Nebhan
L Katy I M I N A
The Explosion of Time in Early Twentieth Century Cubist, Surrealist, Futurist and Kinetic Art1
Katy Nebhan
When Filippo Marinetti proclaimed the death of time and space in the Futurist manifesto, he was reacting, like many artists of his time, to the political and sociocultural struggles that characterised the period beginning from around 1880 to the first few decades of the 20th century. The potency which speed, the machine and the dominance of the metropolis generated during this period, and the resulting distinctive consciousness of time, presented artists with a challenge. This paper seeks to not only consider the relationships that developed between time and art during this period, but to explore the more subtle parodies, tensions and complexities faced by many artists, from various and at times opposing art movements, as they struggled to create the experience of time for the observer and in the process, create an explosion in artistic conventions.
We stand on the last promontory of the centuries! ... Why should we look back, when what we want is to break down the mysterious doors of the Impossible? Time and Space dies yesterday. We already live in the absolute, because we have created eternal, omnipresent speed. Filippo Tommaso Marinetti Manifesto of Futurism In existing art-historical literature these words, and related artistic preoccupations with time and space, are seen as products of a particular historical period beginning from around 1880 to the first few decades of the twentieth century.2 This is a period when many of the most fundamental social, economic, political, and ideological conditions of human life came 113
LIMINA
Volume 7, 2001
into question as a result of intense scientific, technological and cultural innovations. These changes brought to the fore the inadequacies of the existing traditions of the various arts for expressing the dynamism of a period seen to be characterised by the rapid telescoping of changing images, pronounced differences within what is grasped at a single glance, and the unexpectedness of violent stimuli.3 Intensified by the uncertainty and disorientation of world war, and the tempo and multiplicity of the metropolis, this period saw a distinctive awareness and expression of time in modern painting and sculpture, and a strong desire among modern artists to experiment and move away from traditional and absolute ideas about art. Implicated in some of the most critical artistic innovations of this period, including the Cubist, Surrealist, Futurist, and Kinetic art movements, was the importance of simultaneity, the idea of universal dynamism, speed and the machine, the desire to express not only the sensation of movement, but time itself. The sense of an accelerated rate of change in all areas of human discourse, the feeling of an approaching millennium, and the constantly shifting values of scientific culture, provided these artistic movements with a wealth of subject matter with which they could experiment and explore. They also provided artists with a challenge. How could painting and sculpture - one a flat canvas and the other, an inanimate object - reflect and express the dynamism, speed, and chaos of the modern city? More importantly, how were artists to depict the sense of movement and time which were so central to the modern age? Surrounded by the feelings of economic, social and political disaster which destroyed the optimism and idealism of the preceding liberal era,4 many artists believed that their genre was no longer capable of representing time. This study is not concerned with these artists, but with those Cubists, Futurists, Kinetic artists and, to a lesser degree, the Surrealists, who took up this challenge, and who did not simply hold up a mirror to society but demanded attention, to create some of the most powerful images, expressions and comments on time in the twentieth century.5 Drawing on theories of mathematics and geometry, as well as contemporary philosophies of time and the experience of time (particularly in the work of Henri Bergson), a number of studies, most notably those of Stephen Kern, Matthew Gale and Robert Antliff, have sought to understand the experimental methods these artists used to question the political, cultural, and philosophical assumptions underlying art.6 Focusing on the results of these experimental methods by approaching the relationship between art and time through the roles played by artworks in our everyday reality, in our Lebenswelt or lived world, Arto Haapala offers a phenomenological analysis of the ways in which the observer experiences time when dealing with works of art.7 Whilst these contexts and their various juxtapositions are critical to the relationships that develop between time and art during this period, this paper seeks to take Haapalas analysis further, to explore the more subtle parodies, tensions and complexities faced by many artists, 114
Katy Nebhan
