The Art of Cubism Research Assignment Paper (Essay Sample)

Student Name
Instructor
Course
Date
The Art of Cubism
The first article by De Haro and Van Lier titled Hidden Harmony - The Connected Worlds of Physics and Art is a book review of the works by J.R. Leibowitz. This book by J.R. Leibowitz draws analogies between the subjects of physics and visual arts by associating the roles that form plays in both subjects. According to the authors, J.R. Leibowitz identifies a few elements in both physics and art forms that are critical to the creation of excellent pieces of works. Some of the elements include symmetry and its breaking; balance and rebalance; and coherence and unity CITATION Har09 \l 1033 (Haro and Lier). J.R. Leibowitz undertakes a detailed explanation of the concepts of relativism in physics to discuss the art of observer-independence. According to J.R. Leibowitz, Einstein eliminated physics relativism by introducing the relativity on the part of the observer. In other words, Einstein advocated that physics is independent of the subjectivity of the observer. Two notable discussions about symmetry, symmetry breaking, and the conserved quantity affirm J.R. Leibowitz’s beliefs that the principles of art are similar to the principles of physics. In this case, J.R. Leibowitz uses the formula of arriving at Planck’s quantum condition by breaking the symmetry that allows the determination of the properties of a particle and the restoration of the information that define it. The author’s focus on visual arts examines the concepts of coherence and unity, symmetry and broken symmetry, and the concept of balance and its restoration. The author supplements the mention of the form as one factor that helps in balancing color, which aids in the achievement of unity and coherence.
The second article by Elijah Bodish discusses the similarity of cubism art and mathematical concepts of space. In particular, the fourth dimension in terms of projection and section. The author emphasizes on the employment of a perspective technique that renders an image that is visually sensible into a canvas, but in a spatially inaccurate representation. The author affirms that the elusive fourth dimension is inherent in the similarities found in the geometry that people are accustomed to visualizing. The only problem is that people have been conditioned to visualize spaces in the three dimension of x, y, and z CITATION Bod09 \l 1033 (Bodish). The author goes into the details of explaining how the slicing method and projection method have been developed to help humans see the unseen in artwork. For instance, the author’s description of the slicing method of visualizing a square through the fourth dimension considers the many forms that a person observing can experience. The author point out that cubism art was born out of the creators’ desires to find an alternative drawing perspective of the world around them. Conclusively, the author asserts that people often misinterpret the fourth dimensions of space to imply time. In fact, the author claims that the notion that the fourth dimension is time came from the Special Relativity theory that Einstein conceptualized. Bodish describes the rationale behind Einstein’s conceptualization of the Special Relativity theory and why the three-dimensional nature of geometry makes it impossible to explain the relevance of the theory adequately.
It is evident that the two authors above are attempting to correlate Cubism art with the concepts of time and space in physics. At the center of their explanations is the observer’s perception. Consequently, the authors agree that those individuals who employ cubism art are trying to express their understanding of space CITATION Jus08 \l 1033 (Wolf). Although the two authors employ different approaches to describing how cubism art can be achieved in drawings and paintings, they seem to agree on the role that mathematics plays in understanding space and time.
Comparatively, both authors acknowledge the role that Einstein’s Special Relativity theory plays in explaining the space and time continuum. In particular, the authors agree that the works of art can elicit different meanings depending on the artisan’s understanding of the concept of space. In addition, both authors use historical objects of arts to elaborate on their ideas. For instance, Leibowitz uses the works belonging to Pablo Picasso, Van Gogh, and Jan Van Eyck. Similarly, Bodish uses the paintings of notable artisans such as Marcel Duchamp, Georges Braque, and Frederic Goupil. All these works of art are significant in elaborating the manner in which the creators utilized space to achieve different perspectives from the audiences.
However, the authors differ in regards to the approaches of explaining the concepts of dimensions and space. Leibowitz uses form to represent the dimension whose real identity is a mystery. Leibowitz’s argument emphasizes on unity, symmetry, and balance of artworks. Although the principles of geometry are evident in the elaborations of Leibowitz, he never mentions them explicitly. Notably, Leibowitz’s emphasis on the elements that create a form in a piece of artwork negates the causal relationship that exists between physics and art. In other words, Leibowitz avoids pushing the debate about how far physics and art determine each other. On the other hand, Bodish embraces the need to have a deeper understanding of how far physics and art can agree or dispute each other. Bodish uses the concept of geometry in the x, y, and z axes to offer a more comprehensive explanation of the complexities that surrou...