Down the rabbit hole, or ideological antecedents of the JACK FREAK PICTURES 
W głąb króliczej nory, czyli ideowe poprzedniki JACK FREAK PICTURES

Kamila Wielebska

The first thing that comes to my mind when I look at the 153 large-scale pictures that make up the JACK FREAK PICTURES (2008) does not belong to the world of art, its iconography and history. It brings to my mind a kaleidoscope that I played with as a child which made it possible for me to create always new compositions, full of surprising forms and colours, with just one light movement of my hand. Perhaps in my seemingly obvious association I am paradoxically not very far from what the artists intended to do. “And we're interested in the child in us!” is one of the first sentences spoken by Gilbert and George in an extraordinary book that collects interviews given by the artists to François Jonquet(1).

Gilbert & George, ABODE, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

The motif suggesting a kaleidoscopic image of central rosette, or two identical rosettes placed symmetrically on each side of the composition is repeated in many of the JACK FREAK PICTURES. Sometimes it is difficult to grasp because different kinds of symmetrical mirror reflections appear on all the images that belong to these pictures, multiplying, reshaping and deforming forms used by the artists, including this particular one – used every time – of their own bodies. The figures of Gilbert and George are very often present in the images they create which is in a sense a consistent continuation of the idea of living sculpture formulated by the artists at the very beginning of their career. Since 1969, when they presented the Singing Sculpture, what they do is not just a kind of common collaboration, it is “a sculpture composed of two men. Inseparable”(2). The idea of a living sculpture that consists in being it – and thus being a work of art – 24 hours a day every day has been realized by the artists until this day(3). Their figures appear at the beginning of the 1970s in works made with charcoal (for example The Shrubberies 2, 1972 for Hayward Gallery) or in the painterly six triptychs form The Paintings (with Us in the Nature) from 1971. That year the artists started taking black-and-white images and later also introduced colour into them. In fact they always take black-and-white shots and filling them with colour in the following phases of picture creations. In the large-scale cycles made since the end of the 1970s in which the surface of each picture is divided into even fields surrounded with black frames Gilbert and George appear very often, always dressed in impeccably fastened shirts, ties and suits or sometimes also completely naked (as is the case for example with the Naked Shit Pictures made in 1994). Although in pictures from the 1980s there often appeared young men – artists’ friends or boys asked to pose, since more or less 1992 Gilbert and George have not made use of images of other models than themselves(4). In the JACK FREAK PICTURES the double presence of the “sculpture composed of two men”, sometimes additionally enhanced by means of multiplication of each of them (Jack Wheel) emphasises the symmetry of the composition subconsciously bringing to mind at the same time a magical motif of a mirror image double. Or else – if we refer to British literature – it connotes a pair of twin figures of Tweedledum and Tweedledee whom little Alice met in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass(5) and also the name of Humpty Dumpty which echo in the titles such as Hoity-Toity and Hokey-Cokey.

Gilbert & George, Singing Sculpture 1971-91 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Jack Wheel, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Hokey-Cokey, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Apart from the motif of the rosettes that suggests not only kaleidoscopic images but also stained glass of the medieval (or neo-Gothic) churches, among the elements recurring in the JACK FREAK PICTURES we can also distinguish other ones. They appear in different versions subjected to mirror transformations just like a sequence of “arrangements” induced by the movement of the kaleidoscope…

Who is the Jack from the JACK FREAK PICTURES? It is a Union Jack, that is the British flag which can be found in over a half of the images. Sometimes it is a kind of background for the entire composition subjected to – just as other motifs – to the above mentioned deformations, multiplications and mirror reflections. Sometimes the motif of the British flag is filled with medals from different sports and emblems of distinction including orders which are also the recurring motif in these pictures, although, as the sociologist Jeremy Valentine wrote, the end of the 1990s have “encouraged less visibility for the British Flag, which in recent years has only been visible on the Spice Girls’ knickers”(6). In the JACK FREAK PICTURES the motif of the national flag becomes sometimes a pattern on the suits of the two artists or the perisonium of the crucified Christ. The presence of the empire flag is sometimes almost unnoticeable merging for example with the background of the map (shown as a mirror image) with the fragment of the London district of Spitalfields where the artists have always lived; the red and the blue mark the built-up areas cut through with the white of the streets. The motif of the same map recurs in this picture also as a pattern on the suits of the artists standing symmetrically on both sides of the composition and showing the viewer red and blue tongues (Cancan). The presence of the flag is then sometimes marked by the use of three colours – white, blue and red.

