Gerhard Richter and postmodernism – Frederique Jones

In this essay, I investigate why Gerhard Richter is considered a Postmodern

Painter. In doing so, I assess five of his most significant paintings against

relevant definitions of modernism and postmodernism.

Beforehand, it is necessary to give a contextual background of his professional

career from his debut in Dresden, East Germany, in 1957, when he had to

comply with Soviet ideology, to when he fled to Dusseldorf, in 1961. This

happened as a direct consequence of a life-changing visit to Documenta II in

Kassel, West Germany,[CITATION Ric09 \p 163 \l 1033 ] where he discovered

Jackson Pollock’s and Lucio Fontana’s ground-breaking work. From then on,

exerting his newfound freedom, he will experiment frantically and with the

influence of Pop art, will develop a completely new and unique style of painting.

When Richter started his painting career, he had a promising future in the

German Democratic Republic, producing mural commissions supporting the

ideology of the state and being supported

However, these murals were all in
by the state[CITATION DrD10 \p 17 \l 1033 ].
the same socialist realism style, a

realistic art promoting the goals of

communist ideology [CITATION

Rob02 \p "21 - 22" \l 1033 ] , which

Richter found increasingly hard to

comply with [CITATION Ric09 \p

470 \l 1033 ].
1
He privately tried to find a compromise, generating a new form of aesthetic,

‘the third path’, where Eastern Realism and Western Modernism would meet

half way. He worked on a few paintings, however, gradually he felt that his

private work was deteriorating and he was unhappy with it [CITATION DrD10 \p

"22 - 29" \l 1033 ].

His visit to Documenta II in 1959, as part of a forbidden cultural trip to Kassel,

was a defining moment. That year, the International Exhibition of Modern and

Contemporary Art was showing the works of Jackson Pollock and Lucio

Fontana, which totally astounded Richter [CITATION Nic11 \p 20 \l 1033 ][CITATION

Ric09 \p 163 \l 1033 ].

2
(Fig.2) (Fig.3)

Pollock’s Abstract Expressionism (fig.2) focused on the physical involvement in

the act of painting, rather than the traditional brush and easel. Lucio Fontana’s

Spatialism art (fig.3), pioneered by Fontana himself, had abandoned traditional

painting to favour new physical environments, (slashed canvas) [CITATION

Lit04 \p "121 - 122" \l 1033 ].

3
Richter had just had a glimpse of modernism as defined by Clement Greenberg,

who became one of the most influential art critics of the twentieth century

after writing his essays ‘Avant-Garde and Kitsch’ (1939) and ‘Modernist

painting’ (1961)[CITATION San14 \p 3-4 \l 1033 ] . According to Greenberg, the

medium of painting should be self-critical, addressing only its inherent

properties, namely, its flatness, shape of support and pigment properties. He

declared that ‘Realistic, naturalistic art had dissembled the medium, using art

to conceal art’ and that ‘Modernism used art to call attention to art’ [CITATION

Placeholder1 \p 85-93 \l 1033 ]. He also introduced the distinction between ‘high

art’ referring to the avant-garde and ‘middlebrow’ or ‘novelty art’ referring to

Pop Art [CITATION Placeholder1 \p 259-65 \l 1033 ].

When referring to Pollock and Fontana’s work, Richter’s words were ‘The sheer

brazenness of it!’ [CITATION Ric09 \p 163 \l 1033 ]. Although he did not relate to

their work, he had come to the conclusion that compromising his art was no

longer an option and that there was no ‘third path’. In 1961, he fled East

Germany, leaving all his work and family behind [CITATION DrD10 \p 22 \l 1033 ].

Upon his arrival in West Germany, Richter promptly joined the Dusseldorf

Academy, where he met new colleagues, soon-to-be friends, Sigmar Polke,

Konrad Fisher and Blinki Palermo. They provided a fantastic support network,

as well as a source of inspiration. The Academy was soon a hub for Fluxus, an

artists network engaging in experimental art. Richter immersed himself in this,

exploring, experimenting and actively engaging in art through exhibitions and

4
events [ CITATION Ale13 \l 1033 ]. He said ‘I tried out everything I could’[CITATION

Ric09 \p "84, 472-73" \l 1033 ].

