Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Body as Weapon
Beau Rhee
Department of Dance
Barnard College, Columbia University
Spring 2007
Abstract
We need number, measure, and law as armor and as a weapon,
In the summer of 1928, the Bauhaus School in Dessau, Germany offered a course
entitled Human, or Mensch taught by Oskar Schlemmer. Often considered one of the
most influential art schools of the twentieth century, the Bauhaus flourished between 1919
and 1933. Pedagogically, artistically, and theoretically, the Bauhaus was a powerhouse
that produced and exported new modernist ideas about art, industry, architecture, theater,
and design. Here, Oskar Schlemmer taught the Human course, which combined
visual, biological, and philosophical studies to create a full understanding of the man as a
social, bodily, and spiritual being. 3 Within the framework of Bauhaus pedagogy, the
existence of this class within the curriculum demonstrates the importance placed on the
human body. The artist and teacher most dedicated to this idea was Oskar Schlemmer. A
multifaceted artist and teacher who made paintings, sculptures, dances, and theater sets,
he centered his work around the human body and its interaction with the world. His
Oskar Schlemmer, Perspektiven address, quoted in Karin von Maur, The Art of Oskar
Schlemmer, in Oskar Schlemmer, ed. Arnold Lehman and Brenda Richardson, (Baltimore: The
Baltimore Art Museum, 1980) p. 120.
Oskar Schlemmer, Theater (Bhne), in Theater of the Bauhaus, ed. Walter Gropius and Arthur
Wensinger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), p. 81.
Oskar Schlemmer, Man: the Teaching Notes from the Bauhaus (Cambridge: M.I.T Press, 1972), p.
20.
closest companion and wife, Helena Tutien Tut Schlemmer, explains that the
guiding concept of his life was the idea: man within space. 4 His paradigm of the
body is evident not only in his Mensch curriculum but also in his essays Man and the
Art Figureand Theater, as well as in his Bauhaus Dances, works that can be
thought of as distilled crystallizations of his work at the Bauhaus from 1921 to 1930.
Schlemmers dance-theater works reveal that his project was to create a new, modern
understanding of the human body. His views on the body are inherently paradoxical:
radically abstract yet deeply humane, intensely simplified yet subtly complex. He
emerges as an artist deeply influenced by early modernist concerns, yet also immensely
dedicated to finding timeless, universal forms that eloquently expressed the
contemporary human condition. A historically informed and visually specific analysis of
his choreographic and theoretical work at the Bauhaus offers an understanding of his
unified, ordered, and profound allegory of the modern human body that transcended the
chaos of the modern era. The allegory of the human body is ultimately one of identity.
Tut Schlemmer, ed., Letters and Diaries of Oskar Schlemmer (Middletown: Wesleyan University
Press, 1972), p. xii.
Background
The dates of Schlemmers birth and death give us a brief glimpse of the range of
experiences that must have filled his life. Born in 1888, his life spanned one of the most
rapidly modernizing periods in European history. From 1914 to 1943, the year he died, he
lived through World War I, the Weimar Republic, and the first four years of World War II.
The rapid and chaotic modernization that took place doing his lifetime coincided with the
development of major artistic and intellectual movements. At a young age, shortly after
both his parents passed away, Oskar Schlemmer made a living for himself as an artisan,
working as a design craftsman in a wood-inlay factory. 5 Because of his excellent work, he
received a scholarship at the Stuttgart Akademie der Bildenden Kunst (Stuttgart Academy
of the Plastic Arts), where he studied from 1906 to 1911. 6 He developed an extremely
important and influential relationship with his teacher Adolf Hlzel, a painter linked to the
German Werkbund and the head of the Stuttgart Akademie. Hlzels theoretically rich
Werkbund philosophy concerning the aestheticization of the objects of everyday modern
life greatly influenced Schlemmer, giving him an early exposure to deeply theoretically
grounded art practices. 7 He was one of Holzels star students; Oskar Schlemmer and
Willi Baumeister painted the murals for the main pavilion of the Cologne Werkbund
6
7
Oskar Schlemmer, ed. Arnold Lehman and Brenda Richardson, (Baltimore: The Baltimore Art
Museum, 1980) p. 195.
Letters and Diaries of Oskar Schlemmer, p. 3.
Vernon Lidtke, Twentieth Century Germany, in Oskar Schlemmer, ed. Arnold Lehman and
Brenda Richardson (Baltimore: The Baltimore Museum of Art, 1986), p. 29.
exhibition. The ideas of the German Werkbund involved, above all, a search for a unique
German style in terms of design aesthetic and theory in direct relationship with the rapid
industrialization of Germany at the turn of the twentieth century. Founded in 1907, the
Werkbund aspired to a cooperation of art, industry and crafts in the ennoblement of
commercial activity by means of education, propaganda, and a united stand on pertinent
questions. 8 This cooperation must have been one of the foundational ideas that
Schlemmer encountered with Hlzel; an instance of early modernist thinking that
undoubtedly influenced his own practices. After studying at the Akademie, Schlemmer
founded the Neckarstrae Gallery, which was the first gallery to exhibit modern Cubist
paintings in Stuttgart, an early display of the dedication to Modernism that continued
throughout his life. 9
From 1914 to 1918, he served in World War I. He served briefly in the field as a
soldier, but worked mainly as a mapmaker. He does not seem to have had a terribly
disturbing war experience. In a letter to his closest friend, Otto Meyer, he humorously
wrote of his mapmaking work (which involved aerial photography): I hope that
something positive comes of all these negatives. 10 Although serving in the war no
doubt came with dark encounters, his mapmaking job gave him much time and freedom;
his journals are rich with entries on art movements throughout Europe (Futurism, Cubism,
8
Heinrich Waentig: Wirtscahft und Kunst, (Jena, 1909) p.47 quoted in Magdalena Droste, Bauhaus,
(New York: Taschen, 2005) p. 12.
