VOU CAN'T MISS IT-on bus stops.

in magazines and newspapers, at fan sites on the

Internet. This wintcr it's en:rywhere. Half tableau-vivant, half tableau-dcad, it is
the emblem of the new season of "The Sopranos." Last year these gloriously dark
embodiments of family nlues appeared around a table in a fairly overt parody of
a biblical scene-think Bill Viola gane sardonic ora Last Supper pageant staged in
the back roam of a pizzeria somewhere in New Jersey. As things played out, it was the last
L.U
::::,
supper for a few of those in attendance.
o
cn Saint Antho~,
L.U
l- This year we got the Last Judgment with the Soprano gang gathered by the edge of the Riwr Tempted o,
o
CC
e.o Jordan as it ílmvs through the Jersey meadowlands, where much of the rcgion 's waste disposal Demons
CC
::::,
o
takes place. That's Tony's business, and there 's lots of waste at the bottom of the picture.
cn Standing or sitting, in front of a skyline trawrsed by a bridge set against heavy storm clouds,
:z 1·
o
l-
ei:
a palc sulforous sun, and a ílight of crows-we are in 2004 and once again it's morning in
==
CC America-members of the clan dressed in funereal gray and black are assembled in and
o
u..
=
L.U around a mud-drab rowboat. At their feet are seven partially clothed bodies of men and
e
oa women in agonizing poses. Two dcsperatdy clutch the gunwales but rigor mortis seems
cn
L.U

I-
already to have set in: one stares straight at you but his eyes apparently see nothing; one slaps
ce
cE bis hand to his forchead as if he'd just thought of something, ora bullet had just hit its mark.
a..
cn
e
Once more. remcmbered images crowd in as they must have fillcd the designer's imagina-
tion. The roster is extensive: for examplc Jeff Wall's Dcad Troops Talk (A Visio11 Ajtcr <111

A111b11shl?f a Rcd Ar111y Patrol 1'\'carAloqor, AJ,;zh,111ísta11,

T+'i11tcr1986) (1991-92), ThéodorL'
Gérioult's Thc R4·r 4 thc 1\1cd11sa(1818-19), Eugene Ddacroix's Da11tc a11dVi1:t;tilCrossi11.'<
thc Rillcr Styx (1822). Then there are all the R.enaissance paintings from Michelangelo fres-
coes in the Sistine Chapei to the altarpieccs of Lucas van Leyden and Hans Memling in
which thc damned get more loving attention than the saved from artists grateful for thl'
opportunity to show humanity i11cxrrcmis and to create thc demons that torment them. for
centuries, whether openly or secretly, the pu blic has reveled in such monsters. They cm 't ,top
themselves. Tony is the Devil and thesc are his works. Everybody feels a twinge and ewry-
body gets the joke. Grotesque? You bet!

WE ARE TAUGHT TO CHOOSE OUR WORDS CAREFULLY, lest they betray us. The assumption i,
that words say what they mean but must be kept under watch for fear that they might expres,
something slightly more, slightly other than, or even something contrary to what we intend.
Such corruptions of language have two main causes. First is our own uncertainty about ,vhat
we really think and how much we actually wish to reveal. Second is the actual polyvalence
of symbols and the tendency of their multiple aspects to recombine and create unexpected,
perhaps unwanted meanings. Thus, we aspire to absolute darity but live with ambiguity.
Some people dread such confusion, some exploit it, and some accustom themselves to it by
degrees. A fe,v make it their medium.
011é of tl1t' 1110,r t'IÍ:ÍcÍt'llt \\ ,t\, oí lli,ci1 1 lii1111c! Lu1c!liclc!L' ,o ,b tu li1111t mi,undn,Lrnding 1s II

to rctdic,il!Y 11 ru11t' tl1t' \·c1ru11t lh,lc!'=" tl1c1t t1uuri,h c1nnt11L! ,t c!l\c'll tc-r111-d,1burati11g tlw
COllllOLHiun, ÍL h,1, ,tcquirt'Ll U\t'r tllllt' c111,L i11,tt',td. Lkti11,' it ,,ikh lw n, h,ll1,- dc'l10L1-

tiom. N,11llt' ir ,111d11,1il ir: rlut is r!lt' lé\'t'ii11::: lt'lll1t'lh'\ irnpli,-it in llllht c1n•L'J]l (() pLun

talk. ,rn,l thc in,r1·umc'IH1l llth' nu11,L1rc-,l h\· hthtJll',,lth· J•r,1s111Jtisn1. Tllt'rt' i, ,1 111ort' de-
\ ,ltt'd lllOtl\ ,, ,1, \\ ,,]]. 1h,, 1dc',l ot'
th,· L11c!lLtg,· l,f th,· trilw_" to

hur!'ll\\ StLThJn,' \L1lLirrnL'-, phr.1'l', i,

unt' ,1( d1é 11 ri111,1n· lll1pu],l,, of rnud-

c'nnsrn. ( )1hcr 11n1:,::r.1rns t~ir , k:rns111g

,1rt 01· rlll' c'11ilxlli,lrn1,·1HL ,rnd hkmi,hL''

Ílltrudu,_-,·d h\ HJrnljllL' ur Ro11u11tic'

gr.111Lliloqu,'llCc' 11.cTL' ,1,h,rn, ,·d !,\ ,till

111nr,· ,lr,1,,n11,111 t~ir111.ili,r, frorn rhc Lttl'

11111,'kc'Illh rl1rnugh t!1c' t\\ c'IltÍc'tll Cl'll-

llln_ lc',,11ch Lht, ,,t' ,1rn1L1r ,rripc' ,trl'

\11th u, to,Lt\. llut th,· ,li,trnl'tio11

hc't\\l'L'll

11ur\\ 11,1 d1,r111ctH111 ,n ,i!L Kcq1111g Lm-

c!lLl,_::c' <li} t]IL' l(LtÍ:,_,;ilt ,\Jllj lL\J']'()\\ llLl\

,ll llOll ,l,_::,lllll[

1 - i\11 ,tltc'rll,1[1\ e' tu l'c'clt1ctÍ\ i,1n ut· Lh1'

r ( /;
fJ
J'lll!llic-" til," ur1t1. 1, t,, 111\tTt rlL1l

,h ]Llllllc' ,II!cl L''--j·L11ll 11cll ll1lTc'k \\ luc ,lt

,1 111i11111n1111.
h 111,-,111t\,\ tl1,· \\<in!, \\e' L'llij•l,i\ \,ur r,1 \l't turtli ,til l>r lll<llt ,,r· 1\IL1t (d/1 h,,
lllc\lllt h\ tlwrn_ 1 iih \lL1k,_::\ ,,1· 1,u,Jtl\c' c",h,ILl'-llt>ll J•rc>n11,,,, t,, r,,,t,,r,· th,,1r full ,1c'-11itit-Jlll'L'

\\ h1k Il , )1,illc'Jl,_::c'' llltk]'c'llcklll ,lllli lllcjlll\Ill\ L' lllllll1' lcl dLl\1 tl1,·1r U\111 < tlllllt'dltlll\ ,lllcl

,·1i11,-lL1,iU11, rJ'()JII ,1 l l,·,1rh .lrtll'Lli.ltc'd clt\c'r,1[\_ 111 dÍ~',t. ][ f1 1'llj•tl'L' i'(\tcllllc', llldlllll,ll'IL'' Jllll

L'lll-\l·lopnli,1, ,I\ ]1tc'l',l[lll'l', J }>Ll\tlcl _1,irc',L' l til\ l)lll',_::c-, lcklltl1lc'd J, lill' [1c>Jllll,_::. [JClÍcllLJ! Ll'II-

((']' "t \'llLt111llckr11 tlH,uc',llt. \11d 1t rli,- J•r,,hl,-111 1 ,t ,kti11111'--'-J 111,1111t~1l,l\\ urll ,,r ,·,111L·c'f'l ,,, n1r,
111rl1,- \hll.il ,1' \\,,]] .1, tl1,, \c-rli,il d,,111.1111.tlll'II \•.lrt llt rli,- ,111,\\cT 1, lll ,!i,,1\ p,·upk thL· tlii11::--'.'

tJi,1t tJi,· tcTlll <li' tJic· < llll< L'f'[ n·f, r lc> [t·()l)l ,1, IILIII\ ,lllgk, ,1, t',1,-]1 lll- tJi,-111 ,1J[1l\\'- t;,r_.111d Jl
,iJ] ()f tiic'III Ili l \llll ,Tt '-li,--'.,-'.<''-(_
I2 The "grotesque '' demands such a procedure. These days ,,-eread and hear the word cvery-
,vhere, and. like it or not, it is on our own lips as ,vell. From the evidence, one might
reasonably conclude that the present era is somehow inherently grotesquc. I will not dispute
that, cxcept to note that in Dickensian logic the best of times is always accompanied by the
worst, so that there is nothing special in saying that this is a grotesque time. since ali periods
are lived as a series of contradictions ,vhich, by their nature, temer their mvn characteristic
w
:::,
grotesques. By and large though, we use this term carelessly, gradually draining it of its dis-
o
cn
w
orienting richness and criticai potency. From a concept it has become an epithet. From a
.....
e::,
a:
noun with a past it has becomc an adjective ÚJr whatever strikes someone in the moment as
~

a: aberram or offensive. Newspaper writers ]ove the cxpression, applying it as a dramatic accent
:::,
e::,
to everything from Michael Jackson ·s plastic surgery to the grisly crimes they feverishly retail
cn
z
e::, to the public. Cultural journalists are a little less promiscuous in their enthusiasm for it, but
.....
e,:
:!: not ali that much more exacting in its application.
a:
e::,
u..
w This being the season of Diane Arbus's return to thc museum and publishing world after
..,
CI

years of relative marginality, the contested value of the grotesque is once more at issue in art
cn
w
..... and literary criticai circles. ln the 1970s, Susan Sontag denounced Arbus as a narcissistic
a:
....
e,: tourist in the land of the miserable and thc misshapen, a purveyor of ethically cheap thrills
cn
CI
that debased the standards of concerned photography:

Arbus's work is a good instance of a leading tendency of high art in capitalist countries: to
suppress, or at least reduce, moral and sensory queasiness. Much of modern art is dcvored
to lowcring the threshold of what is tcrrible ... Thc gradual suppression of queasiness does
bring us closer to a rathcr formal truth-that of the arbitrariness of the taboos constructed
hy art and morais. I3ut our ability to sromach this rising grotesqueness in images (mm·ing
and still) and in print has a stiff price. ln the long run. it works out not as a libcration of
but as a subtraction from the sclf a pseudo-familiarity with the horrible reinforces alien-
ation, making one less able to react in real litê. What happens to people 's frclings on the fir,t
cxposure to today's neighborhood pornographic fi.1111
or to tonight's televised atrocity is not
so different from what happens when ,ve first look at Arbus's photographs. 1

ln her recent revie\\· of one of the two Arbus shows now making the rounds in thi, cmm-
try, Janet Malcolm assumes a less rnandarin, less pious posture. and turns Sontag·, ,Yholh·
negative description of the photographer stalking the strange into a generally pmiti,·c'
account of her way with models. 2 Speaking of thc portrait of a homely adolescent l\L1kol111
\\Titcs, "How Arbus got Marcella to look the way she did (a way no real-life elewn-yc.ir-
old girl looks), how she elicited from her the magnificent grotesquerie by which the portrait
is marked, rernains her artist's secret." The more significam difference between each account
3

of Arbus's strategy is that Malcolm identifies the element of the grotesquc not pn:1unh
with the subject-an ordinary adolescent-but with the ,vay in "·hich the cirtist i,nLfü', :::,
estranging details subsumed by the girl's generally conYentional self-prc,enution .. 11d ri:-;,,
them through the lens. ln short, to the extent that the grotesque is about freakishnL''-~. ir 1,
kss a matter of finding extreme cases and treating them as ready-mades, but of extracting r3
the unnatural from the ostensibly natural, separating the more or less consciously cultivated
dfect fi-0111the innate defect. Moreover, Malcolm does not assume, as Sontag does, that the
Yiewer's interest in anomalies, modest or extreme, is an inherently suspect product of a deca-
dent and unfreling society. Yet neither Malcolm nor Sontag explore a broader understanding
of the grotesque outside of its occurrence in these images. Lost, in such criticai shorthand,
i., a foll appreciation of the grotesque's astonishingly protean artificiality and its capacity for
inspiring genuinc delight as wdl as provoking disquiet.

ln contrast to idealistic modes thought to embody what is most becoming in nature, hence
most noble in culture, no other mode of art is so frankly and so subvcrsively artificial. The
\ometimes confrontational but frequently seductive manner in ,vhich the grotesque calls
received aesthetic wisdom into doubt is precisely what has recommended it to artists from
,o many different periods and of such dissimilar styles and intentions. Indeed, rather than
regard it as either a charming or regrettable digression from the greatness of tradition-or
tiom a modernist vantage point, as a swampy bywater of the mainstream-it is more useful
and more accurate to think of the grotesque as a full-fledged. multilayered countertradition,
a pmvert11l current that continuously stirs calmer waters. sometimes redirecting their flow.

With the general failure to do justice to the idea of the grotesque in rnind, my efforts to
get beyond its casually pejorative use as a synonym for the unsightly or the degraded \\·ili
be based largely on history. Recourse to precedem in this instance is not driven by a
desire to borrow authority but simply to expand meaning by example. So saying, a sen-
tence rings in my car, and may ring in that of the reader. ln bis famous 1940 essay, "Toward
a Ne,ver Laocoõn," the critic Clement Greenberg made the case for high-modernist
painting and sculpture in a tour-de-force generalization about art and literature that
sought to definitively separate one fi·orn the other, thereby wiping away all the formal
impuritics and eliminating ali thc poetic absurdities that their previous contlation had
giYCn rise to. Then, backing away from the establishment of a rigorous doctrine, he con-
cluded: '·I find that l have offered no other explanation for the prcsent superiority of
abstracr art than its historical justification ... To argue from any other basis would require
more space than is at my disposal, and would involve an entrance into the politics of
taste ... tiom ,vhich there is no exit-011 paper.'' 4 What Greenberg coyly skirted in this man-
itesto but thereaftcr practiced with a vengeancc-the policies of tastc-is the predicate of
this text and this exhibition. If there is no exit on paper or in the galleries, hopefully tem-
porary confinement to that realm will be compensated for by arresting visual material and
things worth thinking about. As to the argument from history, my intent is not to declare
superiority of thc grotesque, past or present, but just to speak up for its legitimacy~or,
more accurately-its superb illegitimacy.
 THE MOMENT OF PROLIFERATION of thc grotesque comes and goes. Usually it anses

when strictly codified ·'classic" styles have ceascd to bear fruit as a rcsult ofbeing forced
too much or constrained too severdy, like espaliered trces against a smooth stonc wall.
In such sterile circumstances signs of grmnh else,vhere dra,v attention to themselves:
for example colorfi.1!\\Teds at the foot of such a wall, or rampant vines that cra,d along
the top. If allowed to grow unchecked they will eventually invade the space once reserYed for
w
:::::,
the fi.)rmally arraycd tree. Ascending from below and dropping from abovc, ,úld wgetation will F·;, ..
=
V., wind around its trunk and create a mesh with it~ branchcs, adding unexpected color and fi.wm
w
1- The Sleep :'
CI to the horticultura! trophy's skdetal regularity. Insects, birds, and small animais \\·ili use these
=
C!:I
Reason P·::;::_:e
= twigs and tendrils as path,vays, and, wherever possibk, ,úll make their nests. Thus nature ren- Monsters
:::::,
e:,
V.,
dered barren by overcultivation is rejuvenated by owrabundant lifr. Thus the ruin of perfection
z
e:, is the origin of vital hybridities. rnutation, and cross-frrtilization-the source of hitherto unseen
1-
c
:E
cornbinations of :familiar fi.mns. Thus the breakdmvn of a previously established order provides
=
...
e:,
w
e:,
the annature fi.)r rearranging its components: and from that process the shapc of a provisional
new order emerges.
oa
V.,
w
1-
From Shelky's plangent poem "Ozymandias"' and Robert Hubert's sepulchral tabkaux of
=
e collapsing palaces. to Komar and Melarnid's comic fantasy painting of a shattered post-apoc-
CI.
V.,
e:, alyptic Guggenheim Museum, the ruin represents the nnity of human dfort. A record of the
decline of civilizations, it is simultaneously a symbol of decadence and of the erosion of sup-
posedly eternal values that are said to bring about such decline. Why mention this? Ikcause
the grotesque is in many ,nys as basic to thcse historical myths as the caved-in Colmscurn
of Rome with its reputation fór grandeur and ,nntonness. In fact, the concept was in a scme
excavated from the rubble nearby. Around 1+80. ,vhik digging the foundation of a building.
,vorkers broke through to the underground vaults of ,vhat had been the Emperor Nero ·s
pleasure house-the Domus Aurea. To many, the greatest surprise was the profi.1sion of ornatc
dccorations that covered its ,nlls. ln these pagan phantasmagorias, flora fi.1scs\\·ith fauna and
men with beasts in ways unimagined by Renaissance anists taught to adhere to rules gm·-
erning the separation of diflerent types of imagery. According to moralizing Christian
legend, Nero was the cruelcst. most frivolous, and effete of Roman rulers and the nm-elty of
the~e remnants of Neronian .. decadencc" crcatcd an immediate and lasting sensation. Master~
as well as ksscr talents tlocked to see the wonders of these grottoes-hence their original
Italian name grottcschc-and soon imitated them in their ,vorks.

Raphael, one of the great cxponents of the classical Renaissance manner. surrounded ties-
coes commissioncd for thc Vatican with his o,vn wrsions of what he had seen. ln tum Luca
Signorelli, Leonardo da Vinci, and Albrecht Dürer took cues fi:0111the sarne model, while
using it as a license to justit\ their own flights of fancy, their mvn periodic escapes from thc
discipline of high seriousness and high style. From the very beginning, thc ,vhimsical as well
as the troubling unnaturalness of grotesques were associated with reverie. The Italians called
them St~g11i
dei pittori-the dreams of painters. Dürer prophetically called them tra1111111
lTk- 1
dream work-the same word Sigmund Freud employed to describe the way m which the
subconscious processes ideas and emotions unacceptable to the conscious, logical mind.

Overlapping categories that would ofi:en be used as synonyms fór the grotesque include
"arabesque" and "moresque," in recognition of the increasing influence on Europe of
Islamic cultures where decoration of extraordinary graphic and mathematical complexity
played a dominam rather than subordinate role in the visual arts. But whereas arabesques and
moresques were generally abstract, in keeping ,vith the Muslim prohibition against repre-
sentational imagery, grotesques were exuberant!y, though not exclusively, pictorial. Further
development of the formal possibility manifest in the genre was the emergence of carica-
ture as an art têm11, initially in the hands of Ludovico and Annibale Carracci and
Cianlorenzo Bernini, who, like Raphael, ,wre examplars of the most exalted that
Renaissance art had to offer, even as, in the margins, they travestied the formal purity toward
,vhich their primary work strived. ln due course, other words attached themselves to this
aesthetic domain in which inwntion, humor, and impiety were unleashed and where imag-
inative conjuring became the principal object. Giovanni Battista Tiepolo titled allegories in
,vhich heavily costumed men and women congregate ,vith elegant monsters-scherzí or
··jests"-while his son Giovanni Domenico specialized in antic cartoons of Punchinello and
bis cohort. Goya called his contribution to this gro,ving alternative tradition Capríchos-
.. caprice•;''-and Disparatcs-·'disparities."To be Goyaesque-like being Kafkaesque-is to be
grotesque in an especially disconcerting way that rattles right-mindedness by spinning those
,vho cannot decide whether to laugh or ho,vl into a state the nineteenth-century German
,niter Jean Paul described as "sou] dizziness." 5

Ordinarily this does not happen at the sight of people or things that are strange or ugly. We
might be repulsed, or we might be fascinated. look away. or sneak a peek. but curiosity about
damage and deformity rarely touches the nen-e that triggers doubts about who and where we
are. To be grotesque, something must be in contlict ,\'ith something else yet indi,·isible from
it. To result in "sou] dizziness," that conflict must in some t-:1shionalready exist within the mind
of the beholder such that the confusion stems not onh·. fi·om the anomah-. to which we bear
\\Ítness in the ,vorld, but the anomaly that is re,·ealed ,úthin us. Humanism. that much abused
idea, enters into the equation to the extent that the dualities of \Yhich \\"e are composed-the
parts that don't match and the gaps between them-are made more rather than less apparent
by our awareness of the misalignmem or distortion of other parts of reality or of unrealities
given substance by artists. 6 These are the psychological and aesthetic conditions to which
Arbus's photographs so vividly and problematically attcst. This is \Yhy looking unrelentingly
through her camera-eye at freaks or at the less blatant but no less troubling peculiaritíes in
people-or what Arbus thought could be fla,ys-is ultimately self-retlectiw, inasmuch as it
exposes and widens the fi.ssures in the viewer's own consciousness.

