Shooting Bullets at the Barn


click to enlarge
First Papers of SurrealismFirst Papers of Surrealism
Left subtitle
Marcel Duchamp, Cover for the First
Papers of Surrealism
, New York, 1942 (verso)
© 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris
Right subtitle
Marcel Duchamp, Cover for the First Papers
of Surrealism
, New York, 1942 (recto)
© 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris


click to enlarge
Kurt Selingmann's farmhouse
Kurt Selingmann’s farmhouse
in Sugar Loaf, NY, 26 April 2000

In 1942 Marcel Duchamp is said to have fired five shots at the base of artist-friend Kurt Seligmann’s barn in Sugar Loaf, New York. Shortly thereafter, for the 1942 New York exhibition, First Papers of Surrealism, organized by the exiled Surrealist leader André Breton, the cover of the catalogue was perforated where Duchamp’s bullets hit the nineteenth century stone wall. Other holes on the cover look similar but remain without cut-through circles.


click to enlarge
The Bride Stripped Bare by her Bachelors
Marcel Duchamp,The Bride
Stripped Bare by her Bachelors,
Even
, (a typographic
version by Richard Hamilton,
Percy Lund, Humphries: London, 1960),
n.p.

It has been suggested that by firing the bullets, Duchamp was referring to the Nine Shots of the Bachelors in the Bride’s Domain of his Large Glass, whose location,according to one of his notes (written between 1911-15) published in the Green Box (1934), was to be achieved by randomly firing matches dipped in fresh paint from a toy cannon. (1)

On close examination almost sixty years later, the exact location of the barn’s detail depicted on the cover of First Papers of Surrealism can no longer be made out on the surface of the crumbling and weather-beaten wall. As for the cheese on the back of the cover, the debate still continues. It is definitely Swiss cheese (2), from Seligmann’s native country, but is it a refined “gruyère” as Francis M. Naumann and Arturo Schwarz maintain or just “emmentaler,” as Stephan E. Hauser (3)claims? One final incidental: According to Charles Shaughnessy, a longtime family friend and neighbor, the .22 rifle Duchamp used is considered the same one that killed Seligmann twenty years later.

 

 

click image for video (0.8 MB)

  • Kurt Seligmann’s barn
  • Kurt Seligmann’s farmhouse
  • close-up video of
    Kurt Seligmann’s barn in
    Sugar Loaf, NY, 26 April 2000
  • video of Kurt Seligmann’s
    farmhouse and barn in Sugar
    Loaf, NY, 26 April 2000

On Wednesday, April 26th, 2000, Bonnie Garner,Lester Lockwood and the author drove to the Seligmann homestead, 26 Oak Drive, Sugar Loaf, New York (Telephone: 914-469-3849), to examine the barn. We’d like to thank Ms. Patricia Gilchrest, Executive Director of the Orange County Citizens Foundation, and Mr. Charles “Chuck” Shaughnessy for their hospitality. We’d also like to thank Stephan E. Hauser for establishing the contact.


Notes :

 

Footnote Return 1. Francis M. Naumann. The Art of Making Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. (Ghent, Amsterdam: Ludion Press, 1999), pp. 151. (See also: pp. 150, 153.)

Footnote Return 2. Martica Sawin. Surrealism in Exile and the Beginning of the New York School. (Cambridge: MIT, 1995), pp. 224-226.

Footnote Return 3. Stephan E. Hauser. Kurt Seligmann (1900-1962): Leben und Werk.(Basel: Schwabe, 1997), pp. 221-222.




An Open Letter to Donald Kuspit

All quotations in the following letter were taken from a taped recording of the “Jewis Holocaust in Art” session (24 February 2000; 9:30 AM – Noon) at the 88th Annual Conference of the College Art Association held at the Hilton Hotel in New York City, 23 – 26 February 2000. The recording was made by the CAA.

Dear Donald:

In regard to an exchange of words we had at the College Art Association Conference 2000 during the panel “Jewish Holocaust in Art” (February 24, 2000), I would like to add the following.


click to enlarge
Rudolf Herz, Zugzwang
Rudolf Herz, Zugzwang,
1995 (Room installation at the
Kunstverein Ruhr e.V.,
Essen, Germany)
© photo:
Werner J. Hannappel

You were on the dais with several co-presenters in easy reach of a microphone and I was sitting in the audience attempting to voice my puzzlement on a specific work of art being presented by Norman Kleeblatt of the Jewish Museum. The work in question was a wall-like installation by the contemporary German artist and photo-historian Rudolf Herz, depicting reproductions of photographs of Marcel Duchamp and Adolf Hitler. The work was completed in the late 1980s and, according to Kleeblatt, the images were “probing [a] new aesthetic discourse on Nazi representation.” The work’s raison d’être was the apparent discovery that photographer Heinrich Hoffmann photographed Duchamp when he was in Munich in 1912, and later became Hitler’s official photographer. Both subjects appear to be dressed in a dark coat and tie.

I was puzzled about the work and asked for clarification. In my short discourse I said I thought that the juxtaposition of Duchamp with Hitler was bizarre, and I suggested (tongue in cheek) that it might have been appropriate to also include a photograph of Lee Miller since Man Ray (who had become the (un)official photographer of Duchamp) also photographed Miller. Plus, Lee Miller, who reportedly bathed in Hitler’s tub, was one of the subjects of a presentation by Carol Zemel of the State University of New York, Buffalo. In her discussion of the so-called liberation photographs by Margaret Bourke-White and Miller, Zemel suggested that the two women’s photographs tended to “anesthetize and aestheticize” the Holocaust. I could not agree more and I indeed feel that Herz’s Zugzwang “anesthetizes and aestheticizes” Hitler.

Kleeblatt was confused by my question — indeed he had a right to be — but you, Donald, asked for the microphone and said, “I don’t think it’s so bizarre at all. Duchamp was a terrorist, wasn’t he? [Microphone disturbances] I just wanted to say that I don’t think it’s so bizarre at all. Duchamp was a terrorist and so was Hitler, and Duchamp was a fetish object, as Hitler is. And a lot of art historians, there are a whole group of art historians who click their intellectual heels and make the Duchamp salute these days. They are both fairly disruptive figures. I think Duchamp was an extremely disruptive influence on art, despite the rationalization of it as, quote,conceptual and so forth. So I think it is a wonderful and actually rather insightful connection to put Hitler and Duchamp together.”


click to enlarge
Marcel Duchamp
Photograph of Marcel
Duchamp by Hans Hoffmann,
Munich, 1912

At this point I said,”The fact that Duchamp skipped out of France in World War I might make him a draft-dodger or a coward … but to call … a coward a terrorist is ridiculous.” Your response was: “Cowards can be terrorists — the art world is a place were artists can be terrorists.” This drew some laughter from the audience as I protested and gestured trying to show you that there was no proportion to your statement.

The discussion moved on to other statements and questions but toward the end of the session you took hold of the microphone again and said, “Incidentally, I’d like to say one last thing to defend myself about what looks like mockery —artists as cowards — you know, the art world as cowards. There is a famous incident … there was a Dadaist happening in Germany and … I believe there was one of the events where one of the Dadaists went and took all the money and invited people to a lecture and didn’t give the lecture — took the money and made some mockery. They were brought into court — this is documented, okay. They were brought into court — some famous Dadaist,and they were trembling, trembling — brought into court and the judge said to them, ‘How do you explain the fact that you stole all the people’s money?’ Then he looked at them trembling and said, ‘Oh, you’re artists,you were artists. Oh, okay. Case dismissed.'”

If the case existed (neither I nor those I’ve consulted have found any evidence of it), its German judge was the Weimar equivalent of the New York Supreme Court Judge “turn ‘em loose Bruce” Wright of the 1970s. And who was the “famous” Dada artist or artists? The Jew Tristan Tzara, the Communist George Grosz or the diminutive Helmut Herzfelde, a.k.a. John Heartfield — who in utter disgust for the Kaiser’s militarism anglicized his name after WWI and who depicted the Nazis, Hitler, Göhring, et al, in unflattering situations?cowards, you say. Yes, I suppose in the end they were cowards because they did choose to flee (an instinct we share with other species when they or we feel threatened).

I suppose that cowards can be terrorists, but we more often associate terrorists with martyrs.Can one call Hitler a terrorist? I believe that one can call Hitler any bad name possible. I prefer mass-genocidal murderer, myself. Does Duchamp fit those descriptions? No!

As for the “fetish object” association you assigned to both Duchamp and Hitler, were you referring to Rrose Sélavy of the Man Ray photographs or Duchamp portraying the fig-leafed Adam on stage, his playing chess with a nude woman, or smoking a cigar? Dare I say that skinheads surround themselves with Nazi images, and not with those of Duchamp? Were you being cynical when you said that “they are both fairly disruptive figures”? But lastly, I can’t help but put together rather horrible images and thoughts about Nazis when in two short sentences you use “fetish,” “clicking … heels” and “salute” to describe Duchampian art historians. Who would that include? Arturo Schwarz? Francis Naumann? Rosalind Krauss? Calvin Tomkins? Rhonda Shearer? Arthur Danto? Who? Wha?

Sincerely,

Elliott Barowitz




A Life in Pictures Revisited

Marcel Duchamp: A Life in Picturesby Jennifer Gough-Cooper & Jacques Caumont,Translated by Antony Melville,Illustrations by André Raffray,Atlas Press, 1999. (UK 5.99 USA $8.95) 26 pages


click to enlarge
Cover for Marcel Duchamp
A life in Pictures
Cover for Marcel Duchamp
A life in Pictures, 1999
©1999, André Raffray and Atlas Press

See Marcel. See Marcel pun. See Marcel’s toys: Why Not Sneeze Rose Sélavy is Lego. The Box-in-a-Valise is a Matchbox dinky car suitcase. Given is a Bar bie StrippedBare By Her Kens, Even. I was hoping that Jennifer Gough-Cooper and Jacques Caumont’s new kid-focused biography, Marcel Duchamp: A Life in Pictures, would really exploit the silly, outrageous possibilities of M.D.’s work. Just as the Box-in-a-Valise enchantingly opens, then unfolds and even slides into place, I was looking for a little bit of innovation here: pop-up features, scratch-n-sniff illustrations, interactive text, maybe even one or two pull-out posters. But this compact biography, the first English translation of the 1977 work La Vie illustrée de Marcel Duchamp, though indeed elegant and informative, seems more geared for the art world set than for the sandbox crowd. It makes Duchamp, and his work, appear quite adult-serious, even.


click to enlarge
Gamelin chocolate shop
Marcel Duchamp at the window
of the Gamelin chocolate shop
©1999, André Raffray and Atlas Press

What the biography does well is cover eighty-one years of a fairly event-filled life. In less than thirty, compact pages we follow M.D. from his early days in Blainville, to his rebuff at the hands of the jury of the Salon des Indépendants, to his revelatory viewing of Roussel’s Impressions d’Afrique and finally to his lionization in New York. The writing, though occasionally a touch technical, is never condescending: “Far from being oppressed by the event he found that fate had arranged things quite well, and the symmetry of the cracks looked rather intentional; instead of being disfigured the work was actually embellished.” And the book’s general shape may appeal to some young readers as it physically resembles the classic Golden nursery book: small and colorful with glossy pages and a hardcover. André Raffray’s vivid illustrations, however, so replete with Duchampian allusions (note the brides, bachelors and fresh widows hinted at in his chocolate grinder picture) seem, again, more adult than kiddy-ready.