including those from various, and at times opposing, art movements, who struggled to create the experience of time for the observer. The years preceding World War I seemed full of potential. If the exotic machinery of the 1780s seemed to symbolise by the 1880s the conquest of process, then the new century - the twentieth - could look forward to an industrial expansion, an age of the new machine.8 The machine meant a relatively new sense of time and space: the succession and superimposition of views, the sensational feeling of relative motion, and less time in which the eye could dwell on any one thing. The view from a moving train or automobile for instance, compressed more subject matter into the same time. Changes in attitudes to time were also influenced by other developments during this period. In 1905, Einsteins Theory of Relativity put forward that any predication about the dynamic universe was subject to a degree of uncertainty, if applied universally to all time-space situations.9 The reinventing of culture through the growing speed of movement and communications in technology, also disrupted the traditional divisions of past, present, and future time. The ensuing notion of instantaneous time10 eclipsed the rhythmic order of clock-time and the secure regularity which it provided. The strict measurement, or science of time, was questioned by time deviations that created a kind of oscillating temporality, a process which allowed for the distinctions between the three- and four-dimensions of time in such works as Marcel Duchamps Large Glass (1915-23).11 Bergsonian discussions of time as succession and space as simultaneity, and of an artists cumulative experience of duration, were also used and, at times, questioned.12 The rapid changes and uncertainties which these created were particularly difficult for the artist, who in the first few decades of the twentieth century, was experiencing a crisis of identity. The question was not, as Barry Schwartz put it, whether the artist should compliment science and technology and thus play a supportive role in its historical development, or seek a central role for art in offering human resistance to the technocratisation of the human and natural environments.13 In either case, the artist needed to respond with an art that was just as dynamic and powerful as any machine. It was no longer enough to depict a moment in time. Questioning the social and physical frames through which people observed and experienced art was just as critical for its survival as was the need for reinterpretation. As such, the experience of the modern age through movement, speed and time itself, was of central concern to many artists in the twentieth century. The first great art experiment of the twentieth century was Cubism. The Cubists, led by Picasso and Braque, portrayed both the interior and exterior of objects from a variety of perspectives in a single painting, thus transcending traditional spatial and temporal limits in art.14 In doing this, they were creating a new time situation through an art of simultaneity. Motion and the mechanical textures of the thing represented were indicated 115
LIMINA
Volume 7, 2001
by an aspect of its form and the space it occupied, thus expanding the possibilities of representation.15 Visual experiences which were traditionally spread out in time, or serialistic, were presented as one simultaneous visual impact, giving Cubist works an instantaneous sense of the now.16 This interest in motion and time is typified in Marcel Duchamps Nude Descending a Staircase, No.2 of 1912, and Giacomo Ballas Dynamism of a Dog on a Leash of the same year. Both these works are concerned with sensations rather than perceptions. Whilst Balla depicts movement in time in a rather childlike manner, Duchamp, who was not a Cubist in the strictest sense, uses in this work the analytical aspect of Cubism as a means of expressing sequential movement. Duchamp presents in this work a series of visual stimuli or sensations, as a new aspect of the figure is presented in each second of time. Using a linear, geometric form for expressing movement, the work creates a sophisticated representation of phased time. Duchamp explained this preoccupation with sequential movement in the painting as follows: It is an organisation of kinetic elements, an expression of time and space through the abstract presentation of motion. ... But remember, when we consider the motion of form through space in a given time, we enter the realm of geometry and mathematics just as we do when we build a machine for that purpose. ... When the vision of the Nude flashed before me, I knew that it would break forever the enslaving chains of Naturalism.17 The break from both Naturalism and Impressionism was a break from a traditional essence of realism which represented one thing at a given moment in time and which the Cubists saw as being no longer adequate for expressing life in the modern age. Bergsonian theories on the simultaneity of