Conventionalism in Henri Poincar and Marcel Duchamp Author(s): Craig Adcock Source: Art Journal, Vol. 44, No.

3, Art and Science: Part II, Physical Sciences (Autumn, 1984), pp. 249-258 Published by: College Art Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/776825 . Accessed: 03/01/2011 10:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caa. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

in Henri Conventionalism Poincare and Marcel Duchamp

By Craig Adcock

writings of Henri Poincar6 (18541912) were among the major influences on the development of Marcel Duchamp's art and thought.' Through Poincare, Duchamp learned the basic principles of at least three major branches of modern geometry: n-dimensional geometry, non-Euclidean geometry, and topology.2 So important were these geometries to Duchamp that he incorporated numerous references to them in the iconography of his major works: the Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (the Large Glass), 1915-23 (Fig. 1), Tu m', 1918 (Fig. 2), the ready-mades, and the satellite works associated with them. For Duchamp, Poincare's philosophical discussions of the conventional nature of geometry were a way of reinforcing his own speculations about the provisional nature of aesthetics. Many of Poincar6's most basic insights into complex areas of mathematics involved applications of geometry. His brilliant work in his "qualitative theory of differential equations," for example, was predicated on topology. His work on automorphic functions of one complex variable (what he called Fuchsian functions) and his work on analytic functions of several complex variables (Abelian functions) also involved the application of geometrical techniques to problems that might otherwise have proven recalcitrant. Poincar6 argued that invention was often a matter of choice, involving putting things together that did not seem to belong together: "Among chosen combinations the most fertile will often be those formed of elements drawn from domains which are far apart."' He recalled that some of his own most important insights had involved just such unlikely combinations. In Science and Method, he writes that he had made breakthroughsin the study of Fuchsian functions because he had suddenly seen relationships between the transforma- Fig. 1 Duchamp, The Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (the Large tions he was using to specify differential Glass), 1915-23, oil and lead wire on glass, x 691/8".Philadelphia Museum 1091/4 equations and those that occurred in of Art, Bequest of Katherine S. Dreier. non-Euclideangeometry. He also recalls Fall 1984 249

and philosophical he mathematical

Yale University Art Gallery, Bequest of Fig. 2 Duchamp, Tu m', 1918, oil on canvas with long brush attached, 271/2x 1223/4". Katherine S. Dreier. that on another occasion, but with the geometry, a contradiction would occur invention of human reason: "these consame sense of immediacy, he had real- between the two Euclidean theorems ventions are the work of the free activity ized that "the arithmetic transforma- from which they had been translated. of our mind, which, in this domain, tions of indeterminateternary quadratic But since "these translations are the- recognizes no obstacle. Here our mind forms were identical with those of non- orems of ordinary geometry and no one can affirm, since it decrees; but let us doubts that the ordinary geometry is understand that while these decrees are Euclidean geometry."4 That Poincar6 could use geometries free from contradiction," questions imposed upon our science, which, withsuch as topology and non-Euclidean regarding the legitimacy of non-Euclid- out them, would be impossible, they are geometry and obtain useful results was ean geometry should not arise.7 The not imposed upon nature."9 Poincar6 believed that the source of important to his world view. Not too important part of this argument for non-Euclidean was that the Poincar6 the before his geomtime, general laws of mathematics and postulates only long of plane and solid Euclidean geometry etries, because they could be interpreted science lay in the rational human intelwere believed to have any validity. The in terms of the unquestioned proposi- lect; that they were rational was what development of such mathematical con- tions of ordinary Euclidean geometry, gave them their rigor and their essential structs as complex numbers, quater- were no longer just empty displays of usefulness. But Poincar6 also asked nions, n-dimensional geometry, and logic but could be concretely useful in whether, if made up in the mind, they non-Euclidean geometry during the applied mathematics. He was quick to were then also capable of being applied course of the nineteenth century had point out that he had obtained impor- in randomfashion. No, he said: "Experiforced mathematicians to reexamine a tant results by applying Lobachevski's ment leaves us our freedom of choice, number of their fundamental assump- geometry to the integration of linear but it guides us by aiding us to discern the easiest way."10 In other words, tions. No longer could they believe that differential equations.8 mathematics represented a true picture experiment in the real world orders and of the world-that mathematical prog- p oincare's understanding of geome- directs one's choice of first principles. ress was a matter of uncovering the try influenced his philosophical Some are useful in discovering the hidden laws of nature. They were forced insights. Because one geometry could be world, and some are not. Science proto admit that certain aspects of mathe- translated into another and because ceeds by discovering and making use of matics are the constructs of human rea- there was no way of determining if one those conventional hypotheses that are son.5One could no longer deny the exis- geometry was more true than another, productive and by discarding those that tence of such mathematical entities as he argued that geometry was conven- are unproductive. Poincar6 pointed out that some invesn-dimensional spaces with n > 3 or of tional. Poincar6 is the father of philonon-Euclidean spaces in which Euclid's sophical conventionalism. From such a tigators had gone too far in what they parallelism postulate does not hold. position, there are numerous ways of took to be the implications of the conSuch spaces may not have physical ana- describing the world; any one way can- ventional nature of scientific principles: logues, but they are mathematically no not be said to be more true than any "they have wished to generalize beyond less real than three-dimensional Euclid- other-one way can only be said to be measure, and, at the same time, they more useful than another under a cer- have forgotten that liberty is not license. ean space. Some of Poincare's most important tain set of circumstances. Such argu- Thus they have reached what is called mathematical discoveries involved ments can lead to arbitrariness,as Poin- nominalism." Poincar6 suggested that methods of interrelating various geome- care himself was well aware. Since he such thinkers should "have asked themtries. In Science and Hypothesis, he believed that there was an external selves if the savant is not the dupe of his describes, in accessible terms, a kind of world and that it could be discovered own definitions and if the world he dictionary through which Euclidean and through science, he eschewed extreme thinks he discovers is not simply created non-Euclidean geometries could be conventionalism,or "nominalism,"as he by his own caprice."" If science did translated from one to the other. He called it. operate according to the random invenPoincar6 argued that there were a tion of descriptive models, it could never explains that if the theorems of a nonEuclidean geometry were translated number of different kinds of hypotheses. tell us anything about the natural world according to the terms of his dictionary, Some were verifiable facts and could be and the objects that occupy that world. as one might translate a passage from considered truths; some were useful in "Still," Poincar6 added, "the things one language into another, one would organizing research approaches but themselves are not what [science] can arrive at the "theorems of the ordinary were unverifiable;and some were "dis- reach, as the naifvedogmatists think, but geometry."6 Moreover, such transla- guised definitions" or "conventions." only the relations between things. Outtions would necessarily be consistent: if These last, conventional hypotheses side of these relations there is no knowa contradiction were to occur between were most likely to be encountered in able reality."12 two theorems of the non-Euclidean mathematics and science. They were the Geometry and mathematics were 250 Art Journal