Yet as long ago as 1 643, the writer Thomas Brown declared, ·'There are no grotesques 111

nature.'' 7 So saying he made an importam distinction between that which is atypical by acci-
 17

he êlJUld lllc'lllOrÍ7c' th,·ir t-;_'.tturc·, ,111clckl\\ tlwrn 011cc' h,1d~ ,\C h1, <tuclhl. ~\n historÍ(\11, h:n-c
Libdc'd tlw,c· 111;irn·luu, uclcliric·, groLt'S(Jllc'S. hm 1t \OU ,l((c'F't Uro1111·, obsc'n·,ni,,11 rhc·n otlk
Lhosc' t1~tlrc', \\ hic·h cLt\'111ci cTc',\lc'd frorn ,,·r.nch ur ,1g11ilÍcllllh "i1111•rc,\·c·,{upun .. propc-rh
cJllJlif::: rhc n·,r rq,rc·,enr 11,1rurt'·, i11gc·1111ÍrY-clr Cucl',-1.1thn du11 rlur ut· llll.Tl' 11H1rcd,
t'njming rlw 1•c'l'lc'r,1t1L'' ,it thL·ir <l\l n 1111c1~111.1t1,J11,,

( 'harlc·s l'L1udt'L11rc'. tl1c tirq grc'.lt 111<>,kr111sr,·r1t1c 11ho,c· .1c·,tl1c·t1L"clulk11gt' tu .1, .1,k1111c cL1,-

Sllh11l JlHL';-:•;r.nc·d.1 full-hh1\\ll l1u1n.1g,· tu .. 111,l t\}'O:,.;r.q,h1 ,,f ,·.iri,·,1111r,·. come·, tu thc· ,nd of
,ll jtht rhh JU11ct11r,·. fl1s .111.1h,1, ,,f ··t11t' c"t'lh·,· ut· l.1 . 111,lll q,,,t1\111uus css.11
ul· 1:,~~- di,tlc·ctl\.·,tlh clll fuur 111tLTrc·l.1rc·,l}',t11'Í11:,.;,:
hulllor .uhl :cTr,n. i11110Lc'llLL':rnd
,ornq,nu11. 11h()k11,·" .111,lfr . rh,· 11.llltr.il .111,ltil,· llllll.ltur.il .. \, .d11:1\·,. tl:,· .1uthor
,,r· rhc' J'l,,/1'(/.\ l:1·1/ :,.;11,·, thc· ,LT1l hi, ,lu,· ... [li,·\\ i,c· 111.lll ,,11h \\ nh l~',ll' ,11ld tr,·111-

dh' .111'\\c'r li,·, 111thc· ,i11 ul· illlbrh llllllllllllL'cl c'lc'I'\ t1111c· ur ,ullll'lllll'
,l,1 11e" truh 111 lllll,Ull !i'ii/1 tlw <lhJc'd <lt c)llr .llllU,c'llll'lll. Thc'l'd<ll'l'
,,n11,•, 11·0111,1111.111·,
1,k,1 <lllu, ,11111Sllf•c"l'lcll'ltl .. \ ,.1u11i,· 1,k.1

l.1ughr,'r 1, c·,,,·11t1ctlh liun1c111ll 1' ,·",·11t1.ill\ ,omr,1,li,tun. li1.1t 1' t,, ,.1\ ll 1, .n ut1c· .11hl tlw
,,tlllc' n111c' c1 ,i,.:n uf lllti111ll' ,.:rc':l(]lc'" ,111clot· llltt111t,· IITL'l, h,·d11c·" ... lr i, tí-0111 ri,,. l·u11st:111t
,·L1,h nf th,·,,· t110 111t111iric·,th.1t Li tl,,11, .. I, liuc, ,1t' llL1h,' l'.t,,.tl·, hi1un
lllir hc-.1,t hut 111.111
.n1d l:l.1u,kl.nr,··, 11
tllJll oi' rhc· :,.;rotc·,quv ,111,lu\\ 11 .11111Tltc·r, l1kc· IL11l!lc'I'\ ( ).( ·,,1111l1r,t11d ,1rtish
Jikc, ,\likc· Kc·lln. l l1c· l.1nn·, rdl,·,ri,inc ,1ll ,.1n,.1turc· .1r,, .1111011:,.;
tlw ,·"c'IHl.d tc''.l, u11 rhL·
,,_,,c·11r,· h\ ll.111,kL,n,·
,·hc11111,1011c<Ll ,() ,,.1rl, ,,:1. 1 But 11lur ,,t' 11111,H-L'lH : ThL·rc· t<'l'
B.1udcL1irc· \l'c·, ,1 d,·mu111,· f r,·,,·1h'c: 0

lllc-'.llf'. lt j, ]jJ..:c· t\1,· ,1,11 ll( .1 j'J.111[.. \11,J 'li. c_:,·11,-r.tih')'e ,1k111:--'.
Jt, lll.illlt;•,utll'il 1, 1.'r!llT
tl1,· ,1111k. ,n111,·tl1lllC'.li )l)\ [(J rl1,· \\,lC,'.C,'.]11,_'.
1.1il Ili ,1 ,l,,c:: "r tli•i )'lllTIII,_; ,,1· ,.lt•. :\11ci
H't. du Ji<ll 1;,rc-'.c·rtl1.1t 11"th,, l.1u)1t,·r ,li, liildr,·11 rn.11. 1ítcT .til h ,,11,! .111,!cl,111c·.b,, ,11,
tlll!:.;lll'l1nl fr,1111th,· llllt\1 .,rei ,1:>:11,"t .,111111.il,<'lit,·11t111,·11i.
tli,- r,·.,,,,,1 ,, 1h,1t rli1, l.1uc:IH,·1
1\ lllll ,·11t1r,·lc ,lc·\u!cl ut .1111l11t1uti.
,lli,I th.1l 1, ,1, il ,h<llli,i bc-. Ili 1111111-111c·11
,,r 111llLill'1
,1·ur,I, \:1r.,11, "( ,·,,rh :>:l'll\\tl1.

]Ji,, iro11ic· c·lu,tll'L' ()t, th1, l,lc-'.ll .1!c·,111\Ullctí,,11 1, ,1 ti11c·h ,T.ltrl·,l c-'.1",llL''ljllL'<lt' \lTlll<llll711lc-'.

i,k:di,n1.

/\lth()ugli \ILlj'f'c·,I 111h1hl1,.il 111l't.q'h,,r. H.n1,kl.111,··, rl1c·,,n ,,t· liutn,,r h }'l'llt~lllllllh lll(1cl-

L'rll i11 ll, h,llk l''' ,·h,,l\lc-'.lc,il l'l'c'lllhc',. 111,b.1,1c tc·,riic'[lc , nlc'rÍ.1. 111,! !11, pu!ttl, ,. l ,tki11~
,·.11'l' [() cli,till~ll],!i hc'l\\l'l'll .JU\ .l!lli l.tllc-'.lilc'l. H.1t1,kl.11rc' \\ rir,·, . .J-1\ l',1,r, ,,t' J[\l·lr. !,ut it
r8 has differcnt manifestations. Sometirnes ir can hardly be detected; at others it expresses itsclf
in tears. Laughter is rnerely a form of expression. a symptom, an outward sign. Symptom of
what? That is the whole question.Joy is a unity. Laughter is the exprcssion of a double or
contradictory fecling: and it is for this reason that a convulsion occurs.'' 12 That said, impor-
tant distinctions rcgarding ,vh,lt provokes such a rictus rcmain to be madc. For Baudelaire
thcre werc essentially two kinds of humor, that which apes familiar behavior or demeanors
w
:::,
and exaggerates them for effect, and that which invents absurdities whole cloth. The first he
r::::J
e,,
w
namcd the ordinary or significative comic, which ''is clearer, casier for the common man to
l-
o understand, and especially easier to analyze." 13 The second he called the absolute comic or
a:
.,.
a: the grotesque, which for hirn contained a primordial self-sufftciency that made its internai
:::,
o
e,,
incongruities transcend average cxperiencc and sccm almost inevitable, as if one \\Tre faced
z
o by the totality of an Eden turned upside down and inside out. ·'Fabulous creations, beings
...
1-

2
for whose cxistence no explanation drawn fiorn ordinary common sense is possible, ofi:en
a:
o
u..
excite in us a wild hilarity, excessive fits and swoonings of laughter ... herc ... ,ve are con-
w
e:,
fronted with a higher form. From the artistic point of ,·iew, the comic is an imitation; the
oc,
e,,
w grotesque, a creation.'' 14

l-

...
a:
CI..
In Baudelaire's schema the grotesque thus ri,·als Creation by imTrting its orders of being-
e,,
o
think original sin at play-while it approximates art-for-art's sake by striving above all to satisf'.,
its own ,veird logic and the dictates of pleasure. This was and is hcady, herctical stutl. Writing
during a period when church and state, civic morality and religious doctrine-once separatcd
by the French R.e\'olution-had been bound together fór the sake of political e:xpcdiency,
Baudelaire 's recourse to diabolical parable is both a dodge and an act of defiance. Afi:er all.
13audelairc's poems had caused him to be hauled into court on charges of blasphemy and
obscenity. Speaking in codes that resonate in our era, he mischievously suggests that, ''If we are
willing to adopt the othenvisc orthodox standpoint, it is certain that human laughter is inti-
mately connected ,Yith the accidcnt oLm ancient fall... ln the early paradise ... rnan 's countenance
was simple and composed, and laughter that nowadays shakes nations did not distort the fea-
tures of his face.'' 15 More<wcr, Baudelaire continues, ''ln the eyes of Him who knmvs and can
do ali things, the comic does not exist.'' 16 It has been a long time since man's countenance
matched that of the countenancc di,·ine, but \Yhen laughter shakes nations-or ar least thc
foundations of authority-now. as then, the authority retaliares. But the visage of the sternest
Dcity differs from that of the censor ,vho never cracks a smile; one is imperturbably sovercign,
the other implacably vindictive; one a vision of omniscient and forgiving truth, the other the
mask of sanctimony and hypocrisy, in short a favorice persona of the Devi! in disguise.