experience and the instability which this implied provided these Cubists with a stimulant and a challenge.18 As Jean Metzinger pointed out, Cubists uprooted the prejudice that commanded the painter to remain motionless in front of the object at a fixed distance ... formally a picture took possession of space, now it reigns also in time.19 The French Cubist Fernand Leger identified the effect which technology had on the artist and the viewing public, pointing out that present-day life, more fragmented and faster moving than preceding periods, was bound to accept as its means of expression, an art of dynamic divisionism.20 If on the one hand this dynamic art pursued the passage of forms through time and space with an objective discipline, it was also an art which, in accepting the existential attitude towards life, saw the qualitative moment rather than the quantitative flow of time as its main focus.21 This was art that did more than just create an aesthetic experience; as one critic stated with reference to Francis Picabias work, it inspired a sensation akin to a musical 116
Katy Nebhan
emotion.22 Thus artists did not feel that the clock or watch, both having a traditional association with time, were relevant to their preoccupations with movement and simultaneity. Rather, it was what Bourdieu would refer to as the tyranny of the clock with its predictable operation, which many artists sought to escape.23 The few works that do consider clocks as subject matter provide some of the most powerful comments on clock-time in the twentieth century. Whilst the early Cubists were not particularly concerned with the clock as it represented the quantitative rather than the qualitative aspects of time, other artists used the notion of simultaneity to comment on it. Two Surrealist works, Salvador Dalis The Persistence of Memory of 1931 and Rene Magrittes Time Transfixed of 1939, provide good examples. In his famous definition of Surrealism, Andre Breton referred to it as thoughts dictation in the absence of all control exercised by reason and outside all aesthetic and moral preoccupation.24 Louis Aragon believed that Surrealism meant the discovery of the face of the infinite in the concrete forms.25 The clock which symbolised ordered and controlled time, was seen as a concrete object which tried to contain infinite time. It also represented the traditional idea of times arrow, with its notion that each moment occupies a distinct position in a temporal series and that all moments link events in sequential form.26 It was through the influence of Freud, who placed the displacement of the senses of time and space in vision, that Surrealism was able to transcend the limitations of clock time. Dalis clocks are not firm and hard, but limp, melting, flowing. His painting translates into concrete reality the silent but tense friction between measured time and the mysterious infinite.27 In this painting, Dali does not attempt to depict time in motion; rather, his work is a question and a reminder about time as infinite. According to Kern, it is a reflection on the duration of an event which may be stretched in memory, a symbol of the way life distorts the geometrical shape and mathematical exactness of mechanical time.28 In Magrittes painting, it is not the clock but the steam train which represents time. His clock expresses the notion of the moment of cessation of movement: the moment at which time is transfixed.29 Both works parody the notion of controlled time, of the definite, by stripping the clock of its regulating power. The melting clock has no authority, just as Magrittes still clock is overshadowed by the moving train. Almost thirty years later, this parody was taken a step further in Robert Rauschenbergs Reservoir of 1961, which depicts two mass-produced clocks. These clocks which are set at the time the work was begun, and the time it ended, cannot as Johanna Drucker put it, tell the truth of that temporal extension.30 They give no indication of real time, noon or night, nor of the same or different days. Rather, Rauschenberg uses the still clocks to represent a moment of personal activity created from the social sphere, which is itself a reservoir of time.31
117
LIMINA
Volume 7, 2001
The Futurists were not concerned with the question or nature of time as were the Surrealists, nor did they aim to depict an image in time as did the Cubist experiments. They wanted to portray the dynamism and speed of the modern machine and metropolis, to show that art could be part of the world which will be continuously and splendidly transformed by Victorian Science.32 Futurist art was not a question or an experiment; it was both a political and cultural statement. Closely associated with Fascism, the Futurists wanted to establish an Italian national art which was centred in the industrialised and urbanised north, and in which the museum-bound culture of the past could be subverted. Some described the pure plastic rhythm in their work as