dada vs surrealism (help me clear this up)
Dale Houstman
"happy asymptote" <gr...@ion.com.au> wrote in message
news:01bfb70a$1d9abf60$LocalHost@green...
> can i just see if i've got this right? i'm probably way off. that's why
> this is something that needs clearing up for me.
>
> dada and surrealism differ on the fact that surrealism is more focussed;
it
> likes to justify itself a bit more consistently. eg when surrealists seek
> to destroy something, they do so for causes like freedom, breaking down
> barriers, whatever. whereas dadaists just destroy stuff for fun and cos
> they don't like it and subversiveness is fun (?). and when surrealists
> create stuff, they tend to explain their creative processes (ie linking
> conscious/unconscious mind, whatever) as r/evolutionary, or at least
having
> some sort of reason (romantic reasoning as opposed to logical reasoning,
> mind you). whereas dadaists create art that is subversive just cos they
> don't like the other stuff (that which they are rebelling against) and
it's
> just lots of fun (?).
> please correct my dodgy impressions, people. sorry if i offended anyone
> with the incorrectness of my attempt to express what i have already
figured
> out from books and whatnot.
> ps i heard Darren from gerling (o-su-to-ra-ri-an band) was very
> influenced by dada, just as a point of interest to anyone who is
interested
> by interesting things.
> --
Some of this is partly true, and part of it is not true at all. Though
Dadaism has taken on the mantle of "goofy precursor" it is actually a very
living presence in modern attitudes: the punks for instance, who (also) are
akin to the Dadaists in that they were (here and there) very politically
oriented. One must remember that Dadaism sprung from WWI like a poison
mushroom grows in shit I(or shitr), and that we should not forget that it
was composed of many varying personalites. Huelsenbeck (as revealed in his
"Dairy of a Dada Drummer") was less than intrigued by the "antic" side of
Dadaism, and wished to reinvent it as a distinct political posture. And
Tzara, who can seem so roguishly errant, was actually a very tough-minded
tactician and promoter. Arp was a sweet-tempered lyrical poet and artist.
Duchamp is the cool (and coolly amusing) ironist, and so on. So the
complexities grow as soon as we are forced to view Dadaism as a set of
individuals brought together by a shared disgust at the price of militarism.
For a Dadaist, the distinction between "fun" and "seriousness" is not so
easily drawn. But surely the Dadaists did what they did for "freedom" as
much as the Surrealists. When Duchamp puts a moustache on the Mona Lisa it
isn't because he simplistically doesn't "like" it (he probably did), but
because it represents an opportunity to reveal something extra about it;
that it is NOT just a sacred icon, but also a beginning of something new. I
personally view it as homage as much as anything.
The Surrealists - no doubt - were a less "giddy" bunch in toto, and Breton
was certainly no party animal. But Peret's poetry is just as deliriously
revolutionary and unjustifiable as any purely Dadaist work, and many of the
Dadists continued quite uninhibitedly with the Surrealists. I find the
dualistic separation forged between them by many art historians and other
sewer whores to be usually over-simplified and self-serving: it is so much
easier to write long dissertations over emphatic divisions. It is more of a
continuum with a slow evolution driven by the fading of Tzara's (and the
Zurich/Berlin) ambience and the emergence of Breton's rather "anal"
personality (dragging in Freud), but as individuals there seems to be quite
a line of connection. If a simple statement of difference could be made it
might be that the Dadaists wanted MORE to wake up the world to its potential
(by showing it its waste), and the Surrealists wanted MORE to wake up
themselves to their potential and serve - in part - as an example of what
liberated imaginations could be. But these ideals grow from each other, and
I don't find that the segregation needs to be attempted.
Much more can be said...
dmh
happy asymptote
this is something that needs clearing up for me.
dada and surrealism differ on the fact that surrealism is more focussed; it
likes to justify itself a bit more consistently. eg when surrealists seek
to destroy something, they do so for causes like freedom, breaking down
barriers, whatever. whereas dadaists just destroy stuff for fun and cos
they don't like it and subversiveness is fun (?). and when surrealists
create stuff, they tend to explain their creative processes (ie linking
conscious/unconscious mind, whatever) as r/evolutionary, or at least having
some sort of reason (romantic reasoning as opposed to logical reasoning,
mind you). whereas dadaists create art that is subversive just cos they
don't like the other stuff (that which they are rebelling against) and it's
just lots of fun (?).
please correct my dodgy impressions, people. sorry if i offended anyone
with the incorrectness of my attempt to express what i have already figured
out from books and whatnot.
ps i heard Darren from gerling (o-su-to-ra-ri-an band) was very
influenced by dada, just as a point of interest to anyone who is interested
by interesting things.