Goya, whose work Baudelaire greatly estcemed, famously captioned the forty-third of his
Caprichos with a short te:xt that Jus inspired countless \\TÍters and artists and spawned
libraries of commcntary. "Thc sleep of reason produces monsters,'' he wrote. It can be read
two ways. As a critique of rationalism run amuck emanating from someone who, in ·11zc
Disasters (?ff.'Vi1r,documented the horrors of Napoleon 's ca111pa1gn to bring French
L11h~htenrnc·nt or Jt ,1m· Lltt' rrenl·h clo111111llm rn tht éLirk c·ornn, of J feucbl. ,u1 1 cTsti- I <)

uo11-ridclt'11 Spciin. thi, 11hcTÍ].'tio11 in tl1t' t1r,t in,1cu1c·t' c.111bt llllllt'Ltucill J, ,\ \\ ,n11u1g uf
\\·lnt l1c1ppt'1F \Yht'n rt'ci,un ,Ir( ,1111i tht u1irc·,1,u11c1blc:c11d L1ib to rc:L·u~111zttkn it l1c1,tl1c:rc'by
,11mrno1Kd 111rn1,tt'r,. ln uur O\\ n dciY \lc' do nor llL'c'ci ro look fn t'ór ,·:-;,1rnplL·,01· rhl· hide·oLh
, (1Jl,L'l]Uc'lkC, of tlwort'licilh rnpcTior 11 ul1cic·, bc'ill,l for,·dülh im11 0,,·d un "bL·ni~htc·d"
!''1!1UL1t1u1h in thc: rurn,· oi h prn1L·i~1 k ...\, 111:\,1pokrn1·, L1JY.d1c',c' Jrc' dw ~ror,,qut, prn-
ch1,,·,! b\· rq1ubli,, t!ut lic·cmnc· h· lilwrtY. eq11c1lit\. Jlh1 fr,Hc'rL11l\ 1\·lwu thc'\ rnmph
llllll Juthorit,iri.l!li,111. in . ,m,l lli\Íq1·,·11c:".

t ,· nrn1d ·11·hi,·h lw Lbc·kcl tlw ]Jt~·- .\l'l' t<lllllcl 111\ c·1ht! L1psl''
111,l111yikc·,. ! hc· l11L'd1t111,11hth,1t JILllLl:,.>:c'
or thc· tL1th, of "lll'l'rc·,,c·,l thought 111
11 hour, º}'c'LltL' 111uc·h in th,· 11.1\, rlut dr,'.tl11' ,l,1. J, illu,rrs1r,·,l b1 rlll' clln-,11:..,·,1111,
..,r
i}'}'L.lLlllCc' of 011,· tlilll,.': ur n, ,·untlttl()ll or c·unlthl\lll \\ 1th .lll(>tillT Tlrn, f \'l'licl

111tl1,· L1r,·111,lr,'.1111p.11,1n:.:

b,·1n:.: crnnbi11vc! ,111dtt1,,·,l 111t,>,l ,1n:,:k llllll\ 1111h,· 11u111k,t ,!r,'c1111.

.. Y,1u \1ill l1c11c·ill'
d1tíi,·ult1· 111r,·, ,illlll:,: 111,L111c,·,tí,,rn 1,.>11r1>\111drc\1111'uf ,li1·i',Tc'Jltp,·,,r1 k ,·u11

111.1\1,,, ,lr,·,'C·cl lik,· B. IIU\ dll ,,,111,·tlii11c'.1h H \1,· r,·111,·1111

1 ,·r ( · ,111cl.ll 1Ji,, ,.111,,·
11111,·
\1,· 1111\k11n1\ 1l1cn11,'h J l.Tlih '"lllf\,1,11,,· ,1ru,tur, h llt ,·"ur,,· \l)llh_'-

f'k. Js \\e' k1H1\\. dcTI\L' ,,,111,· f\k.1,11r,· fr,,111.1 l1.il1 n. ,,t' ,kl1\,,T,1t,·h ,li,tllrtlllc'. 11111c,n·:1t
\1or,!, 11n,, "l,,,·,·11,· ,,11c·,:,11,li ,lhtllrtlclll• ,1r,· rc-s_:,1r,k,!,1, 1111111\
.. 111,l\1 h,·11 l\c· lw,1r c>IK

\uL·h di,pl.1ccrn,·11t, c111,lLUllcl,·11,,1t1l111'rL·,ulr 111111,\rc' ,,r k" '} ,111u11,·r,111111c·1ck11t,,if th,·

1

:,rrote,qu,·. Thn pl1111:,r,·rl1,· li,r,·1\lT. rc'ctckr. tlr 11c·\1LT 111t,, 1u11,·, \\ h,·rc' t:ll\11l1.1r Li1111c'.,
.lrL·
h\ 'L',·111111µ:h,1rl1 1trc1n rc'LLlJJtiµ;ur.1tH>t1,.l h,·,L· ,1r,· tli,, }'l.1c,·, \1 liL·r,· ! )(1r,-r·, ,\1Hl
L",tL111µ;c·,1
,,1111nc'.,· \\ 1th lt1u,kl.11r,,·,
ITn1d·, ,c'}',lLltc' idc\lL ot' //,11111111'c1/: .1h L>luc,· ,,11111, ,111,l.\fl'
1 t~il
lmn·d h\ ro111ul,i1·,i huµ;l1t,·r ur ,1 cjllL',1,1 :.:r111.
 COMPLAINTS AGAINST THE GROTESQUE .ire nurneroth but cunsistL'llt in tvpc.TbL',.
compose a catalogue of exclusions. The origins of ,·irtually all, like the origins of
rhe gr,ltesquc· itself. can bc· founcl in .111tiquin. E.f !. Gombrich·, T/1c Srnsc ,,t
Ordcr. is an i1l\'aluable source book for them. This extended reflection on the dec-
urati, e' do,c·c1ils lllcelv. \\ ith rhe a11c1lvsis
. ,if c.1r1,-atlnl· he L·arried on 111
collaboration ,Yith the psychoanalvst Ernst Kris. Lese readers rnppO',e that these ,vorb are
w tl1c' mu,ry at1:11r of a,·c1den11c,. it ,lrnuld bc" said tbat rhey form the b.1sis of Mike Kelln ·,
:::::,
o
V., street-rn1art ,kL·nse uf graphic li,·,·me. I11c1eed. tltle of tlie ddi,·ious ironÍL'" of contempo-
w
,_
o rary d1,cmir,e is that. after waves of ,,riting that bypassed or challenged Gombrich ·,
e::
e.e,
e:: cumbin.1tion clt. forrn.dist .1n hi,rnry a11c1ico11ugrapliical exq2:esi,. his rcrurn tu prorni-
:::::,
o ncnce for youngcr critics :111dscholars should bc prompted by a debunker of the .. fine art"
V.,
2
o t 1·1ditio1h such ,1s Kdkv.
,_
e,:
:E
e:: The fir,t charg,·s laid :1gainq rhe c·111bcllishments that gc·neratc·,i the grotesquc· are rooted i11
o
..... d1,putes between the adnicates of pure Att1c rhetoric. and the artífice of the "Asiat1cs'' \\·ho
w
o
otl c·111broi,kred J'Ltin p,1rLmu. C:iceru. tryi11g to rd~Tee tl1i, deh.ne, pror,osed tlie scrndard ut'
V.,
w
,_ .. decorum'' which defines, in cases where Lrnguage is enriched with figures of speech. \\hat
e::
e,: í, withi11 goo,1 tastc· ,md 11hat L''-cc·eds tt. ln ,111e ,1 ,11 or .111other_ mosl ,lttad., 011 tl1,·
e..
V.,

o
grote,que finilt it tc.)r Jack of decorurn. immoderation. and tastelessness.

Shifi:ing to the visual art,. we finei the :1rch1tectural theoretici,m Vitru\'lus expressing his dis-
pkasurc· c1tthL· tm111J'c' l'oeil murais ()fAu~usta11 IZ.01nc· 1n thl·,c· terrn,:

011 the stucco are 111onstersLither than definitc· rc"prescntatiom taken from definite things.
!Jht,·c1d ot ,,ilurn11, thcr, r1,e Uf' ,u]ks; 111,tead ,,r· gabk,. strip,·,l panei, 11·ith ,urled l,·c1\CS
and nilutcs. Candclabra uphold picture ,hrines . .111daboYe the rn111111it
of the,l:'. clustcP, of
th111,talk, r1ce fru111their ruots 111tcndnb ,,·ith i1rrk fi,;me, se.tt,·,i up,,11 then1 .tt randurn.
or slender sulks ,Yich hcads of mcn and mimais <lttached to lnlf thc bodv ...
.Such tliings 11,1thn 1rc·.1101, ,111 b,·. 11or !1.1•,· be,11. On li1L,e lin,·, the nn1· fashions
compel bad judgcs to l·o11de11rngood cnft,mamhip fór ,1,11Iness.For h, ,11·crn :1reed adu-
ally ,usta111,, root'. "r a ,.11hlebl•rt1111t!1,' c,rnaments ot ,1 gable, ora ,ofr and ,lendn stalk
,1 se:1tl'd sutue, or how ,·:111flm1"c'rcand li 1If-st1rn·iSris, .1ltcm:1t,·ly fr,1111roots ,rnd st.tlks;
Yu 1d1en people 11c1,· thc"se falsel10od,. thc"1·appro,-e r.1ther tlnn condcnm. 1 •

,·oice to the chorus and his objectiom to the list:

13ut in che cloistn. in the sight of tlll' re.1di11g111011ks.