a musical analogue for duree.33 The movements radical founder, Filippo Marinetti, vowed in 1909 to mock everything consecrated by time, exalting instead the essence of the present and the future of which industrial modernity was the greatest symbol: O maternal ditch! Almost full of muddy water! Fair factory drain! I gulped down your nourishing sludge.34 Whilst the more fracturing of Cubist paintings inspired the Futurists vision of mechanical speed and flux, the interactions between noises and colours, bodies and space which for them constituted the modern world, it was the development of chronophotography which could make diagrammatic analyses of sequences of human and animal movement, which had one of the greatest impacts on their consciousness of time. Concerned with movement, Futurists initially attempted to present it in sequential form, where for instance, a figure could be depicted as having a number of legs and arms, as in Gino Severinis Dynamic Hieroglyphic of the Bal Tabarin of 1912. In the chronophotographs of Eadweard Muybridge, time was, as seen in his Fencing of 1887, stretched over consecutive pictures. Such images differed somewhat from the chronophotographs of Etienne-Jules Marey, which compare more closely with those of Frank Gilbreth, in that they telescoped action into only one image.35 Such works as Mareys Cheval au Trot of 1886, provided many Futurists with the representational strategy with which they could symbolise power, progress, mechanisation and speed. Ballas Flight of Swifts of 1913 was, like Duchamps Nude paintings, inspired by these studies of sequential photography. For Anton Bragaglia, a Futurist photographer, sequential photography was more than an inspiration. It helped create Futurist Photodynamism, which, full of references to Bergsonian concepts of time and movement, removed itself from both photography and cinematography: To put it crudely chronophotography could be compared to a clock on the face of which only the half-hours are marked, cinematography to one which the minutes too are indicated, and photodynamism to a third on which are marked not only the seconds, but also the intermomental fractions existing in the passage between seconds.36
118
Katy Nebhan
Bragaglia produced blurred images of people to effect the sensation of motion. This blur which may be seen in his Greetings of 1911, The Slap of 1912, and The Fan of 1928, recorded the consequences of not time/motion in successive pictures like Muybridge, or even schematic phases as with Marey, but as regular, continuous experience and statement of objects in space.37 These images introduced a more immediate sense of time into space than the synthesised view which Cubists sought. They also allowed Futurist painters and sculptors, in the words of Guillaume Apollinaire, to encompass in one glance the past, the present, and the future. In this way, they provided some of the most potent examples of the idea of time-space compression.38 This preoccupation with the time element was a strong feature of Futurism, with the works of the movements main theorist, Umberto Boccioni, providing some of the most effective expressions of time/ motion. Bergsons idea of the power of intuition to penetrate the inner life of matter and its absolute motion as opposed to the relative motion which actualises the kinetics of the object, was strongly maintained by Boccioni.39 Boccionis The City Rising of 1910-1911, in which he exalts the dynamics of industry and heavy construction, is an attempt at this simultaneity which moves the figure around in space to create a synthesis of labour, light and movement. A similar attempt is made in his The Street Enters the House of 1911 and Simultaneous Visions of the same year, where urban dynamism is shown to disturb the calm bourgeois home through a technique of spatial disruption.40 Whilst in all three works Boccioni was struggling to find a satisfactory expression of movement, he was also trying to give force to the distinction between the old and the new consciousness of time in the modern age. The old consciousness was seen to be connected with the individual, whilst the new was connected with the universal and, as far as Futurists were concerned, universal dynamism was the principle which drew together all objects in time and space. Unlike Bragaglia, Boccioni rejected the somewhat indefinite expression of motion in both chronophotgraphy and photodynamism. According to Kern, he was more interested in reconciling Bergsons idea of relative and absolute motion, to create an image of modern man which transcended traditional shapes and proportions.41 This reconciliation, along with Boccionis belief that the artist was capable of expressing a single form of continuous movement that would suggest the immediate past and the future of action, made its most powerful statement in his sculptures. Preceding his exhibition in the Galerie Boetie in Paris in 1913, Boccioni made a short statement which included the following: I want to render the fusion of a head with its environment. I want to render the prolongation of objects in space ... I want to transfix the human form in movement. I want to synthesise the unique forms of continuity in space.42 119