The idea of a Duchamp-bio for children is very cool and it may be just the infinitely amusing potential of such an idea that renders A Life in Pictures merely satisfactory. I imagine – if only for Raffray’s intriguing pictures – that most Duchampions will want to check out this little volume but I can’t see too many others, especially the juniors, squealing about either the text or the art. So for now, I suppose, it’s back to the Playstations, the Furbys, and the Easy Bake ovens.See Marcel. See him frown.




Leonardo’s Optics Through the Eyes of Duchamp: A Note on the Small Glass


click to enlarge
To Be Looked at with One Eye
Marcel Duchamp,To Be
Looked at (from the Other Side
of the Glass) with One Eye,
Close to, for Almost an Hour
, 1918
© 2000 Succession Marcel
Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris

The following example of Marcel Duchamp’s overlooked encounter with the mind of Leonardo da Vinci is excerpted from a longer essay. The edition of Leonardo’s Treatise on Painting referred to is Josephin Peladan’s 1910 French translation Leonard de Vinci, Traite de la Peinture. This publication aroused gr eat interest among the Duchamp brothers and their Cubist friends at Puteaux.

To Be Looked At, With One Eye, Close To, For Almost An Hour (in French: A regarder d’un oeil, de près, pendant presqu’une heure) is a cruel set of commands. Nobody would want to look at anything following this prescription. Duchamp wrote the phrase in small capital letters across the face of a glass painting,
and insisted that his directive, issued in the infinitive, serve as its title. But the owner of this work, Katherine Dreier, hated the title, and referred to it instead as Disturbed Balance.

Duchamp, however, was being uncharacteristically descriptive with To Be Looked At… because the image on glass is based upon optics and experiments with the functioning of the eyes. It follows Leonardo da Vinci’s study of vision.In fact, the idea, the image and the phrase itself all come from this short illustrated passage in the Treatise on Painting (1):

Objects in relief, viewed close up with one eye [vues de près avec un seul oeil], seem like a perfect painting. If the eyes A and B look at Point C, C will appear at

click images to enlarge

  • Treatise on Painting

Leonardo de Vinci,Treatise on Painting, 1651 © 1910 Joseph Peladan, Leonard de Vinci, Traite de la Peinture, Librairie Delagrave, Paris

 

D F. But if you look at it with one eye, M, it will seem to be at G.Painting only presents this second form of vision.


click to enlarge

Note

Marcel Duchamp, Note, 1919
© 1993 Pontus Holten, ed.
Marcel Duchamp: Work and Life
,
The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Paintings are flat surfaces.Spacial illusions in paintings are derived from monocular, not binocular,vision. Leonardo was fascinated by the transformation from physiological optics to the artifice of painting, so he studied the behavior of a pair of human eyes. When an object to be looked at is placed close to the face, the paths of vision of the two eyes cross. Duchamp took Leonardo’s X-shaped diagram of cross-eyed vision, along with the wording of his title, directly from this passage in the Treatise. In a posthumously-published sketch for To Be Looked At… he even used Leonardo’s letters “A” and “B” to identify the eyes, or viewing points, represented by circles at the extremities of the cross. But he then placed the configuration on a receding plane, in perspective, and turned it into a pair of giant scissors, a device soon to appear in The Large Glass. Now the cross-eyed observer, it would seem, could cut his way through the visual field by flexing his eyeballs together and apart to make the scissors work. In the small glass To Be Looked At… most of this peculiar tool lies outside the rectangle of the picture, so only its tips can be seen.

The squat, transparent pyramid hovering above the scissors would appear to transport the setting of this one-act farce for eyeballs to ancient Egypt. But it does not.Instead we are right back in the arena of the optics of Leonardo, who wrote frequently and vehemently about the “pyramid of vision.” According to Leonardo:

The body of the atmosphere is full of infinite pyramids composed of radiating straight lines (or rays of light), which are produced from the bodies of light and shade, existing in the air; and the further they are from the object which produces them the more acute they become, and although in their distribution they intersect and cross they never mingle together, but pass through all the surrounding air, independently diverging, spreading, and diffused.(2)
If you look into a mirror and close one eye, you will have formed a visual pyramid pointing at your open eye, whose base is the shape of your face. Leonardo displays remarkable insight into the mechanism of light as it reflects off our surroundings. The receiving human eye always forms the apex of a complex geometric solid, whose base is delineated by the outline of an object in view, and whose sides are formed by the rays of light racing towards the viewpoint from its edges. Leonardo’s use of the word “pyramid,” however, is confusing, because in common usage a pyramid sits on the earth, on a perfectly square base, its axis pointing up to the sky. Duchamp’s Egyptian pyramid in To Be Looked At… is a deliberate and mocking distortion of Leonardo’s idea as it occurs, in the Treatise on Painting, at the center of his theory of optics.

In 1918, from the isolation of Buenos Aires, where he made To Be Looked At…, Duchamp had good reason to poke fun at the visual pyramid. He was probably sick to death of it. His brother, the painter Jacques Villon, was, in contrast, obsessed. Villon believed that Leonardo’s pyramid could provide the unifying theory in his enterprise to make Cubism more than just a passing fad, to transform it into an enduring, classical art form. In 1915, the last time the two were able to meet until after the Great War, Villon would talk of nothing else. All this had started in 1911, when the brothers and their Cubist friends became fascinated by Leonardo’s optical formulations: “Every body in light and shade fills the surrounding air with infinite images of itself; and these, by infinite pyramids diffused in the air, represent the body throughout space and on every side.”(3)

Was Leonardo da Vinci a Cubist himself? He was, it is true, presenting a vision of the space around objects filled with latent images. The eye at any given location could only perceive one image at a time. Visual pyramids “intersect and cross [but] they never mingle together…” But could a painter, a Cubist painter, overcome the laws of light and vision? Could his imagination and intuition capture these half-formed, transparent images, as evoked by Leonardo, before they are condensed into a point, as they overlap, interpenetrate, and jostle for predominance? Jacques Villon struggled to embed this concept of latent visual pyramids into his paintings for the rest of his life.

Marcel Duchamp discussed these ideas with his brother in the early days of Cubism. Then he chose a different path, a directly-perceptual method of creating transparency and overlapping planes in the visual field. He preferred the method that children use. He crossed his eyes.


click to enlarge
Portrait of
Chess Players
Marcel Duchamp,Portrait of
Chess Players
, December 1911
© 2000 Succession Marcel
Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris

Only one painting, supported by a group of studies, was produced using the cross-eyed method: the Portrait of Chess Players.


click to enlarge
Portrait of
Chess Players
Marcel Duchamp,Portrait
of Chess Players
, December 1911
© 2000 Succession Marcel
Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris
For a Game of Chess
Marcel Duchamp,For a
Game of Chess
, October 1911
© 2000 Succession Marcel
Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris

Duchamp asked his two brothers, Jacques and the sculptor Raymond Duchamp-Villon, to sit in front of a chess table, in the midst of a game, and face each other nose-to-nose. Marcel then stationed himself within a foot of his motif, and, in an experiment with scissored configurations of his binocular vision, observed his brothers’
profiles merging and multiplying, engulfing the armies of chessmen behind them. Next, to sort things out, he studied Jacques, on his right, “with one eye, close to, for nearly an hour.” He followed this procedure with Raymond, this time with his left eye, all the while intending the physical proximity of the three artist-brothers (one behind and two in front of the canvas), clustered around their favorite game, to reflect their intellectual and emotional closeness. It is a rare glimpse into a private world.

Duchamp left a clear record of the steps leading up to his finished painting. Five preparatory drawings survive. One is in the format of a triptych, with a central square drawing flanked by two smaller contiguous squares. At first glance it looks as if all three squares are filled with Cubist studies of a man’s head. A closer look reveals Raymond’s, then Jacques’s, physiognomies,delineated separately on either side, on the flanking panels. These two monocular visions are repeated, combined and merged in the central panel, which became the prototype for the final painting, the Portrait of Chess Players. Duchamp had put Leonardo’s visual scissors, as depicted a few years later in the small glass painting of 1918, into practice, in the service of Cubism. He never repeated this experiment.


Notes

 

Footnote Return 1. Josephin Peladan, translator and editor, Leonard de Vinci, Traite de la Peinture (Paris: Librairie Delagrave, 1910), 113. English translations in A. Phillip McMahon, translator, Treatise on Painting by Leonardo da Vinci (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1956), 177, and Edward
MacCurdy, translator and editor, The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci (New York: George Braziller, 1954), 241.

Footnote Return 2. Peladan, Leonardo de Vinci, 89. English translation in Jean Paul Richter, The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, Volume I (New York: Dover Publications, 1970), 39.

Footnote Return 3. Richter, The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, Volume I, 39.




Duchamp as Trickster


click to enlarge
Duchamp
Photograph of Duchamp
sitting in front of a chess set
designed by Max Ernst, 1968 © 2000
Succession Marcel Duchamp ARS,
N.Y./ADAGP, Paris.


click to enlarge
The white square
The white square needs
to be in the lower right-hand
corner. Seen in James Eade,
Chess for Dummies, 1996, p. 11
Chess for
Dummies
Cover for the “Chess for
Dummies,” by James Eade,
IDG Books Worldwide, Inc., 1996

In the accompanying photograph of Duchamp sitting in front of a Max Ernst designed chess set, the master chess player Duchamp has the board set up with a dark square in the lower right corner! (The proper setup is to always have a light square in that corner.) Following the theme of the articles in the first issue of this journal, Duchamp seems to always both 1) deceive, yet 2) leave clues of his deception. (Of course, a deception a without a clue would be hard to uncover.)

As a personal note, most of my previous scholarly work has been on Wittgenstein’s philosophy of mathematics. I have just begun an investigation of the confluences between Duchamp’s readymades and Wittgenstein’s conception of ordinary language. For the moment, I have a title — “Still Life with Wittgenstein and Duchamp” — and some hints. Consider the following sample from remark 129 of Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations:

“The aspects of things that are most important for us are hidden because of their simplicity and familiarity. (One is unable to notice something — because it is always before one’s eyes.)[…] we fail to be struck by what, once seen, is most striking and most powerful.”