9
Tut Schlemmer, Letters and Diaries of Oskar Schlemmer, p. 5.
10
Letters and Diaries of Oskar Schlemmer, p. 60
11
Man and Mask, prod. and dir. Gottfried Just, 40 min., Bavaria Atelier GMBH Production , 1968,
videocassette.
German. Based on the structure of Medieval communities where artisans lived and
worked together, the Bauhaus was conceived as a school that aimed to dissolve the
sharp line between artist and craftsman so that a whole range of artistic media would
exist together in unity. Walter Gropius, the author of the Bauhaus manifesto and the
founder of the school, famously stated that the Bauhaus community would work without
a retreat into the ivory tower, and look for a new synthesis of art and modern
technology. 12 This progressive and ambitious institution gathered together artists/
teachers of many different movements; indeed, Kandinsky (a Transcendentalist) taught
painting; Laszlo Moholy-Nagy innovative photography and photomontage; Paul Klee color
and form classes; Marcel Breuer design, while de Stijl artist Theo van Doesburg played
an integral role in determining the course program. 13 Unlike Paris, Weimar was a small
provincial city, so this kind of internationalism shows the appeal of Gropius ideas to a
wide range of artists, as well as the social and artistic openness of the Bauhaus. A very
early member of this community, Schlemmer was able to pursue his vision of a new
painting and a new theater through the intellectual and material resources of the Bauhaus.
The politics of the Bauhaus were decidedly left-wing and Socialist. The idea of
community that permeated Bauhaus art and life can be seen from its founding manifesto
written by Gropius. Let us together create the new building of the future, which will be
12
13
Walter Gropius, Introduction,in Theater of the Bauhaus, ed. Walter Gropius and Arthur
Wensinger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), p. 7.
Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture (London: Thames and Hudson, 2004), p. 123-124.
everything in one form. Architecture and sculpture and painting. 14 In this manifesto,
building is not only an artistic and intellectual activity, but also a social one. Building
leveled the traditional distinction between bourgeois artist and proletarian worker and
united them under a new concept and activity. The Bauhaus hierarchy of apprentice and
master (student and teacher) reveals the sociological connections to the Medieval guilds
on which Gropius modeled the school. Furthermore, the social structure of the Bauhaus,
within the context of prevailing German cultural norms, which emphasized democratic
rather than hierarchical relationships, marks the school as a type of social experiment.
Schlemmer, though much more interested in intellectual and artistic endeavors
than political ones, was clearly aligned with the left in politics. In college he participated
in Socialist demonstrations; he supported a leveling of class structures and admired the
Russians for their revolution in 1917. 15 The German revolution [is] a pale imitation of the
Russian; we shall be lucky to get a measly democracy, he writes on January 25,
1919. 16 One can find these socialist ideas in Bauhaus aesthetic philosophies; thus,
Schlemmers ideas and works must also be understood in the context of this leftist
political stance. Much of his work is imbued with a knowledge of Socialist ideas of
community as well as a knowledge of post-revolutionary ideas and art, such as
Constructivism.
14
15
16
Walter Gropius, Bauhaus Manifesto, quoted in Magdalena Droste, Bauhaus (New York: Taschen,
2005) p. 10.
Letters and Diaries of Oskar Schlemmer, p. 65
Ibid.
Gropius appointed Schlemmer as the director of the sculpture and mural studios
in 1921. 17 Schlemmer initially worked on experimental theater with Lothar Schreyer, who
was the first director of the stage workshop, but later become the director of the Bauhaus
stage in 1923. 18 His important and early work, The Triadic Ballet was conceived and
choreographed from 1918 to 1921, and premiered at the Stuttgart Landestheater in
1922. 19 The Bauhaus Dances, choreographed between 1923 and 1928, are more
representative of the artistic and theoretical work that would occupy him while teaching at
the Bauhaus. 20 A series of short dances consisting mainly of solos, duets, and trios, The
Bauhaus Dances are named simply, with titles such as Gesture Dance, Hoop Dance, Pole
Dance, and Space Dance. Although Schlemmer remained a painter throughout his life,
dance was a medium that allowed him to explore his primary theoretical and artistic
interest: the human figure. Furthermore, dance seems to have marked an artistic
progression from the two dimensional medium of painting to a more spatially oriented
practice. In a letter to his great friend Otto Meyer, written from a battlefield in February
1918, Schlemmer states: I certainly see great possibilities in the realm of ballet and
pantomime I believe this independent branch of the theatrical arts will provide the
17
18
19
20
impetus for a renewal. 21 Schlemmer was not a trained ballet dancer, nor was he
particularly interested in dance as a young man, but this newfound interest quickly
bloomed into a life of its own, and by 1927, he joined Rudolf Laban at the Magdeburg
Dance Congress. 22 From the years 1923 onward, he also began to write and lecture more
about dance and theater. Essays such as Man and the Art Figure (Kunstfigur) and
Theater (Bhne) are examples of how he continually tried to theorize his developing
choreographic ideas. As Schlemmers work matured with time, his visions formed a
choreographic vocabulary that existed as a theatrical embodiment of Bauhaus concerns.
