ABSTRACT This thesis is concerned with an investigation which compares and illuminates the structures and meanings in Allen Ginsberg's long poem Kaddish, of 1959, with the structures and meanings in fifteen combines (created between 1954 and 1960) of Robert Rauschenberg. The uses of space and metaphor, the varieties of these artists' manners of presentation, and viewpoints, the common environment from which the works spring, old traditions of narrative, repetition, and catalogues used in new traditional ways, other traditional aspects, and use of auto­ biography as found in these two artists' works have been discussed. These elements have been related to simple and complex, abstract and concrete images. The investigation proves in depth that there are many points of similarity between the .structures and meanings of these works, which are created in such different media, as well as similarities in the environments from which they spring. Little study has previously been concentrated in comparative criticism in such an intensive way on the works of two contemporary artists. Name: Dean Cheshire. Title of Thesis: Structure and Meaning in Ginsberg and Rauschenberg. Department: English. Degree: Master of Arts. Résumé Dans cette thèse, nous avons tenté de comparer les structures et les significations du poème d'Allen Ginsberg, Kaddish (1959), à celles des quinze "combines" (créés entre 1954 et 1960) de Robert Rauschenberg, en éclairant les uns au moyen des autres. Nous avons examiné, succes- sivement, l'utilisation de l'espace et de la métaphore, les différents moyens employés pour présenter la réalité ainsi que la manière dont les oeuvres étaient perçues par les sens. Nous avons ensuite étudié le milieu populaire qui a donné naissance aux oeu vres du peintre et à celle du poète. Tous les deux utilisent les vieilles traditions du conte, la répétition, le "catalogue" et l'autobiographie d'une manière nouvelle ainsi que d'autres aspects traditionnels. Nous avons rapproché ces éléments d'images simples, complexes, abstraites ou concrètes. Nous sommes arrivée à la conclusion qu'il y avait des ressemblances pro- fondes entre les structures et les significations de ces oeuvres, bien qu'elles fussent créées à partir de matériaux différents. Ce genre de critique comparée qui s'exerce sur les oeuvres d'un poète et d'un peintre contemporains est encore rare. Nom: Dean Cheshire. Titre de thèse: Structures et significations chez Ginsberg et Rauschenberg. Département: English. Degré: Master of Arts. STRUCTURE AND MEANING IN GINSBERG AND RAUSCHENBERG by Dean Cheshire STRUCTURE AND MEANING IN GINSBERG AND RAUSCHENBERG by Dean Cheshire A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of English, Mc Gill University, Montreal, Canada. February 1971. @ Dean ~ heahire 1971 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1 would like to thank Professor R. Reichertz, who advised me in the preparation of this thesis, for the many hours that he has spent in discussing it with me and in reading it over. He has made many helpful suggestions which have been much appreciated. 1 would also like to thank ·Mrs. E. Coffey for her friendly interest and the time and effort that she put into taking all the photographs of the combines which appear here. To my parents 1 would like to express my appreciation for their encouragement and support throughout. Lastly, but not at all least, 1 would like to thank Mrs. M. Blevins who' typed the whole and was so helpful and patient throughout. Her high standards of execution and quick-thinking have averted several disasters- which would have marred the appearance of the typescript. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 INTRODUCTION. 1 II SPACE/TIME AND METAPHOR. 18 m VARIETIES IN MANNERS OF PRESENTATION AND IN VIEWPOINT. • • . • . 47 IV FORM, MEANING, AND ENVIRONMENTAL REALITY. 59 v NARRATIVE, REPETITION, AND CATALOGUES RE LA TED TO TRADITION. • . • . • . 87 VI TRADITIONAL ASPECTS AND AUTOBIOGRAPHY . 126 VII CONC LUSION . 154 END NOTES ... · . 178 BIBLIOGRAPHY . · . 188 ILLUSTRA TIONS. · . 193 iii ILLUSTRA TIONS (at the end of the book) PLATE 1 CHARLENE, 1954 RAUSCHENBERG TI UNTITLED, 1955 ID HYMNAL, 1955 IV BED, 1955 V REBUS, 1955 VI SMALL REBUS, 1956 VU STATE, 1958 vm CURFEW, 1958 IX ODALISK, 1955-58 X GIFT FOR APOLLO, 1959 XI 1'ROPHY l, 1959 xn CANYON, 1959 xm MONOGRAM, 1959 XIV BROADCAST, 1959 XV PILGRIM, 1960 XVI PAGE FROM BURROUGHS' ST. LOUIS JOURNAL BURROUGHS iv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Allen Ginsberg's poem Kaddish, written in 1959, and Robert Rauschenberg's paintings, of about the same period, seem to have similarities despite the fact that they are works that employ dtlferent media for their expression. In this thesis 1 will analytically discuss and discursively review individu al elements of structure and meaning in Kaddish, comparing these with some elements in works of Rauschen­ berg. 1 hope to prove in doing this that there are many points of similarity, that, in fact, these two artists have got visions of our world which are very similar to one another. If we can find points of similarity in the meaning and structure between the arts we shall be able to view our world from a more unified position. 