Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 21:04:16 GMT
From: anacmar-AT-mail.telepac.pt (Carlos Martins)
Subject: Re: what is a "Metaphysical Surrealist Artist" ?  


>
>Hi all,

>[I have posted this also to alt.surrealism]

>Once again Frank has raised what I think is the most
>important and immediate two challenges we face:

>>1. How should we react to people abusing the word
>>surrealism? 2. How should surrealist art develop further?



>===========>As for #1...
>===========
>The problem is that most of the abuse is lazily passive and
>diffuse, rather than assertively intentional and focused.
>This presents a very difficult situation as any surrealist
>reader of "alt.surrealism" soon discovers.

>That space is mostly populated by what one could describe as
>the "well-meaning ignorant" -- those whose knowledge and
>experience of the surrealist movement has been filtered
>through the (grossly distorting) "popular" sources.  They've
>learned just enough perhaps, to recognize affinity but not
>yet enough to question with critical poetry.

>This is the soil from which all surrealists grow.

>Then there are what I've called the "arrogantly ignorant" --
>those who've decided (apparently on very little evidence)
>that they _know_ what surrealism is.  These are the people
>who adopt a resolutely defensive posture when challenged,
>refusing to consider the possibility that their knowledge is
>limited, or their conclusions in error.

>We need to fertilize and weed concurrently.

>Because "alt.surrealism" is one of the first places a person
>will attempt to make contact with surrealists on the net, I
>think it is important that we position our horizon in
>contrast to the fluff drifting in all that inert gas.
>Perhaps simply posting an occasional message such as this to
>it will help.

yes, i agree and i did it sometimes. However the usual response is a complete
silence over what we could say. When they don`t want to argue with
us they kept silent or indiferent. My personal experience with alt.surrealism
is that you described. Most people tend to emphazise the aesthetic way
of surrealism because is the most simple to do. Surrealism (here i have to
quote my friend Joao Garcao in "Surrealist theater in Portugal") is commonly
identified with a pictoric representation of biologically deformed caracters
with the hears on the ass and the teeth on the axillas. However all we know
that one may easily express an aesthetic surrealism and very difficultly we
can call him/her as surrealist. Even a kind of psiquic automatism (written or
painted) may be applied by many artists that aren`t surrealists themselves.
Playing games with words and so many other things that many
people can easily exhibited with very talented energy it isn`t itself as
surrealist. The essence of surrealism is its capability of rebellion in all
senses.


>We should also work to counter the misrepresentations,
>trivializations, or blatant abuse of "surrealism" which
>occurs in other media.  Perhaps a standard group response
>could be drafted, signed by all, and authorized for use
>_immediately_ and _independently_ by any signatory whenever
>such abuse is encountered.

yes i also agree. If we don`t response to those people (firm but
not necessarly with exceeding rudeness as it seems we found a wrong way with
ourselves) obviously they still remain to think wrongly about what surrealism
is but surely they will feel not so quiet when they abuse of the word.
Difficulty is when, even between us and despite the common positions after
all we maintain, there are some misinterprations about what surrealism is
beyond and fondamentally over the aesthetical way. All we saw as
was very hard to have a group response on the subject of censorship
to the M.Betancourt`s works by B & H and all we still may to see as the
subject of a social and political position on surrealism is considered
between us (even now and despite my private mail to some and my last postings
explaining the reasons i had to stop to participate in the discussion and over
all why i decided to reply to William in spanish - until now i had no response
to any of them except from Pierre and Frank). Naturally this is mostly due the
fact most of us we come from very different countries and cultures with very
different ways to represent what art, social, poetical, political
and especially Surrealism is for each one of us. However it seems there is
already a very strong link between us (even personal) in which, despite the
differences and perspectives, it seems we could keep as a very strong platform
to stand our positions.



>===========>As for #2...
>===========
>Anyone reading recent discussions on this list (or visiting
>the URL's in my "sig") knows that taking the surrealist
>project further (especially as it relates to art) is
>something that many of us have already given considerable
>thought.

yes, especially as it relates to art. I agree too.

>The key, as I see it, is to redefine the word "aesthetic"
>and make it usable in a surrealist context, so we can
>overcome the tiresome burden of those who would claim as
>"surrealist art" all random scribblings.

Since the begining of the movement the surrealists always
taken as prioritary this redefinition of the aesthetical but
despite this effort Surrealism is still considered as an aesthetical
movement. Of course all the efforts we made to change this
mentality (and your particular efforts with ARTLAB are very evident)
can be productive in that sense. However some of us (like myself)
still remains to think that the most strongest thing we can do
is precisely to move our work in a dialectical and revolutionary
way, uniting poetry and life, art and life. In this sense the efforts
(such as the need of the redefinition of the aesthetic as you told) as the
need to express (such in a creative way either as a group
intervention)  our positions about so many other fields like science,
esoterism, revolution, social, love, sex) are very productive even to help to
stop this confusion and misunderstanding about what surrealism is and wish.
After all the contributions of many of us here can be considered in that
sense of a need of redefinition of some concepts and of replacing of others
in a surrealist context. That`s obviously a very positive way to work.