Sophie Taeuber-Arp: An Introduction

“Only when we go into ourselves and attempt to be entirely true to ourselves will we succeed in making things of value, living things, and in this way help to develop a new style that is fitting for us.”[1] So wrote the artist, designer, and craftsperson Sophie Taeuber-Arp (fig. 1) almost a century ago, in 1922. The “living things” Taeuber-Arp had produced up to that moment generally fall into the category of applied arts (fig. 2). They include vividly colored, geometrically abstract textile studies; intricately beaded bags and necklaces; rugs and embroidered pillowcases and tablecloths; polychrome, turned-wood puppets and containers; and a remarkable group of small, stylized, sculptural heads that have been compared to hatstands.[2] Collectively, their bold, simplified shapes across media speak to Taeuber-Arp’s stated ambition of creating works in a “new style” alive to her own era. This was a task to which she assigned not only aesthetic but also moral and ethical value.

Taeuber-Arp was 33 when she wrote these impassioned words; she had recently married the Alsatian artist and poet Jean (Hans) Arp.[3] In accordance with Swiss custom, following her marriage she took a hyphenated double surname. From that point on, she used “Arp-Taeuber” and, increasingly during the 1930s, “Taeuber-Arp” as her professional name. Her new husband’s name, however, remained simply “Arp.” The significance of this is obvious yet important. Married or not, Arp retained his independent identity. By contrast, to introduce the former Sophie Taeuber, from her wedding day on, is always also to introduce her artist husband. This basic fact is symptomatic of the difficulties faced by women of Taeuber-Arp’s generation, in particular those with well-known spouses, to be considered artists in their own right—as individuals first, rather than as partners.

In this publication and the exhibition it accompanies, we have pursued an evidence-based approach to our subject, with the goal of telling, to the degree possible, the story of Taeuber-Arp’s artistic legacy on its own terms. Our research is grounded in the firsthand examination of her works by conservators so as to better understand her material and technical choices;[10] in primary sources that include her voluminous correspondence and photographic archives;[11] and in the careful study of publications, exhibition catalogues, and installation views from the years in which she was active. We have deliberately excluded the drawings and collages that her grieving widower posthumously identified as “duo,”[12] along with his various post–World War II “re-creations” of her works,[13] in order to concentrate on Taeuber-Arp’s self-defined lifetime production. This is not to say we believe that she worked in isolation or that her partnership with Arp was unimportant. Far from it. It is, however, to place her at the center of our investigations.

Today, as the exclusionary character of our received (art) histories becomes ever more apparent, we believe Taeuber-Arp’s multifaceted oeuvre—which is as consistent in its technical and stylistic precision as it is materially diverse—has a heightened relevance. On the one hand, it makes us think about the history of modern art in a more open-ended and generative way, by challenging distinctions between fine art and craft, major and minor, geometric painting and decoration, precise planning and creativity. On the other, it offers a vibrant model of what might best be described as a “living abstraction”—by which we mean one that relates to the body, to the applied arts, to architectural space, and to the political, social, and cultural situation in which it was made, while extending Taeuber-Arp’s legacy in terms that are as relevant to our own time as to her interwar era.

Read the full essay and explore the whole catalogue.