Tristan Tzara and the Jewish Roots of Dada, Part 2

Brenton Sanderson


Other Jews involved with Zurich Dada

Among the other Jewish artists and intellectuals who joined Tzara in neutral Switzerland to escape involvement in the war was the painter and sculptor Marcel Janco (1895–1984), his brothers Jules and George, the painter and experimental film-maker Hans Richter (1888–1976), the essayist Walter Serner (1889–1942), and the painter and writer Arthur Segal (1875–1944).

Advertisement

Marcel Janco was a significant leader within the Dada movement. Born Marcel Hermann Iancu, Janco grew up in a family of upper-middle-class Jews in Bucharest. Having enrolled to study chemistry at the University of Zurich, in 1916 Marcel and his brother Georges reunited with their childhood friend Tristan Tzara at the opening night of the Cabaret Voltaire. Janco’s primary contributions to Zurich Dada consisted of painting as well as etching and woodcut designs for posters and journal covers for Tzara. Hockensmith notes that Janco’s work in each of these media “was highly influenced by primitive art, which the Dadaists understood broadly as the art of Oceanic and African peoples, the art of the mentally ill, and the art of children.” She notes that “For Janco, as for other Dada artists, the primitive provided a means of escape from the bankruptcy of the western European traditions of painting and sculpture.”[i]

Marco Janco

While in Zurich, Janco sculpted an oversize mask of Tzara made from paper, board, burlap, ink and gouache. The mask shows Tzara in ochre and purple, with a twisted, distorted face. In masks like this Janco used African art as a means of breaking with the European tradition and to show that art could be conjured up from even the crudest materials.[ii]

Untitled (Mask, Portrait of Tristan Tzara) by Marcel Janco (1919)

In 1940 Janco fled Europe and took refuge in Tel Aviv, where in 1953 he founded the Israeli artist colony at Ein Hod. A revered figure in Israel, The Janco Dada Museum was established in his honor there in 1983. It exhibits the work of Janco and other Jewish artists from the Dada and Surrealist movements.

Johannes Siegfried Richter was born into a wealthy Jewish family in Berlin. Wounded while training with the German military, Richter and his wife travelled to Switzerland to consult physicians about his back injuries; while in Zurich he met up with Tristan Tzara and Marcel Janco. From 1917 to 1919 Richter was closely involved with Dada events, exhibitions, and publications, as well as producing paintings he called “visionary portraits”. As a Jew and modernist artist and filmmaker, Richter was forced to leave Germany in the thirties and migrated to the United States where he taught at the Film Institute of City College in New York.

Jean Arp, Tristan Tzara and Hans Richter in Zurich (1917)

Arthur Aron Segal grew up in provincial city of Botosani, Romania, the son of middle-class Jews. At the outbreak of World War I Segal fled to Switzerland and settled in a small village near Zurich with a reputation as a refuge for artists and intellectuals. Segal’s house soon became a gathering place for those associated with Zurich Dada, including Tzara. Segal exhibited his paintings at the Cabaret Voltaire and later at the Kunstsalon Wolfsberg.  The inventor of “simultaneous painting” and “spectralism,” Segal applied the concept of “artistic equivalence” in his abstract paintings, which was derived from the ethical principle of equality and non-hierarchical organization. Sandqvist maintains that the Hassidic conviction according to which “all people are equal before God and before themselves in an ultimate, immovable harmony” was translated by Segal into his artistic theory, a theory that had an explicitly radical political spin.[iii]

Segal contributed woodcuts to Dada journals like Dada 3 and Der Zeltweg. When Romania entered the war in 1916 he officially became a draft dodger. At the end of the war he moved to Berlin and became a member of the Novembergruppe, an artist society with communist sympathies formed just after the November Spartacist Revolution in Germany to promote the integration of art and society. Segal fled Berlin in 1933, first to Mallorca, and then to London in 1936 where he reopened his painting school.

“Der Bildhauer” (1919) by Arthur Segal

Walter Serner (born Walter Eduard Seligmann) fled to Zurich from Vienna in 1915 to avoid being conscripted and to avoid arrest for forging a doctor’s certificate of ill health for a friend. Unlike other Dadaists he initially believed that rational understanding produced the best kind of social criticism and denounced the early Dadaist for their “unforgivable blasphemy against the intellect” and of not offering any real alternative to what they wanted to destroy. This position was soon to change drastically and Serner joined Tzara in becoming one of the most radical of the Dadaists. In 1918 he wrote a Dadaist manifesto entitled “Letze Lockerung” (Final Dissolution) which he read out at the eighth Dada soirée in April 1919, and which was published in the Anthologie Dada the following month. This manifesto, Serner’s most significant contribution to Zurich Dada, “expresses a profound nihilism that Hans Richter would later characterize as the ‘definitive watchword of all that Dada meant philosophically.’ In it, Serner annihilated the ground of aesthetic judgement and creation, dismantling convention with irony and obscenity.”[iv]

Walter Serner

After Zurich, Dada was to take root in Berlin, Cologne, Hanover, New York and Paris, and each time it was Tristan Tzara who forged the links between these groups, by organizing (despite the disruption of the war) exchanges of pictures, books and journals. In each of these cities Dadaists “gathered to vent their rage and agitate for the annihilation of the old to make way for the new.”[v] Tzara had made strident antinationalism a central tenet of Dada, and Dickerman observes that “Dada’s promotion of a proto-globalized identity is even evident in the stationary that Tristan Tzara produced for the ‘Mouvement Dada’ in Paris, which mimicked corporate models by listing Dada branches underneath the letterhead.”[vi]

Dada in Paris

By 1919, when Tzara left Switzerland to join the poet André Breton in Paris, he was, according to Richter, regarded as an “Anti-Messiah” and a “prophet”.[vii] His 1918 Dada Manifesto in the third edition of Dada had appeared in Paris and, according to Breton “Tzara’s 1918 Manifesto was violently explosive. It proclaimed a rupture between art and logic, the necessity of the great negative task to accomplish; it praised spontaneity to the skies.”[viii] It was felt by the editors of the avant-garde literary review Littérature that Tzara could fill the gap left after the deaths of Apollinaire (another Jew) and Vaché. Gale notes that “Tzara immediately became the most extreme contributor to Littérature,” and by the end of 1919 “the Littérature editors had to defend his work from nationalistic attacks in the Nouvelle Revue Française.”[ix] Nevertheless, a coordinated Dada insurgency was not really achieved until Tzara’s arrival in Paris the following year.

