In Lavin's article on Hannah Hoch's work, she points out the idea of revolutions occurring when a group of people feel discontented or angry about a the present. There is no way to better the future-- or rather-- there is no will of the people to better the future if there is no anger. I think that Hannah Hoch embodies the dichotomy of anger and pleasure but mostly discontent in her works. Largely putting aside socioeconomic standpoints for a moment, just looking at her work puts you on edge. You want to know why are there floating heads, masses of people in corners, things coming out of others' ears, dancers acting uninterested? There seems to be so much confusion all at once-- so much happening that there is not a moment of peace. Machinery, chaos, flailing about, mad faces, etc. all join together in a stress-ball and that alone is enough to make the viewer think that there is something wrong happening. Hoch's work is visceral in that sense; you can automatically feel that there is an impending upheaval. One of the best lines in the article that speaks about but so far beyond art into the revolutionary scheme of things is this:
"In order to imagine a better future, Bloch argued, a person needs a sense of anger and discontent with some aspects of the present. But he or she must also know the experience of pleasure and have a feeling of entitlement to that pleasure in order to imagine an improved life." (30)
If anything I would say that Hoch's Cut with a Kitchen Knife is pivotal in the role of pointing out the upheaval. You have to wake up and upset the people to get them to do anything.
(Written by Jodi Hebert-- please do not use my words in a form of plagiarism.)
+seaweed+womb+1972.jpg&sa=X&ei=iXFLTqrXGOTJsQK-nI2-CA&ved=0CAQQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNGxlPqwyav1FU9nSG1MTV7LrR8gDQ)
