Marcel Duchamp was born in 1887 in the French region of Normandy. Duchamp was born into a family of artists. Of his six surviving siblings, four became established artists. Duchamp was given classical training in the arts as a child, but rejected traditional eighteenth century art in favor of modernist strains. Influenced by his older brother, Jacque Villon, Duchamp began his career in cubist painting, however he became increasing avant garde throughout his career.
In 1915, Duchamp coined the term “readymade.” Through it Duchamp asserted the artist not only as the creator of art, but the declarer of art. Dictionnaire abrégé du Surréalisme or the Abridged Dictionary of Surrealism, written by leading surrealist artists Andre Breton and Paul Eluard, defined readymades as “an ordinary object elevated to the dignity of a work of art by the mere choice of an artist.” Duchamp saw readymades as the antithesis to what he called “retinal art” or visually appealing art that lacked any underlying thoughts or complexity.
Bicycle Wheel was Duchamp’s first readymade, although the artist did apply that designation retroactively (It is actually an “assisted readymade” since the found objects had been altered by Duchamp.) Sitting on a white platform within The Museum of Modern Art’s Drawing and Painting II gallery, Bicycle Wheel is a wooden stool painted white has a bicycle fork mounted on its seat. The wheel attached spins freely when pushed. Duchamp actually encouraged onlookers to spin the wheel, but unfortunately this is not permitted in this museum.
The wheel is considered to be a piece of Dada art. Dada grew out of pre-World War I avant garde movements like cubism. However, Dada was a distinct product of disgust and horror towards the Great War. Dadaists felt that the war was manufactured in the same way mass-produced products were. They felt that cold and emotionless logic and rationality lead to the brutal destruction of the war. Dadaist reacted to this by eschewing logic as a whole and instead embraced chaos and irrationality. In fact “Dada” itself is a nonsense word.
Bicycle Wheel is intensely irrational. By placing the two pieces together, the functionality of either piece is cancelled, rendering both unusable. Duchamp rejected the industrialized fashion in which the wheel and stool were created. By making the rational functionality of the objects irrational and useless, Duchamp is mocking the entire system from which they were born.
The feeling of humor and mockery was compelling, as well as the elegant simplicity of the piece. As a precursor to true conceptualism, it conveys its message of irrationality and rejection of modern industrialization effortlessly. It is not too heavy handed in its condemnation, nor too forgiving. The ability to interact with the piece as well as the captivating kineticism of the piece is also equally fascinating (Bicycle Wheel is actually considered to be the first kinetic sculpture ever made.) These are the elements that draw me to Duchamp’s Bicycle Wheel.
If I were to ask questions I would ask what happened to the original creation of the Wheel? It has been noted to be lost. I also wonder why Duchamp chose to keep it from a gallery for so long. It was first created in 1913, but was only first formally shown in a gallery in 1951.
Seeing this work of art make me see what modernism is all about. It is simple but it has whole other meaning. I really like the part on how making the wheel look useless represents that the painter did not like the time period.
Jessica, This is an interesting and sophisticated account of Duchamp’s work. Don’t forget to include any sources you consulted in preparing your comments! One of the things I love best about the work of Duchamp and his contemporaries is the way it engages the question, “what is art?” and reminds us how important context can be to making that determination. The notion of “Readymades” and the practice of making art from things that already exist also remind me of how much borrowing and reappropriation there is in the arts in our own era. Nice work.
This artwork drew me attention as I first encounter it. My first reaction is how absurd this work is by misplacing these pieces which makes them not functioning. This reminds me the incoherence of modern art. Also, this piece also has a strong characteristic of Dada. I have encountered several artwork of Dada in MoMa, and most of them are the combination of artificial materials and the painting. I think these are interesting combination.