Readymades of Marcel Duchamp

Marcel Duchamp’s readymades are works of art conceived between 1913 and 1921 that Duchamp selected and presented as found objects based on visual indifference. By designating everyday objects as art with visual indifference, the readymades represented a form of denying the possibility of defining art. The ordinary manufactured originals disappeared almost immediately after their designation as art. No physical record, other than their secondary documentation, has been found.[1][2] (Pierre Cabanne, Dialogues with Marcel Duchamp, Thames and Hudson, 1971)

The readymades survive through art historians, scholars and later generations of artists who accept that Duchamp's miniatures, photographs, notes, blueprints, and later authorized replicas of the original manufactured artifacts only represent the lost original.[4] Duchamp distinguished the objects solely by titling, dating, and naming them at “such-and-such a time,” as noted in the Green Box. He called the concept “the most important idea to ever come out of my work.”[6] The idea was first recorded in a January 1916 letter to his sister Suzanne Duchamp [2], which read:

/quote take the bottle rack for yourself. I’m making it a ‘Readymade,’ remotely. You are to inscribe it at the bottom and on the inside of the bottom circle, in small letters painted with a brush in oil, silver white color, with an inscription which I will give you herewith, and then sign it, in the same handwriting as follows: [after] Marcel Duchamp.

No record of the 1917 Fountain scandal, other than the photograph published in the Blind Man, has surfaced, including any record of its submission for exhibition [2]. The loss of most originals, and the 1964 Schwarz authorized replicas together created the layered paradox that now defines the readymade in art history.[1][2]

A Case for Collecting Objects of American Cultural Heritage

The Art Science Research Laboratory (ASRL), founded by Rhonda Roland Shearer and Stephen Jay Gould, has contributed significantly to the study of Marcel Duchamp's readymades through interdisciplinary research combining art history, scientific analysis, and historical contextualization.

Their investigations have highlighted difficulties in locating exact period matches or duplicate examples for some of Duchamp's purported readymades in commercial catalogs or surviving objects. Cases include the wooden stool appearing in Duchamp's 1917–18 studio photographs (no exact mass-produced match found despite similar examples in 1897 Sears Roebuck catalogs), the corkscrew whose shadow appears distorted in Tu m' (1918), and others such as the urinal in Fountain (1917), the Sapolin enamel sign in Apolinère Enameled (1916–17), and further items like a Hershey postcard note, red cone, rubber bathing cap, glass medical ampule, and Underwood typewriter cover. ASRL argues that these discrepancies suggest greater artistic intervention in some readymades than the traditional narrative of pure selection from store-bought items implies, and stresses the urgency of preserving such historical materials before they disappear. For further details, see: Marcel Duchamp: A Readymade Case for Collecting Objects of Our Cultural Heritage Along with Works of Art on Tout-Fait.

Hat Rack as a Test Case in Forensic Analysis

The Hat Rack (1917) exemplifies the difficulties in conducting forensic analysis on Duchamp's readymades, as the original object is lost and survives only through secondary documentation and traces. No period-appropriate commercial hat rack has been located that exactly corresponds to the object as documented, raising questions about the precise nature of its selection as a readymade and potential alterations, as investigated by the Art Science Research Laboratory, led by Rhonda Roland Shearer in collaboration with Stephen Jay Gould and colleagues.

ASRL's analysis of these sources shows variations in details such as dimensions, number of hooks, and form. This case underscores the broader corpus instability of the readymades: with originals missing, scholarship depends on inconsistent secondary representations, leading to divergent interpretations across institutions and researchers. Hat Rack thus serves as a test case for how forensic methods—examining photographs, shadows, blueprints, and replicas—can be applied to reconstruct and interrogate the historical reality of Duchamp's lost works.

Corpus instability and institutional divergence

The readymades form a historically layered and contested corpus due to loss of originals, reliance on replicas, and varying scholarly and institutional interpretations. Institutions differ in classification (assisted/unassisted), titles, dates (often 1917/1964), and dimensions for the same works.[1][2][4][5][6][12][14]

Notable readymades

Nine of ten original unassisted readymades lost. Replicas and reconstructions central to museum collections. Public awareness formed later through replicas and exhibitions from the 1930s onward.[1][10][4] Bicycle Wheel (1913, assisted) Bottle Rack (1914, unassisted) In Advance of the Broken Arm (1915) Comb (1916) Fountain (1917) — rejected in 1917[11][13] Hat Rack (1917)[3][7][8][9] Hat Rack shows corpus instability. Surviving traces (shadows, photos, 1964 blueprint and replica) vary in details. No exact historical match found for an unaltered commercial original.[2] Trébuchet (1917) 50 cc of Paris Air (1919) L.H.O.O.Q. (1919) Art Science Research Laboratory's contributions to Duchamp studies

The readymades form a historically layered and contested corpus due to loss of originals, reliance on replicas, and varying scholarly and institutional interpretations. Institutions differ in classification (assisted/unassisted), titles, dates (often 1917/1964), and dimensions for the same works.[1][2][4][5][6][12][14]

Origins and Early Development

Duchamp's journey toward readymades began around 1912-1913, when he was achieving success as a painter in Paris but growing increasingly dissatisfied with purely visual art [2]. "I was interested in ideas—not merely in visual products," he later explained, marking his shift away from traditional painting [2]. This philosophical pivot occurred during the years immediately preceding World War I, a period of social and cultural upheaval that influenced many artists to question established conventions.

