planet of the arts volume 7 issue 7 = the layman' guide to page 10 Ss surrelalism by Jeff Griffiths -with his final essay, Jeff marks his from art school departure and planet Surrealism is defined by the Random House college dictionary as “a style of art and literature developed principally in the twen- tieth century stressing the subconscious or non-rational arrived at by automatism or the exploitation of chance effects, unex- pected juxtapositions, symbolic objects, etc." Mind you, it also defines life as "the condi- tion that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic objects and dead organ- isms, being manifested by growth through . metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.” On a ra- tional level, any dictionary can define any given word, concept, person, place, idea etc., literally our entire perception of our universe in a logical allotment of so many lines per subject containing an at least coherent description of the basic concepts involved. However, just as there is a bit more to rational knowledge than the Ran- dom House College dictionary, there is also a bit more to life than the above definition of "metabolism, reproduction, and adapta- tion". As well, there is also a bit more to Surrealism than subconscious, non-rational imagery and unexpected juxtapositions. Surrealism is said to have been derived in part from Freudian and Jungian philoso- phies of subconscious drives and motivations which underlie the conscious and supposedly rational human mind. In fact, the whole basis of Surrealism is to portray the non-rational mind ina realistic way, or, at least bring images suggesting nonrationality into contact with the ra- tional world. It would seem, then, a contra- diction, an impossibility, to attempt to define a non-rational forcein rational terms. This, to me, is arather close-minded analy- sis. Such a definition is.a mere improbabil- ity, as, even in the realm of physics and mathematics, nothing is impossible to de- fine (ex. irrational numbers). Thus, even though Dali would probably, if he were alive, kidnap and threaten to feed chicken bones to my parent's dog in an act of des- peration after trying time and time again to rationally dissuade me from writing such a definition, I'm afraid that I'm just going to have to go ahead and do it. Ever since that first french caveman, ex- hausted from a nights revelry (and perhaps just a bit squeamish from all that weird grape juice he'd downed) stumbled into the wrong part of the cave and started seeing buffalo coming out of the walls, humanity has sought to express how we saw the world through art, from biblical depictions to ex- acting studies of leaves, to two blue stripes bisected by one red one. Therefore, it is absolutely rational that the non-rational expressions of Surrealism came about when they did. Essentially, in 1924, when Andre Breton wrote up his dictionary-esque definition of Surrealism, the whole world wasn't mak- ingmuch sense. The world hadjustemerged, less than unscathed, from the great war, yet fascism had taken root in Italy and was on the rise in Germany and Japan; the British Empire was still subjugating entire continents, and the depression was only: five years away. As well, Dadaism had left the art world in a tailspin, expanding the conventions of art at an explosive rate. In the aftermath of this, artists had much more freedom to explore, and Surrealism is the result. Surrealism is an artistic representation of our subconscious, our dreams, and derives, as said before, from Freudian psychoana- lytical methods. Freudian philosophy takes a rather dim view of human nature in explaining that everything that we do has its roots in hidden primal drives that we all possess. Consequently, we deal with the world by rationalizing these drives so as to fit in with others, to become a member of society. Example: underneath it all, Bob really wants very badly to have sex with Gina, however, he rationalizes this into merely asking her how she is doing suspi- ciously often, and masturbating in the shower. Surrealists interpreted these theo- ries into a notion that a truer art could be achieved by tapping into the primal drives, the subconscious, whatever, through vari- ous zany methods such as automatic writ- ing, and purposely not planning anything. Thus, in many Surrealistic works, the uncontainable and the inneffable are com- bined to create the aforementioned improb- able and thoroughly non-rational to great effect and little praise until the cursory 5- 50 years after the artist's unfortunate de- misein a horrible and inexplicable rototiller incident that barely made the local news. As well, Jungian philosophy, popularized by Karl Jung (strangely enough) explores possibilities of a collective unconscious, that, in fact, we are all wired together somehow, and that through this, symbolism becomes a common thread throughout our culture, our species, the universe, etc. The Surreal- ists incorporated this as an excuse for the constantly eclectic and eccentric juxtaposi- tions (there, I've said it) of images, subject matter, whatever, in that, evenif they don't make any sense, they're still related. “It's all related down in your subconscious," aging surrealists would say to young flashy dilettantes after maneuvering them into a broom closet and out of their brassiere (that's right, their collective brassiere) for an in-depth discussion on primal drives according to Freud. "The clocks melting like butter, the phallic nose into the pipe- bowl, these are all subconsciously connected to your affair with me over the next few months until I finally tire of you and in- stead shamelessly chase after your maid, Brunhilda." Perhaps the point of Surrealism isn't the images themselves , for as Dali himself is quoted from the "Art in Cinema" sympo- sium on the film UnChien Andalou, "...noth- ing, in the film, symbolizes anything." If this statement were applied to Surrealism in general, then itis only the fact that these people were doing meaningless, non-ra- tional art that has any significance whatso- eve:. Were they a mere