The Dreamlike State of Mind in Magritte and Oppenheim
By: Priscilla Indrayadi
Tags: Art, Psychology, Analysis, Philosophy, Fine Art

Inspired by Dadaism in the alluring 1920s of Paris, Surrealism is essentially a revolution, a movement which transgressed art into something more. This essay will explore the Surrealist art movement by referencing mostly André Breton’s Surrealist Manifestos, and linking them to two important works, “Déjeuner en fourrure” by Meret Oppenheim, as well as “Time Transfixed” by René Magritte. Both important works inherit Surrealist characteristics in different ways, based on their content, medium, and the responses that are evoked from the viewers. Apart from Breton’s manifestos, the essay will touch on Sigmund Freud’s analysis of dreams, as well as Jean-Paul Sartre’s writings on human imagination. With this, the intimate relationship between the human mind, surreality, and Fine Art is inquired into the research.

In 1924, through his “Manifesto of Surrealism”, Breton gave a definition to the word Surrealism which is, the “Pure psychic automatism, by which one proposes to express, either verbally, in writing, or by any other manner, the real functioning of thought. Dictation of thought in the absence of all control exercised by reason, outside of all aesthetic and moral preoccupation.” Along with this, an encyclopaedic description of the word. For him, the word Surrealism should be understood as a philosophy, “based on the belief in the superior reality of certain forms of previously neglected associations, in the omnipotence of dream, in the disinterested play of thought. It tends to ruin once and for all other psychic mechanisms and to substitute itself for them in solving all the principal problems of life.”[1] Breton’s text had become influential not just to his acquaintances, but for so many artists at the time. The Surrealist movement had become an explosive cultural gesture in expanding the boundaries of art.

One of the key figures in relation to dreams and Surrealism is understandably René Magritte, who was personally a friend of André Breton himself, and was part of the Surrealist group in Paris. Being a poet himself, “everything is enigmatic” in Magritte’s paintings.[2] Magritte constantly compels the viewers to experience different sides of life. It is easy to see a pattern of motifs and themes in his paintings, with different details and a slight change in situations, he conveys unfamiliarity within the everyday life. In one of his letters, he explains that he wishes not to depict the “unreal” or the “imaginary”, but rather painting reality in a way which reality itself loses its sense of tedious characteristic,[3] which can be seen especially in “Time Transfixed”.

Magritte’s masterpiece, “Time Transfixed” (see Figure 1), painted in 1938, is an exemplar of displaying the disruption of time and space in relation to reality. Its original title, French, is “La Durée Poignardée”, which literally translate to “Ongoing Time Stabbed by the Dagger,” until it was re-titled as “Time Transfixed”. One might consider that its literal translation is understood to be more violent and intense, which was what Magritte had preferred anyway. But both titles are self-explanatory. The basic human understanding of time is that it is “The indefinite continued progress of existence and events in the past, present, and future regarded as a whole”, as defined by Oxford.[4] In this case, time is personified because it now has the possibility of action and reaction. Regarding the painting, in 1997, Magritte explained that he decided to paint the locomotive, while incorporating two familiar, although distinct, images together to “evoke mystery”.[5] He does this by putting an immensely scaled-down image of the train alongside an image of the ordinary fireplace of a dining room hall. Except, this clash of ordinary images is actually unusual and extraordinary.

Figure 1: René Magritte, “Time Transfixed” 1938, oil on canvas, 147 × 98.7 cm, The Art Institute of Chicago, Illinois.

Starting off with what might seem to be usual is the setting of a fireplace in a living room, or a dining room of a pleasingly built house. There are two candlesticks and a clock placed strategically above the fireplace, underneath a mirror. At first glance, this setting is beautiful in the sense that it is interiorly symmetrical and it reflects a safe domestic space. However, the mystery begins to unfold when the details are taken into account. Both the clock and one of the candlesticks are reflected in the mirror behind them, leaving one remaining candlestick along with the rest of the room invisible in the mirror. The mirror’s colour itself appear to be darker than the bright room. To note, Magritte uses mirrors as a motif in his paintings because he believes that mirrors do not reflect true reality, and often provides mystery,[6] which helps explain the peculiarity in the setting of the painting.

