Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

dimanche, 31 octobre 2010

Archère par Dragos Kalajic

drago10ba8.jpg

En souvenir de nos universités d'été communes, cher Dragos, et de notre intervention à Milan en 1999 contre l'intervention de l'OTAN en Serbie!

Que vive notre amitié au-delà de la mort !

00:10 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : serbie, art, arts plastiques, peinture | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

samedi, 30 octobre 2010

Aigle impérial par Dragos Kalajic

drago03nk2.jpg

En souvenir de notre camarade serbe Dragos Kalajic, qui a quitté nos rangs trop tôt!

Notre souvenir ému !

00:10 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (1) | Tags : serbie, tradition, art, peinture, arts plastiques | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

Filippo Marinetti

marinetti-Futurismo.jpgFilippo Marinetti

Kerry BOLTON
 
 
Filippo Marinetti is unlike most of the post-nineteenth Century cultural avant-garde who were rebelling against the spirit of several centuries of liberalism, rationalism, the rise of the democratic mass, industrialism, and the rule of the moneyed elite. His revolt against the leveling impact of the democratic era was not to hark back to certain perceived ‘golden ages’ such as the medieval eras upheld by Yeats and Evola, or to reject technology in favor of a return to rural life, as advocated by Henry Williamson and Knut Hamsun. To the contrary, Marinetti embraced the new facts of technology, the machine, speed, and dynamic energy, in a movement called Futurism.

The futurist response to the facts of the new age is therefore a quite unique reaction from the anti-liberal literati and artists and one that continues to influence certain aspects of industrial and post-industrial sub cultures. An example of a contemporary cultural movement paralleling Futurists is New Slovenian Art, which like futurism embodies music, graphic arts, architecture, and drama. It is a movement whose influence is felt beyond the borders of Slovenia. The best-known manifestation of this art form is the industrial music group Laibach.

Marinetti is also the inventor of free verse in poetry, and Futurist adherents have had a lasting impact on architecture, motion pictures and the theater. The Futurists were the pioneers of street theatre. They inspired both the Constructivist movement in the USSR and the English Vorticists Ezra Pound and Wyndham Lewis.

Marinetti was born in Alexandria Egypt in 1876. He graduated in law in Genoa in 1899. Although the political and philosophical aspects of the course held his interest, he traveled frequently between France and Italy and interested himself in the avant-garde arts of the later nineteenth Century promoting young poets in both countries. He was already a strong critic of the conservative and traditional approaches of Italian poets. He was at this time an enthusiast for the modern, revolutionary music of Wagner, seeing it as assailing “equilibrium and sobriety . . . meditation and silence . . . ”

By 1904, Futurist elements had manifested in his writing, particularly in his poem Destruction that he called “an erotic and anarchist poem,” a eulogy to the “avenging sea” as a symbol of revolution. After an apocalyptic destruction, the process of rebuilding begins on the ruins of the “Old World.” Here already is the praise of death as a dynamic and transformative.

With the death of Marinetti’s father in 1907, his wealth allowed him to travel widely and he became a well-known cultural figure throughout Europe. Nietzsche was at this time one of the most well-known intellectuals who desired liberation from the old order. Nietzsche was widely read among the literati of Italy, and D’Annunzio was the most prominent in promoting Nietzsche. Among the other philosophers of particular importance whom Marinetti studied was the French syndicalist theorist Georges Sorel, who inclined towards the anarchism of Proudhon. This rejected Marxism in favor of a society comprised of small productive, cooperative units or syndicates; and founded a new myth of heroic action and struggle. Rejecting much of the pacifism of the left. Sorel viewed war as a dynamic of human action. Sorel in turn was himself influenced by Nietzsche, and applying the Nietzschean Overman to socialism, states that the working class revolution requires heroic leaders. Sorel became influential not only among Left wing syndicalists but also among certain radical nationalists in both France and Italy.

Futurist Manifesto

Marinetti’s artistic ideas crystallized in the Futurist movement that originated from a meeting of artists and musicians in Milan in 1909 to draft a Futurist Manifesto. With Marinetti were Carlo Carra, Umberto Boccioni, Luigi Russolo and Gino Severini. The manifesto was first published in the Parisian paper Le Figaro, and exhorted youth to, “Sing the love of danger, the habit of energy and boldness.”

marinetti02The Futurists were contemptuous of all tradition, of all that is past:

We want to exult aggressive motion . . . we affirm that the magnificence of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed.

The machine was poetically eulogized. The racing car became the icon of the new epoch, “which seems to run as a machine gun.” The Futurist aesthetic was to be joy in violence and war, as “the sole hygiene of the world.” Motion, dynamic energy, action, and heroism were the foundations of “the culture of the Futurist future. The fisticuffs, the sprint and the kick were expressions of culture. The Futurist Manifesto is as much a challenge to the political and social order as it is to the status quo in the arts.

It declared:

1. We intend to sing the love of danger, the habit of energy and fearlessness.

2. Courage, audacity, and revolt will be essential elements of our poetry.

3. Up to now literature has exalted a pensive immobility, ecstasy, and sleep. We intend to exalt aggressive action, a feverish insomnia, the racer’s stride, the mortal leap, the punch and the slap.

4. We affirm that the world’s magnificence has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed A racing car whose hood is adorned with great pipes, like serpents of an explosive breath–a roaring car that seems to ride on grape shot is more beautiful than the victory of Samothrace.

5. We want to hymn the man at the wheel, who hurls the lance of his spirit across the Earth, along the circle of its orbit.

6. The poet must spend himself with ardor, splendor, and generosity, to swell the enthusiastic fervor of the primordial elements. Except in struggle, there is no more beauty. No work without an aggressive character can be a masterpiece. Poetry must be conceived as a violent attack on unknown forces, to reduce and prostrate them before man.

7. We stand on the last promontory of the centuries. Why should we look back when what we want is to break down the mysterious doors of the impossible? Time and space died yesterday. We already live in the absolute, because we have created eternal, omnipresent speed.

8. We will glorify war–the world’s only hygiene–militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of freedom-bringers, the beautiful ideas that kill, and scorn for women.

9. We will destroy the museums libraries academies of every kind, will fight moralism feminism, every opportunistic or utilitarian cowardice.

10. We will sing of great crowds excited by work, by pleasure, and by riot. We will sing of the multi-colored, polyphonic tides of revolution in the modem capitals, we will sing of the vibrant nightly fervor of arsenals and shipyards blazing with violent electric motors, greedy railway stations that devour smoke-plumed serpents, factories hung on clouds by the crooked lines of their smoke; bridges that stride the rivers like giant gymnasts, flashing in the sun with a glitter of knives; adventurous steamers that sniff the horizon: deep-chested locomotives whose wheels paw the tracks like the hooves of enormous steel horses bridled by tubing: and the sleek flight of planes whose propellers chatter in the wind like banners and seem to cheer like an enthusiastic crowd.

It is from Italy that we launch through the world this violently upsetting incendiary manifesto of ours. With it, today, we establish Futurism, because we want to free this land from its smelly gangrene of professors, archaeologists, ciceroni and antiquarians. For too long has Italy been a dealer in second-hand clothes. We mean to free her from the numberless museums that cover her like so many graveyards.

Museums: cemeteries! . . .  Identical, surely, in the sinister promiscuity of so many bodies unknown to one another. Museums: public dormitories where one lies forever beside hated or unknown beings. Museums: absurd abattoirs of painters and sculptors ferociously slaughtering each other with color-blows and line-blows, the length of the fought-over walls!

That one should make an annual pilgrimage, just as one goes to the graveyard on All Souls’ Day, that we grant. That once a year one should leave a floral tribute beneath the Gioconda, I grant you that . . .  but I don’t admit that our sorrows, our fragile courage, our morbid restlessness should be given a daily conducted tour through the museums. Why poison ourselves? Why rot? And what is there to see in an old picture except the laborious contortions of an artist throwing himself against the barriers that thwart his desire to express his dream completely? Admiring an old picture is the same as pouring our sensibility into a funerary urn instead of hurtling it far off in violent spasms of action and creation.

Do you then wish to waste all your best powers in this eternal and futile worship of the past, from which you emerge fatally exhausted, shrunken, beaten down?

In truth we tell you that daily visits to museums, libraries, and academies (cemeteries of empty exertion, Calvaries of crucified dreams, registries of aborted beginnings!) are, for artists, as damaging as the prolonged supervision by parents of certain young people drunk with their talent and their ambitious wills. When the future is barred to them, the admirable past may be a solace for the ills of the moribund, the sickly, the prisoner . . .  But we want no part of it, the past, we the young and strong Futurists!

So let them come, the gay incendiaries with charred fingers! Here they are! Here they are! . . .  Come on! set fire to the library shelves! Turn aside the canals to flood the museums! . . .  Oh, the joy of seeing the glorious old canvases bobbing adrift on those waters, discolored and shredded! . . .  Take up your pickaxes, your axes and hammers and wreck, wreck the venerable cities, pitilessly!

The oldest of us is thirty so we have at least a decade for finishing our work. When we are forty, other younger and stronger men will probably throw us in the wastebasket like useless manuscripts–we want it to happen!

They will come against us, our successors will come from far away, from every quarter, dancing to the winged cadence of their first songs, flexing the hooked claws of predators, sniffing dog-like at the academy doors the strong odor of our decaying minds which will have already been promised to the literary catacombs.

But we won’t be there . . .  At last they’ll find us–one winter’s night–in open country, beneath a sad roof drummed by a monotonous rain. They’ll see us crouched beside our trembling aeroplanes in the act of warming our hands at the poor little blaze that our books of today will give out when they take fire from the flight of our images.

They’ll storm around us, panting with scorn and anguish, and all of them, exasperated by our proud daring, will hurtle to kill us. Driven by a hatred the more implacable the more their hearts will be drunk with love and admiration for us.

Injustice, strong and sane, will break out radiantly in their eyes. Art, in fact, can be nothing but violence, cruelty, and injustice.

The oldest of us is thirty: even so we have already scattered treasures, a thousand treasures of force, love, courage, astuteness, and raw will-power, have thrown them impatiently away, with fury, carelessly, unhesitatingly, breathless, and unresting . . . Look at us We are still untired! Our hearts know no weariness because they are fed with fire, hatred, and speed . . .  Does that amaze you? It should, because you can never remember having lived! Erect on the summit of the world, once again, we hurl our defiance at the stars.

You have objections?–Enough! Enough! We know them . . .  We’ve understood! . . .  Our fine deceitful intelligence tells us that we are the revival and extension of our ancestors–Perhaps! . . .  If only it were so!–But who cares? We don’t want to understand! . . . Woe to anyone who says those infamous words to us again! Lift up your heads. Erect on the summit of the world, once again we hurl our defiance after stars!”

A plethora of manifestos by Marinetti and his colleagues followed, futurist cinema, painting, music (“noise”), prose, plus the political and sociological implications.

War, the World’s Only Hygiene

Marinetti’s manifesto on war shows the central place violence and conflict have in the Futurist doctrine.

We Futurists, who for over two years, scorned by the Lame and Paralyzed, have glorified the love of danger and violence, praised patriotism and war, the hygiene of the world, are happy to finally experience this great Futurist hour of Italy, while the foul tribe of pacifists huddles dying in the deep cellars of the ridiculous palace at The Hague. We have recently had the pleasure of fighting in the streets with the most fervent adversaries of the war and shouting in their faces our firm beliefs:

1. All liberties should be given to the individual and the collectivity, save that of being cowardly.

2. Let it be proclaimed that the word Italy should prevail over the word Freedom.

3. Let the tiresome memory of Roman greatness be canceled by an Italian greatness a hundred times greater.

For us today, Italy has the shape and power of a fine Dreadnought battleship with its squadron of torpedo-boat islands. Proud to feel that the martial fervor throughout the nation is equal to ours, we urge the Italian government, Futurist at last, to magnify all the national ambitions, disdaining the stupid accusations of piracy, and proclaim the birth of Pan-Italianism.

Futurist poets, painters, sculptors, and musicians of Italy! As long as the war lasts let us set aside our verse, our brushes, scapulas, and orchestras! The red holidays of genius have begun! There is nothing for us to admire today but the dreadful symphonies of the shrapnel and the mad sculptures that our inspired artillery molds among the masses of the enemy.

Artistic Storm Trooper

Marinetti brought his dynamic character into an aggressive campaign to promote Futurism. The Futurists aimed to aggravate society out of bourgeoisie complacency and the safe existence through innovative street theater, abrasive art, speeches, and manifestos. The speaking style of Marinetti was itself bombastic and thunderous. The art was aggravating to conventional society and the art establishment. If a painting was that of a man with a mustache, the whiskers would be depicted with the bristles of a shaving brush pasted onto the canvas. A train would be depicted with the words “puff, puff.”

Both the words and deeds of the Futurists matched the nature of the art in expressing contempt for the status quo with its preoccupation with “pastism” or the “passe.” Marinetti for example, described Venice as “a city of dead fish and decaying houses, inhabited by a race of waiters and touts.”

To the Futurist Boccioni, Dante, Beethoven and Michelangelo were “sickening” Whilst Carra set about painting sounds, noises and even smells. Marinetti traversed Europe giving interviews, arranging exhibitions, meetings and dinners. Vermilion posters with huge block letters spelling ‘futurism’ were plastered throughout Italy on factories, in dance halls, cafes and town squares. Futurist performances were organized to provoke riot. Glue was put onto seats. Two tickets for the same seat would be sold to provoke a fight. “Noise music” would blare while poetry or manifestos were recited and paintings shown. Fruit and rotten spaghetti would be thrown from the audience, and the performances would usually end in brawls.

Marinetti replied to jeers with humor. He ate the fruit thrown at him. He welcomed the hostility as proving that Futurism was not appealing to the mediocre.

Politics

Portrait of Marinetti by Carlo Carra

 

The first political contacts of Marinetti and the Futurists were from the Left rather than the Right, despite Marinetti’s extreme nationalism and call for war as the “hygiene of mankind.” There were syndicalists and even some anarchists who shared Marinetti’s views on the energizing and revolutionary nature of war and gave him a reception.

In 1909, Marinetti entered the general elections and issued a “First Political Manifesto” which is anti-clerical and states that the only Futurist political program is “national pride,” calling for the elimination of pacifism and the representatives of the old order. During that year, Marinetti was heavily involved in agitating for Italian sovereignty over Austrian-ruled Trieste. The political alliance with the extreme Left began with the anarcho-syndicalist Ottavio Dinale, whose paper reprinted the Futurist manifesto. The paper, La demolizione was not especially anarcho-syndicalist, but of a general combative nature, aiming to unite into one “fascio” all those of revolutionary tendencies, to “oppose with full energy the inertia and indolence that threatens to suffocate all life.” The phrase is distinctly Futurist.

Marinetti announced that he intended to campaign politically as both a syndicalist and a nationalist, a synthesis that would eventually arise in Fascism. In 1910, he forged links with the Italian Nationalist Association, which from its birth also had a pro-labor, syndicalist aspect. In 1913 a Futurist political manifesto was issued which called for enlargement of the military, an “aggressive foreign policy,” colonial expansionism, and “pan-Italianism”; a “cult” of progress, speed, and heroism; opposition to the nostalgia for monuments, ruins, and museums; economic protectionism, anti-socialism, anti-clericalism. The movement gained wide enthusiasm among university students.

Interventionism

The chance for Italy’s “place in the sun” came with World War I. Not only the nationalists were demanding Italy’s entry into the war, but so too were certain revolutionary syndicalists and a faction of socialists led by Mussolini. From the literati came D’Annunzio and Marinetti.

In a manifesto addressed to students in 1914 Marinetti states the purpose of Futurism and calls for intervention in the war. Futurism was the “doctor” to cure Italy of “pastism,” a remedy “valid for every country.” The “ancestor cult far from cementing the race” was making Italians “anaemic and putrid.” Futurism was now “being fully realized in the great world war.”

The present war is the most beautiful Futurist poem which has so far been seen. Futurism was the militarization of innovating artists.

The war would sweep away all the proponents of the old and senile, diplomats, professors, philosophers, archaeologists, libraries, and museums.

The war will promote gymnastics, sport, practical schools of agriculture, business and industrialists. The war will rejuvenate Italy: will enrich her with men of action, will force her to live no longer off the past, off ruins and the mild climate, but off her own national forces.

The Futurists were the first to organize pro-war protests. Mussolini and Marinetti held their first joint meeting in Milan on March 31st 1915. In April, both were arrested in Rome for organizing a demonstration.

Futurists were no mere windbags. Nearly all distinguished themselves in the war, as did Mussolini and D’Annunzio. The Futurist architect Sant Elia was killed. Marinetti enlisted with the Alpini regiment and was wounded and decorated for valor.

Futurist Party

Ritratto di Marinetti by Thayat

 

In 1918, Marinetti began directing his attention to a new postwar Italy. He published a manifesto announcing the Futurist Political Party, which called for “Revolutionary nationalism” for both imperialism and social revolution. “We must carry our war to total victory.”

Demands of the manifesto included the eight hour day and equal pay for women, the nationalization and redistribution of land to veterans; heavy taxes on acquired and inherited wealth and the gradual abolition of marriage through easy divorce; a strong Italy freed, from nostalgia, tourists, and priests; industrialization and modernization of “moribund cities” that live as tourist centers. A Corporatist policy called for the abolition of parliament and its replacement with a technical government of 30 or 40 young directors elected form the trade associations.

The Futurist party concentrated its propaganda on the soldiers, and recruited many war veterans of the elite Arditi (daredevils), who had been the black-shirted shock troops of the army who would charge into battle stripped to the waist, a grenade in each hand and a dagger between their teeth.

In December 1919, the Futurists revived the “Fasci” or “groups.” which had been organized in 1914 and 1915 to campaign for war intervention, and from which was to emerge the Fascists.

Futurists and Fascists

The first joint post-war action between Mussolini and Marinetti took place in 1919 when a Socialist Party rally was disrupted in Milan.

That year Mussolini founded his own Fasci di Combattimento in Milan with the support of Marinetti and the poet Ungasetti. The futurists and the Arditi comprised the core of the Fascist leadership. The first Fascist manifesto was based on that of Marinetti’s Futurist party.

In April, against the wishes of Mussolini who thought the action premature, Marinetti led Fascists and Futurists and Arditi against a mass Socialist Party demonstration. Marinetti waded in with fists, but intervened to save a socialist from being severely beaten by Arditi. (To place the post-war situation in perspective, the Socialists had regularly beaten, abused, and even killed returning war veterans). The Fascists and futurists then proceeded to the offices of the Socialist Party paper Avanti, which they sacked and burned.