ways of articulating the relationships between objects of perception. They were not the same as experimental facts, but they were useful in picturing the world. Poincar6 argued that because the axioms of more than one kind of geometry could be shown to be consistent, one could no longer believe that Euclidean geometry was the one true way of describing space and its inhabitants. He pointed out that experience no doubt teaches us that the sum of the angles of a triangle is equal to two right angles; but this is because the triangles we deal with are too little; the difference, according to Lobachevski, is proportionalto the surface of the triangle. Will this perhaps become sensible when we operate on larger triangles or when our measurements become more precise? The Euclidean geometry would thus be only a provisional geometry." What this provisional status implied for Poincare was that "one geometry cannot be more true than another;it can only be more convenient."14 Poincare's philosophy developed out of his mathematics. In particular, his attitudes were conditioned by his studies involving the relationships among different kinds of geometry. One could invent the principles of geometry and develop them through logic. These principles were conventions and disguised definitions, but, nonetheless, they were "drawn from experimental laws."'5 In certain ways, Poincare's position was a precursor to logical positivism. In Science and Method, he argues that a demonstration truly founded upon the principlesof analytic logic will be composed of a series of propositions. Some, serving as premises, will be identities or definitions; the others will be deduced from the premisesstep by step. But though the bond between each proposition and the following is immediately evident, it will not at first sight appear how we get from the first to the last, which we may be tempted to regard as a new truth. But if we replace successively the different expressions therein by their definition and if this operation be carried as far as possible, there will finally remain only identities, so that all will reduce to an immense tautology. Logic therefore remains sterile unless made fruitful by intuition.l6 In his discussion of intuition in The Value of Science, Poincar6 writes that even when scientists thought that their

structure of the art world. How did progressin art proceed and what was the role of theory or aesthetics within that process? On the one hand, Duchamp had become disenchanted with practical matters of aesthetics: from personal experience, he had found that such things could be arbitrary and guided by suspect taste.21 On the other hand, he was intensely involved with making concrete contributions to art, especially during his early years. He was like a scientist making discoveries in a laboratory but not knowing how to unify his facts within an encompassing theory. Through his reading of Poincar6, uchamp's philosophyalso shares Duchamp found a paradigm for articucharacteristics with positivism. In lating his art problems;science provided his interview with Pierre Cabanne, a metaphorical schema for defining the Duchamp pointed out that process of making art. the Viennese logicians worked out a system wherein everything is, oincar6's systemof doubtdoes not imply a lack of faith in science or in as far as I understand it, a tauthe of humans to do science. That ability tology, that is, a repetition of one could not decide on the ultimate In it premises. mathematics, goes truth or falsity of certain kinds of hypofrom a very simple theorem to a theses did not mean that one had to but it's all in very complicated one, retreat into arbitrariness. Duchamp's the first theorem. So, metaphysics: system had a similar kind of a reasontautology; religion: tautology; ableness about it. His system was careful, is everything tautology, except plotted, consistent, and subtle. What black coffee because the senses are emerges from Duchamp's doubt is a in control! The eyes see the black careful skepticism-a skepticism that coffee, it's a truth; but the rest is also characterizes the best scientists. always tautology.'9 What one sees in Duchamp, as in Duchamp's reference here to the Vienna Poincar6, is a healthy willingness to Circle is suggestive. Philipp Frank question-a process that leads to new recalled that some of the most pressing solutions. It was in this regard that questions that concerned him and his Poincar6 was most important to Duassociates in Vienna, a group that champ. It was a matter of one genius included Otto Neurath and Hans Hahn, reinforcinganother genius. It was a matinvolved the relationship between exper- ter of the best of human endeavor imental facts and scientific hypotheses: (science) reinforcing the best of human "In our opinion, the man who bridged endeavor (art). the gap successfully was the French Poincar6 articulates his discussions of mathematician and philosopher Henri the provisionalnature of different kinds Poincar6. For us, he was a kind of Kant of geometry by demonstrating their freed of the remnants of medieval scho- interrelatedness. By showing the conlasticism and anointed with the oil of nections between, say, metric geometry modern science."20 and projective geometry, between EuOne of the apparent discrepancies or clidean and non-Euclidean geometry, problems in the development or progress and by then showing their various relaof science concerned the role of scien- tionships with topology, Poincar6 could tific generalizations. Material science show that how one chose one's geometry seemed to advance steadily with respect was a matter of convenience. Duchamp to the gradual accumulation of knowl- wanted to demonstrate the conventional edge and facts acquired through experi- nature of aesthetics-to show that how ment. But at the same time, grand the- one chose one's art was also a matter ories or large-scale theoretical schemata of context. were likely to be proven false and were Tu m', 1918 (see Fig. 2), clearly then discarded by the scientific commu- shows that approach. The painting can nity. If a theory was soon to be thrown be taken as a demonstrationof the prinout, why advance it in the first place? ciples discussed by Poincar6, and the What was the role of hypothesis in the philosophical implications of the paintadvancement of science? An important ing for art are similar to those that part of Poincar6's philosophical inquiry Poincar6 articulated for science. Tu m' addressed the latter question. is susceptible to interpretation from the Duchamp was faced with a similar point of view of several different geomekind of problem within the operational tries. The cast shadows or projected

research was free from intuitive approaches they were deluding themselves. Innovation requires intuition: "Pure logic could never lead us to anything but tautologies; it could create nothing new; not from it alone can any science issue."" Poincar6 thought that mathematics and the other sciences progressed by something more than syllogistic arguments from first principles: they progressedby intuitive invention. One of the sources for original creation was "generalization by induction, copied, so to speak, from the procedures of the experimental sciences."18

