The Concept of Kitsch in Art: Clement Greenberg’s Perspective

Clement Greenberg’s essay Avant-Garde and Kitsch (1939) introduced a profound distinction between the high art of the avant-garde and the more popularized, sentimentalized art known as kitsch. In his critique, Greenberg defines kitsch as art that is formulaic, predictable, and appeals to mass taste rather than intellectual or aesthetic challenge. Kitsch, derived from the German verb "verkitschen" (meaning "to make something cheap"), is art that aims to cater to existing desires, without promoting critical thinking or pushing artistic boundaries. Greenberg asserts that kitsch is a direct contrast to avant-garde art, which is daring, experimental, and often critical of established norms. Kitsch is, in essence, art that aims to please the masses rather than provoke thought.

Greenberg’s concept of kitsch serves to devalue traditional notions of art and taste by labeling works of art that are formulaic and mass-produced as inferior to works of intellectual and aesthetic merit. According to Greenberg, kitsch is a form of art that does not challenge its audience or push artistic boundaries. It often adheres to sentimental, easily recognizable forms and themes that aim to comfort rather than stimulate the viewer. This devaluation of kitsch relies on the premise that genuine art should stimulate the mind and evoke new perspectives, rather than simply reaffirming conventional ideals.

Tomáš Kulka’s Kitsch and Art echoes Greenberg’s views by explaining that kitsch does not seek to create new expectations, but rather to satisfy existing ones. As Kulka suggests, kitsch plays on universal images and emotional charges that appeal to a broad audience, relying on the "common denominators" of human sentiment (Kulka). The aim of kitsch is to please as many people as possible, rather than to provoke intellectual engagement or aesthetic innovation. This sentiment aligns with Greenberg’s critique, positioning kitsch as art that is non-challenging and predictable, designed for mass consumption rather than for artistic contemplation.

The question of whether kitsch has been around since the beginning of time or if it is a modern concept requires a historical examination. In one sense, kitsch has always existed in various forms, as human beings have long produced art meant to appeal to the masses. However, the specific notion of kitsch as discussed by Greenberg is a product of modern industrialization, where mass production and popular culture became intertwined with the art world. In earlier periods, art produced for mass consumption may have existed in forms such as religious icons, decorative objects, or reproductions of famous works, but the term "kitsch" itself did not emerge until the rise of modernity, when art became commodified and accessible to a broader audience.

The difference between art and kitsch lies in their purpose, execution, and impact on the audience. Genuine art, as Greenberg defines it, challenges the viewer and seeks to explore new ideas, concepts, and forms. It is driven by innovation and critical thought. Kitsch, on the other hand, is formulaic and predictable, catering to the tastes and desires of the masses without offering new perspectives. An example of kitsch art might be the ubiquitous velvet Elvis paintings that became popular in the mid-20th century. These works often present familiar, nostalgic imagery that lacks the intellectual depth of avant-garde art and relies on emotional appeal rather than intellectual stimulation.

In conclusion, Greenberg’s concept of kitsch serves to distinguish high art from popular culture, labeling the former as intellectually stimulating and the latter as emotionally manipulative. While kitsch may have existed in various forms throughout history, it is only in the modern era that it became recognized as a distinct category of art. As mass-produced, formulaic art that caters to popular taste, kitsch represents the commodification of culture. Whether kitsch is a playful or ironic critique of popular culture today remains a point of contention, but its origins remain tied to Greenberg’s notion of art that lacks depth and intellectual engagement.

Works Cited

Greenberg, Clement. “Avant-Garde and Kitsch.” Partisan Review, 1939.

Kulka, Tomáš. Kitsch and Art.