Acting-Out Politics

Weblog opens discussion about the psychology of Bushmerican style of behavior.

The sphere of objectified knowledge has been enormously enhanced, while available time for conscious elaboration has inversely decreased… This double dynamics has provoked an explosion of unawareness… The critical mind is unable to function in conditions of info-nervous saturation, while the rate of education and its quality have fallen and deteriorated… What takes place is actual darkening of the social mind, the decay of human rationality…
Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi, “The Second Coming”, 2019, p. 13, 19, 114

Trade wars are the stuff real wars are made of…
Slavoj Zizek, “Trump’s Conflict with China is a genuine war”, August 10, 2019

Digital introduction of the film’s characters

Why to introduce the characters of the film to viewers in a digital form? May be, because it’s emphasizing the instrumental, mechanical character of the human life in our time? When the emotional breath of the human soul disappears under the burden of mental calculations, people start to behave like robots – they don’t know what to do except to act according to mechanical logic of necessity, although this only deepens their blind dependence and general chaos and creates the illusion that everything is continuing – is moving along while nobody knows why, how and where to. What in digital system is an automatic order, in life is its opposite, but we don’t know, in what kind of opposite we are find ourselves locked.

Extra- multibillionaire with financially geopolitical interests

The incarnation of P.J. Lurz from Texas in his German office.

“Close-up” of the mighty international mogul – you don’t need a human face when you are getting instead the banknote of the trillion dollars value – that’s why P.J. Lurz came to Berlin.

Multi-billionaire’s pragmatic wisdom

Versatility of P.J. Lurz’ intellectual competence is impressive

The multi-billionaire can talk about any subject

During a pop-carnival revelous “duel” between P.J. Lurz and his secretary (one of the leading figures in the terrorist organization) is represented in a curious way – “the first strike” is by the billionaire using a toy (noisemaker blowout) in her direction, while she behaves, as if, she is impulsively afraid of his toy. The billionaire here obviously dominates the terrorist. It looks like Lurz is provoking the terrorist group to act. But what is connoted by and so powerful in and dangerous with his plastic parper toy? It is the billionaire’s money which is his superweapon. We see that to provoke the terrorists to act is the very function of Lurz’ big money which can kill you, make you immortal or help you to kill others.

Everyday life of a revolutionary-terrorist organization

What we see here is not a terrorist act, but a prosaic bank robbery by a terrorist group, which is in a banal need of money. The person who happens to be an obvious victim is the husband of one of the terrorists (Pietra Vielhaber – Margit Carstensen) who resourcefully uses the situation to get rid of the man she hates already for several years.

Professional murderer hired by the terrorist group (Paul – Raoul Gimenez) demands from his temporary landlady (member of the group) – a college professor and an intellectual – to be his mistress. He became like a bone stuck in the very throat of her very life, but when he was murdered by the secret police, she felt his… common humanity and cried (Fassbinder’s lesson to the personage of his own film).

The abandoned desk of the rebellious group includes traces of “political pondering” (disordered chess figures), chaotic banknotes in a creative disorder and a trivial pack of cigarettes

Ilse Hoffmann (Y Sa Lo), domestic and bodily presence in the group, is dramatically overdosed on drugs and soon will die.

Carnivalesque event in all its cathartic irresistibility and as an underground political demarche

P.J. Lurz’s secretary Susanne Gast during the carnival which masks the fact of kidnapping him, was very playful – maneuvering and inexhaustible, like children playing war games

Carnival is moving towards its culmination, and a person in a transvestite outfit is the leader of the plot to kidnap the mighty billionaire while using the chaotic and cheerful atmosphere.

Edgar Gast (Udo Kier) – the commander of the terrorist group who appreciates the kidnapped billionaire’s collaboration, is blackmailing the German government to exchange Lurz’s life for governmental acceptance of the group’s demands. Of course, the terrorists we see in the film are middle class people, lazy and disoriented by general chaos. They like to think of themselves as romantic fighters, but until the secret police hadn’t murder one of their members, their rebellious orientation moved according to verbal channels of their chats with one another.

While the carnival with blackmail extends itself into the next days…

… The multibillionaire behaves with an amazing courage by joining the terrorists in asking the government to trade him in exchange for accepting their demands. In the film, by the way, we never hear any demands which, probably, disappeared in the general confusion of life.

