Some Questions on Dada
Brandon Freels
1. For the sake of the FAQ I've been reading Richter's Dada: Art and
Anti-Art which I've found to be rather dry and uninteresting. If I remember
correctly Matthew Gale's Dada and Surrealism was a pretty good read with a
good deal of information, but I read it about two years ago so I could be
imagining things. Are there any books out there that people can recommend?
2. How should the FAQ address such individuals as Vache and Cravan who, to
my knowledge, only influenced Dada?
3. Historically, didn't New York Dada (Duchamp, Man Ray) develop at the same
time as Zurich Dada?
john adams
>2. How should the FAQ address such individuals as Vache and Cravan who, to my
knowledge, only influenced Dada?
Included as influentials or occasional participators? Vache of course being
breton's close departed friend and recurring ideal regarding surrealism.
>3. Historically, didn't New York Dada (Duchamp, Man Ray) develop at the same
>time as Zurich Dada?
>
I think it was flourishing alongside it until it became a more official
aspect, as history most typically recounts, but try the Dada Almanac
available through atlas ("the largest collection of dadaist texts [and some
pictures] ever assembled by the movement", or tzara's seven dada manifestoes.
john
Dale Houstman
"john adams" <gala...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010226031731...@ng-da1.aol.com...
> >1.
>
> >2. How should the FAQ address such individuals as Vache and Cravan who,
to my
> knowledge, only influenced Dada?
>
> Included as influentials or occasional participators? Vache of course
being
> breton's close departed friend and recurring ideal regarding surrealism.
Vache is particularly close to being a "muse" of all things, and both - in
some ways - serve the same function in Breton's life as Neal Cassady did in
Kerouoac's life: as a precursor and asymptote of action and thought. Their
"disappearances" (one by death the other by simple vanishing into a
mythological arena) constitute a classical entry point into a permanently
"pure" state of rememberance. In my view it would be a mistake to exclude
these figures, whose participation goes far beyond mere influence. Of
course, it is impossible to separate Vache from Breton's creative recreation
of Vache, and Cravan seems mostly to be a projection of several people's
enthusiasms. All the more reason to include them.
dmh
Parry
My reservations about all the suggested additions have to do with space
and scale. The Dada section, like the other parts of the “Periphery,”
was intended to be very brief. Detailing the influence of the Futurists
imbalances the faq somewhat, seeing as Romanticism, for instance, is
never mentioned. And why give special attention to Vache when there’s no
spotlight for Breton, Péret, Duchamp, etc.?
One solution may be to create a section that deals with surrealism’s
constant prowl for antecedents and contemporary resonances in art,
philosophy and elsewhere. This remains a significant facet of the
movement, conjuring a surrealist elite of guiding stars. It would be an
ambitious section to write, though.
Another solution would be to write a separate faq on Dada.
-- Parry
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
The Lemming
Brandon Freels <b.j.f...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:pffm6.4128$Ea1.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Now that we are thinking about it:
>
> 1. For the sake of the FAQ I've been reading Richter's Dada: Art and
> Anti-Art which I've found to be rather dry and uninteresting. If I
remember
> correctly Matthew Gale's Dada and Surrealism was a pretty good read with a
> good deal of information, but I read it about two years ago so I could be
> imagining things. Are there any books out there that people can recommend?
>
The two books you mention are the two I have that have dada as a main
concern; there are various magazines I have that offer more information, and
BLAST! (Vorticist jourrnal) has some semi-dada stuff in it. Richter isn't
bad, if a little dry, as you say, but I prefer Gale, though that's probably
because he has a more surrealist outlook on dada.
> 2. How should the FAQ address such individuals as Vache and Cravan who, to
> my knowledge, only influenced Dada?
>
Vaché was an influence on both dada and (through Breton) Surrealism, so I'd
consider him in there, but I believe that Cravan was only a minor influence
on dada; it would depend on the amount of space we** wanted to
spend on Dada itself, as an influence on Surrealism, as to how much we**
spend on their like.
** Where I type "we", I mean, of course, those putting together the FAQ,
which does not particularly include me. :-)
> 3. Historically, didn't New York Dada (Duchamp, Man Ray) develop at the
same
> time as Zurich Dada?