Gilbert & George, Cancan, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Red has appeared in Gilbert and George’s work since 1974 in the pictures such as Cherry Blossoms Pictures, Bloody Life, Bad Thoughts, Mental and Red Morning Pictures. As they explain its ambiguous symbolic meaning, “blood, danger, love, hate. […] For years we saw only red in front of our eyes. Red in political, emotional terms... Misery”(7). In many Indo-European languages the word that means red (red, rouge, rot, rosso) comes from the Sanskrit word rudhirā – meaning “blood”(8). Red is then in European culture most of all the colour of blood, and blood connotes different, often contradictory meanings. Within the framework of the British flag, an element featured in the JACK FREAK PICTURES, red is the colour of the cross placed on a blue background – the cross of Saint George, the patron of England, framed with white, and the cross of Saint Patrick, the patron of Ireland, visible in the background which covers the white cross of Saint Andrew, the patron of Scotland. The motif of the cross in artists’ art will be discussed in the following part of this text.

Gilbert & George, Union Jack, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

In the 1980s the red gains the company of yellow, green and blue, later the colour palette is broadened to include also silver and golden leaves(9). The question of colour seems to be important for them. As has already been mentioned, they always use black-and-white imagery, whereas the colour is added later on. In the JACK FREAK PICTURES next to white, blue, red and black and different shades of grey of the image we can find green and yellow and a colour which is more difficult to name – light brown or rather beige. This colour “imitates” the skin appearing both in the parts of human body and shoes, as well as it covers fragments of streets, houses, and tree bark. Other colours appear sporadically. They are usually different shades of purple.

Gilbert & George, Rosarium, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Royal purple features in Rosarium where it is accompanied by the red of the suits of the artists standing symmetrically on both sides of the composition and the rocaille-like forms that look like fragments of a decoration or rosary. The grey “texture” that breaks through the colours makes us see them not as white and yellow, but as silver and golden. The purple that is the background of the composition, thanks to the use of a digital effect, looks like a sophisticated upholstery made of an expensive material. This effect appears on images from this series many times, usually though the artists use it to suggest a texture of entirely different kind, namely plastic or they make their bodies look like three-dimensional constructs of the virtual world (Dating, Bleeding Medals, MetalJack).

Gilbert & George, Dating, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

In the JACK FREAK PICTURES there also appear floral motifs that can be found in Gilbert and George’s art since the 1980s. However, this time they are not the flowers that were recurring often in the 80s, but the plane tree, growing mostly in city parks, with its typical fruit, and the partly parasitic mistletoe growing on the trees with its magical power of a talisman, the belief in which dates back to antiquity and has been preserved to this day in the Christmas customs cultivated most of all in Anglo-Saxon culture. The dark shapes of the branches that seem to loom alarmingly in the darkness of the sky form abstract phantasmagorical patterns which, due to mirror image-repetitions, begin to form central symmetrical sets, looking like rosettes or kaleidoscopic images. The motif of a branch that invests them with the atmosphere of gothic dread is supposedly the most often recurring theme. One might say that it is the leitmotif, similarly to the role played by the Ginkgo biloba leaf in the Gingko Pictures, a frost-resistant ornamental tree giving longevity that grows in parks and gardens of Europe. In 2005 they were shown at the Venice Biennale at the national British Pavilion in Giardini.

Gilbert & George, Tree Dance, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Kit, 2005 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Winter Flowers, 1982 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Lovers, 1988 (c) Gilbert & George