In this shot we see them all – P.J Lurz in the background, Suzanne Gast (Hanna Schygulla) and her husband Edgar Gast (Udo Kier) as a couple, Rudolf Mann (Harry Baer) with his back to viewers and between the spouses Hilde Krieger (Bulle Ogier – the college professor). They all look like wax-figures.

The super-businessman and virtuoso financial dealmaker looks human only on the TV screen, but in actual life he more and more looks like stuffed doll.


Only after the end of the film – only step by step the viewers gave a chance to understand, that the ultimate reason of the preventive counter-measures against the danger of terrorist attack and ultimately this very attack (kidnapping Lurz) is the existence and actions of the self-sacrificial billionaire himself – his masterful staging of the conflict between German government and terrorists with a purpose of making a grand and crown sell.

This statement belongs as a joke to the Berlin Police Chief (Hark Bohm). In other words, it is big money that creates the geopolitical conflicts between Western democracies and terrorists who started to try to undermine them.

We live Between Being and Non-Being, Ritualistic Loving with Roaring Accompaniment of Hating, Between Stupidity and Calculations, Obsessive Optimism and Compulsive Despair

Pay attention to Paul’s (Jacques Dutronc) almost completely crushed smile – echo of an almost destroyed soul. It’s a barely smile of a body existentially separated from its soul.

Paul has lost his feeling of being able to love and deserving to be loved. Here, he is sitting on the same bench where obviously a proletarian family is enjoying its togetherness – Paul is, as if, trying to feel close to family happiness which he personally has lost and frankly, never had. But the longer Paul sat there on the bench it became clear to him that this family is “fake” – these people just hope to make a little money by impersonating family happiness.

Paul is suddenly “attacked” by a homosexual man (valet at the hotel where Paul was temporarily living) who started to frantically beg Paul to use him sexually referring to his impressive competence and without any commerce intended. Paul retreated like a boy running from police.

Sometimes, when a person doesn’t know how to realize love s/he feels it’s necessary to do something eccentric and absurd, impressive and strong. Without understanding what he is doing, Paul frantically jumps on Denise (his previous mistress – Nathalie Baye) over the table where they were eating. But in reality such pompous impulses are mute and without expected results. They’re just futile despair of lost or pseudo-togetherness.

Pay attention to Cecile’s (Cecile Tanner) contemptuous grimace when she is looking at her father (Paul). Indeed, she just feels disgust toward him who cannot be successful in this society. At her age and in an environment of merciless fight for success (in the atmosphere of belligerent ambitions) it’s easy to look down at “losers“.

Paul is struck by a casual car and is between life and death (between absence and presence of god nearby)

Paul is still between life and death, while his x-wife and daughter (casual witnesses of the accident) were rushing away from the scene.


With life provoking in us the desire for various simultaneous entrepreneurship and for opening up of new spaces for social success – we invent fetishes to balance our restlessness – populist political fakes, obsessive hobbies, wealth appropriation, alcohol, pills, drugs, money-money-money in order at least to soften our worries, worries, worries. The world, in the perception of today’s people, is full of dangerous surprises, which they believe can betray them at any moment. You need likeminded friends but even these common identity – buddies for common survival (old by tricky “technology”) is as chaotic like the world and their survival-success may not include you. It’s felt necessary to make a group with a common, collective mind. So, totalitarian tendencies become stronger and stronger – group against group, ideology against ideology, team against team, country against country and all against all.

The Murder of Children In Wars or By Hate, Their Utilitarian Use and Exploitation, Their Physical, Emotional or Sexual Abuse Are the Morbid Vices of the Adult Power

Kate Kollwitz, “Apotheosis of Love For Children”

Mother knows and loves her baby even with closed eyes. Their ability to see each other sublimates and enlarges their love. Mother’s gaze irradiates love and awakens love in the gaze of the child.

Kate Kollwitz, “Widows and Orphans”

Wars abruptly intervene into bonds of fathers and children. But transforming women into widows and children into orphans, wars endanger even the more primordial ties of mothers-children‘s unconditional love by traumatizing it with incurable grief – by destroying the life of mothers-children as a couple – the basic happiness of procreation. Warmongers are rewarded by wars with extra billions and power over geopolitical spaces by transforming human life into torment and previous children into suffering haters with souls full of pain and indifference. To kill children through war technology is like to kill them by following the order of King Herod.