>
>
Pretty much so, as far as I can gather...Most sources place Zurich at 1916,
though some mention 1915 without giving too much evidence, and most sources
also mention NY as 1916, though again some mention 1917 and the publication
of Picabia's 391. Having said that, didn't Picabia take his title from 291,
which was an existing NY publication? On balance, I'd say at the same time,
just about.
Nick the Lemming
--
Happy VHEMT Volunteer
May we live long and die out
In Your Face, Space Coyote!
Brandon Freels
> My reservations about all the suggested additions have to do with space
> and scale. The Dada section, like the other parts of the "Periphery,"
> was intended to be very brief. Detailing the influence of the Futurists
> imbalances the faq somewhat, seeing as Romanticism, for instance, is
> never mentioned. And why give special attention to Vache when there's no
> spotlight for Breton, Péret, Duchamp, etc.?
As I think I've told you before but not the others, I'm trying to hold the
"Periphery" to a 500 word limit for each entry. I think Dada could fit into
that limitation. I don't think I'll detail the influence of Futurism but
merely mention it in passing. The same may go for Vache (with the Paris
group) and Cravan (I think Richter said he influenced the NY group?).
Are there more pre-dadists? I feel like we are missing someone...
I've been contemplating turning the FAQ into a hypertext version. Sort of a
Surrealism FAQ/Online Encylopedia. This would give us room to write seperate
sections on Vache, Cravan, others such as Ducasse, Rimbaud, and to expanding
the FAQ greatly. At the present time this is just a thought. Anyone have any
comments?
> Another solution would be to write a separate faq on Dada.
Yiks!
Brandon Freels
> ** Where I type "we", I mean, of course, those putting together the FAQ,
> which does not particularly include me. :-)
It could. Watch out. Be careful.
The Lemming
Parry <pa...@perfectOMITmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A9A9C...@perfectOMITmail.com...
> My reservations about all the suggested additions have to do with space
> and scale. The Dada section, like the other parts of the "Periphery,"
> was intended to be very brief. Detailing the influence of the Futurists
> imbalances the faq somewhat, seeing as Romanticism, for instance, is
> never mentioned. And why give special attention to Vache when there's no
> spotlight for Breton, Péret, Duchamp, etc.?
>
I think I mentioned this in an earlier post about including Futurism etc -
space considerations should be a factor. However, I se some benefit in
including the main Surrealists, to give some background info, maybe a couple
of works, a web address for further info, etc. People like Vaché I'd only
spend a line on in the dada bit of the FAQ on the influences of Surrealism.
> One solution may be to create a section that deals with surrealism's
> constant prowl for antecedents and contemporary resonances in art,
> philosophy and elsewhere. This remains a significant facet of the
> movement, conjuring a surrealist elite of guiding stars. It would be an
> ambitious section to write, though.
>
I think this is a very good idea; it wouldn't have to be particularly long,
just mention stuff in passing. Perhaps somewhere in the FAQ we could add
something about anyone desiring further knowledge, or having further
knowledge to impart on a particular subject / artist, should post to the NG
with their queries / theories.
> Another solution would be to write a separate faq on Dada.
>
> -- Parry
>
>
Is that such a good idea though? A lot of information in both would be
shared; I think a Dada one would be better as being part of the Surrealist
FAQ. As a major influence on Surrealism, I think it should be included
within the FAQ, and further mention on individuals could mention Dada in
their resumés.
Dale Houstman
"Parry" <pa...@perfectOMITmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A9A9C...@perfectOMITmail.com...
Of course I'm not really constructing the thing, so I am less aware of the
utilitarian aspects of the project. Cravan is probably not worth the
trouble, but Vache seems - more than any other - to represent, to embody the
entire adventure that surrealism will become. As such he is more of a
principle than a person. That said he might be mentioned as the source of
the concept of "umour" which so compelled Breton. Umour - at any rate -
needs to be defined.
dmh
The Lemming
> "Parry" wrote
> > My reservations about all the suggested additions have to do with space
> > and scale. The Dada section, like the other parts of the "Periphery,"
> > was intended to be very brief. Detailing the influence of the Futurists
> > imbalances the faq somewhat, seeing as Romanticism, for instance, is
> > never mentioned. And why give special attention to Vache when there's no
> > spotlight for Breton, Péret, Duchamp, etc.?
