The Pariah Project
Wayne Freno
The Pariah Project has been ongoing in an amorphous state
for many years. It is the project of a lifetime. It is
partly inspired by Andre Breton, not so much his life but
his ideas. Donald Kuspit said of him: "The irony of Breton
is that he understood homogenous society better than it knew
itself, but he hardly understood himself. He saw the rot in
conventional society, and he saw the rot in his disciples who
wanted to pass for conventional, and he understood that rot
to be the living form of the homogenous."
Kuspit says Breton "reaffirmed himself as a tragic pariah
by publicly indulging in socially disapproved, unclean,
dispicable behavior and language, usually kept private in
unspoken thoughts." Kuspit quotes Elisabeth Lenk:
For the pariah, there are only two possibilities:
either a radical self-renunciation - the impure ones
must permanently subject themselves to purification
rituals; only then can they succeed in rising fairly
high within the homogeneous social hierarchy - or a
return to disavowed heterogeneousness, a rebirth of
the (disavowed) convictions - the development of
pariah consciousness. As a result of the latter
choice, the pariah either begins a radical
questioning of the values of the society which has
devalued the pariah's 'otherness,' or the values
are inverted in a manner distinctly characteristic
of the pariah..."
William S. Burroughs said "The untouchables of any society
perform a priestly function in taking on themselves all
human vileness." The Pariah Project likes William S. Burroughs.
The Pariah Project likes the painters Francis Bacon and Jean
Dubuffet - not so much their lives, but their work, in both
cases the early and middle periods. "To Dubuffet,
the anti-social and isolated artist working for personal pleasure
and satisfaction created the most effective artwork.
"Dubuffet often said that the only way to get noticed
is to do things the wrong way; in so doing, new insights
can be gained into the characteristics of old, common things."
The definition of Funk Art is helpful: "The liking of the
complex, the sick, the tatty, the bizarre, the shoddy, the
viscous, the overtly or the covertly sexual, as opposed to
the impersonal purity of a great deal of contemporary art."
Some example words in the Pariah Project's small but
growing vocabulary: Nonconformity, scandal, ambivalence,
ambiguity, negativity, irrationality, irresponsibility,
irreality, blatancy, stupidity, inanity, insanity, taboo,
inarticulacy, inchoateness, DADA, Fluxus, illogic, alogic,
nonmeaning, irreverence, irrelevance (hey, we try.)
--
Pleased to meet you. I am Truly Abominable.
-Kuspit's book is "Signs of Psyche in Modern and
Post-Modern Art" 1993.
-Lenk's book is "Indiscretions of the Literary Beast: Pariah
Consciousness of Women Writers Since Romanticism" 1982.
-Other words in quotes are not mine.
-This particular Pariah Project (there must be others) is
associated with my name only.
p.ki...@delillo.lsr.ph.ic.ac.uk
> THE PARIAH PROJECT
> inspired by Andre Breton ...
> Donald Kuspit said ...
> Kuspit says ...
> Kuspit quotes Elisabeth Lenk ...
> William S. Burroughs said ...
> To Dubuffet, the anti-social ..."
> Dubuffet often said ...
> The definition of Funk Art is ...
Incredible. So do you have anything to say about yourselves, or
are you here as a dim mirror for your celebrity pantheon?
#Paul
barrett john erickson
"Wayne Freno" <wfr...@vcn.bc.ca> wrote in message
news:3c8865a6...@news.lynx.net...
> THE PARIAH PROJECT
> [...]
since you seem to hold Donald Kuspit in such high esteem, perhaps you (or
anyone else, please) can help me identify the source of the quote that
someone posted here a year or two ago prompting the following tract (written
for potential distribution by surrealists in minnesota)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The "Death of Surrealism" as pronounced by Kuspit
Given that Surrealism was pronounced dead by its own creators in the 1940's,
those who believe that Surrealism has evolved and suddenly become a new
movement again, must first show that it has democratic appeal-appeal to
those generally unschooled or not professionally interested in it. Then it
must suffer a period of aristocratic rejection-by those schooled in an
accepted and thereby 'traditional' movement, those with a vested interest in
the status quo, and concerned with protecting it at all cost. So far the
mention of any Surrealist movement after the 1940's does not include either
of these necessities.
- Donald Kuspit
It is true that Mr. Kuspit has been diagnosed as an "art critic". And while
this disability might ordinarily entitle him to certain allowances, we find
the magnitude of his violence against reality overrides any such allowances
and cannot be ignored.
[However, we will still defend him against any accusations of being an "art
historian".]
We strongly suspect that anyone who could say that "Surrealism was
pronounced dead by its own creators in the 1940's" has no idea who "created"
surrealism and even less idea what kind of entity surrealism actually is.
Perhaps he mistakes surrealism for the kind of thing that an individual or
group of individuals might plant in clay pots, tend for a while, and then
discard like a houseplant. But even the worst indoor gardener wouldn't
proclaim an entire species dead simply because he or she has failed
miserably at cultivating its seeds. And even the most reckless of
horticulturists wouldn't accept such declaration as true.
But rather than expend any more energy in attempting to correct a display of
such profound ignorance, we'll move on.