Marinetti stood as a Fascist candidate in the 1919 elections and persuaded Toscanini to do so. Whilst the Fascists held back, the Futurists threw their support behind the poet-soldier D’Annunzio’s takeover of Fiume. Marinetti arrived and was warmly welcomed by D’Annunzio.

When the Fascist Congress of 1920 refused to support the Futurist demand to exile the King and the Pope, Marinetti and other Futurists resigned from the Fascist party. Marinetti considered that the Fascist party was compromising with conservatism and the bourgeoisie. He was also critical of the Fascist concentration on anti-socialist agitation and on opposition to strikes. Certain futurist factions realigned themselves specifically with the extreme Left. In 1922, there were several Futurist exhibitions and performances organized by the Communist cultural association, Pro-letkul, which also arranged a lecture by Marinetti to explain the doctrine of Futurism.

Futurism and the Fascist Regime

mussolini

 

When the Fascists assumed power in 1922 Marinetti, like D’Annunzio, was critically supportive of the regime. Marinetti considered: “The coming to power of the Fascists constitutes the realization of the minimum futurist program.”

Of Mussolini the statesman, Marinetti wrote: “Prophets and forerunners of the great Italy of today, we Futurists are happy to salute in our not yet 40-year-old Prime Minister of marvelous futurist temperament.”

In 1923, Marinetti began a rapprochement with the Fascists and presented to Mussolini his manifesto “The Artistic Rights Promoted by Italian Futurists.” Here he rejected the Bolshevik alignment of Futurists in the USSR. He pointed to the Futurist sentiments that had been expressed by Mussolini in speeches, alluding to Fascism being a “government of speed, curtailing everything that represents stagnation in the national life.”

Under Mussolini’s leadership, writes Marinetti:

Fascism has rejuvenated Italy. It is now his duty to help us overhaul the artistic establishment . . . . The political revolution must sustain the artistic revolutions Marinetti was among the Congress of Fascist Intellectuals who in 1923 approved the measures taken by the regime to restore order by curtailing certain constitutional liberties amidst increasing chaos caused by both out-of-control radical Fascist squadisti and anti-Fascists.

At the 1924 Futurist Congress, the delegates upheld Marinetti’s declaration:

The Italian Futurists, more than ever devoted to ideas and art, far removed from politics, say to their old comrade Benito Mussolini, free yourself from parliament with one necessary and violent stroke. Restore to Fascism and Italy the marvelous, disinterested, bold, anti-socialist, anti-clerical, anti-monarchical spirit . . .  Refuse to let monarchy suffocate the greatest, most brilliant and just Italy of tomorrow . . .  Quell the clerical opposition . . . . With a steely and dynamic aristocracy of thought.

In 1929, Marinetti accepted election to the Italian Academy, considering it important that “Futurism be represented” He was also elected secretary of the Fascist Writer’s Union and as such was the official representative for fascist culture. Futurism became a part of fascist cultural exhibitions and was utilized in the propaganda art of the regime. During the 1930s, in particular the Fascist cultural expression was undergoing a drift away from tradition and towards futurism, with the fascist emphasis on technology and modernization. Mussolini had already in 1926 defined the creation of a “fascist art” that would be based on a synthesis culturally as it was politically: “traditionalistic and at the same time modern.”

In 1943, with the Allies invading Italy, the Fascist Grand Council deposed Mussolini and surrendered to the occupation forces. The fascist faithful established a last stand, in the north, named the Italian Social Republic.

With a new idealism, even former Communist and liberal leaders were drawn to the Republic. The Manifesto of Verona was drafted, restoring various liberties, and championing labor against plutocracy within the vision of a united Europe. Marinetti continued to be honored by the Social Republic. He died in 1944.

00:05 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : italie, art, avant-gardes, futurisme, marinetti | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

dimanche, 24 octobre 2010

Hergé (1907-1983) et la tradition utopique européenne

Hergé (1907-1983) et la tradition utopique européenne

 
Par Daniel Cologne  
 
 

HergéGeorges Remi (devenu Hergé par inversion des initiales) est né à Etterbeek (Bruxelles) le 22 mai 1907 à 7h30. Il aimait à rappeler cette naissance sous le signe des Gémeaux (1). Peut-être explique-t-elle la récurrence du thème de la gémellité dans ses albums (les DupontDupond, les frères Halambique, etc.).

 

Il est également vrai que son père avait un frère jumeau. L’horoscope serait-il sans importance ? Rien n’est moins sûr. Remarquons-y la culmination exacte de Saturne (conjoint au Milieu du Ciel à 25°38’ des Poissons), statistiquement en relation avec un grand intérêt pour les savants et la science lato sensu (2).

Hergé grandit et évolue dans un milieu catholique, belgicain, fascisant et colonialiste. Tintin au Congo exalte la politique paternaliste de la Belgique en Afrique centrale. Les albums situés « au pays des soviets » et en Amérique renvoient dos à dos le communisme totalitaire et la frénésie capitaliste de l’exploitation industrielle.

Mais dès 1934, Hergé élargit sa perspective tandis que Tintin fait route vers l’Orient.

Dans Les Cigares du Pharaon, le professeur Philémon Siclone inaugure la galerie des portraits d’hommes de connaissance. Ceux-ci sont égyptologue, sigillographe (Halambique dans Le Sceptre d’Ottokar), ethnologue (Ridgewell dans L’Oreille cassée), psychiatre (Fan Se Yeng dans Le Lotus bleu), physicien (Topolino dans L’Affaire Tournesol). Quant à Tournesol lui-même, qui devient un personnage récurrent à partir du Trésor de Rackham le Rouge, il s’intéresse autant à la culture des roses (Les Bijoux de la Castafiore) qu’aux techniques de falsification de l’essence (Tintin au pays de l’or noir).

L’Île Noire envoie Tintin au large des côtes écossaises. Dans un château en ruines sévit une bande de faux-monnayeurs. La succession de symboles est évidente. Cet album de 1937 offre la contrefaçon de l’utopie insulaire, vieux thème de la littérature européenne de l’Atlantide platonicienne à sa version modernisée de Francis Bacon (1561-1626), de « l’île blanche » des Hyperboréens à la Cité du Soleil de Tommaso Campanella (1568-1639).

Au Moyen Âge, dans les récits du cycle du Graal, le château se substitue à l’île comme lieu utopique et objet de la quête.

Les premiers dessins d’Hergé paraissent dans le quotidien bruxellois Vingtième Siècle dirigé par l’abbé Wallez. Mais en 1936, l’hebdomadaire parisien Cœurs Vaillants sollicite Hergé pour la création de nouveaux personnages : Jo, Zette et leur petit singe Jocko.

Dans ces nouvelles aventures se confirment à la fois les influences de la tradition utopique européenne, les préfigurations thématiques des chefs d’œuvre futurs et la volonté d’Hergé d’en finir au préalable avec les contrefaçons.

Jo et Zette sont confrontés à des pirates qui annoncent les flibustiers du Secret de la Licorne et dont le repaire sous-marin renvoie aux motifs de l’utopie et de la contre-utopie souterraines. Le chef des pirates est un savant fou, reflet inversé du scientifique inspirant au saturnien Hergé un indéfectible respect. Les deux enfants et leur singe sont finalement recueillis sur une île par de « bons sauvages », réminiscences de Bernardin de Saint-Pierre (1737-1814). Le jeune Hergé n’est-il pas aussi l’auteur d’un Popol et Virginie chez les Lapinos, bande dessinée animalière dont le titre rappelle l’œuvre maîtresse du célèbre écrivain préromantique ?

La question des sources littéraires d’Hergé demeure controversée. Benoît Peeters estime par exemple excessifs les rapprochements qui ont été faits entre Jules Verne et Hergé.

Il n’en reste pas moins que le savant fou de la contre-utopie du fond des mers mène ses expériences dans sa cité-laboratoire à la manière de Mathias Sandorf dans son île utopique.

Dès 1942, au cœur du « combat de la couleur » (3), Hergé reçoit l’assistance d’Edgar-Pierre Jacobs pour le coloriage de ses albums antérieurs conçus en noir et blanc.

Lorsque Tintin devient un hebdomadaire en 1946, la collaboration de Jacobs s’avère précieuse. Les aventures de Blake et Mortimer reprennent le thème du savant fou (Septimus dans La Marque jaune), parfois récurrent (Miloch dans S.O.S. Météores et Le Piège Diabolique), le tandem Septimus-Miloch s’opposant par ailleurs au savant idéal que constitue le professeur Mortimer.

Parmi les autres collaborateurs du journal Tintin d’après-guerre, Raymond Macherot combine la bande dessinée animalière et l’utopie. Dans Les Croquillards, Chlorophylle et son ami Minimum parviennent à dos de cigogne dans l’île australe de Coquefredouille, où les animaux parlent comme les humains, circulent dans des voitures qui fonctionnent à l’alcool de menthe et sont organisés en une société idéale jusqu’à l’arrivée d’Anthracite, le rat noir perturbateur.

Chlorophylle et Minimum forment un couple inséparable, comme Tintin et le capitaine Haddock à partir du Crabe aux pinces d’or (1941). Chlorophylle rétablit le roi Mitron sur son trône de Coquefredouille de la même façon que Tintin restaure la monarchie syldave dans Le Sceptre d’Ottokar (1938).

La Syldavie est la principale utopie d’Hergé. Avant la guerre, elle n’est encore qu’un petit royaume d’Europe centrale reposant sur des traditions agricoles et menacée par des conspirateurs au service de la Bordurie voisine. L’Allemagne hitlérienne vient d’annexer l’Autriche. Comme pour la guerre entre le Paraguay et la Bolivie (devenus San Theodoros et Nuevo Rico dans L’Oreille cassée), Hergé s’inspire de l’actualité.

Trop perméable à « l’air du temps », Hergé se rend coupable de quelques dérapages dans L’Étoile mystérieuse (1942). Cet album nous interpelle surtout parce qu’il narre une sorte de navigation initiatique (4), à la manière du mythe grec de Jason et des Argonautes, vers une forme d’« île au trésor » (5). L’aérolithe qui s’abîme dans les flots arctiques recèle un métal inconnu sur Terre. Ce métal est la « Toison d’Or » découverte par Tintin, Haddock et leurs amis savants européens au terme d’une course qui les oppose à des Américains sans scrupules.

Onzième album dans une série de vingt-deux, en position centrale dans le corpus hergéen des aventures de Tintin, Le Trésor de Rackham le Rouge synthétise les thèmes utopiques de l’île, du château et du souterrain. Conçu en 1944, cet album met en scène une navigation infructueuse vers une île lointaine et la découverte finale du trésor dans la crypte du château de Moulinsart, et très précisément dans une mappemonde surmontée d’une statue de l’apôtre Jean. L’Apocalypse de Jean comporte vingt-deux chapitres. Cette apparente influence ésotérique sur Hergé est-elle due à la fréquentation de Jacques Van Melkebeke, initié à la Franc-Maçonnerie en 1937 ? Benoît Peeters en paraît convaincu (6).

Une chose est certaine : l’incontestable érudition littéraire de Van Melkebeke autorise à reposer le problème des sources d’Hergé, sur lesquelles le créateur de Tintin a peut-être été trop modeste (7).

Si l’île et le château sont deux thèmes majeurs de la tradition utopique européenne, l’un apparaît en filigrane de l’autre dans Le Grand Meaulnes d’Alain Fournier (1886-1914), dont aucun biographe d’Hergé ne signale l’influence. Le château des Galais est l’objet de la quête de Meaulnes. Le récit est criblé d’images marines. Alain-Fournier rêvait de devenir navigateur et a raté le concours d’admission à l’École Navale de Brest. La casquette à ancre de Frantz de Galais fait penser à celle du capitaine Haddock.

C’est avec des métaphores marines que Charles Péguy (1873-1914) présente sa région de la Beauce à Notre-Dame de Chartres, illustre vaisseau de l’architecture gothique. Péguy est un ami d’Alain-Fournier, originaire de Sologne, de l’autre côté de la Loire. Péguy est le chantre de la « cité harmonieuse » dont « personne ne doit être exclu ». Péguy est l’écrivain de référence des milieux catholiques des années vingt. L’ambiance intellectuelle où baigne le jeune Georges Remi et certains leitmotive de l’œuvre d’Hergé invitent à l’hypothèse d’une influence de Péguy et d’Alain-Fournier (8) sur le créateur de Tintin.

L’utopie souterraine apparaît dans la littérature européenne au XVIIe siècle avec l’Anglaise Margaret Cavendish (9) et dans l’œuvre d’Hergé dans l’immédiat après-guerre avec Le Temple du Soleil.

C’est en réalité la seconde partie d’un diptyque commencé avec Les Sept Boules de cristal, où l’on retrouve, comme dans L’Étoile mystérieuse, une expédition de sept savants, dont l’américaniste Bergamotte, spécialiste ès sciences occultes de l’ancien Pérou.

Cachée dans les contreforts des montagnes andines, la cité des Incas est atteinte après la périlleuse traversée d’une forêt. Le thème de l’épreuve forestière fait écho aux romans du Graal et à certains contes de Perrault (1628-1703), comme La Belle au bois dormant, dont une version est également fournie par Grimm (1786-1859).

Certes, les Incas punissent le sacrilège de mort et leur science n’est pas, sous le crayon d’Hergé, assez évoluée pour prévoir une éclipse solaire. Néanmoins, leur cité souterraine, qui abrite un trésor dérobé aux regards rapaces des conquistadores, est une sorte d’utopie dans la mesure où l’on y cultive les valeurs chevaleresques, le respect de la parole donnée, la réconciliation et la fraternisation avec l’adversaire. Au début de l’aventure, Tintin défend un petit Indien persécuté par d’odieux colons espagnols. Le grand prêtre inca observe en cachette la scène. Il comprend que Tintin n’est pas un ennemi de sa race. Bien qu’il soit chargé de barrer à Tintin la route du repaire montagnard, il lui offre un talisman protecteur.

Selon Raymond Trousson, l’étymologie du mot « utopie » est incertaine. Le terme vient du grec. Mais la racine est-elle ou-topos (le pays de nulle part) ou bien eu-topos (l’endroit où on est bien) ? L’œuvre d’Hergé est utopique dans les deux acceptions du vocable. Le château de Moulinsart est une « eutopie ». L’île au trésor inaccessible est une « outopie », cette terra australis dont ont rêvé de nombreux écrivains d’Europe, de Thomas More (1478-1535) à Nicolas Restif de la Bretonne (1734-1806).

L’utopie souterraine est conçue par Hergé comme une cité de la science (10), cachée dans les montagnes de Syldavie. De là part l’expédition vers le satellite de la Terre dans le célèbre diptyque du début des années cinquante : Objectif Lune et On a marché sur la Lune. Ainsi modernisée, la Syldavie refait irruption dans l’univers hergéen. Un savant-traître ne peut pas être totalement mauvais. Pour permettre aux autres occupants de la fusée d’économiser l’oxygène et de revenir sur Terre vivants, Wolff se sacrifie en se jetant dans le vide. Le suicide de Wolff est une autre forme de l’hommage d’Hergé à la science et aux savants.

La Syldavie apparaît une dernière fois dans L’Affaire Tournesol (1956). Pour Hergé commence l’époque du désenchantement, du brouillage des repères, de la progressive indistinction des valeurs. Les services secrets syldaves et bordures sont renvoyés dos à dos, comme le sont, dans Tintin et les Picaros (1974), les deux généraux de San Theodoros, le vieil ami Alcazar et son rival Tapioca.

Certes, entre-temps, il y a encore Tintin au Tibet (1960), Vol 714 pour Sydney (1968), où Hergé fait une concession à la mode « ufologique » (hypothèse des visiteurs extra-terrestres) et Les Bijoux de la Castafiore (1963), où Tintin se laisse enchanter par des airs de musique tzigane et où le château utopique de Moulinsart offre une étonnante unité de lieu. Les Tziganes sont accueillis dans le domaine, car ils ne sont pas « tous des voleurs », comme l’affirment stupidement les Dupont-Dupond.

L’esprit européen d’Hergé réside dans le mélange de fascination du savoir et de culte des vertus chevaleresques. Il faut y ajouter l’ouverture à l’Autre, malgré les bavures de la période d’occupation nazie. Car une question mérite d’être posée : le malencontreux financier juif de L’Étoile mystérieuse pèse-t-il si lourd au point de contrebalancer à lui seul la défense des Peaux-Rouges chassés de leur territoire pétrolifère, le secours porté au tireur de pousse-pousse chinois, au petit Zorrino et aux Noirs esclaves de Coke en Stock, la nuance admirative qui accompagne le commentaire de Tintin devant le seppuku du « rude coquin » Mitsuhirato, le plaidoyer pour les « gens du voyage » et leurs violons nostalgiques ?

Si nous sommes avec Benoît Peeters d’« éternels fils de Tintin », c’est parce que nous sommes des Européens capables de nous laisser bercer par des chants tziganes montant des clairières proches de Moulinsart et de toutes les forêts abritant nos châteaux de rêve.

Notes

1 : Benoît Peeters, Hergé. fils de Tintin, Paris, Flammarion, collection « Grandes Biographies », 2002, p. 26.

2 : Michel Gauquelin (1920-1991), Le Dossier des influences cosmiques, Éditions J’ai lu, 1973, et Les Personnalités planétaires, Guy Trédaniel Éditeur, 1975.

3 : Benoît Peeters, op. cit., p. 199.

4 : Jacques Fontaine, Hergé chez les initiés, Dervy-Livres, 2001.

5 : Le parallélisme entre Hergé et l’Écossais Robert Louis Stevenson (1850-1894) est remarquablement étudié par Pierre-Louis Augereau dans son Tintin au pays des tarots, Le Coudray-Maconard, Éditions Cheminements, 1999.

6 : Benoît Peeters, op. cit. Van Melkebeke est cité une quarantaine de fois, du début (p. 36) à la fin (p. 439) de l’ouvrage.

7 : Pudeur et modestie sont aussi des traits « saturniens » selon les statistiques astrologiques de Gauquelin.

8 : Sur la spiritualité d’Alain-Fournier, cf. Lettre inédite d’Isabelle Rivière (sœur du romancier) à Mademoiselle Renée Bauwin (étudiante à l’Institut des Sœurs de Notre-Dame de Namur), 22 janvier 1962.

9 : Raymond Trousson, Voyages aux pays de nulle part. Histoire littéraire de la pensée utopique, Éditions de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, 1999.

10 : On peut la rapprocher de la « Maison de Salomon » de Francis Bacon (Nova Atlantis), qui inspira la Royal Society anglaise.

