Abstract
The Dada Fair exhibition of 1920 brought the self-proclaimed “central attack on the culture of the bourgeois” of Berlin Dada to its spectacular culmination. The catalogue brashly announced the abolition of the art market, while a placard by George Grosz and John Heartfield proclaimed the death of art itself and the rise of the new “machine art of Tatlin” (Figs. 1 and 2). If the latter claim was based more on the critic Konstantin Umanski's description of “Tatlinismus” as a “conquering materialism” than on any knowledge of how Vladimir Tatlin's art actually appeared, it was typical of the confident, ironic social criticism of Berlin Dada. While a profound disillusionment among the Expressionists was producing somber obituaries, Raoul Hausmann appeared triumphant in his coup de grâce published in April in Der Dada 3: “Dada is the full absence of what is called Geist. Why have Geist in a world that runs on mechanically?”
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