In addition to his messianic zeal, Tzara brought to Paris Dada a skill in managing events and audiences, which transformed literary gatherings into public performances that generated enormous publicity. In the five months from January 1920 he helped organize six group performances, two art exhibitions and more than a dozen publications. Dempsey notes that “the popularity of these events with the public soon turned these revolutionary ‘anti-artists’ into celebrities. The cumulative effect of this first ‘Dada season’ as it became known, was to mark the movement as a nihilistic collective force leveled at the noblest ideals of advanced society.[x] The performances with which Dadaists tested their Parisian audience were consistently aggressive in nature, and aggression characterized many of their artworks and journals. As one source notes: “Like the plays and stage appearances, individual works produced within Dada emanate a violent humour, ranging from vulgar to sacrilegious language to images of weapons and wounds, or references to taboos great and small: suicide, cannibalism, masturbation, vomiting.”[xi]

It was widely observed at the time that the spectacles and output of Paris Dada constantly exhibited a “profound violence: physical hurt, damage to language, a wounding of pride or moral spirit,” that to native observers seemed wholly “uncharacteristic of French sensibility.”[xii] Comoedia, a Parisian arts daily focused on theatre and cinema, soon became the central forum for debates over Dada and its effects on French audiences. Charges of enemy subversion, lunacy and charlatanism regularly appeared — just as it did in many German newspapers — pretexts to isolate what seemed to many a traitorous insurgency against bedrock national values.[xiii] Attacks on Dada in Paris soon took on an openly anti-Semitic tone when the French writer Jean Giraudoux, in explaining his rejection of Dada, pointed out: “I write in French, as I am neither Swiss nor Jewish and because I have all requisite honours and degrees.”[xiv]

The French cultural establishment had looked askance at Dada since it had arrived in Paris at the beginning of 1920. It was common knowledge that the Dadaists were avowed partisans of revolution and the communist uprisings in Berlin and Munich that had barely been put down. Trotsky’s red legions were then cutting a swathe of death and destruction in Poland, and perceiving that a Jewish ethnic agenda united Trotsky’s Bolshevism and Tzara’s Dada, the La Revue de l’Epoque declared: “The grand master of Dadaism is in reality the Jew Bronstein called Trotsky.”[xv] The connection was confirmed in the minds of many Parisians by Dada’s appearance at socialist and anarchist venues in the city. The connection was also clear in the mind of the Romanian nationalist Nicolae Rosu who noted that: “Dadaism and French Surrealism exploit the moral and spiritual exhaustion of a war-torn society: the aggressive revolutionary currents in art seem to be an explosion of primal instincts detached from reason; post-war German socialism, largely developed by Jews, uses the opportunity of defeat to dictate the Weimar constitution (written by a Jew), and then through Spartakism, to install Bolshevism. Russian Bolshevism is the work of Jewish activists.”[xvi]

In October 1920, the messianic Walter Serner arrived in Paris and reconvened with Tristan Tzara, who had just returned from his first visit to Romania since 1915. However, Serner’s campaign of shameless self-promotion, which included placing an advertisement in a Berlin newspaper describing himself as the world leader of Dada, was resented by Tzara, who was eager to establish his own priority as leader. By 1921 many of the original Dadaists had converged on Paris, and arguments between members created difficulties. By 1922 internal fighting between Tzara, Francis Picabia, and André Breton led to the dissolution of Dada.”[xvii] Dada was officially ended in 1924 when Breton issued the first Surrealist Manifesto. Hans Richter claimed that “Surrealism devoured and digested Dada.”[xviii] Tzara distanced himself from the new trend, disagreeing with its dream-centered Freudian dynamic, despite its anti-rationalism. As Robert Short notes:

For Tzara, automatism [literary and artistic free association] was a visceral spasm, an explosion of the senses and the instinct that expressed the primitive and chaotic intensity in man and Nature. Where Surrealist automatism was introverted and sought to reveal patterns in the human unconscious, Dada art mimicked an objective chaos. … Surrealism was to prospect and exploit a vast substratum of mental resources which the Western cultural and economic tradition had deliberately tried to seal off. In place of science and reason, Surrealism was to cultivate the image and the analogy. In its efforts to restimulate the associative faculties of the mind, it turned its attention with respect and enthusiasm toward the thought processes of children and primitive peoples, towards the lyrical manifestations of lunacy and the synthesizing notions of occultism.[xix]

Tzara also disagreed at times with the political orientation of Surrealism which evolved from the near-nihilist anarchism of the Dadaists to a strict adherence to the Communist Party line by the late 1920s, and then to Trotskyism following Breton’s personal meeting with Trotsky in Mexico in 1938.[xx] Nonetheless, Tzara willingly reunited with Breton in 1934 to organize a mock trial of the Surrealist Salvador Dalí, who at the time was a confessed admirer of Hitler.[xxi]

André Breton, Paul Éluard, Tristan Tzara with French Dadaist and Surrealist poet Benjamin Péret

Tzara’s own politics were profoundly radical and with Hitler’s ascension to power in 1933 effectively marking the end of Germany’s avant-garde, Tzara threw his support behind the French Communist Party (PCF). The allegiance of the great majority of Dadaists to Marxism was paradoxical given that Marxist dialectical materialism and forecast of the historical inevitability of communist revolution was based on a kind of mathematical rationalism that ran directly counter to the Dada spirit.

Tzara’s allegiance to Marxism-Leninism was reportedly questioned by the PCF and the Soviet authorities. This was because Tzara’s irregular vision of utopia made use of particularly violent imagery — shocking even by Stalinist standards.[xxii] Tzara backed Stalinism and rejected Trotskyism (at least publically), and unlike some of the leading Surrealists, even submitted to PCF demands for the adoption of socialist realism during the writers’ congress of 1935. Nonetheless, Tzara still interpreted Dada and Surrealism as revolutionary currents, and presented them as such to the public. After the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War he briefly visited Madrid with the Soviet Jewish reporter and future mass-murderer Ilya Ehrenburg while it was under siege by the Nationalists.[xxiii]

During World War Two, Tzara took refuge from the German occupation forces by moving to the southern areas controlled by the Vichy regime. Back in Romania he was stripped of his Romanian citizenship, and his writings were banned by the regime of Ion Antonescu along with 44 other Jewish-Romanian authors. In France, the anti-Semitic and pro-German publication Je Suis Partout made his whereabouts known to the Gestapo. In late 1940–early 1941, he joined a group of anti-Nazi and Jewish refugees in Marseille who were seeking to flee Europe. Unable to escape occupied France he joined the French Resistance and contributed to their published magazines, and managed the cultural broadcast for the Free French Forces clandestine radio station.

During 1945, he served under the Provisional Government of the French Republic as a representative to the National Assembly, and two years later received French citizenship. Tzara remained a spokesman for Dada, and in 1950 delivered a series of nine radio addresses to his Parisian audience discussing the topic of “the avant-garde revues in the origin of the new poetry.”[xxiv] Towards the end of his life Tzara returned to his Jewish mystical roots, with Codrescu noting that “After Dada, after Surrealism, after fighting against Fascists in the Spanish Civil War, after the Second World War, after the Holocaust, after membership of the French Communist Party, Tzara returned to the Kabbalah. He studied and wrote about the secrets of the language of Villon and Rabelais, in whose work he discerned the mystical workings of the Kabbalistic Language Crystal.”