During this period, the early 1960’s, Pop art was emerging in Europe and with it

the idea of postmodernism started to creep in. Indeed, Pop art legitimised the

appropriation of popular imagery and rejected ideas of high art and low culture

[CITATION Lit04 \p 131 \l 1033 ] and Both issues were directly addressed by

postmodernism and defined by art historians, Paul Wood and Charles Harrison,

under ‘The Critique of Originality’ and ‘The Critique of (Art) History’ [CITATION

San14 \p 241-43 \l 1033 ]:

 The Critique of Originality was a response to the Greenbergian idea that

the medium should only address its inherent properties, postmodernism

allowed artists to use whatever medium, in whichever style, they felt was

relevant to make art.

 Postmodernism used appropriation of images or found objects to elevate

these objects (of popular culture or mass production) into the contexts of

art. This dissolved Greenberg’s distinction between ‘art’ and ‘culture’ and

so undermined the modernist authority to define art, thus addressing the

critique of originality and the critique of a single view on art history.

There was also ‘the critique of the grounds of difference’, addressing issues of

race, gender and class [CITATION San14 \p 238-39 \l 1033 ].

So, with the use of images being legitimised by Pop art and the influence of

Fluxus encouraging artists to experiment with art, combined with a lifelong

interest in photography[CITATION Nic13 \l 1033 ], Richter started ripping images

from magazines to paint them. He had the feeling he was doing something 5
special and radical, particularly with his traditional academic background

[CITATION DrD10 \p 46 \l 1033 ]. Soon, with a view to speeding up his work, he

developed a smudging method and produced his first blurred paintings in 1963

[CITATION Ric09 \p "21 and 84" \l 1033 ].

From then on, his painting process followed the same method, systematically

bearing the hallmarks of postmodernism:

 His appropriation of images was as we saw a defining aspect of

postmodernism, addressing the critique of originality and the critique of a

single view on art history [CITATION San14 \p 241-43 \l 1033 ].

 His subsequent projection of the images on canvas, to trace and paint

them, as realistically as he could, ignoring Greenberg’s idea that realistic

painting was an attempt to conceal art, addresses the issue of a single

view of art history.

 Finally, the manipulation of the medium, with the brush or squeegee,

further enhancing the origin of his source, an out of focus found

photograph, reiterated the critique of originality. Incidentally, he also

believed that the blurring, as well as, keep the focus on the subject,

would erase his personal style, in favour of the technological style of a

camera.

[CITATION Ric09 \p "22, 32-33 and 84" \l 1033 ].

Regarding his subjects, what mattered to Richter was the ‘information content’

of his photographic source, which he spent time choosing carefully [CITATION

Ric09 \p "21 and 33" \l 1033 ] . In his earlier work, he focused more on his own

‘childish feelings of anxiety and fascination’ [CITATION Jou90 \l 1033 ] and when
6
the pictures were not about death and the aftermath of the war, which Nicholas

Serota explains in his interview with Jane Morris in 2011 [CITATION Mor11 \l 1033

], Richter favoured banal photographs. As he said, ‘Not ‘art’ photographs, but

ones taken by ‘lay people’, or by ordinary newspaper photographers’. He found

them more interesting [CITATION Ric09 \p 21 \l 1033 ].

With regard to ‘Toilet Paper’, Richter declared that although toilet paper

appeared banal and was ‘a poor person’s picture’ [CITATION Jou90 \l 1033 ], ‘if

nobody had ever painted toilet paper in art history, it was time to paint toilet

paper and it certainly could not be banal’ [CITATION Rob02 \p 294 \l 1033 ].

Beside its painting process, as previously

described, Richter demonstrated unequivocally

that realistic painting from a photograph of the

most banal and even lowly consumer object

constituted art, thus dissolving issues of high

art and low culture, as argued by Greenberg, as

well as, undermining his authority and single

view on art history.

