Authorship and identity in Max Ernst's Loplop

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

From 1928 to 1932 an avian creature named Loplop, Bird Superior, appears regularly in the collages and paintings of the surrealist artist Max Ernst. In this article I suggest that Ernst models Loplop on the father/totem, as defined by Sigmund Freud in his Totem and Taboo of 1913. An exploration of Ernst's interpretation of Freudian theory in creating Loplop illuminates the character's surprising complexity and centrality to Ernst's oeuvre. As a totem, Loplop emerges from a primary oedipal conflict on which Ernst structures his artistic identity and practice. Equating traditional notions of creative authorship with various forms of patriarchal authority, Ernst's constructed totem signifies his personal, aesthetic and political rejection of individual mastery in favour of his fraternal allegiance to the surrealist group and his embrace of surrealist automatist practices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalArt History
Volume28
Issue number3
StatePublished - Dec 1 2005

Fingerprint

Authorship
Surrealists
Max Ernst
Centrality
Freudian Theory
Surrealist Group
Sigmund Freud
Artist
Taboo
Mastery
Allegiance
Aesthetics
Creatures
Rejection
Authority

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Visual Arts and Performing Arts

Cite this

@article{1da81615ab8d423da09fbff04055e5d8,
title = "Authorship and identity in Max Ernst's Loplop",
abstract = "From 1928 to 1932 an avian creature named Loplop, Bird Superior, appears regularly in the collages and paintings of the surrealist artist Max Ernst. In this article I suggest that Ernst models Loplop on the father/totem, as defined by Sigmund Freud in his Totem and Taboo of 1913. An exploration of Ernst's interpretation of Freudian theory in creating Loplop illuminates the character's surprising complexity and centrality to Ernst's oeuvre. As a totem, Loplop emerges from a primary oedipal conflict on which Ernst structures his artistic identity and practice. Equating traditional notions of creative authorship with various forms of patriarchal authority, Ernst's constructed totem signifies his personal, aesthetic and political rejection of individual mastery in favour of his fraternal allegiance to the surrealist group and his embrace of surrealist automatist practices.",
author = "Kavky, {Beth Samantha}",
year = "2005",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
journal = "Art History",
issn = "0141-6790",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

Authorship and identity in Max Ernst's Loplop. / Kavky, Beth Samantha.

In: Art History, Vol. 28, No. 3, 01.12.2005.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Authorship and identity in Max Ernst's Loplop

AU - Kavky, Beth Samantha

PY - 2005/12/1

Y1 - 2005/12/1

N2 - From 1928 to 1932 an avian creature named Loplop, Bird Superior, appears regularly in the collages and paintings of the surrealist artist Max Ernst. In this article I suggest that Ernst models Loplop on the father/totem, as defined by Sigmund Freud in his Totem and Taboo of 1913. An exploration of Ernst's interpretation of Freudian theory in creating Loplop illuminates the character's surprising complexity and centrality to Ernst's oeuvre. As a totem, Loplop emerges from a primary oedipal conflict on which Ernst structures his artistic identity and practice. Equating traditional notions of creative authorship with various forms of patriarchal authority, Ernst's constructed totem signifies his personal, aesthetic and political rejection of individual mastery in favour of his fraternal allegiance to the surrealist group and his embrace of surrealist automatist practices.

AB - From 1928 to 1932 an avian creature named Loplop, Bird Superior, appears regularly in the collages and paintings of the surrealist artist Max Ernst. In this article I suggest that Ernst models Loplop on the father/totem, as defined by Sigmund Freud in his Totem and Taboo of 1913. An exploration of Ernst's interpretation of Freudian theory in creating Loplop illuminates the character's surprising complexity and centrality to Ernst's oeuvre. As a totem, Loplop emerges from a primary oedipal conflict on which Ernst structures his artistic identity and practice. Equating traditional notions of creative authorship with various forms of patriarchal authority, Ernst's constructed totem signifies his personal, aesthetic and political rejection of individual mastery in favour of his fraternal allegiance to the surrealist group and his embrace of surrealist automatist practices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249421172&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249421172&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:34249421172

VL - 28

JO - Art History

JF - Art History

SN - 0141-6790

IS - 3

ER -