Breton, Andre. Manifestoes of Surrealism. Trans. Seaver, Richard and Helen R. Lane. Ann Arbor: Univ of Michigan Press, 1972.
When Breton lay claim to a new perception he called surrealist, it was as much a reactive turn as it was eccentric.
The first Manifesto of Surrealism, dated 1924, came a few years after another rebellious shift in poetic principles from that small cadre of Imagistes. The elements of Imagism and Surrealism share only a single similarity, and that is the freedom, and for the Surrealists, the compunction to write about anything. But while the Imagists were concentrating their attention on clear images, Breton and his Surrealists were playing in that twisty tunnel of automatic writing where murky images took precedence. For the Surrealists, the synchronous was the source of that freedom, along with an absolute aversion to all that was established, held sacrosanct, iconic and disciplined.
Breton’s first Manifesto is effusive. His principles and his process become one and only a relaxed and receptive mind – a sort of hypnotic listening – will be able to cull his Surrealist tenets from the mass of lines. But Surrealism accepts contradiction. In this it mimics Emerson’s dicta that “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” The inconsistency here is that the Manifesto must also be studied to be understood.
Rereading leads to a few points that underlie the Surrealist hope. “The imagination is perhaps on the point of reasserting itself,” a declaration that Breton assigns to the influence of Freud and as a reaction against the “reign of logic.” Breton hails the dream state, calls the waking state an “interference,” and admits that multiple realities exist, each of which is equal to another.

Andre Breton
“I believe in the future resolution of these two states, dream and reality, which are seemingly so contradictory, into a kind of absolute reality, a surreality, if one may so speak.” This surreality for Breton, is the source of poetic imagination.
The 1924 Manifesto includes Breton’s definition of surrealism (“psychic automatism”), his listing of surrealists in his midst, an example of a surrealist composition (first and last draft) and a surrealist poem made out of headlines. Breton concludes his first Manifesto in an assertive and almost hopeful manner. He verges into the still-uncovered realm of chaos, a derivative of synchronicity, when he states: “Everything is valid when it comes to obtaining the desired suddenness from certain associations.”
Soluble Fish, also dated 1924, is the next component in the surrealist manifestoes, an illustration of automatic and absurd writing, pickled with dialogue and juicy with description and random associations. I admit that I could not complete Soluble Fish in its entirety, and wonder if it is necessary.
The Second Manifesto of Surrealism, dated 1930, is full of vituperative language and accusations, a strident breakdown in which Breton demeans his accusers and those former comrades whom he denounces as “traitors.” It is difficult to read without context. Even with context, it remains a an angry verbal assault, and a refusal to amend or admit any compromise.
Still, the anger acts as a lightning rod for focus and Breton utters some fascinating and sharp thoughts on that elusive state of mind he named surreal.
Everything tends to make us believe that there exists a certain point of the mind at which life and death, the real and the imagined, past and future, the communicable and the incommunicable, high and low, cease to be perceived as contradictions. Now, search as one may one will never find any other motivating force in the activities of the Surrealists than the hope of finding and fixing this point.
Here Breton the Surrealist sounds like Breton the Buddha, transcending all inconsistency in a taoist path toward total unity. And yet, that’s not correct. For Breton encourages a “tenet of total revolt, complete insubordination, of sabotage,…” What he espouses is violent, revolutionary. There is no passive-active receptivity here. Very few people, asserts Breton, “are of a caliber to meet with the Surrealists’ exacting standards,” and those who failed are treated with contempt.

Andre Breton, Diego Rivera and Leon Trotsky in Mexico
It is this revolutionary flavor that drives the Second Manifesto, in which Breton launches his fiery denunciation of that “most mediocre sort” of mind representing individuals of the French communist party. These were the men who questioned the acceptability of Surrealist philosophy alongside Marxist doctrine. While purporting to be a manifesto of surrealism, the bulk of the essay is rebuttal and rebuke. In it, Breton personalizes his disappointments – the fallen and failed compatriots of surrealism, the superficial and facile “revolutionaries” of the International.
He also continues to explore Surrealism, a sort of multilevel exposition that joins the alchemists and Freud, that avoids the proleteriat as a market, and that demands the “recreation of a state that can only be fairly compared to that of madness.”
Some of his most engaging ideas are found in the profuse notes at the bottom of the page. For example, Breton admits the surrealist activity of automatic writing is perceived as a parlour game. Nonetheless, the results of these collaborative efforts produce “striking relationships.” Through the phenomenom that Breton calls pooling, “remarkable anaolgies appear,” and indeed, he insists that these joint games are the “most extraordinary meeting grounds.”
The Manifestoes of Surrealism contains several other chapters, reproductions of lectures given by Breton, petitions and position papers on surrealism and politics, surrealism and art, traveling through a few decades and coming to a stop with On Surrealism and Its Living Works, dated 1953. But the grist of Breton’s hope and the swath of surrealist principles and denunciations are contained in those first two manifestoes. Those tracts are reactive, reflective, evocative, sort of a raging effort of an individual to define the inelucatable. No wonder inconsistencies and misinterpretations resulted. As a missionary, Breton is passionate. As a messenger, he disdains compassion. One either “gets it” or not.