More importantly, though, his choreographic language also signified Schlemmers ideas
about his understanding of the human body as a vessel to creating a modern allegory of
human identity.
21
22
10
11
Schlemmer protested loudly against this decision, and in 1927 the theater reappeared officially
on the Bauhaus Dessau campus roster of classes.23 Schlemmer worked intensively with the
students who took Theater classes from 1927 to 1929. Some of the students he worked with were
Lux Feininger, Andreas Weininger, Werner Siedhoff, Walter Kaminsky, Manda von Kreibig, and
Karla Grosch. Although none were trained in ballet from an early age, the Bauhaus offered
gymnastics and movement classes that the theater students were strongly encouraged to take.
In 1929, this group of Theater Workshop students and Schlemmer made a tour of Germany and
Switzerland, receiving a large amount of success and attention. When Hannes Meyer took over
Walter Gropius position, however, the budget for theater was reduced. Schlemmer had to give
up his elaborate costumes and sets and the students formed an extremely political, Piscatorian
theater called The Young Group which was heavily inspired by Soviet theater and minimally by
Schlemmers work.24
What seems particularly alarming about the reception of Debra McCalls 1982
reconstruction of Schlemmers Bauhaus Dances in the United States is the flat consensus on
the abstraction and metaphysical qualities of Schlemmers theater that seems to drain the
cultural importance of Schlemmers work. In a New York Times review on October 31, 1982,
Anna Kisselgoff does little more than situate Schlemmer within a rather uninteresting gloss of the
Bauhaus and suggests that it would be useful to see the metaphysical dimension behind
23
24
12
Schlemmer's own abstract dance theater.25 D.S. Moyinans article on the Bauhaus Dances
published in the Autumn 1984 issue of The Drama Review also disappointingly does little more
than quote McCall and describe her reconstruction process, rather than offering any historical or
thematic interpretation of the work. An article by Susanne Lahusen published in Dance Research
in Autumn 1986 concludes rather anticlimactically with this point: Schlemmer had sensed that
his abstract style was too avant-garde for the dance world of his time.26 If Lahusen had
considered that Nijinskys The Rite of Spring and Malevichs Victory Over the Sun both
premiered in 1913, or that The Tradic Ballet premiered in 1922, she would have understood that
The Bauhaus Dances were in no way abstract works that sprung out of the blue, but were
developed from well established modernist ideas about the body and theater. McCall gives a
slightly more sophisticated reading of his work when she speaks of the spirit of play,
playfulness of the characters. Theyre like big adult-sized puppets. Each of them has character
and temperament.27
What takes the Bauhaus Dances beyond the level of conceptual visual play with abstract
forms is the level at which Schlemmer engages with a dark humor that creates a space that is at
once orderly but inexplicably dangerous, a dark humor that brings to life characters that seem to
25
Anna Kisselgoff, They Created Dance Works at the Bauhaus, too The New York Times.
October 31, 1982.
26
Susanne Lahusen. Oskar Schlemmer: Mechanical Ballets? Dance Research: The Journal of
the Society for Dance Research, Vol. 4, No. 2. (Autumn, 1986), p. 76.
27
13
hide behind puffy protective costumes and beautiful (but often frightening) masks. I argue that
abstraction of the body is merely a means to create a body of works that point to the vulnerability
of the modern human condition. Although the Bauhaus Dances do have solos, the longer threeminute pieces are always trios. Rather than exploring themes of an individual man finding his
identity, or a relationship between two people, Schlemmer chooses a number that he believes
implies the collective, or the larger social matrix. When asked why he named his longer work The
Triadic Ballet, Schlemmer explained: Because three is a supremely important, prominent
number, within which egotistic one and dualistic contrast are transcended, giving way to the
collective (July 5, 1926).28 It is within this collective, then, that Schlemmers humor operates
at its most incisive and critical level.
The costumes most frequently worn in The Bauhaus Dances are padded uniforms that
hide the natural contour of the individual body and make each dancer appear as though the
body were a prototype. According to Andreas Weininger and Lux Feininger, the costumes were
made of colored linen and quilting.29 Usually, dancers are differentiated by different colored
costumes. The curved shape of the unitard makes it impossibly to differentiate the gender of the
performers. These curved prototypes of bodies are found in Schlemmers painting as well. On
canvas, his figures (regardless of gender) have bulging chests and hips; often the only
differentiation from one figure to the other is found in the hairstyle or clothing. For the most part,
28
29
14
the nude figure remains a set of distilled, curved, non-gendered forms. Most importantly, on
stage, the element of padding both humorously and ominously functions as a protective layer
from the outside world. Clothing functions in society as a both functional and cultural item. On
stage, however, costumes take on a mostly aesthetic role, beyond the need to allow movement.
It is a darkly humorous statement when a costume functions primarily as a protective layer; it
signals that the space outside of the body present both physical and psychological danger.