Kate Kollwitz, “Mother Trying to Save Children from the Demon of War”

The more humans live through wars the more the human soul becomes poisoned by aggressive alertness and vengeful need to dominate and the more human race develops technical science to have the capacity to kill more and more adults and children. Human history makes war-murder a giant snow-ball.

Kate Kollwitz, “The Mother Trying to Save Her Son from the Death”

Hunger, diseases and permanent fear of bombs and bullets during the wars or breaks between wars (like in our country today, where mentally deficient murderers easily can buy high-tech machine-guns) make mothers unable to nurture the next generation with normal human souls. In this Kollwitz’s work we see how desperately a mother is trying to save her son from death (seen in the left upper corner of the drawing).

Kate Kollwitz, “The Death Taking the Mother from Her Little Daughter to the Land of the Dead”

Mothers are less and less able to save the future generations. We see here how the child is trying in vain to save her mother from the monstrous figure of death triumphing over human life.

Kate Kollwitz, “Two Little girls attempting to save their sister from the Death”

Ancient and recent histories teach children the horrors of wars much more than freedom and happiness. Some people who are traumatized by war will say that freedom ought to be defended. For them war is something like freedom in action. But freedom can develop only if humans have the ability to overcome killing and hate to be able to talk with other people on equal terms, human to human, without megalomania, with a good will instead of manipulation, bribery or financial seduction, without calculation of advantage over the other side. To be capable to talk positively it’s necessary to get a humanistic education, but now less and less people are interested in knowing history, psychology, sociology, serious art, while more and more people learn how to scheme, mislead, lie, fabricate pseudo-information and manipulate and buy loyalty for money. Peace (overcoming war) is only possible if both sides really want peace, are really able to want it.

Kate Kollwitz, “A Horrified Mother Trying Not to Let Her Daughter Be Grabbed By Death


Most of Kathe Kollwitz’s drawings, sketches and sculptures were created during the WWI, WWII and during the interval between them. But today-ness of her art is impressive. How many children have perished from hunger and bombings of Yemen, Syria, Iraq, etc.! And new wars are ready to go. And every day at least 20 American veterans of the Iraq war take their own lives and nobody was here to adequately address their suffering.

Return To Chantal Akerman’s Cinematic Elegy “Night and Day” – The Existentially Spiritual Femininity And The
Abandonment Of Angels

Is the heroine of the film Julie (Guilaine Londez) waiting now for a friend or, conversely enjoying a moment of break from people? This ambiguity in her will sustain itself to the very end of the film.

Julie and Jack (Thomas Langmann) are lucky with each other not only because they are in love but because they love to spend time together. In their case it means to accumulate their emotional and cognitive power.

Julie and Jack love to share with one another the world – not so much the objective – visible world which is possible to touch and pleasant to glue to with one’s eyes. They rather don’t like to lend themselves to the noise and chaos. They love to exchange with one another their own and others’ thoughts and verbal and visual images. In other words, they love sharing with each other their internal “events”, understanding of their feelings.

Sometimes they liked just to sit together and be something like blissfully lost – not to think of anything and enjoy some kind of emptiness together – two bodies dissolved in non-being.

After making love they could feel that blissful togetherness they habitually enjoy so much cannot be given forever, and then they could sense that even this eclipse of happiness can be just its another side, its echo or its twin.

Joseph (Francois Negret), like Jack, is a taxi-driver – as a matter of fact he drives the same car, only Jack does it during night while Joseph by days. One day when Julie was meeting Jack in the morning he introduced her to Joseph who was just starting his working day.

When during the week Jack returned home in the mornings after night work, Julie who also didn’t sleep during the night (she usually just walked the Parisian streets and squares) fell asleep with him on equal. They always shared with one another their insomnia, sleepiness or wakening up.

Jack and Joseph unexpectedly became for Julie’s twin brothers – two angels, always melancholic because they both were doomed to disappear. Masculinity (not as power, but as isolation from immortality of femininity) is mortal. While women’s bodies are also mortal, like men’s, femininity is eternal. Masculinity in spite of all its orgasmic and ejaculatory excitements and fanfares is doomed. Woman’s eggs are not only part of female physiology, but of her soul, while men’s spermatozoids are outsiders to human soul and they act in secrecy.

