AND I THOUGHT I KNEW HIS WORK...
A few months ago Anne and I had crossed in the street. She was coming back from the Paul Klee exhibition. By the time I arrived at the Beaubourg, there was no way that I would confront that crowd. The weeks went by and finally Pierre, who hadn’t been either, suggested that we went at opening time on a Monday morning. We sailed through but after a perhaps 15 minutes, Pierre said it wasn’t for him and left me to it.
I was in the first gallery. So I thought I knew Paul Klee’s work. In less that three paintings, it would seem that I knew absolutely nothing. My references are these : little stick men :
bright colors:
abstract work :
Then I remembered that Pierrette and I had seen a retrospective of his work at the end of 2014
Cheeful Squares and Lots of Smiles .
When I re-read this after having written this particular chapter, I could feel that I was overwhelmed then and yet rather dubious about his very large palette.
This was going to be an exhibition which would knock me sidewards.
It was divided into 7 parts. At first his works seems very approachable. Smaller formats enable views to establish a close relationship with the artist. That’s how I felt. Even some of th work seems to be reminiscent of the art of childhood. Simple and yet, so sophisticated.
Then his work seems to oscillate between apparent simplicity and extreme sophistication. It is extremely complex in my book, not to mention prolific. Would you believe over 10,000 works? He seems to be very romantic at times and yet very ironical. He can be an actor, a sculptor, sketching minimalist drawings which are funny or work which is painful to look at because of the period it represents. The second world war and when he too was designated as a degenerate artist by the Nazis.
There are over 230 works in this retrospective which is probably the most important in France since 1969. There is a catalogue in our library which goes back to that date. I would suggest if you want to really read about his life and history that the MET’s description is a very good one.
Paul Klee
My description can only give you my feelings about what I saw and how perhaps I was bowled over by the complexity and his wide palette. I spent over three hours at the Beaubourg, going backwards forwards, seeing something new each time I looked at a picture a second or a third time. The first period which is called « Satirical Beginnings » shows at once just how much there is humour in his work. Although he joined a life drawing class in Berne, making good his inadequacies in anatomical drawing, the human body is grotesque with deformations and l would think that he is sending himself up. You see at once that he doesn’t belong to any artistic period and that perhaps he was after a wider public. His sculptures for instance are really deformed and frankly if they hadn’t been signed Klee, I would perhaps have thought of another artist.
The following period is called Klee and Cubism. Late 1911. I find this difficult to accept as the paintings are a long way off the Cubists. Picasso, Braque, ….there are other scenes as well and many of them once again seem to have a satirical atmosphere.
We go on then to Mechanical Theatre which features an imagery of mechanized figures. He was also teaching at the Bauhaus during this period. Even so, many of his paintings seem to include ancient mosaics, figures in caves - prehistoric -as if he has been inspired by cave art during this period.
One picture in particular stood out for me. Not at once but on a second viewing. « Snake Paths ». The sinuous red form of the snake stands out against the background of white and monochrome browns….l doubt if it is there for any particular purpose but the snake gives a freedom to the painting.
Moving on again, we see the interaction of his work with Picasso. Although there had been a first contact with Picasso’s work around 1912 (cubism?) it’s in the 30’s when Picasso discovered « Surrealism ». Particularly his large paintings of female figures. Innovations that appear frequently in Klee’s work after the Bauhaus and were said to stimulate him during his final years. From what I have read there was a considerable tension between those two giants of modernity. Even if Klee was influenced by Picasso, I find it difficult to see so in his own paintings.
At the same time, a lot of his work evokes for me the Klee I know or thought I did before coming to this exhibition.
Hitler coming to power in 1933 marked the end of Klee’s carer in Germany and forced him into exile in Bern. He seem to recount terror through a childlike, playful iconography where signs are transformed into stickmen dancing not in joy, but in fear. Klee was also seriously ill during this period. An illness which was slowly stiffening his bodily movements. He developed something called scleroderma or a wasting disease that gradually mineralized his body.
