“Largely self-taught” (“Marcel Duchamp”), well-off playing billiards than attending classes Duchamp left the Academie Julian after his first year (“Marcel Duchamp”). Through his brothers, Duchamp “made a meager living” (“Marcel Duchamp”) by “selling cartoons for publication in Parisian magazines, including “Le Lire” and “Le Courier Francais” (“Marcel Duchamp”). Through 1913 and 1914 “Duchamp worked as a librarian” (“Marcel Duchamp”). Finding Paris intolerable, Duchamp went to New York (Liukkonen, par. 6).Duchamp's nihilistic comment on the whole history of the Western art and art museums became an icon of the Dada movement (Liukkonen par. 8). “He was outside artistic tradition not only in shunning repetition but also in not attempting a prolific output or frequent exhibition of his work. In the Fauvist style Marcel painted some of his best early work three or four years after the Fauvist movement itself had died away. In 1911, Duchamp’s painting began to show a trace of Cubism (“Marcel Duchamp” par. 3). “Between 1913 and 1923” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 8) “a stroke of genius led him to a discovery of great importance in contemporary art, the so-called ready-made. In 1913 he produced the “Bicycle Wheel,” which was simply an ordinary bicycle wheel” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 9). “He was then, and remained, an artist whose works would have been sought after but who was content to distribute them free among his friends or to sell them for intentionally small amounts” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 10). “He lived more than ever in semiretirement, content with chess and with producing, as the spirit moved him, some strange and unexpected object” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 15). “This contemplative life was interrupted in about 1960, when the rising generation of American artists realized that Duchamp had found answers for many of their problems. Suddenly tributes came to him from all over the world” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 16). “However, his works were ignored by the public for the greater part of his life. Until 1960 only such avant-garde groups as the Surrealists claimed that he was important, while to “official” art circles and sophisticated critics he appeared to be merely an eccentric and something of a failure” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 17). “He was more than 70 years old when he emerged in the United States as the secret master whose entirely new attitude toward art and society, far from being negative or nihilistic, had led the way to Pop art, Op art, and many of the other movements embraced by younger artists everywhere. Not only did he change the visual arts but he also changed the mind of the artist” (“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968)” par. 17). “Duchamp also invented himself a female alter ego, Rrose Sélavy (Eros that’s Life), who appeared in his friends works. Man Ray photographed Rrose Sélavy on several occasions. Under her name Duchamp published in 1939 a book of puns and word games” (Liukkonen, par.10) “In 1927 Duchamp married Lyndie Sarazine-Levassor, the daughter of a wealthy industrialist. They divorced in 1928” (Liukkonen, par. 12). “After living for a long time as a bachelor, Duchamp married in 1954 Alexina Sattler Matisse (1906-1995). Next year he became an American citizen. In secret, known only to his wife, he had started to develop an assemblage after World War II, “Etant Donnés”, his visual testament. The exterior consists of an old wooden door, closed, with two peepholes. Through them can be seen a naked girl without pubic hair. In the background is a landscape. Duchamp died in Neuilly-sur-Seine on October 2, 1968. He was buried in Rouen” (Liukkonen, par. 15).
Duchamp, was the inventor of the readymade. He was a prankster “of modernism, who mocked all around and turned jokes, like dressing up in drag” (Lewis, par. 2-4). He created an idea that anything can be art (Collings 49). “Duchamp refused to produce art for the pleasure of a society” (Mount 168(18)). Duchamp refused “to accept the standards of the traditional art community” (“Marcel Duchamp”) he made art “for more theoretical and even humorous concerns” (“Marcel Duchamp”). Duchamp is professed “as iconoclastic, anarchistic and nihilistic” (“Marcel Duchamp”). “Still, after only seventeen years of creating art, Duchamp turned his back on painting, spending the second half of his life playing chess. Quitting art was as much of a statement for Duchamp as his artwork itself had been. His was an uncompromising life” (“Marcel Duchamp”). Duchamp’s nihilism is shown through his pieces. Duchamp’s artwork is to be viewed intellectually. It makes you think hard about what it’s trying to say. You question it, is this art? His artwork also questions whether art should be beautiful or authentic. His “Fountain” is a classic example. The “Fountain” is an early 1900’s porcelain urinal. It’s white and has a signed “R. Mutt 1917” in black ink. This piece is a black and white photograph of the urinal. Many people do not see this as art. Duchamp purposely wanted people to think this. He wanted to challenge what art really is. Is art supposed to be beautiful, is it supposed to be pleasing, agreeable? Duchamp thinks the exact opposite, he thinks art should be provoking you, it should be strange and humorous. “Later in his life Duchamp himself commented on the name of the alter ego he created for this work: 'Mutt' comes from Mott Works, the name of a large sanitary equipment manufacturer. But Mott was too close so I altered it to Mutt, after the daily cartoon strip ‘Mutt and Jeff‘. But not even that much, just R. MUTT. If you separate the capital and lowercase letters we get ‘R.M’ and ‘utt‘, ‘R.M’ would stand for ‘Readymade’ which is the fountain itself and ‘utt’ when read out loud sounds like ‘eut été’ in French (much like Duchamp's L.H.O.O.Q.). Together it means ‘Readymade once was, 1917‘. Word games like this are common in Marcel Duchamp's work” (“Fountain (Duchamp)”, par. 6). Not only in his piece but also in the title, Duchamp is challenging the viewer. Another way Duchamp challenges and provokes art, is by taking something that is not considered art at all and turning into art. It goes back to Picasso, who did not only question the “making what is low and rejected into art; it is also a question of bringing dead matter to life” (Sylvester 103). Duchamp took something inanimate and made it something lively, by turning it into art. The provocation that it brings to the viewer’s mind is what brings it to life. Even though, this piece of art is now considered one of the most influential pieces of modern art, it was rejected by the Society of Independent Artists. The board members had debated whether it was art or not. Submitting the artwork under another name, Duchamp soon resigned from the board of the Society of Independent Artists, after the “Fountain” was rejected. Another readymade by Duchamp was the “Bicycle Wheel”. The “Bicycle Wheel” is a bicycle wheel mounted upside down on a stool. This is another piece that challenges the, what is constituted as art. The wheel is black and the stool looks like it is wooden. This readymade is considered Duchamp’s first readymade, even though it was made before the term “readymade” was established. Duchamp has said that it has “’little to do with the idea of the Readymade. Rather it had more to do with the idea of chance. In a way, it was simply letting things go by themselves and having a sort of created atmosphere in a studio, an apartment where you live. Probably, to help your ideas come out of your head. To set the wheel turning was very soothing, very comforting, a sort of opening of avenues on other things than material life of every day. I liked the idea of having a bicycle wheel in my studio. I enjoyed looking at it, just as I enjoyed looking at the flames dancing in a fireplace. It was like having a fireplace in my studio, the movement of the wheel reminded me of the movement of flames‘” (“Bicycle Wheel”, par. 1). Seems to be that, the purpose of the “Bicycle Wheel” was to help unblocked Duchamp’s mind, to sooth him. One wonders why he submitted it as a piece of artwork. It has that provocation of what it really is and disputed the constitution of art, but why was submit something that seems so personal? Maybe that was the purpose of it, to not only mocks and provoke, but also to comforts and sooth. This readymade is a paradox within its-self. Not only does it have the nihilism in it, but it also does what Duchamp is trying to not do. Which is, that in a way it pleases society. It brings pleasure to society. Duchamp undoes what his artwork is supposed to do. It’s not supposed to please society, it’s supposed to displease society, and show that anything dead or ugly is equally art as something appealing and beautiful. Duchamp mocks beauty in art, humorous in “L.H.O.O.Q.”. Through his own version of Leonardo Da Vinci’s “Mona Lisa”. It is a replica of the “Mona Lisa” but with an added moustache and goatee in black ink. “L.H.O.O.Q.” in French is elle a chaud au cul, which translated means she has a hot ass. Clearly Duchamp meant for this to be humorous. In his version of the “Mona Lisa”, Duchamp “walked away from a definition of art that had ruled the West for over 2,000 years: no more beautiful imitations. Art should be a concept, not a copy. It should disturb, not please. Most important, it should not be beautiful” (Mount 168(18)). This piece by Duchamp is one of the most famous acts of degrading art. Duchamp would have been very content knowing this. He made it disturbing, not pleasing. It perfectly demonstrated what Duchamp wanted to do. He took an artificial beauty and turned it into what he thought art should be. Art should agitate, should perturb you.