--
:D
he took his sister from his head and painted her on the sheets
then he woke her up in grass and trees and they kissed til they were dead
(pixies)
Matthew Moffett
> dada and surrealism differ on the fact that surrealism is more focussed; it
> likes to justify itself a bit more consistently. eg when surrealists seek
> to destroy something, they do so for causes like freedom, breaking down
> barriers, whatever. whereas dadaists just destroy stuff for fun and cos
> they don't like it and subversiveness is fun (?). and when surrealists
> create stuff, they tend to explain their creative processes (ie linking
> conscious/unconscious mind, whatever) as r/evolutionary, or at least having
> some sort of reason (romantic reasoning as opposed to logical reasoning,
> mind you). whereas dadaists create art that is subversive just cos they
> don't like the other stuff (that which they are rebelling against) and it's
> just lots of fun (?).
of the differences. The surrealists had Breton, the self-proclaimed
leader who decided the goals of surrealism and tossed anyone out who
disagreed with his views. The dadaists had several who saw themselves
as "leaders" when there really wasn't one. They don't seperate the
Zurich, NY, and Berlin schools of dada for no reason; their differing
motivations were everything from complete madness to denouncing the Nazi
party.
Treeclimbr
how beautific a poet Tzara was,
how well-worked and dense his
imagery is, emotionally serene at times,
and heartfeld in its mysticism/spirituality. He is
really the most wonderful person to
get into, yet most just look at him
as some kind of smug, wreckless
iconoclast for the sake of iconoclysm.
___________________
Robert Pearson
Creative Virtue: http://www.eskimo.com/~telical/
ParaMind Brainstorming Software http://www.paramind.net/
Nick
the surrealist movement; there was a lot of mutual respect at times, and
they overlapped quite considerably - look at some of the surrealist
exhibitions organised by Breton et al, and you'll see quite a few artists
and poets who are usually called dadaists; Breton was also involved with
Tristran Tzara for quite a considerable time before surrealism really formed
a coherent whole, if it ever did.
Bloody your hands on a cactus tree,
wipe it on your dress and send it to me...
(More Pixies, Cactus) ;-)
--
In your face Space Coyote!
ICQ 35484641
www.vhemt.org :-)
The body's four elements: bone, pure will, movement, scream.
happy asymptote <gr...@ion.com.au> wrote in message
news:01bfb70a$1d9abf60$LocalHost@green...
> can i just see if i've got this right? i'm probably way off. that's why
> this is something that needs clearing up for me.
>
> dada and surrealism differ on the fact that surrealism is more focussed;
it
> likes to justify itself a bit more consistently. eg when surrealists seek
> to destroy something, they do so for causes like freedom, breaking down
> barriers, whatever. whereas dadaists just destroy stuff for fun and cos
> they don't like it and subversiveness is fun (?). and when surrealists
> create stuff, they tend to explain their creative processes (ie linking
> conscious/unconscious mind, whatever) as r/evolutionary, or at least
having
> some sort of reason (romantic reasoning as opposed to logical reasoning,
> mind you). whereas dadaists create art that is subversive just cos they
> don't like the other stuff (that which they are rebelling against) and
it's
> just lots of fun (?).
Dale Houstman
"Treeclimbr" <treec...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000506014220...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> In this light, it's interesting to look at
> how beautific a poet Tzara was,
> how well-worked and dense his
> imagery is, emotionally serene at times,
> and heartfeld in its mysticism/spirituality.
This is very true. Like Breton he is - at base - a romantic poet, although I
think he does have more of the mystic in him.
>He is
> really the most wonderful person to
> get into, yet most just look at him
> as some kind of smug, wreckless
> iconoclast for the sake of iconoclysm.
Yes, but then again this is an image he delighted in creating.
dmh
Aeon
>with the incorrectness of my attempt to express what i have already figured
>out from books and whatnot.
I think you've had a lot of good explanations here already, but I have
a very simple explanation I'd like to add.
Surrealism has a main theme of exploring the sub-concious, the imagination,
and bringing it/them outwards. Many of the techniques to do this are
similar or the same as some used in Dada.