,,·hat is the point of ,uch ridiculous
rn,>11•tros1t\.thc ,tr111ge 111dot ,iupel,·" ,ha1xl111css,,,r ,hap,·h ,hap,·k,snes, 0 \Vhy tlic·sc
umightly monkeys. \Yh\' thl'sc· iiercc" liom. \\'h\ the momtrous cenraurs. ,, l1Ysemi-humam.
\\ spottc"ll tigcr,. \Yh\ ti:.:htin~ ,,)ldi, r,. ,,·h, trump,·1111g hu11t,me11~\'ou c.111see 111.111y
bolhes under 011c hcad. and rhen .1gai11one bod,, \1ith lll,111\ hcads, hcre you sce a
q11.1,lrupc·cl\1·ith 1 ,cTpc1il·, cai!. ii,re a ri,h \\'Ítl1 rhc h,·.1,I of :1 q11adíllf'c·d. Hnc· is a bc·.1st
which is a horse in front but drags half 11go,Jt lx·hind, hcre a horncd animal has thc
 hindquarters of a horse. In short then.' is such a Yariety and such a di,·ersity of strangc 21

slupes every,,·here that \\"e may prcfrr to read the marbks rather than thc books. 19

A fi.u-ther jump cut takcs us to Versailles as pcrceiYed by the English architect Christopher Wren:

Not an lnch within but is crowded with litt!e Curiosities of Ornamems: thc Women, as
they makc here the Lmguage and Fashíons. and meddk wíth Politicks and Philosophy. so
they ,way also in Architectun:: Works of FilgramL and little Knacks are in grcat Vogue: but
Building certainly ought to havc the Attribute of eternal. and therefore thc only Thíng
uncapable of ncw Fashions. The masculine Furniture of Palais jfa:ari11 pleas'd me nrnch
better where is a grcat and noble Collection of antique Statues and Bustm ... 20

ln 1812, the t,vo French ,,Titers C. Percier and P.F.l. Fontaine took out after thc decoration
made possible by improved tcchnologics on thc grounds that it not only confi1scd the imag-
inary with the real, but substituted the genuinc with thc fake:

To do cverything for a reason, to do cverything in a ,vay to make that rcason apparcnt and
to justify the mcans tmyards the end is the first principie of architccture. whik the first
principie of fashion is to do evcrything without any reasem exccpt to do othenYise ...
What sprcads the im-entions and the forms of such ,vorks universally is not a frcling
for what is right nor a more enlightencd taste ... things are not desired bccause thcy are
found to be beautiti.11;they are fimnd to be beautifol becausc they are dcsired. ln this way
they soon sutfrr thc face of ali fashionable products. Industry gcts hold of thcm and rcpro-
duccs them in a thousand economical ,vays to placc them ,vithin reach of the least
afflucnt. Ali kinds of falsifications de base their ,·alue. Plastcr take, thc place of marble, paper
plays the part of painting. stencils imitate thc \\'Ork of scissors, glass substitutes for precious
stonc, tinfoil rcplaces solid metal. varnish fakcs porphyry. 21

This diatribe against ersatz grandeur and cheap-chic sounds as if it could have been written
today, cither by neoconscrvative enemies of f:1shion or neo-Marxist enemies of spcctacle,
,vhich is only to say that its main thrmt combines um,,ffering belicf in the concept of truth
to materiais and unmitigated opposition to the anistie uses of what much !ater became
knmvn as kitsch. Purity in art mcant not only iconographic austerity but purity of medi um.

Last in this synoptic account of the hostility decoration has stirred comes thc early twcmi-
cth century Austrian architect, Adolf Loos, ,vhose vision of immaculate modernism provides
Kelley with his ideal foi!. If. with abbreyiations, I still quote at length, it is becausc Loos giws
so revealing-so self-damning-a description of the purity hc sought and that others, less can-
did, continue to seek.

Thc less civilized a pcople is, thc more prodigal it \\'ili be with ornamcnt and decoration.
The Red lndian covers e,-cry object. every boat, every oar, everv arrow over and oYer ,vith
ornament. To regard dccoration as an advantage is tantamount to remaining 011 the levei
of a Red lndian. Bnt chc Red lndian within us must be ovcrcome. Thc Red Indian says:
That woman is beautifül beca use she wears golden rings in hcr nose and in her ears. The
22 civilized person says: This ,vo111anis beautiti.1! because she has no rings in hcr nose and
in her cars. To seek beauty only in form and not to make it depcnd 011ornament, that is
the aim towards which the ,vhole of mankind is tending ... The child is amoral. The
Papuans are equally so for m. The Papuans slaughtcr their enemies and eat thcm. They
are not criminais. Jf. however, a m<m of this century slaughters and eats someone he is a
criminal or a degeneratc. The Papuans tattoo thcir skin, their boats. thcir oars, in short
everything within rcach. They are not criminais. But the man of this century who tattoos
hi1melf is a criminal or a degenerate ... Thc urge to ornament one ·s f1ce and everything
\vithin reach is the very origin of the visual arts. lt is the babbling of painting. Ali art is
erotic. .. The first ornamcnt that ,vas en:r crcatcd. the cross. is of erotic origin ... The hor-
izontal stroke is a reclining \voman; a vertical strokc the man penetrating hcr. The man
\vho created this expnienced the sarne urge as Beethoven. he \vas in the sarne heavcn in
,vhich Beethoven created his Ninth Symphony, but the man of this crntury who feeh thc
urge to cm·er walls with eroric symbols is a criminal or a degcnerate .. .I have tê.mnd the
follm\·ing law and prcsented ir to mankind: the evolution of ci\·ilization is tantamount to
the remova! of ornament from objccts of use ... Every age has its mvn style and our own
should bc dcnicd one? ... Wc ha\T ove1-come ornamcnt, we have strugglcd frcc from orna-
ment. Lo. the time is nigh and fi.1lfillment a,vaits us. Soon the streets of the city will gleam
likc white \\·alls; like Zion, the Holy City. the capital of heaven. 22

Let me summarize the attitudes contained in these indictments. The basic. explicitly moral
fault found by ali the enemies of the decorative and of the grotesque is that these modes traf-
fic in illusion. Thus Gombrich begins his treatise on the subject by quoting Shakespeare\
.Hcrrhallf l!f Vc11iccto thc effect that. "'the world is still deceived by ornament ... ornament is
but the guiled shorc to a most dangerous sea." 23 With grcater alertness to social and política!
subtexts than Gombrich himself \\"as disposed to, we can detect other biases.

According to defenders of Attic style. \Yhat was wrong \Yith fancy speech was rooted in
where it carne from-Asia. The conviction that barbarism is a foreign rathcr than domestic
phenomenon is a pcrennial of Eurocentric ideas of civilization. Decline follows the infiltra-
tion or Ílwasion of the homeland by outlandish peoples and customs; it signals the breakdown
of a oncc healthy organic state. 24 And so the inscription belmY Thomas Couture 's iconic salon
painting Thc Ro111,111s
1f thc Dccadcnff (1 8.+7) quotes Juvenal's judgment: "Luxury has fallen
upon us, more terrible than the S\Yord. and the conquered East has a,-enged herself ,vith the
gift: of her ,·ices."

Vitruvius and Clairvaux developed the theme of the unnatural uses of artistic license with a
verbal flair that makes one suspect that they sncakingly paid more attcntion to the results than
tbey cared to admit. In any case they prm·ide those willing to be seduced by the distraction
of the grotesque with Yivid ,vords for articulating their expericnce. How better could one
describe the metamorphic coiling of Gothic illuminations or hmY the filigrecd head and
torso of a man twists into an animal"s hindquarters than ClairYaux's "the strange kind of
shapeless shapcliness, of shapcly shapelessncss." Occasionally an idea's main adversaries ,up-
ply the best language fi.H"its defense. But Wrcn's denunciation of Versailks as having fi11lcn 23
under the influcnce of womcn and fashion injects sexual politics into thc mix. Like revolu-
tionaries to come. neoclassicists such as Wren scorn the old aristocracy as urnnanly.
Accordingly, architecture suitable to public purposc must assert the masculinc virtues embod-
ied in clean lines and hard forms. For their part. Messrs. Percier and Fontaine bemoan the
drop in standards facilitated by manufacture, along with the ensuing difficulty of distinguish-
ing between those who can afford genuine luxury and thme who can only atford it,
Ílllitation. Their underlying concern is thc blurring of class distinctions. With loos, hysteria
t.ikes over: noble savages may do as they wish or must, but ,vhen modern men and ,vomen
,1dorn themselves they become outlaws. Although far from complete, this rostcr of charges
nonetheless lays bare thc social, politicaL and cultural assumptions of thc accusers. Compareci
to ,vhat is right and proper in art, decoration and the grotesquc are stigmatizcd as primitivc,
,1lirn. degenerate, effeminate, and vulgar. These ac-ljcctives indicate the categories to which
dist'nfranchised constituencies are consigncd. Is it any ,vonda that so many artists coming
from the margins havc made an cxpressive Yirtue of the cultural vices for ,vhich they have
,ilreadv been blamed?

For nwnty-five years and more, thcorists havc been on the look out for a marker they could
poinr to as proof that we had once and for all left: thc modem era and entered the post-
modern one. The blinding whitc city Loos envisiont'd is, of course, a thing of the past, or
r.1thcr of a futurc indefinitely deterred. Neverthelcss, pristine spaces, great and sma!L are
llt'sted in commercial and residential high-rises and institutional buildings-chief among
tllt'm thc museum. There behind façades of partitioncd glass, brutalistic concrete, and varie-
g,ned marbk, "white cube" galleries stretch as far as the cyc can see, a,vaiting a cornucopia
of ,1rt. Much of the art has the plainness loos celebrated but an increasing proportion is glo-
riously ripe or owrripe-as if a table covered by Cézanne's apples suddenly spilled over \\'Íth
pomcgranates, guavas. and rotting passion fruir. We might mcasure the rclative hegcmony of
modernism and postrnodernism by weighing the quantity of onc fruit-group versus thc
qu,mtity of thc other. But the scales art historiJns use are calibrated diffcrently, though, like
grcL'ngrocers, tastcmakers do squeeze the merchandise and argue over the quality of the
goods before rccommending that it be bought in bulk. No, the surest signs that loos's ideal
of modernism is behind us are the abundam tattoos on the arms, shoulders, and backsides of
young visitors to the white cube. like it or not, the "criminais" have passed the turnstilt's.