Uniqueness of Jack and Joseph was that they, as if, knew that they are doomed and lived with this truth inside. For Julie they were radically different from all other young men – they lived burdened by their intuition about their radical mortality of being outsiders of or peripheral to the very chain of procreation, just capable of reproduction. It’s from here their melancholy, their touching and irrecoverable sadness. It’s for this reason of Julie’s feminine power, her love for them both was irresistible for her.

Julie’s love was trying to emotionally and physically nurture them with her unconditional and inexhaustible power of carrier of procreation – a function she shares with the Creator Himself. The more she loved Jack – the more she loved Joseph. Joseph’s presence opened her eyes to the reason she loves Jack, and her love for Jack reinforced her to love Joseph. They were irresistible for Julie’s unlimited femininity. Poor men invent power games, trying to out-strength, out-power and outsmart one another. They invent hate, weapons to be able to fight one another. They invent money and wealth to outdo each other. They are jealous and envious towards one another. They are so miserable, so weak in front of their destiny. And it’s her mission – the mission of her femininity to help them, until she is able.

Whose hand has a hold of Julie’s hair? She couldn’t be sure herself. It’s not important at all – who is embracing Julia, Jack or Joseph. Embracing her is embrace by both of them.

Jack’s torso turned towards his destiny, that Julie sees from behind, is the torso of Joseph, both are belonging to her sad knights of masculinity.

Julie turns towards the summer in Paris.

Something strange was taking place inside Julie’s soul, something she herself couldn’t grasp.

Where is Julie going? Away from the masculine mortality – from men being touched by the feeling of being doomed, in spite of their touching appeal? Men’s love is as discrete as light consisting of pieces of itself. Does she want to continue serving immortality itself – sharing her femininity with the ones who are painfully doomed? Is she now in a process of choosing an abrupt and wholesome revolution in human relationships? And how to know what could be the content of such a revolution?

Chantal Akerman

Chantal Akerman (1950-2015)

Ernst Barlach is a German expressionist sculptor, printmaker, lithographer and writer. He is especially known for his sculptures protesting against war. During the rise of Nazi party most of Barlach’s works were confiscated as degenerate art.

Ernst Barlach, “Flying Angel with Closed Eyes”, 1927

Ernst Barlach, “The Tormented Face of the Flying Angel with Closed Eyes”, 1927
Ernst Barlach, “The Tormented Face of the Flying Angel with Closed Eyes”, 1927

The face of the angel is painfully strained by her inhuman effort not to surrender to (human) crying – she doesn’t want her tears to be seen – crying angel can make people suffer even more than they already are. But even angel is not able to help to dissipate this cosmic grief which swallowed people after WWI.

The photo of Ernst Barlach as a very young man (with a face of a cupid)

Ernst Barlach at a very young age

This photo is very close to the previous one. But its larger format gives us the chance to see not just Barlach’s cupid-like face, but to notice his critical refusal of the psychological condition of decision makers, consists of megalomania, calculation of advantage, and also greed and vanity – the very engines of catastrophic existential perversion generating human inequality and injustice and as a result – mountains of agonizing human suffering.

Ernst Barlach in his later years

As we compare this Barlach’s old age photo with that of his young age he obviously didn’t restore his belief in human race. Conversely, he is looking at the human world as his flying angel could, had she kept her eyes opened. Barlach’s facial expression in this photo is that of a martyr. He is a martyr of seeing the truth of human society and understanding what he sees – probably the highest title an artist in modern times can deserve. As we see him in this photo, he, as if, sees today what he saw back then (when he was still alive) – in the second part of the thirties. His gaze is not reproaching humankind for violence towards itself – he is weeping for us, for our ancestors and descendants, for our stupidity, belligerency and cruelty, for our spiritual emptiness, for our mindless exploitation of God’s Name (by using It as a justification of our crimes and indifference) and for our betrayal (without understanding this) of Christ.

There are rare artists whose human appearance is like a work of art, when their spiritual nature makes a unique work of art from them.