Fall 1984

251

shadows (ombres portedes) are references to projective geometry. Perspective is a subcategory of projective geometry, and part of the subject matter of Tu m' is perspective. On one level, Duchamp was dealing with a traditional two-dimensional picture surface that represents a three-dimensional space. This is already n-dimensional geometry with n = 2 and n = 3. But Duchamp was also interested in situations where n > 3. Such situations are considerably more complex. Because it could be thought of as an analogy for projection, the concept of a cast shadow was important in Duchamp's thinking about n-dimensional geometry. Part of the imagery of Tu m' consists of shadows cast by three of his ready-mades: the Bicycle Wheel, the Corkscrew, and the Hat Rack. The Corkscrew has survived only as a shadow on Tu m'. The shadows of the three ready-mades are outstretched across the surface of the canvas with the Bicycle Wheel on the left and the spiral of the Corkscrew leading out from the axle of the wheel to the center of the painting. A sign-painter's hand emerges from the handle of the Corkscrew and points towards the shadow of the Hat Rack on the right. These shadows are analogies: if a three-dimensional object casts a two-dimensionalshadow, then by analogy a four-dimensional object would cast a three-dimensionalshadow. In one of his notes for the Large Glass in A l'Infinitif, Duchamp used that analogy: "The shadow cast by a four-dimensional figure on our space is a threedimensional shadow."22He then refers to a passage is Esprit Pascal Jouffret's de geometrieit quatre Trait eblementaire dimensions: "See Jouffret, Geom. of 4 dim., page 186, last 3 lines." In those lines, Jouffret suggests that "in this regard [conceptualizing the fourth dimension]," one would do well to "consider the horizontalshadow that attaches itself to you as you walk along in the sun and that, long or short, wide or narrow, repeats your movements as if it understood you, although it is only an empty semblance."23 Jouffret uses the analogy of the cast shadow to introducea discussion of flat-beings. Since it is difficult to envision higher-dimensional spaces, it might be useful to envisionlower-dimensional spaces. By imagining what it would be like to live in a flat, twodimensional plane, one could better appreciate the relationships between three-dimensional beings and fourdimensionalspaces. In Tu m', three-dimensional readymades become flat, two-dimensional shadows. They become, in a sense, flatbeings. In one of his notes for the Large Glass included in the Green Box, 252 Art Journal

Fig. 3 Duchamp, "Shadows of Ready-mades," photographtaken in Duchamp's studio, 33 West 67 Street, New York, 1918. Collection, Mme Marcel Duchamp, Villiers-sous-Grez.

Duchamp discusses the "cast shadows of ready-mades."24The inclusion of this note in the Green Box indicates that he intended that the imagery both of Tu m' and of the Large Glass involve shadows cast from ready-mades. A photograph taken by Duchamp in his New York apartment in 1918 (Fig. 3) reinforces this idea. The forms of the shadows are very similar to the flat shapes of the Bride in the upper panel of the Large Glass. rojective analogies need not be The implicationsof n-dimensionalproconfined to discussing the interrelajection were explained by Duchamp on tionships of different n-dimensional Euseveral occasions. He told George Heard clidean spaces. Explanations of nonHamilton and Richard Hamilton: Euclidean geometry can also involve interdimensionalanalogies such as flatanything that has three-dimensional form is a projection in our beings.27The flat-being represented by world from a four-dimensional the shadow of the Bicycle Wheel in Tu world, and my Bride, for example, m' may be a reference to non-Euclidean would be a three-dimensional progeometry. The circular rim of the wheel, the circumferenceof the circle, if rotated jection of a four-dimensional Bride. All right. Then, since it's on aroundone of its diameters would generthe glass it's flat, and so my Bride ate a sphere, which is an analytic Euclidean surface that can serve as a model for is a two-dimensional representation of a three-dimensional Bride, the elliptic non-Euclidean geometry of who also would be a four-dimenRiemann. The wheel would generate a sional projection on a threefigure much like the one on the rightdimensional world of the Bride.25 hand side of a diagram from Jouffret's In his interview with Pierre Cabanne, Traitb(Fig. 4).28 The diagram accompanies a descripDuchamp connected this kind of discussion of projective geometry with the tion of Riemann's geometry. The drawing might also serve as an illustration for notion of cast shadows: Poincar6's explanation in Science and Since I found that one could make Hypothesis. In order to discuss Riea cast shadow from a three-dimenmann's geometry, Poincar6 introduces sional thing, any object whatsothe notion of "beings with no thickness."

ever... I thought that, by simple intellectual analogy, the fourth dimensionalcould projectan object of three dimensions. . ... "The Bride" in the "Large Glass" was based on this, as if it were the projection of a four-dimensional object.26 In Duchamp's thinking, Tu m', the Large Glass, the notes, the readymades, their cast shadows, and their geometrical implications were all tightly interconnected. The same may be said of their philosophical implications. Tu m' is a metapainting and perhaps metaphysical. Duchamp may have intendedhis shadowsas Platonic references;he may have wanted to suggest that the work of art was a shadow of a shadow. If so, the reasons would not have been Plato's, but Duchamp's. More precisely, they would have been Duchamp'sas developedout of Poincar6. By 1918, Duchamp had come to feel that painting was largely empty semblance. He was interested in the idea behind the work of art, not in order to affirmthe first principlesof a valuational aesthetics but in order to cast doubt on those first principles. Tu m' clearly involves geometry. The purpose of this involvementis less clear, but the connections between various geometries and their conventionalist implications are what Duchamp used in the unificationof his art. He had learned the geometry and the philosophy from Poincar6. In Duchamp's descriptions of art, as in Poincar6's descriptionsof the world, the relationships between objects were more accessible than the objects themselves.

