-
The inverted canvas as narrative cancellation. Baselitz turns the representational motif upside down to strip it of easy reading and rhetorical meaning, forcing attention to pure painterly structure — color, gesture, form — while preserving figurative content. Evidence: Der Wald auf dem Kopf (1969); Baselitz’s statement that inversion was a way to avoid expressionist cliché and socialist realism’s narrative expectations.
-
Monumental scale in the service of the defeated body. The canvases are large — 250 × 180 cm, 162 × 130 cm, wall-filling woodcuts — but the bodies they hold are wounded, bandaged, solitary, grotesque. Scale is not triumph but exposure. Evidence: Helden series (1965–66), Die große Nacht im Eimer (1962–63), Kiefer’s Wege der Weltweisheit woodcuts.
-
Vehement paint: the brushstroke as declaration. Lüpertz called his own work “dithyrambic”; the brushwork is aggressive, rapid, unblended, often applied with tools other than the brush. Evidence: Lüpertz’s dithyrambic paintings of the late 1960s; Fetting’s shower paintings; Baselitz’s finger-painted works.
-
National iconography restaged as ironic inversion. The eagle, the German landscape, the heroic soldier, the Nazi salute — all are reproduced but disabled, grotesque, upside down, or reenacted by the artist-as-perpetrator. Evidence: Baselitz’s Adler paintings (1982 onward); Kiefer’s Heroische Sinnbilder photographs (1969); Kiefer’s Wege der Weltweisheit.
-
Material heaviness: sand, straw, lead, ash. Particularly in Kiefer, the paint is not only pigment but matter — earth, straw, lead sheets, ash, wood. The work carries the weight of the history it depicts. Evidence: Märkischer Sand (1980), Margarete (1981), Kiefer’s entire material vocabulary from the late 1970s onward.
-
Anti-heroic figuration: the body as ruin. The solitary wanderer, the bandaged soldier, the masturbating grotesque — these are anti-heroes in rubble-strewn landscapes. The body does not triumph; it survives, barely. Evidence: Baselitz’s Helden; Immendorff’s Café Deutschland crowded tables; Salomé’s gay-subject nudes.
-
The triptych and altarpiece format reclaimed. From Beckmann’s moral tribunals to Kiefer’s woodcut forests to the Café Deutschland series, the multi-panel format is revived as a structure for historical and moral argument. Evidence: Beckmann’s direct influence on the generation; Kiefer’s Wege der Weltweisheit.
-
Raw painting: the deliberate anti-academy. Crude proportions, aggressive ugliness, “bad” drawing — the deliberate adoption of outsider-art and Art Brut aesthetics against the polished finish of academic painting. Evidence: Pandämonium manifestos’ praise of schizophrenia and outsider art; Baselitz’s early drawings; Penck’s Standart sign-system.
-
Photographic ground + painterly overlay. Kiefer uses black-and-white photographs as the substrate for painting, creating a hybrid where the documentary image (the Nazi salute, the historical site) is buried or partially revealed under layers of paint and material. Evidence: Heroische Sinnbilder series; Hochsommer (1980).
-
Direct historical confrontation as formal strategy. The work does not allude to German history; it restages it. Kiefer performs the Hitler salute; Immendorff paints the divided Germany as a nightclub; Baselitz paints the eagle upside down. The confrontation is the composition. Evidence: the 1980 Venice Biennale scandal; the seizure of Die große Nacht im Eimer.
-
Punk color and club light (Junge Wilden). The next-generation Berlin painters introduce high-key neon, fluorescent color, and nightclub atmosphere — a deliberate departure from the earth-toned heaviness of the core generation. Evidence: Fetting’s Berlin Wall series; Middendorf’s nightlife scenes; Salomé’s saturated self-portraits.