Among artists, Kelley is the leading intellectual spokesman and analyst of this change in sen-
sibility. ln his extended critique of Loos and the modernism of which he is cmblematic.
Kelley's focus is on caricature rather than decoration. 2õ But. as is clear from Combrich, cari-
cature is a linear descendcnt of thc mural "tattoos" unearthed in the subterranean chambers
of Rome. The structure of Kelley's thesis, like most radical insights, is wonderfully simple in
principie but its implications are astonishingly broad and complex. Dismissal of caricature as
a minor or debased art form usually hangs on the argument that it disfigures nature and
 exploit, clisturtiun tcir it, cm n ,,1ké. Bm ,1' Kdlé\ é"J-'Lün,. cjlll)(ing Kn, ,rnd thé art histo-
ri.tn Albnt Bo1nw thc· cLt,,1c.1l p.1Ltcl1g111 h Illl k,, ,t d1qonion uf ruturc· than thc· elcgant

c·JrtllOlh líf thc· C:,1rr,1cci, .111clBcT!lllll ,1, \\ c·ll ,1' thc· rude· orw, of l:\.1'11 \Vuh-crton ,rnd Ed

lw giYl..'11fulk,t ,lttc·11tiu11. C:Lh,1L,d bc',lllt\ i, thu, c,111,titutc'cl uut uf ,lll c·11h,1nccrnn1t-that is

u.J
:::::,
to ,,1\. ,111éxctggér.itiun ur· 1-k,1'111g ur é!lllubli11c: Jttributés
0 th,1t ,1ré lllll-''1"ibk to loc1té in any
o
V., Cover for
.....
,_ Mad Magaz "e
o
e:,: u111quc· to llllc' j-'cTso11 or npic·c1! of ,.'.l"cllll-''· Lqu1cli,um fr,n11rc-.ilin·. botl1 c·,lit tlw natural and
t!!I MAO Supe'
e:,: it, ,·ltc·c·r, to crnbo,h ,1 trurh rlut li,·,\\ nh111 or bc\ond .l)'l'''.1nr1c,·s. ln ,hort. cari- Special # 11 3
:::::,
o c ,1tur,· 1, rl1c· d1,tl,ulíc,d t\\ Íll ur· rq,rc·,c·11t.llÍl>JJ.ti 1d,'.1li,rn.
V.,
z
o
,_ ,111d lllllllJll thc· \\,l\. th,1t ot!JcTS
e:,:
:il:
e:,:
o
u..
..... nwughts ()Jl ( ·.1n,·,1turc·.'· ,uµ:µ:c·,ts th,n qth',f!OI1' ur· ,lo r1ot go h· thc hurd
o
.., \\ h,·11 urll' c'JJtc·r, thh rcc.tl111but u,t te> ,l ,htfrrc'IH ,un,Lird. ( ·.1nc,1rnr,··s p.1r.1gons-s0111c·-
V.,
u.J
....
e:,:
e:,: \\illí,1rn I1 ._],1111c·s( · .J.1rnc·, E11s,1r. -\lfrc·,! I<.uhrn. ,1nd. lllc'\ 1t.1bk i>1c1Sso. But thcse
e..
V.,

e:,

Ollc' ,!0111,1111,lrc· lllll buttrc'"c·d b\ gc·nc·r.ilh .1,·c·,·1'll',l 111.blc'n lll ,1rlwr,. I hc probk1n of
c·,ublishi11µ: cTÍtcTLl t1,r ,li,, n11111c·11t llLl\ n c'Il 'L'L'lll ,1 !lll!l \c'ljllltllr \\ hc'll tlll· fu11d:lllll'11t:1l
\,d1dn\· ut· tlw K111d ,1t-\\"lirk hç111 e ,,1h1,krc·,l !1.1, ir"·lf l,,·c·11 ,·:dkd inr,, quc·,tillll. If 1t's fri\·-
ol()us. \\·lw 11çnl, rc, Kllll\\ lllllrc': If 1r·, tr.1'11. \\ lLlt d1lL'' lt rn ,:1\ ir\ goud
111,.-.111 tr:1,h or h.1d

rr.1'li ur tr.hll\ tr.1sh:

Anel,() \\l' c'llll"l tlll' lll.lr,h\ lcTrJlcll"\ ,1r· (())l]]l\)\\('l!r,hq,. \\.h lt h ::'l)Ud r:1q1· Íll h.id t.\Stl';

\\ !10 ,ire· \\e· lu lru,t \\h,·11 1,1,krng 111L1,hnH>Jlh ,111 J'<1llull",l µ:n>lllllE (:nu111h 11ut 1wopk

\\ hu r1g1dk ,c11lll c2_u,1rd,i1n,1,k ,lr 11,·n,ll1,k ,n,·I,· tli,· l'cTÍllll"fcT '-s11r ,li,Hil,l \\e' 11.1\c' 111ud1
nllltitkrH ,· 111tli1l,c' \\ illJ l,r1dh ,rq 1 ll\ ,r 1t u11h r,, r,·rr,-.1t ru ,,1t~·n \\ l1c-rcrl1n ,.111 ,kscrilw
Lh,·ir ,1d\c·11turc·, tu tl:o,c· llll'rc· tin11,l. \\,· 111\hf rc·h i11,r,-.1,l 011 pc·upk \\ liu kn,l\\. tli,·ir \\.1\

:1rou11d. Th,·r,· :1r,· ,1, 111.111\ui' th,·,,· .. 111,l .1, t~'\\. ,1, rhcTL' .1r,· ,·,1,,-rt, Ill ,11,l lll.\\tLTs: ,u1ndÍlllL''

Lhn ,lrc· ,111c·,111d tlw ,,11n,·. 1 unli,r111<ir,·. \\e' 11n1,t rru,t tl1,·ir ,1"11r.1nc,· t!1.1t l1kc· ,d] IIL'\\. il.1-

\·c,rs. ,·,1-
1 ,·,·1.ilk ,rnn1::' ,111,·,. rl1,· grut,·sqL1c· 1, .111 ,kcjlllr,·,l u,t,·. 11·1l 1, h1tll'r. th,·11 s,1\ur ir hLlt

d,1 11or \\\ ,11lcJ\\ tuci <]lll< kh If \ ,lll ,l,1. ,1J1d 1l ,!,1c·, 11cil kill \ \\li -thuugh \\ irh potcnt lllll\h-

nH>llh .1 ,·cTl.1111 ll.tlls,·,1 ti·,·q11,·11tl\ .1,·,-,llll}l,llllc', 111\l'-'.<'1.ltlllc_; lulhklll.ltlll!!S-thc·11 \"llll :ir,·

t111,·. ,111clth,· tl11h prubk1n 1, \\ li,·tli,·r r,1 ,l,, Jt ,1g.1111.

Lllc' .IJlL\ llllSLTlllll\. rlll' l.1ttn

prc·u,·1·ll]'ll'cl \\ nh "il,·11111 \c·r1t1,·,. ur .1t k.1\l \\ 1th lul,1tu,dh k,·q,lllg ,l ,tr.1ight 1:1cc for dr.1-

111.1t1c c'lllj•h.1,í,. ,·,, q,t \\ hc·11 1n 1k111:c;lu11 ,,i· \(1t1r ,1,lhT,.1r1,·,. \11d ll.l\c' I 11L·gkctcd to

llll'lltHlll 111 tlií, ,1,1111,·d1u11 th,1t 1\ h1k ,.1r1,.1turc· 1' lhll.1111 d1r,·,t,·,l Jt utlins. gnltL'SljllcT\'
26 often begins at horne-in Yisions of the self as other. or the self retkcted in the trick mirrar
of others? ln the second circumstance the distinction between laughing at and laughing with
the subject of a jokc is lost when the two implode into one. Thus hostile racial, sexual, eth-
nic, religious, and other stereotypes can be repossessed by those they offend and inverted to
expose just how absurd they are, and how, rather than lampooning their ostensible targets.
they reflect the sknved world view of their inwntors. Camp does this with regard to straight
....
:::,
society, celebrating all that Wrcn decried, and pushing it over the top. So does the work of
<:r
....
CIO African-American satirists who start with minstrels, manunics, sambos, and thcir clownish
....
o modem variants and play them back at the white ,vorld whose demeaning delusions thc\·
...
CC

CC were t"i-0111
the beginning. So does anyone \Yho vomits back thc twisted irnage of themselws
:::,
o
they have been force-fed-so long as they spew it forth with style.
CIO
z
Q
....
<
The grotesque results in this fashion from an eruption of things systematically denied: instinct
==
CC by convention; the Id by the Super Ego; minorities by the majorities; nujorities by more
o
u..
w powerful minorities. But as Freud insisted, thc return of the reprcssed always involves distor-
Q
o,!j
tions of the primary impulse or idea. We may lament them, but such transformations are
....
CIO

.... neither a moral nor an artistic failing. Furthcrmore they are inevitable. Longings for perfec-
CC
< tion should not divert attention from striking imperfrctions, rnuch of whose intcrest resides
a..
CIO

Q
in the telltalc traces left by the forces that inhibited the full and free expression of the feel- Razullo a~::

ings or thoughts at their source. If anything, the most artful grotesques cnhance those traces. Cucuruc~

When the repressiYc forces are largely internai, thc image or object may take on a dreamlikc
or nightmarish aura. When they are predominantely externai, the deformations generally
resemble burlesque or horrific magnifications of otherwise ordinary realitics. To the extcnt
that either type of grotesque pointedly reminds the public of its baser inclinations and un::id-
mitted transgressions, then the tendency is to blame the messenger.