>
> As I think I've told you before but not the others, I'm trying to hold the
> "Periphery" to a 500 word limit for each entry. I think Dada could fit
into
> that limitation. I don't think I'll detail the influence of Futurism but
> merely mention it in passing. The same may go for Vache (with the Paris
> group) and Cravan (I think Richter said he influenced the NY group?).
>
I think that a couple of the other influences could be mentioned, but with a
lot less than 500 words - a couple of sentences could probably sum up Vaché,
ditto for Futurism, just mentioning the use of Bruitism, the layout thing
etc - probably could come in under 100 words quite easily. Still not sure
about Cravan - I'll have to check my Richter later and see what he says
about him, but I'd suggest a mini-entry for him too if he had that much of
an effect. What about the other influences? Rimbaud? Mallarmé? Lautréamont?
Apollinaire? Romanticism? Sade? Primitivism? Fauvism? Psychoanalysis?
Cubism?
> Are there more pre-dadists? I feel like we are missing someone...
>
Jarry?
> I've been contemplating turning the FAQ into a hypertext version. Sort of
a
> Surrealism FAQ/Online Encylopedia. This would give us room to write
seperate
> sections on Vache, Cravan, others such as Ducasse, Rimbaud, and to
expanding
> the FAQ greatly. At the present time this is just a thought. Anyone have
any
> comments?
>
sounds good to me. As the FAQ? or as an adjunct to it? Would it make the FAQ
an unmanageable beast, too tortuous to read through, too daunting a task to
enter? Would it be better was something linked to the FAQ, with a note
mentioning "further info on XXX can be found in the Surrealist hypertext
pages by clicking here"?
The Lemming
/me hides.
:-)
Dale Houstman
>
> Brandon Freels <b.j.f...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:6Aym6.4537$rL4.4...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> >
>
> Jarry?
Jarry is particularly central it seems to me, especially as it pertains to a
discussion of anarchy and umor. Could a way of "farming out" these endless
personalities be employed? For instance, a mention of Jarry as precursor
with a link to an already available site that goes into pertinent detail
about him, and others, if such sites exist? This serves a double function of
explicating the person's importance, and of creating possibly useful
connections. Just a thought.
>
> > I've been contemplating turning the FAQ into a hypertext version. Sort
of
> a
> > Surrealism FAQ/Online Encylopedia. This would give us room to write
> seperate
> > sections on Vache, Cravan, others such as Ducasse, Rimbaud, and to
> expanding
> > the FAQ greatly. At the present time this is just a thought. Anyone have
> any
> > comments?
> >
>
> sounds good to me. As the FAQ? or as an adjunct to it? Would it make the
FAQ
> an unmanageable beast, too tortuous to read through, too daunting a task
to
> enter? Would it be better was something linked to the FAQ, with a note
> mentioning "further info on XXX can be found in the Surrealist hypertext
> pages by clicking here"?
>
All of this borders on the infinite! To my mind it just goes to show how
complex a subject surrealism is, and how it isn't just another aesthetic
movement. "Post-cursors" such as Abstract Expressionism and Happenings, etc.
and the activities of modern surrealist groups are also important if we are
to show the impact and still viable life of Dadaist and Surrealist thought.
I'm just glad someone else is doing it!
dmh
dmh
The Lemming
Dale Houstman <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
news:3a9ae380$0$62905$65a9...@news.citilink.com...
> > Jarry?
>
> Jarry is particularly central it seems to me, especially as it pertains to
a
> discussion of anarchy and umor. Could a way of "farming out" these endless
> personalities be employed? For instance, a mention of Jarry as precursor
> with a link to an already available site that goes into pertinent detail
> about him, and others, if such sites exist? This serves a double function
of
> explicating the person's importance, and of creating possibly useful
> connections. Just a thought.
