Mengxi Yang
Although René Magritte has been known and remembered for his unique individual identity, icons and the recurring themes in his art, he had also claimed that personal artistic expression was the last thing he would value. Magritte regarded his art works as a collaboration in which the idea of uniqueness was often undermined by himself (Hanson & Wulf, 1993). This paradoxical fact leads to thoughts of the cause and effect of his self-effacement, in which I believe the context of his social relation to the Belgian Surrealists’ groups plays a vital role. In this essay, I will examine Magritte’s evalution of personal artistic expression by first analysing the characteristics and beliefs of the Belgian Surrealists and how Magritte’s value is in accordance with them. Then I will list some examples illustrating the collaboration on art works and look into how Magritte and the Surrealist’s viewed the meanings of his paintings. Finally, I am going to examine how Magritte stands out from the audiences’ perspective. In this study, we can gain an understanding of why Magritte meant to undermine his personal expression and how the artist’s value fits into a social context.
Fig 1. La goutte d’eau (Drop of Water), Jane Graverol, 1964
The Belgian Surrealists
Compared to the well-known Parisian Surrealists group, the Belgian Surrealists seem to have always been hiding themselves secretly behind doors from the public, which resonate with the group portrait La goutte d’eau (Drop of Water) (see Fig. 1) painted by the Belgian surrealist female artist Jane Graverol in the 1960s. This portrait may perfectly reflect the philosophy and characteristics of Belgian Surrealists. As if looking into a spy hole, we find a group of kind and harmonious people. Firstly, no one seems to be taking a leading position and everyone is equal, suggesting a friendly and relaxed atmosphere among them; secondly, they look by no means like what our pre-assumptions are about ‘surrealists’ or ‘extremists’. They look like ordinary people who lead a normal life, just like our neighbors without anything special; and last but not least, you cannot say they are as common as they seem to be. Through the viewpoint of the spy hole, we feel like we are peeking into their secrets—the unknown side of their lives and minds (Paenhuysen, 2005). The Belgian surrealists acted like superheroes hidden in the mass public yet secretly fighting against enemies—the bourgeois culture. As distilled from the group portrait, collectivity, anonymity and secrecy formed the characteristics of the Belgian surrealists, who diverged from the fame and public recognition perused by most Parisian Avant-Garde artists at that time (Paenhuysen, 2005).
“Community Art”
As a result of the rejection to fame and wealth, the Belgian Avant-Garde artists adopted ‘Community Art’ as a keyword in their production, which was directed against the individualism and decadence of the previous generation of Impressionists (Paenhuysen, 2005). For the Surrealists, there is no concept of ‘genius’ and they conceived themselves as receivers of universal ideas and someone who present these collective ideas to the public. Furthermore, the Belgian Surrealists were extremists in their execution of this rule. The tactic they used was ‘depersonalization’ where ‘commonplace’ objects were reused in their works. Louis Scutenaire even gave up his identity and published his books under his wife Irène Hamoir’s name. Paul Nougé was even more strict towards this ‘anti-work’ belief and set up the rule of anonymity for the Belgian Surrealist group. His fear of corruption following the public success led him to claim that “the figures whose names were becoming too well known had to renounce their fame” and that: “Only by this selfless act could a genuine freedom be obtained” (Paenhuysen, 2005).
By claiming “to have no talent, no originality, no artistic aptitude” (Whitfield, 1992: 29) Magritte’s philosophy was in accordance with the ideas of Belgian Surrealists and their desire to “conduct revolutionary action from behind the doors” (Hanson and Wulf, 1993). However, it is hard to say whether it was the latter that had influenced the former, because Magritte’s personal philosophy corresponded to the Belgian group from the very beginning and we may even say this is the reason why Magritte chose to join them instead of staying with the Parisian group. He was a “quiet and contemplative man, prone to anonymity and camouflage”, just like his Belgian companions (Hanson and Wulf, 1993). He was not a full-time artist and even refused to have a studio of his own, just like Paul Nougé who was a chemist in a Brussels laboratory and Louis Scutenaire who worked at the bar and then the civil service (Paenhuysen, 2005). Magritte even refused to be classified as a regional artist or categorized into a certain type of artist as he was concerned about a limited interpretation of his artwork due to this categorization (Tyson, 2005). Interestingly, the Belgian Surrealists likewise resisted being seen as a united whole. They were “divided, exploring and being marked by the differences within its own history”, with contrasts as well as shared points (Allmer & Gelder, 2005). All these similarities have drawn Magritte into the circle of his Surrealist friends.
The Accomplices of René Magritte
Although Magritte was not the center of the Belgian Surrealists at that time, he is arguably the only one who is still well known today (Paenhuysen, 2005). He might have been the beneficiary of Nougé’s extreme anonymity and self-effacement, as this belief led Nougé—who was the leading figure among the Brussels Surrealists—to “give pride of place to Magritte” (Whitfield, 1992: 29). In a one-man show of Magritte in January 1928, Nougé called on the Brussel Surrealists for an alliance around their painter and in an address stated: “For this very reason we have no reservations about declaring ourselves here and now the accomplices of René Magritte.” The Brussels Surrealists acted in many ways to support Magritte, such as finding titles for his paintings, illustrating his paintings with short poetic texts, thinking up images and writing about his works (Whitfield, 1992).
Finding titles, for instance, had long been a pastime with his friends since the first Surrealist paintings of Magritte, while it was only after he settled back in Brussels in 1930 that it became a more regular activity within the Belgian group. Often taking his titles from literature, films and musical scores on the completion of the picture, he also invited friends to make suggestions (Matteson, n.d.). Louis Scutenaire once recalled the process of Magritte on creating an artwork as: “…he has often been incubating it for months, with all his being… Then, having painted it conscientiously, if not with pleasure, he has taken many days, and called on all the goodwill of his friends, to find its title” (Whitfield, 1992: 39). Camille Goemans, one of the suggestion makers, described this as a game: “They often start humble, because they arise in gatherings of friends as a kind of game, but under Magritte’s watchful, lucid gaze, once these titles have been let loose on the world with the works they accompany, they take on a resonance at which their creators are sometimes the first to be amazed.” Paul Nougé have also helped Magritte title many of his paintings (Matteson, n.d.). In the Perspective: Madame Récamier de David, Nougé thought up the word “perspective” which bears a double meaning of both the temporal and geometrical senses. (see Fig. 2)
Paul Nougé explained how the title finding can both promote anonymity and collectiveness to a painting and maintain its uniqueness of thoughts at the same time:
The title isn’t a programme to be carried out. It comes after the picture. It’s as if it were its confirmation, and it often constitutes an exemplary manifestation of the efficacy of the image. This is why it doesn’t matter whether the title occurs to the painter himself afterwards, or is found by someone else who has an understanding of his painting. I am quite well placed to know that it is almost never Magritte who invents the titles of his pictures.
Magritte himself also expressed the similar opinion as:
The titles are chosen in such a way as to prevent my picture from being situated in the reassuring region to which people’s minds would automatically assign them in order to underestimate their significance. The titles must be an extra protection which will discourage any attempt to reduce pure poetry to a trivial game.
Fig 2. Perspective: Madame Récamier de David, René Magritte, 1949
In spite of titles, Magritte also enquired other forms of inspirations from his friends. Most of the images whose ideas were suggested by Magritte’s friends date back from the 1930s and 1940s (Whitfield, 1992). In 1934, he send Paul Colinet a postcard illustration of the picture he was going to draw and asked him for advice. Colinet engaged in creating famous paintings of Magritte including Ceci est un morecau de fromage (This is a piece of cheese) and La Reconnaissance Infinie (Reconnaissance Without End). He drew out the initial sketches which Magritte’s paintings were based on. (see Fig. 3 and 4)
Fig. 3 Drawing by Paul Colinet, as reproduced in Les Levres Nues, new series, no.12, 1973. scanned copy from Magritte, Whitfield, 1992 (left); This is a Piece of Cheese (Ceci est un morceau de fromage), René Magritte, 1936 or 1937 (right)
Fig. 4 Paul Colinet, pen drawing, 1933 (left); La Reconnaissance Infinie (Reconnaissance Without End), René Magritte, 1933 (right)
Also, as Magritte’s biographer David Sylvester suggests, the paintings in 1927 such as L’assassin menace (The Threatened Murderer) and Jeune Fille Mangeant un Oiseau (Young Girl Eating a Bird) were originally a set of violent and erotic poems by Paul Nougé which transformed by Magritte into pictures (Matteson, n.d.). As some lines from The Threatened Murderer shows:
In the background, at the level of the window sill,
Four heads stare at the murderer.
In the corridor on either side of the wide open door,
Two men are approaching unable as yet to discern the spectacle.
They are ugly customers.
Crouching, they hug the wall.
One of them unfurls a huge net, the other brandishing a club.
All this will be called, “The Threatened Murderer.”
—Paul Nougé
Fig 5. L’assassin menace (The Threatened Murderer), René Magritte, 1927
A Painter or Not a Painter
Although images served as a virtually impressive tactic to spread their thoughts, both Magritte himself and his friends held the belief that it was not the painting that matters, but the collective ideas behind it. As Louis Scutenaire put it in 1942 “Magritte is a great painter. Magritte is not a painter.” The Brussels group regarded him as an “image-maker” instead of a “painter” (Whitfield, 1992). Magritte copied what he termed neutral or “indifferent” images in his paintings, such as postcards, illustrations from dictionary, children’s books and medical manuals and made replicas to be used in his own paintings (Whitfield, 1992). As he said in an interview: “ I always try to make sure that the actual painting isn’t noticed, that it is as little visible as possible…so that the only thing the reader is able to see in his work is the idea he was trying to express. So the act of painting is hidden” (Whitfield, 1992: 28). This explains the reason why Magritte claimed no personal expression in his art work: The images came from ordinary objects and commonplace pictures, and the ideas came from collaborations among groups. However, it is this distilment and expression of the collective wits that have finally contributed to the uniqueness of the art work. Moreover, we cannot deny the fact that the personal preference of Magritte himself also infiltrated into the artistic expressions in an inadvertent way which gave rise to an iconic feature perceived by the viewers.
Independence of Mind
Gamille Goemans once described Magritte as “one of the rare people who can really pride themselves on their independence of mind, and this shows in everything” (Whitfield, 1992: 44). It is true that Magritte himself was an artist with sharp viewpoints and a clear mind about how an idea should be expressed. He also had a strong personal preference of the circle he would like to settle in and the artistic styles he would appreciate. Such examples can be found throughout his life.
The sharp viewpoint is nicely reflected in the title-finding games. Even though adopting a collective creation, Magritte would not accept any notion without careful examination of them. He had expressed explicit rules towards titles: “I think that the best title for a picture is a poetic one. In other words, a title consistent with the more or less lively emotion we feel when we look at the picture…The poetic title has nothing to teach us, but it must surprise us and enchant us” (Selected Writings, 2016: 115). He would also give guidelines to his friends and discuss with them into details. Any suggestions, if not in accordance with his expectations, would be turned down relentlessly (Dillon, n.d.).
In terms of personal preferences, Magritte had more friends from the literary circle rather than having a close relationship with his fellow art students (Hanson and Wulf, 1993). When asked if he had any friends who are painters in an interview, Magritte answered harshly: “The painters I know are concerned with questions that do not interest me. For me, it’s not a question of painting but of thinking” (Selected Writings, 2016: 207). Emphasizing “painting is visible poetry”, Magritte also said there were only two painters whom he thought highly of: de Chirico and Max Ernst, who had shaped Magritte’s personal identity significantly. E.L.T. Mensens has recalled that “It wasn’t until he came across Chirico (and the first collages of Max Ernst) that Magritte was able to become himself”. All these choices he had made independently, together with his insightful views, added to his paintings an obvious personal imprint.
