From “http://www.huntfor.com/arthistory/C20th/dadaism.htm”

“According to its proponents, Dada was not art; it was anti-art. For everything that art stood for, Dada was to represent the opposite. Where art was concerned with aesthetics, Dada ignored them. If art is to have at least an implicit or latent message, Dada strives to have no meaning–interpretation of Dada is dependent entirely on the viewer. If art is to appeal to sensibilities, Dada offends. Perhaps it is then ironic that Dada is an influential movement in Modern art. Dada became a commentary on art and the world, thus becoming art itself.”

 

Dadaism celebrates your opinion, and it is empowering because when you don’t agree with what the critics, establishment, mainstream, media, authorities tell you…  YOU are right.

Art is a wonderful forum for stirring up trouble, and the Dadaists seem to have understood that the artist’s job is to give us an excuse to feel, think, and laugh.  

Which only makes trouble if you are against feeling, thinking, and laughing.

 

Please add on to this post – and make it dada!