Moving on to the next piece of the puzzle is the image of the train. Immediately, Magritte integrates the locomotion of the train with the stillness of the fireplace. On these terms, the locomotive is conveniently shrunk with the aim that it fits inside the fireplace. Moreover, it is placed in a situation as if it is emerging out of a railway tunnel, with the absence of the railway and the tunnel itself. The train also produces smoke which goes up to the fireplace all the way to the chimney, which proposes the idea that it produces fire. The locomotive is certainly not the biggest aspect of the painting, although it shows the biggest impact. Apart from this, it is also important to realize that seeing the locomotive while in action indicates the consciousness of the presence of time for both Magritte and the viewers.

With this, the use of visual manipulation in “Time Transfixed” is significantly crucial in the way that it disrupts time and space through its dream-like reality. Magritte plays with the idea of space and time in a subtle way, which is easy to get unnoticed. Firstly, the presence of the clock demonstrates this disruption. The clock reads that it is almost a quarter to one o’clock, but the brightness of the room does not correspond with the time fixated on the clock. This highlights the uncertainty and the precariousness of time. Time, which is by consensus, considered to be an indication of the certainty and predictability of life, suddenly does the opposite. In addition, in the painting, time is associated with motion, as only a portion of the train is visible while the rest is invisible. This establishes motion; and where there is motion, there is time. However, the stillness of the painting indicates that time as proposed by its title, transfixed by its own mystery. With this, through the painting, Magritte questions the very existence of time. If time exists, then how can it be transfixed, let alone be stopped by even Magritte, the creator, himself? This is a paradox, as Magritte eternalises time by painting something that might have never happened.[7]

Equally important, Magritte also asks the question of whether space itself exists. To understand, first one must realize that time cannot happen without space, and vice versa. Therefore, with the paradox of the absence of time, this generates the idea that space is also absent. On the contrary, if space does exist, then it is disturbed by the presence of the unreal. The setting represents a conventional domestic space, in which everything is placed exactly where they were supposed to be.

Apart from this, Magritte have strategically used shapes in showing the importance of space. Everything in relation to space; the domestic space and the setting, is identified with sharp edges and fine lines. Whereas time, in this case the clock and the locomotive, is represented with circular lines. This, again, emphasises on the distinction between reality and the dream. Precisely by using juxtaposition, altering the mundane, as well as emphasizing on what can be seen and what is hidden, Magritte epitomizes the very nature of Surrealism. Through this artwork, Magritte initiates the idea of everyday life to be surrealistic. The painting demonstrates what Breton considers to be the functions of Surrealism, which is to examine the “notions of reality and unreality, reason and irrationality, reflection and impulse, knowledge and ‘fatal’ ignorance, usefulness and uselessness.”[8] Therefore, there is a fine line between what makes sense and the nonsensical.

Surrealists have the aim to touch on the unconscious and they do this by making artworks that unlock the madness inhibited deep down in the human mind. Human consciousness is ignored, and the unconscious along with the subconscious is embraced. In regards to this, Breton argues that, humans should also not confine themselves to reality, but rather use their imagination as a means to investigate further beyond reality.[9] In this case, the Surrealist movement encourages imagination to be liberated, as well as rationality, norms, and common sense to be rejected. Doing this, the visual artists incorporate their unusual ideas, for instance; primitivism, myths, and violence, mostly with the use of imagery.

Moving on to Oppenheim and her sensational artwork, “Déjeuner en fourrure” (see Figure 2) was painted in 1936, inspired from her conversation with Pablo Picasso and Dora Maar at a Parisian café. Both Picasso and Maar was admiring Oppenheim’s fur-covered bracelet, when Picasso had joked that almost anything could be covered in fur, in which Oppenheim replied, “Even this cup and saucer”. Little did she know, this joke would then end up to be a masterpiece in the world of Surrealism that is still discussed today, more than eighty years later. Following this conversation, Oppenheim purchased a cup, saucer, and spoon from the French department store Monoprix, a department store in Paris, and had covered the items in Chinese gazelle fur.[10]

Figure 2: Meret Oppenheim, “Déjeuner en fourrure”, 1936, fur-covered cup, saucer, and teaspoon, Museum of Modern Art, New York.