Schlemmers constumes were directly inspired by Russian Constructivist clothing experiments
and costumes. Because of Schlemmers admiration of the Russians as well as the influence of
Constructivism on Bauhaus thinking, it is extremely likely that Constructivism influenced his
costume choices. The aesthetic of Schlemmers padded body suits matches the unitard suits
or prozhodezha worksuits that the Constructivists wore, originally designed by Varvara
Stepanova for Rodchenko.30
Schlemmers masks are also important to consider, especially when determining the
type of subjectivity the performer on stage is projecting. As the costumes do to the body,
Schlemmers masks reduce individual features from the human face and make the face of the
performer appear as a type. Rather than, as in the tradition of European theater and opera,
which conveys the persona of an individual character, Schlemmer explores the possibility of an
establishment of a type of figure that could serve as a metaphor for a broad range of people. In
30
Christine Lodder, Russian Constructivism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983) p. 212.
15
31
Oskar Schlemmer, Theater (Bhne), in Theater of the Bauhaus, ed. Walter Gropius and Arthur
Wensinger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996) p. 101.
16
move; because yellow moves about three times faster than blue, yellow ends up traversing three
times as much space. Yellow takes interesting diagonal patterns while the blue dancer plods on
a straight line. Through speed and patterning, Schlemmer is able to use contrast and humor in
his work. One extremely interesting moment is towards the end, when a cue creates a
dangerously close collision between the three moving bodies, but the respective speeds in
which they move stops the possible collision or contact. This moment is at once eminently
dangerous but also very humorous, as it seems as though the whole system of the cue that the
piece rests on will ultimately fail; however, the feeling of suspense is overcome by a prevailing
calm. This moment that almost breaks the calm that Schlemmer sets up is both humorous and
critical. This humor is dependent on a tension between a greater order maintaining its structure
and the possibility of its complete demise. Furthermore, this moment calls to attention the
disconnect between the dancers on stage; this greater order seems one that unites the dancers
together in terms of their tasks, but separates them in terms of human contact.
Gesture Dance is another trio, with three characters who wear separate colorsyellow, blue, and red. Yellow opens the piece, striding aggressively on stage from stage right.
After hopping around his seat, he sits. Then Red enters from the upstage right, walking a little
slower, but with purpose. He does four grand battements around his seat, then sits down.
Strangely enough, then Blue enters from stage left, dragging his body with his arms in a push up
position and then hops in front of his bench. At this moment, all three make a strange zzzzz
17
noise and sit down in unison. Then begins a contorted, strange conversation. Yellow speaks in a
hysterically high whisper to Red, behind a secretive hand. Both
hands on the ground and throwing their heads back to express their glee. They look at each
other, and rub their hands together as though plotting some sort of scheme. Red leans over and
then tells something to Blue. Upon hearing what Red says, both Red and Blue sway in laughter,
then their laughter escalates until they laugh in a violently percussive rhythm while bouncing on
their chairs. When the laughter stops, the three get up and swirl together in movement. A whistle
blows from afar; they separate and walk for a while in a circle. Then, Yellow signals for the other
two to stop. They stop, and the three link hands, and perform a fairly cheerful maypole dance.
Then, they go off as they came in, Red and Yellow exit stage right, and Blue to stage left.
This piece functions as a comment on the secrecy and unreliability of human
communication, especially those conversations that build power structures or hierarchies
between people. Communication never happens within this collective; rather, it is a decree that
unites these three in movement, whether it is the whistle or Yellows gesture. By the end of the
piece, it is Yellow who holds the power over Red and Blue. One could read this as a piece that
shows how one person can essentially construct his own power over a group of people. This is,
of course, a frightening and incisive insight- probably coming from Schlemmers experience
with the chaos and corruption of Weimar Republic politics.
Already, an analysis of Schlemmers two trios show that he was not an aesthete
18
concerned only with making beautiful abstract forms. Behind what seems only playful and
inpenetrable mechanical gestures, there is a certain severity and alarming seriousness. The two
other trios, Game of Bricks and Flats Dance also address issues of identity and power
construction.
Game of Bricks is an architectural piece; one can almost imagine the architecturally
inclined faculty at the Bauhaus viewing the piece with great glee. In a way, this piece seems to
presuppose Judson Dance Theaters task-oriented performances. The main action involves the
three dancers arranging large cubes in various arrangements. Each of the cubes six sides are
painted red, yellow, blue, white, black, and grey. The piece opens with all three primary colors of
the cubes equally displayed. Throughout the beginning of the piece, though, the number of
cubes corresponding to each character seems to signify the amount of control or power that
character has. The title Game of Bricks could be seen as a metaphor for how construction and
architecture is a domain (or game) of control. The conflict occurs when Yellow and Blue decide
to collaborate and build a structure together. They attempt to coalesce Red to give them more
cubes to assist them in building their structure. However, Red refuses to conform and
surprisingly, Red ends up ordering the other two around. Reds movements are brave and
charismatic. Under Reds control, the three build a pyramidal structure, which they push to
rotate when completed. The rotation shows the audience that the structure represents all three
colors equally! The piece seems a hopeful comment on leadership- that when the right person
19
holds power over a group of people, a collective can make a beautiful and equally
representative structure.
