Perpetuum mobile Kolář Hanna Marciniak

In a classic article The Originality of the Avant-Garde (1981) (1) Rosalind Krauss raises the issue of originality, as being one of the key concepts of the avant-garde art theory, as well as she poses the question of its complementarity to the category of repetition. Essentially, originality may be understood as a radical “sourcefulness”, creatio ex nihilo, on the other hand, it can be associated with exceptionality and uniqueness. Another important distinction is the one between originality of the work as a separate artifact (Utopian perception is already rejected by the historical avant-garde) and originality of method, which is associated with the categories of inventiveness, innovation and experiment. Paradoxically, this avant-garde fascination with originality is right from the start accompanied by ambivalent fascination with the possibilities of technical reproduction of a work of art. On the basis of many examples of the contemporary art sensu largo (from Auguste Rodin to Sherrie Levine), Krauss argues that the duet of the original-copy/ reproduction /repetition can be perceived not necessarily from the "more valuable" side, but also from the perspective of what is incorrectly discredited. In this antinomy, “the manifold is opposed to the unitary, reproducible to unique, false to genuine, copy to original. It is the negative part of this set of concepts that the practice of critical modernism tried to reject, and which was actually banished” (2). This "forced out" part – as we will see on the example of Jiří Kolář - seems to return in the neo-avant-garde or post-avant-garde artistic movements, which have been exploring the category of repetition. This category can be understood literally, as the repetition of a particular theme or frame (3), or - more broadly - as the abolition of this fixed opposition and an emphasis on the infinite variability and variation within repetition.

According to many researchers – including Niklas Luhmann and Peter Bürger – in the historical avant-garde, the perspective of defeat and the self-ironical awareness is inherently inscribed. The avant-garde – says Josef Vojvodik – as "clearly self-referential artistic system, which - when conceptualized in an extreme way - was born from the idea of self-intentionality​​ of art, subject to pressure of permanent innovation and progressivity, which eventually condemned avant-garde design to self-negation" (4). From this perspective, the neo-avant-garde appears to be a continuation of historical trends, precisely focusing on the development of this very paradox, in the same time rejecting other props from the avant-garde repertoire, such as political involvement, historical optimism, militant rhetoric of manifests, etc. (5)

Although the interwar reception of the avant-garde in East bloc, and therefore in Czechoslovakia after 1948 (6), proceeded differently than even in the U.S., and applying the concepts of Western intellectuals seems risky, some assertions are justified, for example the one about political sobriety of the post-avant-garde or its delusion regarding the "liquidation" of art. A specific feature of the Czech post-avant-garde is the key role of surrealism as a reference point. In the texts of Jindřich Chalupecki, Karl Teige or Vratislav Effenberger, collaterally to critical concepts (post-war post-surrealism identified by the abbreviation UDS, which decrypted as "utěk do skutečnosti", that is "an escape into reality", or as "Už dost surrealismu ", i.e. "enough of surrealism"), there were affirmative notions, in which surrealism is granted a special role and is thought to re-evaluate the shallow perception of progress, also the artistic one, and to show its darker side, such as anxiety or obsessiveness. (7) Moreover, the conviction was upheld that surrealism – in František Dryje’s words - "is not art", nor does it have any particular aesthetics.

"Surrealism is not aesthetics and professes no aesthetics - says Karel Teig - there is no uniform surreal stylistic morphology. It is true that as a result of passage of time and the interactions functioning between the individual authors, some forms and methods of poetic and artistic expression are perpetuated, that we encounter later in a rather similar form in various works. A certain degree of uniformity is practically unavoidable. We should not believe any longer in individualistic fallacy of absolute originality." (8)

From the context outlined above emerges the work of Jiří Kolář, who, from the end of the 40s was associated with the Group of 42 (Skupina 42). The group’s leading theorist was Jindřich Chalupecky. In his critical writings, we can often find purely avant-garde rhetoric of art, that depicts art as a "dangerous" operation, reaching far beyond aesthetics. In an interview with Jiří Padrta (early 70s) Chalupecky states: "It seems that for false-minded people experiment and courage of art are much more dangerous than anything else. Start thinking on your own and you become more dangerous than anything that can ever be produced. All the power of art, and especially of literature, lies only in moving something into a new field of perception. If the majority of literature actually means human slavery, this is because it is at the same stage of its development as a human being who cannot even eradicate wars and famine. When barracks are more important than hospitals.” (9)

Kolář very often attempted artistic, but mainly literary, experiments. He emphasized the role of Joyce and Eliot, who created a modernist text collage, leading to a clash not only of different stylistic and narrative elements, but also time grounds.

Critics are unanimous about the fact that Kolař’s collages - created since the mid-60s, i.e. after the breakthrough signaled by the volume Básně ticha (1959 - 1961), which included the so-called evident poetry (non-verbal concrete poetry making use of a graphic sign as a material object) – do not have much in common neither with the French cubist nor surrealist tradition of collage (Braque, Picasso and Ernst), photomontage (Rodchenko, Heartfield, Lissitzky), nor of the vernacular tradition. In the Czech avant-garde and post-avant-garde, two main branches of collage developed. The first one - which could be referred to as a prototype - is a post-aesthetic pictorial poem, described by Karl Teige as result of the interaction between modern poetry, in which an increasingly important role is played by the visual sphere, and painting, which by the invention of photography became relieved from its mimetic obligations and becomes a lyrical construction. (10) The second form is a surreal collage, which was developed in different versions, from a photomontage practiced by Teige, through the "classic" collages in Ernst style, made from engravings (Jindřich Štyrský), to the installation of Jindřich Heisler, prior to concrete poetry of the 60s and 70s. (11)

For the surrealist collage - says Elza Adamowicz – it is crucial to identify its source, the well-though-of strategy of selecting and combining "prefabricates", which are subversive carriers of meaning. The semantic transformation process - next to choosing, cutting and pasting elements in one ground– is the last and most important step in creating collage.

