Censorship and Freedom in Dada and Beyond

Abstract

When Dada exploded into the world in 1916, it was met with disapproval by the good people of Zurich. Almost simultaneously in New York, Duchamp’s urinal was rejected as degenerate. In Paris, Dada events often ended in violence—against and within the group of performers—and occasionally with the police being called. Dada spread mischief in every city that it called home, seeking to shake society into readdressing its role within the madness of wartime ‘civilisation’. Deviance was Dada’s status quo and scandal was its modus operandi. Yet within a few short years, Dada declared itself dead; the avant-garde’s most notorious group of misfits disbanded and moved on, several members denying any continuing association. Almost a century later, Dada has been incorporated into galleries and academic research; anti-art has become viewed as art. In short, the Dada that was once pelted with rotten vegetables has become acceptable, desired, and commodified. Previously censored words, acts and art works are now celebrated—including through their hefty price tags—instead of reviled. Has the designation of respectability become a form of censorship in its own right?