In 1956, Tzara visited Hungary just as the hated government of Imre Nagy faced a popular revolt (with strong undercurrents of anti-Semitism), and while receptive of the Hungarians’ demand for political liberalization, did not support their emancipation from Soviet control, describing the independence demanded by local writers as “an abstract notion.” He returned to France just as the Revolution broke out. Ordered by the PCF to be silent on the events in Hungary, Tzara withdrew from public life, and dedicating himself to promoting the African art that he had been collecting for years. He died in 1963 and was buried in the Montparnasse cemetery in Paris.

Go to Part 3.

REFERENCES

Beitchman, P. (1988) ‘Symbolism in the Streets’, In: I Am a Process with No Subject, University of Florida Press, Gainesville.

Bradley, F. (2001) Movements in Modern Art – Surrealism, Tate Gallery Publishing, London.

Codrescu, A. (2009) The Posthuman Dada Guide: tzara and lenin play chess, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Dempsey, A. (2002) Styles, Schools and Movements – An Encylopaedic Guide to Modern Art, Thames & Hudson, London.

Dickerman, L. (2005) ‘Introduction & Zurich,’ In Dada Ed. By Leah Dickerman, Dada, National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.

Gale, M. (2004) Dada & Surrealism, Phaidon, London.

Haslam, M. (1978) The Real World of the Surrealists, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London.

Hockensmith, A. (2005) ‘Artists’ Biographies,’ In Dada Ed. By Leah Dickerman, Dada, National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.

Livezeanu, I. (2005) ‘From Dada to Gaga: The Peripatetic Romanian Avant-Garde Confronts Communism,’ in Mihai Dinu Gheorghiu, Lucia Dragomir (eds.), Littératures et pouvoir symbolique. Colloque tenu à Bucarest (Roumanie), Editura Paralela, Paris.

Mileaf, J. & Witkovsky, M.S (2005) ‘Paris,’ In: Dada Ed. By Leah Dickerman, National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.

Richter, H. (2004) Dada. Art and Anti-art, Thames & Hudson, London & New York.

Rojas, C. (1993) Salvador Dalí, or the Art of Spitting on Your Mother’s Portrait, Penn State University Press, University Park.

Schnapp, J.T. (2006) ‘The Dada revolution’ In: Art of the Twentieth Century – 1900-1919 The Avant-garde Movements, Skira, Italy.

Short, R. (1994) Dada and Surrealism, Laurence King Publishing, London.

Waldberg, P. (1997) Surrealism, Thames & Hudson, London.


ENDNOTES

[i] Hockensmith p. 477

[ii] Gale p. 52

[iii] Sandqvist p. 296

[iv] Hockensmith p. 486

[v] Dempsey p. 115

[vi] Dickerman, p. 1

[vii] Richter p. 168

[viii] Bradley, p. 18-19

[ix] Gale p. 180

[x] Mileaf & Witkovsky p. 349

[xi] Ibid. p 358

[xii] Ibid. p. 350

[xiii] Ibid. p. 352

[xiv] Ibid. p. 366

[xv] Haslam p. 65

[xvi] Codrescu p. 174

[xvii] Dempsey p. 119

[xviii] Richter p. 191

[xix] Short p. 69 & 83

[xx] Waldberg p. 18

[xxi] Rojas p. 98

[xxii] Beitchman p. 48-49

[xxiii] Livezeanu, p. 245-246

[xxiv] Hockensmith p. 489

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

46 Comments to "Tristan Tzara and the Jewish Roots of Dada, Part 2"

  1. Connor Dirk's Gravatar Connor Dirk
    November 21, 2011 - 8:14 pm | Permalink

    @thm: It’s probably best that you not represent White Nationalists publicly. You’re not ready. I’ll let you know when the time is right.

  2. Connor Dirk's Gravatar Connor Dirk
    November 21, 2011 - 7:57 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: No one takes seriously your inane remarks. Note my standard of excellence. Follow me.

  3. Joe Webb's Gravatar Joe Webb
    November 21, 2011 - 1:51 pm | Permalink

    I forgot to add that the two white cops who showed up , especially the Sergeant (Kratt… big muscular Germanic..I told him he looked like Mr. Clean, and he said that was what happens when you lose your hair. He grinned. I told him he looked great, what a cop is supposed to look like White, friendly, muscular and rational..(No , i did not say that…just to be honest.) supported me. The first white cop was a bit agitated and hostile but I persuaded him, particularly when I stated that I was going to the city council with all this. He was worried that I would diss him. Politics being more important than Absolute Truth, I told him not to worry, that he would be praised.

  4. Joe Webb's Gravatar Joe Webb
    November 21, 2011 - 1:44 pm | Permalink

    @thm: the short answer is no. I am a minority of one where I live, in the belly of the beast, Palo Alto area full of jews. Then I don’t have a job to lose. Those sympathetic folks, like those who give me thumbs-up on my bumper sticker (America First, Not Israel) or leave notes, have jobs and are in fear of the jews. Then, even others who are more or less in agreement…and whose exposure is minimal, have a hard time showing up to help.

    I just finished the first part of the deal yesterday, with the last performance of Parade! by the Palo Alto Players. I was hassled by a mexican cop , which I remarked as another affirmative action hire by PAPD in an appended note to my original piece by Kevin, and also ran down the Free Speech angle …the Palo Alto Players stomping on my free speed while getting a free ride on the tax payers of Palo Alto for their venue. I also noted the recently imposed eruv on Palo Alto (the first try about 11 years ago; I led the opposition that stirred the pot then and we stopped it.) which apparently gave the jews the notion that public property was private jewish property….contributed to the absurdities of this flap. I am taking it to the Palo Alto city council and human relations commission after I ascertain whether the Palo Alto Players pay for their use of public property…

    I also got a beautiful Aryan gal who wanted my card. Sometimes you get some bennies from being a White Nationalist.. Joe

  5. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 21, 2011 - 12:00 pm | Permalink

    @thm: Yes it is creepy. I believe if you look at most of Connor’s posts, as I finally did, you’ll find a certain pattern. He’s not here to debate or engage, but rather to disrupt and I would say slander. The idea that this project is a money-making operation is insulting in the extreme to all the people like MacDonald and Parrott, who have put so much effort into at great personal cost. It’s a silly charge made by other trolls in the past.

  6. thm's Gravatar thm
    November 21, 2011 - 11:33 am | Permalink

    @Connor Dirk:

    Dr. Mac’s opinion doesn’t impress me either, as he seems too much of a “yes” man for the Jews. Prof. never ventures very far from the party line. The wide range of articles presented at TOO are a business tactic, and don’t necessarily reflect his views. This site is principally an outlet for books, tapes and periodicals.

    That is a creepy, troll-like thing to say. It is NOT the truth.