Texte paru précédemment dans Europe-Maxima

Le 3 mars 2003 correspondait au vingtième anniversaire de la mort d’Hergé. 2007 verra le centenaire de sa naissance. Opportun est le moment de retracer l’itinéraire du créateur de Tintin.

mercredi, 13 octobre 2010

Francis Bergeron: une conférence sur Tintin et Hergé...

Francis Bergeron sera jeudi soir au Local pour donner une conférence sur Tintin et Hergé...

image-copie-2.jpg

dimanche, 19 septembre 2010

J. J. Esparza: de la postmodernité

postmodern-art-layout.jpg

 

Archives de SYNERGIES EUROPEENNES - 1986

 

De la post-modernité

 

José Javier ESPARZA

 

La post-modernité est à la mode depuis une bonne décennie. Le terme "post-moderne" a été forgé par le philosophe français Jean-François LYOTARD qui entendait exprimer un sentiment hyper-critique, généré par le désenchantement que suscitaient notre époque (in: La condition postmoderne, Editions de Minuit, Paris, 1979). Depuis lors, les interprétations du phénomène post-moderne se sont succédé pour être appliquées sans trop d'ordre ni de rigueur. On en est même venu à l'identifier à une mode musicale, ce qui, finalement, revient à ne percevoir que la partie d'un tout. La musique hyper-sophistiquée par la technique, les "comics" américains ou la bande dessinée européenne, la mode, le foisonnement des manifestations artistiques de coloration dionysia- que ne sont ni plus ni moins que des facettes de la post-modernité. Mais les facettes les plus visibles donc, a fortiori, les plus appréciées par la culture mass-médiatique. Avant toute chose, il convient de comprendre ce qui a précédé ces phénomènes pour éviter de nous fourvoyer dans une analyse trop fragmentaire de la post-modernité.

 

Présentisme et désenchantement

 

Quels sont les facteurs sociologiques qui définissent la post-modernité? Pour Fernando CASTELLO, journaliste à El Pais, il s'agit de la vogue post-industrielle, portée par l'actuelle révolution scientifique et technique qui implique l'abandon des fonctions intellectuelles à la machine et se manifeste dans l'univers social par une espèce de nihilisme inhibitoire, par un individualisme hédoniste et par le désenchante- ment (1). D'autres, tel Dionisio CAÑAS, nous décrivent l'ambiance émotionnelle de l'attitude post-moderne comme un déchantement par rapport au passé marqué par l'idéologie du "progrès". Cette idéologie a donné naissance à la modernité et aujourd'hui, sa disparition engendre une désillusion face à un présent sans relief ainsi qu'une forte sensation de crainte face au futur immédiat. L'ensemble produit une vision apocalyptique et conservatrice, négatrice de la réalité, vision qui, selon CAÑAS, coïncide avec une esthétique "réhumanisante", anti-moderne et, parfois, engagée. Une telle esthétique avait déjà été annoncée par Gimenez CABALLERO, dans son ouvrage Arte y Estado, publié en 1935 (2). Pour ces deux auteurs, il s'agit, en définitive, d'un retour au conservatisme.

 

Entendons, bien sûr, que ce conservatisme ne saurait se réduire à un mental "droitier". Guillau- me FAYE (3) parle, par exemple, d'un néo-conservatisme des gauches, régressif mais tou- jours égalitaire, qui survient lorsque le progressisme se rétracte en un présent sans perspective, une fois coupées la mémoire et la dimension vivantes du passé. La post-modernité, l'attitude post-moderne, restent "progressistes" (du moins en paroles) et égalitaire, mais le progrès qu'elles évoquent est mis à l'écart lorsqu'il affronte, dans la réalité concrète, un futur incertain et critique. Le discours progressiste est, à l'épreuve des faits, freiné et immobilisé par la menace d'une crise mondiale. Mais s'il veut conserver sa valeur et sa légitimité, il doit continuer sa marche en avant tout en maintenant son utopie de normalisation du monde. Le résultat est que l'utopie progressiste commence à perdre sa crédibilité, faisant place à une forme élégante et sophistiquée de présentisme en laquelle le lyrisme technique de la modernité devient un snobisme technologique.

 

Le manque de perspectives que nous offre le futur crée un vide fatal, une sensation de désenchantement vis-à-vis du présent. Dans la modernité, le présent avait toujours été la préfiguration du futur, sa mise en perspective, qu'il s'agissait de la lutte des classes pour une société communiste ou de la normalisation légale pour aboutir au règne sans partage de la société marchande. Lorsque l'idéologie sociale, la modernité, n'a plus la possibilité de préfigurer quoi que ce soit, la post-modernité émerge. Mais pourquoi la modernité n'est-elle plus à même d'offrir un futur? Pourquoi est-on arrivé au point final de la modernité?

 

La mort du finalisme

 

L'idée de fin se trouve dans l'embryon même des idéologies de la modernité. Toutes partent d'un point de départ négatif (exploitation d'une classe prolétaire par une classe plus élevée, impossibilité de mener à bien les échanges naturels entre les individus, etc.) pour arriver à un point final positif (la société sans classes, le libre-échange, etc.). Dès lors, le finalisme est partie intégrante de la modernité en tant qu'idéologie.

 

Il est évident que la modernité n'est pas seulement une idéologie. La modernité est un phénomène ambigu parce qu'elle contient tant une idéologie homogénéisante et inorganique qu'un vitalisme transformateur de la nature organique. Ainsi, aux yeux d'Oswald SPENGLER, la modernité présente d'un côté la vitalité faustienne et aventurière qui est en grande partie à la base de la force d'impulsion du devenir historique européen, mais d'un autre côté, elle présente des tendances meurtrières qui prétendent normaliser (moderniser) la planète entière, en promouvant une vision inorganique. Une telle normalisation signifie pour SPENGLER la fin de l'âge des "hautes cultures" (Hochkulturen), la fin de l'ère des spiri- tualités et de la force vitale des peuples. Il existe donc un divorce entre la modernité comme vitalisme, comme aventure, comme "forme". La première est la vision progressiste de l'histoire, la seconde est la vision tragique du monde et de la vie. La première est celle qui a prédominé.

 

Le souci d'homogénéiser et de normaliser le monde, pour qu'il accède enfin à la fin paradisiaque promise, trouve son cheval de bataille dans l'idéologie du progrès, véhiculant une vision du temps linéaire qui relie le monde réel négatif au monde idéal positif. Cette particularité rappelle ce que NIETZSCHE nommait l'inversion socratique: la césure du monde en deux mondes, germe de toutes les utopies. Le progrès idéologique se perçoit comme matrice de la modernité. Mais ce progrès signifie aussi la certitude de l'existence d'un point final, puisqu'on ressent l'infinitude du progrès comme une hypocrisie et que, dans ce cas, il faudra un jour cesser de croire en lui. NIETZSCHE n'a-t-il pas écrit dans l'Antéchrist: "L'humanité ne représente pas une évolution vers quelques chose de meilleur ou de plus fort, ou de plus haut, comme on le croit aujourd'hui; le progrès est purement une idée moderne; c'est-à-dire une idée fausse". Par sa propre nature, la notion de progrès implique la fin de l'histoire. C'est ce que pressentait sans doute Milán KUNDERA, lorsqu'il écrivait: "Jusqu'à présent, le progrès a été conçu comme la promesse d'un mieux incontestable. Aujourd'hui cependant, nous savons qu'il annonce également une fin" (4). Cette certitude qu'une fin surviendra est cela précisément qui produit le désenchantement. Tous les finalismes sont à présent morts parce qu'ils ne sont légitimes que dans la mesure où ils atteignent un but hic et nunc.

 

Régression et fin de l'histoire

 

Mais quid dans le cas où l'on affirmerait aucun finalisme? Dans le cas où l'on ne prétendrait pas arriver à une fin de l'histoire, à la fin des antagonismes et des luttes entre volontés oppo- sées? Cette conclusion, consciemment ou inconsciemment, des milliers d'intellectuels l'ont déjà tirée. En se posant une question très simple: où se trouve ce fameux paradis annoncé par les progressistes? La réponse est lapidaire: nulle part. Déduction: la seule possibilité qui reste pour sauver l'utopie, c'est de cultiver une idéologie de la régression. On passe de ce fait à un culte du "régrès" qui remplace la culte du "progrès" devenu désuet et sans objet.

 

Ce n'est pas un hasard si la gauche de notre époque vire au "vert" et à un certain passéisme idyllique. Pour la gauche actuelle, l'Arcadie pastoraliste s'est substituée à l'Utopie constructiviste. Cette mutation est dans la logique des choses. Le progrès avait été conçu selon une double optique: idéologique et technologique. Le progrès technologique, véhiculé par cet esprit faustien et aventurier (SPENGLER), qui donna toute son impulsion au développement de l'Europe, a, plutôt que de normaliser et de pacifier, créé plus de tensions et d'antagonismes. Prométhée, dit-on, est passé à droite... La gauche a réagi, consciente que le progrès technique était par définition sans fin et limitait ipso facto son "monde idéal"; elle délaissa la technique, abandonna son promé- théisme (sauf, bien sûr en URSS où le technicisme marxiste se couple au mythe de Gengis Khan). La gauche a opéré un tour de passe passe conceptuel: elle n'a plus placé la fin de l'histoire, l'homogénéisation de la planète, dans un avenir hypothétique. Sur le plan des idées et de la praxis, elle a replacé cette fin dans l'actualité. Attitude clairement observable chez les idéologues de l'Ecole de Francfort et leurs disciples.

 

Cette mutation s'est effectuée de manière relativement simple. Il s'agit, dans la perspective actuelle de la gauche, de vivre et de penser comme si la révolution et le paradis sans classes, idéaux impossibles à atteindre, existaient de manière intemporelle et pouvaient être potentialisés par l'éducation, le combat culturel et la création de mœurs sociales nouvelles. On constate que la gauche intellectuelle effectue cette mutation conceptuelle au moment où sociaux-démocrates et sociaux-libéraux affirment de fait la fin de l'histoire parce qu'ils estiment, sans doute avec raison, que leur société-marché a abouti. On croit et l'on estime qu'est arrivé le moment d'arrêter le mouvement qui a mis fin jadis à l'Ancien Régime et implanté l'ordre social-bourgeois.

 

Mais que faire si ce mouvement ne s'arrête pas partout, en tous les points de la planète? Si le principe de révolution agite encore certains peuples sur la Terre? En Occident, on a décrété que l'histoire était terminée et que les peuples devaient mettre leurs volontés au frigo. Et en ce bel Occident, c'est chose faite. Elles croupissent au frigidaire les volontés. Ailleurs dans le monde, la volonté révolutionnaire n'est pas extirpée. Le monde effervescent du politique, la Vie, les relations entre les peuples et les hommes n'obéissent pas partout à la règle de la fin des antagonismes. Croire à cette fiction, c'est se rendre aveugle aux motivations qui font bouger le monde. C'est déguiser la réalité effeverscente de l'histoire et du politique avec les frusques de l'idéologie normalisatrice et finaliste.

 

Là nous percevons clairement la contradiction fondamentale de la société post-moderne.

 

Un doux nihilisme

 

Dans de telles conditions, nos sociétés ne peuvent que vivre en complet dysfonctionnement. D'un côté, nous avons un monde idéal, suggéré par les idéologies dominantes, conforme à ses présupposés moraux qu'il convient de mettre en pratique dans sa vie quotidienne pour ne pas se retrouver "marginal" (humanitarisme, égalitarisme, bien-être). D'un autre côté, nous voyons un monde réel qui, en aucun cas, n'obéit à l'idéologie morale moderne et qui nous menace constamment d'une crise finale, d'une apocalypse terrible.

 

La technique qui nous permet de survivre dans cette contradiction est simple: c'est la politique de l'autruche. Le divorce entre les deux réalités crée une formidable schizophrénie sociale. Selon les termes de BAUDRILLARD: Perte du rôle social, déperdition du politique... De toutes parts, on assiste à une perte du secret, de la distance et à l'envahissement du domaine de l'illusion... Person- ne n'est actuellement capable de s'assumer en tant que sujet de pouvoir, de savoir, d'histoire (5). Le spectateur a supplanté l'acteur. Quand les hommes, les citoyens avaient un rôle, le jeu social détenait un sens. N'étant plus que des spectateurs impuissants, tout sens s'évanouit. Et derrière le spectacle, en coulisses, se déploie un monde qui n'a rien à voir avec celui qui nous est offert, suggéré, vanté. Le système cherche à ce que nous vivions comme si la fin de l'histoire, du politique, du social était déjà survenue. Autrement dit, le système simule la disparition du sens que nous évoquions.

 

Il ne reste plus aux hommes qu'à s'adonner au nihilisme "soft" d'un monde sans valeurs. Mais le sens des valeurs a-t-il réellement disparu? Non. Il se cache. Il est imperceptible dans les sociétés de consommation de masse d'Europe mais reste vivace là où se manifeste une volonté collective d'affirmation. Du point de vue de l'idéologie occidentale dominante, les signes d'un tel sens restent cachés comme un visage derrière un masque. Pourtant, ce visage est celui d'un être bien vivant. C'est ce qui explique pourquoi l'homo occidentalis ne mesure les phénomènes nationalistes du Tiers-Monde que sous l'angle de folies individuelles alors qu'en réalité, il s'agit de volontés nationales d'échapper à la dépradation américaine ou soviétique. Dans nos sociétés, au contraire, il n'y a déjà plus de volonté collective mais il règne un individualisme englouti dans l'indifférence généralisée de la massification. C'est un univers où chacun vit et pense comme tous sans pour autant sortir de son petit monde individuel. C'est là une autre forme de nihilisme et l'on ne détecte rien qui puisse affirmer une quelconque volonté.

 

Cet individualisme a déteint sur toute la société post-moderne. Il a suscité tous les phénomènes qui caractérisent ce post-modernisme, y compris ce nihilisme hédoniste, né de la disparition du sens. Gilles LIPOVETSKI confirme cet individualisme intrinsèque de la société post-moderne en énumérant les traits qui la caractérisent: recherche de la "qualité de la vie", passion pour la personnalité, sensibilité "écolo", désaffection pour les grands systèmes qui exigent la motivation, culte de la participation et de l'expression, mode rétro,... (6).

 

Arrêtons nous un moment à ce culte de la participation et de l'expression qui sont symptômes supplémentaires de la schizophrénie sociale et, par là, facteurs de nihilisme. Il existe dans nos sociétés une impulsion de type moral qui appelle constamment à la participation dans la vie publique et à l'expression de la volition individuelle par le biais de la communication. Ainsi, l'on prétend que nos sociétés sont des sociétés de communication, thème que l'on retrouve chez des auteurs aussi éloignés l'un de l'autre que HABERMAS, MARSHALL McLUHAN ou Alvin TOFFLER. Mais où participer, où s'exprimer quand les institutions qui avaient traditionnelle- ment la fonction de canaliser ces pulsions et ces nécessités ont cessé de posséder un sens, ont succombé aux impulsions commerciales de la communication de masse? Comme l'a vu justement BAUDRILLARD (7), le système appelle sans cesse à la participation, il veut sortir la masse de sa léthargie, mais la masse ne réagit pas: elle est trop bien occupée à assurer son bien-être individuel. La participation et l'expression jouent aujourd'hui le même rôle de norme sociale que l'idée que le souverain était l'incarnation d'un pouvoir divin. Actuellement, les normes morales  -déjà non politiques-  du système social-démocratique ne sont qu'un simple vernis, comme le fut, à la fin du XVIIème siècle, l'idée du souverain comme principe incarnateur. Cela signifierait-il que nous sommes à la fin d'un cycle? En termes clairs: le silence des masses, l'impossibilité des dogmes fondamentaux du système démocratique signifie- raient-ils le terme, la mort de l'idée démocratique de participation du peuple, laissant cette participation à une simple fiction juridique, comme le pense Jürgen HABERMAS (8)?

 

Ainsi, l'impossibilité de réaliser ce qui paraît le plus important dans toute société démocratique qui se respecte pourrait donner naissance à un nouveau facteur de nihilisme qui s'ajouterait à ceux déjà énumérés. D'autre part, à la vision apocalyptique inhérente à tout finalisme, se joignent actuellement divers paramètres de crise: économiques, écologiques, géostratégiques... Tous pourraient, à un moment donné, converger. En réalité, la crise est l'état habituel du monde depuis que l'homme existe sur cette planète. Le sens que l'on donnait à la vie était celui qui réduisait l'acuité des crises; il y avait alors quelque chose à leur opposer. Aujourd'hui, en revanche, la crise se profile avec netteté et le consensus a disparu. L'appareil macroéconomique transnational qui régit actuellement l'Occident est occupé à régulariser un système de crise. Mais cette crise ne peut être régularisée indéfiniment. Après la crise viendra inéluctablement la guerre... ou une autre situation conflictuelle qui ne prendra pas nécessairement le visage de la confrontation militaire directe; Songeons aux guerres économiques et culturelles qui affaiblissent déjà l'Europe, avec parfois la frappe chirurgicale et précise d'un terrorisme manipulé...

 

Parier pour l'interrègne

 

Le nihilisme de notre actuelle quotidienneté n'a rien à voir avec le nihilisme classique, exprimé par le terrorisme urbain et le chaos social. Le nihilisme actuel est un nihilisme doux, "soft", accepté comme tel par le système en tant que rouage de son mécanisme complexe. Un nihilisme qui peut se présenter comme inhibiteur, c'est-à-dire comme une acception des normes politiques et morales du système couplée à un refus d'avaliser son fonctionnement et les hiérarchies qu'il implique. Mais un nihilisme qui peut aussi se présenter comme nihilisme "exhibé", comme c'est le cas pour les "nouveaux barbares". Finalement, aucun des deux modèles n'est réellement nocif pour le système. Ce flou est précisément ce qui fait de la post-modernité une époque potentiellement décisive, dans la mesure où on peut franchement la définir comme un interrègne. Interrègne obscur, chargé d'ivresse dionysiaque sourde, comme nous l'a décelé Guillaume FAYE (9). Interrègne qui est prémisse de quelque chose d'encore incertain. Quelque chose qui pourrait rendre à notre monde son enthousiasme, son sens de l'aventure, la nécessité du risque et la volonté de prendre à nouveau des décisions. Tel est le pari de tout interrègne.

 

Giorgio LOCCHI écrit que les représentants les plus autorisés de la Révolution Conservatrice allemande du temps de Weimar, de JüNGER à HEIDEGGER, ont appelé "interrègne" cette période d'attente durant laquelle le destin bascule entre deux possibilités: 1) achever le triomphe de la conception du monde égalitaire avec sa "fin de l'histoire" ou 2) promouvoir une régénération de l'histoire (10). La post-modernité actuelle est un interrègne. Pour cela elle peut être le creuset d'une nouvelle révolution culturelle comme celles qu'a connues l'Europe tout au long de son histoire. En dernière instance, la balance penchera de l'un ou de l'autre côté...