At least that's what surrealism seems to be to my knowledge.
Dada on the other hand was anything and nothing. It was like the gibberish
that runs from a drunken homeless man's lips while he wets himself on the
sidewalk in front of a midday crowd.
alright, I need more sleep... I make no sense.
>he took his sister from his head and painted her on the sheets
>then he woke her up in grass and trees and they kissed til they were dead
>(pixies)
this ain't no holiday!
orlan
--Joan of Ark heard voices too--
laura transforms
http://www.gurlpages.com/art/orlan/index.html
Treeclimbr
if you find any, please pass them along.
I only have one book of his poetry
(Chanson Dada), and another one
photocopied which has mostly juvenalia.
There is Approximate Man, a very
long work, book length. It's very expensive.
All these great works, so hard to get,
should be scanned in, slightly changed
and put on the web. It's the least we can do. Translation should be a job
paid
for by universities to make such work
available to the public, not to go out of
print and become only the domain of
university libraries and "rich" people
(or people who must spend all their money
on such books).
Treeclimbr
>In article <20000506120328...@ng-mb1.aol.com>,
> treec...@aol.com (Treeclimbr) wrote:
>> As far as Tzara's writings on the web,
>> if you find any, please pass them along.
>
>would be interested in doing this as well?)
I guess I figure it's futile, but I will try.
>> I only have one book of his poetry
>> (Chanson Dada), and another one
>> photocopied which has mostly juvenalia.
>> There is Approximate Man, a very
>> long work, book length. It's very expensive.
>
>I have the following book from the San Francisco Public Library.
>
>The Random House Book of Twentieth-Century French Poetry, edited by
>Paul Auster with translations by American and British Poets, A Dual-
>Language Edition. Random House, Inc., New York; and simultaneously in
>Canada by Random House of Canada, Toronto, 1982. ISBN 0-394-52197-8.
I just looked at biblifinder. It
lists mostly expensive French first editions,
ranging in the $75 -- 2000.
It seems Tzara like to do limited
editions, which were probably very
expensive to start out with. Some
are stated as having Vellum bindings.
>> All these great works, so hard to get,
>> should be scanned in, slightly changed
>> and put on the web. It's the least we can do. Translation should be
>> a job
>> paid
>> for by universities to make such work
>> available to the public, not to go out of
>> print and become only the domain of
>> university libraries and "rich" people
>> (or people who must spend all their money
>> on such books).
>
>I agree. I'm just beginning to study Surrealism and its precursors,
>and I'm going to have to join a university library. On the few
>occasions when my local library does have a book pertaining to
>Surrealism or Dada listed, it's almost always been "Borrowed, Assumed
>Lost", and won't be replaced.
You wouldn't happen to live in
Seattle, would you? Because that's
what it seems like here. But I've
been able to interlibrary loan them
just from my city/county library
system.
Jean-Jacq...@ubuwanadoo.fr
<dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
>"happy asymptote" <gr...@ion.com.au> wrote in message
>news:01bfb70a$1d9abf60$LocalHost@green...
>> can i just see if i've got this right? i'm probably way off. that's why
>> this is something that needs clearing up for me.
>>
>> dada and surrealism differ on the fact that surrealism is more focussed;
>it
>> likes to justify itself a bit more consistently.
and all this sort of things.
>Some of this is partly true, and part of it is not true at all.
and so on...
>Dadists continued quite uninhibitedly with the Surrealists. I find the
>dualistic separation forged between them by many art historians and other
>sewer whores to be usually over-simplified and self-serving: it is so much
>easier to write long dissertations over emphatic divisions. It is more of a
>continuum with a slow evolution
you forgot US, after breton, the ever living collége of 'pataphysique.
--
UBU
Qui répondrait dans ce monde à l'horrible obstination
du crime, si ce n'est l'obstination du témoignage.
A. Camus, Actuelles II
ye...@travel-net.com
Dale Houstman
<Jean-Jacq...@UBUwanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:39144f75...@News.wanadoo.fr...
> On Fri, 5 May 2000 23:40:56 -0500, "Dale Houstman"
> <dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"happy asymptote" <gr...@ion.com.au> wrote in message
> >news:01bfb70a$1d9abf60$LocalHost@green...
> >> can i just see if i've got this right? i'm probably way off. that's
why
> >> this is something that needs clearing up for me.
> >>
> >> dada and surrealism differ on the fact that surrealism is more
focussed;
> >it
> >> likes to justify itself a bit more consistently.