1 have started an inquiry into the relationship between the arts very simply with two arts-poetry and painting-created by two artists-Ginsberg and Rauschenberg-and have narrowed my discussion to one long work of Ginsberg's and fifteen works of Rauschenberg's which were executed at about the same time. 1 hope, by starting with two artists whose works, over this short period of time, appear to me to have many similarities, and by confining my attentions to only two artists, to prove extensively and conclusively that the works do indeed have 2 similarities when they are examined closely. In proving that these similarities do exist in spite of the different media used by the artists and the different personalities of the artists invol ved, 1 hope that a foundation of soUd information will be laid of analogies between two contemporary arts that later writers can build on to create a body of information relating to the analogies between the arts which will pro- o vide a basis for the creation and criticism of the arts in unity result­ ing in the production of a more active appreciation of the arts in relation to each other, and the creation of a better understanding of each individual art. In this Introduction 1 shall gi ve views of several authors concerning the relationship of the arts. 1 shall then gi ve a definition and explanation of what 1 mean by images in regard to Ginsberg' s and Rauschenberg's works. In the following chapters 1 shall deal exten­ si vely with separate points of the relationship of images in and between these works as well as aspects of other relationships" that these works bear to each other. The first point to be dealt with will be one concerning the space/time aspect of these works. There are at least four types of what Ginsberg calls "gaps" of space/ time that Ginsberg and Rauschenberg are using. These "gaps" provide the entrance for reader/ spectator participation. The images creating these "gaps" are either epiphoric or diaphoric in their relationships. Ginsberg and Rauschenberg both use several manners of presentation. 0 In Ginsberg these are concerned with his use of different manners of 3 delivery. He uses narrative, dialogue, apostrophe, and prayer. Rauschenberg in his different manners of presentation uses different materials besides paint and canvas. He uses fabrics, wood, metal, string, paper, and so on. He also employs different forms in pre­ senting his images. There are photographs, reproductions from magazines and newspapers, comic strips, drawings by children and adults, reproductions of paintings by Old Masters, and writing by children and adults, as weIl as printed signs or parts of letter s. Ginsberg and Rauschenberg present different viewpoints through differ­ ences of scale in size and through the different senses with which we percei ve information. In this they are very close to sorne J apanese .. haikus that practise the same effect. The environment from which these works spring-the world which they express, and to which they return for their appreciation-is the modern urban environment of the common man. The forms that these works take are created by the meaning, the content, that they are to convey. Both artists hope that their works will not be artifices but part of the real world which exists around them and us. Ginsberg attempts to create this impres­ sion with his colloquial speech and Rauschenberg does the same thing with the materials from our everyday world that he uses in his com­ bines. They both intend to create a "lowll art of the people rather than a "high" art that can be appreciated by only a small audience. For this reason Ginsberg also uses everyday imagery in almost snap­ shot like presentations of his world, and Rauschenberg uses actual 4 snapshots of friends and family as weIl as reproductions of photo­ graphs from the newspaper. Included in their everyday imagery is the mind of the mad-in Ginsberg's Kaddish-~d primitive-Iooking drawings by children and unskiIled adults as weIl as the writing of children-in Rauschenberg's work. Both artists desire to break down the barriers between art and life, to create a unity between these two, as 1 hope to create a unity in comparing their works. The everyday includes aspects of shock, lack of colour, the bizarre, and the exotic. These last two are partly responsible for the elements of humour which crop up in both of these artists' works.