  7. Connor Dirk's Gravatar Connor Dirk
    November 20, 2011 - 8:28 pm | Permalink

    @Jason Speaks: You see, Jason, Jewish doctrine prevents my according them any respect at all. On the principle holy day of their liturgical year these people pledge themselves to dishonesty – not once but three times. Translation of the Kol Nidre Oath was not always in the public sphere, but today it is…thankfully. Jews exercise no morality outside their own ethnic group. This means they place themselves beyond the trust of Gentiles. And this applies across the board, so far as I’m concerned – whether we are discussing finance, science, education, or what have you.

    Only Jews would have any reason to theorize and implement research on that aspect of genealogy you have mentioned. As their “findings” reflect Jewish method, personally, I wouldn’t waste my time considering it. And this is a situation which they, themselves, create through their way of life.

    Same goes with the subject of Khazars, which we discussed earlier. It is in the interest of Jews to downplay that connection, and so far as I’m concerned, their “findings” are without credibility. Dr. Mac’s opinion doesn’t impress me either, as he seems too much of a “yes” man for the Jews. Prof. never ventures very far from the party line. The wide range of articles presented at TOO are a business tactic, and don’t necessarily reflect his views. This site is principally an outlet for books, tapes and periodicals.

    Sorry if you find my position intractable, but I have no use for a people without social responsibility, nor any universal ethical system. Neither am I willing to pardon their criminal history as a “strategy for survival.” Evolution does not proceed according to strategies.

    Jews don’t even entertain loyalty toward their host country. Who needs them? Take my word for it: no one. And we’re going to do what is necessary to relieve ourselves of the burden.

  8. Jason Speaks's Gravatar Jason Speaks
    November 20, 2011 - 5:43 pm | Permalink

    @Connor Dirk: But Jews are an ethnic group in the genetic sense. All the evidence suggests a line going back to the Middle East over two thousand years ago. The problem of Jewish behavior is not merely Judaism.

  9. Connor Dirk's Gravatar Connor Dirk
    November 20, 2011 - 4:57 pm | Permalink

    @thm: Your acknowledgment of my post is appreciated and well-taken.

    It’s good to find someone who considers closely all details of a matter. However, it’s sometimes necessary to settle for a compromise if all bases cannot be covered in a satisfactory way. In such an event – particularly for your present purpose – it’s best to err on the side of simplicity and directness.

    Let’s try again. We might consider these factors:

    a) Jews do not consider themselves Caucasian. This, of course, is idiotic, and pure fabrication. Nevertheless their anthropologists have insisted that Jews are Semitic. Whether we like it or not the Jewish people have adopted this terminology. As far as they’re concerned there’s no such thing as a White Jew. When you have used the term White or Caucasian you have successfully excluded Jews – by their own definition.

    b) Since, technically, Judaism refers to a religion, the term Christian also excludes Jews. However, being the contrarians which they are, many Jewish converts call themselves Jews for Jesus. So, apparently, such individuals have not given up their Jewish identity, which makes the term “Christian” problematic. On the other hand, a Christian Jew is not a problem.

    c) The “ethnic” factor, I think, is a non-essential detail.

    Since you seem to like catchy, imaginative devices, how about “Cauk” or “Caukies” or “Caukies for Christ” or “Whites for Christ.” Visually, this might become a white Cross on a purple square. Purple – the color of royalty. How about that? Through history, the shape of the Cross has assumed many variations. Choose one to your liking. Perhaps the Knights Templar Cross, using white on purple.

    As I write, many ideas come to mind. This visual symbol might become a flag, and the icon for an entire movement. Anything of this sort would need to be perfectly executed – pristine and immaculate.
    Remember, the sign of the cross is the most powerful symbol on earth. It holds the puissance to exorcise demons, to confer military victory. You have not forgotten Joan of Arc. Indeed, it has split Time in two. A purple satin banner bearing a pristine white cross is capable of routing Jews forever. That was, in fact, Christ’s mission. He is the Panacea. He is the Panacea forever. He is the ONLY Panacea for the problems publicized at TOO.

    Everything considered, I would use the term Christian along with the pennant. Ideologically, Jewish Christians should not be a problem. Think of the enormity of the world-population of Christians. This is POWER that can be harnessed. With this comes the unbounded power of PRAYER.

    Good luck!

  10. thm's Gravatar thm
    November 20, 2011 - 12:13 pm | Permalink

    @Connor Dirk:

    Shortly after my post someone else in the thread insisted on use of the term, “European American.” Jews are familiar with this and will understand your reference. It has class, and designates both the founders and the preponderant majority of citizens in this country. Were I you, both phrases you have named would be dropped– immediately and completely – as being too verbacious, that is to say – a foul and confounding “mouthful.”

    Here is my problem with “European American”: it does NOT distinguish between Christian heritage European ethnic people aka non-Jewish White people, and Ashkenazi Jews.

    “What is your problem. the American movie industry IS controlled by European Americans (who happen to be Jews)” is how the ADL etc. will use that phrase! We need a term or phrase than unambiguously includes only CHEEP and not Jews. There must be no ambiguity — ambiguity gives a powerful leverage to ADL types to confuse the issue and muddy the waters.

  11. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 20, 2011 - 7:37 am | Permalink

    @Connor Dirk:Herod must have been a real wake-up call to the Jews. If only others were as chary of censuses. Sir John Cowperthwaite recognized the danger of collating statistics during his term as HK’s Financial Secretary.
    http://gwulo.com/node/6190

  12. Connor Dirk's Gravatar Connor Dirk
    November 19, 2011 - 10:09 pm | Permalink

    @thm: It is gratifying to learn of your interest in activism. Since we no longer have meaningful government, citizens, themselves, must restore this republic. We’re home alone. The responsibility rests with us.

    It was I who called for a better term than “Whites,” which, as you say, is demeaning, and relegates the ruling class to a Third World category. All that you have said about communicating with simplicity and directness is true. The wrong terms can defeat a cause from the outset.

    Shortly after my post someone else in the thread insisted on use of the term, “European American.” Jews are familiar with this and will understand your reference. It has class, and designates both the founders and the preponderant majority of citizens in this country. Were I you, both phrases you have named would be dropped– immediately and completely – as being too verbacious, that is to say – a foul and confounding “mouthful.”

    Hold in mind that our government is a Zionist Occupied Government, and for that reason has no reliability. The operating principle of Judaism is deception, so there is no reason to believe that anything published by the U.S. Government is honest or accurate– particularly the Census Report. It is in the interest of their agenda to end the dominance of European Americans. If they can do this with lies they most assuredly will. To further substantiate my point, Jews do not participate in the Census at all. The truth is, their numbers worldwide are unknown and far in excess of what is believed. So in all that you do, may it be with the pride of one representing the historic and substantial ruling class of America. Good luck!

  13. thm's Gravatar thm
    November 19, 2011 - 5:08 pm | Permalink

    TYPO:

    Fourth paragraph, third line, should read: Christian heritage European ethnic people.

    Would be good if there were a way to make corrections to posts for a short time after uploading them!