LIMINA
Volume 7, 2001
Whilst Balla was interested in pursuing the image of abstract speed, Boccioni was concerned with creating a sense of continuous movement. The Development of a Bottle in Space of 1912-1913 was Boccionis first successful sculpture which, in light of his above statement, embodied not only the form of an object that was to continue in space, but also an expression of the inanimate forces symbolised in the energy at work within.43 The sense of time in this sculpture is generated through the simultaneous interaction between object and environment. It is a rhythmic form which, like many Cubist works, also sought to depict an image which would radiate in time and offer a work of art which is no longer a dead portion of space44, but a dynamic force with which the viewer can interact. It is in Boccionis Unique Forms of Continuity in Space of 1913 however, that one finds a coherent expression of his theory of sculptural movement. This sculpture encompasses both man and machine, energy and speed, to create the dynamic sensation of movement itself. This preoccupation with expressing the state of movement - this living reality - was a theme which Boccioni developed in his other sculptures of the same period including: Synthesis of Human Dynamism of 1912, Speeding Muscles of 1913, and Spiral Expansion of Speeding Muscles of the same year. In traditional sculpture, time and movement were static and expressed a state fixed for eternity. These sculptures however, enforce the twentieth century vision of space as Futurists saw it, through their expression of the inseparable state of the time element and the destruction of mass.45 These works also typify, as pointed out earlier, the Futurist concern with universal dynamism which they believed drew together all forms and objects in time and space. It was through this universal dynamism that Boccioni, along with other Futurists, was able to deal with the contemporary phenomena of speed, the machine, and the dynamism of life in the metropolis. The Kinetic artists took this preoccupation with time and movement one step further. In the words of the Kinetic artist Naum Gabo, they sought to bring time as a reality into our consciousness, to make it active and perceivable.46 The Kinetic artists were interested in the idea of movement producing the possibility of an artwork whose form is a process of growth. This was quite unlike the Futurist principal of dynamism, which as an expressive form, placed emphasis on process, and its power to synthesise the manifold experiences of sense and memory in a coherent simultaneity. The implications of such a difference are great. However, for the purpose of this study, it is the distinction between actual and implied movement and time, that is critical. For the Futurists movement was material, articulated within the artwork through the complex match of rhythm and line to emotion, a spontaneity of expression, the simultaneous intensification of sensations in the movement of time, and an immediate reflection of a world dominated by technology and speed.47 Even Boccioni, who articulated the Futurist belief in an active dynamic space through his words, to paint a human figure you must 120
Katy Nebhan
not paint it; you must render the whole of its surrounding atmosphere, showed a concern with an environment that was spatially limited by its proximity to the artwork.48 For the Kinetic artists however, movement was not material. Their works aimed to extend in time as well as space. The Kinetic expression of time involved the idea of replenishment: the belief that the work was always new and always changed lives in the present. This was born from the belief that the dimension of time removes a work from solitary, permanent existence and makes it relative.49 Constantin Brancusi came close to expressing this non-material notion of time in his bird sculptures, in particular, Bird in Space of 1926. His statement I do not sculpt birds but flights is an indication of his concern not with the material work, but with time outside it.50 His bird deflects the gaze of the observer, as it travels along the lines of force which provide a sense of continuity of motion. Whilst the observer is aware of the traces of the birds flight in space, the work encourages one to look beyond to the unobserved sense of motion and time.51 By resisting time within the sculpture, Brancusi creates a stronger sensation of time outside it. His works are not concerned with the mechanical movement of the Futurists, but with what Robert Hughes has referred to as the upward stream through time and space.52 Like Brancusi, the works of the Futurists, Surrealists and Cubists, did not extend beyond the material sense of movement; the