Mr. Kuspit asserts that "those who believe that Surrealism has evolved and
suddenly become a new movement again, must first show that it has democratic
appeal..." We answer that the continuing evolution of surrealism in no way
requires it to become a "new movement" but simply that it continue to place
the highest priority on its exploration of the imagination's place in our
daily living.
And since when is the validity of actions or concepts to be judged according
to their popular appeal or their rejection by an aristocracy? Even an "art
critic" must realize that value is not something bestowed by crowds.
The reason "the mention of any Surrealist movement after the 1940's does not
include either of these necessities" is because surrealists reject the
"necessity" of hopeless myopia.
We end with a quote from an earlier text:
"to refer to 'new' surrealism is like referring to 'new' weather. it can
only seem 'new' if you stand too still and small, too stuck in place to see
the larger context. it's only 'new' if you mistake the perpetual change and
development of a single complex life form, as it passes by, for a series of
deaths and rebirths of something much simpler."
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
-- barrett
BLUE FEATHERS se2 (The New World Odor) is now available
(BF#4 will be available in April)
http://www.MagneticFields.org/blue/
bar...@MagneticFields.org
http://www.MagneticFields.org/
surrealists in minnesota
Sur...@MagneticFields.org
==============================================
"Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a
certain point of the mind at which life and death, the real and the
imagined, past and future, the communicable and the incommunicable, high and
low, cease to be perceived as contradictions."
...André Breton
==============================================
Wayne Freno
> So do you have a pantheon?, dim mirror for you,
> anything to say? or are you here as Incredible celebrity.
I am the shadow
Fuck me over good death
Make me sick
I have nothing to give
--
Pleased to meet you. I am Truly Abominable.
>
>#Paul
D. Cochrane
barrett john erickson wrote:
>
>
> "We strongly suspect that anyone who could say that "Surrealism was
> pronounced dead by its own creators in the 1940's" has no idea who "created"
> surrealism and even less idea what kind of entity surrealism actually is."
>
> Hmm.
> Here'a a little thing from one who created and help define surrealism:
"At the age of 91, how do feel about carrying the surrealist banner?
I guess I'll be called a surrealist forever, like a
tattoo: "D. Loves S." I still believe in the surrealist effort to plumb our
deepest subconscious to find out about ourselves. But please don't say I'm
carrying the surrealist banner. The movement ended in the '50s and my own work
had moved on so far by the '60s that being a called a surrealist today makes me
feel like a fossil! "
From an interview with Dorthea Tanning at:
http://salon.com/people/feature/2002/02/11/tanning/index.html
DC
Nik Maack
Wayne Freno wrote:
>
> I am the shadow
>
> Fuck me over good death
>
> Make me sick
>
> I have nothing to give
Lips torn off by crows,
teeth taken by rock collectors,
my skull shattered by Ghallager
in a piece of watermelon inanity,
don't ask me what I think --
this is not a time for thinking.
barrett john erickson
"D. Cochrane" <w...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:3C89DB6A...@telus.net...
i have no personal knowledge about how Tanning views surrealism today.
and i know nothing about John Glassie. however, having read his article
when the link was first posted, i don't trust him to have sufficiently
probed, or even accurately recorded Tanning's views.
so i'll limit my comments:
if Tanning means to say that she doesn't feel trapped by her past and
prefers to define herself by what she is doing today, i applaud. this is a
posture fully compatible with surrealism.
if, by the 60's, she felt her work was no longer part of an on-going
"surrealist effort", i certainly won't argue that she has no right to
distance herself from that effort.
if she means to say that _movement_ was not a significant characteristic of
surrealists in the 50's and perhaps even into the early 60's, i'd strongly
agree. the Situationist International (which of course had surrealist
roots) was doing what surrealists should have been doing during those years.
i'd even say that the dynamics of an actual "movement" still seems a rare
thing among surrealists today.
but if she actually meant to say that the surrealist movement is dead, i'd
simply point out that surrealism wasn't a star vehicle for founding
surrealists, it is a project with a history of actions and texts that define
it fairly well. surrealism can only be defined as the aggregate of
surrealist activity and the focus of that activity -- the surrealist
project -- can be taken up by anyone who recognizes the marvelous potential
of everyday living in contrast to its current poverty. no one's
proclamation of death, alone or in unison with Jean Schuster, Jose Pierre,
Edouard Jaguer, or whoever else was involved in planning the '69 wake, makes
it so. regardless of their second generation "credentials".
even Breton, didn't have the authority to declare surrealism dead as long as
there were active surrealists.
but Schuster and company were certainly justified in disbanding _their_
group in '69 -- they had no energy left just when they should have been most
active.
Polzotti quotes Caude Courtot: "The events of May 1968, which one could see
as Surrealism in the streets, by the same token meant that it no longer
remained within the confines of the group. We were almost ejected from it.
We felt we had been overtaken."
it was an astounding arrogance -- and a betrayal of the project -- for them
to proclaim surrealism finished just because they were.
but a handful of tired people in Paris couldn't kill the Czech group, or
deny that new groups were forming in the USA and elsewhere even as they
issued their death certificate and turned their attention to taxidermy.
and even in Paris, new surrealist groups quickly formed.
the simple fact that a new and very active group emerged in Portland (OR)
just last year is sufficient evidence that such a proclamation of
surrealism's death remains false today.