 

Dès lors, nous pouvons affirmer qu'il existe quatre attitudes fondamentales en jeu actuellement. L'une de ces attitudes est proprement post-moderne, elle est hédoniste, éclectique, dionysiaque, indécise. Cette atittude-là est celle du pari pour les mutations superficielles mais contestatrices. Une deuxième attitude est également conforme au système; elle intériorise les présupposés "progressistes" et prône l'aveuglement face à l'histoire en marche, face au devenir du réel; elle fuit tout espèce de pari. Une troisième attitude pourrait être celle de nouveaux barbares, citadins ou ruraux. Elle consiste à sortir du système, à en sortir psychiquement pour les premiers, physiquement pour les secondes. Il s'agit de tuer les parieurs en "cassant le jeu". Enfin, la quatrième attitude est l'attitude faustienne et aventurière: miser et gagner. Mais pour quel enjeu? La régénération de l'histoire européenne. La décision de miser constitue alors un moment-clef.  Telle pourrait être l'attitude d'une Nouvelle Révolution, inspirée de la révolution conservatrice allemande des années 20. Tous les révolutionnaires conservateurs, écrit Louis DUPEUX (12), se définissent comme résolument modernes... Loin de la peur et des tourments qu'engendre le pessimisme conservateur traditionnel, la Révolution Conservatrice dégage une modernité contre le modernisme ou le progressisme, une contre-modernité. Il s'agit, en clair de se décider pour le côté organique de la modernité et d'abandonner les chimères inorganiques. Accepter et assumer la modernité comme forme vitale, comme impulsion et non comme sens orienté vers un finalisme inéluctable (et finalement misérabiliste) qu'on n'atteindra en fin de compte jamais. Rappellons-nous l'expression de JüNGER: fondre passé et futur en un présent vivant, ardent.

 

Il faut que dès maintenant, ceux qui ont décidé de parier pour cette nouvelle révolution spirituelle prennent conscience que le destin de notre culture et de notre continent se trouve entre leurs mains. Il serait toutefois assez ingénu de rejeter simplement les manifestations sociales et esthétiques de la post-modernité au nom d'un "conservatisme" qui, au bout du compte, ne pourrait conduire à rien. Il s'agit de savoir ce que peut donner comme résultat "l'orgiasme" en lequel se plonge la post-modernité. FAYE a écrit que dans les orgies romaines, seul l'amphitryon reste sobre: parce que le "climax", l'apogée du dionysisme n'est autre que le signal du prochain retour d'Apollon. Dans la perspective de cette nouvelle révolution culturelle, notre nouvelle révolution culturelle, la post-modernité ne peut être que la certitude, esthétique et mobilisatrice, que Dionysos sait ce qu'il fait même si ses serviteurs ignorent ses desseins.

 

Javier ESPARZA.

(traduction française de Rogelio PETE).

 

Cet article de Javier ESPARZA, traduit par Rogelio PETE est extrait de la revue PUNTO Y COMA (N°2, décembre 85 - février 1986). Adresse: Revista PUNTO Y COMA, Apartado de Correos 50.404, Madrid, España. Tel.: 410.29.76. Abonnement pour six numéros pour tout pays européen: 2600 pesetas. Tarif étudiant: 2200 pesetas.

 

Notes

 

(1) Castello, F., Tiempos Posmodernos, El Pais, 30/1/1985.

(2)  Cañas, D., La posmodernidad cumple 50 años en España, El Pais, 28/4/1985.

(3) Faye, G., La modernité, ambigüités d'une notion capitale, in: Etudes et Recherches n°1 (2ème série), printemps 1983.

(4) Kundera, M., cité par Régis Debray in Le pouvoir intellectuel en France, Ramsay, Paris, 1979.

(5) Baudrillard, Jean, Les stratégies fatales, Grasset, 1983.

(6) Lipovetsky, G., L'ère du vide, Gallimard, 1983.

(7) Baudrillard, J., Cultura y Simulacro, Kairos, 1984.

(8) Habermas, J., Historia y crítica de la opinión pública, Gili, Col. Mass Media, 1982.

(9) Faye, G., La nouvelle société de consommation, Le Labyrinthe, 1984.

(10) Locchi G., Wagner, Nietzsche e il mito sovrumanista, Akropolis, 1982.

(11) L'auteur du présent article ne trouve pas, dans la "révolution conservatrice" actuelle des Etats-Unis, d'éléments valables pour une régénération historico-culturelle de l'Europe. Il estime que ces éléments sont davantage à rechercher dans le sillage de la "Nouvelle Droite" française et des mouvements qu'elle a influencé ou dont elle a reçu l'influence en Europe.

(12) Dupeux L., Révolution Conservatrice et modernité, in Revue d'Allemagne, Tome XIV, Numéro 1, Janvier-Mars 1982.

 

samedi, 11 septembre 2010

Konstantin Vasiliev: Aigle

KVaigle.jpg

Ex: http://www.vasilyev-museum.ru/

00:10 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : russie, peinture, art, arts plastiques | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

mercredi, 01 septembre 2010

Kunstexpositie: Magievan de Herinnering

Kunstexpositie: Magie van de Herinnering
Op zondag 5 september 2010 zal Dr. Pavel Tulaev, directeur van het Russisch tijdschrift "Atheneum", in Vlaanderen te gast zijn om enkele hedendaagse Russische schilderijen voor te stellen.

De echte werken naar hier halen is op zo'n korte tijd onbegonnen werk. Daarom zullen de bezoekers kennis kunnen maken met prachtige reproducties. Deze reproducties zullen ter plaatse aan een prijsje aangekocht kunnen worden.

Dr. Pavel Tulaev bezoekt Vlaanderen nadat hij in Italië deelneemt aan het World Congress for Ethnic Religions.

U krijgt, met de medewerking van Euro-Rus, een unieke gelegenheid om met Dr. Pavel Tulaev en de werken van Russsische kunstenaars kennis te maken.

De gallerijtentoonstelling vindt plaats te Dendermonde, zaal-taverne 't Peird, Kasteelstraat 1, vlakbij de Grote markt en op korte wandelafstand van het station. De deuren gaan open om 11u00. Dr.Pavel Tulaev zal het woord nemen om 11u30. De gallerijtentoonstelling eindigt om 16u00.

Het wordt voor u zeker en vast een interessante en leuke zondagmiddag.

Wij hopen u dan in Dendermonde te mogen begroeten,

Euro-Rus

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Pavel Tulaev is de drijvende kracht achter het Russischtalige tijdschrift "Atheneum", reeds in 20 verschillende landen verkrijgbaar en verkocht. Hij zag het levenslicht op 20 februari 1959 te Krasnodar, Zuid-Rusland.

In Moskou studeerde hij in 1982 af aan aan de Moskouse linguistische staatsuniversiteit met specialisaties voor Spaans, Engels en Frans.

Hij is de drijvende kracht achter deze nieuw rechtse Russische denktank, die zich buigt over vraagstukken die de Russische, Slavische en Indo-Europese volkeren aangaan. Hij schreef zeer interessante en aan te raden stukken over Rusland, de Slaven, de Vierde Wereldoorlog, e.a. Verschillende werden reeds op de pagina's van Euro-Rus gepubliceerde.

Hij publiceerde reeds meer dan 100 stukken over Rusland, Europa, Latijns-Amerika en de Verenigde Staten. Hij gaf reeds verschillende boeken uit : «Крест над Крымом» (1992), «Семь лучей» (1993), «К пониманию Русского» (1994), «Консервативная Революция в Испании» (1994), «Франко: вождь Испании» (1998), «Венеты: предки славян» (2000), «Афина и Атенеи» (2006), «Русский концерт Анатолия Полетаева» (2007), «Родные Боги в творчестве славянских художников» (2008).

In niet-Russische talen publiceerde hij volgende teksten : Rusia y España se descubren una a otra. Sevilla, 1992; Sobor and Sobornost, – "Russian Studies in Filosophy", N.Y., 1993, vol. 31, № 4; Deutschen und Russen – Partneur mit Zukunft? – "Nation & Europa", 1998, № 11/12; Les guerres de nouvelles génération, – "Nouvelles de Synergies Européennes", Brussel, 1999, № 39; Intretien avec Pavel Toulaev, – Ibidem, № 40; Atak I zwyciestwo kazdego dnia.– "ODALA", SZCZECIN, 1999, numer V; Veneti: predniki slovanov.– Tretji venetski zbornik – Editiones Veneti, Ljubljana 2000; Сiм променiв – «Сварог», Киiв, 2003; Венети (превео са руског Владимир Карич), Београд, 2004; Pavel Tulaev: «Deutschland und Russland», "Der Vierte Weltkrieg" – DEUTSCHLAND UND RUSSLAND. Deutsche Sonderausgabe der Zeitschrift ATHENAEUM, Moskau, 2005; BUYAN SPEAKS. An interview with Pavel Tulaev conducted by Constantin von Hoffmeister for National Vanguard (USA), 2005; Рiдним богиням i берегиням – «Сварог», Киiв, 2006; Pavel Tulaev «Euro-Russia in the context of World War IV», Moscow, 2006; Pavel Toulaev «L'Euro-Russie dans le contexte de la Quatrieme Guerre Mondiale» Moscau, 2006; «La Russie: le grand retour» – Reflechir & Agir (Toulouse) №23, 2006; Pavel Tulaev «España y Rusia: dos suertes analogas» Discurso pronunciado en Madrid 4.11.2006; Павел Тулаев «Русия и Европа в условията на Четвърта Световна Война» 2006; ИнтервЉу са Павелом ТулаЉевом БУ£АН ГОВОРИ! (2007); Interview with Andrej Sletcha (Prage, 2008); etc.

Ook organiseerde hij verschillende congressen, waaronder het succesvolle congres van 2007 te Moskou "Europa en Rusland, verschillende perspectieven" waar Kris Roman Euro-Rus vertegenwoordigde.

Van 17 tot en met 25 juni 2010 organiseerde Dr. Pavel Tulaev een tentoonstelling van Russisch-Slavische meesterwerken. Met hetzelfde doel bevond hij zich reeds in West-Europese steden zoals Parijs.

http://www.ateney.ru/art/index.htm

vendredi, 09 avril 2010

Avant-Garde Fascism

Avant-Garde Fascism

antliffAvant-Garde Fascism: The Mobilization of Myth, Art, and Culture in France, 1909–1939
Mark Antliff
Durham and London: Duke University Press,  2007

Mark Antliff, a professor of Art, Art History, and Visual Studies at Duke University, has put together a useful analysis of the cultural-aesthetic memes utilized by French fascists of 1909-1939 to promote their visions of national renewal. Antliff’s analysis focuses on the connection between fascist ideologies and the European avant-garde, which most people would more likely associate with the anti-national left. Antliff is fairly even handed in the book, with the occasional use of scare quotes to express his skepticism/disdain for certain “fascist ideas.”

In contrast, I believe his use of the term “democracy” should always have scare quotes, as “democratic” systems deceive the populace into believing that someone other than self-interested elites are running the show; however, apparently, Antliff and I disagree on our political preferences. Antliff also concludes the book with a line about how the ideas of the French fascists were not able to stem the tide of the “bloodshed” caused by the military aggressions of Hitler and Mussolini (including the invasion of France). Very well. One hopes an academic will write about the real blood that has been shed imposing “equality” on “the people” – either that of the mass-murdering Marxists or the genocidal globalist multiculturalists and their plans for a multiracial West. So much for my complaints about the book. What about fascism and avant-garde aesthetics?

Roger Griffin, in his Fascism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), famously described fascism as “palingenetic populist ultra-nationalism” – making the elements of renewal, rebirth, and regeneration central to all permutations of this ideology. It is also important to differentiate between real fascism and “para-fascist” ersatz fascism. Para-fascism is often confused with real fascism in the public mind, which gives the false impression that fascism is ossified reactionary conservatism, rather than a revolutionary movement interested in avant-garde themes and ideas.

The differences between real revolutionary fascism and para-fascism are easily summarized: Para-fascist regimes are authoritarian, traditionalist, reactionary regimes, often military dictatorships, that fossilize a status quo favoring traditional elites of business, nobility, religion, and the military. Such regimes want nothing to do with the revolutionary and palingenetic aspects of true fascism; the idea that the secular religious, Futuristic, and avant-garde characteristics of, say, (early) Italian Fascism has anything to do with Franco’s Spain or Pinochet’s Chile is absurd.

fortunato_depero_1945Indeed, as Griffin makes clear, fascists and para-fascists are usually, by their very nature, bitter enemies. While para-fascists may co-opt some superficial characteristics of their fascist opponents, in power they tend to ruthlessly suppress the expression of revolutionary fascism. When para-fascism attempts to co-opt fascism by sharing power – as Antonescu attempted in Romania with the Legionaries — conflict is inevitable, since the objectives of the two parties are completely different: para-fascist ossification vs. fascist palingenetic regeneration. Thus, in Romania, civil war between para-fascists and fascists led to the victory of the para-fascists, and the exile of the fascist forces. The idea that Antonescu was “fascist” is a byproduct of either ideological ignorance or ideological mendacity, a Marxist desire to strip their fascist competitors of revolutionary dynamism and reduce them to mere “bourgeois hooligans.”

Not all fascisms were equally “fascist” and revolutionary, and even individual fascist movements have oscillated between revolutionary ideals and borderline reactionary para-fascism.

For example, Italian fascism went through three distinct phases. In the years before the seizure of power and in the first half-dozen years of Mussolini’s regime, Italian fascism was in its “purest” form – revolutionary and palingenetic – emphasizing the regeneration of the Italian people and the Italian nation-state. Avant-garde themes and theorists, particularly Futurism, were important in this period, and individuals such as Marinetti were influential in early day Italian fascism.

However, the forces of reaction and of compromise with the establishment were always present; the presence of the King and the Vatican were two impediments to the process of “fascistization” that Mussolini could not, or would not, deal with. In the end, the Concordat was a turning point and the regime’s second phase veered to the “right” in the 1930s, becoming more conservative and reactionary, replacing internal regeneration with external imperialism. Without WW II, chances were good that Italian fascism would have degenerated into a stagnant para-fascist regime similar to that of Franco’s Spain.

Military defeat and the overthrow of Il Duce stopped that process; in the last and third phase of Italian fascism, the “Salo Republic,” the ideology shifted to the left, embracing a militant socialism, and becoming overtly pan-European in scope.

What about the Hitler and the Nazis? There has been some debate as to whether German National Socialism was a form of fascism. It seems to me obvious that it was; that differences existed between the Italian and German forms of fascism is not an argument against that conclusion. All genuine fascisms displayed important differences, yet still contained within themselves the core components of Griffin’s “palingenetic populist ultra-nationalism.”

In the case of National Socialism, the palingenesis was biological; Nazism was a heavily racialized and materialist form of fascism. The German National Socialists were tribalistic in worldview rather than Futurist, and, internal debates aside; Hitler himself was very hostile to the European avant-garde.

Thus, key differences between fascist forms are observed. The German brand had the biopolitical advantage of recognizing the importance of race. On the other hand, the Italian brand had the sociopolitical advantage of a more optimistic Futurist orientation, and was more open-minded with respect to tapping into the cultural energies created by the avant-garde artistic and sociopolitical movements extant in the first decades of the twentieth century.

eur-sq-colosseoIn some sense, perhaps the “purest” brand of fascism was that of Codreanu and his “Legion of the Archangel Michael,” also known as the Iron Guard. This intensely palingenetic movement emphasized spiritual and moral regeneration to create a Romanian “New Man” to lead the nation to a higher level and fulfill the destiny of the Romanian people. This highly “virulent” form of “palingenetic populist ultra-nationalism” proved itself unable to co-exist with Antonescu’s conservative authoritarian para-fascism; the Legionary movement’s attempt to seize full power for itself (rather than share it with para-fascists; this sharing was correctly seen by the Legionaries as being an emasculating compromise of their ideology) was crushed by the para-fascist military apparatus.

Three fascisms, three different movements. But the revolutionary energies unleashed by these ideologies stand in sharp contrast to the moribund and ossified conservatism of the para-fascists. The political/cultural avant-garde (Italian), the biological-racialist (German), and the spiritual/moral (Romanian) components of these fascisms are important to us today.

And it is probably wrong to separate out the avant-garde mindset as being only applicable to the political/cultural sphere. After all, we really do need new, cutting-edge memes with respect to both materialist race and non-materialist morality. To quote a certain pro-fascist poet: “Make it new!”

Mostra 1933With respect to Antliff’s book itself, chapter topics include Sorelian myth and anti-Semitism, and the fascistic politics of Valois, Lamour, and Maulnier. The importance of Sorelian myth was underscored by a recent Michael O’Meara piece that appeared on TOQ Online. Antliff stresses that culture and aesthetics were extremely important to Sorel in his quest to formulate a doctrine of instrumentally utilizing myth to overturn the hated rationalist-capitalist-democratic system. Art is part of this aesthetic emphasis and, truth be told, Sorel focused on culture over politics; indeed, he was scornful of the power of the myth being used and squandered for low-level political aims.

Further, Sorel went through a distinctly “anti-Semitic” phase, in which Jews were considered the exemplars of ultra-rationalist anti-creators, whose worldview set them in opposition to native peoples and native cultural expressions and aesthetics. Opposing the pro-Dreyfus “French” journal La revue blanche, Sorel sarcastically referred to the journal’s Jewish founders as “two Jews come from Poland in order to regenerate our poor country, so unhappily still contaminated by the Christian civilization of the seventeenth century.” Sorel accused Jewish intellectuals of wanting to promote an abstract (i.e., non-ethnic, non-national, non-cultural) concept of (French) citizenship and to also promote “cosmopolitan anarchy.”

Related to this “anti-Semitism,” Sorel admired and promoted the Classical World; the values of classical heroes, such as the Greeks at Thermopylae, were something counterpoised against the Jewish ethic and the degeneration of parliamentary democracy.

Sorel considered art as related to the creativity of work, a creativity that he wished to inculcate into the “productive workers” in place of assembly line mass capitalism and rationalized “one man-one vote” democracy. He also considered an enlightened “proletariat” as being able to reinvigorate a stagnant bourgeoisie through class conflict.

Georges Valois, 1878–1945

Georges Valois, 1878–1945

Georges Valois (born Alfred-Georges Gressent) went through a wide variety of ideological contortions in his lifetime, from fascism to “libertarian communism,” ending up dying in a Nazi concentration camp after being captured as a member of the “French Resistance.” While such an unbalanced individual represents much of what is wrong with the “movement” (changing your mind is one thing – completely switching your worldview from one moment to the next is another), some of his activities during his “fascist stage” are of interest.