A significant and worthy of emphasis fact is that at the very beginning of their career the artists placed the images of themselves on the background of a landscape (dominating the composition with its colour and size) in the already mentioned triptychs of paintings of 1971 entitled The Paintings (with Us in the Nature). In Triptych No. 1 the artists clearly refer both to the tradition of English painting as well as to the art of shaping landscape cultivated in Britain – the fragment of nature presented in the picture may be both a view of woodland or country area, as well as a carefully tended English park. In English language (as well as in Polish) the adjective natural coming from the noun nature means both that which belongs to nature understood as a world of flora and fauna, as well as connotes that which is ordinary, casual and spontaneous. George, sitting under the tree, with a pose that brings to mind the similarly posed girl in Joshua Reynolds’s Age of Innocence (1788) and Gilbert, standing in the foreground – both dressed according to the rules of living sculpture in impeccable suits and ties – are as natural as the English park whose creators adapt nature so that it follows certain rules and define how this naturalness should be achieved and presented. Similarly, Gilbert and George have defined their rules in a text of Underneath the Arches (1970) published a year before that which listed The Laws of Sculptors(10). The title of the text is also the title of the song played over and over again for many hours while artists with their faces and hand painted with multi-colour metallic powders, sang and moved holding a plastic cane and a single rubber glove to exchange the objects when the song was being played yet another time. This way they presented their living sculpture at the turn of the 60s and 70s. The text of the song is about the vagabonds sleeping under the bridge who prefer this condition to living in Ritz hotel and, as the artists explain, it describes their life at the time, the sense of owning nothing(11). In the context of this sculpture, as well as the triptych made at the time, once again an interesting reference to English tradition suggests itself, this time of the portrait presented on the background of a landscape. John Berger, who wrote about such pictures in reference to one particular work – the portrait of Mr and Mrs Andrews by Thomas Gainsborough (1750) – in his Ways of Seeing (1972) points to their connection with the fortune of the portrayed who present themselves on the background of their estate as owners of the land visible behind their back(12). Over two hundred years later Gilbert and George pose to a similar picture (of which they are also authors) and becoming part of this tradition they admit at the same time that they have nothing. In one of the text written at the time they emphasise however also their vision of the world: „We bagan to dream of a world of beauty and happiness of great riches and pleasures new of joy and laughter of children and sweets of the music of colour and the sweetness of shape, a world of feeling and meaning a newer better world, a world of delicious disasters of heart-rending sorrow, of loathing and dread a world complete, all the world an art gallery”(13).

When after many years Gilbert and George portray themselves again on the background of the floral landscape in the JACK FREAK PICTURES they make an impression as if they were climbing the wall of green (It Shall be Written). Perhaps they recall again their decision to reshape the world into an art gallery by following at the same time the example of the author of the idea of an English garden, William Kent, about whom Horace Walpole wrote that he „[...] leaped the fence and saw that all Nature is a garden”(14).

Gilbert & George, It Shall Be Written, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Coming back, however, to The Paintings (with Us in the Nature), Triptych No. 1, one may be tempted to find a completely different painting as a reference to its central part. The artists sitting under a tree suggest to some extent a similarly placed group of The Luncheon on the Grass (1863), by a French painter Édouard Manet – a composition which by means of references to the Renaissance masterpieces and the following transpositions and reinterpretations constitutes a sort of iconographic model. In Gilbert and George’s triptych the group is reduced, of course, to their completely dressed male figures. However, they repeat in a way the poses of the figures in Manet’s picture (perhaps referring more directly to its predecessors – Pastoral Concert ascribed to Titian from around 1510 and The Tempest by Giorgione dated 1506) transforming them in some parts and reversing the gazes of the figures in the 19th century painting. George, sitting in the pose of the naked woman, looks in the direction of the pond located in the background (just like in Manet’s work), whereas Gilbert, placed in the foreground and stretching his slightly bended legs, directs his look at the viewer.

Gilbert & George, Class War, 1986 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Militant, 1986 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Gateway, 1986 (c) Gilbert & George

If we admit this interpretation, we can talk about three themes that foretell in this art the following, consistently developed, oeuvre. One of them is the near complete absence of women in their art, emphasized, as it seems, by many who write about it, indicated here in a consciously ironic fashion. The second one, almost in a sense “masked”, or perversely suggested by the lack of it, is the nakedness of the artists that returns in many following pictures. The third motif that appears in all their art, including the JACK FREAK PICTURES, is the presence of religious motifs. As far as the 1971 picture is concerned, they are hidden in the very structure of the work that takes the form of the triptych – typical for an altar – with the central part and two smaller wings. In the series from 2008 these are usually the images of the cross which have been previously mentioned, a crucifix, Christ as well as images of Christ’s face used sometimes as a decorative element visible on their suits.

Religious symbols are quite frequent in the artists’ pictures; the motif of the cross has appeared since 1977. Their attitude to formalized religions seems to be highly critical, yet ambivalent. The artists comment on their multilayered approach to this topic in the following way: “It's not a contradiction, just many things together. We’re more into exploring and discussing than forming a deliberate judgement”(15). They also often emphasise the importance of the moral message inherent in their art which consists not in the externally imposed laws, but rather springing from the inside of people, from their possibilities to change and invest things with new meanings. In a way, the religious dimension is present also in their approach to the human body itself, as well as to the bodily fluids, the microscopic images of which were the subject of many groups of pictures in the mid 90s (The Fundamental Pictures and the others): “Why in the drop of urine enlarged under the microscope can we discern a cross? I don’t know. Why does it look like Arabic writing? Perhaps the moral dimension is inscribed somewhere deep inside our bodies?”(16).

