 1932 Henry-Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson introduced the notion International Style. In 2017 we are talking about 3 groups of dominant styles: Cubist, Expressionist and Constructivist architecture. In Europe the term International Style is a little bit outdated in 2017. You can see the development of the 3 groups of styles in the article Modern architecture (29 October 2017).

2- and 3-dimensional artistic world: On your website one can find a very interesting collection of paintings of the 2-dimensional artistic world, and architecture is minimal present. Perhaps this is the source of the conflict and discussion between Cubist architecture and International Style?

Green color: You uploaded the cover of the magazine "De Stijl" 1917-1. De colors of "De Stijl" are red, blue and yellow (incl. black and white). In the country of "De Stijl", the Netherlands, the green color of your illustration is not acceptable. Perhaps the green color can be eliminated?

Deletion of correct informations: In the article "De Stijl" you deleted correct informations! 9.11.2017 you deleted the Manifesto of "De Stijl", Dadaism and later Housing Kiefhoek in Rotterdam, Weissenhof Stuttgart etc. Do you have the right to delete correct informations? This is not the best condition for a useful discussion.

Leuk2 (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Leuk2: Ping me when you've answered the question I asked you twice now. Coldcreation (talk) 16:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Leuk2:: I see you've edited your comments but you still have not provided a source (please see WP:RS if you are uncertain about what that means). Cubist architecture being synonymous with International Style, to the point of piping the former term over the article title of the latter, is highly questionable and will definitely need some good sourcing. I am failing to see the relevance of your initial edit: that Europeans don't care for the term "International"? If so, what's the point in the context of this article? It's arbitrary and confusing. That De Stijl influenced cubist architecture? That's nice, if true, and I suppose it can be mentioned if well-sourced, but it's hardly a crucial point to make, particularly the way it's introduced in the paragraph you added. Wikipedia should reflect as much as possible global views on topics but not if that means erasing common mainstream views, particularly without any sources. We can't just take your word on it. If the term International Style is outdated, this isn't the article to address it. freshacconci (✉) 14:52, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • As to your comment on the "green" cover: the publication in question was black ink on white or cream paper with no colour. What you are seeing is the fading of an archival work. It's not "green" it's just appearing to have a green tint due to time. You can see the uncropped image here which shows the fading around the edges of the cover. It's entirely possible that the first issue was printed on green paper as well, as it was a journal/magazine and they would have used what was available or economical or they were not concerned with purity of colours in something like a journal. In any case, this is the image that is available to us in the public domain and unless a different free example is available, changing it based on assumptions of what the original intent what is misguided. freshacconci (✉) 15:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is another copy, taken from a Christie's auction site. Clearly not the same copy: the one Wikipedia uses appears to be cropped from a version with a stamp in the upper right corner. This version has no stamp but has the same sort of fading. Either it's green paper fading to beige on the edges, or the paper is greening with age (which may have to do with the kind of paper used, the material that went into the paper -- paper from China was popular at the time and Chinese paper often used bamboo and leaf material rather than cotton more common in the west). This may explain the greening (or, as I said, they simply used green paper at the time. It was the first issue; who knows what restrictions they had). freshacconci (✉) 15:11, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on De Stijl. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Theo van Doesburg: The pioneers of "Cubist architecture" (1922)[edit]

See quotations in Talk:Modern architecture. Leuk2 (talk) 11:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leuk2 (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What your source is for your claim that: "The magazine "De Stijl" (first issue October 1917) was influential on "Cubist architecture" of the International Style.@Leuk2: Ping me when you've answered the question I've asked you three times now. The link you posted at Talk:Modern architecture doesn't cut it. Coldcreation (talk) 14:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:De_Stijl&oldid=1194331881"