Bunch of criminals pursuing Will Kane (Gary Cooper) to take over the town

“Stubborn” Will Kane (Gary Cooper) and his courageous wife Amy (Grace Kelly)

The hero fights the gang of outlaws in spite of being betrayed by the townsfolks (philistines choosing bandits over the honest person)

In “High Noon” the Marshal of the little town (Gary Cooper) is informed about arrival to the town of a pack of bandits with guns and thick criminal records. The Marshal’s assistant, a shameless self-promoter suddenly couldn’t be found, and so several friends seemed reliable until this moment. In the hope to find help to resist the intruders Gary Cooper is going to the church, but meets there a lack of desire to join him. The town inhabitants hope that if the Marshal will leave the town before gangsters arrive the bandits will not behave dangerously and everything will be alright, peaceful and prosperous. Shocked by the people’s refusal to help him, the local authority and friendly person for many years, Will Kane decides not to run away and stays to fight the outlaw murderers alone. But he understands that the armed criminals and robbers and philistines of cowardly happiness are like the right and left hands of the same body.

It is not the uniforms of SA or SS that can identify real “fascism”, and it is not the Nazi flag or Mussolini or Franco‘s slogans. It is the psychological condition of human beings, which, first of all is a combination of frustrated self-aggrandizement and rather diffused hate as a result of this frustration. This hate is directed towards those who are perceived as rivals for and danger to one’s prosperity and wellbeing. It is usually the minorities: blacks, foreigners and intellectuals (all of them are obvious personifications of dissimilar others). Secondly, it is absolute (infantile and sentimental) admiration for a tough top leader – a personification of a perfect strongman, a man whose power is as unlimited as his wealth – an idealized father figure as it is perceived by an early adolescent boy.

The amazing feature of a really fascist leader is a mixture of imperial distance from the masses which worship him and his “miraculous” identification with members of the loyal crowds. He is perceived as tough and demanding, but in other times as a close and a loving friend, loving as only you can love yourselves (configuration referring to a common identity between a private and a general – one who can easily die and one who gives commands).

In a fascist universe self-sacrifice is natural – it is, as if, the one who is sacrificed (died in a line of duty) is at the same time always staying alive as his/her comrade in arms. For this reason concentration on hate towards the dissimilar others as a basic prototype of an enemy is a factor outweighing fear for one’s own life. If you will die you still will be alive as your very comrade. Hate in the fascist world is more focused on than love – love is always there whether one is alive or dead, but hate is a collective focus on a distinguish target – the enemy (the alien, the bizarre, the monstrous.

Unconditional love for a fascist leader and our comrades in arms on the one hand and the unconditional hate for those who are the bizarre others and must be hated and punished for being different from “us” on the other, creates a drastic contrast between fascist togetherness and fascist dehumanized alienation from dissimilar people. The presence of enemy, foreigner as carrier of all evil, all that is wrong binds people to unite without criticism with their own crowd.

It is not too difficult to comprehend how this psychological and social totalitarian dynamics came to be a reality in the beginning of the 21st century. Americans from childhood are objects of “official” suggestion that they are exceptional people belonging to exceptional country. But the word “exceptional” is semantically close to (and easy resonates with) the word “superior” – “exceptionalism” is connected through the golden chain with “supremacy” and “superiority”. This problem refers to the megalomania of Soviet Communists who treated themselves as the number one country in the world by its exceptionalism and superiority based on the uniqueness of their ability to belief in Communism. This semantic knot is too close to the Arian megalomania as a part of military thinking constellation before and during WWII.

Let’s not forget that it is the primitive human megalomania that creates Consuls, Tsars, Kings/Queens, Dukes, Billionaires, Gen-secs, Gods, power, wars, D. Trumps as standing above Congress and Demos, and the outlaw bandits of the Wild West in “High Noon”.

Solitary fight with a gang of outlaws is not easy, but the more difficult is to survive the disappointment with the people. Will Kane (Gary Cooper) is a real human being – instead of megalomania he has dignity. After his victory over the megalomaniacal bandits he “resigns”. Humility respects the ability to tolerate the human pain. Probably, he will never become a Marshall or a Sheriff again.

