Dada vs. Neo-Dada - "Contextualizing Contemporary Art"
Contextualizing contemporary art
The Dada art movement or “Dadaism” began around 1914 in Europe. The movement was itself created in reaction to World War 1, as artists began to question the society that had allowed the atrocities of the war to occur (Dada 2019, par. 1). They placed most of the blame upon conformity and traditional values in both art and society, and therefore sought to completely reject traditional approaches to art. In this way Dada could be considered an art movement which embraced “anti-art” (Dada 2019, par. 3), and was framed as a critique on society. It accomplished this through emphasis upon the message conveyed by the art rather than just it’s appearance or façade. A major art concept popularized by Dada artists in the early 20th-century was the readymade: an “ordinary article of life” stripped of its traditional uses and significance and presented so as to create a “new thought for that object” (Ray and Duchamp 1917). The most famed example of the readymade is Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain. Duchamp submitted a signed urinal to an art exhibit in New York City and was promptly denied inclusion in the exhibition. Fountain became a huge symbol for the Dada art movement as a whole. By effectively removing the urinal’s usefulness, the purpose of the object became entirely aesthetic and Marcel believed it should therefore be considered art. This brought up a common thread throughout the Dada art movement: that the artist themselves defined what should be considered art. The act of choosing and labeling a “readymade” object for presentation as art was just as much an act of creation as a painting or handmade object would be. Fountain epitomized Dada’s rejection of conventional art practice, and many found it to be debase and meaningless as a result. Nonetheless, it has had an immense impact on art throughout the 1900’s and into the modern day.
Decades later, the 1950’s saw a resurgence of the Dadaism style in what was coined “Neo-Dada”. It began and ended in America alongside the Pop Art movement, meaning Neo-Dada drew from both Dada and Pop Art. Pop Art, in many ways exemplifying commercialism and conformity, was a stark contrast to the core principles of Dada, which offered criticism of these same principles. Some former Dada artists didn’t see Neo-Dada as an homage to Dada, but rather a derivative – a less impactful copy. While Dadaism was a rejection of traditional artistic form and practice, Neo-Dadaism was a rejection of art altogether. It leaned on absurdity and often seemed to have no meaning or message at all. Although some pieces might’ve appeared absurd or random upon first glance, at the heart of Dada artwork was a message which rejected societal norms and the boundaries set for what could be considered art. To some, Neo-Dadaism was absurd art for the purpose of absurdity, stripped of the underlying message behind its predecessor.
Neo-Dadaists, on the other hand, believed their art to have meaning through the viewer’s interpretation (Neo Dada 2019, par. 5). They accepted that art could have multiple meanings or no meaning at all, and placed more emphasis upon anti-art and anti-aesthetic than Dada had. Their work juxtaposed absurd imagery with modern materials and Pop Art to effectively question their relationship or lack thereof (Chilvers and Glaves-Smith 2009). Neo-Dadaism expanded upon the somewhat paradoxical nature of Dada. One such example is Ushio Shinohara’s “Ashura” (“Ushio Shinohara” 2019), a sculpture made from found objects. The found objects are assembled so as to depict a cartoonish man with several extra appendages: one holding a sword, another a flower, two more gripping the handlebars of the rusted-looking motorbike he sits atop. Segments of the piece are garishly painted in the same bright colors one might see in an Andy Warhol piece, while others retain their naturally dingy appearance. These found objects (often literally discarded trash) earned much of Shinohara’s work the label “junk art” (Lansroth 2015, par. 6), much like Duchamp’s repurposed urinal may’ve been regarded by some in its day. It is the inherent contrast between these aesthetically derelict found objects and the neon colors that accompany them which add another layer to fundamental Dadaism and create something entirely new.
Works Cited:
Chilvers, Ian and John Glaves-Smith. A Dictionary of Modern and Contemporary Art. Oxford University Press (2009), p. 503.
“Dada Movement Overview.” The Art Story. Accessed February 12, 2019. https://www.theartstory.org/movement-dada.htm.
Lansroth, Bob. “10 Neo Dada Art Pieces That Influenced and Shaped This Groundbreaking Art Movement.” Widewalls, October 3, 2015. https://www.widewalls.ch/neo-dada-artworks/.
“Neo-Dada Movement Overview.” The Art Story. Accessed February 12, 2019. https://www.theartstory.org/movement-neo-dada.htm.
Ray, Man and Marcel Duchamp. “The Richard Mutt Case.” Edited by Marcel Duchamp. The Blind Man, May 1917.
“Ushio Shinohara | Ashura (2014) | Available for Sale | Artsy.” 11 Artworks, Bio & Shows on Artsy. Artsy. Accessed February 12, 2019. https://www.artsy.net/artwork/ushio-shinohara-ashura.