The following two paintings depict the subject of war and its aftermath.

Although made at two very different times, both paintings address German

history in a similar manner.

7
8
Fig.5 Uncle Rudi, 1965. Fig.6 Confrontation 2, 1988.

They are both black and white paintings of a smiling young person. In the first,

we are made aware of the family connection in the title. Yet, ‘Uncle Rudi’ is

wearing a World War II Wehrmacht (Nazi) uniform, which Richter carefully

blurred into the background, diminishing its importance.

As Richter explains ‘I blur things to make everything equally important and

equally unimportant’[CITATION Ric09 \p 33 \l 1033 ]. The second (‘Confrontation 2’,

1988) is part of a series of 15 paintings called 18 Oktober 1977, the date of the

deaths in prison of members of the Baader-Meinhof terrorist group. The painting

is a cropped version of the original photographs of Gudrun Ensslin, carrying a

number plate, on her way to an identity parade [CITATION Joe14 \l 1033 ].

In both cases, the viewer knows the context in which the pictures were taken

but in removing information or diminishing their importance, Richter shifted the

focus to the human being and the kindness of a smile, rather than the ideology

they represent or the crimes they committed.

In doing so, Richter created a different narrative, thus questioning ideologies

that turn young and friendly (symbolized by the smile) people into mass

murderers, addressing the critique of German history. [CITATION San14 \p 251-252

\l 1033 ].

In the next painting, ‘Ema (Nude on a Staircase)’, Richter painted a direct

response to Marcel Duchamp’s ‘Nude descending a staircase’. Duchamp

proclaimed that conventional painting was dead, calling the work of many of

his fellow artists ‘retinal’ art. Duchamp’s hallmark was always his subversion of

Although impressed by Duchamp’s painting Richter

was irritated by his arrogance. He challenged

traditional artistic values with irony and satire, which he explored to the limit

with his readymade objects [CITATION Nan04 \l 1033 ].

In the 1970’s, Richter started making abstract paintings, experimenting with

chance and loss of control [CITATION Nic11 \p 27 \l 1033 ]. These paintings are

important firstly because they became central to Richter’s practice and also

because, as Curator Ulrich Wilmes explains [ CITATION Wil09 \l 1033 ], Richter

does not differentiate his abstracts from his figurative paintings. They were

more about the physical process [CITATION Rob02 \p 303 \l 1033 ] but Richter also

‘allowed for aspects or suggestions of images in the abstract work’ because he

believes ‘we always try to identify a relation of a picture to some sort of

appearance’ [CITATION Rob02 \p 304 \l 1033 ].

‘Cage 6’ is part of a series of six paintings, named after the avant-garde

composer John Cage. Richter admired how Cage handled chance and

coincidence in his oeuvre and was inspired by it [CITATION Ric09 \p 446 \l 1033 ].
1
As with all his abstract0

paintings, there is smudging

However, Pollock’s drip (fig.2) defines his facture, a mark tightly connected to

his physical gesture and also depending on a chance factor (his tools do not

touch the canvas), which, in turn, is tightly linked to the inherent properties of

the medium.

On the other hand, Richter’s smudging or scraping, encompasses more than

just his physical gesture. Indeed, Richter exerts some control over his

squeegee or brush. There is decision making in the process, where he ponders

and concludes to remove or reapply a layer of paint, ‘giving form to chance’

[CITATION Nic11 \p 27 \l 1033 ] . With all the various layers, the painting develops a

history of colours and textures and the viewer tries to look for a ‘figurative

meaning’ in the painting [CITATION Adr11 \l 1033 ]. And so, even when Richter

produced an abstract painting, the painting was not just about the inherent

1
1
properties of the medium, addressing once more the critiques of originality and

art history.

In the study of these paintings, Richter’s entire work process bears the

hallmarks of postmodernism, each step challenging, as we saw, Greenbergian

modernist ideas, addressing, in turn or simultaneously, the critiques of

originality (use of images, photorealistic painting and blur), history (‘Uncle

Rudi’, ‘Confrontation’) and art history (‘Toilet Paper’, ‘Ema’).