Chess should play an illuminating and complicat
ing role, as in this passage from Wittgenstein’s Blue Book (p. 65): “I want to play chess, and a man gives the white king a paper crown, leaving the use of the pieces unaltered, but telling me that the crown has a meaning to him in the game, which he can’t express by rules. I say: ‘as long as it doesn’t alter the use of the piece, it hasn’t what I call a meaning’.'”

I hope to report further in a future issue of Tout-Fait. Fellow investigators are welcome to contact me at Steven.B.Gerrard@williams.edu.
[José Antônio Fabiano Mendes Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, informs Tout-Fait’s readers that 39 chess games played by Marcel Duchamp can be retrieved at http://www.chesslab.com/positionsearch.htmlDate range: select Historical archive(1485-1990)].




The Gift of Cassandra


click to enlarge
Exterior view of :1. The Waterfall /
2. The Illuminating Gas
Interior view of :1. The Waterfall /
2. The Illuminating Gas
Left
Marcel Duchamp,Exterior view of Etant donnés: 1° la
chute d’eau / 2° le gaz d’éclairage
(Given: 1. The Waterfall /
2. The Illuminating Gas), 1946-1966 © 2000 Succession Marcel
Duchamp ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris.
Right
Marcel Duchamp, Interior view of Etant donnés: 1° la
chute d’eau / 2° le gaz d’éclairage
(Given: 1. The Waterfall /
2. The Illuminating Gas),1946-1966 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp
ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris.

In the spring of 1961,Euripides’s The Women of Troy opened at the Récamier Theater in Paris. The first night was attended by many of the intellectual elite: André Pierye de Mandiargue, Alain Jouffroy, Robbe-Grillet and Octavio Paz; our party was made up of Noma and Bill Copley, Marcel Duchamp and myself. The Women of Troy, being both anti-war and anti-misogynist, has been produced more times than any other Greek play so that Marcel might have seen it before, though he did not say so. The play was given an extravagant production in New York in 1964, so he might have seen it again at the very time he was changing the name of the foundation that was to donate his yet secret work [Given: 1. The Waterfall, 2. The Illuminating Gas] to the Philadelphia Museum of Art.


click to enlarge

Brygos Painter Vase

Attributed to the Brygos
Painter Vase,
ca. 480
B.C. – 475 B.C.
© Museé du Louvre

Euripides opens his play with Cassandra, possessed with prophecy, coming on stage with a flaming torch in each hand. One she places in a sconce on the statue of Hymen, God of Marriage, and the other she holds high in her right hand singing the marriage song, prophesying her betrothal to Agamemnon; this despite the fact that even Apollo had respected her virginity.

“Hecabe,”says Hephaestus. “In our weddings you are the torch-bearer; but this torch-bearing is a hideous mockery.”

At dinner after the play the four of us discussed the predicament in which Cassandra had put Apollo. Apollo appeared to her and promised to teach her the art of prophecy if she would lie with him. After accepting his instruction, Cassandra went back on the bargain. A successful teacher communicates the facility of achieving certain significant results which become intuitive once acquired by the student. So it was with Cassandra, and she saw no reason to lose her virginity for something that was already hers. (This is heuristic education and can at times be disconcerting.) Apollo, accepting the fact that what he taught her was irretrievably hers, begged her to give him just one kiss. A sentimental compliance to what seemed to be an innocent reward was her demise. As she gave Apollo his kiss, he spat into her mouth thus ensuring that none would ever believe what she prophesied.What he did in spite was not instruction but a God-given gift.

Not long after this I made a sculpture called The Torch of Cassandra which was bought by Barnet Hodes, one of the directors, along with Marcel Duchamp and Noma and William Copley, of the William and Noma Copley Foundation. Some years later, Hodes told me that because of my sculpture he had investigated the story of Cassandra, so that when Marcel presented the motion to change the name of the foundation to the Cassandra Foundation, he (Hodes) said, he was the only one to know her story.

Bill Copley recounted an incident that happened in his sixty-ninth street apartment in New York.Noma did not, naturally enough, see why the Noma and William Copley Foundation should be changed to the Cassandra Foundation. Marcel was waiting in the living room while Bill was in the bedroom, which was just off the living room, trying to convince Noma to change the name of the Foundation. After quite a time, Bill blew a cloud of white cigarette smoke out the door of the bedroom to let Marcel know that he had been successful.

I see a relation between Marcel Mauss’s “Essai sur le don,” “Étant donnés,” “don de la Fondation Cassandra,” the gift of Cassandra (which Marcel seemed to think was among his gifts as well) and all that potlatch entails. Marcel spent the war in the German-speaking part of Switzerland and had lived in Germany and so was able to add a common Teutonic word to his arsenal of puns, “Gift”: die Gift, gift, das Gift, poison.

(In a telephone conversation, March 1, 2000, Noma Copley would not comment on Mr. Metcalf’s remarks. However she assured us that “his statements are all fine.”)




L’inventeur du temps gratuit

Un Chapeau

Robert Lebel (5 janvier 1901–28 février 1986), écrivain, expert d’art (à partir de 1935) et expert en tableaux anciens près les tribunaux et les cours d’appels (à partir de 1953), est né et mort à Paris.

C’est à New York, à la galerie d’Alfred Stieglitz, An American Place, en juillet 1936 selon toute vraisemblance, qu’il a rencontré Marcel Duchamp, alors aux États-Unis afin de réparer le Grand Verre.

C’est encore à New York, à l’occasion de la Deuxième Guerre, durant l’exil forcé, qu’il a écrit “L’inventeur du temps gratuit”, vers 1943-1944, “à une époque où je voyais Duchamp presque tous les jours. Le titre Ingénieur du temps perdu date de beaucoup plus tard et je crois que Duchamp s’est inspiré de mon titre plutôt que moi du sien. Je lui avais montré mon texte peu après l’avoir écrit”.(A) Ce “conte féérique et sacrilège en pleine civilisation du gratte-ciel et du métro aérien”(rabat de la couverture, édition de 1977) sera publié une quinzaine d’années plus tard en revue: Le surréalisme, même, Paris, nº 2, printemps 1957, avec trois photos de l’Elevated, justement (B), puis sept années plus tard en livre: La double vue suivi de L’inventeur de temps gratuit, avec un diptyque gravé à l’eau-forte par Alberto Giacometti et un pliage (La pendule de profil, 1964) de Marcel Duchamp, Paris, Le Soleil noir, 1964; ce livre a reçu le prix du Fantastique en 1965.

Enfin, c’est vers 1949 que Robert Lebel a le projet de consacrer un livre — biographie et catalogue — à Marcel Duchamp, livre auquel il travaille de façon élaborée du printemps 1953 à l’automne 1957 et qu’il complète et corrige en 1958, au moment de sa traduction en anglais. Ce livre, qui sera le premier livre, aura été précédé et suivi d’une vingtaine d’articles (sur Duchamp, mais aussi sur Picabia et Duchamp, de Chirico et Duchamp, Breton et Duchamp, Man Ray et Duchamp, etc.) parus à partir de 1949, justement, et qui n’ont pas tous été repris dans l’édition entièrement recomposée de 1985:

Sur Marcel Duchamp, Paris, Trianon Press, 1959; traduit en anglais par George Heard Hamilton, New York, Grove Press, 1959; traduit en allemand par Serge Stauffer, Cologne, DuMont Schauberg, 1962;

• 2e édition, américaine augmentée, New York, Paragraphic Books, 1967; 2e édition allemande revue et augmentée, Cologne, DuMont Schauberg, 1972;

Marcel Duchamp, 2e édition française revue et augmentée, bien qu’élaguée de son catalogue, de ses illustrations et de sa mise en page, Paris, Belfond, coll. “Les dossiers”, [septembre] 1985;

• réimpression en fac-similé de l’édition courante de 1959, augmentée sur feuilles volantes de 4 lettres de Marcel Duchamp à Robert Lebel, Paris et Milan, Mozzotta, et Paris, Centre Georges Pompidou, 1996.

Avec Francis Picabia (à partir de 1911), peintre et poète, Man Ray (de 1915), peintre et photographe, et Henri-Pierre Roché (de 1916), collectionneur et diariste, Robert Lebel aura sans doute été le dernier complice de Marcel Duchamp. “Tout en étant très amis, nous étions restés sur une certaine réserve” ainsi résumera-t-il, à la fin de sa vie, cette complicité.

André Gervais
9 avril 2000

Footenote ReturnA. Robert Lebel, lettre à André Gervais, Paris, 21 mai 1979. Ingénieur du temps perdu est le titre de la réédition, en 1977, des Entretiens avec Marcel Duchamp (1967) de Pierre Cabanne.

Footenote ReturnB. Dans un article sur Robert Lebel et Marcel Duchamp (Critique, Paris, nº 149, octobre 1959), Patrick Waldberg précise que “le brillant et curieux texte de Robert Lebel, L’inventeur du temps gratuit, véritable spéculation, au sens où l’entendait Jarry”, aurait pu paraître dans le Da Costa encyclopédique, preparé à partir de 1946. Et il ajoute: “On reconnaît sans peine, dans l'”inventeur” en question, sinon Marcel Duchamp en personne, tout au moins l’un de ses frères en esprit.”

L’inventeur du temps gratuit

par Robert Lebel

Tous les photos reproduit ici étaient publiée avec l’article original.
(Le surréalisme, même, Paris, nº 2, printemps 1957.)

Dès qu’il laissait derrière soi, vers la pointe de l’île, la silhouette mutilée déjà du terminus, l’Elevated pénétrait dans des rues étroites dont il frôlait les façades aux escaliers de fer. Front street, Pearl street qu’il recouvrait et calfeutrait comme de longs tunnels, ne menaient au-dessous de lui, dans l’intervalle de ses ébranlements, qu’une existence illusoire et silencieuse d’ancien décor. Scellées de volets imprenables ou aveuglées de crasse, les fenêtres avaient cessé l’une après l’autre de s’ouvrir. C’était, entre les docks de l’East River et les gratte-ciel de Wall street, l’étrange ville morte où tout ce que New York recelait de menaçant venait se terrer et attendre.

Ce quartier m’attirait et j’ai souhaité d’y vivre mais les maisons y étaient à ce point inhabitées qu’un locataire éventuel y faisait aussitôt figure de suspect. Personne ne voulait croire que l’on songeât sérieusement à s’établir dans ces bâtisses délabrées, à l’écart de tout ce que le zèle urbaniste proposait de dignité et de confort. En vain avançais-je l’excuse que je me donne volontiers d’être artiste. Cet argument qui est accueilli souvent avec indulgence ne provoquait ici qu’un surcroît de méfiance et d’hostilité.