reflection of the world around them? Senseless art for a senseless era? Or was it something deeper than a mass grave for common sense that these jokers were un-earthing ? Andre Breton further stated in 1924 that he believed "in the future resolution of the states of dream and reality, in appearance so contradictory, in a sort of absolute real- ity, or surreality.” Or, in other words, a reality in which anything could happen at any moment, a place where thought alone could mould matter into figment and fan- tasy. Literally, a place where pigs could fly. Surrealism, then, was the process of intro- ducing the two conflicting realities to each other, then ducking. So was this new? Order and Chaos had been rubbing up against one another and causing sparks since the birth of the hu- man mind, and perhaps much earlier. The Surrealists obviously thought the world was a little too logical, that society was conforming into outrageously conservative patterns of behaviour in relation to the nonsensical ideas that were running wildly through their heads. In many ways that was what Dadaism was about as well, up- ending the tabled beliefs and codes of mo- rality that had pervaded European thought throughout the Victorian era, "the age of reason.” When we look at the effects that this has had, 70 years later, the facts are appalling. We now live in an age where illogical, emotional, cultural issues and logi- cal, scientific concerns are in a state of constant conflict and confusion. As well, "the age of information" that we are now probing has had an impact such that hu- mans now suffer from information over- load. We are so overcome mentally by the sheer output of events, opinions, issues etc. that an air of selfish hopelessness pervades the modern, informed person. "I can't actu- ally doanything that would affect the world one way or another, " we say in low, exas- perated voices, so why not buy a Porsche?” What part did Surrealism playin this? Was it, perhaps, yet another wacky art move- ment on the road to Post-Modernism? Or was it just a side-effect, historically, of other, more important events of the time, like, say, Lenin's death? Perhaps not. Surrealism, by definition (and I ain'ttalkin’ Random House) stands alone as a move- ment, as a cultural force. First of all, itis a bit of a contradiction, in that it is based on theories arrived at logically and rationally by scientists, rather than, as with Expres- sionism, a new way to paint landscapes. Now, I realize that this is a huge generali- zation, but how specific do think I'm going toget at fourteen hundred words and count- ing? The point is that the Surrealists were possibly the first to adhere to an intellec- tual method as opposed to a technical method, in forming their art. Surrealism could be used in any medium and would still be Surrealist, chiefly because if one was to try and decipher it logically, one would eventually get a very bad headache. Conclusively, anything could be defined as surrealist, providing it doesn't make sense, and is claimed by the artist who created it (or at least two out of three of their former spouses) to be art. the layman' guide to planet of the arts volume 7 issue 7 page 10 Ss surrelalism by Jeff Griffiths -with his final essay, Jeff marks his departure from art school and planet Surrealismisdefinedby the Random House college dictionary as a style of art and literature developed principallyin the twen- tieth century stressing the subconscious or non-rational arrived at by automatism or the exploitation of chance effects, unex: pected juxtaposition, symbolicabjects ete ‘Mind you, it also defines life as "the co ‘ion that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic objects and dead organ- ‘sms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.” On a ra- tional level, any dictionary can define any given word, concept, person, place, idea tc, literally our entire perception of our universe in a logical allotment of so many Tines per subject containing an at least ‘coherent description of the basic concepts involved. However, just as there is a bit ‘more to rational knowledge than the Ran- dom House College dictionary, thereisalso ‘abit more to life than the above definition of ‘metabolism, reproduction, and adapta- tion”. As wel, there is also a bit more to Surrealism than subconscious, non-rational imagery and unexpected juxtapositions. Surrealism is said to have been derived in part from Freudian and Jungian philoso- phies of subconscious drives and motivations which underlie the conscious and supposedly rational human mind. In fact, the whole basis of Surrealism is to portray the non-rational mind na realistic way, or, atleast bring images suggesting nonrationality into contact with the ra tional world. It would seem, then, a contra- diction, an impossibility, to attempt to define anon- rational foreeinrational terms. ‘This, tome, is arather close-minded analy sis, Such a definition is a mere improbabil ity, as, even in the realm of physies and ‘mathematics, nothing is impossible to de- fine (ex. irrational numbers). Thus, even though Dali would probably, if he were alive, kidnap and threaten to feed chicken ‘bones to my parent's dog in an act of des- peration aftertrying time and time again to rationally dissuade me from writing such a definition, Im afraid that Im just going to have to go ahead and doit. Ever since that firt french eaveman, ex- hausted from anights revelry (and perhaps just a bit squeamish from all that weird ‘grapejuice hd downed) stumbled into the ‘wrong part of the cave and started seeing buffalo coming out ofthe walls, humanity has sought toexpresshow wesaw the world through art, from biblical depictions to ex- acting studies of leaves, to two blue stripes bisected by one red one. Therefore, itis absolutly rational that the non-rational expressions ofSurrealism cameabout when they did Essentially, in 1924, when Andre Breton ‘wrote up his dictionary-esque definition of Surrealism, the whole world wasn't mak- ingmuch sense. The world hadjustemerged, less than unscathed, from the great war, vet fascism