Geographies of Surrealism: introductory notes

By evoking the “geographies” of Surrealism and the internationalization of the movement in the title of the issue, one intends to respond to a line of research that has received particular attention in recent times. The issue is one that, in a certain sense, characterized the history of this avant-garde, even before the outbreak of the Second World War and before the consequent diaspora from France of many intellectuals led to its dissemination overseas. At the same time, choosing two countries such as the United States of America and Italy as case studies might seem strange or contradictory, given that, at least at first glance, the impact of the Surrealist movement in these two nations appears diametrically opposed in terms of importance and consequences. For the United States, in fact, there is a long tradition of research aimed at investigating the spread of Surrealism throughout the nation, traditionally considered, alongside abstract art movements, as one of the two essential artistic stimuli that contributed to the mature development of a fully and authentically American art: a line of investigation that has grown steadily over time and continues to be topical. Quite different is the case in Italy, where Surrealism appeared as a foreign body difficult to interpret and in any case to be rejected, not only – as might seem obvious – in the years of the Fascist dictatorship, in which the avant-garde currents were obviously not well viewed by the official culture, but also in the post-war period, in which, paradoxically, the movement founded by Breton was at the centre of polemics and rejections that came from different and sometimes antithetical intellectual circles (from Catholic to Marxist ones), which nevertheless clustered around the rejection of an avant-garde that was in fact still poorly known (we may think of the two culminating moments of this controversy, the Venice Biennali of 1948 and 1954). The Italian reception of Surrealism was therefore controversial and problematic, and has recently been the subject of a lively season of studies. Such an abundance of research in both these areas could be discouraging, yet the field of investigation still appears very vast and open to further study. In particular, with regard to the present issue of Mélusine, one has tried to privilege innovative and specific case studies that present new documentary evidence; with regard to Italy, moreover, it has been considered appropriate to extend the spectrum of analysis to a series of artists who fall within a broader definition of fantastic art, given the particular way in which Surrealism was received in the peninsula. Finally, an attempt has been made to create a bridge between the two sections of the issue which, although dealing with different periods (the American part focuses on the years between the two wars and the Italian one on the post-war period), are in some way linked (in at least half of the essays proposed) by an ideal journey from the United States to Italy of some of the artists examined. Thus, symbolically, the first part closes with a contribution on Milton Gendel, who moved from New York to Rome; and the Italian section features artists who were active in both countries, from the Italian-American Surrealist Enrico Donati to figures such as Pavel Tchelitchew, Eugène Berman, and Carlyle Brown; finally, one essay addresses the issue of the Italian reception of Joseph Cornell.