> >
Sounds like a plan to me.
> All of this borders on the infinite! To my mind it just goes to show how
> complex a subject surrealism is, and how it isn't just another aesthetic
> movement. "Post-cursors" such as Abstract Expressionism and Happenings,
etc.
Very good idea!
> and the activities of modern surrealist groups are also important if we
are
> to show the impact and still viable life of Dadaist and Surrealist
thought.
> I'm just glad someone else is doing it!
>
Hurrah! Are there any more links that people know of to add to the FAQ for
existing surrealist groups? The Chicago group is an obvious one...Oulipo?
'Pataphysique?
Brandon Freels
"The Lemming" wrote
> Hurrah! Are there any more links that people know of to add to the FAQ for
> existing surrealist groups? The Chicago group is an obvious one...Oulipo?
> 'Pataphysique?
Sections on Oulipo and Pataphysics (which will include Jarry) are already
planned for the "Periphery" section. I don't know if they'll be ready by
v1.2. My priorities right now are first Dada, and then Dali.
Brandon Freels
> What about the other influences? Rimbaud? Mallarmé? Lautréamont?
> Apollinaire? Romanticism? Sade? Primitivism? Fauvism? Psychoanalysis?
> Cubism?
This is why I was thinking recently of doing a hypertext FAQ. I'm not going
to make any decision on this possibility though until the FAQ gets into a
more complete state.
Parry
> Vache seems - more than any other - to represent, to embody the
> entire adventure that surrealism will become. As such he is more of a
> principle than a person. That said he might be mentioned as the source of
> the concept of "umour" which so compelled Breton. Umour - at any rate -
> needs to be defined.
Vache gets a cursory mention at the end of the “Black Humour” section
but yes “umour” should be explicitly defined and included there. Just
somebody has to write the definition.
Dale Houstman
"Parry" <pa...@perfectOMITmail.com> wrote in message
> Dale Houstman wrote:
> > Vache seems - more than any other - to represent, to embody the
> > entire adventure that surrealism will become. As such he is more of a
> > principle than a person. That said he might be mentioned as the source
of
> > the concept of "umour" which so compelled Breton. Umour - at any rate -
> > needs to be defined.
>
> Vache gets a cursory mention at the end of the "Black Humour" section
> but yes "umour" should be explicitly defined and included there. Just
> somebody has to write the definition.
>
Even Vache appeared to have a vague hold on it, but I gather it is akin to
black humour, and especially that kind of absurdity which arises
spontaneously from the rubbing together of social expectations and anarchist
afrrontery. I'm sure Breton has more to say on it.
dmh
john adams
> Vache gets a cursory mention at the end of the "Black Humour" section
> but yes "umour" should be explicitly defined and included there. Just
> somebody has to write the definition.
<Yes, and - from what little I've read on it - it will be somewhat
difficult.
<Even Vache appeared to have a vague hold on it, but I gather it is akin to
<black humour, and especially that kind of absurdity which arises
<spontaneously from the rubbing together of social expectations and
anarchist
<afrrontery. I'm sure Breton has more to say on it.
I'm sure too; the trouble only being how to voice those concerns into any
discrete
forms. I personally believe him to be watching over through his one eye
piece, now
and again, in between moments of creating religious poetry, or brushing his
long
curly white locks with a stuffed animal. You never know...
john
elag
> Pretty much so, as far as I can gather...Most sources place Zurich at 1916,
> though some mention 1915 without giving too much evidence, and most sources
> also mention NY as 1916, though again some mention 1917 and the publication
> of Picabia's 391. Having said that, didn't Picabia take his title from 291,
> which was an existing NY publication? On balance, I'd say at the same time,
> just about.
291 was the modern art gallery run by Alfred Steiglitz.
elag
I believe that you can cobble together a basic definition from the
introduction to Breton's "The Anthology of Black Humour".
The Lemming
elag <el...@cloud9.net> wrote in message news:3A9C6D48...@cloud9.net...
Yup, named after his address on 5th Ave.
He also produced a magazine called Camera Work, which in 1915 changed its
name to....291. :-)