Reading
the Dada manifestos was admittedly difficult to understand from the artists
because their lingo is like a run on sentence. They do not really get to the
point but they just keep on using examples. From what I understand however,
Dada is a simple word that has created a movement because it is simple and it
can be anything you want it to be. According to Hugo Ball, Dada is an art. Dada
can also be a word that means saying "good bye". Dada can be anything
and everything making it an art. On the opposite spectrum, Tristan Tzara believes
in the nothingness and non-conformity making Dada in his opinion really nothing
which somehow equates that to the intricacies and complication that is similar
to life. He says that art is not supposed to be beauty because there is
no such thing but only objectivity. I think what he is saying basically is that
Dada is the opposite of what Hugo Ball's Dada means. Dada does not have to mean
anything, dada does not have to be art. Whereas Hugo Ball's Dada basically
means everything. Dada is the rebel in the art world. It is anarchistic
in an artistic sense that questions the political and social norms.
