Surrealism and the Occult: Shamanism, Magic, Alchemy, and the Birth of an Artistic Movement

by Nadia Choucha

An art historian shows how many surrealists and their predecessors were steeped in magical ideas that were expressed in their art: the sorcery of Dali, the alchemy of Picasso, the Theosophy of Kandinsky, and the shamanism of Ernst and Carrington.

Genres: Art, Occult, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Art History, Psychology

152 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1991

Reviews

[Karla Huebner]

Mixed feelings here. The book is intelligent and gives the nonspecialist reader an introduction to a topic that is not, in fact, written about in detail by many scholars of surrealism (the Warlick book on Ernst is the main study I can think of). However, the majority of the book deals with the occult interests of fin-de-siecle cultural figures, cubists, Duchamp, and an obscure non-surrealist British occultist artist. The only surrealist artists examined are Ernst and Carrington (who are the main surrealist artists whose occult interests have been examined by other writers, though admittedly not prior to the publication of this book). My impression, shared with some other reviewers here and on Amazon.com, is that the author wrote the book after preliminary background research rather than after immersing herself in the surrealists. This is a topic that deserves an in-depth scholarly study that looks at a wider range of surrealists and more closely examines the evolution of the "occultation" of surrealism. The bulk of this book would ideally form the introductory chapter of such a study.

[Ashlea]

Who influenced whom: Andre Breton and his Automatic Writing, or Austin O. Spare and his Automatic Drawing? Must find out.

[Matthew W · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great introduction to the subject for the novice (which I pretty much am). It seems the author had just starting researching the subject before reading the book. After all, infamous surrealist works like Mabille's Mirror of the Marvelous are not even mentioned nor cited. Still, those with at least a slight interest in the topic will find this book fairly easy to follow and quite inspiring. For those interested in seeing what really influenced the surrealists metaphysically/meta-politically, this is the book to read.

[Tim Pendry · Rating 3 out of 5]

The great insight of this book is that Surrealism as an artistic ideology did not emerge without having a much larger context than many may realise. It flowed from Symbolist thought and practice as much as it did from the revolutionary dissidence of Dada.

She is precise in her timing of Dada (1916-1923) and that of the foundation of Surrealism in a text by Breton ('The First Surrealist Manifesto') in 1924, It could be argued that, although its high point was the interwar period, Surrealism has never really disappeared since.

Choucha probably over-eggs the role of the occult in a movement led by someone (Breton) who claimed to be a scientific materialist but it would be equally foolish to deny a strong presence for occultism if only because this was such a strong force in French late nineteenth century culture.

It has to be said that the book runs out of steam in the later chapters and becomes a set of mini-monographs but perhaps that is inherent in the material. Surrealism expanded in the interwar era to the point where its authoritarian founders had difficulty in retaining discipline.

Nevertheless, the book can be regarded as close to definitive on the links of the movement to magic and the occult 'sciences' although, much as with the Tate's 'Visions of the Occult' (2023), I think that it struggles to make the Occult central rather than just a contribution to the movement.

There is definitely a strong link 'in places' both theoretically and in practice if only because both Occultism and Surrealism were trying to tap something outside reasoning cognition and logic in order to gain either new power (occult) or new insights (surrealism).

And perhaps that is the point. Despite Breton's intense dabbling in Communism, Surrealism is a matter of aesthetics and not power and certainly not necromantic power. On the other hand, the occult is not often seen in psychological terms (as it perhaps it should be) by its practitioners.

Surrealism is not about tapping into the occult self in order to reach anything outside the self or to enhance the self in the world but rather it is about expressing and exploring the self by tapping into what is internal to the brain but not easily accessible.

Hence, the importance of Freud. It is Jung who upsets Freud, the 'scientist', by positing a Collective Unconscious which was a step towards a rediscovery of the Occult. Although Jung does come to have an influence, it is Freud's view of the Unconscious that predominated amongst Surrealists.

Surrealism as a Movement is based on one 'scientific' model (psychoanalysis) and partly on another ((Marxist scientific materialism) and is influenced by a pseudo-scientific model (Jungian psychology) but Occultism only emerges as an appropriated tool by some sometimes.

Nevertheless, it would be surprising if artists undertaking this project 'scientifically' did not associate what they found with a hidden world of mystery and then see the tropes of occultism as overlapping with their own concerns - and so eminently usable.

Yet the Surrealist impulse is fundamentally psychotherapeutic and aesthetic. If it changes the world, it changes it through symbolism (hence the appropriate link back to the Symbolist tradition) and through changing perception. It remains rational in its studied irrationality.

Placing an umbrella and a sewing machine on a dissecting table [De Lautremont's image] is the conjunction of three material objects with no reference to a directing spirit. The objects are not spirits and create no new spiritual rather than psychological meaning.