He then argues that if such beings were cognizant and if they lived on the surFig. 2 face of a sphere, they would not invent ordinarygeometry: "First it is clear they will attribute to space only two dimensions; what will play for them the role of the straight line will be the shortest path from one point to another on the sphere, that is to say, an arc of a great circle; in a word, their geometry will be the spherical geometry." He goes on to say that F0 "Riemann's geometry is spherical geextended to three dimensions."29 ometry The shadow of the Bicycle Wheel in Tu m' is essentially made up of onedimensional line segments. They can be : --ii~ii?ell thought of as projections from a twocr:-~iiii? non-Euclidean surface like dimensional, S Pi:iiai:-~ii~i:ithe one in Jouffret's illustration. The left-hand side of Jouffret's diagram, which resembles a bicycle wheel, can be taken as a projection of the right-hand Fig. 4 Illustration from E. Jouffret, Traite blekmentaire de g omi trie 'i quatre diagram. The sphere, in its turn, can be dimensions, p. 16. taken as a projection from a threedimensional, non-Euclidean space. Geometersoften point out that there is a conceptual correspondencebetween a three-dimensional, non-Euclidean Riemannian space and a four-dimensional Euclidean hypersphere." Each can be thought of as a sphere with an extra dimension. Poincar6 had this correspondence in mind when, in the introduction to his discussion of his Euclidean-nonEuclideandictionary,he said that people who were used to thinking about fourdimensionalgeometry would have no difficulty in extending the two-dimensional models of non-Euclidean geometry into three dimensions.31 Evidence that Duchamp was interested in the relationships between Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry, specifically in regard to Poincar6's use of Lobachevski's geometry, is provided by his Unhappy Ready-Made, 1919 (Fig. 5), and his original photograph of the book hanging from a Paris balcony (Fig. 6). In the latter, no "geometry" is visible at all. Duchamp chose the dia5. Fig. 6. Duchamp, Unretouched grams as ready-made geometry and Fig. Duchamp, Unhappy. from the 1919, Ready-made, photographof UnhappyReady-made, c. then retouched the photograph with 1941-42. 1919. PhiladelphiaMuseum of Art, Box-in-a-Valise, Paris, compass and ruler. What he chose is Museum of Art, The Marcel Duchamp Archives, Gift of Dr. Philadelphia The drawing depicts orthogsignificant. William A. Camfield. onal circles and demonstrates one of Louise and Walter Arensberg Euclid's theorems.32Various Euclidean Collection. theorems and their corresponding diagrams often begin discussions of paral- defines straight lines as being either Euclidean geometry.35 Thus, the nonlelism in Lobachevski'sgeometry.33 Spe- straight lines passing through the center Euclidean geometry is consistent if the cifically, Euclidean orthogonal circles of the fundamental plane or arcs of Euclidean geometry is consistent. Poinare often used by way of comparison in circles cutting the fundamental plane car6's model is the one that he later explanations of Poincar6's method of orthogonally. Angles remain angles. described in more general terms as a demonstrating the consistency of Loba- Distance becomes logarithmic. Two tan- "dictionary" in Science and Hypothechevski's non-Euclidean geometry. gent arcs that intersect on the funda- sis.36 If one were to translate the diaPoincar6 first used this approach in the mental plane are parallel. What Poin- grams of orthogonal circles that Ducontext of his work on automorphic (or car6's system amounts to is a way of champ used for his ready-made geomeFuchsian) functions.34 relating the two geometries: he shows try book according to Poincar6's rules, Poincar6 begins by defining the fun- that the axioms and theorems of Loba- one would arriveat an arrangementthat damental plane as a circle. He then chevski's geometry are special cases of looks very different: the Euclidean dia-

V A

.0

.:

i i ;?:::~L~i-::?aiC-i~i:~4

a '~c~g-?

ib~ i

-:.~ i~

~;,i~,is~~iri~irxgi

."'-

ak'fi- i

i- ~-i

:-j_

.:

~:,::~n-:;-!_~i~F~:--:

- i:

- i - i~i i: i

~- _?:

:i -~i : i~-:

?l:_

Fall 1984

253

length. In general, this flexible and inextensible figure cannot be displaced without leaving the surface; but there are certain particularsurfaces for which such a movement would be possible; these are the surfaces of constant curvature. He goes on to point out that such surfaces can be derived for both branches of non-Euclidean geometry: "The twodimensional geometries of Riemann and Lobachevski are thus correlated to the Euclidean geometry."38 oincare's remarks about a canvas bring Tu m' to mind. The buckling around the trompe l'oeil tear suggests that the two-dimensional plane surface of the canvas has become a two-dimensional curved surface. This kind of deformation can be taken as a reference to non-Euclidean geometry. The shadows can be taken as references to the figures projected onto that surface. The points of an n-dimensionalconfiguration can be projected onto an n - 1 dimensional configuration, as when threedimensional objects are projected onto two-dimensional perspective or isometric drawings. In a less complete sense, a two-dimensional shadow is a projection of a three-dimensionalobject. In one of his notes for the Large Glass, first published by Matta in his magazine Instead, Duchamp says that "after the Bride," he wanted "to make pictures using cast shadows." Tu m' was apparently one of the results. In the note, he goes on to say that by means of n - 1 dimensional shadows projected by n-dimensional objects, "first on a plane, second on a surface of such or such curvature, third on several transparent surfaces,..,. one can obtain a hypophysical analysis of the successive transformations of objects (in their form contour)."39 The reference here to both plane and curved surfaces suggests that Duchamp was thinking in terms of both metric and projective geometry and in terms of both Euclidean and nonEuclidean geometry. Depending upon the surface chosen-plane, positively curved, negatively curved--the resulting geometries could be quite different. In another of his notes, this one from the Green Box, Duchamp talks about the shadows cast by "2, 3, 4 readymades 'brought together.'" He discusses the shadows as being threedimensional ready-mades "having become" two-dimensional projections of ready-mades. "Take these 'having becomes,' "he says, "and make from them a tracing without of course changing their position in relation to each other in the original projection."40 Duchamp traced the shadows of the ready-mades