Gilbert & George, Piss on Tears, 1997 (c) Gilbert & George

Religious motifs can be found in their art also in a less obvious way, one which is not so easy to decipher by means of interpretive tools dominating in the 20th century. For, the artists use the category of the grotesque which was disliked at the time by the so-called mainstream of culture. It dates back to around 1480 when Nero’s Domus Aurea was excavated and what was found was the 1st century painting which already back then Horace called “dreams of a sick mind”(17), and which found in Italy a lot of followers with Raphael Santi as the major one. Grotesque, which means “a hidden hollow” or “cave”, defined by John Ruskin as a form „of two elements, one ludicrous, the other fearful”(18), as a stylistic motif survived in European culture for ages finding expression in its British version in works such as Alexander Pope’s 18th century studio in Twickenham which consisted of “an underground passage cum atelier bedecked with mirrors, seashells, and false stalactites”(19).

The grotesque formed in the Renaissance refers (adding up Platonic, neo-Platonic and Christian elements) to the of late antiquity syncretic tradition which located in underground caves the place of contact with the gods or supernatural powers. However, under the influence of the Platonic vision of the cave as a symbol of the prison of the senses, the cave in official European culture lost its meaning as a place of the transcendent encounter with sacrum and became a cursed place, an embodiment of nightmares, or the disturbing dreams of this culture inhabited by its outcasts who were given devil’s horns and expelled to the world of madness, frivolous extravagance, strangeness and entertainment. Summing up “the typical twentieth century critical position on the supernatural in art – and what follows its post-1700 vehicle, the grotesque – is well represented by the condescension of a commentator like Bernard McElroy who unwittingly replicates the classic colonial anthropological approaches when he states that << the grotesque does not address our rationality or our the scientist in us, but the vestigial primitive in us, the child or the potential psychotic in us >>”(20).

The category of the grotesque which can be used many times in reference to the art of Gilbert and George seems especially adequate in the discussion of the JACK FREAK PICTURES. Referring to Ruskin’s handy definition, looking at these pictures one might have an impression that our spiritual strings are pulled by two different powers – the absurd humour is accompanied by the sense of being pulled inside a gloomy tunnel that looks like an inside of a rabbit hole… Whereas the useful metaphor of the kaleidoscope coined by me in reference to these pictures at the beginning of this essay puts in our hands an object which is only shaped like (as in Plato’s cave) a telescope. In reality it does not serve putting closer that which is distant, but it creates completely new extraordinary and unexpected worlds. And this is what it is all about! For, „[...] the thinker of eternal return – who indeed refuses to be drawn out of the cave, [finds] instead another cave beyond, always another in which to hide”(21).

When I am finding in Gilbert and George’s art all these traces which let me find in it some links with certain traditions of culture and define the continuity of its themes, I am aware at the same time that the artists’ approach to the way their art is being interpreted is articulated directly: “We want our art to talk to people directly beyond the barrier of knowledge. We want our art to be viewed through life”(22). How to reconcile the above words with the evident references to the above mentioned traditions and allusions which are not just visual borrowings, but something deeper that enters into the dialogue with them? One may once again quote artists who explain that it is not so much the contradictions that interest them but noticing many things simultaneously. Is it then some kind of spectacular transference? In fact, the source of these large-scale colourful images, which straightforwardly mix beauty with triviality, the absurd with the dreadful, with the recurring motif of two identically dressed figures (if they are dressed at all), demonstrating as if “naturally” the artificiality of the living sculpture played 24 hours a day which flanks the drama of “sex, money, race and religion”(23), played out in the background, may be found in the market puppet shows.

The existence of street theatres of this type organized by travelling actors in Western Europe date back to the 16th century. In Britain especially popular were shows with Punch and Judy, a play that has origins in similar Italian shows with Pulcinella. Although in the version showed in Britain the pair of protagonists until this day are puppets pulled by strings, it is worth mentioning that in some of the European regional versions of the history of Pulcinella dolls are made of gloves. The deeper meaning of this “plebeian” entertainment is discussed by Victoria Nelson, the author of The Secret Life of Puppets: “Puppet shows had long been a tremendous popular favourite at great fairs, as depicted in Ben Jonson’s Bartholomew Fair (1614), which provides a nice sub-Zeitgeist moment of high-low convergence when the Puppeteers Leatherhead and Filcher demonstrated how they convert highbrow classical stories, such as the history of Hero and Leander << to a more familiar strain for our people >> by means of a puppet theatre madly fractured between Greek myth and the argot of the London street”(24).

