Dubuffet’s Aesthetic
February 2, 2008
“The secret is to a thing badly. If you serve someone spinach that is cooked the way it should be, no one notices or remembers that they have eaten spinach. Whereas if you burn it, it shocks their taste buds and they become immediately aware that it is burned spinach and they gain new insights into the characteristics of spinach, etc (23).”
-Jean Dubuffet
Dubuffet’s intention was to shock the viewer out of normal visual experience or to extend his metaphor the normal palette. He saw his art as a reaction against both the good tastes of academic traditional art and also the refined, esoteric tastes of the avant-garde. Dubuffet saw himself as radically democratic. Through the appropriation of a common vernacular he avoided the elitism of the avant-garde, with its obscurity and complexity. But he also saw himself as radically individualistic. His willful raw, unfinished, “badly” made images were meant to offend good taste and the common preference for the sentimental and picturesque.
By over (or under) cooking his paintings Dubuffet hoped that the experience would cut through all pretense to an experience of raw, unmediated matter. This constitutes in large part his turn from academic finish to physical gritty surfaces and crude draftsmanship (see the blog entry about craft below).
Dubuffet sought subject matter that was both banal and crude. He thought of himself as a realist directly engaged with the world, devoid of artifice and the restraint that characterized western culture. “Painting operates, through signs which are not abstract and incorporeal like words. The signs of painting are much closer to the objects themselves (18).”
Dubuffet rejected the categorical, analytic thought that was integral to western thought. In his attempt to reject the obscurity and categories of Occidental culture Dubuffet turned to the art of the insane and “primitive” art.
In his attempts to reject western culture Dubuffet was unable to avoid adopting the rhetoric of irrationality and naiveté with which the west characterized primitive art. But Dubuffet did see primitivism as a healthy alternative to the artificiality and linguistic dependence that was a distinctive feature of western thought. He would, however, romanticize the “irrationality” and “madness” he found in art of the insane and “primitive”. He saw insanity as a way of getting closer to reality instead of the loss of reality and the escape into fiction and delusion that so often accompanies clinical forms of insanity.
Though much of Dubuffet’s thought came under critical suspicion and notions of the raw and the unmediated as well as notions of authenticity were called into question Dubuffet was also able to expand the cannon of art, calling previous forms of art to be reevaluated and reappreciated. It allowed a whole new supply of signifiers into the discourse, signifiers of innocence and humor and crudeness.
Rowell, Margit Jean Dubuffet.
Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, New York 1973.
Entry Filed under: art, art history, criticism. Tags: Dubufett, Outsider Art, Primitive art.
2 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1.
joseph | February 5, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Like the comment about signs that are more clear to reality than words…signs with bodies he seems to be implying that art, as an object, can relate more democratically. Is this true? Do people just never learn to “read” visually? Or do people really just not care about thinking?
and
Your grandma really knows how to cook some nasty smelling cabbage.
2.
mattchristy | February 7, 2008 at 11:27 pm
“Is this true?”
It’s a big question. I think people do “read” when they experience the cultured world, that is the art (ificial) world. But so much of it is unconscious. So in a way its extremely democratic. Even if one is uninterested, they still experience something, they still “read” art.
I don’t think grandma’s trying to teach us anything about cabbage.