had taken rot in aly and was ‘on the rise in Germany and Japan; the British Empire wasstill subjugating entire continents, and the depression was only five years away. As well, Dadaism had left the art world in a tailspin, expanding the conventions of art at an explosive rate. In the aftermath of this, artists had much ‘more freedom toexplore, and Surrealism is the result. Surrealism is an artistic representation of our subsonscious, our dreams, and derives, as said before, from Freudian psychoana- lytical methods. Freudian philosophy takes fa rather dim view of human nature in ‘explaining that everything that we do has its ootsin hidden primal drives that we ll possess. Consequently, we deal with the world by rationalizing these drives soas to fit in with others, to become a member of society. Example: underneath it all, Bob really wants very badly to have sex with Gina, however, he rationalizes this into merely asking her how she is doing suspi- ciously often, and masturbating in the shower. Surrealistsinterpreted these theo- ries into a notion that a truer art could be achieved by tapping nto the primal drives, the subconscious, whatever, through vari- ous zany methods such as automatic writ- ing, and purposely not planning anything, ‘Thus, in many Surrealistic works, the uncontainable and the inneffable are com- bined tocreatethe aforementioned improb- able and thoroughly non-rational to great effect and little praise until the cursor 50 years after the artist's unfortunate de- miseinahorribleandinexplicablerototiller incident that barely made the local news. ‘swell, Jungian philosophy, popularized by Karl Jung (strangely enough) explores possibilities ofacollective unconscious, that, infact, we areal wired together somehow, and that through this, symbolism becomes ‘a common thread throughout our culture, our species, the universe ete, The Surreal- {sts incorporated this as an excuse for the constantly eclectic and eocentricjuxtaposi tions (there, I've said it) ofimages, subject matter, whatever, in that,evenitthey don't make any sense, theyre still related. “It's all related down in your subconscious, agingsurrealists would say toyoungflashy dilettantes after maneuvering them into a broom closet and out of their brassiere (that's right, their collective brassiere) for an indepth discussion on primal drives according to Freud. "The clocks melting like butter, the phallic nose into the pipe- bowl, theseareall subeonsciously connected to your affair with me over the next few ‘months until I finally tire of you and in- stead shamelessly chase after your maid, Brunhilda. Perhaps the point of Surrealism isn't the images themselves, for as Dali himself is quoted from the "Art in Cinema” sympo- siumonthefilm Un Chien Andalou, ”..noth- ‘ng, in the film, symbolizes anything,” If this statement were applied to Surrealism ingenera,thenitis ony the fact that these people were doing meaningless, non-ra- tional artthathas any significance whatso- eve:. Were they a mere reflection of the world around them? Senseless art for a senseless era? Or was it something deeper than a mass grave for common sense that these jokers were un-earthing ? ‘Andre Breton further stated in 1924 that he believed "inthe future resolution ofthe states of dream and reality, in appearance socontradictory ina sort of absolute real- ity, or surreality.” Or, in other words, a reality in which anything could happen at ‘any moment, a place where thought alone could mould matter into figment and fan- tasy. Literally, a place where pigs could fy Surrealism, then, was the process ofintro- ducing the two conflicting realities to each other, then ducking, So was this new? Order and Chaos had been rubbing up against one another and causing sparks since the birth of the hu- ‘man mind, and perhaps much earlier. The Surrealists obviously thought the world was a little too logical, that society was conforminginto outrageously conservative patterns of behaviour in relation to the nonsensical ideas that wererunningwildly through their heads. In many ways that ‘was what Dadaism was about as well, up- ‘ending the tabled beliefs and codes of mo- rality hathad pervaded European thought throughout the Victorian era, “the age of reason.” When we look at the effects that this has had, 70 years later, the facts are appalling. We now live in an age where illogical, emotional, cultural issues andlogi- cal, scientific concerns are in a state of constant conflict and confusion. As well, ‘the age of information” that we are now probing has had an impact such that hu- mans now suffer from information over- load. We are so overcome mentally by the sheer output ofevents, opinions, issues et. that an airof selfish hopelessness pervades the modern, informed person. “can't actu allydoanything that would affect the world ‘one way or another, " we say in low, exas. perated voices, 'sowhy not buy Porsche?” What part didSurrealism playin this? Was it, perhaps, yet another wacky art move- ‘ment on the road to Post-Modernism? Or was it just a side-effect, historically, of other, more important events of the time, like, say, Lenin's death? Perhaps not. Surrealism, by definition (and lain'ttalkin’ Random House) stands alone as a move ment, asa cultural force. First ofall, itis a bit ofa contradiction, in that tis based on theories arrived at logically and rationally by scientists rather than, as with Expres- sionism, a new way to paint landscapes. Now, [realize that this is a huge general zation, but how specific do think Tm going togetat fourteen hundred words andcount- ng? The point is that the Surrealists were possibly the first to adhere to an intellec tual method as opposed to a technical method, in forming their art, Surrealism could be used in any medium and would still be Surrealist, chiefly because if one was to try and decipher it logically, one would eventually get a very bad headache. Conelusively, anything oould be defined as surrealist, providingit doesn't make sense, ‘and is claimed by the artist who created it (or atleast two out of three oftheir former spouses) to be art.