Newton tried to keep color in the realm of an independently provable entity by analysing that light refracted from a prism was separated into a spectrum of colors. He tried hard to maintain objective observations and had an assistant help him make his readings to avoid his own subjective perceptions. He avoided “colors in a dream or what a mad man sees”, and emphasized a quantifiable, objective analysis of color. His works on color and light were published in the much celebrated "Opticks" showing that light was made of colored rays.
It is chemical and physical scientists who have shown the most interest in measuring and studying color, and not the artists who would rather use it rather than analyze it. Yet, alongside the very lucrative paints (and other color industries) which they propagated, these same chemists have realized that the history of color is not just a numerically speculative phenomenon, but involves other values such as emotions and morals to which artists espouse. In fact, the history (or the understanding) of color is closely intertwined with these objective scientists and the more subjective artists.
If one were to place Goethe in this continuum, he would definitely figure at the other end with the artists and other poets of color. Goethe insisted that color should be studied as the human eye perceives it, rather than as instruments measure it. In his unparalleled “Theory of Color Theory”, he spent many experiments trying to show the role our eyes (our perceptions) play in determining the effects of color.
For example, he studied the phenomenon that is now called ‘after-images’ where after looking for a prolonged time at a certain color, when switching to a blank white canvass, we see the ‘contrasting’ color on that white canvass – blue instead of yellow. His premise became that color is not a fixed entity, but depended on many other human and non-human factors in order to be seen. Goethe was convinced that color affects us morally, physiologically, and psychologically; that we react subjectively to color. He eventually started to establish his theory on the ‘morality’ of colors, introducing us to his color polarities starting out with specific colors, and incorporating subjective values on to them: Yellow vs. Blue; Force vs. Weakness; Brightness vs. Darkness; and one is tempted to add Good vs. Evil. Of course, these may only be his subjective views, and another artist may decide that it is red and green that are in such opposition.
Goethe’s emphasis on the perceptions of color, what colors meant, emoted, symbolized, how they affected our senses, feelings and morals influenced the direction and importance of color in painters from there on. Color, up until then, had been give a secondary role to drawing, where line, light and shade dominated. Earlier painters had always delegated a secondary role to color finding no way of equating it with line and form. If Newton were to critic Goethe, I’m sure he would side with these earlier artists and put more emphasis on the straightforward drawing, rather than Goethe’s elusive perceptions of color.
Despite the differences that Goethe found between his and Newton's work, he eventually reconciled these differences, asserting that both objective and subjective views were possible. Newton also had never rejected the idea that color can be a subjective phenomenon. Ultimately, it is this supreme interest in color that unites Newton and Goethe. But Goethe was perhaps more right than wrong in emphasizing the elusive nature of color, and in disagreeing so vehemently with Newton at the beginning of his studies. Color has continued to be as elusive, subjective and ephemeral as he had suspected it to be. Perhaps both Goethe and Newton opened a pandora's box when they decided to put color at the fore-front of their inquiries.
Still , in just a matter of decades, we go from Newton’s predominantly ‘objective’ "Opticks" to Goethe’s ‘subjective’ "Theory of Color". From quantitative measurements to subjective perceptions. How did this come about? Why was Goethe interested in demonstrating the subjective, while Newton insisted on the objective?
I believe it has to do with transcendence. Both Newton and Goethe profoundly understood the human 'will'. Newton wanted it subservient to and Goethe wanted it at the center of man. Newton stressed, in his method of inquiry, that something beyond man determines things. Goethe’s central figure is man himself, and man’s perceptions are the primary factor in his life. It really was a battle between the supremacy of God, and the supremacy of man. In Goethe’s world, man finally wins. By allowing man to focus on his will and whim, Goethe put a stop to this transcendence. Color became the easiest way for artists to win this battle (if they were fighting it in the first place). It was no longer necessary to accurately depict lines and, in Newton’s heroic attempt, colors. Artists no longer had to describe, as best they could, our natural, external world. They could only be expected to personally interpret it, where wilful perceptions finally take over.
Color became a manifestation of the artist’s personal feelings, personal will, personal interpretation and personal desires. Goethe’s "Theory of Color" became the gateway for artists to focus on the much easier human will rather than on Godly transcendence. This led to color being the most important element in painting, and eventually dominating the whole canvass. Later on, this would also result with the distortion of line, form and even content subject to the artist’s interpretation. Color released the artist from any outside commitments, and allowed him to be accountable only to himself. This is essentially the attribute of the modern artist. “What does this mean?” becomes a common question directed at most modern paintings.
Since color is really a manifestation of the modern artist’s personal interpretations, it becomes all about the artist’s feelings. Thus, emotions (or sensations) play a very large part in these paintings. Monet may have attributed his bluish/pinkish haystacks to the time of day, and type of sunlight falling on the dried grass, but it is essentially his subjective and exaggerated interpretation of that particular moment of the day. This later became much more pronounced in his Rouen series, where a blue Cathedral finally exists. This is only a step before Van Gogh’s who tried to “express the terrible passions of humanity by means of reds and greens…” in his Night Cafe. No longer are we subjectively describing a scene, but expressing and interpreting it emotionally as well. Artists even suggested choosing colors "from their palette than from nature".
Feelings are naturally unstable – one is not always happy, or always sad, or always angry. Van Gogh’s deep sense of alienation in red and green could just as soon turn into the calm accommodations of pastels, which he did use in his "Almond tree in Bloom". With nothing to ground these paintings, and focussing on shifting personal sentiments and emotions, artists can say and paint anything they want, and then change their minds about them. Kandinsky, after seeing Montet's variously hued haystacks said, "Deep within me the first doubt arose about the importance of the object as a necessary element in a picture". Now, even the object, the epitome of form, is no longer required as a reference to the external world. The artist can draw anything he wants, and color it anything he desires. Even the title to Kandinsky's paintings is indicative of this belief.
With no external responsibilities, or a sense of transcendence to force these artists beyond the self, this battle of relevance has now raged for more than a century. I think it all started when color, that fickle, deeply personal, ephemeral quality, took precedence over the drawing. When previous attempts at objectivity were superseded by subjectivity. This unwillingness to face the difficult external world, and perhaps humbly attribute it to something greater than oneself, changed the focus of the artist from the external world to his internal landscape. The color field aritsts of the 1960s epitomize this attitude, where nothing but color dominates the whole canvass. This has been the saga of modern art.
References:
Gage, John. Color and culture : practice and meaning from antiquity to abstraction. Boston ; Toronto : Little, Brown and Co., c1993
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. Goethe's color theory / Arranged and edited by Rupprecht Matthaei. New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1971.