Figs. 7 and 8 Duchamp, 3 Standard Stoppages, 1913-14, assemblage: three threads glued to three painted canvas strips, 51/4x 471/4", each mounted on a glass panel, and wooden templates shaped along one edge to match the curves of the threads; the whole fitted into a wood box, 111/8x 507/8". New York, Collection The Museum of Modern Art, Katherine S. Dreier Bequest. grams would be transformed into non- constant curvature. Poincar6 explained Euclidean diagrams. Duchamp may this concept thus: have intended the deformations caused Consider any figure on a surface. in his book by hanging it from a balcony Imagine this figure traced on a as references to such transformations. flexible and inextensible canvas The curved pages may have been referapplied over this surface in such a ences to the curvature involved in nonway that when the canvas is disEuclidean geometry.37 placed and deformed, the various The two-dimensional models for nonlines of this figurecan change their Euclidean geometry require surfaces of form without changing their 254 Art Journal

onto the surface of Tu m' with pencil. This technique (calquer) involves the "projection" of three-dimensional objects onto two-dimensional surfaces. The French term is interesting because a calque is not only a "tracing" but also an "imitation" or "close copy." The ready-mades come out of the molds of mass-production techniques as close copies. The calque made from the shadow of a ready-made is itself a commonplace reproduction:a shadow can be cast by "any object whatsoever." In a metaphorical sense, the fourth dimension may have been for Duchamp a device for flattening works of art into shadows-"three times removed from the true." Images on picture surfaces and shadows on picture planes are ndimensional projectionsof n + 1 dimensional objects. They are geometrical "sections" in the same sense that Alberti used the term in his discussion of perspective. In Tu m', Duchamp is dealing with a two-dimensional picture surface, a Renaissance mirror surface as it were, and three-dimensional objects projected onto that surface, both as shadows and as perspective renderings. In the center of the painting, the conventional symbol of a hand emerges from the handle of the Corkscrew and points towards both a shadow and an unconventional perspective arrangement. Overlapping the traced shadow of the Hat Rack is an open-ended, transparentbox. One end of the box is made up of a white rectangle drawn in perspective. From each corner of this rectangle, two curved lines are drawn parallel to the picture plane with the templates of the 3 Standard Stoppages (Figs. 7 and 8). The volume suggests a curved region of space. The double edges drawn with the templates are perhaps meant to cast doubt on measuring devices. They suggest the provisionalnature of geometry. Further, they suggest that there is an ad libitum freedom involved in choosing between alternatives. Tu m' becomes an essay in makingin art making, hypothesis making, and aesthetic judgment making. Traditionally, the picture plane had been an area in which reality took place; it had been a window opening onto a space constructed according to the principles of perspective-a subcategory of projective geometry. Duchamp tore a hole through that area. Similarly, the invention of non-Euclidean geometries had torn a hole through the intellectual structure of reality. The Euclidean space that had been depicted in pictures was called into question by the invention of these geometries. Truth, geometric reality, was ripping apart. It could be held together only by conventional constructs, by safety pins.

he iconography of Tu m' involves in this discipline two figures are both the philosophy of art and the equivalent every time it is possible to have one correspondto the other philosophy of science. Part of Poincar6's by means of a continuous deforquestioning of the foundations of geommation, whatever the law govetry concerned the sources of axioms erning the deformation may be, and theorems. Were they experimental provided that continuity is maintruths? He argued that "we constantly tained. Thus, a circle is equivalent reason as if geometric figures behaved to an ellipse or even to any type of like solids," but such apparent connecclosed curve, but it is not equivations with what we see in the world do lent to a line segment because the not justify an assumption that geometry segment is not a closed figure. A is experimental. He goes on to say that sphere is equivalent to any convex "the properties of light and its rectisurface whatever, but it is not linear propagation have also given rise equivalent to a torus because in to some of the propositionsof geometry, the torus there is a hole and there and in particular those of projective is none in a sphere. Let us imagine geometry, so that from this point of view a pattern of any kind and the copy one would be tempted to say that metric of this pattern drawn by a clumsy geometry is the study of solids, and draftsman. The proportions are projective, that of light."4' But there is a distorted, straight lines drawn by a fundamental problem with such aptrembling hand have undergone proaches: if geometry were based on distressing deviations and result in experiment or measurement, it could disproportional curves. From the never be exact. Because there are no point of view of metric geometry, rigorously rigid solids in nature, an and even from that of projective experimentally based geometry could geometry, the two figures are not only be approximate.42 Several aspects of Tu m' involve the equivalent; but on the contrary are equivalent from the point they nature of deapproximate measuring of view of analysis situs.45 vices and the distinctions between metric geometry and projective geometry. Topological operations are carried Poincar6 explained that out as if the bodies undergoing the transformations were made of rubber. metric geometry is based on the So long as continuity is maintained, a notion of distance; in it, two figgeometrical figure can be stretched into ures are considered as equivalent any number of configurations. A circle when they are "equal" in the sense is topologically equivalent to a square which mathematicians assign to and a torus is topologically equivalent to this word. Projective geometry is a coffee cup, because if the circle were a based on the notion of the straight rubber band, it could be stretched into line. For two figures to be considthe shape of the square,just as a rubberered as equivalent in projective sheet torus could be stretched into the geometry it is not necessary that shape of a coffee cup. With these points they be equal; it is sufficient that in mind, any numberof Duchamp's "deto each other they correspond by formations" can be interpreted as topomeans of a projective transformalogical transformations. The flat and that is, that one be the protion; curved pages of the geometry book can jection of the other.43 be taken as topologically equivalent conClassical perspective is subsumed figurations, or homeomorphisms,as can under projective geometry. In one of his the flat and curved surface implied by notes, Duchamp says that "by perspec- the trompe l'oeil buckling on Tu m'. tive (or other conventional means) the From a topological point of view, the lines, the drawing, are 'strained' and curved line segments in 3 Standard lose the nearly of the 'always possible' Stoppages (see Figs. 7 and 8) are equivwith moreover the irony to have chosen alent to straight lines or to each other. the body or original object which inevi- As the individual pieces of string fell tably becomes according to this perspec- through space, they underwent any tive (or other convention)."44In a per- number of transformations. Topologispective transformation, lengths and cally, the transformations were ad libiangles are "strained" and "inevitably tum or h son gr&.Such variations interbecome" according to the principles of ested Duchamp because of their philothe transformation. Duchamp's "other sophical implications. He believed that convention" may have been topology the meaning of a work of art was elastic because, in it, transformationsare more and ad libitum: "An oeuvre by itself nearly "always possible." doesn't exist, it's an optical illusion. It's Poincar6's remarks about metric and only made to be seen by the people who projective geometries introduce an ex- look at it. The poor medium is only amination of analysis situs, a geometry gratuitous. You could invent a false now called topology. He explains that artist. Whatever happens could have