There are 10,000 recruiters across the country working with a $700 million a year advertising budget… you are more likely to see the recruiters in schools where kids have less options after graduation.
“The War in Our Schools”, Z-magazine, June, 2016, by Rory Fanning, p. 17

Recruiters have contact information for every junior and senior. This is the law. “No Child Left behind Act” insists that the school hand over information about every student to the Department of Defense, if it wants to receive federal funds.
“The War in Our Schools”, Ibid, p. 18

We, humans tend to underestimate the intelligence of God. And intelligence as such is in tune with humor and very often irony, because it knows its logically inevitable limits and for this reason is prone to frame itself with embellished borders, humoristic or ironic.

God has to think in a very difficult conditions, when thinking has to proceed not in relatively short moments, like it is the case with His Adams or Eves, but in the widest historical periods which tend to swallow His intuitive inspirations like berries. For Him His own humorous or ironic reactions on His creative achievements are rather routine, like the types of creatures he created and their problems. Even oak or maple leaves become ironic or rat’s tale and zebra’s camouflage, even when we cannot appreciate this aspect of Creation. See for yourselves. Even the most basic and elementary creatures not seen by our human eyes (like bacteria or viruses) are involved in permanent “macro” battles with opposing armies of other bacteria or viruses. Dinosaurs or human bodies are literally made of internal wars between those who live, kill and be killed inside them. Can we be surprised that we ourselves – the inhabitants of the world where we kill and victimized or survive, are no less belligerent than other creatures? Rare creatures among us try to become morally above Creation (and its murderous inside) – above militancy as life’s alphabet. But it’s hellishly difficult, not to say – above human power. We, humans become easily angry and furious and are enraged with a speed of air into and out of our lungs. We are as intolerant as stormy wind or rain. For us to kill other humans with our today’s high-tech weapons is easier than for volcanos and earthquakes. We enjoy (!) torturing other people (remember photos of American soldiers in Iraq). With what ease, readiness and cheery itch (!) we go to new wars. The impression is that our youth is genetically programmed to rival and to fight, not just to quarrel but to clash and resourcefully justify doing so, and to… kill with the feeling of being heroes or to die with the feeling of being gloriously immortal and praised by contemporaries. Democracy tried to soften this part of us, at least rhetorically, but as we see today, it is just a veneer of reality, a kind of a wig on an outdated superstar or cosmetic makeup for the personifications of future social success. More and more people among us are yearning to get the chance to insult, assault and beat up others – they pay for high-tech guns and shooting range with human-like targets and enjoy jokes about shooting at human knee-cups.

It seems that the young people of all nations are genetically programmed (by God’s inspiration) not only be ready to kill, but also be unconditionally obedient to the elder males, especially to the ruling authority and military commanders. They psychologically combine hate (towards dissimilar others) and extreme obedience to leaders (whom they worship). This combination of contradictory features in the young people is a miracle of nature (one of the miracles created by God inside the very nucleus of human nature).

Another God’s miracle (not the last, of course) is matter-of-factness, normalized version of predators-preys’ natural “co-existence” in nature. God not only equipped the predators with very efficient – almost “military” tools for hunting and killing and swallowing the preys, but obviously followed the principle of justice of His own invention – He equally equipped the preys with some abilities to avoid being killed: with knowledge how to hide or run away with some success. Our human ancestors resourcefully joined the natural predators and with arrows, spurs and knife-like instruments provided themselves and their offspring not only food but very soon slaves and so forth, and as people today proudly proclaimed – “conquered the Planet Earth”.

Here God is, as if, saying to Himself – I gave the preys the ability to hide and run – be good at these and other capabilities and then your chances of survival will grow in comparison with the big predatory cats or crocodiles and anacondas, etc., etc. Here God is not just showing his sarcastic humor. Here God is really a joker. It’s not surprising that people are able to shoot children from military helicopters. It seems that the Creator either doesn’t care about His creatures or was not able to make a more just structure of living on our tiny planet. Indeed, even God-genius has drastic limitations of His creative thinking. We, the offshoot of his Adams and Eves are not able to refrain from violence and learn how to live in an interracial and international world peacefully – how to create a language to talk with the dissimilar others on an equal terms, without bribes and ultimatums, without seductions and menaces. Our shameless moral impotence is a legacy of (but, of course, not an excuse for) our Creator’s cynical and miserable humor.

Hans Bellmer, “The Machine Gun-neress in a State of Grace”, 1937

This incredible Bellmer’s construction is not just a parody on human obsession with weapons and on an emancipation of women who try to become as gun-equipped and gun-competent as the best of men. Again we see that exceptional artists are capable not be just critical of the reality but to look into the future of our species – at our today’s life.