Particularly enlightening is the focus on the urbanism of Le Corbusier, which stands in contrast to much of the American “movement” and its anti-urbanist emphasis on militant ruralism. No doubt, in the West today, the city is an anti-white, anti-Western disaster, full of racial enemies. No doubt as well that throughout much of human history, the city was an unhealthy and sterilizing place, inimical to racial survival and racial progress.

However, in our modern technological age, if we can solve our racial problems, the city itself does not necessarily have to be a racial evil. As part of a natural continuum of human ecologies – isolated rural, rural, suburban/town, small city, larger cities, etc. – the city may play an important role in the Futurist racial ethnostate of tomorrow, a place of technological advancement, racially healthy avant-garde memes, and sociopolitical dynamism. Racial nationalism can and should be reconciled to a certain degree of urbanism – not the urbanism of degeneration, but that of regeneration.

This of course underlies a schism within activism that often goes unnoticed – between modernist, technological tribalist-racialist Futurism and a ruralist anti-technological ecotribalism. It is clear that the French fascists described by Antliff for the most part fall into the first group. Thus, a major divide exists between the Futurist-Modernist fascists (think Marinetti in Italy) and the ruralist soil-oriented romantic past-oriented fascists (think Darre in Germany, or the agrarian-nostalgic Vichy regime in France).

Of course, a healthy society needs both worldviews, and in practical terms a balance is required. For example, Valois incorporated a “love for the native soil” along with his Futurist mindset. Indeed, Valois contrasted “Asiatic nomadness” associated with communism with the “Latin sedentary” style — derived from “cultured Roman legions” — of the French, tied to the native soil and inclined to fascism. He also associated the hated nomadic lifestyle with capitalism, since hyper-rational capitalism uprooted the workers from grounding in an organic society and turned them into atomized, rootless “nomads.”

A related issue is the relationship between Futurism and the veneration of the past. Antliff makes clear that the emphasis on the past in fascism (e.g., the Greco-Roman classical world) was not meant to mean turning back the clock and shunning progress. Instead, this look to the past was, paradoxically, futurist, in that the fascists wanted to take from the past certain noble values and behaviors and use these to help build the modern, technological world of tomorrow. Therefore, one need not discard the past to build a new future, but judiciously use elements of the past as necessary building blocks for the projected futurist edifice. Different strands of fascist thought need not be incompatible, just as common ground must be found between the tribalist futurist and tribalist ruralist strands of modern racial nationalist thought.

Another French fascist, Philippe Lamour, also went through many ideological “twists and turns,” ultimately rejecting fascism in favor of anti-fascism and syndicalism. Lamour originally represented the fascist variant of “machine primitivism” – that is, an anti-rationalist “new consciousness attuned to the dynamism of technology.” Thus, urban industrialism, technology, productivity, and futurist modernism need not be associated with “rational” egalitarianism but with tribalistic fascism. Lamour wished to create a “community of producers” integrating the different classes of French society to overturn liberal democracy in favor of a modernist technologically dynamic fascist state.

Early French fascists such as Lamour also promoted the idea of a European federation, and attempted to make common cause with more pan-European and “leftist” German National Socialists, such as the Strasserian “Black Front,” who favored European cooperation as opposed to Hitler’s hegemony through military conquest. Not coincidentally, before he fell into Hitler’s orbit, Mussolini also favored an alliance of European (fascist) states, promoted through the doctrine of “Roman Universality,” with practical expression through events such as the pan-fascist Montreux conference.

Lamour’s greatest contribution to French fascism was the promotion of the “conflict of generations,” pitting the younger fascistic generation of WW I against the older generation of parliamentary democrats. This latter group was seen as being out of touch with the new age of national regeneration, avant-garde culture and politics, Sorelian myth, as well as technological productivity. Lamour and his “war generation” were at the forefront of the battle of youth vs. the image of fossilized reactionary status quo politicians.

Aesthetically, the work of German artist Germaine Krull and even Soviet filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein influenced the avant-garde sensibilities of “machine primitive” young French fascists such as Lamour. Antliff summarizes Lamour’s unique contribution to the ideology of interwar French fascism as the melding of “machine aesthetics” to the concept of generational warfare. Thus, to Lamour, technological dynamism and the replacement of the ossified previous generation with fresh youth were the Sorelian myths required to spark an era of national renewal.

Thierry Maulnier, 1908–1988

thierry-maulnier

Thierry Maulnier (born Jacques Talagrand), author of “Crisis Is in Man,” had as his concept of Sorelian myth “classical violence.” Within the journal Combat, Maulnier and colleagues opposed the leftist French Popular Front’s Marxist-themed “culture” with their own view of aesthetics in architecture and sculpture. Antliff describes Combat’s as focusing on “three interrelated spheres: political institutions, human spirituality, and aesthetics.” The classicism of the Maulnier school promoted the idea of a “synthesis of Dionysian energy and Apollonian restraint.”

Politically, Maulnier wished for a form of French fascism that rejected parliamentary democracy but which still supported the rights and aspirations of the individual, as opposed to what was perceived as the more authoritarian and collectivist societies of Fascist Italy and National Socialist Germany. These distinctions between French and other fascisms became more salient after Mussolini fell into Hitler’s orbit and became hostile to French national interests. Indeed, before the start of WW II, Maulnier advocated a “minimal fascist program” for France that would be both a short-term “fix” to bolster the French military for confrontation with the Axis, as well as preparation for the long-term and permanent fascistic remodeling of society after the Axis threat had dissipated.

It must be noted that the Valois, Lamour, and Maulnier fascist ideologies, while linked together by a palingenetic call for national renewal and a rejection of parliamentary democracy, did differ in important ways. In particular, the classicism of Maulnier can be contrasted with the militant futurism and “machine primitivism” of Lamour. Although Antliff stresses that the French fascist focus on the classical world does not necessarily imply a rejection of modernism per se, the specific differences between Maulnier and Lamour were the greatest of any of the individuals profiled by Antliff. Valois and Lamour both embraced the image of “industrial production” as a central motif of their ideology; however, while Lamour spun together a myth of generational conflict, Valois instead emphasized a “spirit of victory” in which the heroism of WW I will now be turned to a battle of the entire nation to create an organized fascist-industrial society. Of these three men, it was Lamour who was the most steadfastly “avant-garde” in cultural-aesthetic orientation, Maulnier the least.

Crude ethnic stereotyping may lead one to conclude that an emphasis on art, culture, and aesthetics in the creation of fascist ideology was (and is) a particularly “French” phenomenon. Of course, other fascist movements were concerned with these issues, sometimes to a significant extent, but none of them incorporated such memes into the core of the political thinking as did French fascist thinkers. Indeed, the cultural-aesthetic emphasis of the French strain of fascism is a breath of fresh air after immersion in the more focused political thought of the Italian Fascists and the racialist ideals of the German National Socialists.

In fact, all three areas of focus – cultural-aesthetic, political, and racialist – are required for a complete memetic complex to promote fascistic ideals. As a biological reductionist, I would emphasize the racialist first of all, but doing so with respect to modern genetic science rather than the sort of quackery that passed as “racial science” under the Nazis. However, biological racialism by itself is not enough. Without an edifice of political and cultural-aesthetic memes, the foundation of ultimate interests will go nowhere.

Related to this issue of political aesthetics, I was impressed by Alex Kurtagic’s analysis of “semiotic systems” and the importance of style in shaping perceptions of status within nationalist memes. This is important. Of course, the enemy will, as a matter of course, attempt to oppose this approach through co-option and/or mockery.

Co-option is a problem for any memetic threat to establishment power; for example, the GOP has effectively co-opted “rightist, racist” concerns through the exploitation of “implicit whiteness.” This strategy has enabled the Republicans to retain white support while at the same time moving continuously leftward in the direction of overtly anti-white policies.

Thus, while aesthetics and style are important, they always must be innately linked to content to prevent the establishment from utilizing the same semiotic systems to promote the exact opposite of our objectives. Dealing with co-option will be difficult, and it is crucially important that the problem be analyzed from the beginning in a proactive fashion.

In other words, right from the start, the construction of unique avant-garde racial-nationalist semiotic systems must incorporate strategies for preventing co-option and dealing with co-option if these preventive measures fail. Therefore, we must identify, in advance, as many problems with each approach as possible, and develop multiple contingency plans for dealing with each emergent counter-move of the establishment.

Mockery is also a problem; the establishment, utilizing its control of the mass media and its stable of celebrity puppets, can subject any racial-nationalist semiotic system to a barrage of withering ridicule. It is important that the elitist and superior nature of the system be of sufficient strength that adherents can turn around such ridicule and assert it as a matter of pride and not shame. In other words, the establishment ridicule itself must be mocked as the pathetic attempts of a dying and out-of-touch system to delegitimize a novel movement of which they are afraid.

Again, careful planning is required to plan against the establishment’s ridicule strategy, but if both co-option and mockery can be successfully dealt with, the semiotic-aesthetic strategy has a chance to achieve its objectives. And those objectives are, in essence, to defuse the “social pricing” attacks of the establishment against racial-nationalist activists and adherents, by providing an alternative value system opposed to, and independent of, establishment standards and acceptance.

In summary, Antliff has dissected a particularly interesting and heretofore unexplored strain of French fascism characterized by an embrace of avant-garde cultural concepts, modernism, Futurism, productivity and the planned society, urbanism and industrial technology, exemplified by so-called “machine primitivism.”

With today’s worries of “peak oil,” and concerns that the multiracial West will collapse, visions of decentralized ruralistic tribalism have again become prominent in nationalist thought. However, the white man is endlessly inventive, and free of the shackles of genocidal globalist multiculturalism, the technological genius of whites, so unleashed, may provide the foundation for a Futurist, technologically advanced and tribalist society. Such a society would have options for both the urbanist technological and ruralist agrarian lifestyles for those whose preferences are for one or the other.

Although I am sure he is an “anti-fascist,” Antliff’s work helps us to consider one technological Futurist option. The major conclusion from both Antliff’s and Kurtagic’s analyses is that staid and conformist methods for sociopolitical activism may be best replaced, at least in part, by avant-garde memes that let some “fresh air” into stale “movement” environs.

Published:

mardi, 06 avril 2010

Louis-Ferdinand Céline par Ioannis Mouhasiris

Louis-Ferdinand Céline par Ioannis Mouhasiris

samedi, 13 mars 2010

Marc. Eemans ou l'autre versant du surréalisme

Archives de SYNERGIES EUROPEENNES - 1989

Marc. Eemans ou l'autre versant du surréalisme

 

La conversion de Marc. Eemans au Surréalisme est contemporaine de celle de René Magritte et de ses amis. Elle s'est faite entre 1925 et 1926. A cette époque Marc. Eemans avait à peine dix-huit ans, alors que Magritte était son aîné de quelque neuf à dix ans.

 

eemanspipe.jpgC'est grâce à la rencontre de Geert Van Bruaene, alors directeur du Cabinet Maldoror en l'Hôtel Ravenstein, que le jeune Marc Eemans a été intié à la poésie présurréaliste des «Chants de Maldoror» et c'est également alors qu'il entra en contact avec Camille Goemans et E.L.T. Mesens qui allaient bientôt devenir ses compagnons de  route avec Paul Nougé, René Magritte, André Souris, paul Hooremans et Marcel Lecomte, dans l'aventure du premier groupe surréaliste belge, groupe où ils furent bientôt rejoints par Louis Scutenaire qui, à l'époque, se prénommait encore Jean.

 

Certains historiens du Surréalisme en Belgique ont estimé qu'à ses débuts, Marc Eemans, en tant que peintre, n'était qu'un épigone, un imitateur de René Magritte, mais, qu'il n'y a pas eu imitation, tout au plus chemin parallèle, ce qui s'explique aisément, car il fut une époque où le Surréalisme vivait dans l'osmose de l'air du temps».

 

Pour s'en convaicnre, il suffit d'ailleurs de consulter la petite revue «Distances», éditée à Paris par Camille Goemans en 1928, à laquelle collabora Marc. Eemans (x). Ajoutons-y au même titre ses dessins à la plume dans le mensuel «Variétés», paraissant à la même époque à Bruxelles.

 

D'ailleurs, Marc. Eemans alla bien vite prendre définitivement un chemin tout autre que celui de René Magritte et de ses compagnons de route, à l'exception de Camille Goemans et de Marcel Lecomte. Nous en trouvons un témoignage irréfutable dans un album paru en 1930 aux Editions Hermès, fondées par Goemans et lui-même et au titre bien significatif! Eemans s'y révèle comme un adepte moderne de ce que Paul Hadermann, professeur à l'Université Libre de Bruxelles, a appelé le »trobar clus de Marc. Eemans» d'après le terme provençal propre aux troubadours et minnesänger qui pratiquaient jadis une poésie hermétique «close», accessibles aux seuls initiés. Cet album intitulé «Vergeten te worden» (Oublié de devenir) compte «dix formes linéaires influencées par dix formes verbales». Il est paru initialement en langue néerlandaise, mais une réédition, avec traduction française et une introduction du prof. Hadermann, à laquelle nous venons de faire allusion, en est parue en 1983.

 

La coloration du Surréalisme propre à Marc. Eemans est dès lors nettement affirmée. Ce Surréalisme s'est fortement éloigné de celui de René magritte que Salvador Dali a qualifié un jour d'«A.B.C. du Surréalisme».

 

Tandis que les options des membres de ce que Patrick Waldberg a appelé plus tard la «Société du Mystère» se sont trop souvent orientées vers les facilités d'un certain «néo-dadaïsme» au dogmatisme sectaire à la fois «cartésien» et «gauchisant» en lequel la contrepèterie se le dispute à l'humour noir et rose, voire au «prosaïsme» petit-bourgeois (le chapeau melon et la pipe, de Magritte!), Marc. Eemans, lui, accompagné en cela par Camille Goemans et Marcel Lecomte, s'est orienté derechef vers un autre versant du Surréalisme fort proche de l'Idéalisme magique d'un Novalis et du Symbolisme de la fin du siècle dernier.

 

Ce Surréalisme, que les historiens du Surréalisme en Belgique semblent ignorer ou plutôt passer sous silence, répond en quelque sorte à l'appel à l'«occultation» lancé par André Breton dans son «Second manifeste du Surréalisme». Rappelons d'ailleurs à ce propos à quel point Breton a été profondément touché par le Symbolisme, au point que Paul Valéry a été son témoin lors de son premier mariage et qu'en 1925, voire plus tard encore, lui-même ainsi qu'Eluard et Antonin Artaud se sont révélés comme des admirateurs inconditionnels du poète symboliste Saint-Pol-Roux.

 

La filiation du Romantisme au Surréalisme via le Symbolisme est d'ailleurs évidente, aussi Alain Viray a-t-il pu écrire qu'«il y a des liens entre Maeterlinck et Breton», à quoi nous pourrions ajouter qu'il y en a également entre Max Elskamp et Paul Eluard, tandis que l'ex néo-symboliste Jean De Bosschère a viré étrangement, vers la fin de sa vie, vers le Surréalisme, un certain Surréalisme il est vrai.

 

Quoi qu'il en soit, l'art que Marc. Eemans a pratiqué, dès sa vingtième année, est ce que l'on pourrait appeler un «Surréalisme ouvert», détaché de tout sectarisme et de cet esprit de chapelle cher aux surréalistes qui se considèrent  de «stricte obédience». Dès lors la question se pose: Marc. Eemans est-il encore surréaliste? Mais en fait qu'est-ce qu'une étiquette? What is a name? En tout cas, Eemans a déclaré un jour, lors d'une enquête de la revue «Temps Mêlés» qu'il ne serait pas ce qu'il est sans le Surréalisme…

 

Parlons plutôt de la revue «Hermès» que Marc. Eemans fonda en 1933 avec ses amis René Baert et Camille Goemans (c'est ce dernier qui en rédigea toutes les «Notes des éditeurs»). C'était une revue d'études comparées en laquelle poésie, philosophie et mystique furent à l'honneur. Y collaborèrent activement e.a. Roland de Reneville (un transfuge du «Grand jeu» et auteur d'un «Rimbaud le Voyant»), le philosophe Bernard Groethuysen, l'arabisant Henri Corbin ainsi que le poète Henri Michaux qui en devint le secrétaire de rédaction. Revue surréaliste? Oui ou non, et nous croyons même que le mot «surréalisme» n'y a jamais figuré… Par contre y furent publiées les premières traductions en langue française de textes des philosophes Martin Heidegger et Karl Jaspers. Y collabora également le philosophe franças Jean Wahl tandis qu'y figurèrent des traductions de textes poétiques ou mystiques flamnds, allemands, anglais, tibétains, arabes et chinois, sans oublier l'intérêt porté à des poètes symbolistes, pré-symbolistes ou post-symbolistes.

 

En somme «Hermès» pratiqua un «Surréalisme occulté» qui a retenu l'attention d'André Breton, mais aussi l'indifférence, si pas l'hostilité de certains membres de la «Société du Mystère». Notons à ce propos que Breton a toujours préféré le «merveilleux» au «mystère», en prônant surtout le recours à la magie, sans toutefois pouvoir se soustraire à la tentation d'une magie de pacotille, celles des voyantes et des médiums. Du côté d'«Hermès», au contraire, il y eut toujours le souci d'un hermétisme davantage tourné vers l'austère éthique propre à tout ce qui relève de la «Tradition primordiale». Mais ne l'oublions pas:: le Surréalisme d'André Breton et de ses amis n'a jamais pu se défaire d'un certain «avant-gardisme» très parisien en lequel le goût de l'étrange, du bizarre à tout prix, de burlesque provocateur et de l'exotimse forment un amalgame des plus pittoresques fort éloigné des préoccupations profondes de Marc. Eemans et de ses amis de la revue «Hermès». Chez lui surtout prévaut avant tout la soumission à des mythes intérieurs nés de ses fantasmes. Il y a chez lui une gravité qui l'a conduit à une incessante quête de l'Absolu. En témoignent aussi bien ses peintures que ses écrits poétiques. Comme l'a écrit Paul Caso («Le Soir, 26-28.XII.1980): «On doit reconnaître l'existence de Marc. Eemans et la singularité d'un métier qui a choisi de n'être ni claironnant, ni racoleur. Il y a là un poids d'angoisse et de sensibilité».