Enticingly, Oppenheim’s sculpture has evoked tactile behavior, as Oppenheim’s works often explore the sense of touch, along with the relationship between the senses and the intellect. Similar to Magritte’s painting, the sculpture represents many juxtapositions in the three objects. There is the contradictory between animal and human, nature and culture, and ancient and modern. The cup, saucer, and spoon represents human, culture, and modern, whereas the fur represents animal, nature, and ancient. These contradictions evoke disturbing and unpleasant feelings, both physically and mentally as the idea of putting one’s lips against the fur-lined cup is just as disturbing as the thought of drinking tea from it.[11]

Additionally, Oppenheim also stresses on the physicality of “Déjeuner en fourrure”, in which viewers can immediately imagine what it would feel like to drink from a fur-covered cup without having to do much. Without realization, the artwork requires us to extend our sensory experiences to fully appreciate and understand what it is all about. With this, one is allowed to interpret the work themselves through their visceral memories and thoughts, which emphasizes the concept of Surrealism itself. “Déjeuner en fourrure” exemplifies really well Breton’s argument, especially in his essay “The Crisis of the Object”, that displaying or presenting the mundane in unexpected ways and the mystification of utilitarian objects would immediately challenge reason, and enforces society to connect to their subconscious and conscience, whether they are ready or not.[12]

Besides incorporating symbols of sex, cannibalism, and mortality, Oppenheim have also evoked the lesser sense of touch, which is often ignored. Oppenheim has found a new language to communicate with the viewers’ deepest thoughts and repressed feelings through her symbolism and juxtaposition. Perhaps, Oppenheim is suggesting that the senses, although more difficult to comprehend, is to be trusted.[13] This can be linked to Jean-Paul Sartre’s ideas that imaginations require a visual representation, whether it be a mental picture or a physical image.[14] This helps challenge viewers immediately.

However, as the artwork was made during the age of Freud, the gastro-sexual interpretation of the painting is inevitable. Also producing unpleasant feelings, the spoon could be interpreted as phallic, the cup vaginal, and the fur as pubic hair.[15] Through this, Oppenheim have successfully expresses the fetishistic ideas of cannibalism, animalism, and eroticism that humans have suppressed due to its violence and inhumanity. In reference to the “Surrealist Manifesto,” Breton tries to give attention to the inferiority of dreams and the unconscious, also described to be “the madness that one locks up”,[16] which he argues should be superior in comparison to logic and rationality. A way that Surrealism as written by Breton could be understood is by looking at it through a an analogy, in which the human mind is a cage, and madness is an animal. The cage is made of logic and rationality, and common sense are the guards for the cage. As humans grow, this cage gets thicker and stronger, and the animal slowly gets weaker, making it harder for it to escape the cage. In this case, Oppenheim sparks the irrational within the human mind by allowing the viewers to have a shocking awareness of what is never conversed about, as well as simultaneously awareness of what one deeply desires and really thinks of.

In regards to the concept of Surrealism relating to “Déjeuner en fourrure”, Breton writes that the state of surreality is ultimately a merge of reality and dream.[17] Through this, he refers to Sigmund Freud’s “The Interpretation of Dreams”. Freud’s theory has been the fundamental basis for understanding the Surrealist movement. In his book, Freud ultimately legitimatizes the significance of dreams and the unconscious, associating it with human desires and emotions. Freud believes that the worlds of sexuality, desire, and violence are repressed and are only accessible through dreams. Through Freud’s text, he suggests that all dreams have meanings, and interpreting these dreams are crucial in resolving the unconscious feelings and emotions.

Both Magritte and Oppenheim’s works are visceral representations of the complexity of behavior and mind. However, unlike Oppenheim’s “Déjeuner en fourrure”, Magritte’s “Time Transfixed” does not necessarily emphasize on the materiality of the artwork to produce a mystifying and cryptic attitude. But rather, it signifies the importance of content. In “Déjeuner en fourrure”, through its three-dimensional characteristic, one is able to physically see the sculpture right before the eyes, as well as touch it. In this case, Oppenheim manipulates the object and the material to disrupt the reality of it. Whereas, in “Time Transfixed”, Magritte is not manipulating the medium or the material, instead, he manipulates the content of the medium. It is only through the visual sphere that one can experience and understand the concept of the artwork. Whereas, “Time Transfixed” encapsulates the fine line between what is real and what is not by using realistic painting techniques to paint unrealistic and illogical content.