>
> and all this sort of things.
> >Some of this is partly true, and part of it is not true at all.
>
> and so on...
> >Dadists continued quite uninhibitedly with the Surrealists. I find the
> >dualistic separation forged between them by many art historians and other
> >sewer whores to be usually over-simplified and self-serving: it is so
much
> >easier to write long dissertations over emphatic divisions. It is more of
a
> >continuum with a slow evolution
>
> you forgot US, after breton, the ever living collége of 'pataphysique.
Well, I made no claim to inclusiveness (I end my remarks with "there is much
more to be said"), and I am quite aware of pataphysics. It - of course -
preexisted surrealism and Dada, and continues now. I also didn't mention
OLIPO. These are interesting pathways. Why don't you tell us more, since my
intimate knowledge of such is less than intimate?
dmh
Treeclimbr
with Oulipo. They seem to be just
interested in what they can do with
games and mathematics. The substance
of the end result isn't really that satisfying,
in my own opinion. I think computer-generated writing, with
edits, is more interesting. It's like
a super-fast cut-up technique, and
like cut-ups, you can add whatever
you want into the mix. Oulipo seems
to satisfy some strange quirk that
doesn't seem to be that much in the
Surrealist line of thought.
Sally Waddingham
Aeon <ae...@bullet.40-eyes.com> wrote in message
news:slrn8h8gl...@bullet.20-eyes.com...
Jean-Jacq...@ubuwanadoo.fr
>In article <20000506120328...@ng-mb1.aol.com>,
> treec...@aol.com (Treeclimbr) wrote:
>> As far as Tzara's writings on the web,
>> if you find any, please pass them along.
>
>Would you like to share the looking? (And maybe some other people
>would be interested in doing this as well?)
>
>> I only have one book of his poetry
>> (Chanson Dada), and another one
>> photocopied which has mostly juvenalia.
>> There is Approximate Man, a very
>> long work, book length. It's very expensive.
>
>I have the following book from the San Francisco Public Library.
>
college of 'pataphysic edited some years ago a work from tzara, a
piece of paper, sort of poem, when you made the standart boat from
this paper, you got a fresh new poem.
type of oulipo work.
Jean-Jacq...@ubuwanadoo.fr
<dm...@citilink.com> wrote:
>
><Jean-Jacq...@UBUwanadoo.fr> wrote in message
>news:39144f75...@News.wanadoo.fr...
>> you forgot US, after breton, the ever living collége of 'pataphysique.
>
>Well, I made no claim to inclusiveness (I end my remarks with "there is much
>more to be said"), and I am quite aware of pataphysics. It - of course -
>preexisted surrealism and Dada, and continues now. I also didn't mention
>OLIPO. These are interesting pathways. Why don't you tell us more, since my
>intimate knowledge of such is less than intimate?
some links:
http://worldserver2.oleane.com/fatrazie/
this is the oficial site of our beloved college, you will found a lot
of links, including some american subsidiary.
for the time being, there is in the MOMA, new york, an exhibition on
our best painters.
unfortunatelly, oxana is still not here.
basicaly, we want to dominate the world, using all ways and means.
Oulipo is one of our sub commission, it is in charge of litterature.
we have also oulipopo (police romans), oulipeinpo (pein for peinting),
and more generally ouliXpo.
latest is very interesting from a french point of view, is X= ccoking.
hope it will help.
Jean-Jacq...@ubuwanadoo.fr
>I have to say I'm somewhat disappointed
>with Oulipo. They seem to be just
>interested in what they can do with
>games and mathematics. The substance
>of the end result isn't really that satisfying,
>in my own opinion. I think computer-generated writing, with
>edits, is more interesting. It's like
>a super-fast cut-up technique, and
>like cut-ups, you can add whatever
>you want into the mix. Oulipo seems
>to satisfy some strange quirk that
>doesn't seem to be that much in the
>Surrealist line of thought.
OF COURSE, surrealism is dead with Breton (and the fall of communism)
and Oulipo took the exact reverse of this naive and childish "cadavre
exquis".
They decided to use a fully rationnal and post-post modern approch of
litterature.
Did you read anything from our beloved Perec?
in adition to crss words, he wrote a very good roman "la disparition "
without E. I hope there is somewhere an english translation, because
the roman is quite good.
then he wrote a new roman, only with E .
