The Revolutionary Consciousness of Surrealism Faced with Totalitarianism

Summary

Surrealism claims to be revolutionary, but the nature of that revolution is unclear. The movement's early relationship with the French Communist Party ended in disillusionment by the 1930s, and later engagements with Trotskyism and anarchism were similarly disappointing. Even the initial enthusiasm for the 1959 Cuban Revolution faded. This article reexamines what revolution meant for the Surrealists as totalitarianism emerged, focusing on Pierre Mabille's 1937 concept of egregores—the process by which groups solidify into entities capable of social and political change—and François Jullien's idea of silent transformations.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Surrealism presents itself as a revolutionary movement, but it isn’t clear what sort of revolution it envisages. In the early years the Surrealists had a complicated relationship with the French communist party that ended in the 1930s in disillusionment. Flirtations with Trotskyism and anarchism were hardly more encouraging, and although in the early 1960s they enthusiastically welcomed the 1959 Cuban Revolution, this once again soon turned to disillusionment. This article looks at the experience of the Surrealists as the clouds of totalitarianism began to form in the 1930s. It reappraises what ‘revolution’ might mean in the context of Surrealism, taking particular account of Pierre Mabille’s 1937 study of egregores, that is, the socio-psychological process by which aggregates of people solidify into recognizable entities able to effect social and political change. From this perspective François Jullien’s notion of ‘silent transformations’ is also considered.

Tags