He also does this in his “Paradise”. Instead of the simulated beauty that art is to be, Duchamp painted the beauty of the nude human body. In the painting, there is a man and a woman and they are nude. The man is standing and has his hands covering his male organ. It seems that he is looking straight ahead and has an apathetic look on his face. He neither looks pleased or displeased. His skin is palely white but is accented with a golden yellow, he is much lighter than the woman. He seems to have brown hair and brown eyes. The woman is sitting down and she is much thicker than the man. Her skin is golden with red accents. She is looking the opposite way of the man and seems to be looking at something contently. Her hair has purple in it, but is brown, also her eyes are brown but seem to be outlined with red. She is sitting on her right hand and has her left arm over her stomach. Her left leg is on the ground while her right leg is upright. The man and woman seem to be in a garden or country setting with trees in the background. The rest of the painting is in warm colors: brown, gold, yellow, red. In this painting Duchamp is not only mocking the idea of what beauty is, he is also making a mockery of woman. When humans are at their most natural state, they are at true beauty. That natural state is when they are nude. What Duchamp may be saying is that you’re not really beautiful when you have all this stuff on you. You’re not truly beautiful wearing fashionable clothes or make-up, when you’re done up. Nudity is the realest, truest beauty. It’s the curves and forms of your body that’s beautiful. Here is his nihilism, when you are completely and utterly material less, is when you are beautiful. Not when you’re completely covered with materials. He demolishes the institution of beauty as he does art. He finds that the opposite of what is “supposed to be” actually is what it’s supposed to be. To him, everyone has it wrong, everyone has it backwards. Art isn’t just on the surface; it’s supposed to move you, make you question, make you think. “Paradise” exhibits mockery of woman. It can be perceived that the man in the painting is more civilized then the woman. More respectful, more aware. The man is standing there, well put and covering his male organ, while the woman is on the ground, with her legs opened and she is not covering her chest. The woman is crude. It’s like she just there, she serves no purpose, the man seems to not even acknowledge her presence. Along with Picabia and Man Ray, Duchamp was considered a “playboy, whose treatment of women both in life and art was irredeemably patriarchal” (Lewis 43). Duchamp didn’t respect woman, he thought that they were disposable. He illustrated that in his paintings and life. Marcel Duchamp was a prankster and a playboy, but more importantly he became a godfather to conceptual art. He “was allergic to work. To society too. Paradoxically he has become an icon of contemporary art and remains an enigma” (Savigneau 261). Through his on and off relationship with art, Duchamp created artwork that would mock, provoke, and humor its viewers. He mocked and humored with “L.H.O.O.Q.” and provoked the constitutions of art with the “Fountain”. “Duchamp's work continued to attract both praise and criticism, and by late 1913 he was searching for greater freedom of artistic expression than that allowed by either cubism or futurism. He had at this time developed a close friendship with painter Francis Picabia, whom Duchamp felt ‘had more intelligence than most of our contemporaries.’ In addition, Keneas remarked, the two ‘shared each other's sense of iconoclastic wit and absurd humor.’ Together with writer Apollinaire they were formulating a new concept of art that prefigured the Dada movement; it mocked accepted artistic norms and sought to de-emphasize the artist's hand by using chance and mechanical methods” (“Marcel Duchamp”).
Works Cited
“Bicycle Wheel”. 3 April 2009.
Brief description on the readymade, when it was made.
Collings, Matthew. "Anything Goes.(Arts; Exhibition)(Marcel Duchamp, Francis Picabia and Man Ray)." Time International (Europe Edition) 171.10 (March 10, 2008): 49. Expanded Academic ASAP. Gale. Boston Public Library. 1 March 2009.
Article on Duchamp, Picabia, and Man Ray. Associated them with the Dada and Surrealism movement. Art can be anything.
Lewis, Ben. “Who's the Dada? The joke's on us: Francis Picabia's Femmes Au Bull Dog (1940-42), above; Untitled (Ferns) by Man Ray (1923), left, and Marcel Duchamp's Fountain (1917), far left.” The Evening Standard (London, England), Feb 21, 2008 p43. InfoTrac. Boston Public Library.
Article on the artist’s anti-art movement and puns through art.
Liukkonen, Petri. Marcel Duchamp (1887-1968). 12 March 2009.
The site was about Marcel Duchamp entire life, his career as an artist and the end of his career. It spoke about and why Duchamp's urinal (“The Fountain”) was voted by art experts that it’s the most influential artwork of the 20th century.
"Marcel Duchamp." Authors and Artists for Young Adults, Volume 47. Gale Group, 2003. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, Mich.: Gale, 2009.
Brief article on Duchamp’s artwork. Lists most of his pieces with brief descriptions.
“Marcel Duchamp Biography (1887-1968).” Bio: True Story. 12 March 2009.
Biography on Marcel Duchamp’s life
Sylvester, David. “Marcel Duchamp”. Writers on Artists. New York: DK Publishing, Inc., 2001.Article on Marcel Duchamp, talks about his contempories and where/who he got theories from
Mount, Nick. "The return of beauty." Queen's Quarterly 115.2 (Summer 2008): 168(18). Expanded Academic ASAP. Gale. Boston Public Library. 2 March 2009. http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.bpl.org/itx/start.do?prodId=EAIM.
Speaks of the simulated beauty that art creates. How Duchamp tries to abolished it through his artwork.
Savigneau, Josiane. "Duchamp, Marcel Marcel Duchamp.(Marcel Duchamp: La vie a credit)(Brief article)(Book review)." Biography 30.2 (Spring 2007): 261(1). Expanded Academic ASAP. Gale. Boston Public Library. 1 March 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment