dadaism

Sabrina Kureshy
European History
Pugliese E
Response #7

Dadaism
Dadaism captured the disheartened and dissatisfied sentiments of those artists who were a part of the movement, post-WWI. Speak to any Dadaist during that time, and he or she would have be offended if the movement referred to as an artistic one. It was certainly not. It was anti-art. It was a cultural movement that reflected an attitude, a view of the world, a certain understanding (or rather lack there of). There lies an interesting connection between the concept of anti-art and the effects of WWI on people.
If art was supposed to have a meaning, dada was meant to be meaningless; if art was intended to appeal to the senses, dada was meant to offend. How strange, yet how understandable. It was a depressing time for people around the world, and thus Dadaism developed, attracting people who look at the world in a very nihilistic way.
Dadaists looked cynically upon the human potential. They didn’t understand how men could become involved in such brutal actions on the battlefield. Consequently, Dadaism was a nonsensical and restriction-lacking outlet for those who couldn’t believe that order could give way to the horrid events that took place during WWI.
Having written about the Romantic Movement and how it was reactionary to European industrialization, political tensions etc., I think its interesting that throughout history, movements like Romanticism and Dadaism have formed because of events that upset the calmness and understanding amongst certain people. There is clearly a link between historical events and actions and those who chose to react in ways other than voicing dissenting opinions. What are we supposed to make of this? I think we are supposed to understand that as humans, many of us feel the need to express our opinions in very different ways. Historically, cultural and artistic expression (whether its Romanticism, Classicism, Dadaism, Realism, Surrealism, etc.) has been a key medium in which people relieve their unhappiness. We can’t always change the world around us, but perhaps it is reactionary movements like these, that have allowed us to, in our own mind, make the world a better place.

Shell Shock in the 21st Century

Numerous papers and periodicals have, in the last two years, run special coverage of the special and often dire cases of soldiers returning home from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As early as 2003, the Christian Science Monitor was reporting on the difficulties soldiers face when returning home from war zones; nineteen months later, the Monitor ran a piece on rising homelessness among veterans of the "Wars on Terror". In the last two years, more mainstream publications have followed suit. Anderson Cooper got in on the action. The New York Times and Washington Post both commented on the surge in homeless vets. Our own Chronicle ran a special Veteran's Day piece last year on the continuously rising statistics, citing data from the Palo Alto VA Hospital – the largest in-patient mental health facility in the country.

The horror stories go beyond homelessness. In a special series they called War Torn, the New York Times reported over one hundred and twenty cases of violent – and often lethal – crimes committed by soldiers returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. The New Yorker followed suit, with an article on the suicide of a decorated Marine, movingly coupled with a series of military portraits. The Washington Post, meanwhile spent years on a special investigation into charges of neglect and malpractice at the Walter Reed Army Medical facilities. The series won the Pulitzer Prize for public service in 2008.

Jean-François Millet and the Realist Movement Thesis

Through the universal medium of artwork Jean-François Millet inspired a political reaction from the working class and paved the way for an era of loftier peasant aspirations, rendering him a vicious threat to stability in 19th century Europe as it teetered under the weight of the powerful politicians and elite class.

Industrialization's contribution to nationalism

In the corner of nearly every public school classroom throughout the United States, the stars and stripes of the American flag hang proudly. Next to this symbolic piece of cloth, stapled to the wall is the order of the presidents, starting with the recognizable George Washington. The words memorized in one’s young age recite the allegiance pledged to the flag, and the student continues their classes like any other school day. This small symbol of nationalism could not be nearly as powerful without the historical propaganda and widespread unification. However, such unification could not reach such great heights until the country had sufficient communication and efficient transportation. The flags and pictures of our founding fathers could not be distributed to the schooling systems unless we had a reliable industry that could develop such goods due to an increase in demand. The schooling system itself would not hang this common flag and teach a universal curriculum unless textbooks and lesson plans were easy accessible. Indeed, behind every sense of nationalism, there lies the powerful movement of industrialization.

Calvi's Essay on WWI

What made WWI

World War I could best be described as the war that finally drew a steady map of Europe. For eons, since the death of the Roman Empire, Europe had been something akin to a large dish of water. Nations and empires, whether it be the Holy Roman Empire, the states of Italy, or Napoleon’s conquered territories, floated around in this dish, swelling in shrinking to fill up different portions of the map. As a result wars between two nations were frequent as the different floating states would collide into one another and each would try to gain the same territory. Europe was in a constant state of friction, each nation rubbing against another.
It’s impossible to point out what factors exactly led to WWI breaking out. Saying that it was all Gavrillo Princep’s fault is just not correct. However it is possible to accurately say what WWI represented. In my esteemed opinion, I believe that WWI was a rebellion within Europe of Sorts. Nations that had previously been either occupied or regarded as redundant (Serbia, Italy, and Russia) were now moving against the dominant powers (Germany, Great Britain, Austro-Hungary.) These punk nations, fresh in the state of independence and relevancy, picked fights with nations much bigger and more powerful than them, feeling for the first time that they had a chance to stand up against the set powers in Europe. Whether it be when the Serbs marched against Austrian troops in the Balkans, when the Italians stormed Izonzo to claim land they felt was theirs, or when the Turks defended themselves from the Anglo invasion; WWI was the war of sticking it to the man.

Darwin and Atheism

Much of Darwin's scientific theories are responsible for the formation and acceptance of Atheism in 19th Century European Society.   

Awesome Thesis about Darwin

Darwin's theory of evolution led way to social darwinism, as well as the idea of White Man's Burden, which justified Imperialism as a socially and politically acceptable practice for European powers although it was in fact a way to control foreign lands and their people, and overtake their goods and resources for powerful European countries.