Everybody is taught, whether true or not, that the first abstract painting is "Les Damoiselles d'Avignon" by Picasso. Therefore art critics writing around1907 would consider Picasso unique (although the truth is that he developed analytical cubism in collaboration with Georges Braque, and it is difficult to distinguish the early cubist paintings of one from those of the other). Get Parisian culture magazines from the early 1900s. That would be the best place to start. How could critics have been unaware of Cezanne, who was so close in his African masks to Picasso of the early 1900s as to be indistinguishable as well? Anyhow, focus on Picasso as your point of departure. Afterwards, trace the evolution of artists deemed unique. Here is a tip for you: Picasso was in intimate contact with the "moderniste" movement in Barcelona, spearheaded by Santiago Rusinyol among others. That movement published a journal called L'Avenc, afterwards spelled L'Avens (The Advance). As far as I know, no one has studied the Picasso link, yet should. You should also research early Italian Futurism (Marinetti et al). If you find no likenesses between Picasso and his contemporaries, you will have hit upon an objective criterion for uniqueness.

thanks nelson for the suggestions and the tip about L'Avenc!

I wanted to clarify what you meant by likenesses. Are you suggesting to objectively compare Picasso and his contemporary's styles? Or see if critics of the period saw him as more unique?At the moment, I am more interested in the critics and art experts view. But I am also interested in the former but I am still debating what might be the best way to go about determining objective style differences.

Indeed, most modern critics from Alfred Barr on recognize Cezanne's influence on Picasso (and Braque). But you are suggesting that critics in the past (circa 1907) did not recognize his influence? Or you are suggesting they did recognize the influence but still saw Picasso's work (specifically, Les Desmoiselles d'Avignon) as a novel recombination of existing styles ? I would think it is more likely the latter and thus saw Picasso as unique and perhaps also innovative? This is indeed interesting given that --

-The beginning of abstract art is a contested one...some trace it back to Whistler, others to impressionists and yet others to Fauvist. Arguably, in the period starting around 1905, Fauvists and Cubist ( and later all the versions of Cubis, German Expressionism, Futurism, Vorticism etc.) the break from non-representational art became cleaner and perhaps even mainstream.

I have come across several different culture and mainstream magazines but given time and linguistic constraints, I have to narrow down any text analysis attempts to a few. And, yes, I am looking Futurists, salon cubists, Suprematists as well as other abstract art movements that emerged during that period.

By likenesses, I mean similarities of form that you can see with your own eyes. For instance, in the Hartford Atheneum in Hartford, CT you can see a Cezanne painting of an African mask that looks exactly like one of the African masked prostitutes in "Les Damoiselles d'Avignon." I believe that Picasso would not have caused such a stir in 1907 if art critics of the time had not thought his painting unique and innovative. You need to look specifically at critics from 1907. You can easily do this because many journals of the period are on-line at the French Bibliotheque Nationale! So are Catalan journals! You need to narrow your focus, I believe. The theme of "innovation in PIcasso" could generate a monograph in itself. Limit yourself, let us say, from the blue period to the period of the Spanish Civil War (1936-39). You would also have a wide reading public and you could go deeper and well as more broadly. This, of course, is only my opinion, but you have a fascinating theme in innovation and should exploit it to the fullest by balancing depth with breadth. Are you trying to write a thesis? You will never finish if you continue your broad-based focus. I have friends who are Columbia U. PhDs and who took a decade to finish their theses. Or are you attempting to write a book? In that case, I should tell you from recent experience that editors are limiting space to 350-page books or less.