I somewhat reluctantly
went to the Dali exhibition at the Centre Pompidou on Friday night. Although I am
a fan of Dali’s film collaborations, I have never been that taken with his
surrealist creations. But I went with an open mind and also so I could have an
opinion when the subject of the exhibition comes up at dinner parties!
Salvador Dali, Les Montres Molles ou la Persistance de la Mémoire, 1931 |
With the exception of
some early figurative paintings, it is striking to notice how little Dali’s
preoccupations change across the course of his lifetime. From very early on,
the works are sexual, they concoct wildly imaginative nightmares of anxiety and
trauma. As an aesthetic, the works tend to be fairly consistent, with the major
point of connection being illustration. Dali’s skill as a painter varies: there’s
a swiftness to the paintings, but there are also paintings, particularly
landscapes, in which the technique appears somehow virtuosic, creating a
luminosity that verges onto transparency. The living and breathing sky in The True Painting of the "Isle of the Dead"
by Arnold Böcklin at the Hour of the Angelus, 1932
for example demonstrates a clarity of vision that is not always present in more
drafted works.
Salvador Dali, The Aprodisiac Telephone, 1936 |
My friend Anne remarked
that while the works were, at times, intellectually challenging and
provocative, they often left her cold, offering no opportunity for emotional
connection. It’s true that there is something alienating about these paintings,
something that made them emotionally inaccessible, but it’s difficult to put my
finger on what. I want to say it’s the relentless repetition, the almost
obsessively meticulous detail, the psychological disorder of an artist that
leaves no trace of the canvas, paper or wood support untouched and unworked. It
is as though Dali’s psychological freneticism and obsessiveness forms a wall
between the paintings and their viewer.
Salvador Dali, The True Painting of the "Isle of the Dead" by Arnold Böcklin at the Hour of the Angelus, 1932 |
There is no medium that Dali does not touch:
he paints using water colours, oils, draws, films, makes sculptures as well as
conceives readymade environments, and even ventures into the theatre. This
reach is impressive. And as if that’s not enough, the works take inspiration
from and often repeat overwhelmingly their tribute to the history of art.
Velasquez Millet, Vermeer, Caravaggio, Böcklin, and others all become, at some
point, his obsessive, yet creative, focus. Perhaps the most touching paintings
in the exhibition are those which interpret through reworking Jean-François
Millet’s The Angelus (1857-59).
Dali’s interpretations radically transform this otherwise quiet and humble
scene of two peasants at the end of their day, the sun’s last light gently
bathing the scene in a variety of ways. In Dali’s interpretations, the figures
are abstracted and repeated, the man and the woman oversized and in the process
of morphing into unknown forms, nakedness, violence, death and uncertainty,
always soaked in sexual perversion. Clearly, like all of Dali’s works, these
visions represent Millet seen through the eyes of Salvador Dali rather than an
excavation of any hidden meaning in Millet’s French genre painting.
In addition to the works inspired by the
history of art, I enjoyed some of the drawings and smaller scale sketches on
display. There was a meticulousness to the detail that becomes mesmerizing, and
the sketches reveal the painstaking process of his art, a process that is
otherwise elusive in the bigger paintings. In addition, once Dali turns to
larger scale, especially when they are not re-interpreting paintings from the
history of art, the works become like cartoons that remind more of the
illustrations of Robert Crumb than they reveal any kind of artistic genius.
Of course it was fun to see all of the
images and objects which have been canonized by popular cultural reproduction:
the melting clocks, the lobster telephone, the man with his moustache in
portrait after portrait. And I never tire of seeing the scene in Un Chien Andalou where the razor slices
open the eye. But ultimately, I was left wondering how to take this massive
body of work seriously. There’s no arguing that Dali was prolific. But I did
come away with the question of whether or not the self-obsessed paranoia gives
anything to anyone other than Salvador Dali. In the end, there’s a lot of fun
to be had going around this massive exhibition, but I am not convinced that we
need to rethink twentieth century art in light of Salvador Dali’s contribution.
No comments:
Post a Comment