 

Jean d'Urcq

00:05 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, avant-gardes, surréalisme, belgique, belgicana, flandre, peinture | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

dimanche, 24 janvier 2010

Striptekenaar Jacques Martin overleden

alix2.jpg

Striptekenaar Jacques Martin overleden

Ex: http://www.standaard.be/

De Franse striptekenaar Jacques Martin is op 88-jarige leeftijd overleden. Dat meldt zijn uitgeverij Casterman. Martin raakte vooral bekend als de bedenker van de Gallo-Romeinse held 'Alex'.

Martin was ook bekend van de stripreeks 'Lefranc' en van zijn medewerking aan diverse avonturen in het weekblad 'Kuifje'.

De striptekenaar werd op 25 september 1921 in Straatsburg geboren. Op 25-jarige leeftijd trok Martin naar België. Samen met Hergé en Edgar Pierre Jacobs ('Blake en Mortimer') vormden ze de drie grootste vertegenwoordigers van de zogenaamde "Brusselse school" en de geestelijke vaders van de 'klare lijn'.

In 1948 is Alex voor het eerst te bewonderen in het weekblad Kuifje (met het avontuur 'Alex de Onversaagde'). In datzelfde weekblad kan men in 1952 zijn nieuwe creatie Lefranc bekijken ('Het sein staat op rood').

In 1953 trad hij toe tot de studio Hergé, waar hij 19 jaar lang zal werken aan diverse avonturen van Kuifje. In 1984 schrijft hij de scenario's voor 'Xan/Tristan Madoc' en voor 'Arno'. Recente initiatieven van Martin, tijdens zijn laatste levensjaren nagenoeg blind en veroordeeld het tekenwerk aan anderen over te laten, waren 'Keos' en 'Orion', die zich afspelen in het antieke Griekenland en Egypte, en 'Lois', gesitueerd aan het hof van Lodewijk XIV.

Van de strip 'Alex', avonturen ten tijde van de ook herhaaldelijk in de strip opduikende Julius Caesar, zijn in heel Europa meer dan 20 miljoen exemplaren verkocht.

00:20 Publié dans Bandes dessinées | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : bandes dessinées, 9ème art, art, antiquité | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

samedi, 23 janvier 2010

In memoriam : Jacques Martin

In Memoriam : décès de Jacques Martin, créateur « d’Alix »

alix-lintrepide

22/01/10 – 11h55
PARIS(NOVOpress) – C’est un monument de la bande dessinée de qualité qui vient de disparaître. En effet, Jacques Martin, créateur d’Alix, vient de s’éteindre en Suisse à l’âge de 88 ans.

Né à Strasbourg (est de la France) en 1921, il avait fait des études aux Arts et Métiers en Belgique, pays où il avait rencontré sa femme Monique et eu leurs deux enfants, Frédérique et Bruno.

L’œuvre de ce passionné d’histoire est colossale et a participé à la découverte de l’Antiquité ou du Moyen-âge (la série « Jhen ») par de nombreux jeunes.
Au total, on comptabilise quelque 120 albums qui se sont vendus à 20 millions d’exemplaires, et ont été traduits en 15 langues.

Ancien collaborateur d’Hergé, il était l’un des derniers « grands classiques » de la bédé franco-belge.

[cc [1]] Novopress.info, 2010, Article libre de copie et diffusion sous réserve de mention de la source d’origine
[
http://fr.novopress. info [2]]


Article printed from :: Novopress.info France: http://fr.novopress.info

URL to article: http://fr.novopress.info/46338/in-memoriam-deces-de-jacques-martin-createur-%c2%ab-d%e2%80%99alix-%c2%bb/

URLs in this post:

[1] cc: http://fr.novopress.info http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/fr/

[2] http://fr.novopress. info: http://fr.novopress. info

00:20 Publié dans Bandes dessinées | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : bandes dessinées, 9ème art, art, antiquité | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

Wyndham Lewis

Wyndham Lewis

Percy Wyndham Lewis, 1882 - 1957

Percy Wyndham Lewis, 1882 - 1957

Percy Wyndham Lewis is credited with being the founder of the only modernist cultural movement indigenous to Britain. Nonetheless, he is seldom spoken of in the same breath as his contemporaries, Ezra Pound, James Joyce, T. S. Eliot, and others. Lewis was one of the number of cultural figures who rejected the bourgeois liberalism and democracy of the nineteenth century that descended on the twentieth. However, in contradiction to many other writers who eschewed democracy, liberalism, and “the Left,” Lewis also rejected the counter movement towards a return to the past and a resurgence of the intuitive, the emotional and the instinctual above the intellectual and the rational. Indeed, Lewis vehemently denounced D. H. Lawrence, for example, for his espousal of instinct above reason.

Lewis was an extreme individualist, whilst rejecting the individualism of nineteenth Century liberalism. His espousal of a philosophy of distance between the cultural elite and the masses brought him to Nietzsche, although appalled by the popularity of Nietzsche among all and sundry; and to Fascism and the praise of Hitler, but also the eventual rejection of these as being of the masses.

Born in 1882 on a yacht off the shores of Nova Scotia, his mother was English, his father an eccentric American army officer without income who soon deserted the family. Wyndham and his mother arrived in England in 1888. He attended Rugby and Slade public schools both of which obliged him to leave. He then wandered the art capitals of Europe and was influenced by Cubism and Futurism.

Wyndham Lewis, "Timon of Athens"

Wyndham Lewis, "Timon of Athens"

In 1922, Lewis exhibited his portfolio of drawings that had been intended to illustrate an edition of Shakespeare’s Timon of Athens, in which Timon is depicted as a snapping puppet. This illustrated Lewis’ view that man can rise above animal by a classical detachment and control, but the majority of men will always remain as puppets or automata. Having read Nietzsche, Lewis was intent on remaining a Zarathustrian type figure, solitary upon his mountain top far above the mass of humanity.

Vortex

Lewis was originally associated with the Bloomsbury group, the pretentious and snobbish intellectual denizens of a delineated area of London who could make or break an aspiring artist or writer. He soon rejected these parlor pink liberals and vehemently attacked them in The Apes of God. This resulted in Lewis largely being ignored as a significant cultural figure from this time onward. Breaking with Bloomsbury’s Omega Workshop, Lewis founded the Rebel Art Centre from which emerged the Vorticist movement and their magazine Blast. Signatories to the Vorticist Manifesto included Ezra Pound, French sculptor Henri Gaudier-Brzeska, and painter Edward Wadsworth.

Pound who described the vortex as “the point of maximum energy” coined the name Vorticism. Whilst Lewis had found both the stasis of Cubism and the frenzied movement of Futurism interesting, he became indignant at Mannetti’s description of him as a Futurist and wished to found an indigenous English modernist movement. The aim was to synthesis cubism and futurism. Vorticism would depict the static point from where energy arose. It was also very much concerned with reflecting contemporary life where the machine was coming to dominate, but rejected the Futurist romantic glorification of the machine.

Both Pound and Lewis were influenced by the Classicism of the art critic and philosopher T. E. Hulme, a radical conservative. Hulme rejected nineteenth century humanism and romanticism in the arts as reflections of the Rousseauian (and ultimately communistic) belief in the natural goodness of man when uncorrupted by civilization, as human nature infinitely malleable by a change of environment and social conditioning.

A definition of the classicism and romanticism, which are constant in Lewis’ philosophy, can be readily understood from what Hulme states in his publication Speculations:

Here is the root of all romanticism: that man, the individual, is an infinite reservoir of possibilities, and if you can so rearrange society by the destruction of oppressive order then these possibilities will have a chance and you will get progress. One can define the classical quite clearly as the exact opposite to this. Man is an extraordinarily fixed and limited animal whose nature is absolutely constant. It is only by tradition and organization that anything decent can be got out of him.

Wyndham Lewis, "Ezra Pound"

Wyndham Lewis, "Ezra Pound"

Lewis’s classicism is a dichotomy, classicism versus romanticism, reason versus emotion, intellect versus intuition and instinct, masculine versus feminine, aristocracy versus democracy, the individual versus the mass, and later fascism versus communism.

Artistically also classicism meant clarity of style and distinct form. Pound was drawn to the manner in which, for example, the Chinese ideogram depicted ideas succinctly. Hence, art and writing were to be based on terseness and clarity of image. The subject was viewed externally in a detached manner. Pound and Hulme had founded the Imagist movement on classicist lines. This was now superseded by Vorticism, depicting the complex but clear geometrical patterns of the machine age. In contradiction to Italian Futurism, Vorticist art aimed not to depict the release of energy but to freeze it in time. Whilst depicting the swirl of energy the central axis of stability dissociated Vorticism form Futurism.

The first issue of Blast describes Vorticism in terms of Lewis’ commitment to classicism:

Long live the great art vortex sprung up in the center of this town.
We stand for the reality of the Present-not the sentimental Future or the scarping Past . . .

We do not want to make people wear Futurist patches, or fuss people to take to pink or sky blue trousers . . .  Automobilisim (Marinetteism) bores us. We do not want to go about making a hullabaloo about motor cars, anymore than about knives and forks, elephants or gas pipes . . .  The Futurist is a sensational and sentimental mixture of the aesthete of 1890 and the realist of 1870.

In 1916 his novel Tarr was published as a monument to himself should he be killed in the war in which he served as a forward observation officer with the artillery. Here he lambastes the bohemian artists and literati exemplified in England by the Bloomsbury coterie:

Your flabby potion is a mixture of the lees of Liberalism, the poor froth blown off the decadent Nineties, the wardrobe-leavings of a vulgar bohemianism . . . . You are concentrated, highly-organized barley water; there is nothing in the universe to be said for you: any efficient state would confiscate your property, burn your wardrobe–that old hat and the rest–as infectious, and prohibit you from propagating.

A breed of mild pervasive cabbages has set up a wide and creeping rot in the West . . .  that any resolute power will be able to wipe up over night with its eyes shut. Your kind meantime make it indirectly a period of tribulation for live things to remain in your neighborhood. You are systematizing the vulgarizing of the individual: you are the advance copy of communism, a false millennial middle-class communism. You are not an individual: you have. I repeat, no right to that hair and to that hat: you are trying to have the apple and eat it too You should be in uniform and at work. NOT uniformly OUT OF UNIFORM and libeling the Artist by your idleness. Are you idle? The only justification of your slovenly appearance it is true is that it’s perfectly emblematic.

There is much of Lewis’ outlook expressed here, the detestation of the pseudo-individualistic liberal among the intelligentsia and his desire to impose order in the name of Art. In 1918, he was commissioned as an official war artist for the Canadian War Records Office. Here some of his paintings are of the Vorticist style, depicting soldiers as machines of the same quality as their artillery. Once again, man is shown as an automaton. However, the war destroyed the Vorticist movement, Hulme and Gaudier-Brzeska both succumbing, and Blast did not go beyond two issues.

artlewiswyndb

Wyndham Lewis, "A Battery Shelled" (1919)

In 1921, Lewis founded another magazine. Tyro: Review of the Arts. The title reflects Lewis’ view of man as automaton. Tyros are a mythical race of grotesque beings, all teeth and laughter. Satire is a major element of Lewis’ style. His exhibition “Tyros and Portraits” satirizes humanity.

The Code of a Herdsman

Lewis’ non-Nietzschean Nietzsechanism is succinctly put in an essay published in The Little Review in 1917, “The Code of a Herdsman.” Among the eighteen points:

In accusing yourself, stick to the Code of the Mountain. But crime is alien to a Herdsman’s nature. Yourself must be your Caste.

Cherish and develop side by side, your six most constant indications of different personalities. You will then acquire the potentiality of six men . . .  Each trench must have another one behind it.

Spend some of your time every day in hunting your weaknesses caught from commerce with the herd, as methodically, solemnly and vindictively as a monkey his fleas. You will find yourself swarming with them while you are surrounded by humanity. But you must not bring them up on the mountain . . .

Do not play with political notions, aristocratisms or the reverse, for that is a compromise with the herd. Do not allow yourself to imagine a fine herd though still a herd. There is no fine herd. The cattle that call themselves ‘gentlemen’ you will observe to be a little cleaner. It is merely cunning and produced by a product called soap . . .

Be on your guard with the small herd of gentlemen. There are very stringent regulations about the herd keeping off the sides of the mountain In fact your chief function is to prevent their encroaching. Some in moment of boredom or vindictiveness are apt to make rushes for the higher regions. Their instinct fortunately keeps them in crowds or bands, and their trespassing is soon noted Contradict yourself. In order to live you must remain broken up.

Above this sad commerce with the herd, let something veritably remain “un peu sur la montagne” Always come down with masks and thick clothing to the valley where we work. Stagnant gasses from these Yahooesque and rotten herds are more dangerous than the wandering cylinders that emit them . . .  Our sacred hill is a volcanic heaven. But the result of the violence is peace. The unfortunate surge below, even, has moments of peace.

Fascism

Wyndham Lewis,<br> "The Artist's Wife, Froanna"

Wyndham Lewis, "The Artist's Wife, Froanna"

Poverty dogged Lewis all his life. He, like Pound, looked for a society that would honor artists. Like Pound and D. H. Lawrence, he felt that the artist is the natural ruler of humanity, and he resented the relegation of art as a commodity subject to the lowest denominator to be sold on a mass market.

Lewis’s political and social outlook arises form his aesthetics. He was opposed to the primacy of politics and economics over cultural life. His book The Art of Being Ruled in 1926 first details Lewis’s ideas on politics and a rejection of democracy with some favorable references to Fascism.

Support for Fascism was a product of his Classicism, hard, masculine, exactitude, and clarity. This classicism prompted him to applaud the “rigidly organized” Fascist State, based on changeless, absolute laws that Lewis applied to the arts, in opposition to the “flux” or changes of romanticism.

Lewis supported Sir Oswald Mosley’s British Fascist movement, and Mosley records in his autobiography how Lewis would secretly arrange to meet him. However, Lewis was open enough to write an essay on Fascism entitled “Left wing” for British Union Quarterly, a magazine of Mosley’s British Union of Fascists, which included other well-known figures in its columns, such as the tank warfare specialist General Fuller, Ezra Pound, Henry Williamson, and Roy Campbell. Here Lewis writes that a nation can be subverted and taken over by numerically small groups. The intelligentsia and the press were doing this work of subversion with a left wing orientation. Lewis was aware of the backing Marxism was receiving from the wealthy, including the millionaire bohemians who patronized the arts. Marxist propaganda in favor of the USSR amounted to vast sums financially. Marxism is a sham, a masquerade in its championship of the poor against the rich.

That Russian communism is not a war to the knife of the Rich against the Poor is only too plainly demonstrated by the fact that internationally all the Rich are on its side. All the magnates among the nations are for it; all the impoverished communities, all the small peasant states, dread and oppose it.

That Lewis is correct in his observations on the nature of Marxism is evidenced by the anti-Bolshevist stance of Portugal and Spain for example, while Bolshevism itself was funded by financial circles in New York, Sweden, and Germany; the Warburgs, Schiff, and Olaf Aschberg the so-called “Bolshevik Banker.”

Lewis concludes his brief article for the BUF Quarterly by declaring Fascism to be the movement that is genuinely for the poor against the rich, who are for property whilst the “super-rich” are against property, “since money has merged into power, the concrete into the abstract . . . ”

You as a Fascist stand for the small trader against the chain store; for the peasant against the usurer: for the nation, great or small, against the super-state; for personal business against Big Business; for the craftsman against the Machine; for the creator against the middleman; for all that prospers by individual effort and creative toil, against all that prospers in the abstract air of High Finance or of the theoretic ballyhoo of internationalisms.

Nonetheless, Lewis had reservations about Fascism just as he had reservations about commitment to any doctrine. For him the principle of action, of the man of action, becomes too much of a frenzied activity, where stability in the world is needed for the arts to flourish. He states in Time and Western Man that Fascism in Italy stood too much for the past, with emphasis on a resurgence of the Roman imperial splendor and the use of its imagery, rather than the realization of the present. As part of the “Time cult,” it was in the doctrinal stream of action, progress, violence, struggle, of constant flux in the world, that also includes Darwinism and Nietzscheanism despite the continuing influence of the latter on Lewis’s own philosophy.

Wyndham Lewis,<br> "The Apes of God" (1930)

Wyndham Lewis, "The Apes of God" (1930)

An early appreciation entitled Hitler was published in 1931, sealing Lewis’ fate as a neglected genius, despite his repudiation of both anti-Semitism in The Jews, Are They Human? and Nazism in The Hitler Cult both published in 1939.

Well before such books, Lewis’ satirizing and denigration of the bohemian liberal Bloomsbury set had resulted in what his self-styled “literary bodyguard,” the poet and fellow “Rightist” Roy Campbell, calls a “Lewis boycott” “When life’s bread and butter depended on thinking pro-Red and to generate one’s own ideas was a criminal offence.”

Time and Space

A healthy artistic environment requires order and discipline, not chaos and flux. This is the great conflict between the “romantic” and the “classical” in the arts. This dichotomy is represented in politics and the difference between the philosophy of “Time” and of “Space,” the former of which is epitomized in the philosophy of Spengler. Unlike many others of the “Right,” Lewis was vehemently opposed to the historical approach of Spengler, critiquing his Decline of the West in Time and Western Man. To Lewis, Spengler and other “Time philosophers” relegated culture to the political sphere. The cyclic and organic interpretations of history are seen as “fatalistic” and having a negative influence on the survival of the European race.

Lewis does not concur with Spengler, who sees culture as subordinate to historical epochs that rise and fall cyclically as living organisms. “There is no common historical and cultural outlook representing any specific cycle, but many ages co-existing simultaneously and represented by various individuals.”

This time philosophy was in contrast to that of Space or the Spatial, and resulted in the type of ongoing change or flux that Lewis opposed. Lewis looked with reverence to the Greeks, who existed in the Present, which he regarded Spengler as disparaging, in contrast to the “Faustian” urge of Western Man that looked to “destiny.”

Democracy

Lewis’s antipathy towards democracy is rooted in his theory on Time. Of democracy, he writes in Men Without Art, “No artist can ever love.” Democracy is hostility to artistic excellence and fosters “box office and library subscription standards.” Art is however timeless, classical.

Democracy hates and victimizes the intellectual because the “mind” is aristocratic and offensive to the masses. Here again Lewis is at odds with others of the “Right,” with particular antipathy toward D. H. Lawrence. Again, it is the dichotomy of the “romantic versus the classical.”

Conjoined with democracy is industrialization, both representing the masses against the solitary genius. The result is the “herding of people into enormous mechanized masses.” The “mass mind . . .  is required to gravitate to a standard size to receive the standard idea.”