In case of Kolář’s collages, the analogy principle and process of creating metaphors are significantly reduced, objets trouvés – the unprocessed fragments of reality - rather than evoke wonder, create a kind of quasi-realism; the used fragments of objects and reproduction stubbornly remain themselves. Subsequently, Kolář’s aesthetics is frequently compared to the Dadaist ready-mades.

Let us take a look at a series of "seuratystic” collages (Dobrý den, pane Seurate, Sólo pro kuličkové pero, Pocta G. Seuratovi) inspired by the work of the creator of pointillism. Kolář uses a dot as a certain kind of "unit" of the image, however, he produces it mechanically – using an office hole punch, and – equally mechanically – he reproduces it positioning on the paper. Unlike the original, the whole image is non-depicting. Let us recall the original comment:

"Already in the 50s, I pondered over an idea of ​​how to make a pointillist collage. Of course, the first thing which came to my mind was confetti, but it struck me at once too »cheap«, so by using a small office hole punch I extracted confetti myself. I had a possibility to find the exact paper I wanted. Such a beginning heralded however something else. I discerned the unique poetry of confetti writing, and because I knew that there were punches for different diameter, I began to punch the rings, and then used them to replace cut parts and pieces from which I previously made color or picture poems. Although I sacrificed the form of the different pieces and slices, but I had come to some order, which led me up to the round collages."(13)

The moment of originality and inventiveness is therefore moved from the idea, invention, or even "material", towards a technical innovation of realization. The discovery of a new tool, "heralds something else." The sourcefulness becomes a completely empty category, since we are dealing with multiplication and creation of the model, that created imitatively from secondary sources (other elements), is paradoxically "undisputed point of departure, where there is no earlier model, for example, a referent or text " (14) The thing that deserves attention is also Kolář’s unlimited inventiveness when it comes to inventing "genres" of collage and concrete poetry, which are often one-off genres, having only one realization. Variation, variability and modification are the keywords for Kolář’s works. Repeatability of themes, motives and symbols, is in his opinion something that absolutely one should accept, originality should be sought in the choice of experiment as the same method itself.

 

 

1. See: R. Krauss, The Originality of Avant-Garde, in: The Originality of Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths, MIT Press, Cambridge – London 1986.
2. Ibid., p. 162.
3. H. Foster, Powrót realnego. Awangarda u schyłku XX wieku, translated by M. Borowski, M. Sugiera, Universitas, Kraków 2008.
4. J. Vojvodík, Avantgarda mezi (sebe)afirmací a (sebe)kritikou,utopií jednoty uměni a života a skepsí k „viře v budoucnost”, in: Symboly obludností. Mýty, jazyk a tabu české postavantgardy 40.-60. let, red. M. Langerová, J. Vojvodík, A. Tippnerová, J. Hrdlička, Malvern, Praha 2009, p. 56.
5. See: B. Groys, Gesamtkunstwerk Stalin, Carl Hanser, München – Vienna 1988.
6. Coup of February, after which the Communist Party took over the country, meant the actual end of democracy, even in culture, and thus the recognition of avant-garde trends, especially surrealism, as "degenerate art".
7. See: J. Vojvodík, Świat strachu i strach przed światem w czeskim surrealizmie lat 30. i 40., trans. H. Marciniak, „Teksty Drugie” 2007, nr 6.
8. K. Teige, Maliřství a poesie, in: Avantgarda známá a neznámá. Sv. I – od proletářského umění k poetismu, ed. S. Vlašín, Svoboda, Praha 1971, p. 408.
9. J. Kolář, Mistr Sun o básnickém umění. Nový Epiktet. Návod k upotřebení. Odpovědi. Dílo, Sv. IV, Mladá fronta, Praha 1995, p. 253

10.  K. Teige, Maliřstvi a poesie, op. cit.

11.  I wrote more about the traditions and genres of Czech collage in article Poetyki kolażu w czeskim surrealizmie.Karel Teige – Jindřich Štyrský – Jindřich Heisler, „Artium Quaestiones” 2011, XXII.

12.  E. Adamowicz, Surrealist Collage in Word and Image: Dissecting the Exquisite-Corpse, Cambride University Press, Cambridge 1998, p. 68–69.

13.  J. Kolář, Slovník metod, red. V. Karfík, Kant, Praha 1999, p. 184.

14.  R. Krauss, The Originality of Avant-Garde, op. cit. p. 162.

Hanna Marciniak

(born in 1984) - a graduate of Polish Studies (majoring in cultural studies) and Czech studies at the Jagiellonian University, a Ph.D. student at Charles University, a translator. She is a scholarship holder of such institutions as FNP and Visegrad Fund. She is an author of the book Inwencje i repetycje. Formy doświadczenia poetyckiego w twórczości Juliana Przybosia (2009)/ Inventions and repetitions. Forms of poetic experience in the works of Julian Przyboś (2009), as well as articles and translations (including “Teksty Drugie”/ "The second texts", "Slovo a smysl", „Revue labirynt”/"Revue labyrinth",” “Pamiętnik literacki”/ " Literary Diary”, „Artium Quaestiones").