  14. thm's Gravatar thm
    November 19, 2011 - 5:02 pm | Permalink

    @Joe Webb:

    I just finished my second night of leafletting the jew agit-prop theatre piece. It went well, actually surprising me. Only one jew getting agitated. The theatre managers scowling and telling me to get 90 feet away. I said, is that some kind of kaballa numerology magic? No I did not say that, keeping my nose clean as my dad used to say, in case the cops arrive. I just told him no. About two thirds of the folks took my leaflet, and one or two actually wanted to talk. So, TOO and KM get some outreach.

    Do you have a mailing list people can sign up for, or a website, or some other suggested paths that interested people can plug in to? Are you on the lookout for good candidates, maybe to handout the flyers etc. with instead of just by yourself and to get together to strategize with?

    When I read Kmac’s books, speeches, articles etc., my mind is always thinking about how this paragraph or that insight or this way of looking at the facts could provide leverage in leaflets, articles, posters, handouts etc. to help wake people up to the threat to the values, culture religion cohesion etc. of Christian heritage European ethnic people. If you are not looking at that question, how to reach out to others, what is the point.

    By the way, some time ago someone posted on this blog the suggestion that we come up with another term than “White people” and I strongly agree because “White people” is a totally compromised term. It’s biggest drawback is that it does not make a distinction between Jews and Christian European ethnic people (CEEPS) or Christian heritage European ethnic people (CHEEPs), which believe me words are powerful and this ambiguity is endlessly exploited by Jewish supremacist type people and organizations. So I came up with those two terms, and hey, if you don’t like them, how about suggesting alternatives! Occasionally I’ll revert to “non-Jewish White people”.

    Strangely enough, when I recently posted on an SPLC blog and used that phrase, the other posters immediately vehemently claimed that there was no such ethnic group as Christian heritage ethnic people! I said, isn’t that just like all the Jews who claim that the Palestinians don’t exist (and are really Jordanians etc) as a way of trying to claim their land! The fact that the people there were so adamant that there is no such ethnic group made me realize I was on to something. I also talked about how it wasn’t right that Kmac is so demonized by the SPLC and lo and behold, who should make her appearance there but Heidi Beirich, who I’ve never seen on that blog before – but that is another story.

    What is needed is to form some kind of effort, a brain trust or mini think tank, devoted to creating models that people can adopt in reaching out to people about the threat to European ethnic people’s culture and values. Jewish organizations are masters at this so studying what has worked for them is a good place to start.

    I’ve got many, many ideas along this line, but I’ll just stop here for now!

  15. Joe Webb's Gravatar Joe Webb
    November 19, 2011 - 1:39 pm | Permalink

    Objectivity and reasoned discourse is what , in part, Whites are all about. It is ok to rant now and then, but the people we want to reach want objectivity.

    I just finished my second night of leafletting the jew agit-prop theatre piece. It went well, actually surprising me. Only one jew getting agitated. The theatre managers scowling and telling me to get 90 feet away. I said, is that some kind of kaballa numerology magic? No I did not say that, keeping my nose clean as my dad used to say, in case the cops arrive. I just told him no. About two thirds of the folks took my leaflet, and one or two actually wanted to talk. So, TOO and KM get some outreach.

    SOP for whacked-out jews? “Whats your name!” I usually say to them to save their trouble, Mossad already has me in their files. So, the cops did not arrive, probably getting a laugh at the jews’ expense.

    The images on the wall of the lobby have street scenes of marching folks, the confederate flag centrally desplayed…large. A whole altar of Southern White Depravity. I used the KM piece in which he quotes Lindemann’s use of the Leo Frank lawyer who tries to blame a nigra for the murder…calling him , Jim Conley, a “dirty, filthy, black, drunken, lying nigger.”

    Ouch! Jews do say the funniest things. This is not lost on Palo Alto audience…

    Sent some folks home with some other data, and the theatre fakers with a headache.. heh. Joe

  16. November 19, 2011 - 1:28 pm | Permalink

    The phrase jewish supremacism is probably more understandable than the rather novel “Semitism.”

    There’s also the term “loxist,” which deserves to be more widely known and widely used.

  17. Connor Dirk's Gravatar Connor Dirk
    November 19, 2011 - 2:31 am | Permalink

    These articles constitute a creditable exposition of the Dada movement… its sources, catalysts and ideology. Mr. Sanderson cites a wealth of analytical commentary which places the subject in context fairly and objectively.

    It is good to make acquaintance with a man who loves writing on aesthetical matters, and is disposed to bring his competence to the pages of TOO.

    We are reminded that anything may be turned to purposes of art, and are challenged when considering content intended as hostile. Yet, recalling that creativity is first-and-last self-expression, the troubled spirit needs must make it’s confession also, as do those spirits which are more contented and unencumbered.

    This reflects the boundless flux of life and keeps us in touch with other dimensions. If one wishes a world which is static and in conformity with inflexible rules, then tolerance and empathy for the spectrum of human experience does not come readily.

    Being, myself, of a creative leaning, and appreciating a broad spectrum of style, I, personally, have never found Dada anything other than completely charming. For me, the mask of Tzara by Marcel Janco is delightful. On the other hand, my experiences have been broad and varied, and I can’t expect others to have the same nonchalance as I.

    The antics of those bad boys considered in this chronology strike me much like the behavior of mischievous children. Life is trying in the extreme, and empathy is usually more appropriate than judgement.

    Anyone who writes-off an entire century of creative expression on this fitful old earth – because so much of it happens to be Jewish – is only short-changing himself. We are not Greeks, nor Romans, and it is preposterous to suppose that 20th century mores should not reflect the turbulence of an era marked by more rapidly changing developments than any period of history.

    Despite the irony that Dada was inimical to order, individuals who choose to devote themselves to graphic media are invariably exercising choice of content, arrangement, chromatics, tonality, texture, etc. This is what makes art. With the passage of time, literary messages may become obscure or lost altogether.

    It is within the physical object, itself, wherein the art must lie. No amount of writing or analysis or criticism can provide this. To protest that a particular image does not resemble the work of Raphael or  Jean Auguste Ingres is to miss the whole point. No one era is like another. No single individual, like any other. All in all, the twentieth century produced a more thrilling array of art than that of any similar period of time.

    So, Dada was part of a culture of critique. What of it? As someone has remarked, “Life is a banquet, and most poor fools are starving to death.” The burden is now on us to foil that agenda. I’m pretty sure the best men will win. Let’s just make damn sure we are the champs.

  18. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 18, 2011 - 8:17 pm | Permalink

    @European: No, not at all. What do you take me for? However, I’m still hoping he’ll send me the fifty bucks I politely requested.

  19. European's Gravatar European
    November 18, 2011 - 8:10 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:
    Pierre de Craon November 18, 2011 – 6:50 pm | Permalink
    Did you just have intellectual intercourse with Sanderson? Thank you for sharing your bliss! I am sorry, but I had to chuckle throughout reading your post.

  20. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 18, 2011 - 7:00 pm | Permalink

    @Freki: It’s a safe bet. Rather, it’s no bet at all, since a gentleman doesn’t bet on a sure thing.

