A Discussion with the Professor

Alfred Stieglitz’ proto-dada journal 291 offers an interesting look into the way the Dada movement sought to define itself; that is, by resisting definition. While 291 shows distinct influences of artistic movements that we have already studied, such a Cubism, Futurism and Vorticism, there is something altogether different about Dada. The movement itself arose as a response to the sense and rationality that led to WWI; and so came to define itself by non-sense, non-rationality. Dada un-defines itself in this way. In the first edition of 291, Paul B. Haviland speaks directly to this constant state of anti-definition in a short article. The article is displayed like an interview, or a discussion. And unnamed “Professor” attempts to question the magazine personified. The dichotomy between the Professor and the magazine is an interesting one, considering the stance Dada takes on established knowledge. As an art form, Dada is interested in the rejection of the artistic status quo, evidenced most clearly in Marcel Duchamp’s provocative submission of Fountain (a signed urinal) to the Society of Independent Artists in 1917. A submission which was rejected, with prejudice. Haviland’s Professor becomes a symbol of this formal establishment which seeks to make or at least maintain the idea of Art, capital A. Though the Professor does not reject Dada outright, they are still trying to force Dada, or 291 specifically, to assume a more recognizable, homogenized form. The first statement/question from the Professor, therefore, cuts directly to the problem of anti-definition: “What I wonder at, is why you did not tell the world what 291 is.” This sparks an interesting set of responses from 291 that frustrate and resist the Professor’s reasonable, logical attempt to categorize it. The responses have an almost Socratic quality, as in this short set of questions from the Professor in which they continue to ask what 291 is:

“Prof. - Precisely; but there is a logical sequence in the course of events. The past history of 291 shows it. . . You started with a fight for photography; you wanted your problem answered; “What is photography?”; you got the photographers together, you held exhibitions, you published reproductions of meritorious work; writers came who wrote about photography and out of all these efforts came an answer. We all know now what photography is, what it can accomplish; we have standards by which we can judge new work. What was 291 while all this was going on?

291 - Nothing but a laboratory, a place for experiments.

Prof. - And is it not still a laboratory, only with new problems to solve?

291 - That is what it is.

Prof. - And what is the object of a laboratory?

291 - To experiment.

Prof. - And what do experiments lead to?

291 - To finding out.”

This intentional obscurity on the part of 291 does not slow the Professor. From these responses they extrapolate a definition of the magazine, and establish a set of laws by which to govern its production. Ironically, this elicits a response from 291 that is as close to a definition perhaps as is possible to give, “But laws are the very things I have been fighting against all my life.” The Professor skirts this protest, citing the fallibility of words, and goes on to propose the great discoveries of 291 and Dada in general that are to come. It is a wonderful article that darkly foreshadows the fate of Dada, becoming the very thing it sought to oppose, Art.