Je n’en poursuivais pas moins mes démarches de porte en porte. La déception que j’éprouvais à me heurter inévitablement à de nouveaux échecs se trouvait amplement compensée par mes découvertes à l’intérieur des maisons que je visitais de fond en comble. J’y errais parfois deux ou trois heures sans rencontrer un être vivant. C’est au cours de l’exploration d’un immeuble qui me parut totalement abandonné que je lus à une porte l’inscription suivante, en français:

A. Loride, L’Inventeur du Temps Gratuit – Cela était écrit à la plume, négligemment, sur une feuille de papier fixée par deux clous.

J’avais déjà pu parcourir, aux autres étages, les bureaux d’une compagnie de navigation, l’atelier d’une imprimerie et un établissement de bains, tous également déserts. J’entrai donc sans hésiter. Il était trois heures de l’après-midi d’un jour ouvrable.

Au centre d’une sorte de vaste entrepôt extraordinairement encombré, un homme entièrement nu exécutait des mouvements de culture physique. Il se retourna et je constatai qu’il devait avoir dépassé cinquante ans, bien que son corps fût toujours assez svelte. Il était glabre et son apparence de méticuleuse propreté dans un tel milieu surprenait. Pourtant je fus surtout frappé par son absence d’embarras. Sans penser à se couvrir, à marquer son étonnement ou à justifier sa tenue, il me considérait avec calme et attendait mes explications.

Je ne trouvai d’abord, plutôt sottement que: “Etes-vous Français?”, ajoutant après un silence: “Je viens pour votre invention”.


click to enlarge
Cliquez pour agrandir
Cliquez pour agrandir

D’un signe, il me permit de m’asseoir mais, sauf un lit où était couchée une très jeune femme, on n’apercevait aucun siège et je m’appuyai contre une caisse, poliment. “Je vous écoute”, dit-il. “A ce moment, l’Elevated surgit au ras des fenêtres et tout se mit autour de nous à vaciller.”

“Monsieur,” lui répondis-je enfin, dès que l’on put s’entendre, “je ne vous cacherai pas que je m’intéresse prodigieusement à vos découvertes et c’est parce qu’il me tarde d’en discuter avec vous que j’ai omis de prendre, avant d’entrer ici, les précautions d’usage.”

˜Je ne reçois que sur rendez-vous,” répliqua-t-il brièvement. “Inscrivez votre nom et votre adresse (il me désigna un mur couvert de notes et de chiffres), je vous convoquerai” et, me tournant le dos, il se remit à sa gymnastique.

Sa lettre ne me parvint que trois semaines plus tard. Elle était rédigée sur une feuille à en-tête de A. Loride and Company. “Je vous préviens, écrivait-il, que je ne suis ni fou, ni mystique, ni philosophe, ni inspiré, ni poète. Je me livre à des recherches positives et mon activité correspond, dans une large mesure, au titre peut-être un peu trop affirmatif que je me suis décerné. Engagé dans une entreprise réelle, la nécessité pratique m’obligeait à lui donner une raison sociale. D’autres s’intitulent bien roi du pétrole ou pharmacien de l ère classe. Quoi qu’il en soit, nos rapports éventuels, permettez-moi de le stipuler, ne pourront être que strictement commerciaux. Je ne désire pas de nouveaux amis, mon excentricité ne regarde que moi et ce n’est pas sans intention précise que j’ai choisi, pour m’y retirer, un lieu où seules votre curiosité et votre extrême indiscrétion devaient vous emmener à me découvrir.” Et il m’assignait un entretien pour un jour suivant.

Je fis le chemin mas l’Elevated. A plusieurs reprises déjà, depuis notre première entrevue, j’avais tenté l’expérience de passer devant ses fenêtres, espérant le surprendre en quelque posture significative mais, du compartiment, s’il eût suffi de se pencher à peine pour frapper à sa vitre, on ne distinguait rien qui permit de soupçonner sa présence.

Il me reçut avec l’impassibilité que j’avais observée précédemment. Il n’était ni réticent, ni chaleureux. C’est armé d’une bonne grâce un peu lointaine qu’il se présentait à ce tête-à-tête dont, visiblement, il n’attendait mais aussi ne redoutait rien. Vêtu non sans recherche, il me guida courtoisement à travers un remarquable désordre de machines, d’établis, de poutres, d’horloges, de coffres-forts, jusqu’au lit qui n’était pas occupé.

“Vous avez beaucoup de matériel,” lui dis je pour amorcer la conversation. “Tout ce que vous voyez dans cette pièce, ou mieux dans ce magasin, y a été laissé par de précédents locataires,” répondit-il. “Vous n’y verrez donc pas grande chose qui m’appartienne, mais je préfère ces instruments de hasard. La diversité de leur nature m’interdit de me borner à un seul mode de réflexions et, dans ce laboratoire dont j’inventorie systématiquement et, bien entendu, à contresens les ressources, mon imagination s’expose moins à marquer le pas.”

“Mais le temps?” demandai-je.

“J’y venais puisque j’ai mis au point ma théorie grâce à la réunion toute providentielle devant moi de ces trois horloges dont une fonctionne avec exactitude, une autre irrégulièrement et la dernière pas du tout. De même, cette bascule m’a conduit à réviser mes vues sur le isotopes et je dois à cette essoreuse électrique des révélations inattendues sur la suspension pyrrhonienne.” Mais, rencontrant mon regard, il ajouta vivement: “Surtout ne me prenez pas pour une espèce de penseur. Je ne vise qu’à relier des notions éparses, je ramasse les miettes des grandes idées. Je hais les abstractions. Toutes ces machines, pour la plupart déficientes, me ramènent sans cesse aux détails, aux vérifications fragmentaires et m’astreignent à un bricolage mental d’une heureuse incohérence. Elles imposent à mon interrogation sa forme concrète tandis que leur caractère éminemment fictif me retient de céder, comme le font les physiciens et comme l’ont fait, malheureusement, tant d’alchimistes, au souci mortel du résultat. J’apprends ici à tirer inutilement parti du tout. Ainsi, le passage inéluctable de l’Elevated assume pour moi une fonction aussi fondamentale que le cycle des marées. Il exprime avec autant de perfection le piétinement humain mais, en outre, il a l’immense avantage de maintenir l’organisme dans un état d’exaspération latente. Le flux et le reflux ne nous incitent jamais qu’à nous résigner, alors que l’Elevated nous pousse directement à la révolte contre ce qu’on persiste à nous présenter comme notre condition.”

“Mais le temps?” insistai-je.

“Nous y sommes. Chacun de nous aspire à l’intensité d’une vie de chien, à ces journées bien remplies qui préludent traditionnellement à un repos bien gagné. Notre époque a beau jumeler en un culte dérisoire la liberté et le loisir, les êtres les plus satisfaits sont toujours les plus affairés, donc les plus asservis. Or il est clair qu’aucun progrès n’est à notre portée si nous ne surmontons d’abord la compulsion de l’activité utile. C’est cependant elle, et elle seule, qui continue à régir notre concept du temps. Tenez, fit-il en saisissant un bâton pour désigner les horloges, chacun de ces cadrans figure le temps sous un de ses trois aspects. Pour la quasi totalité des hommes, il n’en existe qu’un. Les individus dits évolués en pressentent peut-être deux, mais je suis un des rares à en définir explicitement le troisième, si bien que je puis, sans trop d’imposture, m’en présumer l’inventeur. Mon but, d’ailleurs, est moins de le formuler théoriquement que de lui donner une consistance. J’ai l’ambition d’en faire une véritable denrée, un simple objet de consommation et d’échange, au même titre que ces remèdes dont les chimistes sont seuls à connaître la composition, mais qui se vendent à tous les comptoirs. C’est pourquoi je me flatte d’être un commerçant et non un philosophe.”


click to enlarge
Cliquez pour agrandir
Cliquez pour agrandir

Il se tut, alla s’installer devant une machine qui se trouvait à proximité des horloges et, du pied, mit une pédale en marche. Bientôt, de minces baguettes de bois commencèrent à jaillir d’un orifice d’échappement. “Excusez-moi,” dit-il, “je dois satisfaire à une commande pressée.”

“Seraient-ce là vos comprimés de temps?” m’écriai-je. Je les eusse plutôt imaginés cristallins et sous les dehors de quelque pastille.

“Peu importe le symbole,” fit-il, tout en continuant à pédaler. “Il se trouve que, sans y être pour rien, j’ai à ma disposition cet appareil qui débite des rondins dont les quincailliers du voisinage, mes clients, se sont révélés avides. Un sculpteur surréaliste en ferait même, me dit-on, courant usage. Toujours est-il que cette industrie exige à peine de moi la somme d’attention dont je suis capable à l’égard de ce qui me fait vivre. Je puis m’y livrer sans quitter des yeux cette première horloge et, aussi aisément que, de cette même place, je vois venir, passer et disparaître l’Elevated, je vois, sur ce cadran, venir, passer et disparaître le temps qui ne s’interrompt jamais, le temps qui possède une valeur vénale. Ces aiguilles déjà vétustes tournent avec une régularité qui ne peut tenir que du prodige. Il semble que ce soit leur destin de tourner, quoi qu’il arrive. Leur bonheur consiste à n’être ni en avance, ni en retard, ni surtout arrêtées. On discerne dans leur mouvement net, résolu, sûr de soi, la satisfaction cocardière dont resplendit le visage de l’honnête serviteur, de la ménagère diligente, de l’ouvrier consciencieux, du fonctionnaire méthodique, de l’homme d’affaires entreprenant, de tous ces gens que je vois se bousculer le matin dans l’Elevated pour se rendre à leur travail, et s’y écraser de nouveau le soir pour regagner leur domicile. Or ce temps se déroule devant moi comme un film. Je sais, je sens que j’y suis étranger. Littéralement j’y échapper, mais serait-ce en vertu de mon horaire que l’on peut estimer fantaisiste? Je ne le crois pas. Comparez les physionomies que je vous ai décrites avec celles qui les remplacent aux heures que l’on nomme si justement creuses, lorsque les compartiments presque vides sont devenus à peu près confortables. Les privilégiés qui, pour des raisons généralement très douteuses, ont bénéficié d’une levée d’écrou, loin de se montrer ravis, paraissent, au contraire, pour la plupart, inquiets et tourmentés. Ils parcourent distraitement leur journal, ils se crispent nerveusement sur leur banquette, la lenteur des trains les irrite. En bref, leurs symptômes sont ceux d’une rumination morbide.”