expression of art in their works was implied. The Kinetic artists were able to move beyond this implied sense of movement and time to a state of actuality, by making their works more immediately accessible, more social. One could argue that the Futurist involvement in cinema and happenings or performed art, was also concerned with social involvement. Whilst this may be the case, such interactions were between the artists and the observer and not, as with Kinetic art, between the artwork and the viewer (who is no longer a mere spectator but an active participant). The importance of this notion of active art may be seen in a statement made by Thomas Wilfred, in which he points out that the time dimension demands that the artist be a choreographer in space.53 Unlike the Surrealists who communicated time through the unconscious,54 Kinetic artists believed that art needed to enter into direct communication with the perception, psyche, and/or intellect of the spectator and enhance their feeling of participation and existence.55 The works of Nicolas Schoffer and Frank Malina illustrate this Kinetic attempt to compose in time, to use time itself as a material. In Malinas threestage construction of a Lumidyne of 1953, and the detail of motion in one lumidyne from his Constellation series of 1955, one sees the introduction of a regulated time sequence to govern a series of actual motions. Rather than relying on the illusion of motion, Malina was able to establish a sequence of images in time, using the context of pictorial methods of composition used in static art.56 Whilst both of these works are static in that they can be placed on a wall for observation, their content is kinetic in that through 121
LIMINA
Volume 7, 2001
incorporating an active time cycle, they are pieces of what could be described as theatrical formula. The spectator is able to participate in both the potential and the realised aesthetic experience through their response to particular passages of abstraction which form a whole shape, its disintegration then its reintegration, and its regeneration by another path of development and growth.57 The spectator is part of an actual rather than implied experience in and of time. In his essay on microtime, Nicolas Schoffer pointed to the importance of the conceptual future, the virtual present, and the perceptual past in the ordering of the flow of events.58 The role of the kinetic artwork, as Schoffer perceived it, was to not only project the time of a physical event, but to bring about a condensation of the conceptual, the virtual, and the perceptual flow of this event, thus enabling the spectator to be part of this event as a whole. The relationship between the speed of the moving images and human powers of perception was essential to Schoffer because it allowed him to utilise the unit of experience that occupies the timelag between the physical event, and ones perception of it, to achieve an integration of structures in motion into an aesthetic whole.59 In Schoffers Microtemps series of 1964, a lucid attempt is made to compose in time and to use time as material. Both mechanical movement and the use of projected light help to dissolve the sculpture as a stable structure, by displacing it continually in space. Rather than identifying with movement, the observer is able to identify with time since, according to Bann, movement is in essence linear, whilst the Microtemps series contains superimposed rhythms and multiplies the incidents of each moment.60 For Schoffer, and many other Kinetic artists, the static or implied expression of time in art was inadequate in the present day progressive environment, which needed a clearer revelation of change and time. Whilst the graphic composition of a kinetic work was fixed, the unifying structure of the work was the time-cycle which, in repeating itself, built up an accumulative response in the participants mind. Kinetic art was thus about the revelation of change and time as a totality. The kinetic work did not aim to express time, it was a manifestation of time. That the political and socio-cultural changes which took place in the twentieth century created a distinctive time-consciousness in art is clear in the experiments and works of the many artists who responded to them with a violent explosion of all artistic conventions.61 The need to intensify the artistic experience of technology and modern progress through expressions of simultaneity and dynamism, provided them with a challenging response to the potency which speed, the machine and the dominance of the metropolis generated. The past, present and future tenses corresponding to traditional expressions of time and the distinct mental activities associated with them,62 were rejected in the Cubist, Surrealist and Futurist struggles to express the sensation of movement and time, an expression which, though powerful, was largely implied. In the works of the 122
Katy Nebhan