Wyndham Lewis, "Self-Portrait"

Wyndham Lewis, "Self-Portrait"

Democracy and the advertisement are part and parcel of this debasement and behind it all stands money, including the “millionaire bohemians” who control the arts. Making a romantic image of the machine, starting in Victorian times, is the product of our “Money-age.” His opposition to Italian Futurism, often mistakenly equated with Vorticism, derives partly from Futurism’s idolization of the machine. Vorticism, states Lewis, depicts the machine as befits an art that observes the Present, but does not idolize it. It is technology that generates change and revolution, but art remains constant; it is not in revolt against anything other than when society promotes conditions where art does not exist, as in democracy.

In Lewis’s satirizing of the Bloomsbury denizens, he writes of the dichotomy existing between the elite and the masses, yet one that is not by necessity malevolent towards these masses:

The intellect is more removed from the crowd than is anything: but it is not a snobbish withdrawal, but a going aside for the purposes of work, of work not without its utility for the crowd . . .  More than the prophet or the religious teacher, (the leader) represents . . .  the great unworldly element in the world, and that is the guarantee of his usefulness. And he should be relieved of the futile competition in all sorts of minor fields, so that his purest faculties could be free for the major tasks of intelligent creation.

Unfortunately, placing one’s ideals onto the plane of activity results in vulgarization, a dilemma that caused Lewis’s reservations towards Nietzsche. In The Art of Being Ruled Lewis writes that of every good thing, there comes its “shadow,” “its ape and familiar.”

Lewis was still writing of this dilemma in Netting Hill during the 1950s.
“All the dilemmas of the creative seeking to function socially center upon the nature of action: upon the necessity of crude action, of calling in the barbarian to build a civilizations.” This was of course the dilemma for Lewis in his early support for Hitler and for Italian Fascism.

Revolt of the Primitive

Other symptoms of the romantic epoch subverting cultural standards include the feminine principle, with the over representation of homosexuals and the effete among the literati and the Bloomsbury coterie; the cult of the primitive; and the “cult of the child,” that is closely related to the adulation of the primitive.

Female values, resting on the intuitive and emotional, undermine masculine rationality, the intellect–the feminine flux against the masculine hardness of stability and discipline. To Lewis revolutions are a return to the past. Feminism aims at returning society to an idealized primitive matriarchy. Communism aims at a returning to primitive forms of common ownership. The idolization of the savage and the child are also returns to the atavistic. The millionaire world and “High Bohemia” support these, as it does other vulgarizing revolutions. The supposedly outrageous, to Lewis, is tame.

Lewis’s book Paleface: The Philosophy of the Melting Pot inspired as a counter-blast to D. H. Lawrence, was written to repudiate the cult of the primitive, fashionable among the millionaire bohemians, as it had been among the parlor intellectuals of the eighteenth century; the Rousseauean ideal of the “return to nature” and the “noble savage.” Although D. H. Lawrence was writing of the primitive tribes to inspire a decadent European race to return to its own instinctual being, such “romanticism” is contrary to the classicism of Lewis, with its primacy of reason. In contradiction of Lawrence, Lewis states that,

I would rather have an ounce of human consciousness than a universe full of “abdominal” afflatus and hot, unconscious, “soulless” mystical throbbing.

Wyndham Lewis, <i>Blast</i>, no. 2

Wyndham Lewis, Blast, no. 2

In Paleface Lewis calls for a ruling caste of aesthetes, much like his friend Ezra Pound and his philosophical opposite Lawrence:

We by birth the natural leaders of the white European, are people of no political or public consequence any more . . .  We, the natural leaders of the world we live in, are now private citizens in the fullest sense, and that world is, as far as the administration of its traditional law of life is concerned, leaderless. Under these circumstances, its soul, in a generation or so, will be extinct.

Lewis opposes the “melting pot” where different races and nationalities are becoming indistinguishable. Once again, Lewis’ objections are aesthetic at their foundation. The Negro gift to the white man is jazz, “the aesthetic medium of a sort of frantic proletarian subconscious,” degrading, and exciting the masses into mindless energy, an “idiot mass sound” that is “Marxistic.”

Compulsory Freedom

By the time Lewis wrote Time and Western Man he believed that people would have to be “compelled” to be free and individualistic. Reversing certain of his views espoused in The Art of Being Ruled, he now no longer believed that the urge of the masses to be enslaved should be organized, but rather that the masses will have to be compelled to be individualistic.

I believe they could with advantage be compelled to remain absolutely alone for several hours every day and a week’s solitary confinement, under pleasant conditions (say in mountain scenery), every two months would be an excellent provision. That and other coercive measures of a similar kind, I think, would make them much better people.

Return to Socialist England

In 1939, Lewis and his wife went to the USA and on to Canada where Lewis lectured at Assumption College, a situation that did not cause discomfort, as he had long had a respect for Catholicism although not a convert. Lewis as a perpetual polemicist began a campaign against extreme abstraction in art, attacking Jackson Pollock and the Expressionists.

Lewis returned to England in 1945, and despite being completely blind by 1951 continued writing, in 1948 his America and Cosmic Man portrayed the USA as the laboratory for a coming new world order of anonymity and utilitarianism. He also received some “official” recognition in being commissioned to write two dramas for BBC radio, and becoming a regular columnist for The Listener.

A post-war poem, So the Man You Are autobiographically continues to reflect some of Lewis’ abiding themes; that of the creative individual against the axis of the herd and “High Finances”:

The man I am to blow the bloody gaff
If I were given platforms? The riff-raff
May be handed all the trumpets that you will.
No so the golden-tongued. The window sill
Is all the pulpit they can hope to get.

Lewis had been systematically stifled since before World War I when he broke with the Bloomsbury wealthy parlor Bolsheviks who ruled the cultural establishment in Britain. Lewis continued with “Herdsman’s principles of eschewing both Bolshevism and Plutocracy, staying above the herd in solitude”:

What wind an honest mind advances? Look
No wind of sickle and hammer, of bell and book,
No wind of any party, or blowing out
Of any mountain blowing us about
Of High Finance, or the foot-hills of same.
The man I am he who does not play the game!

Lewis felt that “everything was drying up” in England, “extremism was eating at the arts and the rot was pervasive in all levels of society.” He writes of post-war England:

This is the capital of a dying empire–not crashing down in flames and smoke but expiring in a peculiar muffled way.

Wyndham Lewis,<br> Portrait of Edith Sitwell

Wyndham Lewis, "Portrait of Edith Sitwell"

This is the England he portrays in his 1951 novel Rotting Hill (Ezra Pound’s name for Netting Hill) where Lewis and his wife lived. The Welfare State symbolizes a shoddy utility standard in the pursuit of universal happiness. Socialist England causes everything to be substandard including shirt buttons that don’t fit the holes, shoelaces too short to tie, scissors that won’t cut, and inedible bread and jam. Lewis seeks to depict the socialist drabness of 1940s Britain.

Unlike most of the literati, who rebelled against Leftist dominance in the arts, Lewis continued to uphold an ideal of a world culture overseen by a central world state. He wrote his last novel The Red Priest in 1956. Lewis died in 1957, eulogized by T. S. Eliot in an obituary in The Sunday Times: “a great intellect has gone.”

Chapter 8 of K. R. Bolton, Thinkers of the Right: Challenging Materialism (Luton, England: Luton Publications, 2003).

dimanche, 29 novembre 2009

Laibach: "Was ist Kunst?"

ARCHIVES DE SYNERGIES EUROPEENNES - 1998

laibach_volk_tour_2007_banner.jpgLAIBACH: «Was ist Kunst?»

 

«Was ist Kunst?». L'éternel cri de guerre laibachien a de nouveau retenti depuis les majestueuses cîmes des Alpes slo­vènes, et inondé la vieille Europe de son écho puissant. En 56 minutes d'un terrifiant martèlement dodéca-wagnérien, les ténors du Neue Slowenische Kunst  lèvent enfin le voile qui depuis 1980 dissimulait leurs réelles intentions artistico-poli­tiques et nous révèlent le pourquoi de ce qui fut dès l'origine la source même de la polémique, le dérangeant porte-drapeau de leurs ambitions, leur nom: LAIBACH.

 

Au milieu de l'année 1983, les autorités politiques de la République de Slovénie, composante de la fédération yougoslave, ont recours à la loi pour prévenir toute apparition en public des provocateurs de LAIBACH. La Gazette Officielle de la République Socialiste de Slovénie, à la demande du SML (Assemblée Municipale de Ljubljana) et du tout-puissant MK SZDL (Alliance Socialiste des Travailleurs Slovènes), promulgue dans son numéro 3/79 l'interdiction pure et simple du nom de scène du groupe, au titre d'une distorsion du nom Ljubljana (ndlr: en fait “Laibach” estle nom allemand de “Ljubljana”). Peu de temps après, le journaliste Klaus Marck interrogea le porte-drapeau du groupe sur le choix d'un tel titre: «Un nom signifie la réification de l'idée au niveau énigmatique du symbole cognitif». Le nom de LAIBACH fut mentionné pour la première fois en 1144, conjointement à celui de Ljubljana, la ville au bord de la rivière, terme repris ensuite au ratta­chement de la Slovénie à l'Empire austro-hongrois puis, après 1943 et la capitulation de l'Italie fasciste, à l'annexion de la région par le IIIième Reich. Cette période vit nazis, belogardistes (Garde Blanche) et partisans titistes s'affronter avec une rage que sont venues nous rappeler ces dernières années les images de la guerre yougoslave. En 1980, dans la cité monta­gnarde et sidérurgique de Trbovlje, un quintet d'artistes résolument novateurs et provocants adopta ce nom pour la création d'une formation artistique et idéologique systématiquement politisée, afin de définitivement marquer la victoire de l'idéologie sur l'activité artistique. «Dans ce sens, le nom résume l'horreur de la communion entre le totalitarisme et l'aliénation géné­rée par la production sous forme d'esclavage».

 

Une formation artistique et idéologique systématiquement politisée

 

«En Slovénie, qui en tant que nation, naquit de son incessante lutte contre les allemands, avec les teutons (pas seulement les nazis), l'acte même de prendre pour nom de groupe Laibach est ignominieux en soi; il est impossible d'imaginer geste dadaïste plus réussi. Le nom de ce groupe est leur invention la plus réussie» (Taras Kermauner, Nova revija, 13/14, 1983). «Est-il possible que quelqu'un ait permis, ici à Ljubljana, la ville du premier héros de Yougoslavie (ndlr: Tito), à un jeune groupe de prendre un nom aussi douloureux pour les mémoires que celui de Laibach, demandait déjà le 5 mai 1982 ma­dame Marica Cepe depuis Delo aux autorités du pays. De fait, LAIBACH fut interdit de toute prestation scénique sous ce titre.

 

Qu'à cela ne tienne, et les membres du groupe désormais anonyme décidèrent de contourner les autorités en décembre 1984 par la tenue d'un concert incognito à Ljubljana en commémoration du suicide d'un membre du groupe «In Memoriam Tomaz Hostnik», chanteur initial du combo mort en 1982. Pour parer à toute interdiction, les affiches ne mentionnèrent nulle part le titre du groupe. Toute référence fut réduite à la suprématiste, abstraite et très énigmatique croix asymétrique de Malévitch, qui allait devenir l'emblème de LAIBACH. Seules figuraient au bas des pancartes les initiales de la salle, Malci Belic, la date et l'heure, 21 décembre à 21 heures. Et si les radios locales évitèrent soigneusement de prononcer le nom in­fâme, le public sut déchiffrer le message, qui vint en masse assister au concert qui n'eut jamais lieu. Le succès fut total, la réputation artistique du groupe garantie. La répression politique n'avait fait qu'assurer le tremplin idéal à la promotion du jeune groupe.Il fallut toutefois attendre le 17 février 1987 pour que LAIBACH puisse enfin jouer à Ljubljana sous son vrai nom. A cette occasion, son porte-parole devait dire à la presse: «Notre nom est peut-être sale, mais nous sommes propres».

 

Ce CD est donc d'abord un document sur lequel les inconditionnels du groupe se jetteront avec avidité, amateurs éclairés qui sauront apprécier à sa juste valeur l'intérêt que présente cet enregistrement pirate composé des quatre principaux titres improvisés à Ljubljana, et agrémenté de deux morceaux joués à Zagreb et deux au Festival Atonal de Berlin, cela à la même époque. En neuf compositions bruitistes, aux rythmes industriels bruts tempérés par d'étonnantes touches de jazz, LAIBACH nous assène un déchaînement de sonorités métalliques organisé en une longue symphonie sidérurgique et arti­cule autour d'une idée centrale, le procès du XXième siècle et de la Slovénie titiste.

 

«Notre nom est peut-être sale, mais nous sommes propres»

 

De «Sodba Veka» (Le jugement du Siècle) à «Sredi Bojev» (Au milieu des Combats), en passant par «Ti Ki Izzivas» (Toi, qui défies), la violence se fait animale, les tambours martèlent la cadence syncopée sous les attaques des cuivres et les assauts répétés des violons désaccordés. Les notes se font criardes sur fond d'orgues ténébreux. Dans «Sika» (La Force), le texte, murmure sur la déferlante effrénée des peaux maltraitées, s'efface devant l'élan des trompettes glorieuses. La ca­cophonie, «Musique de fosse» (Ico Vidmar), s'installe dans les bruits d'usine, le claquement des portes métalliques, le crissement des chaînes. L'industrie, monstre déshumanisant, a englouti le XXième siècle dans sa gueule béante. Les en­clumes sont frappées avec une violence inouïe, les cuivres s'abîment dans les longs grincements disharmonieux qui écra­sent les tympans. Le monde moderne a engendré la guerre totale, la mobilisation systématique des masses. Sur un bruit de pellicule de film, les tambours règlent le pas de la Garde qui monte à l'abattoir, les pulsations s'accélèrent, la peur s'insinue dans les chairs, le souffle se fait rapide, la bataille fait rage... Miel, sang et or, les nappes de synthé entament l'oraison fu­nèbre des foules sacrifiées. Le cri monstrueux de la bête traquée se mue en brame du cerf, arbre de vie, fécondité, guide vers la lumière, éternel retour. C'est Nova Akropola (Nouvelle Acropole), quand le jour se lève sur la plaine en cendres. Les ombres des guerriers disparus se relèvent, les regards extatiques convergent maintenant vers l'Acropole nouvelle. Sous le grondement d'un ciel incertain, les nouvelles lois sont scandées: Compagna! Compagna dei maccella! Eja, eja, alala! et le Fiume de d'Annunzio est ressuscité. Sous les acclamations du public, quatre discours du Maréchal Tito viennent rappeler les blessures yougoslaves, sa foi dans l'avenir, sa défense de la paix, l'orgueil de son indépendance, son nationa­lisme généreux: «A l'Est comme à l'Ouest, il doit être bien clair que nous continuerons à nous situer sur la scène étrangère comme nous le faisons depuis 1948. A savoir que nous avons notre voie propre, que nous dirons toujours bravement ce qui d'un côté est juste et ce qui ne l'est pas, ce qui de l'autre est juste et ne l'est pas». Que la paix règne dans l'harmonie recou­vrée. A une courte plage symphonique reposante pour nos oreilles déchirées (Dokumenti II) suit en cascade l'orage strident des bruits d'usine, le monde est à reconstruire éternellement. L'Europe reprend sa dynamique perpétuelle (Dokumenti III, IV), les claviers viennois et la pluie sur les toits se fondent. Au loin se fait entendre l'orage sur les crêtes alpines. Le temps peut de nouveau s'écouler, les peuples s'éveiller... Toujours, majestueux, le cerf sera là.

 

Le renouveau culturel identitaire, base des futures révolutions politiques

 

Imagerie partisane, agit-prop, projection de chasse au cerf, chants de guerre, la révolution à construire, groupe paradant en costumes de miliciens, écran frappé de l'imposante croix, les spectateurs furent soumis à un des concerts les plus courts de LAIBACH, brutal, tranchant, assourdissant, intuitif et anarchique. «Le paradoxe de ce concert, qui officiellement n'eut ja­mais lieu, est qu'il donna au public slovène une des meilleures improvisations qui fut jamais jouée par des musiciens slo­vènes, écrira Ico Vidmar, les constructions sonores provoquent plus que jamais des vibrations du diaphragme, paralysent les oreilles, et terrorisent noblement l'esprit» (Gorazd Suhadolnik).

 

laibachsympathydevil.jpgD'inspiration authentiquement totalitaire et avant-gardiste, ce concert devait durablement marquer les critiques slovènes, et asseoir la notoriété laibachienne. Sa contribution artistique au renouveau culturel slovène allait préparer les esprits à l'inéluctable et indubitablement favoriser le réveil de la petite république. Bientôt la Yougoslavie imploserait, débandade ini­tiée par Ljubljana, qui déclarerait son indépendance le 2 juillet 1990: «L'esthétique nationaliste romantique est une phobie du service culturel progressiste. LAIBACH est organiquement lié à son environnement natal et entretient jalousement un lien instinctif avec la nation slovène et son passé, tout en étant constamment conscient de son rôle dans le polygone culturel et politique de la Slovénie» (entretien paru en 1986 pour la revue HHT). Une fois supplémentaire, le renouveau culturel identi­taire allait préparer et jeter les bases des futures révolutions politiques.

 

M.B. December 21,1984 (NSK 3-Mute) trouvera aisément sa place parmi les Rekapitulation 80-84 (Walter Ulbricht Schallfolien), Ljubljana-Beograd-Zagreb (NSK l-Mute) et autre Through the Occupied Netherlands (Staaltape) qui résument au mieux la première période bruitiste du concept LAIBACH et établissent les bases éthiques et musicales de son œuvre prolifique.

 

Laurent SCHANG.

 

 

00:05 Publié dans Musique | Lien permanent | Commentaires (2) | Tags : musique, slovénie, totalitarisme, art | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

dimanche, 08 novembre 2009

Primo futurismo italiano e futurismo russo

marinetti-futurismo.jpgPrimo Futurismo italiano e futurismo russo: estetiche a confronto in occasione del centenario


di Stella Bianchi / http://www.italiasociale.org/

I rapporti tra i movimenti futuristi italiano e russo servono a capire l’esordio delle avanguardie europee:,Marinetti e Majakovskij, rappresentano un’intreccio di confronti e divergenze tra i due filoni futuristici. .

