Why the Hatrack is and/or is not Readymade:
with Interactive Software, Animation,
and Videos for Readers to Explore

by Rhonda Roland Shearer with Gregory Alvarez, Robert Slawinski, Vittorio Marchi and text box by Stephen Jay Gould

<PART II>

Duchamp's readymade hatrack only
exists in the mind not in factual nature.

After duly noting the geometric distortions in Duchamp's six hatrack representations, we must conclude that the simple history and definition of the hatrack that everyone believed -- that a readymade is an unaltered, mass-produced object -- must be completely reassessed and rewritten.

Click to enlarge
Illustration 19A.	Illustration 19B.
Studio photograph (1916-17) with Duchamp's ghost image found in 1960's © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris	Photograph of Duchamp's studio by Man Ray with Duchamp as ghost image, 1920

We can return to the six representations of the hatrack and explore some of the issues now raised such as to how Duchamp generated the six depictions? Did he alter hatrack objects or doctor photographs or both? We are presently working with forensic scientists to help us determine more about the exact nature and type of photographic or physical manipulations that Duchamp may have used. Duchamp, obviously, put us all on notice that he was doing the photographic tricks well known in the late 19th and early 20th century by both amateur and professional photographers, see illustrations #19A, B. In both photographs 19A and B, Duchamp himself appears to be a ghostly apparition, a typical photo trick of the time.⁽¹³⁾

Click to enlarge

Illustration 20A.

Original Studio Photograph, 1916-17 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris

Forensic experts that I have consulted also noted that the scale, shadows and light directions in many of Duchamp's photographs are inconsistent throughout the whole image.⁽¹⁴⁾ As an example, strong shadows will, inconsistently, be cast from one object but not from the other object directly next to it. (Closely examine illustration 20A, Note that the stick leaning against the wall cast a shadow and yet the Bicycle Wheel does not! Moreover, the pillows in the foreground cast strong shadows and yet the Coatrack does not!)

For another example, look at illustration 20A, B and C. A full size snow shovel could not possibly be hanging physically from a height indicated in these studio photographs. We discover that the wood shaft would have to be too short when we compare the shovel's size to the ceiling.

Click all images to enlarge
Illustration 20B.	Illustration 20C.
Photograph of Duchamp's studio used for making print for the Box in a Valise, 1941 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris Note: circle is for clarity added by author	Note that shovel could not be hanging at its full length from the ceiling. Photograph of Duchamp's studio with Duchamp's ghost image, 1916-1917 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris Note: circle is for clarity added by author

Click to see video

Illustration 21A.

Marcel Duchamp, In the Manner of Delvaux, 1942 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris Note: arrows are for clarity added by author

Click to enlarge

Illustration 21B.

Mathew Brady used composite techniques in the earlist days of photography. From Dino A. Brugioni, Photo Fakery: The History and Techniques of Photographic Deception and Manipulation, Virginia: Brassey's, 1999, p. 34 Note: circles are for clarity added by author

Our resulting hypothesis must be that the shovel's wood shaft and handle have been somehow cut off. Duchamp (or someone in his behalf) shortened the wood shaft either physically or photographically. In the later case of trick photography, instead of hanging a short snow shovel in his studio, Duchamp, or someone at his behest, could have; 1); taken a photograph of a snow shovel and carefully trimmed away the background; 2), Next, this snow shovel shaped photograph part (with short wood shaft) would then be inset into a precisely sized and shaped cut out receptacle in the studio photo's emulsion

Click all images to enlarge

Illustration 22A.

Marcel Duchamp, Trébuchet, 1917

Illustration 22B.

Marcel Duchamp, Fountain, photograph by Alfred stieglitz from Blindman No. 2, 1917 © 2000 Succession Marcel Duchamp, ARS, N.Y./ADAGP, Paris

(similar to putting a cut out cookie back into its negative space within the rolled out dough); 3), the studio background and shovel fragment now appear as one photograph that is rephotographed and printed for the final resulting composite that we see. Examine here the video of the work, In the Manner of Delvaux (1942) which documents only one example among many of the expert skill Duchamp (or someone at his request) demonstrated in creating photographic composites. (See Illustration 21A) Adding or subtracking subjects from photos was done with numerous techniques from the earliest days of photography. Mathew Brady seamlessly added an eighth Civil War general in illustration 21B.

The aforementioned studio photographs (19A, B and 20A, B) present many other instances of photographic manipulations that I will leave for future discussions. However, please see Stephen Jay Gould's text box here to read his observations and discovery regarding Duchamp's studio photograph, illustration 19B. For now, I will limit myself to analysis of two studio photographs of readymades to continue my argument (see illustrations 22A and 22B that show Duchamp's "original" 1916 coatrack and "original" 1917 urinal.)