Marcel Duchamp said:-
Where had the time gone to? A couple of the supervisors heads had reverted from their smart phones to my comings and goings. I doubt that I was more interesting even if they did wonder why I was going backwards ad forwards - but if I had moved a painting when they were deep into games on the ‘phones, would they have noticed? This event was one of the best so far this year - learning that I knew very little about the artist. Exhilarating!
Titles were translated into English.
I was in the first gallery. So I thought I knew Paul Klee’s work. In less that three paintings, it would seem that I knew absolutely nothing. My references are these : little stick men :
 |
| Scene of the Fire, 1939- |
bright colors:
 |
| With the Rotating Black sun and the arrow - 1919 |
abstract work :
 |
| The Stag - 1919 |
Then I remembered that Pierrette and I had seen a retrospective of his work at the end of 2014
Cheeful Squares and Lots of Smiles .
When I re-read this after having written this particular chapter, I could feel that I was overwhelmed then and yet rather dubious about his very large palette.
This was going to be an exhibition which would knock me sidewards.
It was divided into 7 parts. At first his works seems very approachable. Smaller formats enable views to establish a close relationship with the artist. That’s how I felt. Even some of th work seems to be reminiscent of the art of childhood. Simple and yet, so sophisticated.
 |
| After a Drawing, 1919 |
 |
| A fish, a hook, a little creature 1901 |
 |
| Two fishes, a hook and a worm.1901 |
 |
| Two fishes, one on a hook. 1901 |
 |
| Girl stooping, followed by a snake-like dachshund. 1906 |
 |
| Portrait of an emotional lady: 1906 |
 |
| Wretched couple. 1905 |
 |
| The Pianist in need: 1909 |
 |
| Concert of the parties : 1907 |
Then his work seems to oscillate between apparent simplicity and extreme sophistication. It is extremely complex in my book, not to mention prolific. Would you believe over 10,000 works? He seems to be very romantic at times and yet very ironical. He can be an actor, a sculptor, sketching minimalist drawings which are funny or work which is painful to look at because of the period it represents. The second world war and when he too was designated as a degenerate artist by the Nazis.
There are over 230 works in this retrospective which is probably the most important in France since 1969. There is a catalogue in our library which goes back to that date. I would suggest if you want to really read about his life and history that the MET’s description is a very good one.
Paul Klee
My description can only give you my feelings about what I saw and how perhaps I was bowled over by the complexity and his wide palette. I spent over three hours at the Beaubourg, going backwards forwards, seeing something new each time I looked at a picture a second or a third time. The first period which is called « Satirical Beginnings » shows at once just how much there is humour in his work. Although he joined a life drawing class in Berne, making good his inadequacies in anatomical drawing, the human body is grotesque with deformations and l would think that he is sending himself up. You see at once that he doesn’t belong to any artistic period and that perhaps he was after a wider public. His sculptures for instance are really deformed and frankly if they hadn’t been signed Klee, I would perhaps have thought of another artist.
 |
| Virgin (dreaming) 1903 |
 |
| Aged Pheonix : 1905 |
 |
| Two Nicotine addicts : around 1915 |
 |
| Uneassiness at thought : 1915 |
 |
| Death in the mask of a Mummy :1915 |
 |
| St. Germain near Tunis :1914 |
 |
| Villas on the beachn:1914 |
 |
| With the Brown : 1915 |
 |
| The Niesen : 1915 |
 |
| The Hopeless Ones : 1914 |
 |
| Laughing Gothic : 1915 |
 |
| A house : 1915 |
 |
| Rose garden : 1920 |
 |
| Growth of Plants : 1921 |
 |
| Garden in the Plain 1: 1920 |
 |
| Garden in the Plain ll: 1920 |
We go on then to Mechanical Theatre which features an imagery of mechanized figures. He was also teaching at the Bauhaus during this period. Even so, many of his paintings seem to include ancient mosaics, figures in caves - prehistoric -as if he has been inspired by cave art during this period.