Fall 1984

255

been completely different."46For Duchamp, aesthetics, critical interpretation, art history, and artistic intention were topological. The line segments in 3 Standard Stoppages are topological homeomorphisms in one dimension. At the lower left of Tu m' are three curved lines drawn with the templates of the 3 Standard Stoppages. They are at the edges of three overlapping curved surfaces that suggest the configurations that would have been generated by the curved line segments of the strings as they fell through space. These three surfaces are topological homeomorphisms in two dimensions. The three "Draft Pistons" in the upper panel of the Large Glass (see Fig. 1) are also topological homeomorphismsin two dimensions. Duchamp hung flat, two-dimensional pieces of cloth in front of a window and allowed the wind to distort their shapes. He then photographed the pieces of cloth (Fig. 9) and used the forms as templates for determining the irregularholes in the ipanouissement of the Bride. As a next logical step in this n-dimensional sequence, Duchamp's ready-made Traveler's Folding Item (Fig. 10) can be taken as a reference to topological homeomorphisms in three dimensions. The work looks like a rubber-sheet cube. If taken as a metaphor for a topological solid, it would become a three-manifoldwith boundary.The twodimensional deformed surfaces of the three "Draft Pistons" can be taken as analogues for the deformed surfaces that would be generated by the onedimensional deformed lines of the 3 Standard Stoppages displacing themselves through space. The Traveler's Folding Item can, in its turn, be taken as an analogue for the configuration that would be generated by the two-dimensional "Draft Pistons" displacing themselves through space. The next step towards a displacement into the fourth dimension would be, in Duchamp's term, "hypophysical." Traveler's Folding Item is a typewriter cover and thus associated with writing. Both the three "Draft Pistons" and the 3 Standard Stoppages are also associated with writing. In one of his notes, Duchamp refers to the "Draft Pistons" as "alphabetic units," and it is through them that the "commands" of the Bride are telegraphed to the Bachelors in the lowerpanel of the Large Glass. Duchamp explains that the Bride's instructions have "their alphabet and terms governed by the orientationof the three Draft Pistons."47 Thus, communication in the Large Glass proceeds by a topologically deformed sign system. In another of his notes, Duchamp suggests that geometrically deformed symbols 256 Art Journal

Fig. 9 Duchamp, "Draft Piston," 1914, photograph, 231/8x Mme Marcel Duchamp, Villiers-sous-Grez.

191/16".

Collection,

!i::iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiililiiiiiiii i:R,

mo

'n

....... Xx~

lin

Fig. 10 Duchamp, Traveler's Folding Item, 1916, H. 23". Sarasota, Fla., John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, Gift of Mary Sisler Foundation/Mrs. William T. Sisler.

could be constructed using the 3 Standard Stoppages. He says that one could "compose a schematic sign designating each of [the so-called abstract words in a Larousse dictionary]." This sign could "be composedwith the standardstops."48 Duchamp's desire to construct a "topological language" reflects his attitude concerning meaning: he believed that meaning could be stretched into any number of configurations, as if it were made of rubber. Topological interpretations are in keeping with Duchamp's interests in ndimensional and non-Euclidean geometries. The various geometries can be interrelated, as Duchamp had learned non-Euclidean geometry from Poincar&: is a metric geometry, and metric geometry can be subsumed under projective geometry; projective geometry can be n-dimensional,and non-Euclideangeometry can be n-dimensional; Riemann's geometry is commensurate with topology. Poincar6 points out that "[analysis situs] gives rise to a series of theorems just as closely interconnectedas those of Euclid; and it is from this set of propositions that Riemann constructed one of the most remarkable and abstract theories of pure analysis."49Topology can also be n-dimensional, as Poincar6 reminds us: "there is an analysis situs of more than three dimensions."50

