|
November 14, 2004
Surrealism comes and goes through the threads of junk for code. I don't see it as an art historical movement of the 1930-40s that died out because it had reached a dead end, was rejected by conservatives and subsequently replaced by abstraction and abstraction expressionism.
I see it as a part of our culture and so in informing the way we write about our culture. It is a subterranean current.
An example would be the Lester Bangs approach to rock journalism. This rock aesthetic celebrates the momentary anarchistic explosion of rock expression, sees the stream of consciousness as revolutionary and connects it with gore outrage and death as a way to cope with the gnawing void of our nihilistic present.
Surrealism: Desire Unbound by Jennifer Mundy, is the text, of an exhibition that questions the way we understand surrealism according to this review by Peter Mauro.
Mauro says that:
'...a static essentializing conception of the term "desire" has traditionally been a stumbling block in most scholarly work on the movement. Even in many of the revisionist studies of the 1980?s and 1990?s, influenced by Anglo-French feminist and deconstructivist philosophies, the role of "desire" in Surrealism was generally assumed to be one of phallocentric glorification and the subjugation of women. Often, the revolutionary role that desire played in the early years of the movement in terms of the contestation of sexuality, power, and bourgeois socio-economic norms has often been de-emphasized, while its supposed gender-exclusivity has been heavily critiqued under the auspices of the "male gaze" and "misogyny."'
Mauro is right. "Desire' is a key philosophical category that has its roots in Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit and was subsequently given a Freudian /Nietzschean interpretation by the French in the 1930s and 1940s. This does need to be recovered from the layers of more recent interpretation.
Mauro says of this kind of feminist and deconstructivist of criticism, which became very popular in the Anglo-American academy, that it:
'...often assumed an almost relentless one-sided negativity. This tended to foster a disregard for the truly radical projects of the group, the fiercely independent activities of many of the women associated with Surrealism, and Surrealism?s potential use value as a critical methodology for analyzing late twentieth century media culture. In short, the movement and its philosophies regarding gender, sexuality, pornography, desire, and other key concepts were often reduced to a few simplified and negatively toned Freudian buzz words such as "fetish," "obsession," and "repression."'
Mauro goes on to say that Neil Coxon, one the contributors, offers the most thorough reconsideration of the definition and significance of desire for the movement.
"Cox establishes the centrality of the writings of several ancillary figures such as de Sade, Heine, and Bataille for Bretonian Surrealism. Cox posits Sadean sexuality, with its emphasis on non-reproductive and non-monogamous sexual activities, as a cornerstone for the Surrealist notion of "love." He argues that rather than simply being a cover for the sexual exploitation of women, Surrealist "love," in contrast to bourgeois "love," in fact promoted a critical linkage between acts of love, atheism, and revolutionary morality. Therefore, love ceases to be simply a vehicle by which to subjugate women and takes on a political potential by being in opposition to bourgeois conceptions of morality and desire."
I think this is on the right track with respect to Bataille. I would distinquish Bataille's understanding of surrrealism from Breton's conception of, surrealism. There is conflict and disgreement here, not harmony, even if the disagreements are unclear in a philosophical aesthetic sense.
|
|
Dear Gary,
Thanks for your feedback on my book review of "Surrealism: Desire Unbound." Frankly, I never thought I'd see anything written about it ever again on the Internet.
It's funny you mention my discussion of Bataille and Breton; I'm currently teaching one of my art history classes about the role of Bataille in the Surrealism of the 1930s. Try explaining that one to undergrads! :)
I agree that the two did differ significantly, thus Bataille's formation of the "Documents" group. I hope my review didn't seem to suggest that they were the same! I'll have to reread it and check. Having said that, they do share much in common, at least theoretically. This has been overlooked by their spectacular public rift and the nasty tone of their published disagreements. It seems that Bataille was more willing to push further into shadowy areas of sexual exploration in hopes of trumping bourgeois "normacly," whereas "Pope" Andre wished to stay the more orthodox course politically.
Whenever I read Bataille's texts, I am torn between his critical brilliance and intellectual honesty (for who else could write such things?) and his often incoherent rants. He is capable of fluctuating between these states from sentence to sentence.
Anyway,
All the best,
Pete Mauro
New York, NY