Talk:Surrealism/Archive 2
I don't know whether Giacometti belongs with the surrealists: he is much more closely linked with Existentialism - he was very close friends with Jean Paul Sartre - and although he had a deal with Paul Loeb (the Surrealists' principle dealer) and his work became known between 1929 - 1932 as surrealist, the work of this period is much more concerned with eroticism and symbolism than surrealism itself. But this is just my 2 sous worth... sjc
Edited misleading material on Dada.
Daniel C. Boyer
Added qualification of Andre Breton's definition of surrealism.
Daniel C. Boyer
Expansion of Dada discussion: negative Dada & positive surrealism.
Daniel C. Boyer
Added material for further reading
Daniel C. Boyer
Added "parsemage".
Daniel C. Boyer
Added external link to the Surrealist Movement in the United States. --Daniel C. Boyer
Added external link to Paris Surrealist Group. --Daniel C. Boyer
It was a movement which transformed post-World War I visual art, writing, poetry and film -- this is highly misleading and incomplete! --Daniel C. Boyer
- Oops. I've just refactored that into the opening sentence. If it's "often misinterpreted as an artistic movement", then what IS it? (in 10 words or less ;) ). We need a clear opening that gives the context, before we launch into how Breton initiated it -- Tarquin 07:01 Jul 31, 2002 (PDT)
The bald statement that surrealism is not an art movement kind of flies against the common definition of art movement. It wasn't *simply* an art movement, but it certainly wasn't *not* an art movement.
- It is, not was, not an art movement. There have been many members who have not been artists, who have not ever done any painting, drawing, collage, etc. (except -- if this -- for participating in exquisite corpse); moreover, there have been participants in the movement who have been neither artists nor poets. The surrealist project is not to change art but to transform the world. (This is proved again and again in primary-source surrealist writings, Breton saying that though the preparations are, roughly speaking, "artistic in nature," the day would come when surrealism would not be in this stage of preparation any more. This has now come to be, to a greater or lesser extent, with the Madrid group currently not doing art any more; the group's contribution to a recent exhibition was burning currency.) I do not believe that this "bald statement... flies against the common definition of art movement" but in any case it is the truth. --Daniel C. Boyer 07:36 Aug 26, 2002 (PDT)
Statements that the Surrealist movement ended in the 1930s is not "false". In fact, it's the generally accepted position
- Generally accepted as the position may be, it is based on demonstrably, factually false information. There was absolutely nothing that happened in the 1930s that could be called the "end of the movement." This belief (and people who say surrealism is dead have a notably difficult time agreeing on the date of its demise) is based on nothing more than a desire to collapse "we wish surrealism were dead" into "surrealism is dead." --Daniel C. Boyer
that Surrealism refers to the specific Paris-based collective.
- Which continues today. See the link to GPMS. --Daniel C. Boyer
The concept of Surrealism being an ongoing movement is the minority position; might be useful to discern "Surrealism" from "surrealism".
- There is no distinction other than in the minds of persons determined to falsify what surrealism is. --Daniel C. Boyer 07:36 Aug 26, 2002 (PDT)
--The Cunctator