S’interrompant soudain, il repoussa du pied les baguettes qui s’étaient accumulées devant l’orifice et il reprit sa manœuvre. “Rassurez-vous,” continua-t-il, “mes voyageurs des heures creuses ne sont aucunement dévorés de remords. Au surplus, la réaction du privilégié devant l’esclavage des autres se traduit plutôt par un cynique contentement. Non, l’explication est ailleurs. Si vous passiez comme moi plusieurs heures par jour à braquer vos lorgnettes sur l’Elevated du haut de cette chaire de prédicateur anglican (ce qui me permet de tout voir sans risquer d’être aperçu), vous pourriez constater que ces voyageurs se subdivisent en deux catégories bien distinctes. Simple problème d’interprétation que j’ai dû résoudre à la façon de l’ethnographe ou de l’anthropologue par une exhaustive confrontation des caractères individuels. Certains voyageurs que l’on surprend, aux heures creuses, à sourire, voire à se détendre, sont en réalité des membres provisoirement détachés de la grande fourmilière. Selon le langage des bureaux, ils sont en course ou, comme disent plus noblement les militaires, en service commandé. Leur sérénité, leur désinvolture, qui les différencient aussitôt de leurs voisins immédiats, n’ont pas d’autre origine. Pour eux, l’heure ne saurait être creuse puisque la société qui ne les perd pas de vue en consacre la densité. Le temps où l’usage a frappé une monnaie reste le lien même qui les rive à leur agitation.”

Tandis qu’il dégageait de nouveau les issues de son appareil, je me permis d’objecter: “Cependant, pour les autres voyageurs des heures creuses, ceux qu’à plus ample examen vous classez toujours parmi les oisifs véritables, comment expliquer leur mélancolie si vous écartez l’hypothèse de scrupule? Aurons-nous recours à l’exploitation banale de l’angoisse dont nos voyageurs sont supposés être saisis devant la perspective de leur disponibilité?”

˜Nullement,” répliqua-t-il avec un peu d’humeur. “Ce serait rendre à l’argument spécieux par excellence, celui dont on se sert communément pour justifier les inégalités sociales et démontrer le bien-fondé de la servitude en exagérant à la fois les responsabilités de l’oisif et les dangers que courrait un homme libre. Si les individus qui parviennent à une relative indépendance sont, de fait, les plus désemparés et les plus ombrageux, c’est que, physiquement affranchis, ils demeurent mentalement des esclaves. Ils ne rectifient pas leur conception du temps alors que celui-ci modifie pour eux son rythme. Dès lors s’introduit dans leur existence le déséquilibre que ces secondes aiguilles miment adéquatement. Elles ne sont plus animées que d’un mouvement erratique, fiévreux en quelque sorte et rompu par de longs moments d’immobilité pesante. Sans cesse, elles sont en avance ou bien en retard mais sur quoi, pourrait-on demander, puisque précisément c’est en dehors du circuit de la ponctualité qu’elles se situent? D’où vient cette inconséquence si ce n’est de la conscience très vive qu’elles conservent encore du temps social? En définitive, leur regret d’en être exclues l’emporte sur leur soulagement d’en être dispensées. Une horloge déréglée, donc libre, n’oublie pas l’horloge exacte qu’elle fut. L’heure qu’elle marque n’est jamais absolument délivrée de l’autre dont un timbre antérieur s’obstine à sonner le souvenir.”


click to enlarge
Cliquez pour agrandir
Cliquez pour agrandir

Sans quitter sa machine, il se prit à rire silencieusement.”Voyez-vous,” enchaîna-t-il, “je n’accepterais le titre de penseur que suivi de l’épithète comique, mais au sens non douloureux du terme et comme Stendhal envisageait de devenir “the comic bard”. Contrairement à Molière et à sa misérable suite de vaudevillistes, je ris moins de l’homme lui-même que des abstractions dont il est pénétré. Le comique de la pensée est beaucoup plus irrésistible que celui des caractères. Il est grand temps d’en finir avec la comédie classique et son arsenal de types à jamais flétris pour lui substituer une comédie de la connaissance qui se terminerait par un beau massacre d’idées, au lieu de conclure systématiquement par l’écrasement du “drôle”. Je vois fort bien, par exemple, une comédie sur la notion du temps, vielle coquette aux minauderies sordides, qui compte et recompte inlassablement son or à mesure qu’il lui glisse des doigts. Ce serait elle qu’il s’agirait de confondre et de rosser en lui laissant, comme il sied, sa configuration idéographique. J’aime souvent à croire que les formes surprenantes dont l’art moderne a été prodigue sont des idées qui ont pris corps et s’apprêtent pour la scène future où elles seront rouées de coups. Ce sont les personnages de notre nouvelle comédie et leur aspect, parfois repoussant à première vue, ne fait que confirmer leur signification mythique et annonce le sacrifice bouffon auquel ils sont destinés.”

Les piles de rondins avaient atteint une hauteurs considérable et, jugeant sans doute suffisant le résultat de son effort, mon hôte cessa de pédaler, se leva, désigna de nouveau la seconde horloge et reprit: “Ce temps qui a cessé d’être social et qui n’a pas encore commencé d’être individuel, ce temps amorphe, incolore, insipide, constitue un intolérable poids mort pour ce qu’on est convenu d’appeler l’évolution humaine. Ou bien celle-ci n’est qu’imaginaire et, parmi des masses éternellement primitives, nous ne représentons qu’une écume négligeable de dissidence, ou bien, dès son départ, cette évolution s’est engagée dans une impasse où elle butte à un obstacle qui la fait irrévocablement refluer. Mais qu’on y prenne garde, le désir même de liberté ne résistera pas indéfiniment au démenti terrible que lui infligent les faits. Entre les paroles que nous énonçons et notre comportement notoire, la brèche scandaleuse s’élargit chaque jour. Autour de nous, les défaillances se précipitent et les plus rebelles font parfois penser à ces femmes émancipées qui souhaitent secrètement un homme à poigne. Il ne leur manque jamais qu’une cause pour s’y consacrer “de toute leur âme”. Reconnaissons-le, ce temps social sait entretenir chez ceux qui, momentanément, s’en étaient écartés, une nostalgie particulièrement écoeurante. Les uns sont à la merci de la première équivoque venue, les autres, orgueilleux de leur fermeté, rédigent avec un raffinement morose les codes de leurs nouvelles contraintes. Ceux-là mêmes, si peu nombreux, qui s’accommodent d’être seuls, paient leur tribut sous forme de gémissements. Ils s’ennuient, ils désespèrent ou, plus ridiculement encore, ils travaillent. Chaque bribe de ce temps, qu’ils ont si péniblement conscience de soustraire à la société, acquiert à leurs yeux une valeur extravagante. Ils s’en instituent personnellement les usuriers et, pour mieux faire fructifier leurs tristes épargnes, ils calculent, ils inventent, ils bâtissent, ils peignent, ils écrivent avec une ardeur désolée. Sans doute se livrent-ils à une sorte de transfert: ils convertissent leur temps papier en temps or, ils le consolident et l’on utilise d’instinct pour cette opération mentale un langage de finance. Il n’est question que d’un placement pour les cieux jours ou, suprême ambition de banquier philanthrope, spéculateur à long terme, d’un moyen de se perpétuer.”

“Voyez-vous,” remarqua-t-il en souriant, “je me laisse à mon tour emporter par la satire. Je stigmatise l’homme moderne, l’homme libre, celui qui, semblable aux anciens duellistes, se tient pour comblé dès qu’on lui accorde le choix des armes qui le tueront. Suivez son manège lorsqu’il hésite triomphalement entre les journaux, entre les professions, entre les églises. Entendez-le s’exprimer à son aise dans des langues qui confondent le temps et la cadence, comme l’anglais time ou l’italien tempo. Regardez-le s’éloigner avec assurance, persuadé qu’il pourrait, à son gré, ne plus revenir, alors qu’il porte en lui, plus contraignant qu’un philtre d’amour, le gage de sa soumission. Dans la forêt même où parfois il s’aventure, les fées, les sorcières, les voix anonymes sont autant d’horloges métaphoriques dont la fonction est de lui rappeler l’heure. Sous son regard, chaque surface est un cadran lisible, chaque ombre, une montre embusquée. L’agonie des minutes brame à tous les échos et, jusque dans l’emportement de son vertige, le voyageur s’écoute vieillir car c’est le temps qui bat son pouls, inexorable chef d’orchestre intérieur. Rebrousser chemin, retrouver le “temps perdu”, quelle tentation pour qui, ayant cru fuir, lui aussi, la vielle terre, reprend à son compte l’exclamation désenchantée d’un auteur connu: “Ce n’est rien, j’y suis, j’y suis toujours”.

Depuis quelques instants, mes yeux s’étaient fixés sur le troisième cadran dont l’aspect immuable commençait à me fasciner. “Que cette inertie ne vous inspire pas des images faciles de néant ou d’éternité,” me dit mon hôte d’un ton sardonique. “Dans cette horloge arrêtée, imaginez au contraire un mécanisme plus sensible que les autres, trop parfait pour enregistrer les vibrations grossières du temps social. Ailleurs, en quelque partie soigneusement occultée de ses rouages, d’imperceptibles oscillations révéleraient le passage presque impalpable du temps gratuit. Certes, la façade figée et comme morte de ce cadran est bien faite pour éloigner ceux qui reculent naturellement devant une mutation possible. Tout annonce un passage à franchir, une rupture à réaliser. Entre ce monde et l’autre, aucune transition légendaire, aucune communication discursive. On ne nous offre pas la clé d’un autre nirvana puisqu’il semble même que là où nous allons, l’extase n’ait plus de raison d’être. Nous ne renouons avec rien et peut être aurons-nous enfin brisé avec tout. Ni cérémonial, ni incantations, ni rites, mais atteindre ai point de lucidité où la notion du temps devient un fruit que l’on pèle”, et il fit avec ses doigts de petits mouvements déliés.

Je brûlais de poser une question mais, me devançant, il ajouta: “Ai-je besoin de spécifier qu’en nous retranchant du temps utile, nous entendons en aucun cas nous restreindre à la quiétude neutre du spectateur, à cette transcendance sceptique ou contemplative qui, pour ma part, me répugne absolument? Le domaine du temps gratuit est celui du risque extrême, de l’exaltation soutenue car il est à la fois le seul où l’on perde sciemment son temps, donc sa vie et le seul où tout effet dramatique, toute emphase soient inadmissibles. Le jeu lui-même s’y dépouille des compensations verbales ou passionnelles que lui avait léguées le temps social où nul acte ne se justifie sans dividende. Les anciens aristocrates prenaient la précaution de réunir tous leurs invités avant de jeter leur argenterie au fond de l’eau et les mises à mort, dans la littérature moderne, ont souvent conservé ce style tapageur. Pour nous, le gaspillage est obligatoirement non ostensible et nous chercherons surtout à donner le change. Nous ne serons ni mages, ni héros, ni justiciers, ni prophètes, mais nous aurons soin de jouer des rôles quelconques avec un faux sérieux qui pourra faire illusion. C’est à l’intérieur même du temps social et non à l’écart, ce qui déjà serait édifiant, que nous créerons, sans nécessairement le laisser entendre, des zones de refus et de légèreté.”