 |
| Chosen Boy : 1918 |
 |
| Angelus Novus : 1920 |
 |
| End of the Last act of a drama : 1920 |
 |
| Flowers in the wind : 1922 |
 |
| Man is the Mouth of the Lord : 1918 |
 |
| Adam and Little Eve : 1921 |
 |
| Three Heads : 1918 |
 |
| The Singer : 1923 |
 |
| Pierrot's Persecution Mania : 1924 |
 |
| Popular Mural Painting : 1922 |
 |
| Puppets |
 |
| Puppet |
 |
| Analysis of diverse Perversities ;1922 |
 |
| Picture from the Boudoir : 1922 |
 |
| Puppet |
 |
| Puppet |
One picture in particular stood out for me. Not at once but on a second viewing. « Snake Paths ». The sinuous red form of the snake stands out against the background of white and monochrome browns….l doubt if it is there for any particular purpose but the snake gives a freedom to the painting.
 |
| Snakes Paths : 1934 |
Moving on again, we see the interaction of his work with Picasso. Although there had been a first contact with Picasso’s work around 1912 (cubism?) it’s in the 30’s when Picasso discovered « Surrealism ». Particularly his large paintings of female figures. Innovations that appear frequently in Klee’s work after the Bauhaus and were said to stimulate him during his final years. From what I have read there was a considerable tension between those two giants of modernity. Even if Klee was influenced by Picasso, I find it difficult to see so in his own paintings.
 |
| Influence : 1932 |
 |
| Poison : 1932 |
 |
| Urchs from the Heroic Age : 1939 |
 |
| Stormy Awakeing : 1939 |
 |
| Interrupted Metamorphis : 1939 |
 |
| Hungry Girl : 1939 |
 |
| Wicked Mommy : 1939 |
 |
| Twins : 1930 |
 |
| Portrait Bust of Gaïa : 1939 |
 |
| Love Song at New Moon : 1939 |
At the same time, a lot of his work evokes for me the Klee I know or thought I did before coming to this exhibition.
Hitler coming to power in 1933 marked the end of Klee’s carer in Germany and forced him into exile in Bern. He seem to recount terror through a childlike, playful iconography where signs are transformed into stickmen dancing not in joy, but in fear. Klee was also seriously ill during this period. An illness which was slowly stiffening his bodily movements. He developed something called scleroderma or a wasting disease that gradually mineralized his body.
Marcel Duchamp said:-
« His extreme fecundity never shows sign of reputation as it is generally the case. He has so much to say that a Klee is never like another Klee. »I agree up to a point but many of the later paintings are similar because of these stick men who we all know so well. He had simplified his graphic language which could well express « a contemporary distress » - humanity and his own. But what a force.
 |
| A double screamer : 1939 |
 |
| La Belle Jardinière : 1939 |
 |
| Laden Children : 1930 |
 |
| Prophet : 1930 |
 |
| The Man of the Future : 1933 |
 |
| Your Ancestor ? : 1933 |
 |
| Struck from the List : 1933 |
 |
| Mask Fear : 1932 |
 |
| Threatening Signs : 1938 |
 |
| Fama : 1939 |
 |
| Outbreak of Fear lll: 1939 |
 |
| "Hail!" 1939 |
 |
| Loyal to the Führer : 1939 |
 |
| Tragic Step : 1939 |
 |
| The Game is getting out of Hand : 1940 |
 |
| Oh! these Rumours! 1939 |
 |
| Insular dulcamara : 1938 |
 |
| Intention : 1938 |
 |
| High Spirits : 1939 |
 |
| Angelus Militans : 1940 |
 |
| Hands up! : 1938 |
 |
| In Trouble due to Aridity : 1940 |
 |
| In Trouble due to Water : 1940 |
 |
| Untitled : 1940 |
 |
| Jumper : 1930 |
 |
| Aquarium : 1927 |
 |
| Fishes in a circle : 1926 |
 |
| Dispute : 1929 |
Where had the time gone to? A couple of the supervisors heads had reverted from their smart phones to my comings and goings. I doubt that I was more interesting even if they did wonder why I was going backwards ad forwards - but if I had moved a painting when they were deep into games on the ‘phones, would they have noticed? This event was one of the best so far this year - learning that I knew very little about the artist. Exhilarating!
Titles were translated into English.
Commentaires