Flats Dance is perhaps the darkest of the five trios. Rather than wear different
colored costumes, three dancers wear grey padded costumes and wear white gloves and white
masks. The masks are flat and have holes as eyes and a line for a mouth. The audience does not
see the bodies of the dancers until the end; in the beginning all one sees of the bodies are the
hands, feet, and masks of the dancer floating around the colored planes. The field of movement
is on a plane just as flat as the masks the dancers wear. They hide behind the red, yellow, and
blue planes, playing a game of hide and seek. Individuality has been wiped out- the shifting and
oscillating planes comprise a beautiful visual puzzle. At the end, the game of hide and seek is
over, and the three grey bodies reveal themselves. At this moment, the dancer on stage left
shoots the one who stands center. This dancer falls, and the dancer stage right catches the
fallen body. The sheer unexpected violence after the neutrality and abstraction of the shifting
colored planes is shocking. This is a comment on the danger of revealing identity in a society
where people remain hidden behind identically reproduced masks, a society in which revealing
who you are can potentially lead to death.
If indeed Schlemmers main concern is, as Tut Schlemmer puts it, man and
space, than what kind of man and what kind of space does his work suggest? Upon a closer
reading of the way in which humor operates in The Bauhaus Dances, it seems impossible to
20
write off Schlemmers ideas of man and space as inapplicable aesthetic theorizations, or as
Kisselgoff, the New York Times author, suggested in 1982, to understand his work through the
metaphysical dimension behind [his] abstract dance theater. The space on stage in
Schlemmers dances, organized by the neat grid on stage, oscillates and shivers between a
rigid order and unexpected moments of madness and chaos. It is not as though the organized
grid space of the space were just a clean blank slate; rather, it is textured with an immanent
sense of danger and unpredictability. One must read Schlemmers conception of the body,
then, revealing a similar type of oscillation. Even if the literature on his work emphasizes the
abstract form of his costumes and movement, we must consider what paradigm of the body the
costumes and movement construct. Similarly to the stage space, the costumes at once hide and
heighten the characteristics of the characters on stage, illuminating often beautiful and often
traumatic insights.
21
32
Oskar Schlemmer, Man and the Art Figure, in Theater of the Bauhaus, ed. Walter Gropius and
Arthur Wensinger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996) p. 17.
22
attitude:
By planning for a moment to come (on such a day, such a date, such a
minute), to inscribe a readymadeThe important thing then is just
this matter of timing, this snapshot effect, like a speech delivered on no
matter what occasion but at such and such an hour. It is a kind of
rendezvous. Naturally inscribe that date, hour, minute on the readymade
as information.33
It is as though the work of art has become a mechanical object, one that can be produced
instantaneously provided the conditions allow. Photography also played an important role in both
Dadaist and Surrealist discourse. Duchamp mentions the snapshot effect in the quote
above, pointing to the change in artistic process the mechanical tool of photography had to the
process of art making. Walter Benjamins famous Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction
comments on the fact that the reproducibility of photography strips away the notion of a work of
arts distinct and unique sense of aura and cult value, and instead the camera intervenes
with the resources of its lowering and liftings, its interruptions and isolations, its extensions and
accelerationsthe camera introduces us to unconscious optics as does psychoanalysis to
unconscious impulses.34 That is, the mechanical often replaces, magnifies, or surpasses the
human consciousness and thus affects the very state of human subjectivity.
It is Schlemmers exploration of this tension, then, between the mechanic and the
human in his choreographic work that provides rich material for a formal analysis of the
choreography not only in terms of content, as was explored in Chapter One, but also in terms of
33
34
Marcel Duchamp, Salt Seller: The Writings of Marcel Duchamp (New York: Oxford University Press,
1973) p 32.
Walter Benjamin, Illuminations trans. Hannah Arendt (New York: Schocken Books, 1968) p. 237.
23
the very physical conception of the human body. Beyond the dark content and sarcastic humor
of the piece, the body itself seems to hinge between either extremely mechanic and automatic
movements or extremely recognizable everyday human gestures. Often, the sharp distinction
between machinelike movements and human gesture disintegrates, and thus the very distinction
between human and machine seems to disintegrate. In Gesture Dance, the sardonic laughter is
executed with such rhythmic certainty that it seems to almost reference the movement of a
machine. Or, in Game of Bricks, as the dancers move the bricks around the space, their
movement is so extremely controlled that the every day gestures seem to oscillate between
automatism and familiarity. To Schlemmer, the body is both an organic and mechanical entity
and is characterized both by its own internal laws but also its response to external space.
In Schlemmers case, then, the external space surrounding the organic body
seems particularly rigid and structured, limiting the body to certain square or linear types of
movement. This conception of space can be understood as his architectural understanding of
theatrical space. The Bauhaus was an institution dedicated to architecture. However, many of
the architectural ideas discussed at the Bauhaus can be traced back to the earlier Werkbund
and De Stijl movements. After all, Walter Gropius, who trained originally with the German
Werkbund group, was the director of the school from 1919 to 1927. Theo van Doesberg, a key
figure in the De Stijl movement, also taught at the Bauhaus from 1922 to 1924.
The iconic Werkbund building, Fagus Shoe Factory from 1912, designed by Walter
24
Gropius, is a coining example of the Werkbund architecture that directly influenced Bauhaus
building aesthetics and, ultimately, Schlemmers own conception of space. The Fagus Shoe
Factory was one of the first explorations in architectural building in exclusively glass and steel.