Il Futurismo ha conosciuto la sua realizzazione più grande in Italia e in Russia, e la storia dell’ intersezione dei due movimenti è di primaria importanza perché spesso si è posto il problema del primato cronologico del primo rispetto al secondo.
Dietro alla complessa vicenda dei rapporti tra i due "futurismi", si cela una questione ancora più intrigante, che tocca la nozione stessa di "avanguardia". Questo termine nacque in Francia e fu mutuato dal registro linguistico militare perché la sua funzione di superamento della cultura borghese, doveva essere di rottura e d’innovazione sia nel campo estetico che in quello politico..
L'agognata saldatura delle 'due avanguardie' fu un sogno che divenne dominante dopo lo sconvolgimento dovuto alla prima guerra mondiale, col sovvertimento degli istituti politici tradizionali e con il sorgere del Bolscevismo in Russia e del Fascismo in Italia.
Così, la questione del "primato" e delle "influenze", pur continuando ad esser discussa soprattutto sotto il profilo artistico, ha acquisito una valenza metastorica, perché si rifaceva retrospettivamente al periodo d'oro del primo Futurismo.
La ricostruzione documentaria del dibattito che ne scaturì (con l'intervento, tra gli altri, di Marinetti e Majakovskij , di Prezzolini, di Croce, di Jakobson,di Livsic, di Chlebnikov e di altri..) consente di mettere in luce lo snodo decisivo dell’interpretazione critica dell'avanguardia novecentesca.
L’ampia silloge di fonti originali esaminate negli ultimi trent’anni da più studiosi, ha portato un contributo essenziale alle celebrazioni per il centenario del Futurismo, evidenziando gli aspetti dell’influenza occidentale nei confronti della cultura slava in Russia.

Il dibattito sul primato del Futurismo italiano rispetto a quello russo sembra aver trovato una soluzione perché ormai tutti gli studiosi sono concordi nel sostenere che quello italiano precedette quello russo.
I due movimenti artistico-letterari si sono influenzati a vicenda pur provenendo da formazioni differenti.
Il Futurismo italiano si è affacciato alla ribalta con il noto Manifesto di Filippo Tommaso Martinetti pubblicato agli inizi di febbraio del 1909 da diversi quotidiani inizialmente a Milano e poi su La Gazzetta dell’Emilia a Bologna il 5 febbraio 1909, L’Arena di Verona il 9 febbraio 1909 e infine su Le Figaro di Parigi il 20 febbraio 1909.Questo fu il primo di una lunga serie di manifesti programmatici del Futurismo che seguirono negli anni successivi.
Nel 1910 Marinetti, dopo esser stato assolto dall’accusa di oltraggio al pudore con la sua opera Mafarka il futurista,trovò inaspettati alleati tra i giovani pittori Boccioni,Carrà e Russolo e con il poeta Palazzeschi.
Nel 1910 uscì il Manifesto Futurista della pittura promosso dai pittori divisionisti Boccioni,Carrà,Balla e Severini.(abolizione della prospettiva tradizionale).
Iniziò così una serie di serate a tema futurista durante le quali Marinetti incontrava il suo pubblico e spesso nascevano risse e discussioni.


Nello stesso periodo in Europa si erano sviluppate molte correnti poetiche di avanguardia che riflettevano i gusti dell’epoca come il Simbolismo che in Russia aveva trovato una sua specifica collocazione che facilitò l’introduzione del Futurismo italiano.
La prima volta che in Russia fu introdotto il termine Futurismo fu quando si compose il gruppo di artisti che operavano a San Pietroburgo e che furono denominati egofuturisti poiché esaltavano l’individualismo come chiave di filosofia del futuro.
Gli scambi culturali tra Italia e Russia si erano realizzati già dal 1905 con la rivista letteraria simbolista di Marinetti “Poesia” che era talmente diffusa a Mosca che tra il 1909 e il 1910 comparvero altrettanti articoli futuristi italiani su riviste letterarie russe.
Nel 1911 e anche nel 1912 più di un artista cubista russo venne in Italia per conoscere di persona il Futurismo nascente e da qui si formò una corrente di cubofuturisti russi tra cui Kamenskij.
Nello stesso anno, cioè nel 1911 veniva pubblicata in Francia un’ampia raccolta di manifesti futuristi che trovarono nei poeti francesi Guillaume Apollinaire e Blaise Cendrars(il poeta soldato) i suoi più illustri estensori ampliando così la platea degli artisti che conobbero ed aderirono alle teorie di Marinetti e dei suoi compagni.

futurismo_roma.jpg
In questo modo anche in Russia cominciarono a fervere molti sperimentalismi letterari soprattutto intorno al poeta Chlebonikov che giocava con gli echi simultanei delle parole , con le assonanze , con la creazione di neologismi , con il linguaggio infantile asemantico.E già da allora,la ricerca strettamente formale russa antiaccademica stava avanzando i suoi primi rilevanti progressi attraverso molti sperimentalismi letterari.
Spesso alcuni gruppi di artisti russi organizzavano mostre,si riunivano in serate speciali in cui declamavano i principi della loro estetica oppure passeggiavano per strada con vestiti stravaganti e i volti dipinti declamando tra i passanti a viva voce e in maniera provocatoria i versi dei loro poemi come soleva fare Natalja Goncarova Michail Larionov,David e Nikolaj Burljuk,Benedict Livsic,Aleksej Krucenyc e Vladimir Majakovskij (1909).Ma c’e’ da dire che le loro provocazioni non erano condivise dal popolo.Questi artisti che operavano a Mosca , facevano parte del gruppo Gileia e si contrapponevano ai futuristi di San Pietroburgo perché si battevano per la collettività e per il movimento organizzato.
La ricerca del nuovo, in Russia non era però proiettata verso il mondo moderno, come in Italia(modernismo tecnologico) poiché la Russia necessitava di un profondo e strutturale rinnovamento della società e questo elemento era vissuto come una basilare esigenza anche se spesso l’artista si dibatteva tra le innovazioni occidentali e la necessità di non snaturare la cultura slava e quindi si poneva l’esigenza di rimanere fedele alle proprie radici e alla propria nazione(primitivismo)
Per questo motivo,la diffidenza nei confronti dei modelli occidentali,portò alcune avanguardie russe agli antipodi della cultura futurista dominante, privilegiando modelli fantasiosi con riferimenti preistorici e precristiani(gruppo neoprimitivista “Fante di Quadri” di Natalja Goncarova).
Ecco perché Marinetti trovò spesso grandi ostacoli nei contatti con il Futurismo russo e più volte venne accolto da loro con diffidenza in quanto nella sua estetica predicava la realizzazione del futuro nel presente e perché le sue teorie risultavano paternalistiche,invece i russi concepivano l’arte come ricerca delle radici popolari del passato,al servizio del popolo e come precorritrice della futura rivoluzione
La divergenza tra i due Futurismi si concretizzò definitivamente nel 1914 ad opera di Majakovskij che attorno al LEF (Levyi Front Iskusstv),Fronte di sinistra delle arti, aveva riunito poeti,scenografi e registi.(Einsenstein)

Nel 1913 fu fondata da un gruppo di intellettuali(Papini, Soffici e Prezzolini) la rivista letteraria Lacerba che diede spazio al Futurismo italiano nell’esaltazione anarchica del “genio” e del “superuomo”.In questo periodico comparvero interventi di Marinetti,Folgore,Boccioni,Carrà e Govoni.
Lacerba pubblicò anche il Programma politico futurista nel quale venivano attaccate le istituzioni clericali,liberali e moderate di Giolitti e di Gentiloni.


Le contraddizioni tra i due Futurismi sono molte.Il Futurismo italiano inneggiava alla rivoluzione tecnologica, esaltava la fiducia illimitata nel progresso, decretando inesorabilmente la fine delle vecchie ideologie e della letteratura ottocentesca, viste come passatismo da superare.
“Un’automobile ruggente è più bello della Nike di Samotracia” l’aggettivo bello andava al maschile perché l’automobile era considerata un oggetto maschile che esprimeva un senso di potenza ascrivibile solo ad un soggetto maschio .….
L’esaltazione del dinamismo, della velocità ,della simultaneità nella scrittura e nelle arti figurative erano gli elementi fondanti del Futurismo italiano e li troviamo espressi al meglio nelle opere di Boccioni.
In occidente, l’espandersi di grandi città, il moltiplicarsi di industrie, di catene di montaggio, di mezzi di trasporto, di metropolitane, di automobili, l’estendersi di strade illuminate artificialmente,il telegrafo senza fili ,la radio ,gli aeroplani,spingeva ad un concetto di arte vista come cambiamento veloce delle cose fino all’elaborazione di un’estetica della velocità.

Il Futurismo russo esaltava la visione frammentaria della realtà ,e nella lingua scritta usava le parole come mattoncini(cubismo a parole)in una concezione dello spazio che si stava sgretolando e che ibridandosi con altre avanguardie diventava cubofuturismo..
I futuristi italiani per contrapporsi alla cultura tardo ottocentesca ormai priva di forti contenuti, arrivarono a scardinare completamente la sintassi con l’abolizione dell’aggettivo, dell’avverbio,della punteggiatura e con l’esaltazione dell’onomatopea enfatizzata dalla ripetizione martellante di parole o di intere frasi(ma questo elemento lo troviamo anche in Apollinaire)alla ricerca di un linguaggio slegato dai canoni di bellezza tradizionali(Palazzeschi)…

cavaliere-rosso-1913-de-carlo-carra-museo-del-novecento-comune-di-milano.jpg



Se nel Futurismo russo emergeva la frammentazione della realtà in particelle più piccole(movimento letterario della Centrifuga), in quello italiano invece si rappresentava l’attimo inteso come parte del movimento stesso…fino ad arrivare al Divisionismo.
Nel Futurismo russo spesso vi erano interpolazioni tra testo visivo e testo scritto in un analogismo transmentale dal quale scaturivano tutti i significati possibili e tutte le idee (uso del linguaggio come potenza creativa).
Nel transmentalismo, le parole rappresentavano segni (una specie di Strutturalismo in fieri) generatori di nuovi inediti orizzonti espressivi che diventavano le chiavi interpretative della realtà.
Nello sforzo di pervenire ad un’interpretazione più definita della realtà,si arrivò fino al Raggismo(Goncarova) in cui la struttura a raggio colpiva ogni elemento per cogliere anche la più piccola rifrazione della luce.
Kandinskij tradusse più tardi, Il Trattato dell’Armonia di Schomberg e per spiegare la sua estetica pittorica usava una metafora musicale(transmentale): ”il colore è il tasto,l’occhio è il martelletto,l’anima è un pianoforte con molte corde”.
Da qui si evince la funzione estetica e poetica del linguaggio,come la definì
Jacobson nei suoi studi.
Molti artisti russi mutuarono la loro arte da pregresse esperienze come cartellonisti(i lubok erano delle stampe popolari russe usate come cartelloni pubblicitari).Ma questo accadde anche per artisti italiani come Soffici e Boccioni
E poi si ritorna alla russa Goncarova anch’essa disegnatrice prima che poetessa…
Majakovskij aveva iniziato come cartellonista pubblicitario approdando poi alla poesia intesa però come propaganda politica ed espressione della rivoluzione e come capovolgimento dei valori sentimentali e ideologici fino ad arrivare a rappresentazioni teatrali nelle quali l’azione è definita dal movimento della folla,l’urto delle idee,le critiche al mondo piccolo-borghese.
I futuristi italiani si descrivevano come’ prepotenti’ , dinamici ,militaristi,patrioti,esaltavano la guerra come sola igiene del mondo,si opponevano alle istituzioni come i musei e consideravano la donna come un soggetto destabilizzante per l’arte e quindi da emarginare.(anche se più tardi nel 1912 qualcuno scrisse Il Manifesto delle donne futuriste) Ecco un’altra contraddizione che evidenziava la magmatica dialettica interna al Futurismo italiano.

Nel Futurismo russo invece operavano molte donne attive come Natalja Goncarova,Alexandra Exter,Olga Rozanova,Lioubov Popova,Varvara Stepanova,Nadeshda Udaltsova.

In poche parole , Martinetti voleva trasmettere un impulso impattante, una forte spinta alla trasformazione e al rinnovamento della società e avrebbe voluto creare un fronte unico futurista in Europa per poi estenderlo a tutto il mondo.

I tentativi di mettere a confronto questi due Futurismi hanno spesso portato a conclusioni ossimoriche : è stato detto tutto e il contrario di tutto.
Alcuni studiosi hanno sostenuto che il Futurismo russo avesse influenzato quello italiano, qualcun altro ha sempre sostenuto il contrario, come il poeta russo Majakovskij.
Ma è certo che il Futurismo italiano ha il grande merito di aver contagiato anche altre nazioni come la Francia,e resta nella sua unicità come la confluenza di quelle avanguardie europee che il Modernismo influenzò profondamente.

Forse il Futurismo italiano si avvantaggio di un primato cronologico,anche se c’è da dire che i primi contatti tra intellettuali italiani e russi avvennero a Parigi.
Ardengo Soffici nel 1903 si recò nella capitale francese dove conobbe una coppia di editori e lì inizio a pubblicare suoi scritti;ci fu poi la collaborazione di G.Papini a riviste letterarie francesi …ma nello stesso tempo Goncarova si trasferì a Parigi insieme ad altri artisti russi e lì nell’ effervescente capitale d’oltralpe, i contatti con i migliori autori simobolisti furono inevitabili.
Insomma, ci furono contatti e scambi da ambedue le parti e Parigi all’epoca era la culla delle migliori produzioni artistico-letterarie.
Ci furono molte interrelazioni tra l’estetica russa e quella italiana che stanno a testimoniare la speciale corrispondenza tra la nostra spiritualità e quella russa e ciò dimostra una certa consonanza tra le due culture.
In tutti e due i casi però,si è passati dall’elaborazione teorica ad uno sbocco politico dei due movimenti che suggellò un divergente percorso ideologico poichè, dopo il deflagrante evento della Prima Guerra Mondiale , gran parte dei futuristi italiani appoggiarono più o meno attivamente il regime fascista che nella sua propaganda si riferiva continuamente a quell’insieme di valori propugnati dai marinettiani mentre il Futurismo russo si fece portavoce dei principi dei soviet.

Prezzolini assimilava il Futurismo al Bolscevismo e Croce assimilava il Futurismo al Fascismo..due posizioni estreme e semplicistiche al punto tale che il nostro Futurismo venne ben presto sconfessato dal Fascismo poiché non dava il giusto spazio alla Storia , alla memoria del passato e alla città di Roma culla di Civiltà.In Russia, dopo l’avvento dei soviet, molti futuristi esiliarono all’estero soprattutto a Parigi e Majakovskij si suicidò nel 1930.
In Italia il secondo Futurismo si divise in due fasi:la prima và dal 1918 al 1928 e in questo periodo il Futurismo si legò al postcubismo e al costruttivismo.
Nella seconda fase che và dal 1929 al 1938 il Futurismo si affiancò al surrealismo.Di quest’ultima corrente fecero parte i pittori: Fillia(Luigi Colombo), Enrico Prampolini,Nicolay Diulgheroff,Mario Sironi,Ardengo Soffici e Ottone Rosai.CarloCarrà si staccò ben presto dal gruppo prendendo le distanze dall’ideologia fascista e abbracciando la metafisica.


-L’Avanguardia trasversale –Il futurismo tra Italia e Russia di Cesare G.De Michelis
Conferenza di presentazione libro presso libreria Mondatori Venezia 16 giugno 2009
-L’Arena di Verona 18 maggio 2008 pag.57 a cura di A.Pantano
-Archivio del Corriere della Sera.it-La Goncarova e Larionov:mostra a Milano
-Il venerdì futurista-Conferenza tenuta dal prof.Rino Cortiana presso la
Biblioteca dipartimentale di Cà Foscari Venezia il 12 giugno 2009

30/06/2009

 

 

00:10 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, avant-gardes, italie, russie, futurisme | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

mercredi, 16 septembre 2009

Concerning Louis-Ferdinand Céline

breker1_thumbnail.jpg

Concerning Louis-Fredinand Celine

By Arno Breker  / http://meaus.com/

In the year 1940, I made the acquaintance of Louis-Ferdinand Celine in Paris at the German Institute. At that time he was considered among the most important writers of France. I knew his literary work; he, my sculptural work.

Celine was one of those who, notwithstanding existing differences between France and Germany, loved and understood my homeland. "The ultimate reconciliation and cooperation of our two countries--those are the things that matter most," he said to me during our first meeting.

The desire to do his portrait seized me at once. His facial features, strongly pronounced and enlivened, fascinated me. There was a physical peculiarity about him; this was the discrepancy between the volume of his head and the leanness of his neck, which was emanciated. A discrepancy which I wanted to make up for by means of a neck scarf, just as he always wore toward the end of his life.

Before the war I found Celine to be very elegant. And only afterward did he assume the behavior of a Bohemian of the 19th century. As everyone knows, he was surrounded by a number of cats and dogs and occupied in Meudon a large building that had already begun to decay a little. I visited him there one more time shortly before his death in 1961.

The atmosphere of his apartment was typically French. The furniture and objects that were around him, in their permanent appearance, had seemed for decades to be torpid and immovable. Dust and the patina of time began to cover them with a strange stillness.

On this afternoon Celine took a long look into my eyes, spoke very little, and really seemed to have said everything he had to say in his books. The few words he did say concerned human existence, its stay on earth, and eternity.

As I was leaving, Celine said to me, "This is not 'goodbye'! We shall remain." Taking his hand, I answered him full of emotion, "My dear, my great friend, so be it."

 

 Copyright 1999 Museum of European Art

dimanche, 13 septembre 2009

KONK: durée

duree.jpg

00:25 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : dessins, caricatures, humour, art, france | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

lundi, 29 juin 2009

L. F. Céline par Gilberto Giovagnoli

Louis-Ferdinand Céline par Gilberto Giovagnoli






















 

 

Source: http://lepetitcelinien.blogspot.com/

vendredi, 05 juin 2009

!Liberate!

¡Libérate!

mardi, 24 mars 2009

Le porteur de Torche de Willy Meller

meller-_torchbearer_at_solstice_place.jpg
En souvenir de tous les amis de la 7ème Cie MAT, en manoeuvre à Vogelsang en juin 1983, ce "Porteur de Torche" sous lequel nous aimions nous reposer en ces soirées si chaudes du début de l'été...

00:10 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, sculpture, allemagne | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

vendredi, 20 février 2009

La Nymphe de Maillol

maillol.jpg

00:05 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, sculpture, france | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

jeudi, 12 février 2009

L'été de Maillol

Maillol_Summer_HS7417.jpg

00:05 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, sculpture, france | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

mercredi, 04 février 2009

Rechtse kunst, een paradox? Over van Ostaijen en Dali

Rechtse kunst, een paradox? Over van Ostaijen & Dali

Ex: http://www.nationalisme.info/

00:15 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, peinture, surréalisme, flandre, espagne, catalogne, dali | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

dimanche, 01 février 2009

Statues de Maillol

MaillolStatues%E9cran.jpg

00:05 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : art, sculpture, france, paris | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook