Chapter
four of RoseLee Goldberg’s Performance Art begins to discus the Surrealism in connection
to the previous style of Dadaism. At first, it seemed that surrealism was being
described in correlation to the ‘anti-heroes’ and declaration of distaste of
politics and/or culture performances of the Dadaists.
The Surrealist
Manifesto publication of 1925 marked the official foundation of the movement
(p.88). Goldberg discusses ‘automatism’ and defines surrealism as “pure psychic automatism, by which an attempt
is made to express, either verbally, in writing, or in any other manner, the
true functioning of thought” and it’s rested on the belief in the “higher
reality of certain hitherto neglected forms or association in the omnipotence
of the dream, in the disinterred play of thought” (p.89). This definition
became unclear as I was having trouble understanding the difference between the
movement from Dadaism. One can not be removed from the other.
Goldberg does argue that this
definition gives understanding to the motives from the out of the ordinary
performances. The lines seem blurred to me, though, especially when the
surrealists ‘accept’ that dada describes their work. But, why? Would not
defining and separating themselves (especially when they gave themselves a
definition in their premiere manifesto) have avoided the later conflict of
their principles (p. 90)?
At the end of chapter four,
surrealism seems to be re-defined/ re-assigned as a product of Futurism and Dadaism.
Goldberg chronicles the movements as fierce competitors and that surrealism
came out on top right before WWII when everything came to an abrupt stop in Europe. I feel that same halt in the chapter when trying to understand the definition of Surrealism.
No comments:
Post a Comment