Though this aesthetic has now become the prototype for commercial skyscraper building, at the
time of the Factorys conception, glass was thought of as an almost transcendental material
that could transform a dark, damp interior space into a bright, transparent one. This idea was
particularly powerful in that glass could transform the usually miserable working environment of a
factory into an almost pleasurable one. At the same time, though, the steel grid emphasized the
mechanical, industrial, disciplined structure of the building as well as the very internal
mechanisms of the factory. The space was both open to external light but at the same time was
cohered by the intense internal logic and rigor of the grid. The constant reiteration of the grid
within the factory, then, could be seen as an architectural quotation relating the space of the
factory to a greater idea of order, industry, and discipline. In this way, the structure is not a selfcontained whole, but the logic of an external order determines the behavior of this structure.
One could look to De Stijl works to see further explorations of breaking apart an internally
cohesive architecture. The De Stijl movement was centralized in Holland and took root by about
1917. De Stijl simply means The Style, and the aim of the movement was to create a
common language of contemporary material forms that were appropriate for the times. Some of
the key figures included Piet Mondrian, Theo van Doesburg, and Gerrit Thomas Rietveld. From
25
one of their proclamations: Under the supremacy of materialism, handicraft reduced men to
the level of machines; the proper tendency for the medium (in the sense of cultural development)
is as the unique medium of the very opposite, social liberation.35 Indeed, when one looks at an
early Gerrit Thomas Rietveld design Red/Blue Chair from 1918, one sees the rigid order of the
grid established by earlier movements dispersed by what seems to be a liberation of the grid
from predictability. The back of the seat is a floating diagonal plane; the black wood planks that
hold the chair together are painted yellow at the ends, creating a further sense of movement. It is
as though this design is not simply reiterating the order of the grid, but is emphasizing the
movement possible in the reconstruction or retheorization of the grid. Theo van Doesburgs
Spatial Diagram for a House from 1924 is another example of the De Stijl aesthetic where a
predictable organization of planes breaks down, and the planes seem to hover asymmetrically
between each other as though caught in motion. It is as though a greater logic of forms cannot
be pinned down and stabilized; rather, the aesthetic of the De Stijl points to the possibility of
movement and change within a seemingly closed system.
The space Schlemmer creates on stage, then, can be related to both Werkbund and
De Stijl philosophies. Especially in The Bauhaus Dances, Schlemmer literally draws a white grid
on the stage that rigorously orders the movement and relationships of the dancers on stage.
However, the movement makes apparent that this grid is there to call attention to the moments in
35
William Curtis, Modern Architecture Since 1900 (New York: Phaidon, 1996) p. 156.
26
which the order of this grid is shattered. In Schlemmers work, then, the body reacts to this
architectural space in a both critical and complicit way. Often it seems as though the body is
simply an organism repeating the rules of the space around it, like a factory worker constantly
repeats the hierarchical logic of a factory. Amidst this passive repetition, Schlemmer employs
everyday gestural movement that eerily calls to attention the human subject hidden deep within
the bulky cushions of the costume, the seemingly endlessly repetitive following of the grid. The
body is at once a receptacle that appears pre-coded to follow certain motions and at once a
being with spontaneous communicative impulses. This dual subjectivity of the body is a powerful
method of criticism that extends beyond the immediate humor discussed in chapter one.
That is, Schlemmers conscious decision to incorporate a discussion on space into his
dances could be seen as a powerful tool that engages dance with a discourse on space and
subjectivity. That is, space could be thought of as a physical structure, but space could also be
thought of as the interaction between bodies and physical structures. Thus, it seems that to
Schlemmer, dance is a powerful medium in which this interaction can be fully explored. Indeed,
Schlemmer states in his essay Theater that The stage is above all an architectonic spatial
organism where all things happening to it and within it exist in a spatially conditioned
relationship.36 The very phrase architectonic spatial organism defines the stage as both
a mechanic and organic space that obeys architectural laws as well as the laws of a natural
36
Oskar Schlemmer, Theater (Bhne), in Theater of the Bauhaus, ed. Walter Gropius and Arthur
Wensinger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996) p. 85
27
37
Ibid, p. 92.
28
form, while actually they are only prerequisites for its creation.38
That is, Schlemmers conception of space within his Bauhaus Dances could be seen as an
attempt in his part to approach mechanized space as an aesthetic tool to create new theater
works. Similarly to the De Stijl embrace of the grid as a visual design tool that could be used to
mobilize movement, Schlemmer seems to incorporate the rigidity of the grid in his theater
space in order to mobilize a new kind of movement and theater that could take mechanization
beyond utility and into the realm of creation.
The four types of transformations of the human body that Schlemmer proposes in his
essay Man and the Art Figure are examples of a mobilization of mechanization as a tool for
creation. Looking at these four transformations, one can see the direct correlation between
Schlemmers choreography and his engagement with architecture, industry, and
mechanization. Schlemmer defines the first type, ambulant architecture, as cubical forms
transferred to the human shape: head, torso, arms, legs are transformed into spatial-cubical
constructions.39 This conception of the body literally truncates the body into architectural
forms; at the same time, this truncation provides the basis for a new type of mechanical bodily
movement. All other three types of transformation, technical organism, the marionette, and
dematerialization, point to a certain mechanistic property of the body that is then accentuated. In
a way, this approach in interpreting the material properties through mechanical laws emphasizes
38
39
Oskar Schlemmer, Man and the Art FIgure in Theater of the Bauhaus, ed. Walter Gropius and
Arthur Wensinger (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996) p. 31
Ibid, p. 26.