It is interesting that the most obviously occult artist of the last century, Austin Osman Spare, may have demonstrated independently surrealist techniques (such as automatic writing) but he had no known connection to Surrealism. He also emerged out of a Symbolist milieu.

Nevertheless, Choucha does demonstrate frequent and interesting eruptions of occult and magical thinking within the movement even if one gets the sense that the artists concerned were simply appropriating what was culturally to hand as part of their playful exploration.

There comes point later in the day where we can say that the Occult erupts sufficiently to speak of a form of late Occult Surrealism. Noting the role of Max Ernst, it is interesting how much of this is connected to later women artists like Dora & Leonora Carrington, Leonor Fini and Ithell Colquohoun.

Closer inspection suggests that many of the apparently occult themes of these women artists are cover for deeper psycho-therapeutic and fundamentally feminist concerns as in Fini's appropriation of the witch motif.

This is not uncommon amongst sensitive women struggling to 'find themselves' creatively in a judgmental early twentieth century culture. Faxneld's 'Satanic Feminism' provides some context for this. There, we have Sylvia Townshend Warner's 'Lolly Willowes' presented as a type case.

Warner's liberatory witch story is indicative here. Warner was, in fact, another scientific materialist (a committed Communist). This early work of hers was clearly not so much a precursor of Wiccan spirituality as a use of contemporary anthropological beliefs to show an alternate reality.

Personally I tend to see these powerful female creatives coming to similar conclusions under similar social conditions, independent of both male-dominated Ocultism and Surrealism, and then tapping into something specific to their own gender and circumstances.

Indeed, having read Faxneld, I also incline to see these women artists as heirs to late nineteenth century Symbolism who are simply very good at appropriating and interpreting motifs inherited from that era using the more free and open language that Dada and Breton enabled.

The irony that the Surrealists were so authoritarian and male-centred is not the point. Freedom will find a way to 'detourne' any system. Educated and intelligent women would take anything to hand in the cause of self-expression and self development, indeed of psychological survival.

The essence of Surrealistic freedom was definitely not social or political (despite the Communist influence) but psychological. The shattering of reason and conformity allowed anyone to dig deep into the psyche and draw up visual and literary tools and weapons to redefine the social self.

It is rather odd that Choucha seems unaware of Colquhoun although the Tate book fully recognised her as a British bridge between a conscious occultist sensibility and a surrealist style yet there is something in her story that confirms for me the essential incompatibility of the two ways of thinking.

Colquhoun was closely associated with Surrealism in the late 1930s, met Breton, joined the British Surrealist Group and exhibited with Roland Penrose in 1939 yet she was expelled because the authoritarian Surrealists insisted on group exclusivity and made no exception for occult memberships.

Maybe that is the thing about 'movements'. Male bonding seems to require an analogue of military discipline once a label is applied (although all the first rate male artists such as Ernst and Dali ignored orders) whereas female self creation requires independence within a 'nest' of available ideas.

So, a useful and often insightful book that will undoubtedly stimulate the desire to know more. The periodic appropriation of the Occult is well evidenced. There are overlaps but we should not be misled into linking the two too closely.

Rather, we should treat the book as guide to a Venn diagram where two separate circles overlap, Surrealism sometimes finding raw material in occult thinking analogous to the power of the unconscious and Occultism being drawn a little into a late iteration of the Symbolism it prefers.

[Brandon Desiderio · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having read collections of writings from surrealists already this year (André Breton and Franklin Rosemont), I picked this up at a local teahouse's small indie-supported book section a few months back, and was glad I did. Surrealism has been a critically important point of study for me in 2019, and Choucha does an amazing job of extending her own role as art historian in this limited text beyond the limits of art history, and into the realm of the very tangible political/supernatural sources of inspiration and radicalism that were (and, to this day, are) the most vital and compelling components of the movement. Based on the reviews I've seen on here of Choucha's work, perhaps it's important for non-art historians, and those not trained in a school of art, to seek this work out and read it—those "from the art world" may not have the right tools of interrogation, let alone praxis, for this very ideological and metaphysical work. What surrealism is is not relevant to a 21st-century art school's curriculum, which is why it's taught in such a fraught and fragmented way; what matters about surrealism is its innate need for revolt and reconciling dualities in ways that attack the very foundations of our society, including the institutions that claim to be art galleries or museums, yet in practice are still colonizers that foreclose liberation and revolt. To attend art school seems likely to be as delimiting in this aspect as attending seminary, if you do so without already-unshakable critical tools established to aid you in seeing through all of the normative restraints and pulleys in place to keep you chastened within the narrow hallways and pigeonholes pertinent to your contemporaries in the squabble for an always-vanishing funding art. When you're too close to the problem at hand to realize the power in your own subjectivity, yes, OUTSIDE of the market imperatives for "original" or "visionary" art, then you're susceptible to falling prey to the same market dynamics that we all do in every other dimension of life—and the market is the antithesis of art. Only madness, and love, and subversion are art.

[Otto Hahaa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tämä mukava pikku kirjanen keskittyy surrealismin okkultistisiin juurin tai innoituksen lähteisiin. Ensimmäinen painos oli 1990-luvulta, jolloin kirja on varmaan ollut aika päräyttävä. Näinä päivinä esoteerisuuden vaikutus taiteeseen ovat peruskauraa, joten kirjan vaikutus voi olla vähäisempi. Mutta surrealismin synty ja pääosan esittäjät esitellään näppärästi ja sujuvasti. Koska kirja on kovin ohut kaikkea ei voi saada mukaan ja osa henkilöistä jää maininnan varaan (”Kuka ihmeen Papus?”), mutta ei se mitään, aina voi googlata (ja tämäkin käy 2020-luvulla helpommin kuin 1990-luvulla).

Kirja on kuulemma uudistettu painos, mutta jää epäselväksi mikä on muuttunut. Ainakaan kirjallisuusluetteloon ei ole lisätty mitään 2000-luvulla ilmestynyttä. Pienen kustantajan ongelmia näkyy, ainakin yksi kuva on nimetty väärin, yksi viite puuttuu ja joitakin painovirheitä taitaa olla.

On hankala tietää jälkikäteen kuinka vakavasti surrealistit ottivat okkultismin ja magian. Breton toki viittaa Lévyn kirjoituksiin, mutta otti hän vaikutteita muualtakin. Tähän viitataan epäsuorasti, kun kirjassa verrataan muiden tulkintaa Max Ernstin teoksesta, niin muut näkevät siinä freudilaisuutta kun kirjoittajamme näkee siinä okkultistisia viittauksia. Molemmat voivat olla oikeassa. Toki osa taiteilijoista (kuten Ithell Colquhoun) on selkeästi salatieteilijöitä. Samoin Austin Osman Spare, mutta oliko hän surrealisti lainkaan? Keskustelu jatkukoon.

Mutta kirja kertoo oman tarinansa joka kannattaa lukea. Joku toinen voi olla vähän toista mieltä, ja kirjoittaa toisen tarinan. Mutta sellaista se taidehistoria on.

[Chloe Hyman · Rating 2 out of 5]

“Surrealism and the Occult” is an introductory guide through 19th century occultism and its influence on various modernist movements, concluding with surrealism. It is strangely titled given the time spent by Choucha on symbolism, Dadaism, cubism, and surrealists not associated with Breton’s group, and would perhaps be more warmly received were it to announce this scope on the front cover. I would have liked to read more analyses of surrealist works as we were given just two, and only in the final chapter— a close look at two works by Max Ernst and two by Leonora Carrington.

This chapter was a delight to read because Choucha has a real knack for visual analysis. Here she provides concise summaries of the existing literature on the artworks before using her eye (and extensive research) to probe deeper.

It’s a shame she didn’t write more in-depth analyses because the rest of the book is somewhat confusing.
Artists are discussed fleetingly, with few illustrations of the works mentioned, supported instead by lengthy tangents into relevant occult theories. These are accurate and applicable, but Choucha veers off course too often, listing each occultist’s influences and the Hindu origins of each theory. The reader can’t be faulted for losing track of just what these alchemic texts are illuminating.

[Bill Wallace · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent, too-brief analysis of the influence of late 19th Century occultism on emergent modern art. I had read bits and pieces of this history before but Choucha's book aggregates the information, adds to it, and provides insightful analysis in a very entertaining manner. I would love to see this book expanded, even if only as a chapter in a larger work about the influence of occult beliefs and practices on 20th Century culture. And this text really should be accompanied by color plates of the works discussed. More please!

[Daniel Molina · Rating 5 out of 5]

Providing an in-depth analysis of the influence the occult had on the surrealist movement, the book also analyzes several literary and art works while addressing the historical and cultural impact of the movement.

[Karina Geddes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Would've been a better essay if it covered more female surrealists

[Sierra · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some cool parts but a little wordy and a bit chaotic, def better to skim and take what you need from it

[Gabriel Clarke · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short, convincing argument for the importance of the 19th Century Western Occult or Mystery or Magical tradition for the Surrealists and their forebears, the Symbolists. Especially interesting on Max Ernst and Leonora Carrington.

[Trevor Price]

It's better than it sounds.

[Jaina Bee · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mostly i keep this around to refer to the parts about Leonora Carrington.