A cet instant, une jeune femme entra. Ce n’était pas celle que j’avais déjà vue. Elle se contenta d’incliner la tête et vint s’asseoir sur le lit sans prononcer un mot. Je me disposais à poursuivre l’entretien lorsque je m’aperçus que, manifestement, les pensées de mon interlocuteur avaient pris un autre cours.


click to enlarge
Cliquez pour agrandir
Cliquez pour agrandir

“Puis-je vous prier de ne plus revenir?” me dit-il après quelques minutes de silence. “Epargnez-moi la disgrâce de reprendre ces démonstrations orales qui ne trahissent jamais que nos propres tergiversations. Un bruit de paroles qui prétendent convaincre et il n’en faut pas davantage au temps social, momentanément conjuré, pour retrouver son arrogance.” Et me poussant aimablement vers la porte, il conclut: “La gratuité ne se sépare jamais d’un certain mutisme. Sans doute en ai-je déjà trop dit.”




Constructing Life


click to enlarge
Etant
donnés: 1º la chute d’eau / 2º le gas d’éclairage, 1946-66
Marcel Duchamp, Etant
donnés: 1º la chute d’eau / 2º le gas d’éclairage
, 1946-66

First you have to get far enough back from everything. How ridiculous to let any taboos linger. Having smashed the king of all taboos we looked around to see if anyone else had smashed through as well. Not exactly. Not yet. But had our old friend also sought to defy death? Had he constructed an architectural surround to return to? If “after all death is always only for others,” should not the ironic artist, first off, busy himself with a tomb for himself?!? Revitalizing tombs are Mallarmé’s specialty. His ” Tomb of Baudelaire” serves as point of departure, framing context, and signaling scaffolding for Marcel Duchamp’s heroic but limited, for being local and self-contained, effort to fit himself a tomb. His “Etant Donnés, involving, it would now appear, a returning to this world, might better bear the title ” Encore Etant Donnés” or “To Return To.*”

*Title of a critical essay on Etant Donne by Madeline Gins and Arakawa

*Title of a critical essay on Etant Donne by Madeline Gins and Arakawa


click to enlarge
Click here for video (QT 0.7MB)
Madeline Gins
Madeline Gins

Etant Pris

D. drinks M. drinking B.–drinks-toasts.

Muddy ruby-filled brew.

Pubis, liquid, illuminating gas.

Eternal afternoons—— of cities without night.

Symbols that gaze back at . . . . . . .

Forests of gazing-back symbols–

Dried foliage–

The bec Auer and its predecessor the bec papillon–
or the butterfly or bat’s wing burner

The wick’s desire . . . to be put . . . inserted.

M. Gins


click to enlarge
Click here for video
(QT 0.7MB)
Madeline Gins
Madeline Gins
Marcel
Duchamp as Rrose Sélavy, 1921
Marcel Duchamp, Marcel
Duchamp as Rrose Sélavy, 1921

Being Taken—Having Taken It To Be
by S. Mallarmé or R. Sélavy

Nature is a temple
Whose living pillars
Release confused words
Perfumes, colors, sounds
Are everywhere let loose
All over the place

Humans pass there
Traversing forests of symbols
Which observe them with
A gaze akin to a familiar regard

M. Gins

[Note: Italized words that come up from the last stanza
of Baudelaire’s poem, Correspondances, to invade its first stanza plus all those that exceed the usual bounds of translation.]


Click here for video (QT 0.5MB)

Madeline Gins

“The Tomb of Charles Baudelaire”

The buried temple divulges from its sepulchral mouth
Sewerage: mud and rubies
Abominably an Anubis
The whole of its muzzle aflame with wild ferocious baying

Or that [as] the [most] recent gas twists the squinty wick,
A sweeper away, one knows, of infamies undergone,
It ignites a haggard immortal pubis
Whose flight moves up and off according to movements
Within and off out from the gas street lamp.

What dried-out foliage in “les cités sans soir”*
Votive, could bless like her, she, in her settling down again
Vainly against the marble vainly of Baudelaire

In the veil that wraps her around, absent with shivers,
Always to breathe
This, she, his Shade
Even if it be a tutelary poison
from which…of which…we perish.

by Stéphane Mallarmé
first translated by Roger Fry
adjusted and retranslated by Madeline Gins

Etant Pris

D. drinks M. drinking B.–drinks-toasts.

Muddy ruby-filled brew.

Pubis, liquid, illuminating gas.

Eternal afternoons—— of cities without night.

Symbols that gaze back at . . . . . . .

Forests of gazing-back symbols–

Dried foliage–

The bec Auer and its predecessor the bec papillon–
or the butterfly or bat’s wing burner

The wick’s desire . . . to be put . . . inserted.

M. Gins

Telescopic/Paralll Malic Moulds
by Rrose Sélavy

Charles Baudelaire 1821-1867
Arthur Rimbaud 1854-1891
Henri Poincaré 1854-1912
Stéphane Mallarmé 1871-1898
Marcel Duchamp 1887-1968

M.Gins

Poincaré’s Infra-thin

A.

Because

we cannot

a curve

without width

and must a straight line

under the form of

a rectilinear band

having breadth.

But well know these lines have no width.

Have them be narrower and narrower

thus to approach the limit;

so we do in a certain measure,

but we shall never attain this limit.

Always picture these two narrow bands,

one straight, one curved,

in a position such that

they encroach slightly one upon the other

without crossing.

A hand made of paper

and a hand made of gentle breeze

were made to shake hands

so that zeroing in on

the as-always oversized

triggering-zero might keep narrow. . . .

B. [tangent at infra-thin]

A high-tension non-wire

The tension needed to hold the image of a line.

The width of this line shall not exceed the posited non-width.

The tension needed to hold the thought-the breaking into thinking–
of a line.

The-tension-needed-to-hold-the-image-of-a-line’s width, non-width,
or near-non-width.

The-tension-needed-to-hold-the-thought-of-a-line.

T-T-T . . . te te te te te

A cross-sectional slice, a shaving, a would-shaving of
…tentativeness….

 

M.Gins

Figs. 1, 4 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris. All rights reserved.




An Impertinent Pilgrimage: A “Meditation” on the Creation of Praying for Irreverence


click to enlarge

Dove Bradshaw, 
Praying For Irreverence

Dove Bradshaw,
Praying For Irreverence,
1984

My involvement with Marcel Duchamp started early. Growing up in Manhattan, I first went to the Museum of Modern Art when I was eleven or twelve. I was understandably attracted to the machine imagery of theBicycle Wheel in their permanent collection. The subversive nature of the work left a strong imprint. My first artbook was Arturo Schwarz’s original Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp. By 1969 I was in art school, and it was there that I stumbled into my future work with Indeterminacy in a piece that came from life. It was titled Plain Air.


click to enlarge

Dove Bradshaw,
Plain Air

Dove Bradshaw,
Plain Air, 1969-91
PS1 Institute of Comtemporary Art

Cycling home from school, I came across a discarded bicycle wheel. I hung it horizontally in my studio as a perch for a pair of doves. At the time I let them fly free. The birds picked up pieces of wire and string from the studio to make a nest. Then I placed a Zen archery target below the wheel on the floor. This piece has been recreated three times since: at Sandra Gering and PS 1 Institute of Contemporary Art in New York and at The Mattress Factory in Pittsburgh.

In 1977 my partner William Anastasi was offered three evenings at the Clocktower in which to perform versions of You Are, a piece from 1967. He wanted a writer, a painter and a composer each to serve as narrators. The narrators described ad libitum the viewers. This was taken down by a court reporter and transcribed by a typist; the pages were then pinned to the wall. Because of my involvement with the philosophy of chance, (and remembering that Bill had met John Cage in the 1960s) I suggested Cage as the composer. Cage agreed; a friendship developed and through him we met Teeny Duchamp.

We were invited for dinner with Teeny at Cage’s house in 1982. John, as he often did, had asked us to arrive at five for a round robin of chess. Chance placed me across from Teeny. We had not met before and had barely said a few words before beginning.

It was an intense game. Chess has the capacity to be more revealing than small talk. The play went on for about two hours and I had the sense that neither of us wanted the other to lose, although perhaps neither wanted to throw the game. Teeny, the stronger player, won. This was the beginning of our friendship; we kept a correspondence until her death.

Bill and I often traveled to Europe for our work. On a number of occasions, we stayed with Teeny for a couple of weeks at her home in Villiers-sous-Grez. In 1984, on such a visit, Teeny had driven us to Paris where she had things to do. She put us up in the apartment/studio in Neuilly that she had shared with Duchamp. She returned for us the next day. It was a marvelous unplanned experience.

The Neuilly studio was the place where Duchamp died. Although fifteen years had passed, it looked as if he had just left. The books and folios on the shelves gave the impression of constant use. The room seemed filled with a beautiful spirit.

Among many of the readymades were the Bottle Dryer, Fresh Widow and Fountain. The next morning I asked Bill to photograph me Praying for Irreverence.

That night, we took off for Cadaquès, Spain, where Teeny and Marcel had summered. Our host was Richard Hamilton who was responsible for the typographic version of the Green Box notes. Hamilton’s house (formerly the Governor’s) is a medieval building made of local flint stone. Richard had gathered a rare mix of Antonio Gaudí and seventeenth century furniture. We arrived in January during the month of the Mistral (a cold violent wind which whips off the Mediterranean). Its incessant howling rang through Richard’s vaulted stone corridors. And each house we entered made a different sound. It was known to have set a native’s mind mad. We left this place after a week. I was grateful to quietly reclaim my thoughts. To this day, I associate the wail of the Mistral with that land of Duchamp, Dalí, and Buñuel.

Click here for images of Duchamp’s studio/apartment in Neuilly.

Click here for information on Dove Bradshaw’s recent exhibitions.

For articles on Dove Bradshaw’s “Firehose” (1976-2000),
see The Columbus Dispatch and The New York Magazine.

Click here to see Dove Bradshaw’s recent work: Water of Life.




The Inventor of Gratuitous Time

Introductory Remarks

Robert Lebel, who was born in Paris on 5 January 1901 and who died in Paris on 28 February 1986, was an art expert (1935- ), an authority on ancient paintings with the courts of justice and the courts of appeals (1953- ), and a writer all of his life.

It was in New York, at “An American Place,” the Alfred Stieglitz Gallery, in July 1936 according to all accounts, that he met Marcel Duchamp, then in the United States to repair the Large Glass.