It seems clear that Richter is a key postmodern artist. However, I am not sure

his motivation was solely governed by the desire to address modernism but

rather equally by the need to explore freely, medium and ideas after years of

complying with the demands of an oppressing Soviet ideology. Fluxus and Pop

Art gave him the license to transgress some academic values (use of

photographs). However, Richter admired and respected academic painting,

which he said had a great influence on him [CITATION Ric09 \p "22 and 106" \l

1033 ] and he believed that ‘using photographs was the only possible way to

continue to paint’[CITATION Rob02 \p 293 \l 1033 ]. In his 1964 notes, he declares:

‘I use photography to make a painting just as Rembrandt uses drawing or

Vermeer the camera obscura’ [CITATION Ric09 \p 32 \l 1033 ].

2217 words

1
Bibliography 2
Adams, A. (2013, June 13). At the top of his game. Retrieved February 09, 2014
from The Art Newspaper:
www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/At+the+top+of+his+game/29918

Elger, D. (2010). Gerhard Richter A Life in Painting. (E. M. Solaro, Trans.)

Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press,.

Elger, D. (2009). Gerhard Richter TEXT. (D. a. Elger, Ed., & T. a. Ltd, Trans.)
London: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Greenberg, C. (1939). Avant-Garde and Kitsch . Retrieved 03 08, 2014 from

www.sharecom.ca: www.sharecom.ca/greenberg/kitsch.html

Greenberg, C. (1995). The Collected Essays and Criticism (Vol. 4). (J. O'Brian,
Ed.) Chicago, Illinois, US: University of Chicago Press.

Hage, J. (2014). Art. Retrieved February 08, 2014 from Gerhard Richter:
www.gerhard-richter.com/art/search/detail.php?
paintid=7695&title=confrontation

Little, S. (2004). ...isms UNDERSTANDING ART. London, Great Britain: Herbert

Press.

Mark Godfrey, N. S. (2011). Gerhard Richter Panorama A Retrospective. London:

Tate Publishing.

Moorhouse, P. (2014). Gerhard Richter>Videos>Exhibitions>Portraits . Retrieved

March 22, 2014 from Gerhard Richter: www.gerhard-
richter.com/videos/exhibitions-1/portraits-23

Morris, J. (2011, October 12). The importance of curating Gerhard Richter.

Retrieved February 7, 2014 from The Art Newspaper:
www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/interview:+Nicholas+Serota/24823

Nicholas, S. (2013, July 09). Gerhard Richter: Panorama- interview with Gerhard
Richter. (Tate, Producer) Retrieved February 09, 2014 from YouTube:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExfNJDh4K1g

Schultz, S. (1990, January 15). Journal of Contemporary Art Gerhard Richter. (K.
Ottmann, Editor) Retrieved February 09, 2014 from Journal of Contemporary
Art: www.jca-online.com/richter.html

Searle, A. (2011, 10 17). Gerhard Richter at Tate Modern, The Guardian.

Retrieved 03 19, 2014 from Youtube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8boixn7AMgk

Serota, N. a. (2011). Gerhard Richter Panorama a Retospective. London: Tate

Publishing.

Storr, R. (2002). Gerhard Richter Forty Years of Painting. New York: The
Museum of Modern Art.
1
3
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rosenthal. (2004, 10). Marcel Duchamp (1887-
1968). Retrieved 03 19, 2014 from The Metropolitan Museum of Art:
www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/duch/hd_duch.htm

Ulrich, W. (2009, 02-05). Gerhard Richter>Videos>Exhibitions>The Cage

Paintings. Retrieved 02 15, 2014 from Gerhard Richter: www.gerhard-
richter.com/videos/exhibitions-1/the-cage-paintings-25

Wood, P. a. (1993). Modernism in dispute: Art since the Forties. New Haven &
London, US & UK: Yale University Press in association with the Open
University.

1
4