The echo of a show with puppets pulled by strings can be found in Gilbert and George’s art in the form of the recurring motif of a strange dance. Already in 1969, when they appeared as a Singing Sculpture, the song of Underneath the Arches was accompanied by a kind of choreography compared by François Jonquet to a robot movement the idea of which, as artists explain, was to walk without moving(25). In the film The World of Gilbert & George from 1981 they dance to the music of the song Bend it from 1966 by the British band Dave Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick & Titch. The dance appears frequently in the JACK FREAK PICTURES, which is noticeable more in the titles of the pictures than in the poses of the dancers that sometimes do not differ much from the ones taken in other pictures from this group, and the movement is suggested only by the slight bending of the raised leg. The motif of the dance is referred to in the titles of: Union Dance, Cancan, Harvest Dance, Bear Week Dance, Pole Dance, Tree Dance, Poster Dance, Hanbury Street Dance, Union Wall Dance, Pyre Dance, War Dance, Salvation Army Dance, Nettle Dance. In most of them there is also discernible the fragment of the city in the background, most often these are buildings, but also a map (Cancan) or the typical city flora – the artists standing on the background of tree trunks hold plane tree branches with characteristic fruit (Tree Dance, Pyre Dance).

Gilbert & George, Harvest Dance, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

City is a typical landscape of Gilbert and George’s art present actually from the very beginning. They transfer us to it straight from the green landscape of the triptych The Paintings (With Us in the Nature), Triptych No – although perhaps it may also be a fragment of a city park. Almost always it is the same city, or rather its fragment, an area located in the eastern part of London where they have lived for forty years. In the compositions of the JACK FREAK PICTURES the artists used both the already mentioned maps as well as houses, roofs and streets which, just as other motifs, are subject to different reshapings and deformations, mirror image reflections that make them look like abstract forms, barely suggested, although there also appear bigger recognizable fragments. It is the city which is the area where in conditions of relative egalitarianism low culture meats high culture, the space where the Greek myth may meet the argot of the street.

In British culture the coexistence of contradictory elements has a long tradition; it might even be said to be an inherent part of what we call the national character of art. It was once written about by Erwin Panofsky in his famous essay where he noticed that this “antinomy of opposite principles – analogous to the fact that social and institutional life in England is more strictly controlled by tradition [than in continental Europe – author’s note], yet gives more scope to individual << eccentricity >> than anywhere else – can be observed throughout the history of English art and letters”(26). Panofsky tries to explain this antinomy by, on the one hand, existence of the „Celtic element – tending towards hyperbole, involved and << non-objective >> movement and unbridled imagination – in the very centres of ecclesiastical and secular culture; and, on the other, an unparalleled continuity of classical tradition which, upon an island far removed from the Mediterranean and never Latinized in its entirety, tended to assume the character of an << invisible lodge >>”(27).

Panofsky begins his discussion with a short introduction to the history of the 18th century “garden revolution”, when the regular gardens in Italian-French type were supplanted in Europe by a type called English. However, as he notices, the new type of garden “with its rolling lawns, its seemingly casual though artfully arranged clumps of trees, its ponds and brooks, and its serpentine footpaths”, a garden which “retains and accentuates precisely those << natural >> values which the formal garden intended to suppress: the qualities of picturesque variety, surprise and apparent infinitude”(28) is combined paradoxically with the popular type of a classical (by the model of Villa Rotonda) Palladian villa modelled on Pantheon.

I find this paradoxical coexistence of contradictory elements and antinomies also in Gilbert and George’s art. Thus the artists become a part of the long tradition of English culture, but they also always talk about a particular period in which their art is being made. They are then both the witnesses of that which is unchangeable and has been cultivated for centuries, as well as of the changes and transformations that occur in the course of their life. When in the summer of 2005 they presented their disturbing Ginkgo Pictures in the Venetian British Pavilion, which is actually a classic Italian villa built at the end of the 19th century and rebuilt in 1909 by E. A. Rickards, they unconsciously foretold the dread of terror that was soon to spread in a multicultural London. What is interesting, the same year, for the first time in the history of the Biennale, Scotland and Wales decided to present their art in separate places; two years later Northern Ireland followed their example.