  21. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 18, 2011 - 6:50 pm | Permalink

    In the comment threads for this article and its antecedent, there has been call after call for Brenton Sanderson to be more outspoken, more vigorous, more forthright in Naming the Beast. As I see it, Mr. Sanderson has been working very hard to please and accommodate his readers, both in his generous participation in these threads’ discussions and in all his recent articles. That, of course, is precisely what a good scholarly writer does and ought to do—so long, that is, as pleasing readers does not compromise the scholar’s own convictions and, a fortiori, the legitimate demands of scholarship and learned discourse.

    Pride of place among those legitimate demands is taken by the moral summons to eschew editorializing terminology and emotive language, to present evidence as impartially and forthrightly as circumstances and the writer’s own abilities permit. This “rule,” be it noted, is not an abstract or arbitrary formulation; it is rooted in a tradition, as old as the West itself, that the Romans epitomized in the expression res ipsa loquitur: a thing speaks for itself. The thing that preeminently speaks for itself is truth; hence, another Latin expression, splendor veritatis: the radiance (or brightness) of the truth. Truth is, in this understanding, so radiant, so bright, that any attempt at further highlighting serves only to distract and indeed detract from it.

    I am as aware as the next man, of course, that in the everyday world where most of us spend the bulk of their time, truth can be “spun,” can be manipulated, can be so warped as to appear to make a liar of itself. Enter therefore rhetoric and polemic—the fair, clarion voice and the boot pounding the table. When ably and temperately employed, these tools can cheer the already convinced and occasionally persuade the indifferent and the lackadaisical.

    Yet can anyone who frequents TOO honestly claim that these implements are in danger of rank neglect at this site? TOO is not TOQ, nor do I join or even hear a clamor raised to transform it into TOQ. TOO has articles and blog postings both short and long, reflective and assertive, practical and visionary. There is much evidence to indicate that most of the site’s fans wouldn’t have things any other way. TOO’s neither-fish-nor-fowl character—which mirrors the personality and predilections of its spiritus rector, KM—is, I am certain, in large part what makes it an attractive place for contributors, commenters, and transient readers, not to mention many enemies of a white/Western restoration or even perspective. For the last-named group, of course, “attractive” has a rather different implication.

    What I hear in some of the cavils raised in this thread and the last one is less a distaste for or an impatience with a mode of address that minimizes or eliminates rhetoric and polemic—that is to say, the academic or scholarly mode—than a frank desire to be rid of it completely. As one who not infrequently employs both rhetoric and polemic, I think that such a course of action would be most unfortunate, in that it would inevitably tend to shrink the site’s readership by discouraging the attention and participation of people who prefer to confine their rants to the wife and children (just kidding). Mr. Sanderson himself openly admitted that “this type of article is not to everyone’s taste.” Yet some seem to be insisting that this statement of fact be read as a confession of culpability!

    Few if any habitués of this site can claim that all articles and blog posts have essentially equal appeal. Well, so what? Is the appropriate implication of this fact of life to be that the guy with the biggest stick or the loudest mouth gets to decide what KM does or doesn’t publish or how Brenton Sanderson should or shouldn’t examine a topic of interest to him? (Lest there be any misunderstanding, I regard the preceding as a rhetorical question. [Sorry; I couldn’t resist.])

    Mr. Sanderson, I urge you to stand your (scholarly) ground and doggedly stay your (unrhetorical, unpolemical) course. This site has no shortage of articles and comments that point fingers or pound desks, that first unmask hypocrites and frauds and then shout them down—and I have applauded several dozen of them. Yet pace Milton, they also serve who only place the villains on exhibit and then allow them to hang themselves with rope of their own braiding. It surprises me that many do not, will not, or cannot read these Dada articles in precisely this way or see how much is to be gained from such a reading.

    Don’t be deterred from doing more of what you do superbly, Mr. Sanderson. Continue demonstrating how radiant truth can be when it stands in the pool of its own light. If you decide to start messing about with follow spots, let it be for your own reasons, not those of your readers.

  22. thm's Gravatar thm
    November 18, 2011 - 1:38 pm | Permalink

    @Joe Webb:

    I am leafletting a theatrical event in Palo Alto on the Leo Frank affair. The play is propgaganda of the first order. Palo Alto is about 25% Jewish. I took KM’s piece on Leo Frank from a year or so ago (TOO). and put a cover sheet on it.

    “The Leo Frank affair is another example of Jewish mythology to, among other things, pathologize White Western Culture.”

    Truly refreshing and inspiring to see someone actually make an effort to go out on the street and reach people! Why is that such a rare thing for people concerned about the destruction of Christian heritage European ethnic peoples values, culture, religion and very existence. A lot more of this needs to be done!

    Get a group of people to do this regularly, then publicize how it worked, what was successful, what type of venues worked best etc., give some examples of powerful, compelling literature that can be handed out — create a model that others can emulate in reaching out to people!

  23. thm's Gravatar thm
    November 18, 2011 - 1:24 pm | Permalink

    Here is an interesting article about a scientific study where art students and also non-art students were shown art that was made by 1. recognized modern artists, 2. chimpanzees and other animals and 3. toddlers. The results showed that often the art students and non-art students could not correctly identify which was which. And there is a sample in which you get to try to decide, with the answer given at the bottom.

    Article

  24. Mickey Meadows's Gravatar Mickey Meadows
    November 18, 2011 - 1:01 pm | Permalink

    @Joe Webb:

    Stunningly impressive Joe!

  25. Joe Webb's Gravatar Joe Webb
    November 18, 2011 - 12:32 pm | Permalink

    great piece. The Final Solution to these jews is often Kabbala, as noted in his last paragraph. This was the Final Solution for Derrida too. (to be honest, the only thing I recall lis that he said his solution was his jew identity. Jew identity for jew intellectuals with time on their hands is often Kabbala.)

    When they have wrecked Mind and Thought, they scuttle back to their atavisim of Jew Identity. They were and are intellectual terrorists bent on destruction of the West …as we all know.

    I am leafletting a theatrical event in Palo Alto on the Leo Frank affair. The play is propgaganda of the first order. Palo Alto is about 25% Jewish. I took KM’s piece on Leo Frank from a year or so ago (TOO). and put a cover sheet on it.

    “The Leo Frank affair is another example of Jewish mythology to, among other things, pathologize White Western Culture.”

    I thought I might get a few rambunctious jews in my face, but last night it went all right except for the show’s manager who tried to throw me out of a city owned venue. To my refusal to Obey my jew Better, he said he was calling the cops. I said fine and waited around a bit, then left after curtain.

  26. Mickey Meadows's Gravatar Mickey Meadows
    November 18, 2011 - 11:46 am | Permalink

    @Jordan:

    Jordon – true…actually I started this by reading his reply to you in which he says there is a final piece in which he does say it the way you suggested.
    You didn’t know that at the time of writing, so I guess I should have said all this in a fresh comment.