The point is not to consider the performance, but to look at the piece
as a normal piece of art, the constraint being a way to escape from
facility, and give to the reader a smell of something different.
It is very bad to read the work with the constraint in mind. the
constraint is only to help to creativity (the unconscient of breton
being proved to be poor and without artistic interest).
in other world, OuXpo try to define constraints, wich can be used by
normal artists to help to concentrate and invite to new creations.
you can keep in mind that previously there was a lot of such
constraints (sonnets, alexandrins, music of three minutes, films of
one hour and half, languages...)
sorry for my american, I used to be businesman, I can speak english
only within business patois.
>
>
>
>___________________
>Robert Pearson
>Creative Virtue: http://www.eskimo.com/~telical/
>ParaMind Brainstorming Software http://www.paramind.net/
--
barrett john erickson
"Sally Waddingham" <toxic...@zoom.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8f4g15$2bho$1...@quince.news.easynet.net...
> anything to do with situationism?
i'm not clear what your question refers to here. perhaps you could clarify.
but very generally speaking, as you probably know, the situationists (note
that the use of the term "situationism" is a red flag to a stituationist)
emerged from the factionalized aftermath of WWII in a coming together of
people from various interim groups all with very definite surrealist lineage
(CoBRA, the Revolutionary Surrealists, the Lettrist International) who were
put off (rightly so, in my opinion) by the perceived softening of the main
branch of "surrealism" (breton's leaning towards mythology and mysticism for
example) and wanted to explore a more aggressively direct analysis of the
"poverty of everyday life" as it relatates to what are, after all,
traditional surrealist concerns (enhancing our reality by integrating the
liberated imagination into daily living).
today, i think it's fair to say that most surrealists accept the validity of
the theoretical analysis and tactical contributions of debord, vaneigem and
co. and have merged these into modern "surrealism".
i, for instance, feel much more aligned with the Vaneigem of 1967 than the
Breton of 1956.
-- barrett
Treeclimbr
I have to confess, my French is
not good, and the one book I have
on Oulipo in English didn't seem to
give me more to go on that what
I had when I made my recent statement
here. When I did go to Paris I photocopied
all I could find, which I still have somewhere.
I don't want to belittle anyone's art form,
especially when it's something I have little
knowledge of. I'm glad someone came out
of the motherland (France!) to help clear things up!
Dale Houstman
<Jean-Jacq...@UBUwanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:3915a4e8...@News.wanadoo.fr...
>
> basicaly, we want to dominate the world, using all ways and means.
Although I am more than aware of the 'umorous" nature of pataphysics, I must
say this - as a stated goal - bore and depresses me.
dmh
Treeclimbr
>Have you joined a university library?
No, but it's a good idea. I may look into it
sometime.
Jean-Jacq...@ubuwanadoo.fr
>In article <3915a7cb...@News.wanadoo.fr>,
> Jean-Jacq...@UBUwanadoo.fr wrote:
>>(the unconscient of breton being proved to be poor and without
>> artistic interest).
>
>Would you explain this, ^ please?
>
breton wrote a lot about unconscious and how to manage it and how to
use it as a piece of art.
but most of his works are very conscious work.
i do not think he did published any official "subconscient" work.
mike...
Treeclimbr wrote
>As far as Tzara's writings on the web,
>if you find any, please pass them along.
>(Chanson Dada), and another one
>photocopied which has mostly juvenalia.
>There is Approximate Man, a very
>long work, book length. It's very expensive.
sorry this is such a late response. i don't get a chance to
skim the newsgroups much lately, and on top of that, my
server likes to go completely unconnectable for a week here
and there.
but anyway http://www.13am.net/iconoclast/ has all kinds of
dada / surrealist / precursor / other stuff texts. it's all
a very good read. the pretty pretty tzara section is located
at http://www.13am.net/iconoclast/tzara/ ...whod've guessed?
if you prefer your words to be on paper, "seven dada
manifestos" is currently, and appropriately, i would guess,
available for $7 on ebay. i would like to buy this myself,
but $7 is just too steep for unemployed-boy.
excerpts from the book are on the web here:
http://dept.english.upenn.edu/~jenglish/English104/tzara.htm
l
there is also this at ebay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=32822
2891 . i have no idea how to react to this, but i feel kind
of relieved that no one has bid on it.
next to serner's, "last loosening manifesto" / "loosening
the brakes" (also at 13am), "seven manifestos.." is probably
my favourite dada manifesto. s.
have fun, mike.