29
the possibility of order that the body holds. And if, as Schlemmer states we need number,
measure, and law as armor and as a weapon,
lest we be swallowed up by chaos, 40 these models of orderly bodily transformations
could be seen as Schlemmers constructive theoretical weapon. These transformations
show us that Schlemmers original conceptions of body and space, which stemmed from the
unity of the mechanical study of architectural space and organic study of the human body, were
models that provided a contemporary and philosophically rich understanding of the body. This
kind of understanding, then, could change the very subjectivity of the viewer by providing a
sense of order and law to the body and space.
40
Oskar Schlemmer, Perspektiven address, quoted in Karin von Maur, The Art of Oskar
Schlemmer, in Oskar Schlemmer, ed. Arnold Lehman and Brenda Richardson, (Baltimore: The
Baltimore Art Museum, 1980) p. 120.
30
42
Walter Benjamin, The Storyteller, Illuminations, trans Hannah Arendt (New York: Schocken
Books, 1968) p. 84.
Oskar Schlemmer, Man: Teaching Notes from the Bauhaus. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972) p. 26.
31
The syllabus was meticulously planned for twenty-one periods, in which he taught
one visual studio class, one biology class, and then one philosophy class. This threeclass cycle was repeated with different content seven times. He gave biology lectures
such as Respiration and Circulation, philosophy lectures such as Materialism,
Realism, and Idealism, and formal visual studios such as Man and Space. 43
Taught in one of Schlemmers last years at the Bauhaus, this syllabus gives a
comprehensive list of subjects that Schlemmer believed were the most essential ways to
understand modern man. The order in which the cycles were repeated: form, biology, and
philosophy suggest how Schlemmer conceived his theories of the human body. His
dedication to the materiality of the body was a reflection of Bauhaus formalism, which
centered around the study of the materiality of a medium before going into theoretical
discussion. For example, when making a wood sculpture, the unique qualities of the wood
would be the basis for the artwork. Schlemmer states that in his form classes, he
wants his students to explore the ways of movement, the choreography of the everyday,
organized movement in gymnastics and dance. 44 The study of the mechanics and
kinetics of movement (or dance) lead to studies of the science of the body as well as the
philosophies of the human body and being. Whether paintings, dances, or writings,
Schlemmers most serious works are based on studies on the unique material quality of
43
44
Ibid, p. 29-30.
Ibid., p 26.
32
the body. However, his ideas theorize this body in ways that go beyond its physical
qualities, incorporating philosophy, biology, and even psychology. Thus, for Schlemmer,
human form is a method for him to get to theorization and philosophy. Rather than being
the means and the end, his artistic and choreographic works could be seen as a means
to communicate his theory or philosophy of the body. Working backward, then, one can
analyze the theories of the body in his class Mensch to ask what meaning they can hold
for us today as contemporary thinkers and artists.
Often Schlemmers work is written off simply as an interesting mechanical dance
experiment; However, to fully understand Schlemmers seemingly blind dedication to
finding order, abstraction, and universal laws in the human body, one must locate his
work within the upheaval, change, and trauma of the Weimar Republic in Germany. That
is, his writing and choreography must be situated and interpreted politically. If, as he
states, we need number, measure, and law as armor and as a weapon, lest we be
swallowed up by chaos 45, he is asserting that his work itself is a weapon against the
crises of modernity, such as displacement, homelessness, rupture, and trauma. When
one looks beyond the organized precision of his public writing (such as Man and the
Art Figure or the Mensch syllabus) and examines his personal journal entries, the
45
Oskar Schlemmer, Perspektiven address, quoted in Karin von Maur.The Art of Oskar
Schlemmer, in Oskar Schlemmer, ed. Arnold Lehman and Brenda Richardson, (Baltimore: The
Baltimore Art Museum, 1980) p. 120.
33
46
47
34
texts and thinkers. He draws from a wide range of historical artists and writers to base his
course on: Albrecht Durers studies in bodily proportions, Egyptian theories of the body,
as well as Polycles, the Greek thinker who established the canon of the human body,
Leonardo da Vinci, and Fritsch the anatomist. Schlemmer seems to operate in a method
that is the direct opposite method of the Dadaists, who rejected history and theorized that
the future should be opened up in the form of continual breaks rather than by continuity.
In his diary he speaks of the Dadaists: Arp and the others in Zurich-a lot of it seems to
be hollow decoration. 48 What Schlemmer seems most opposed to is art that is simply
reactionary to its environment. Schlemmer was an artist who stated that even taking
one step is a most grave and serious event, 49 or that each small step could hold great
meaning. It seems that the historiography of the body he presented to students was a
way of assigning great historical and philosophical significance to the body. The
significance of the body, however, is not an external knowledge.
He seems to propose that this understanding and study of history is integral to a
formation of identity. When he states in his syllabus that it is essential for the new
life, which should express itself as a modern feeling about the world and life, that man
should be understood as a cosmic being, he emphasizes the personal necessity he
sees in taking this course. Here is the crux of the significance of this course; Schlemmer
48
49
35
proposes that a visual, biological, and philosophical study of the human body is
fundamental to the very subjectivity of an individual. That is, the changes in the modern
world are so drastic that a shift in the conceptual understanding of the body is the basis
for a sound, grounded subjectivity.