Gilbert & George, Fates, 2005 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George, Hooded, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

And although it is in British culture that different kinds of dichotomies have a chance to be so close to each other partly because, as the American anthropologist E.T. Hall remarks, “in England it is the social system [not space – author’s note] that determines who you are”(29), these processes are to a greater extent related today with global and universal issues. Most of all with the development of mass culture and the egalitarianism of contemporary culture which is both its consequence and the driving force behind this development; this egalitarianism is illusory to some extent because the question of perception has always entailed and probably will entail for some time the accessibility to particular knowledge and, what follows, the ability to read different kinds of cultural codes constructed usually (even in case of things or “products” directed seemingly at the most mass viewer) on many different levels and surfaces. The awareness of reception is then linked with having knowledge that lets one read a given message of culture in many different ways, and the access to this knowledge is subjected to a kind of rationing, very far from egalitarian. As many examples on both older and contemporary art prove, works considered most intriguing and interesting usually consist of many levels of meaning at the same time. This is the context in which I understand Gilbert and George’s motto: “Art For All”.

Gilbert & George, SAP, 2008 (c) Gilbert & George

Gilbert & George's pictures by courtersy of the artists.

(1) François Jonquet, Gilbert & George Intimate Conversations with François Jonquet, London 2004, p. 22.
(2) Ibid, p. 66.
(3) Cf. Ibid., pp. 68, 79.
(4) Ibid., p. 129.
(5) Cf. Levis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There, in: The Complete Stories and Poems of Lewis Carroll, New Lanark 2005, p. 80.
(6) Jeremy Valentine, Contemporary British Art and Cultural Governance in Britain under New Labour, in: „Magazyn sztuki” 18 (2/98), p. 40.
(7) François Jonquet, op. cit., p. 89.
(8) Cf. John Gage, Colour and Meaning. Art, Science and Symbolism, University of California Press, 2000.
(9) François Jonquet, op. cit., pp. 107-114.
(10) The Laws Of Sculptors:
1. Always be smartly dressed, well groomed relaxed friendly polite and in complete control.
2. Make the world to believe in you and to pay heavily for this privilege.
3. Never worry assess discuss or criticize but remain quiet respectful and calm
4. The lord chissels still, so don't leave your bench for long.
Cited in: Jon Wood, David Hulks and Alex Potts (ed.), Modern Sculpture Reader, Henry Moore Institute, Leeds 2007, p. 300.
(11) François Jonquet, op. cit., p. 65.
(12) Cf. John Berger, Ways of Seeing, London 1977, p. 106-108.
(13) Cited in: François Jonquet, op. cit., p. 51.
(14) R. L. Brett, A Study of Form and Meaning in Four Poems, Londyn, Nowy Jork, Toronto 1960, p. 64.
(15) François Jonquet, op. cit., p. 148.
(16) Seks, pieniądze i religia. Rozmowa z Gilbertem i Georgem, in: M. Wasilewski, Seks, pieniądze i religia. Rozmowy o sztuce brytyjskiej, Poznań 2001, p. 58.
(17) Horace, Ars Poetica, cited in: Victoria Nelson, The Secret Life of Puppets, Cambridge MA 2001, p. 2. The authors devoted an en tire chapter to the discussion of the grotesque.
(18) John Ruskin, The Stones of Venice, in: W. H. Gombrich, Sense of Order, p. 256, cited in: Victoria Nelson, op. cit., p. 3.
(19) Victoria Nelson, ibid.
(20) Ibid, p. 16; the quotation from McElroy from: Bernard McElroy, Fiction of the Modern Grotesque, London 1989, p. 5.
(21) Gilles Deleuze, Difference and Repetition, London 2004, p. 80.
(22) Seks, pieniądze i religia. Rozmowa z Gilbertem i Georgem, op. cit., p. 56.
(23) François Jonquet, op. cit., p. 239.
(24) Victoria Nelson, op. cit., p. 55.
(25) François Jonquet, op. cit., p. 66.
(26) Cf,. Erwin Panofsky, The Ideological Antecedents of the Rolls-Royce Radiator in: Idem, Three Essays on Style, Cambridge MA1997, p. 144.
(27) Ibid., p. 154.
(28) Ibid., p. 133.
(29) Edward T. Hall, The Hidden Dimension, New York 1990, p. 142.

Translated by Karolina Kolenda