From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Comment from Camembert: nice edits, but I think "swirling" makes it sounds a bit... well, swirly (like Delaunay or somebody)

  • I agree- "swirling" is not ideal. I was looking for another synonym for Vortex which apparently was meant somewhat literarly by Ezra Pound. I think the idea is that your eye is supposed to wander around the canvas and be drawn in to the centre to give the impression of dynamic movement. Perhaps Vision of Ezekiel 1912 by David Bomberg is better example of a spiral/voxtex composition, although it really is a little early and too figurative. As the description stands without a vortex or swirling it could as easily apply to a 1960 Bridget Riley (on the other hand given Bomberg's Ju-Jitsu 1913 perhaps that isn't so far off the mark).
Well, I think you gave it a good shot, but "swirling", like I say, just struck me as too... I dunno, smooth, lyrical. I'd probably say that typical features of Vorticism are a sense of dynamism, the use of sharply angled lines, and the use of fairly flat colour; I'm not sure, to be honest, that I'd say anything like a vortex is a consistent element, but that's just me. It's hard to talk about these things - we'd be better off with some images to illustrate what we mean, I think (thanks for adding that link to the Lewis - it's a good start). --Camembert
Fair enough. Worse than Delaunay, Swirling could leave an impression of Van Gogh's Starry Night, so best to leave it as is for now. - Solipsist 00:04, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
I have no opinion on swirling or any other term, because I don't really know what Vorticism is. But the language now isn't too helpful. More about the substance of the movement would be appreciated. Also, perhaps more examples would be helpful, if they are available. Cheers. Still A Student 18:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Notability and Lack of Definition[edit]

I'm not that sure Vorticism was that important. The current lead calls it "the only significant British movement of the early 20th century," which is patently false. Firstly, Imagism was far more significant. Secondly, the movement wasn't simply British. Also, it isn't clear just how the literary and artistic "movements" (ONE SHOW ONLY MAKES A "MOVEMENT"?!?!) are related, if at all.

I've been studying Modernism for years, and I've never heard anyone define Vorticism clearly. Sadly, wikipedia doesn't define it well here either. Vorticism involves Cubism, Futurism, and dynamism, but what the hell is Vorticism? It embraces "typographical adventurousness," but what the hell is Vorticism? The best thing in this article is the line that claims that Vorticism "tried to capture movement in an image," though that's still very vague. Someone with some expertise on this matter should help out. Josh a brewer (talk) 04:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what the answer is, TBH, but I'd think a good answer is that Vorticism is (or was) a violent reaction to Marinetti. :) (talk) 12:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Usermaatre-Setepenre

I'm deleting: "It is considered to be the only significant British movement of the early 20th century". Perhaps the source given expresses that opinion, but it is too eccentric to be given such prominence. However, the topic is sufficiently notable to be included as a Wikipedia article, e.g. Frances Spalding gives it several pages in British Art Since 1900.
Something should be said about Christopher Nevinson's Futurist manifesto co-written with Marinetti. Marshall46 (talk) 19:58, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vorticism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:21, 30 August 2015 (UTC)