  27. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 18, 2011 - 11:23 am | Permalink

    @Mickey Meadows:

    One thought is that by beginning a piece referring to “anti-semitism” and ending it by exposing the true historical nature of the phenomenon known as ‘anti-semitism’

    Can you show me where in either essay Sanderson has exposed, or even taken steps toward “exposing, the true historical nature of the phenomenon known as ‘anti-semitism’”?

    From what I have read, the essays only make generalized allusions to Romanian “anti-Semitism” and denial of “emancipation” to Jews and focus instead on explaining Dada-ism as a response to such things.

  28. Mickey Meadows's Gravatar Mickey Meadows
    November 18, 2011 - 11:00 am | Permalink

    @Jordan:

    And rather than using “anti-Semitism” why aren’t you more precise with your words? “Pervasive anti-Semitism” becomes “widespread resistance to jewish supremacism.””

    One thought is that by beginning a piece referring to “anti-semitism” and ending it by exposing the true historical nature of the phenomenon known as ‘anti-semitism’…it brings the reader along in a way that is more joined up.

    Then there is the very powerful (if it is at all possible) concept of ‘taking back’ a word or phrase that has been used against you. Anti-semitism as anti-supremacism.

    Then there is the possibility of of getting printed in a mainstream publication. Editors don’t always read too carefully. Especially when the article seems to be ticking all the ‘right’ boxes at the start and middle.

    If sufficiently high brow, I suppose there wouldn’t have to be a final ‘spelling out’ what the author really meant by anti-semitism.

    Getting mainstream published in ways that stimulate extensions of the underground awakening into radically new territory. That would somethin’

  29. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 18, 2011 - 10:54 am | Permalink

    @Brenton Sanderson:

    The important thing in the context of this topic is that these sources confirm that Tzara’s leadership of Dada was significantly motivated by his Jewish indentity and concerns about, what he perceived as, pervasive anti-Semitism in Romania (whether these percentions were real or imaginary).

    Was Dada-ism in fact a response to perceptions of anti-Semitism (in other words, a defensive move) or was it in fact an aggressive strategy (in other words, an offensive move) to, for example, create the conditions for easier economic exploitation of the European peoples or weaken competitors?

    It is not uncommon for an aggressor to rationalize, either to himself or to others, his actions as done in self-defense.

  30. Freki's Gravatar Freki
    November 18, 2011 - 10:35 am | Permalink

    @Brenton Sanderson:

    I argue exactly this, as you will see by the end of this series of articles.

    Are you saying there’ll be a part 3?

  31. Clytemnestra's Gravatar Clytemnestra
    November 18, 2011 - 10:30 am | Permalink

    Sorry, but I don’t buy the excuse that “DaDa” was the result of “Antisemitism.”

    Every time I read an article like this after several articles about how much higher White IQ is in relation to that of Negros or Mestizos, I despair for my people who seem to embody that old saying about “book smarts, but no street smarts.”

    It is clear to me that some talentless hacks managed to successfully merchandise what amounts to vandalism — hell, I’ve seen gang grafitti spraypainted on street signs that I would sooner put up on my walls than that garbage – to gullible White people.

    I don’t GAFF about the Jews and their antics. We really need to look at ourselves to find out the root causes of why White people, for all our much vaunted intelligence and creativity, choose to play the role of Eternal Patsy. Otherwise, if two peoples were made for each other, then it is definitely Jewish wolves and White Sheeple. Unbelievable. Geesh.

  32. November 18, 2011 - 10:00 am | Permalink

    “Segal applied the concept of “artistic equivalence” in his abstract paintings, which was derived from the ethical principle of equality and non-hierarchical organization. ”

    Of course, some people — Jews — are more equal than others.

    You know, looking at these people, it’s clear that only a virulent mental illness like anti-Semitism could possible lead someone to consider them to be syphilitic degenerates intend on taking down society with them. /snark off.

    I mean, really, they all look like photos taken in some pre-war mental institution. Of course, modern American Idiots are all trained to think it was just like Cabaret between the wars, and only big meanies thought anything was amiss.

  33. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    November 18, 2011 - 3:24 am | Permalink

    @Brenton Sanderson: Yes, that Ehrenburg quote is quite chilling.

    “near-nihilist anarchism of the Dadaists” – I assume you’re just describing one particular strand of anarchism. I totally reject nihilism!

  34. Brenton Sanderson's Gravatar Brenton Sanderson
    November 18, 2011 - 12:11 am | Permalink

    @Petronius:

    Ehrenburg was a “mass murderer” by any definition. He argued strongly for the summary execution of all German prisoners, and instigated the mass rape policy of the invading Red Army. As one source describes him:

    Ilya Ehrenburg. Minister of Soviet Propaganda and disseminator of anti-German hate material dating from the 1930s. Ehrenburg instigated the Soviet Red Army rape and murder of German civilians. Referring to German women, Ehrenburg gloated to the advancing Red Army troops, “that blonde hag is in for a bad time.”

    The Soviet leadership acknowledged that Ehrenburg sought the extermination of the entire German people (cf. Pravda, April 14, 1945). [Pravda was also published in a Yiddish edition, Einikeyt). Ehrenburg won the Order of Lenin and the Stalin Prize. He willed his papers to the Israeli Yad Vashem ‘Holocaust’ Museum.

  35. Brenton Sanderson's Gravatar Brenton Sanderson
    November 17, 2011 - 11:51 pm | Permalink

    @Jordan:

    “Why don’t you state in your essay that you have concluded that Dada-ism was a reactionary strategy intended to undermine European peoples’ capacity to resist jewish supremacism?”

    I argue exactly this, as you will see by the end of this series of articles.

  36. Brenton Sanderson's Gravatar Brenton Sanderson
    November 17, 2011 - 11:46 pm | Permalink

    @Jordan:

    You make some good points Jordan. Reconciling the language used in source material with one’s own conceptions can be tricky.

    I agree that my use of the term “fact” in the passage mentioned (without putting it in quotation marks) was clumsy.

    ‘Anti-Semitism’ is an awkward one. You are correct in asserting that the majority of “mainstream” sources use the term as designating a hostility to Jews that has no rational connection to Jewish behaviour. Kevin MacDonald uses the term in the title of his book “Separation and its Discontents: An Evolutionary Theory of anti-Semitism” – so it’s not as if the term is NEVER used from a perspective that is critical of Judaism.

    The important thing in the context of this topic is that these sources confirm that Tzara’s leadership of Dada was significantly motivated by his Jewish indentity and concerns about, what he perceived as, pervasive anti-Semitism in Romania (whether these percentions were real or imaginary). This is an important admission, in that reveals Dada to be a manifestation of Jewish ethnic politics.

  37. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 17, 2011 - 11:28 pm | Permalink

    TOO commenter Razvan has suggested that the truly oppressed people when it came to Romanian-Jewish relations in the early 20th Century were the Romanians. He writes:

    The jews were not land owners but they could lease the land. In 1907 it was about 80% of Moldavia agricultural land. This issue started two anti-jewish (but also anti-Greek in the Southern Romania) peasant rebellions in 1888 and 1907. The peasants were literary starving due to the jews who were managing as I said 80% of the agricultural land – it was really a huge jewish cartel.

