Cubism, which was introduced in the first half of the 20th century, reconstructed space as a collection of geometrical forms and mathematics. People rejected the new art because it did not reflect the actual world. Cubism, however, was more concerned with the concept of multi-dimensional space and its multi-durational nature. Cubism challenged interiority as well, by changing the sensory experience of people.

Cubism, which broke with the tradition of pictorial one-point perspectives, offered a different reality of space based on human experience. Geometric figures were used to demonstrate spatial perceptions. As this was a drawing principle, it led to an abstracting of what viewers are taught to see. This abstracted approach was more important than a representation that is literal. It focused on the qualities such as space, volume, and mass. Guillaume Apollinaire (1860-1918), French writer, believed that literal representations were no longer relevant because of the artist’s intent ‘…to achieve a new pleasure that could not be obtained from the spectacles of nature. Cubism can be defined as a ‘non-art of painting, an art or conception’. It refers to the notion of reality and how it has been fabricated for the purpose of expressing three dimensions. The movement emphasizes that the only way to show three dimensions is by disfiguring and rearranging the forms. Cubism offered new perspectives on height in addition to revolutionizing approaches.

The Eiffel Tower became a monument in the age of machines, giving people a new perspective on the world. Before, everything was one-dimensional, and all at the same level. Robert Delaunays’ “Windows (1912),” reflects this interest. This painting, inspired by light refractions on the Eiffel, captures atmospheric changes of light over time. The idea that time is made up of many moments and perspectives in space highlights the ongoing and interactive quality of the time.

The Cubists, in turn, dissected space to reveal surfaces and facets, which together created either fragmented pictures or compositions more easily recognisable for the viewer. By separating the space into facets, it was possible to see other views and materials. Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, and others were able, through this arrangement method, to further analyse form and shape, while leaving the final picture open for interpretation. The viewer is left to preoccupy themselves with the possibility of new measurements of space. Delaunay painted the Eiffel Tower from all angles and views, reflecting the Cubist phase (1908-1912) that was characterized by the use of overlays. The interlocking lines and variations in transparency suggest an infinite space.

In addition, the Cubists left ambiguity that led to viewers not understanding the point of their work. Pierre Reverdy expressed in 1917 the opinion that ‘this ambiguity has lasted for too long…not amongst the public or the artists, but both’. He was pointing out the lack of coherence within the Cubist movement. The Cubists introduced a new way of seeing art, but the viewer may only have one perspective on the world. De Saint-Marceaux’s and Denys’ Peuch’s conflicted reactions to the movement, referring to it as an invasion of systematic ugliness and that it was ‘against common sense to want to express the life of a geometric form’, highlight that the artists of the day were not able to come to the same conclusion because they did not share the same mindset as the new painters. Cubism, however, encouraged artists to express reality in any way they chose, which was also intriguing for others.

Cubism also changed the way that people perceive space through its multi-dimensional interiors. Apollinaire wrote that these ‘painters’ offered works that were more cerebral than sensual8. The implication is that Cubist Art requires viewers to make sense out of what they are seeing. The viewer can feel different emotions than with traditional art. The complex shapes of the Eiffel tower in Figure 1 challenge the idea that art is merely about evoking emotions. After this idea is rejected, the viewer will be able to experience a new sensory experience which can influence thought and reason. The Cubists were also in favour of this.

Interiors are similar to this, as they trigger a reaction from the viewer and not one caused by external influences. Cubism aimed to change the way viewers perceived things by challenging intangible feelings. ‘…the Cubist images, instead of just making you feel a certain emotion, stimulates your mind with its new and fruitful idioms. Braque’s muddy brown aesthetic, as seen in his 1910 painting ‘Mandora”, encourages the viewer not to process things with their minds, but to simply see what they see. The viewer may feel what is initially perceived to be a musical piece. Cubism created an embodied feeling through art. The movement encouraged sensory perceptions, rather than creating a physical inner space, because intimacy is a physiological factor that people can feel.

In the end, Cubism wasn’t about introducing new interiors. It was more about flattening the space. Nevertheless, it also led to the creation of many perspectives. The’synthetic Cubism of the next phase (1912-1914), which was marked by the breaking of individual components and reconstructing tactile surfaces and forms using collage, was distinct. The artists’ intentions were questioned, even though it improved the clarity of the images and their reading. Picasso’s Violin Hanging On The Wall (1912) expresses an idea where individual elements are combined to create a collage and also become an image. The collage, while it makes new objects out of different materials, seems to be against rearranging spatial qualities. The collage is a reorganisation or a common object, which in this case was a Violin. It is possible to be confused by the differences between cubism’s analytic phase and its synthetic phase.

Cubism, while fundamental to the shaping of interiors, offered a new way to depict the world and gather different realities. There is no doubt that interiority was constantly changing and people could not reach the same conclusions. The Cubists may have been working within the constraints of the time, as is expected by today’s society. The world will be better understood if we accept the changes.