The dada and surrealist movements in art have both been widely acclaimed as simultaneously thought-provoking and inane. Many pieces are provocative, yet to some viewers can be daunting and confusing. These pieces rely on abstraction and deflection, never showing the meaning at face value. The piece that caught my eye in this way was Man Ray’s Chess Set. This seemingly arbitrary piece captured my attention twofold. Firstly, and I believe this is what most people would realize and stop at, is the fact that it is a chess set. A very cool, modern set that simplifies the pieces. Neat to look at, but not art. That is of course, until you realize the second meaning. The abstraction of the pieces and oversimplification of their base shapes allows you to transcend the idea that they are simply game pieces. Because of the meaning behind them, they take on a completely alternative form. They were not meant to play with. They were meant to influence patterns of thought.
Many Ray’s piece exemplifies the very definition of automatism in the surrealist sense; it is abstraction at its core: reducing objects into the most basic shapes possible while still maintaining their ability to be recognized. For those familiar with the game of chess, it is quite easy to see which pieces are the rooks, knights, and pawns. So, too, can you recognize the bishops, king, and queen. The color palette remains understandably muted so as to focus on the content. I believe that Man Ray decided to utilize surrealism as a mean to convey his ideas because of its abstract qualities. Yes, the idea would be disseminated, but only after a time, and only after it had been studied and pontificated thoroughly about. This idea of psychological abstraction, that is, creating something that seems wholly arbitrary from its form, is rather fascinating to think about.
The very form of Many Ray’s Chess Set is evidence of its surrealist background. It has been reduced into the simplest sense. The color and shapes are kept unnervingly modern, and the entire piece is devoid of texture or interest. Aside from a differentiation of color between the two opposing sides, it would be impossible to identify which pieces belonged to whom. It is interesting to note the shapes that Many Ray employed. Circles for pawns to denote their disposability. Cubes for rooks to portray their solid mass and raw strength. A cone for a queen, and a pyramid for a queen; similar shapes, but softer lines for a female, harder ones for the male counterpart. The bishops and the knights, however, depart from this simplicity. They, seemingly counterintuitively, employ more abstract shapes. The bishop almost resembles a vase of some sort, what with its rounded bottom and smooth, flat top. The knight more closely resembles its predecessor: curved and agile. These pieces, though relatively dissimilar from their source, are still recognizable. The real purpose of this set, though, is to encourage and promote thought. If we can simplify a chess set, what else can we simplify? This flows in the opposite notion of the Arts and Crafts movement, where ornate decoration was encouraged. Man Ray follows in the footsteps of the adage “form follows function” where the bare minimum of material is used. This maxim is typically related to architectural conundrums, but Man Ray utilized it to speak to psychological matters.
My favorite part of the piece, however, is that it is not advertised as just a chess set. If it were, it would be stationary. Boring. Lifeless. Instead, the pieces are moved forward, poised, in the middle of a fervor-ridden battle just begun. Instead of a focus on the pieces, you are focused on the game. It becomes a story with which the viewer can interact. Perhaps it relates to the idea of game theory and its application in our own lives. Perhaps it speaks about the whimsy of childhood, and how games evolve as we grow. Perhaps it even speaks of war, of the calumny of consequence, of warriors ready to fight for a cause that is as fruitless as it is bloody. Whatever the case, this is the discussion that Many Ray hoped to evoke. He wanted thought. Surrealism is the tool to employ with which to inspire. Answers and not simply handed out to those of weak mind or little endurance.
I believe that surrealist pieces are not mean to be considered art, not in the traditional sense. Seeing as many of them lack in traditional technical skill, they are instead a means of communication. Man Ray’s Chess Set is a piece that cannot be taken at its face value. Yes, it must have taken skill to design and carve the pieces, and to carefully construct the board, but that is not the point of his art. He did not want to be recognized as a master carver or designer. He was a surrealist. His work evokes a response that goes much deeper than simple paint on canvas, regardless of anatomical correctness. The automatism represented in this piece allows the viewer to transcend the experience that they are viewing art, and instead take them to a new heightened experience complete with thought-provoking discussion and a chance for change.