beauty was the last thing that he had matics and the philosophy of sciencehad on his mind when he chose them.52 and put them together with aesthetics. But these works were far from uninter- His connections were metaphors for the esting. He said that he had thrown the importanceof relationshipover any cateready-mades into the face of the art gory of individualobjecthood.Given cerpublic as a challenge and that now they tain relationships, the objects could be admired them for their aesthetic beauty. anything whatsoever. Duchamp used This challenge was not just a joke, a conventionalism in his arrangements to schoolboy blague. It was a way of ques- show that "everything could have been tioning the underpinnings of art criti- completely different." His strategy repcism and art history. Duchamp said that resents a substantial connection between "taste is momentary,"that if one waited art and science. Duchamp said that "we fifty years, taste changed. He argued don't speak about science because we that "if one is logical, one doubts the don't know the language, but everyone speaks about art."56Duchamp himself history of art."53 Duchamp's doubt began early in his was an exception. He knew a great deal career. He remembered being turned about the language of science. Through around by the small mindedness that Poincar6, he had learned the philosophihad caused the rejection of Nude cal implicationsof advanced geometries, Descending a Staircase from the Inde- and he used what he had learned to speak about art. And because what he pendents exhibition in 1912: said has been so influential, those geomCubism had lasted two or three etries and the world views that they enyears, and they already had an gendered, have had fundamental effects on line absolutely clear, dogmatic on art, art theory, and the revisionismof it, foreseeingeverythingthat might art history. happen. I found that nafvely foolish. So, that cooled me off so much Notes that, as a reaction against such 1 Duchamp was probably familiar with at least behavior coming from artists four of Poincar6'sgeneral works:La Science et whom I had believed to be free, l'hypothese, Paris, Flammarion, 1902; Science I got a job. I became a librarian et methode, Paris, Flammarion, 1904; La Valat the Sainte-Genevieve Library eur de la science, Paris, Flammarion, 1908; in Paris.54 Dernibres pensbes, Paris, Flammarion, 1913 Shocked into reevaluating the premises
(English translations: The Foundations of Science: Science and Hypothesis, The Value of Science, Science and Method, trans. George Bruce Halsted, New York, The Science Press, 1921; Mathematics and Science: Last Essays, trans. John W. Bolduc, New York, Dover, 1963). 2 In addition to Poincar6's books, the major sources for Duchamp's mathematical knowledge were two works of Esprit Pascal Jouffret: Traite elKmentaire de geombtrie i' quatre dimensions et introduction iala gbombtriea n dimensions, Paris, Gauthier-Villars, 1903; and Mclanges de geombtrie 'i quatre dimensions, Paris, Gauthier-Villars, 1906. Jouffret's books are straightforward mathematical textbooks and, although they contain discussions of numerous geometrical operations that Duchamp made use of, they were probably not as important for the development of his philosophy as were Poincare's books. For more detailed discussions of Duchamp's sources, see: Craig Adcock, Marcel Duchamp's Notes from the Large Glass: An N-Dimensional Analysis, Ann Arbor, UMI Research Press, 1983, pp. 29-39; and Linda Dalrymple Henderson, The Fourth Dimension and Non-Euclidean Geometry in Modern Art, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1983, pp. 117-30. 3 Poincar6, Foundations of Science, p. 386. 4 Ibid., pp. 387-88. 5 For a discussion of these philosophicalchanges, see: Morris Kline, Mathematical Thought from Ancient to Modern Times, New York, Oxford University Press, 1972, pp. 1023-39.

choice of geometry was conven- judgment, Duchamp must have been tional. Duchamp demonstrated that attracted to the alternative intellectual one's choice of art was conventional. tradition represented by mathematics Through conventional means, he trans- and science; it was in his new job in the formed objects that were not art into art library that he probably began reading objects. He did it by placing ready- Poincar6 and found in him a kindred mades within the art context and by spirit. then saying that they were not works of Duchamp called art "une dedale art. In spite of his disavowals, they illogique"--an illogical labyrinth.55He became works of art. Poincar6 argued believed that one lost oneself within the that one could not know objects; one laybrinth, retraced one's steps, and comcould know only the relationships ing around new corners that obscured between objects. Duchamp concurred. old vistas, perceived new ones. Poincare When asked what determined his choice argued that the approach to mathematof ready-mades, Duchamp replied that ics and science also involved intricate it pathways: truth was hidden within a labyrinth, but, nonetheless, one provided dependedon the object. In general, oneself with maps, with hypotheses, and I had to beware of its "look." It's proceeded inward. Both Poincare and very difficult to choose an object, were aided by the philosophiDuchamp because, at the end of fifteen days, cal thread of conventionalism: it proyou begin to like it or to hate it. vided the scientist and the artist with a You have to approach something skepticism that prevented mistaking a with an indifference, as if you had of the labyrinth for its center; it corner no aesthetic emotion. The choice of them with an abiding doubt provided ready-mades is always based on veil of certainty that seems to about the visual indifferenceand, at the same fall across human consciousness too eastime, on the total absence of good ily and too quickly. or bad taste.5' advice and Duchamp took Poincar&'s Duchamp claimed that he had chosen put things together that did not seem to the ready-mades precisely because they belong together. He chose ready-mades were visually neutral-he neither liked and put them together with art objects; them nor disliked them-and that their he chose intellectual disciplines-mathe-

that one's involved in interpretation and aesthetic oincar6 demonstrated

Fall 1984

257

6 Poincar6, Foundations of Science, pp. 56-60; Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevski's most accessible essay is his Geometrische Untersuchungen zur Theorie der Parallellinien, Berlin, 1840; a translation by George Bruce Halsted (Geometrical Researches on the Theory of Parallels) is included in Non-Euclidean Geometry by Roberto Bonola, New York, Dover, 1955, after p. 268; Bernhard Riemann's most famous paper is his "Uber die Hypothesen welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen," Abhandlungen der Ki5niglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gbttingen, 13 (1868), pp. 1-20. 7 Poincar6,Foundations of Science, p. 60. 8 Ibid., these were the Fuchsian functions mentioned earlier. 9 Ibid., p. 28. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid., p. 63. 14 Ibid., p. 65. 15 Ibid., p. 125. 16 Ibid., p. 483. 17 Ibid., pp. 214-15. 18 Ibid., pp. 215-16. 19 Pierre Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, trans. Ron Padgett, New York, Viking, 1971, p. 107. 20 Philipp Frank, Modern Science and Its Philosophy, New York, Braziller, 1955, p. 8; Frank's discussion was brought to my attention by John Philip Paul, "An Analysis and Evaluation of Henri Poincare's Cosmology, Epistemology and Philosophy of Science," Ph.D. Dissertation, Marquette University, 1969, p. 165. 21 In his interview with Cabanne (cited n. 19), p. 31, Duchamp pointed out that the "'Nude Descending a Staircase' had been refused by the Independents in 1912." He added that the rejection was an occurrence that "helped liberate me completely from the past, in the personal sense of the word. I said, 'All right, since it's like that, there's no question of joining a group-I'm going to count on no one but myself, alone.' " Throughout the rest of his life, Duchamp remained suspicious of taste. In his interview with Katherine Kuh, The Artist's Voice: Talks with Seventeen Artists, New York, Harper & Row, 1960, pp. 91-92, he said, "I consider taste--bad or good--the greatest enemy of art." 22 Marcel Duchamp, Salt Seller: The Writings of Marcel Duchamp (Marchand du Sel), ed. Michel Sanouillet and Elmer Peterson, New York, Oxford University Press, 1973, pp. 89-90. 23 Jouffret, Traitt (cited n. 2), pp. 186-87, my translation. 24 Duchamp (cited n. 22), p. 33. 25 Interview with George Heard Hamilton and Richard Hamilton, "Marcel Duchamp Speaks,"

broadcast by the BBC, third program in the series "Art, Anti-Art," 1959, quoted in Arturo Schwarz, The Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp, New York, Abrams, 1970, p. 23. 26 Interview with Cabanne (cited n. 19), p. 40. 27 In his interview with Cabanne, p. 39, Duchamp credits Gaston de Pawlowski with being a popularizer of the fourth dimension who had explained "that there are flat beings who have only two dimensions, etc." and who had "explained measurements, straight lines, curves, etc." Pawlowski's only mention of flat-beings occurs in his book, Voyage au pays de la quatribme dimension, Paris, Eugene Fasquelle, 1912, pp. 27-28, in the context of a discussion of non-Euclidean geometry: flat-beings living on the surface of a sphere would believe that the angles of a triangle would add up to more than 180 degrees, etc. Jean Clair, Marcel Essai mythanaDuchamp ou le grand fictif" lyse du Grand Verre, Paris, Galilee, 1975, has discussed Duchamp's dependence on Pawlowski. Both Henderson (cited n. 2), pp. 119, 128, nn. 7, 31, 33, and Adcock (cited n. 2), pp. 33-34, argue that Clair's case for Pawlowski's being a major influence on Duchamp is overstated. Pawlowski was without doubt part of Duchamp's intellectual background,as he himself says, but Duchamp's knowledge of geometry is far more sophisticated than anything he could have found in Pawlowski. 28 For an interpretation of Jouffret's diagram in relation to non-Euclidean geometry, the Bicycle Wheel, and the "Oculist Witnesses" in the Large Glass, see: Craig Adcock, "Geometrical Complication in the Art of Marcel Duchamp," Arts Magazine 58 (January 1984), pp. 105-9. 29 Poincar6,Foundations of Science, p. 57. 30 See, for example: H. S. M. Coxeter, NonEuclidean Geometry, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1965, p. 12. 31 Poincar6,Foundations of Science, p. 59. 32 This is pointed out by Henderson (cited n. 2), p. 160. The diagram that Duchamp uses shows tangents drawn from an axis through the points of intersection. Such tangents are equal. 33 See, for example: Bonola (cited n. 6), pp. 250-64. 34 Between 1882 and 1884, Poincare published five landmarkpapers on automorphicfunctions in Acta Mathematica. For this particular result, see: Acta Mathematica 1 (1882), pp. 1-62, esp. p. 8 and p. 52; reprinted in Henri Poincar6, Oeuvres, Paris, Gauthier-Villars, 1954, II, pp. 108-68. 35 See: Kline (cited n. 5), pp. 916-17. 36 Poincar6,Foundations of Science, pp. 58-60. 37 Henderson (cited n. 2), p. 160. 38 Poincar6,Foundations of Science, pp. 58-59. 39 Duchamp (cited n. 22), p. 72. 40 Ibid., p. 33. 41 Poincar6, Foundations of Science, p. 64. 42 Ibid., pp. 64-65.

43 Poincar6, Mathematics and Science: Last Essays, pp. 57-58. 44 Duchamp (cited n. 22), p. 36. 45 Poincar6, Mathematics and Science: Last Essays, pp. 58-59. 46 Dore Ashton, "An Interview with Marcel Duchamp," Studio International, 171 (June 1966), p. 246. 47 Duchamp (cited n. 22), p. 36. 48 Ibid., pp. 31-32. 49 Poincar6, Mathematics and Science: Last Essays, pp. 58-59. 50 Ibid., p. 43. 51 Interviewwith Cabanne (cited n. 19), p. 48. 52 See: Duchamp's interviews with Kuh (cited n. 21), pp. 91-92; with Jeanne Siegel, "Some Late Thoughts of Marcel Duchamp," Arts Magazine, 43 (December 1968-January 1969), p. 21; and with Francis Roberts, "I Propose to Strain the Laws of Physics," Art News, 67 (December 1968), p. 62. 53 Interview with Otto Hahn, "Marcel Duchamp," L'Express (Paris), no. 684 (July 23, 1964), p. 22. The original passage in French is worth quoting at greater length: "Le gofit est momentan6, c'est une mode. Mais ce que l'on considere comme une forme esth6tique est d6barrass6du gout. On attend donc cinquante ans, et la mode disparait. Les choses prennent alors un sens. En fin de compte, c'est une entourloupette:une autre forme de gout. Ce qui ne l'6tait pas sur le moment le devient plus tard. Si on est logique, on doute de l'histoire de l'art.... Le public est victime d'un v6ritable complot 6bahi. Les critiques parlent de la 'v6rit6 de l'art' comme on dit 'la v6rit6 de la religion.' Les gens suivent comme des moutons de Panurge. Moi, je n'accepte pas, c'est inexistant. Ce sont des voiles invent6s. Cela n'exista pas plus qu'en religion. D'ailleurs, je ne crois en rien, car croire donne lieu a un mirage." 54 Interview with Cabanne (cited n. 19), p. 17. 55 Interview with Robert Lebel, "Marcel Duchamp, maintenant et ici," L'Oeil (Paris), no. 149 (May 1967), p. 20. 56 Interview with Ashton (cited n. 46), p. 247.

Craig Adcock is Assistant Professor of Art History at The Florida State University, Tallahassee.

258

Art Journal