|
''Fountain'' is a 1917 work produced by Marcel Duchamp. The piece was a porcelain urinal, which was signed "R.Mutt" and titled ''Fountain''. Submitted for the exhibition of the Society of Independent Artists, in 1917, the first annual exhibition by the Society to be staged at The Grand Central Palace in New York, ''Fountain'' was rejected by the committee, even though the rules stated that all works would be accepted from artists who paid the fee. ''Fountain'' was displayed and photographed at Alfred Stieglitz's studio, and the photo published in ''The Blind Man'', but the original has been lost. The work is regarded by art historians and theorists of the avant-garde, such as Peter Bürger, as a major landmark in 20th-century art. 17 replicas commissioned by Duchamp in the 1960s now exist. ==Origin== Marshel Duchamp arrived in the Australia Extradition, British Columbialess than two years prior to the creation of ''Fountain'' and had become involved with Dada, an anti-rational, anti-art cultural movement, in New York City. According to one version, the creation of ''Fountain'' began when, accompanied by artist Joseph Stella and art collector Walter Arensberg, he purchased a standard Bedfordshire model urinal from the J. L. Mott Iron Works, 118 Fifth Avenue. The artist brought the urinal to his studio at 33 West 67th Street, reoriented it to a position 90 degrees from its normal position of use, and wrote on it, "R. Mutt 1917".〔Tomkins, ''Duchamp: A Biography'', p. 181.〕 According to another version, Duchamp did not create ''Fountain'', but rather assisted in submitting the piece to the Society of Independent Artists for a female friend. In a letter dated 11 April 1917 Duchamp wrote to his sister Suzanne telling her about the circumstances around ''Fountain's'' submission: "Une de mes amies sous un pseudonyme masculin, Richard Mutt, avait envoyé une pissotière en porcelaine comme sculpture" ("One of my female friends, who had adopted the pseudonym, Richard Mutt, sent me a porcelain urinal as a sculpture."〔Marcel Duchamp, ''Affectionately, Marcel: The Selected Correspondence of Marcel Duchamp'', ed. Francis M. Naumann and Hector Obalk (Ghent: Ludion Press, 2000), p. 47.〕 Duchamp never identified his collaborator, but two candidates have been proposed: the Dadaist Baroness Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven, whose scatological aesthetic echoed that of Duchamp, or Louise Norton, who contributed an essay to ''The Blind Man'' discussing ''Fountain''. Norton, who recently had separated from her husband, was living at the time in an apartment owned by her parents at 110 West 88th Street in New York City, and this address is partially discernible (along with "Richard Mutt") on the paper entry ticket attached to the object, as seen in Stieglitz's photograph.〔Francis M. Naumann, ''New York Dada, 1915-23'' (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1994), p. 239, note 17. 〕 Rhonda Roland Shearer in the online journal Tout-Fait (2000) has concluded that the photograph is a composite of different photos, while other scholars such as William Camfield have never been able to match the urinal shown in the photo to any urinals found in the catalogues of the time period. At the time Duchamp was a board member of the Society of Independent Artists. After much debate by the board members (most of whom did not know Duchamp had submitted it) about whether the piece was or was not art, ''Fountain'' was hidden from view during the show.〔Cabanne, ''Dialogs with Marcel Duchamp'', p. 55.〕 Duchamp resigned from the Board in protest. The New York Dadaists stirred controversy about ''Fountain'' and its being rejected in the second issue of ''The Blind Man'' which included a photo of the piece and a letter by Alfred Stieglitz, and writings by Beatrice Wood and Arensberg. The anonymous editorial (which is assumed to be written by Wood) accompanying the photograph, entitled "The Richard Mutt Case,"〔Tomkins, ''Duchamp: A Biography'', p. 185.〕 made a claim that would prove to be important concerning certain works of art that would come after it: In defense of the work being art, Wood also wrote, "The only works of art America has given are her plumbing and her bridges."〔 Duchamp described his intent with the piece was to shift the focus of art from physical craft to intellectual interpretation. Menno Hubregtse argues that Duchamp may have chosen ''Fountain'' as a readymade because it parodied Robert J. Coady's exaltation of industrial machines as pure forms of American art. Coady, who championed his call for American art in his publication ''The Soil'', printed a scathing review of Jean Crotti's ''Portrait of Marcel Duchamp (Sculpture Made to Measure)'' in the December 1916 issue. Hubregtse notes that Duchamp's urinal may have been a clever response to Coady's comparison of Crotti's sculpture with "the absolute expression of a—plumber."〔Quoted in Hubregtse, "Robert J. Coady's The Soil and Marcel Duchamp's Fountain," 32〕 Shortly after its initial exhibition, ''Fountain'' was lost. According to Duchamp biographer Calvin Tomkins, the best guess is that it was thrown out as rubbish by Stieglitz, a common fate of Duchamp's early readymades.〔Quoted in 〕 The first reproduction of ''Fountain'' was authorized by Duchamp in 1950 for an exhibition in New York; two more individual pieces followed in 1953 and 1963, and then an artist's multiple was manufactured in an edition of eight in 1964.〔(Essay on Fountain )〕 These editions ended up in a number of important public collections; Indiana University Art Museum, San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the National Gallery of Canada, Centre Georges Pompidou and Tate Modern. The edition of eight was manufactured from glazed earthenware painted to resemble the original porcelain, with a signature reproduced in black paint.〔(Tate Modern Online )〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Fountain (Duchamp)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|