This, of course, brings us to the '·high/low'' dichotomy that h::is bedeviled art for ages and
modernism since its inception. Historically speaking, severa! things need to be said on this
score. First, the grotesque originated in ancicnt Romc as an elite style and has recurred in that
register evcr since, even though its motifs haYe frequently focused on the appetites and nüs-
adventures of the underclasses on ,Yhom those elites projected their half-acknowledged
desires. Second, popular grotesqueries have generally responded to the need among subjugated
communities to let off ste::im by mocking elites and ritually overturning hierarchies. Thesc
imperatives frame the irrewrent ceremonies of carnival which the Russian critic Mikhail
Bakhtin wrote about in relation to the suprcmely visceral grotcsques of Rabelais's Cat'}!al/t11<1

27 Nowhere
mui Pa11t,~{?l'lll'f. is intermingling of the exalted and the hurnble, the sacred and the
profane, denser or more startling than in medieval art. Clairvau:x saw this ckarly. From the
carved stone capitais and façades of cathedrals and the carved wood seats occupied by the
clergy to the illuminated manuscripts read by church functionaries, depictions abound of ±lat-
ulent rnen and lusty women caYorting and people sprouting vegetable arms and bestial legs.
Wherever thc eye fell, coarseness to the point of obscenity-or what would be taken as such
llO\\ctdJY,-c·cmld bé Ú_iuncl d1éék l,y JCl\\·l \\·irh hok <\111bc1b,llll1 holY \\·ord,."' f-'ro111 thc· ,c'Y- 27
t'lltl'\..'llth Cl'lltll!'\ Oll. e:ornll1L'di.1 ,kll'.trtc· q1rpli,·d ,:10\\ 111,h ch,tr,lctéJ', Jlld lJLlLÍ()lh Jl',tl tê)!'
C,11lur to d1t' balkt, of
Di,1'°'hile\ ·, co111petm Jnd \ JnDLh J'niud, of [>1cJ,,u ·, \\ ur\;. l1kc· rlw .rnti,: cornédié, of J11tiq-
uitY frorn \\·hich Conm1édÜ cldLlrlt' clérÍ\ é". it 1' J prnnc· c''.:,lI11l'k ot' tlw ,1rnH1,i, bét\\éell
pld1éÍJ11 ,rnd }'Jtrici,111 t~1n11'. \\'hL'l'L' rnutu.il 1111,tn\lt or ,·um,·1111,r.1111011,.: ,ocul ,.:rclup" hold,
thé uppér lund. thé grutL·,quc· i, ,l \\ c'c1po11:]0 ut \\ hcTc' r,Y1pn1c·.il nll'io,in· l'l't'\'Jtl, Jt lll.l\ .11,u
bt· .t ,oh,·11r rl1Jt ,ubtk hr,·,1k, drl\\ 11 th,· di,u11c'tio11, rl1.1r k,·,v ,q,,1r.1k éllcLl\t'' ,lpJrt.

tllic111cé u( high .u1,l lm\. lhe· ºl'F'0'1k of cultur.il inbr,·c·,lrng. ,uch 1rn,,·,·~c·n.1t1on 11\cl\

LJiJ'c',\lL'll t!JL·Jllll'lt\ l lf \J]oucJJi 1l l'' but lt 11ukc•,; lclr ]nrdl c'l' \( ()( f...!] l e' grntc'lcj lll' Í,; ]1\ bridit\'

\\ 1thout dllhtr.1111r.

lllthkl'll1'1ll \\',h ,\

Cucurucu
 OUR GROTESQUE? Surnt' llU\ bctlk ,ll Ll1t',\\t't'r•Íl1,z llJtllrt' oftliis c·Liirn. Otl1ers m;1y dis-
mq1 ,111\',·Drnll'CtÍ,)11 to '}'L'CÍl1c\Yorb of ,irt upo11 \\·hich it i, b,F,"d-ur. pnliaps. to ai!
uf thL'lll. (;uilt b\· ,l"lKÍ,HÍllll-c'\·c'll for rlll' "1f.:l' of guiltY 1•l,-_1qirL's-pro111pt, rt'sist.mcc.
\\hat ri,,dir. 1,,,opk 111,l\ a,k. d,1L'' ,imune' h,1\·,, to ,pc'.1k t"cir11w; Ur. it" rlwY :Hc' of a ccr-
t.1111,1g,· ur llr· :1 1,op-culrnrctl ,·rudírirn1. rlll·1r 111i11,h111.1\
...h 1•ruu1·01·t11t' grutt'Sljllt'·, t'1Hluring
I.U
=
o Ílll}•Kt. 1l1sh tlw pu11d1 111w of rhc old .\ I.1d .\ LH;ci:11/cqri1 1 fr,1111d1L· I<),;o, ii1 \\ hich thc
V.,

....
I.U

e:,
, ht',. "Jndi:ms. lndians ali
a:
.., around m. \\dl. Tonto. oi" kc·nrn,,l\L'c'. it loob lil'"c' \\L'.rL' t111i,hL·,l.",,\\"' thc' LollL' Ranger. to
a:
=
e:,
\\lncl1 .l ,rnilrng lornu rqiliL'S. ··\\ lur \Ull 111c·.i11\\ !;"
V.,
2
e:, Ir 111,1\ ,L·,·111 od,l th.H .\/c1,/ ,huul,l hc1\·,, gr th,· tL1n,L1nwm,d, of rlw 1,osrrnodcTnist dis-
....
""'
:E
cour"' of rl1L·"'( )tlwr .. so t'.n -1h,·c1dof Íh tÍllll' .. 111 1 rl1L',ll':1d,·111ici11kspilkd si11cc-th:1t
a:
e:,
u..
1l shoul,l hJ\L' ,utL·,I rlwm "l succ·111nh -111,l s,1 n1c·m,11.1bh. llLJL,.llir,· ottc'll ,tL'Jls a march 011
I.U
e:,
.., tlw s,K1s1l.,c·1,·11tit1c".
or philosophi,·.il c"orr,·cuon of l'º]•LlLll' lllhClll1l°L'}'tions. NL'\'nthclc,,,
V.,
UJ
tlw,L' d,1\'S ,1 (L'J"Ulll ,lhll)l\lturr ,lfklld, .Ili\ l1'l' ()f thl· thir,l l'L'r")Jl 11 lurcil. 1:11lightL'lllllCllt
....
a:
""'
CI..
V., IL'rL'lll'l' l'L'l,[lh. ) ;,11JJ"l' \\ h,n 1 ,llll 1wt: 1 ,1111\\ hc1t ) ,111 ,ll'l' )l()[: li\' ,ll"l' \\ lut rlur ,ll"l' 11ot; rlu-y
e:,
;trc' \\·h,1t ll't' Jrc· !lllt. \n much lt1r clw (111nh 01· nun-ur e'\ c'lí chc· fm11h Llt· 111L'll,111d \\'OillCll.
i\11d \\ l1c'll tlic gu111g gL·t, r,

u11Ít\111g ,·rnbr:1CL' of 1,lur,d1t\:

F"r ,-r1 ,lllllll

r()r llLlll\, d1tETL'lKL' rl·,1d,·, 111 ,upj>()\L'dh l'"L']l[U] e h,ILICCL'rh(IL'' dl·t,TlllÍllL'd b\ l'tlrnicit1.
gL·,1gL1ph\. r,,Jigion., u,t,llll. l.111gu,1gc'. <ll ,umL' uth,T cld111i11g lL'ctlllrc' ,,t' J tuti,m or peopk.
rrn,11 ,I n-L1tc'd ur ()\ LTL1i1p111g [1 l'l''['l'c l]\l', lllllljlll'llL'" ], ,I l'Llll\L'ljllL'ill'l' of 1111rl1ic or histor-
1c,il c·irn1111,t.11Jlc'. 1 lll\\L'\L'L url1,T L<llhtituc'llLtl" di,f•lltl' tl1L·,·,111,q,r <lf c',SL'llc·,· cilrog,,thcr.

!11'tc·-1,l. thL·\ .1,,r1h,, Ll1tkr,·11,,, tu ,,111ri11c'.c'IJ[ ,,l1nh111.lt1,111> ,it 111.111\uf th,, s,\JJ\L' i11grcdi-

L'11t, plt,, L'<<lll<lllll,,. ,c,,u,dit1. ,111d .1d,l1t1u1Lil 1:1,l<lr,-1rn,!n Lhe· ]'l'l'\\llrc' ,,( L>llL' entit1\

Jlc'nl t<J d1,t111:,::111,h 1t,L·lt- frurn ll, r11 ,1k lrulll th1, 1 .111ug,· p,,irn. rhc·, 1J11,rrucri,l11 ,1f 1dc11rit\

111,11HL11,·,th,, ,,Jirn111.1t111n 11r ,uhordi1utio11 ui ,111\ L'kllll'lH, \\ h1c·li ,k\Í,ltl' frorn tliL' dnirnl

rno,kl. 111f,,1rr1, uL1r r\1u"· \\ li 1, li ,ug:,::,,,t tli.1t th,, 111,·111bc-ruf J :,::11L'll group ,lur,,, c]ur,1ctn-

1't1,·, th,11 1rn:,::ht ,1111tt1,,· lii111 ,n \J,,r \\Hli rli,· 111,·1\lbn ,,t' ,111,)[\i,T °'-.;,·1tli,-r \'l-r,1,111 tclls tliL·
\\ h11k ,tlln hur tli,· "c,n1,l t,·11, n l,,,,r. ,·,p,·,·1.ilh \\ lic·11 ir LIKL'' i11t,1 ti.ili .lllllllllt tJi,, L'lllO-

tilllLil llll)'L'l,\llll'\ L'lllh,·d,kd 111 tlll' r1r,r.

Yl't thc r;1,,t r,·n1c11n, th,1t \\ lic·thn r\J,,1r ,,·11,,·, ,f rl1L'111,,,11,,, ,kri\ L'' fr,llll qu:ditic', timught to

h,· ÍIIILltc' ())' tÍ'lllll ,( J'(',(\()f)l'd llli(kr,u11d111'"" Jll,l Jll.l!Llgc·111,·11l <li' ltir,·,,, ]]) lL'JlS](>ll ,)l'()l]Jld ,1\
lence. Few are ready to wake up. Gregor Samsa-style, transfigured by the sudden assertion of 29
J recessive or repressed trait, the actualization of a latent capacity to warp into what one
loathes. Few of us that is. And, here, in celebrating grotesquery. I take the liberty of altering
Whitman 's terms to say that "what I assume you shall assume/For e\·ery co11tradictio11
belong-
ing to me as good belongs to you."

ln that spirit, let us welcome Edgar Allan Poe-13audelaire \ inspiration-and seat him next to
Whitman. So doing, we acknowledge that while the hopefol Whitman sang ecstasies of the
nne-as-many and the many-as-one, the disillusioned Poe articulated our dread-filled fascina-
tiun ,vith the bizarre transfigurations toward which things presumed \vhole and consistem
,lrL' susceptible. Blend their voices and interlace their words and a grotesque is born who may
k· c.1pable of persuading even the most reluctant among us to admit that our common expe-
ricnce is self-conflict, and our imaginative commonwealth the simultaneous horror and
\nmder at unexpected, uncontrollable metamorphosis.