Marcel Duchamp, “Paradise”, 1910

It seems, that according to Duchamp God with his supernatural intelligence is not far ahead of what is supposed to be the brains of Adam and Eve. Adam obviously thinks that if he covers his sexual attribute with his palms God will believe that this substantial part of man’s body is not yet assessed by Adam’s mind. But God let’s Adam to fake his innocence rather than to sin in front of His very eyes. Eve is taking her baby out of her primal zone but covering her resourcefulness by turning her back towards god’s eye, while God is already happy that the primordial couple is able to spent at least some time together refraining from intercourse.

Joan Miro, “The Woman”, 1934

Fascist mothers, according to Joan Miro are despotic and scandalous, but screaming and roaring at their children won’t prevent them from becoming fascists. To the contrary they are the future fascists partially because they hate their noisy and bossy mothers.

Picabia’s style of representing couples in a vulgarly-glitzily-radiantly erotic mood includes many details crowding together and expecting from the viewers to indulge in scrupulous analysis to sort it all out. But why to laugh at people who’re giving themselves to the irresistible dangerous waves of love? Picabia could answer that it is very difficult to sublimate the amorous emotions – river of love too often awakens the monstrosities of Eros, its obsessive and violent indulgences and that people need to be aware of these dangers.

Francis Picabia, “First Meeting”, 1925

Is the sky covering the beloveds into a feeling of being isolated into existential interior for the two, as if closed to the world? Or, may be, this sky is just a sheet or blanket of intimacy helping them to feel together with a foretaste of a blissful togetherness?

The man’s eye(s) are, as if, drawn on his face as on a manikins’ head. With his cardboard nose and lips like a little wheel he is rather an object of the woman’s presence than a seducer. Her eyes on the other hand are overstrained not only because she was waiting and looking for a marital partner for too long, but because it appears that she understand that with this particular person (with rather waiting than insisting posture) she has to think and calculate for both of them instead of just relying on her new possibility. Her right eye became an artificial lens blurred by the fog of not knowing what exactly to do, while her left eye is with double pupil because of her stress of feeling ambivalent.

His embrace of her is too gentle for her taste – almost hypothetical, and her protective gesture by her right hand is protecting her only from his “passivity”. It is, as if just marking of a punctured border line between them. Their movement into a possible unity and their hypothetical movement into a common future is reasonably careful. The man’s eye(s) are not only vertical but closed – men’s eyes tend to look at women a bit down – men unconsciously always mean to look at women’s bodies – the ultimate, although carefully masked reflex of physical love.

Woman’s lips are simultaneously opened and closed – more exactly, they’re opened within being closed, as if, she is ready to kiss and at the same time is not. It’s possible even to think that her lips have opened two times – her small – red lips are directed towards the man’s lips-wheel, but her wider bigger lips in black color, as if, swallowing her red mini-lips ready for kissing in order to prevent the impression that she is kissing ready.

The hero of Picabia’s couple in this painting belongs, it seems, to the smaller category of males who want to be loved by women rather than to fall in love, who wants to be chosen by a female partner rather than to conquer her with his passion. Some men from this category want to marry in order to please their parents, not to be judged by “decent people” as “bums”, etc., etc. The pointing finger of woman’s left hand is, as if, pointing at her companion – in spite of all her hesitations her conclusions are rather optimistic. But the black jagged lines along of her arms and hands reminding of the sharp spikiness of a saw underline, it seems, the woman’s torment connected with making her decision for both participants in the situation.

Man Ray’s Photo of Francis Picabia (1879 – 1953), 1922

By looking at Man Ray’s photo of Picabia we get the feeling that in his spirit he is close to those who live in the 21st century with a democratic reflex of a critical mind about what’s going on today. It seems that Francis Picabia is laughing at our civilization – at the pathetic seriousness of innocent philistines driving cars and trying to achieve their social and financial successes. His facial expression is parodying our concentration on our boastful busyness. In this photo Picabia, as if, impersonates our proudly conformist readiness to overcome and smash any obstacles on our way – here he is, as if an exemplary citizen of the future of rewards we all expect for our efforts.

« Previous Entries  Next Page »


August 2019
« Jul    




Recent Comments