It was again in New York, during the Second World War, when in forced exile, that he wrote “The Inventor of Gratuitous Time,” around 1943-44, “during a period when I was seeing Duchamp nearly every day. The title Ingénieur du temps perdu [Engineer of Lost Time] dates from a lot later and I believe that Duchamp was inspired by my title rather than me by his. I had shown him my text a little after having written it.”(A) This “enchanting and sacrilegious tale in the fullness of a civilization of skyscrapers and elevated railways” (from the back cover flap of the 1977 edition) would be published fifteen years later in the journal,Le surréalisme, même (Paris, 2, Spring 1957), with three photos of the Elevated, exactly, (B)then seven years later in the book, La double vue [suivi de] L’Inventeur du temps gratuit, with an etched diptych by Alberto Giacometti and a folding (The Clock in Profile, 1964) by Marcel Duchamp (Paris: Le Soleil Noir, 1964); this book received “Le Prix du Fantastique” in 1965.

Lastly, it was around 1949 that Robert Lebel came up with the plan of devoting a book – both biography and catalogue – to Marcel Duchamp, a book that Lebel would work on in elaborate fashion from the spring of 1953 to the autumn of 1957 and that he would complete and correct in 1958, just as it was translated into English. This book, which would be the first book, was preceded and followed by about twenty articles (on Duchamp, but also on Picabia and Duchamp, de Chirico and Duchamp, Breton and Duchamp, Man Ray and Duchamp, etc.) appearing from 1949, exactly, but only some of these articles would be picked for inclusion in the completely redesigned edition of 1985:

Sur Marcel Duchamp, Paris: Trianon Press, 1959; translated into English by George Heard Hamilton, New York: Grove Press, 1959; translated into German by Serge Stauffer, Cologne: DuMont Schauberg, 1962.

– Second American edition, expanded, New York: Paragraphic Books, 1967; second German edition, revised and expanded, Cologne: Du Mont Schauberg, 1972.

Marcel Duchamp, second French edition, revised and expanded but trimmed of its catalogue, illustrations, and layout. Paris: Belfond, collection “Les Dossiers,” [September] 1985.

– Facsimile edition of the 1959 regular edition, expanded with four letters from Marcel Duchamp to Robert Lebel on loose sheets. Paris and Milan, Mazzotta, and Paris: Centre Georges Pompidou, 1996.

With Francis Picabia (from 1911), painter and poet; Man Ray (from 1915), painter and photographer; and Henri-Pierre Roché (from 1916), collector and diarist; Robert Lebel would have been, without doubt, the last accomplice of Marcel Duchamp. “All for being very good friends, we remained to a certain extant on our guard,” thus did he summarize, at the end of his life, this complicity.

André Gervais
9 April 2000

A. Robert lebel, letter to André Gervais, Paris, 21 May 1979. “Ingénieur du temps perdu” is the title of the new edition, in 1977, of Entretiens avec Marcel Duchamp [Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp] (1967) by Pierre Cabanne.

B. In an article on Robert Lebel and Marcel Duchamp (Critique, Paris, 149, October 1959), Patrick Waldberg specifies that “the brilliant and curious text by Robert Lebel The Inventor of Gratuitous Time, a veritable speculation, in the sense that Jarry heard it,” would have been able to be published in the De Costa encyclopédique, which had begun being produced in 1946. And he adds, “We easily recognize, in the “inventor” in question, if not Marcel Duchamp in person, at least one of his brothers in spirit.”

The Inventor of Gratuitous Time

by Robert Lebel

translated by Sarah Skinner Kilborne (with Julia Koteliansky)

As soon as it was beyond the already mutilated silhouette of the terminus, near the tip of the island, the Elevated penetrated the rail-narrow streets, skimming their iron staircase facades. Front Street…Pearl Street…were covered by it, shut in like long tunnels, and managed beneath, when not shaken from its passing, only the illusive and silent existence of ancient scenery. Boarded up with impregnable shutters or blinded with filth, windows, one after the other, ceased to be openings. Here it was, between the docks of the East River and the skyscrapers of Wall Street, the strange, dead village where everything menacing that came to New York had buried itself, waiting.

I was attracted to this neighborhood and wanted to live there, but the houses were at that point so inhabited that any imaginable tenant would immediately appear suspicious. Nobody would believe that someone could seriously think about living in these dilapidated buildings, far from the dignity and comfort that is so proffered by urbanite zeal. In vain, I proposed the excuse that I wanted an artistic existence. This argument, which is often accepted and indulged, only provoked additional mistrust and hostility.

Nevertheless, I pursued going door to door. My disappointment of having to deal with some unavoidable failures was amply compensated by discoveries I made inside of the houses that I visited from top to bottom. Sometimes I would walk around for two to three hours without encountering a single human being. It was in the process of exploring one of these buildings that seemed totally abandoned when I came upon the following inscription, in French, on a door:

A. Loride, Inventeur du Temps Gratuit [“A. Loride, Inventor of Gratuitous Time”] – This was carelessly written in pen on a sheet of paper attached by two nails.

I had already gone through, on other floors, the office of a navigation company, a print shop and a bath shop, all equally deserted. Thus, I entered without hesitation. It was three o’clock in the afternoon of a weekday.

In the middle of some sort of vast, extraordinarily cluttered warehouse, a totally naked man was executing movements of physical exercise. He turned around and I thought he had to be over fifty, even though his body was still quite svelte. He didn’t have any hair and his meticulously clean appearance was surprising in such surroundings. But I was especially struck by his lack of embarrassment. With no thought of covering himself up, or being astonished, or justifying his attire, he considered me calmly and waited for an explanation.

At first, I found nothing to say except for the silly “Are you French?” adding after a pause, “I’m here about your invention.”


click to enlarge

He made a sign, permitting me to sit down, but, except for a bed where a very young woman was lying down, there was no place to sit, and so I politely leaned against a crate. “I’m listening,” he said. At that moment, the El appeared suddenly level with the windows and everything around us started to shake.

“Sir,” I finally answered, as soon as we could hear each other. “I won’t try to hide the fact that I’m prodigiously interested in your discoveries, and it’s because I couldn’t wait to talk to you that I lost my manners and just came in.”

“I receive only by appointment,” he briefly replied. “Write down your name and address (he pointed to a wall covered with notes and numbers). You’ll be invited,” and turning his back to me he resumed his exercise.

I received his letter just three weeks later. It was written on a sheet of paper with “A. Loride and Company” in the letterhead. “I warn you,” he wrote, “that I’m not a madman, not a mystic, not a philosopher, not a seer, not a poet. I devote myself to positive research and my actions correspond, to a large extent, to the title perhaps a bit too complementary that I have given myself. Engaged in a real enterprise, the practical necessity obliged me to have a professional name. Others call themselves oil kings or first-rate pharmacists. In any case, let me stipulate that our eventual relations can only be strictly commercial. I don’t desire any new friends, my eccentricity is my personal matter and I didn’t unintentionally choose this place to retreat to, where only your curiosity and extreme indiscretion could have enabled you to discover me.” And he assigned me an interview for a following day.

I made my way there on the El. Many times already, since our first meeting, I had passed by his windows, trying to experience what it would be like to catch him in the act of some telling pose, but, from the compartment of the train, even though it was enough to just barely lean out in order to tap at his glass, I distinguished nothing that permitted any suspicion of his presence.

He greeted me with the same impassivity that I noticed before. He was neither reticent nor warm. Armed with a graciousness that was somewhat distant, he presented himself at this tête-à-tête, from which he was obviously neither expecting nor fearing anything. Elegantly dressed, he courteously guided me through a remarkable disarray of machines, benches, beams, clocks, safes, all the way to the bed which was no longer occupied.

“You’ve got a lot of equipment,” I said, to start a conversation. “Everything you see in this place, or rather in this store, was left here by the previous tenants,” he replied. “So, you won’t see much belonging to me here, but I prefer these instruments of chance. The diversity of their nature doesn’t allow me to limit myself to just one way of thinking, and in this laboratory – where I inventory the resources systematically and, of course, in the wrong way – my imagination exposes itself less to marking time.”

“What about time?” I asked.

“I came round to the idea since I adjusted a theory of mine, thanks to the altogether providential gathering in front of me of these three clocks, of which one functions precisely, another irregularly, and another not at all. In the same way, this see-saw made me revise my views on isotopes and I owe this electric drying machine some unexpected revelations on the pyrrhonian suspension.” Then, meeting my gaze, he added sharply, “Most importantly, don’t take me for some sort of a thinker. I only try to connect some scattered notions, I pick up the crumbs of great ideas. I hate abstractions. All these machines, deficient for the most part, constantly bring me back to details, to fragmentary verifications, and make me carry out a mental patchwork of happy inconsistency. They impress upon my questioning a concrete form while their eminently fictitious character keeps me from giving up, just like it does for physicians and like it has done, unfortunately, for so many alchemists, to the detriment of the result. Here, I learn to uselessly take advantage of everything. Thus, for me the ineluctable passage of the El assumes a function as fundamental as the cycle of the tides. It expresses with as much perfection the stamp of humanity, but in addition has the immense advantage of keeping the organism in a state of latent exasperation. The ebb and flow merely encourage us to resign ourselves endlessly, while the El directly drives us to revolt against what is presented to us again and again as being our condition.”

“What about time?” I insisted.

“We’re getting there. Each of us works like a dog, in the hope that our thoroughly full days will eventually lead up to a well-deserved rest. Our era can’t help but twin freedom and leisure into a derisive kind of cult, even though the beings who are most satisfied are the most busy, and consequently the most enslaved. Now, it’s clear that no progress is within our reach unless we first overcome our compulsion to be actively productive. However, this compulsion, and only this compulsion, continues to dominate our concept of time. Look,” he said, grabbing a stick to point at the clocks, “each of these dials shows time in one of its three aspects. For the quasi totality of men, there’s only one aspect. The so-called enlightened individuals might conceive of two, but I’m one of the rare ones to explicitly define the third, to the point where I can, without too much posturing, presume to be its inventor. Moreover, my goal lies less in formulating it theoretically than in giving it a lasting quality. My ambition is to turn it into a real commodity, a simple object to buy and sell, just like those pharmaceuticals whose properties are known only to chemists, but which are nevertheless sold at every counter. That’s why I flatter myself being a tradesman rather than a philosopher.”

click to enlarge

He stopped talking, sat down at a machine situated in proximity to the clocks and set the machine in motion, with one foot on a pedal. Soon, some thin wooden sticks began coming out of an open escapement. “Excuse me,” he said. “I have to work on a pressing order.”

“Would those be your time compressions?” I cried out. I rather imagined that they were crystalline and their appearance, some kind of tablet.