I, .ili of this too literary, too old-fashioned to have any bearing on life or art today? lf I have
(1n)rcd \Vords over images, writers over visual artists in this essay, it is because, surprisingly,
rlllTC is scant discussion of the grotesque in the criticism of modern or postmodern art .
.\ lo,t otten it goes by other names representing one of its many aspects or sources: the form-
k,,. the abject. the Gothic, the uncanny, the macabre, the carnivalesque, the scatologicaL the
l'ºrnographic, etc. Each has produced its own body of analytic \Hiting, but the relations
.1mong these terms and the far-reaching matrix of possibilities they encompass are difficult
to map and are likely to remain so. The problem is the concept that might hold them
together is, by its nature or rather by its propensity to denature, vast, detailed, and yet some-
hmv amorphous. Geoffrey Galt Harpham, among the most thoughtful theorists of the
,ubjL'Ct. observes that "whereas most ideas are coherent at the core and fuzzy at the edges.
the grotesque is the reverse; it is relatiwly easy to recognize the grotesque in art but hard
ro ,1pprehend it directly."ª 1

In the final analysis, perhaps the simplest, surest thing to be said is that the grotesque is the
indissoluble, though far from unchanging, marriage of opposites. ln contrast to the kinds of
JL'Sthetic juxtaposition that emphasize tleeting simultaneities or dynamic incongruities des-
tined to explode in the viewer's face-for example the majority of collages produced by the
Cubists, Dadaists, and Constructivists-the grotesque emphasizes the bond that exists between
incommensurable things or teelings, as in, for example, the aberrational unity of Marcel
Duchamp 's joining of a wooden stool and a bicycle wheel or in the graphic marquetry of
Max Ernst's collage ''novels.''WhateYer contraries they embody, they tieeze consciousness in
the moment of their impossible conflation and completeness. Curiously, the greatest afi-
cionados of this bastardizing geme, like its greatest practitioners, have ofi:en been the people
who, yearning for purity and grace, could not help but be amazed by its opposite. 32 ln regards
to the appreciation of grotesque painting and sculpture, John Ruskin is preeminent. His
judgment is consonam with that of Thomas Mann 's:
30 ... it seems to me that the grotcsque is, in almost ali cases. composed of two elements.
one ludicrous, thc other frarfr1l: that. as one or other of these elemcnts preYails. the
grotesque falis into t\YO branches. sportiYe grotcsque and terrible grotesque; but that \\"l'.

cannot legitimatcly considcr it umln these t\YO aspects, bccause there are hardly any
examples which do not in some degree combine both ckments: there are fr\\' grotesques
so uttcrly playfül as to be oYercast ,vith no shade of frarfrilncss, and frw so tearful as
absolutely to cxclude ali ideas ofjcst. 33
.... OPPOS -::
=
=
cn Detail of a
....
1-
HmYever, R.uskin goes futher than Mann, stating that the incidence of the grotesque is not
grotesque frese:
=
= peculiar to some periods more than others-and in Mann this implicit!y meant periods of from '.r,.
CII

=
=
decline-but instead marches thc cycles of other art íc)rms, and reaches its height \Yhen they do. lhe U" ~

= Florerc::
cn ... wherewr the human mind is healthy and vigorous in ali its proportions, great in imag-
z
=
I- ination and emotion no less than in imcllect, and not overborne by an undue or hardencd PAGES ·: ·.
ce
Details of
==
= prc-eminence of the mere reasoning f:teulties, thnc the grotcsque will exist in fi.ill energy.
=
.... grotesque frese:
.... And, accordingly, I beliew that there is no test of greatness in periods. nations, or men .
frori :··:: .
= more surc than the deYelopment, among the111or in them, of a noble grotesque: and 110
oa lhe U": .
cn
.... test of comparatiYe smallness or limitation, of one kind or another. more sure than the Florer·cê'
1-
= absence of grotesque im·ention. or incapabilitY of understanding of it. 34
CC
~
cn
= Whether our grotesqucs would meet Ruskin 's pcrsonal standards is not a concern here,
although those who liYe in thc past \\ ill doubtlessly raisc the issue by making invidious
comparisons between present practices and historical precedents. That the capacity
among contemporary artists for grotesque invention is unflagging is more to the point.
This show is about the shape-shifting fi:uits of their labor: this essa\· is a brief 011 behalf
of their transgressions.

ROBERT STORR - 2004

32 ON THE SELECTION OF THIS EXHIBITION

ln 1996, 1 organized an exhibition at the Museum of Modem Art in New York titled "Deformations: Aspects of lhe Modem
Grotesque" which dealt with many of lhe themes in this exhibition, but approached them through lhe materiai 1n lhe
collections of MoMA. lt started with Goya. and two-thirds of it was devoted to works made roughly between lhe mid-n1ne-
teenth and the mid-twentieth centuries. with the remaining third consisting of contemporary art. 1 decided lha! on lhis
occasion I would concentrate solely on work by living arlists. This necessitated leaving out a few importanl exponents of
the grotesque who have recently died, in particular Ray Johnson, Martin Kippenberger, and Dieter Roth. Their contrary and,
thankfully, forever untranscendant spirits have hovered over lhe conception and preparat1on of this show. R.s.
w
:::)
o
....
cn
.... NOTES
e:,
a:
c,:i
Susan Sontag, On Photography, New York: Anchor ln other socielies and at other limes such taboos were
a:
:::)
e:, Press. 1977;1990, pp. 40-41. not so rigidly in force. lndeed n our own culture, forb1d-
cn den fruit is readily accessible, so longas it is not dignified
z 2"Diane Arbus: Revelations," San Francisco Museum of
e:, with the word "art'' lt must be said, moreover. lha! even in
....
ci:
Modem Art: Diane Arbus; "Family Albums," Mount Holyoke
cases where an ethical dimension to grotesque work can
College Museum of Art, South Hadley, Massachusetts.
==
a: be found, the assumption that lhe artist and the public are
e:,
u.. in prior agreement as to what moral stance should be
w 3 Janet Malcolm. "Good Pictures," New York Review of
e:, taken toward the subiects addressed may seriously limit
ocJ
Books, Vol. 51, No. 1, January 15, 2004, pp. 3-7-
or skew ils meaning, and re-inscribe il into the conven-
....
cn
4 Clement Greenberg, "Towards a Newer Laocoiin,'' tional discourses of the moment it had sought to ignore
.... or been intended to disrupt. Take two artists in Doty's
a: Perceptions and Judgments 1939-1944, The Collected
....
ci:

cn
Essays and Criticism of Clement Greenberg. Volume 1: show, one of whom is in this exhibition. Is not t'ie differ-
e:, Perceptions and Judgments 1939-1944, edited by ence between Leonard Baskin (a sentimental humanist)
John O'Brian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, and Peter Saul (a caustic and entirely unsentimental one)
1955;1986, p. 37- a difference in quality lha! favors Saul on virtually every
levei in part oecause Saul does not take the viewer's
5 Jean Paul in Wolfgang Kayser, The Grotesque in Art sympathy for granted but on lhe contrary puts lhe viewer
and Literature (Bloomington: Indiana University Press. in the uncomfortable position of not knowing what to
1957), p. 55. think about his provocations? And is not Baskin's com-
plete irrelevance to contemporary art an indicator of how
6 ln lhe post-war era, lhe grotesque has often been
much his compromises and special pleadings make him a
excused of its frivolities, aberrations. and other excesses
prisoner of ris timidly nonconformist milieu whereas lhe
on lhe grounds that it served the cause of "humanism·· by
unhousebroken Saul remains of interest no matter how
recognizing and dramatizing the flaws in our nature and
topical the premises of some of his work may be?
character. ln short, lhe grotesque was acceptable. so 1ong
as it lent itself to being bracketed by a larger. redemptive
7 Thomas Brown in Geoffrey Galt Harpham, On lhe
program. Allhough lhe word grotesque is not used. Paul
Grotesque: Strategies of Contradiction in Art and
Tillich's forward to lhe catalogue of Peter Selz's "New
Literature, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982, p.
lmages of Man" exhibition at lhe Museum of Modem Art
xvi. Harpham·s book is lhe most useful overall criticai
essentially takes this tack to justify the d1stortions 1nthe
treatment of lhe subject of literature on lhe grotesque
work of some of the artists included, among !hem Francis
presently available and it builds on two other general
Bacon, Jean Dubuffet, Leon Golub, and Willem de
Kooning. Robert Doty's essay for lhe "Human Concerni studies that I have also referred to indirectly in this

Personal Torment" exhibition at lhe Whitney Museum of essay: Thomas Wright, A History of Caricature and
American Art in 1969 features a fairly extensive definition Grotesque in Literature and Art, with an introduction by
of the grotesque but also emphasizes lhe moral content Frances K. Barasch. New York; Frederick Ungar
of the art. From this perspective, the existence of amoral Publishing Co., 1968. and Frances K. Barasch, The
or frankly ,;immoral" grotesques worthy of criticai consid- Grotesque, The Hague; Mouton, 1971.
eration seemed to have been inconceivable. lt is perhaps
a measure of our culture's abiding preoccupations with B Charles Piecre Baudelaire. Baudelaire: Se/ected Writings
the supposed unity of "truth and beauty;' and more partic- on Art and Artists, trans. and intro. P.E. Charvet,
ularly that of creativity and ,;goodness" that d dates that Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972. p. 141
capricious or even malicious violations of lhe codes of
decorum remain beyond lhe pale of aeslhetic possibil1ty. 9 lbid,, p. 148
 33
10

19 3s,

20

21 ~ r:~. =í

22

23

24

26

27 "' e
E

28
11

12
29
13

14

30
15

16 IJ,"-)L
31 -ü

17

32 - 11

33 ·' F
18

34 1