The Contradictory Nature of the Dada Movement

  10 September, 2021

LHOOQ by Marcel Duchamp

The Contradictory Nature of the Dada Movement

The Dada art movement was formed during the first world war in Zurich as a reaction to the horrors of way. Dada artists felt the war caused them to question every aspect of society. Their aim was to negate traditional artistic values and create deliberately irrational art and replace old art with the new. A classic example is LHOOQ by Marcel Duchamp which transformed a cheap postcard of the Mona Lisa into an iconic Dada piece. An important concept in Dada is that of creative destruction. In the context of Dada, the term creative destructions refer to the breakdown of previous ideas and concepts regarding art and life. Dada itself means nothing. It is difficult to have a deeper understanding of the idea of creative destruction. Most people can only gain an abstract understanding of the notion. Even iconic Dada artist Marcel Duchamp did not claim to have a full understanding of dadaism. When interviewed, his answers on the topic of creative destruction were vague and questioning. 

Dada is considered negative in rhetoric while creative in artistic output. While this may seem contradictory, the concept of Dada is contradictory. Following the ideas of Dada, Dada artists claim they stand for nothing and create nothing. This is a contradiction to the fact that they are really creating something, and what they create is art. According to the documentary, a true Dadaist would be opposed to the idea of Dada. Despite this, no Dadaists have openly rejected their association with the movement. All their work falls under the ideals of Dada, which in itself does not correspond to the ideals of Dada. The Dadaists often claim, “Dada is anti-Dada.” Dada is negative in its rhetoric because its message is one of anti-art and former culture. Despite this, Dada is creative in its artistic output because, despite the Dadaist message, Dada still produces art and art that is unique.