Conclusion
Through an overall examination of the Belgian Surrealists, especially the Brussels Group, we can find that their codes of conduct—collectivity, anonymity and secrecy highly corresponded to the personal philosophy of René Magritte, whose attitudes towards his artistic creation perfectly reflected the notion of self-effacement and community art advocated by the group. Acting as ‘the accomplices of René Magritte’, his fellow Surrealist friends contributed to many of his titles, painting themes and inspirations. This greatly undermined the originality of his works. However, the support and promotion also gave rise to his paintings being widely known and recognized by others.
René Magritte held the same belief as the Belgian Surrealists that the ideas and thoughts behind paintings bear more significance than the images themselves. The collective thoughts and “indifferent” images constitute what Magritte called “scientific enquiry” rather than “self-expression” (Whitfield, 1992). However, with a strong and independent mind, Magritte did not give up the chance to examine, choose, and extract these existing raw materials. His personal preferences and critical thinking have made his paintings distinctive, especially in terms of visual languages. Furthermore, even if the thought is from groups instead of individual, the uniqueness of it still exits.
In conclusion, collectiveness and individual identity are two dominant characteristics in René Magritte’s art works. The reason why the artist values the former so much can be the accordance of his personal philosophy with the belief of the Belgian surrealist groups, as well as the involvement of participation in the process of his creations. At the same time, his personal preferences have also influenced the outcome of the paintings he produced. Although these personal elements may be attractive to the audience, they still belong to what Magritte called “the painting itself” which he would feel reluctant to cover the thoughts behind them—it is the collective ideas behind the paintings rather than personal artistic images that the artist would like to emphasize on in his artistic expressions.
Bibliography
Allmer, P. and Gelder, H.V. (2005). The Forgotten Surrealists: Belgian Surrealism Since 1924. Image [&] Narrative, [online] (13). Available at: http://www.imageandnarrative.be/inarchive/tulseluper/paenhuysen.htm [Accessed 15 Nov. 2017].
Dillon, G.L. (n.d.). Words in Images: Magritte. [online] Courses.washington.edu. Available at: https://courses.washington.edu/hypertxt/cgi-bin/book/wordsinimages/magritte.html#tcl [Accessed 15 Nov. 2017].
Hanson, A. & Wulf, C. (2000). Teacher Manual: René Magritte. 2nd ed. [ebook] Chicago: The Art Institute of Chicago, pp.4-9. Available at: http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/exhibitions/modernwing/resource/1620 [Accessed 9 Nov. 2017].
Magritte, R. et al. (2016). Selected writings. ALMA BOOKS LTD. pp. 115-207.
Matteson, R.L. (n.d.). Biography – Matteson Art. [online] Mattesonart.com. Available at: http://www.mattesonart.com/biography.aspx [Accessed 10 Nov. 2017].
Matteson, R.L. (n.d.). Paul Nouge – Matteson Art. [online] Mattesonart.com. Available at: http://www.mattesonart.com/paul-nouge.aspx [Accessed 10 Nov. 2017].
Paenhuysen, A. (2005). Strategies of Fame The anonymous career of a Belgian surrealist. Image [&] Narrative, [online] (12). Available at: http://www.imageandnarrative.be/inarchive/tulseluper/paenhuysen.htm [Accessed 15 Nov. 2017].
Tyson, Janet Stiles (2005) ‘The Persistence of Mystery: René Magritte as a Regional Artist,’ Image and Narrative, Online Magazine of the Visual Narrative, No. 13, The Forgotten Surrealists: Belgian Surrealism Since 1924, http://www.imageandnarrative.be/inarchive/surrealism/tyson.htm
Whitfield, S. (1992). Magritte. London: The South Bank Centre. pp. 25-48.
New Minds Eye 