“The symbol is of no importance,” he said, continuing to pedal. “I’ve found that, without having anything to do with it, I’ve got this device at my disposal which cuts up the kind of logs that my clients, local hardware dealers, are very greedy to have. I was even told that a surrealist sculptor has been using them quite often. But the fact remains that this work hardly requires the amount of attention I’m capable of giving to something I do for a living. I can devote myself to it without taking my eyes off the first clock and, as easily as I can, from this spot here, watch the El come, pass by and disappear, I can, by that dial, watch Time come, pass by and disappear, Time which is everlasting and venal. The clock’s hands, already worn out, turn with a regularity that is nothing but miraculous. It seems as if it is their destiny to turn, no matter what happens. Their good fortune consists in being neither ahead nor behind and, above all, not stopped. We can discern in their clear, resolute, and confident movements, the chauvinistic satisfaction that emanates from the face of an honest servant, a diligent housewife, a conscientious worker, a methodical official, an enterprising businessman, all the people that I see every morning on their way to work, jostling each other in the El, and similarly pushing each other every evening on their way home. Meanwhile, time progresses in front of me like a movie. Sure, I feel like a stranger here. I literally escape here, but is it because of my work schedule which can be considered whimsical? I don’t think so. Compare the faces of those I described to you with those who replace them during off-peak hours, when the train is almost empty and just about comfortable. These privileged few who, for generally very questionable reasons, have gotten to be released, far from showing delight, seem, on the contrary and for the most part, anxious and tormented. They carelessly glance through their newspapers, sit upright in their seats, and get irritated by the slowness of the train. In brief, their symptoms are the ones of a morbid rumination.”

Interrupting himself suddenly, he pushed the sticks which had been accumulating in front of the escapement out of his way, and then resumed his small operation. “Don’t worry,” he continued. “My off-peak travelers aren’t in any way eaten up by remorse. What’s more, the reaction of a privileged person to the enslavement of others is contemptuously expressed by a cynical contentment. No, the explanation is elsewhere. If, like me, you spent several hours each day aiming your binoculars at the El from the height of this Anglican minister’s pulpit (it allows me to look at everything without risking detection), you would notice that these passengers are divided into two quite distinct categories. It was a simple problem of interpretation that I solved with the skill of an ethnographer or anthropologist, using an exhaustive comparison of individual characteristics. Those that you espy, in the off-peak hours, smiling, even relaxing, are in reality temporarily removed ants from the big anthill. As they’d say in the office, ‘they’re running an errand’ or as they’d say in the military, with more dignity, ‘they’re on official assignment.’ The serenity, the casualness, which distinguishes them from their immediate neighbors, could have no other explanation. For them, an empty hour is nearly impossible, since society is devoted to filling up time, andthey can’t escape that. Time, in which currency is measured by practice, remains the very glue which binds them to their agitation.”

While he was once again clearing away output from his machine, I permitted myself to disagree. “Nevertheless, for those other off-peak commuters, those that you’d still classify after further examination as true people of leisure, what’s the explanation of their melancholy if you discard the hypothesis of scruples? Should we resort to the well-worn exploitation of anguish with which our travelers are supposed to be seized before the prospect of being at somebody else’s disposal?”

“Not at all,” he answered in a bit of a temper. “That would be giving in to the most spectacularly specious argument, the one commonly used to justify social inequalities and prove the validity of servitude by exaggerating both the responsibilities of an idle person and the risks that run a free man. If individuals who achieve a relative independence end up being, in fact, the most helpless and skittish, it’s because, while being physically emancipated, they remain mentally enslaved. They don’t adjust their notion of time, although time modifies its rhythm for them. Thus, their existence is marked by an imbalance that is aptly mimicked by this second set of hands. These hands are animated solely by an erratic, sort of feverish movement, interrupted by long moments of heavy stillness. The hands are constantly ahead or behind, but of what, we might ask, since they’re set, precisely, outside of the revolutions of punctuality. Where does this inconsistency come from, if not from the very lively consciousness of social time that they manage to keep? When all is said and done, their regret about being deprived of punctuality prevails over their relief from not having to deal with it. A clock that is ‘off,’ and thence liberated, doesn’t forget that it was once an accurate clock. No matter the hour, it will never be totally free of the other whose earlier bell persists stubbornly in ringing and calling up memories.”


click to enlarge

Without stopping the machine, he started to laugh quietly. “You see,” he went on, “I will only accept the title ‘thinker’ if it’s used with the word ‘comic,’ not in the sad sense, but in the way Stendhal envisioned becoming ‘the comic bard.’ Unlike Molière and his miserable suite of vaudevillian writers, I laugh less about man himself than about the abstractions he’s highly conscious of. The comedy of thought is a lot more irresistible than that of character. It’s high time we finished with the classic form of comedy and its arsenal of forever withered ideal types, and replace it with a comedy of knowledge that would end with a beautiful butchery of ideas, instead of a routine conclusion which smothers what’s ‘funny.’ For example, I can clearly imagine a comedy based on the notion of time, that old flirt with her sordid minauderies, tirelessly counting and recounting her gold as it slides through her fingers. She would be the one to astound and trash and leave, as is fitting, with her ideographic configuration. I often like to think that the amazing forms which modern art has been lavished with are ideas which have taken shape and been dressed up for the future where they will be shot down. These are the characters in our new comedy and their appearance, sometimes repulsive at first, only confirms their mythical significance and announces the farcical sacrifice they are destined to make.”

The stacks of logs had reached a considerable height, and probably judging the results of his effort to be sufficient, my host stopped pedaling, stood up, pointed at the second clock again and continued. “This time, which has ceased being social and hasn’t yet started to be individual, this amorphous, colorless, insipid time represents an intolerable dead weight which we’ve agreed to call human evolution. Either it is only fantasy, and among the eternally primitive masses, we represent only a negligible dreg of dissent, or, from the very beginning, this evolution reached a deadlock, meeting with a challenge that irrefutably pushes it back. But we should be careful, because the very desire for freedom won’t endlessly resist the terrible denial imposed by the facts. The scandalous gap between the words we put forth and our notorious behavior grows bigger every day. Around us, failures begin to happen all at once and the most rebellious sometimes resemble those emancipated women who secretly wish for a tough-minded man. The one thing that’s always missing is a cause for dedicating themselves “with all their soul.” We have to admit that this social time knows how to keep those who are momentarily outside of it feeling disgustingly nostalgic. Some are at the mercy of the first ambiguous welcome; others, proud of their firmness, write down with a morose refinement the codes of their new constraints. Even the few who put up with being alone pay tribute by way of moaning. They are bored, they despair or, what’s more ridiculous, they work. Every bribe of this time, which they are so painfully aware takes away from society, acquires in their eyes an extravagant value. They personally establish themselves as usurers and, to make their sad savings more fruitful, they calculate, they invent, they build, they paint, they write with a sorry fervor. Without a doubt, they give themselves over to a sort of transference; they convert their paper-time into gold-time, they consolidate, and it’s pure instinct to use the language of finance for this mental operation. The matter is only a question of investing for old age or, like the ultimate ambition of a philanthropist, the long-term investor, for a way to survive.

“You see,” he said smiling. “I sometimes let satire get the best of me. I stigmatize the modern man, the free man, the one who, like ancient duelists, feels spoiled when accorded the choice of how he’d like to be killed. Follow him in his game as he vacillates triumphantly between newspapers, between professions, between churches. Hear him expressing himself at ease in languages which mix-up rhythm with time, such as the English ‘time’ or the Italian ‘tempo.’ Watch him confidently walk away, persuaded that he could stay away if he wants, while he carries within him, more restricting than a love potion, the proof of his submission. Even in the forest where he sometimes ventures, the fairies, the witches, the anonymous voices are just like metaphorical clocks whose function is to remind him of the time. Under his gaze, each surface is a readable dial, each shadow, a watch that awaits in ambush. The agony of the minutes bellows in every echo and the traveler listens to himself grow old, to the point where he is dizzy with anger, because it is time, the inexorable maestro of the interior orchestra, that beats his pulse. To retrace his steps, to search for ‘lost time,’ what temptation for someone who, having believed he avoided old ground, resumes on his own account the disenchanted exclamation of a famous author: ‘It is nothing, I am here, I am still here.'”

For several moments, my eyes had been fixed on the third dial whose unchanging face had begun to fascinate me. “Don’t let this inertia inspire facile images of nothingness or eternity,” my host told me in a sardonic tone. “On the contrary, imagine within this stopped clock a more sensible mechanism than the others, too ‘perfect’ for registering the coarse vibrations of social time. Somewhere, in some carefully hidden part of its gears, imperceptible oscillations will reveal the almost impalpable passage of gratuitous time. Of course, the face on this dial, fixed and death-like, is well-made for turning away those who naturally step back from any possible mutation. Everything announces a passage to go through, a rupture to realize. Between this world and the other, there’s no legendary transition, no discursive communication. No one offers us the key to some different nirvana because it seems as if, where we’re going, ecstacy has no reason to exist. We reunite with nothing and perhaps will have broken with everything. No ceremonial, no incantations, no rites, but reaching the point of lucidity where the notion of time becomes a fruit one can peal,” and with his fingers he made these little, nimble movements.

I was burning to ask a question but, getting ahead of me, he added, “Do I need to specify that in removing ourselves from useful time, we don’t in any way intend to restrict ourselves to the neutral calm of a spectator, to a skeptical or contemplative transcendence which, as far as I’m concerned, is absolutely repulsive? The domain of gratuitous time is the domain of extreme risk, of sustainable exaltation, for it is, at once, the only one where we consciously lose time and therefore life, and the only one where every dramatic effect, every emphasis is unacceptable. The game itself is stripped of the verbal or passionate compensations bequeathed by social time where no act is justifiable without a dividend. Ancient aristocrats would take the precaution of gathering all their guests before tossing their silverware to the bottom of the water, and various ways to execute, in modern literature, have kept this showy style. For us, waste is strictly mandated to be not ostensible, and we will try above all to stay above suspicion. We’re not magi or heros, dispensers of justice or prophets, but we’ll take care to play any roles with a false seriousness in order to create an illusion. It’s exactly within social time – not outside of it, which will itself be enlightening – that we’ll create, without necessarily meaning to, zones of refusal and lightness.”

click to enlarge

At this point, a young woman entered. She wasn’t the one I’d seen before. She just nodded her head and sat down on the bed without saying a word. I was prepared to continue the conversation when I realized that, without a doubt, the thoughts of my colleague had taken a turn.

“May I request something, that you never come back again?” he asked after some minutes of silence. “Spare me the disgrace of resuming these oral demonstrations which only betray our own shilly-shallying. The noise of words claiming they can persuade is enough for the momentarily averted social time to regain its arrogance.” And kindly pushing me towards the door, he concluded, “Freedom is never separate from a certain silence. Yes indeed, I have already said too much.”