Schlemmers theories of the body, then, are based on the idea of a body that is
whole within itself. The body conveys cosmic and universal ideas when looked at in
isolation, as long as it remains within the physical laws of the world around it. Rather than
looking at what the body might be in relationship to other bodies, or looking at states of
the body that change and mutate on a day-to-day basis, such as the processes of aging,
dying, or pain, Schlemmer theorizes what I will call a simulacrum of the body. In the
essay Plato and the Simulacrum Deleuze states that in Western culture we have
proceeded, then, from a first determination of the Platonic motive; to distinguish essence
from appearance, the intelligible from the sensible, the Idea from the image, the model
from the simulacrum. 50 He calls for a re-evaluation of the simulacrum and speaks of the
simulacrum in relationship to art.
The simulacrum is constructed around a disparity, a difference; it
interiorizes a dissimilitude. That is why we can no longer even define it
with regard to the model...the simulacrum includes within itself the
differential point of view, and the spectator is made part of the
simulacrum, which is transformed and deformed according to his point
50
Gilles Deleuze. Plato and the Simulacrum trans. Rosalind Krauss. October, Vol. 27. (Winter,
1983), p. 43.
36
51
52
Ibid, p. 49.
Ibid.
37
s work. The simulacrum points to the rupture, the gap, the irresolvable difference
between reality and the ideal model. However, what the simulacrum does is stubbornly
produce a continuing, spiraling search for, perhaps what Schlemmer would call
number, measure, and law as armor and as a weapon against the otherwise
multiplicitous, chaotic unfolding of events in reality. The very making of a simulacrum,
then, could be seen as an act of resistance against a complicit acceptance reality.
Schlemmers construction of a simulacrum of the human body and human identity was a
weapon against the frustrating and fracturing reality of experience.
38
Bibliography
Bayer, Herbert, Walter Gropius and Ise Gropius . Bauhaus. New York: Museum of
Modern Art, 1938.
Carr, William. The History of Germany: 1815-1945. New York: St. Martins Press, 1979.
Curtis, William. Modern Architecture Since 1900. New York: Phaidon, 1996.
Deleuze, Gilles. Plato and the Simulacrum trans. Rosalind Krauss. October, Vol. 27.
(Winter, 1983), pp. 45-56.
Dodds, George and Tavernor, Robert Ed. Body and building: essays on the changing
relation of body and architecture. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2002.
Droste, Magdalena, Bauhaus, New York: Taschen, 2005.
Marcel Duchamp. Salt Seller: The Writings of Marcel Duchamp. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1973.
Fiedler, Jeannine ed. Social Utopias of the Twenties: Bauhaus, Kibbutz and the Dream of
the New Man. Germany: Mller and Busmann Press , 1995.
Foster, Hal, Rosalind Krauss, Yve-Alain Bois, Benjamin H.D. Buchloh.
39
Kniesche, Thomas W, and Brockmann, Stephen ed. Dancing on the Volcano: essays on
the culture of the Weimar Republic. Columbia SC: Camden House, 1994.
Lahusen, Susanne. Oskar Schlemmer: Mechanical Ballets? Dance Research: The
Journal of the Society for Dance Research, Vol. 4, No. 2. (Autumn, 1986), p. 65-77.
Lehman, Arnold and Richardson, Brenda ed. Oskar Schlemmer. Baltimore: The
Baltimore Museum of Art, 1986.
Lodder, Christine, Russian Constructivism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.
Lee, Stephen J. The Weimar Republic. London: Routledge, 1998.
Man and mask: Oskar Schlemmer and the Bauhaus stage / Director: Gottfried Just.
Videocassette. Bavaria Atelier GMBH Production, 1968.
Moholy-Nagy,Laszlo and Schlemmer,Oskar. The Theater of the Bauhaus. Trans.Arthur
Wensinger. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1996. (Check out of Barnard
Library)
Moynihan, D.S. Oskar Schlemmers Bauhaus Dances: Debra McCalls
Reconstructions The Drama Review: TDR, Vol. 28, No. 3, Reconstruction. (Autumn,
1984), p. 46-58.
Oskar Schlemmer: Muse Cantini Catalogue. Paris: Muse de Marseille, 1999.
Reynolds, Nancy and McCormick, Malcolm. Dance in the Twentieth Century: No Fixed
Points. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.
Schlemmer, Oskar. Man: Teaching Notes from the Bauhaus. Trans. Janet Seligman.
Cambridge: M.I.T Press, 1971.
Schlemmer, Oskar. The Letters and Diaries of Oskar Schlemmer. Ed. Tut Schlemmer.
Trans. Krishna Winston. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1972.
Schwarz, Arturo. The Complete Works of Marcel Duchamp. New York: Delan Greenidge
Editions, 1997.
40
41
Illustrations
1) Oskar Schlemmer, Space Dance 1926 (with Werner Seidhoff, Walter Kaminsky)
2) Space Dance Masks
3) Oskar Schlemmer, Figure in a Grid Space 1924
4) Oskar Schlemmer, Four Transformations 1924
5) Oskar Schlemmer, Man in the Realm of Ideas 1928
6) Oskar Schlemmer, Figure Studies 1928
42