Kinetic artists, time was a material used to seek actual rather than implied movement. Through their desire to create a real and felt consciousness of movement and time in their works, all of these artists were making a powerful comment on, and giving art a place in, the rapidly changing world of the twentieth century.
Notes
I would like to thank Jim Masselos from the Department of History at the University of Sydney for his encouragement and inspiring suggestions. 2 See S. Kern, The Culture of Time and Space 1880-1918, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1983; E. Braun, (ed.) Italian Art in the Twentieth Century, Prestel, Munich, 1989; J. Golding, Cubism: A History and an Analysis, 1907-1914 (1959), Faber, London, 1988; M. Martin, Futurist Art and Theory, Hacket Art Books, Oxford, 1968. 3 George Simmel cited in V. Kolocotroni (eds), Modernism: An Anthology of Sources and Documents, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 1998, p.52. 4 J.J. Kockelmans, Heidegger on Art and Art Works, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1985, p.73. 5 M. Gale, Dada and Surrealism, Phaidon Press, London, 1997, p.5. 6 Ibid; Kern 1983; M. Antliff, Inventing Bergson: Cultural Politics and the Parisian Avant-Garde, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1993. 7 A. Haapala, Art and Time: Toward an Analysis of Time in Art, in Arto Haapala, Jerrold Levinson & Veikko Rantala (eds), The End of Art and Beyond: Essays after Danto, Humanities Press, New Jersey, 1997, pp.140-153. 8 R. Hughes, Shock of the New: Art and the Century of Change, BBC Publications, London, 1980, p.11. 9 G. Collier, Form, Space and Vision, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1967, p.232. 10 J. Urry, Sociology of Time and Space, in Bryan S. Turner (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Theory, Blackwell, Oxford, 1996, p.388. 11 L. Henderson, Duchamp in Context: Science and Technology in the Large Glass and Related Works, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1998, pp.166-167. 12 See H. Bergson, Time and Free Will, Macmillan, New York, 1913. 13 B. Schwartz, The New Humanism: Art in a Time of Change, Praeger Publishers, London, 1974, pp.14-15. 14 Kern, p.7. 15 New York Review, 8 April 1999, p.18. 16 Collier, p.233. 17 Cited in T. Copplestone, Modern Art Movements, Paul Hamlyn Limited, London, 1976, p.29. 18 See H. Bergson, Introduction to Metaphysics: The Creative Mind, Adams & Co., Littlefield,1965. 19 Cited in Kern, pp.144-145. 20 N. Wadley, Cubism,The Hamlyn Publishing Group, London, 1972, p.130. 21 Collier, p.233. 22 Anon. review, Exposition de peinture, Le Journal [Paris], 22 November 1911, p.3. 23 P. Bourdieu, Time Perspectives of the Kabyle, in John Hassard (ed.), The Sociology of Time, Macmillan, London, 1990, p.222. 24 S. Wilson, Surrealist Painting, Phaidon Press, London, 1975, p.3. 25 A. Balakian, Surrealism: The Road to the Absolute , Allen and Unwin, London, 1972, p.125. 26 S.J. Gould, Times Arrow Times Cycle, Harvard University Press, London, 1987, pp.11-12. 27 Ibid., p.204. 28 Kern, p.23. 29 Wilson, p.9. 30 J. Drucker, Theorising Modernism: Visual Art and the Critical Tradition, Columbia University Press, New York, 1994, p.55. 31 Ibid.
1
123
LIMINA
32 33
Volume 7, 2001
C. Tisdall and A. Bozzolla, Futurism, Thames and Hudson, London, 1977, p.32. Antliff, p.168. 34 Cited in V. Kolocotroni (ed.), Modernism: An Anthology of Sources and Documents, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 1998, p.250; C. Butler, Early Modernism, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994, p.138. 35 M. Mandel, Making Good Time, University of New Mexico Press, Santa Cruz, 1989, p.14. 36 Cited in Tisdall & Bozzolla, p.138. 37 Mandel, p.17. 38 J. Urry, Consuming Places, Routledge, London, 1995, p.22. 39 H. Bergson, Time and Free Will, p.77ff; G. Lista, Futurism, (trans. C. L. Clark), Art Data, England, 1986, p.19. 40 Tisdall & Bozzolla, pp.42-43. 41 Kern, p.123. 42 Cited in Tisdall & Bozzolla, pp.77-78. 43 Ibid., p.79. 44 Butler, p.143. 45 Wadley, p.140. 46 G. Brett, Kinetic Art, Reinhold Book Corporation, New York, 1968, p.22. 47 Lista, p.12; Butler, p.150. 48 Cited in Kern, p.163. 49 Brett, p.25. 50 Cited in D. Grigorescu, Brancusi, trans. R. Hillard, Stintifica Si Enciclopedica, Bucharest, 1987, p.38. 51 Ibid. 52 Hughes, p.310. 53 Cited in S. Bann et al, Kinetic Art, Motion Books, London, 1966, p.10. 54 I. Hedges, Languages of Revolt, Duke University Press, Durham, 1983, p.33. 55 Ibid., p.13. 56 Ibid., p.28. 57 Ibid., p.29. 58 N. Schoffer, Microtime, in A. Hill (ed.), DATA: Directions in Art, Theory and Aesthetics, Faber and Faber, London, 1968, p.151. 59 Bann, p.9. 60 Cited in ibid., p.59. 61 Hedges, p.xi. 62 Namely the association of the past to knowledge; the present to feeling; and the future to desire and obligation, as well as potentiality. See G. J. Whitrow, Time in History: The Evolution of Our General Awareness of Time and Temporal Perspective, Oxford University Press, New York,
124