    The explanation given to Tzara’s stance is such a convoluted lie it makes me sick. It is about defending a draft-dodger, rich jewish boy, spending his life inside a cafe, dreaming how those anti-Semites (the same people that made him and his traitorous ilk so rich) could be enslaved and exterminated in a more efficient way.

    Read his full post in the Part 1 comment section here.

  38. arthurdecco's Gravatar arthurdecco
    November 17, 2011 - 10:32 pm | Permalink

    Where else could I learn the back story behind “Dadaism” right after reading hundred’s of interesting posts on “The Lost Soul of WASP America, Part 2 by Andrew Fraser”?

    That’s eclectic…and welcome. Thank you, TOO.

  39. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    November 17, 2011 - 10:24 pm | Permalink

    @Pierre de Craon:

    The Communists in the old Soviet Union made a lot of use of Dadaist photomontage in the mid 1920’s. Then with the rise of Stalin in the late 1920’s photomontage was out—socialist realism was in.

    Was socialist realism in the USSR Jewish?

  40. Petronius's Gravatar Petronius
    November 17, 2011 - 9:49 pm | Permalink

    Julius Evola was briefly involved in Dada movement as well and produced some paintings, but rather futuristic than Dada.

  41. Petronius's Gravatar Petronius
    November 17, 2011 - 9:46 pm | Permalink

    Ehrenburg was a propagandist, but not a “mass murderer”.

  42. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 17, 2011 - 8:24 pm | Permalink

    P.S. @ Brenton Sanderson:

    Why don’t you state in your essay that you have concluded that Dada-ism was a reactionary strategy intended to undermine European peoples’ capacity to resist jewish supremacism?

    And rather than using “anti-Semitism” why aren’t you more precise with your words? “Pervasive anti-Semitism” becomes “widespread resistance to jewish supremacism.”

    (The phrase jewish supremacism is probably more understandable than the rather novel “Semitism.” )

  43. fender's Gravatar fender
    November 17, 2011 - 8:24 pm | Permalink

    Jewish art tends to be quite base, primal, and blunt. One common thread in all of it- whether it’s painting or filmmaking or even writing- is the lack of elegance. There’s neither the depth and richness of European art, nor the formal exactness of Oriental art.

    Looking at these works, I get one message from all of it: “We resent you.” That’s pretty much what it says. Granted, there are exceptions– not all Dada is bad– but there’s definitely an juvenile insolence associated with this.

  44. Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
    November 17, 2011 - 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Trotsky’s red legions were then cutting a swathe of death and destruction in Poland, and perceiving that a Jewish ethnic agenda united Trotsky’s Bolshevism and Tzara’s Dada, La Revue de l’Epoque declared: “The grand master of Dadaism is in reality the Jew Bronstein called Trotsky.”

    This passage, as well as several others with similar implications, underlines something now largely forgotten (not, I hasten to say, by Mr. Sanderson): that in the pre-Stalin years there was something between approving tolerance and heartfelt support for various Modernist impulses and directions in the literary, musical, and graphic arts. One need think only of Larionov, Goncharova, and the Rayonists (let alone Tatlin and his Cubist-inspired constructivist paintings and sculptures), virtually all of whom had fallen afoul of the State by the mid-1930s. I think it’s fair to say that Lenin and Trotsky viewed anything that served to subvert received Western Christian culture as something useful to them.

    I admit to respecting, perhaps even furtively admiring, some little of Tatlin’s graphic work. Unlike Tzara, most of his Dadaist and Modernist contemporaries, and later celebrity painters (Mark Rothko being a notable example, one that Mr. Sanderson splendidly examined and analyzed two months ago), Tatlin did not embrace Modernist modes in whole or in part because of technical limitations, especially those related to life study. He may have lacked Dali’s ultimate ability to render realistically (on those occasions when it so pleased him) damn well anything he felt like rendering, but Tatlin was no slouch, and the path he pursued, however frustratingly inconsistent and inconclusive, was not one forced upon him by his own academic inadequacies.

    Thanks for a stimulating part 2, Mr. Sanderson.

  45. Jordan's Gravatar Jordan
    November 17, 2011 - 7:34 pm | Permalink

    @Brenton Sanderson:

    Thank you for your response to my question about defining “anti-Semitism.” Your definition is very interesting:

    I would say that “anti-Semitism” is simply a reaction to “Semitism” – which is Jewish Supremacism. Anti-Semitism is opposition to Jewish Supremicism.

    I have a few critical reactions, however. Firstly, what percentage of your readership do you think share that understanding of the term? I would guess that a significant percentage, including myself, do not. Two more common understandings of anti-Semitism could be said to be “doing wrong to jews” or “discriminating against descendents of jews on the basis of their DNA.” I would also guess that a number of the writers whose works you cite as evidence of Romanian anti-Semitism would define it as something closer to the two undrstandings I have provided than to your definition. These divergent understanding create a strong possibility of a disconnect between what intend to express and what your readers understand you to be expressing.

    Secondly, in light of these multi understandings, would it not be better if you dispensed with the phrase “anti-Semitism” and instead described whatever policies and acts that existed in Romania in ther terms you use in your definition? Thus, Dada-ism becomes a reactionary movement directed against efforts by the Romanian people to combat Semitism. Or a strategy to advance Semitism against the national sentiments of the European people.

    Thirdly, I believe the probability that people will misunderstand what you mean by “anti-Semitism” is increased by the phrasing you use when you employ the term and by other narrative twists in your writing. These include phrases like “pervasive anti-Semitism,” jews having been “subjected to” anti-Semitism, and describing jewish Romanians as “not emancipated.”

    As a side note, in your prior post you wrote: “He [Sandqvist] links Tzara’s profound revolt against European social constraints directly to his Jewish identity, and to the fact that the Jewish population of Romania (and particularly in his native Moldavia) was subjected to pervasive anti-Semitism.”

    If the claim of pervasive anti-Semitism is meant to be attributed to Sandqvist, I think you run into trouble when you describe it as “the fact of.”

    Thank you for part 2 of the essay. Judging by the footnotes, you have clearly put some work into this research and I am more educated about European politics than I was two days ago. In this part 2, you state that Hassidic Judaism holds that all men are created equal. What support do you have for this claim?

  46. Tom's Gravatar Tom
    November 17, 2011 - 6:11 pm | Permalink

    “Tzara willingly reunited with Breton in 1934 to organize a mock trial of the Surrealist Salvador Dalí, who at the time was a confessed admirer of Hitler.”

    Salvador Dali is the on the other side of the Dada coin.

1 Trackback to "Tristan Tzara and the Jewish Roots of Dada, Part 2"

  1. on November 17, 2011 at 6:03 pm

Comments are closed.