In Surrealism, space and time of reality is un-concrete and purely perceptual. In “Time Transfixed”, this can be seen through its content as Magritte plays with the intangible and definite concept of time in place. Whereas, Oppenheim uses the medium and material’s features to disrupt reality’s space and time. As a result, “Time Transfixed” produces the feeling that reality is in fact, ephemeral and transient, and “Déjeuner en fourrure” presents a very solid and striking cognizance that reality is a fabrication made of a number of norms and criteria. Furthermore, in homage to Roland Barthes’s “Camera Lucida”, Jean-Paul Sartre writes that a depiction in an artwork is a result from the combination of the resemblance of an image and the response that it ignites within each viewer.[18] What Sartre means by this is that an artwork’s depiction crucially requires the viewer’s response, along with their pre-existing knowledge and experience.[19] This explains to how Surrealist works can be interpreted differently for each individual and how depictions differ from one artist to another. Considering this, both “Time Transfixed” and “Déjeuner en fourrure” are quite open for interpretation, which gives the viewers freedom to incorporate their own thoughts and experiences.

However, “Time Transfixed” and “Déjeuner en fourrure” are more than just illustrations and visual representations of the Surrealist movement. They are evoking “what it can be”, instead of what it is, through imagination and by escaping from the reign of logic, as written by Breton.[20] Therefore, they encourage that the mind can embrace much more beyond reality; like dreams, illusion, and fantasy. In relation to this, Sartre also argues that freedom of thought is “intimately bound” to imagination.[21] Without imagination, the human mind would be hopelessly tied to reality, and would be incapable of realizing potential and possibilities.

With this, the Surrealist art movement is not something that has been left in the past, but rather approaches the presence and the future endlessly. The artworks of the Surrealists mainly reflected the idea of going beyond reality, which explains the portrayal of realism, with the addition of the unconscious. “Time Transfixed” by Rene Magritte and “Déjeuner en fourrure” by Meret Oppenheim are two very different artworks, distinguished by their medium, material, and content. However, some similarities could also be found within the two masterpieces. In both works, we can see that space and time are two mere illusionistic features of reality. In surreality, space and time exists only figuratively, because Surrealism stands for what is beyond the real. In this case, Surrealism should be understood as not to be a movement, but also a way of living, and the attitude towards life itself.

NOTES:

[1] André Breton, “The First Manifesto of Surrealism” in Art in Theory: 1900–2000, ed. Charles Harrison and Paul Wood (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2003), 452.

[2] Nathalia Brodskaïa, Surrealism — Genesis of a Revolution (Temporis Collection). Parkstone International, 2012, 171

[3] Ibid., 181

[4] “Time: Definition of Time by Lexico.” Lexico Dictionaries | English, Lexico Dictionaries, www.lexico.com/en/definition/time.

[5] Cory Wulf, “Time Transfixed 1938 by René Magritte,” Department of Museum Education, The Art Institute of Chicago, https://www.artic.edu/assets/3e982e0a-2098-ae73-d23a-9c754f501f0a

[6] Ibid.

[7] “Time Transfixed.” Time Transfixed by Rene Magritte, Rene-Magritte.com, www.rene-magritte.com/time-transfixed/.

[8] André Breton, ‘The Second Manifesto of Surrealism’, in Art in Theory: 1900–1990, eds. Charles Harrison and Paul Wood (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1992), 446–447

[9] Ibid., 448

[10] Brigitte Nicole Grice, “The Fetish, the Fur and the Exquisite Corpse: Meret Oppenheim and Her Surrealist Proclivity,” X-Tra: Contemporary Art Quarterly 22, no. 2 (Winter 2019): 82

[11] Elisabeth Mansén, “Fingertip Knowledge: Meret Oppenheim on the Sense of Touch,” The Senses and Society 9, no. 1 (2014): 5–6.

[12] Cathrin Klingsöhr-Leroy, Uta Grosenick, ed., Surrealism (Taschen, 2004), 80.

[13] Elisabeth Mansén, “Fingertip Knowledge: Meret Oppenheim on the Sense of Touch,” The Senses and Society 9, no. 1 (2014): 13

[14] Jonathan Webber, “Philosophical Introduction” in Jean-Paul Sartre, The Imaginary, xiv

[15] Nina Martyris, “‘Luncheon In Fur’: The Surrealist Teacup That Stirred The Art World,” NPR, 9 Feb. 2016, www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/02/09/466061492/luncheon-in-fur-the-surrealist-tea-cup-that-stirred-the-art-world.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Breton, “The First Manifesto of Surrealism,” 450.

[18] Webber, “Philosophical Introduction,” xvi.

[19] Ibid., xvii.

[20] Breton, “The First Manifesto of Surrealism,” 447–448.

[21] Webber, “Philosophical Introduction,” xxvi.