{"title":"‘The Constantin Guys of the atomic era’: on the poetic reception of Robert Rauschenberg by Alain Jouffroy and Surrealism","authors":"G. Parkinson","doi":"10.1080/02666286.2022.2118491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Robert Rauschenberg is not usually thought to have had much contact with Surrealism and even spoke openly about his disdain for the movement on some occasions. However, through the period 1958–69, the Surrealists showed great enthusiasm for the ‘poetic’, ‘metaphorical’ resonance of Rauschenberg’s work, a positive response that has since largely been lost. In place of that history, the interpretation of Rauschenberg by John Cage as a ‘literalist’ or ‘factualist’ gained ground and even came to define the artist’s œuvre in some quarters, a reading that Rauschenberg himself approved. Caught in the middle of these two versions of Rauschenberg are the largely untranslated texts of French poet, critic, and ex-Surrealist Alain Jouffroy (1928–2015), which form the substance of this article. Jouffroy pioneered the positive critical reception of Rauschenberg in France from 1961 while he continued to be influenced by his Surrealist past, to the point that his writings on Rauschenberg reveal consistent contradiction under close reading. The highest point of tension was reached across 1963–64 when Jouffroy wrote eulogistic poems devoted to Rauschenberg’s massive silkscreen painting Barge (1962–63) and to Surrealism in L’Antichambre de la nature (1966, written in 1964), alongside key texts of art criticism on Rauschenberg. Culminating in an analysis of the silkscreen and poems, this article argues that while Jouffroy’s writings seem ostensibly to further the Cagean interpretation of the artist, they are riven by an awkward dual loyalty that can be read in support of a ‘poetic’ ‘Surrealist Rauschenberg’.","PeriodicalId":44046,"journal":{"name":"WORD & IMAGE","volume":"3 1","pages":"176 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WORD & IMAGE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02666286.2022.2118491","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Robert Rauschenberg is not usually thought to have had much contact with Surrealism and even spoke openly about his disdain for the movement on some occasions. However, through the period 1958–69, the Surrealists showed great enthusiasm for the ‘poetic’, ‘metaphorical’ resonance of Rauschenberg’s work, a positive response that has since largely been lost. In place of that history, the interpretation of Rauschenberg by John Cage as a ‘literalist’ or ‘factualist’ gained ground and even came to define the artist’s œuvre in some quarters, a reading that Rauschenberg himself approved. Caught in the middle of these two versions of Rauschenberg are the largely untranslated texts of French poet, critic, and ex-Surrealist Alain Jouffroy (1928–2015), which form the substance of this article. Jouffroy pioneered the positive critical reception of Rauschenberg in France from 1961 while he continued to be influenced by his Surrealist past, to the point that his writings on Rauschenberg reveal consistent contradiction under close reading. The highest point of tension was reached across 1963–64 when Jouffroy wrote eulogistic poems devoted to Rauschenberg’s massive silkscreen painting Barge (1962–63) and to Surrealism in L’Antichambre de la nature (1966, written in 1964), alongside key texts of art criticism on Rauschenberg. Culminating in an analysis of the silkscreen and poems, this article argues that while Jouffroy’s writings seem ostensibly to further the Cagean interpretation of the artist, they are riven by an awkward dual loyalty that can be read in support of a ‘poetic’ ‘Surrealist Rauschenberg’.
罗伯特·劳森伯格(Robert Rauschenberg)通常被认为与超现实主义没有多少联系,甚至在某些场合公开表示他对超现实主义运动的蔑视。然而,在1958年至1969年期间,超现实主义者对劳森伯格作品的“诗意”、“隐喻”共鸣表现出极大的热情,这种积极的回应在很大程度上已经消失了。取而代之的是,约翰·凯奇(John Cage)将劳森伯格解释为“字面主义者”或“事实主义者”,这一解释获得了认可,甚至在某些方面定义了这位艺术家的œuvre,劳森伯格本人也认可这种解读。在这两个版本的劳森伯格之间,是法国诗人、评论家、前超现实主义者阿兰·茹弗罗伊(1928-2015)大部分未翻译的文本,这构成了本文的内容。自1961年以来,Jouffroy在法国率先对劳森伯格进行了积极的批评,同时他继续受到他超现实主义过去的影响,以至于他关于劳森伯格的作品在仔细阅读时显示出始终如一的矛盾。在1963年至1964年期间,Jouffroy为劳森伯格的大型丝网画《驳船》(1962年至1963年)和《自然antichambre de la nature》(1966年,写于1964年)中的超现实主义写了赞美诗,以及对劳森伯格的艺术批评的关键文本,达到了紧张的最高点。在对丝网印刷和诗歌的分析中达到高潮,本文认为,虽然Jouffroy的作品表面上似乎进一步推动了对艺术家的凯根解释,但它们被一种尴尬的双重忠诚所撕裂,这种忠诚可以被解读为支持“诗意”的“超现实主义劳森伯格”。
期刊介绍:
Word & Image concerns itself with the study of the encounters, dialogues and mutual collaboration (or hostility) between verbal and visual languages, one of the prime areas of humanistic criticism. Word & Image provides a forum for articles that focus exclusively on this special study of the relations between words and images. Themed issues are considered occasionally on their merits.