The first readymade, Bicycle Wheel (1913), consisted of a bicycle wheel mounted upside-down on a wooden stool [1]. Created in Duchamp's Paris studio, this piece established the basic principle of the readymade: taking manufactured objects out of their utilitarian context and presenting them as art through the simple act of artistic selection and repositioning. The original 1913 version, along with a second version from 1916-17, has been lost, though later versions exist in major museums [1].

Duchamp continued developing the readymade concept after moving to New York in 1915, where he found a more receptive audience for experimental art. His New York studio at 33 West 67th Street became a laboratory for readymade creation, housing works like the coat rack titled Trap (Trébuchet) from 1917, which he placed directly on the floor [1].

Key Works and Techniques

Duchamp's readymades fall into several categories based on their level of modification. Pure readymades involved no alteration beyond selection and signing, while assisted readymades combined multiple objects or included minor modifications [7]. The most famous example, Fountain (1917), represents a pure readymade — a standard porcelain urinal signed "R. Mutt 1917" and submitted to an art exhibition [5].

Fountain became the most notorious readymade when Duchamp submitted it to the Society of Independent Artists exhibition in New York. The work was rejected by the exhibition committee despite the society's stated policy of accepting all submissions from members who paid the fee [5]. This rejection sparked intense debate about the boundaries of art and the role of institutions in determining artistic legitimacy.

Other significant readymades include Bottle Rack (1914), an unmodified commercial bottle-drying rack that Duchamp purchased in Paris, and In Advance of the Broken Arm (1915), a snow shovel with the title painted on its handle [6]. These works demonstrated Duchamp's systematic approach to challenging artistic conventions through the strategic selection of mundane objects.

Duchamp also created reciprocal readymades, a theoretical concept where famous artworks would be used for practical purposes — such as using a Rembrandt painting as an ironing board [7]. While never executed, this concept further illustrated his critique of the artificial separation between art and everyday life.

Philosophical Impact and Art Theory

The readymades fundamentally challenged the retinal tradition in Western art — the emphasis on visual beauty and technical skill that had dominated artistic practice for centuries [4]. By removing the artist's hand from the creative process, Duchamp shifted focus from aesthetic contemplation to conceptual engagement, forcing viewers to consider why certain objects are classified as art while others remain mere utilities.

This conceptual approach influenced the development of institutional theory in art philosophy, which suggests that objects become art through recognition by art world institutions rather than inherent aesthetic properties [5]. Duchamp's readymades demonstrated that artistic status could be conferred through context, presentation, and institutional acceptance rather than traditional markers of artistic skill or beauty.

The readymades also introduced questions about authorship and originality in art. Since Duchamp did not manufacture the objects himself, the works challenged Romantic notions of the artist as individual creator. Instead, they positioned the artist as selector, curator, and conceptual orchestrator — roles that would become central to much contemporary art practice.

Influence on Modern and Contemporary Art

Duchamp's readymades profoundly influenced subsequent art movements, particularly Pop Art, Conceptual Art, and Installation Art. Artists like Andy Warhol, who elevated commercial products like Campbell's Soup cans to art status, directly built upon Duchamp's precedent of finding art in mass-produced objects [6]. The readymade concept also prefigured the appropriation strategies used by artists like Sherrie Levine and Jeff Koons in the 1980s and beyond.

Conceptual artists of the 1960s and 1970s, including Sol LeWitt and Lawrence Weiner, extended Duchamp's emphasis on ideas over objects, creating works that existed primarily as concepts or instructions rather than physical artifacts. The readymade's demonstration that artistic value could reside in selection and recontextualization rather than creation became fundamental to conceptual art practice.

Contemporary artists continue to engage with readymade principles through found object sculpture, institutional critique, and relational aesthetics. Museums worldwide now regularly exhibit works that trace their lineage directly to Duchamp's revolutionary gesture of presenting everyday objects as art.

Criticism and Controversy

The readymades have faced persistent criticism from traditionalists who argue they represent a degradation of artistic standards and skill. Critics contend that by eliminating craftsmanship and aesthetic consideration, readymades reduce art to mere intellectual games divorced from human emotional and spiritual needs [5]. This criticism reflects broader tensions between traditional and avant-garde approaches to art that continue to influence contemporary cultural debates.

Some scholars have also questioned the democratic claims often made for readymades, arguing that their appreciation requires significant cultural capital and art historical knowledge. Rather than making art more accessible, critics suggest readymades may have created new forms of cultural exclusion based on conceptual sophistication rather than aesthetic sensitivity.

Feminist critics have noted the gendered implications of Duchamp's choice of objects, particularly the urinal in Fountain, arguing that his selections often reinforced masculine perspectives on public and private space. These critiques have opened important discussions about how avant-garde gestures can simultaneously challenge and reinforce existing power structures.

Legacy and Museum Collections

Today, Duchamp's readymades are housed in major museums worldwide, including the Museum of Modern Art in New York, the Philadelphia Museum of Art, and the Tate Modern in London [6]. Since the original versions of many readymades were lost or destroyed, museums display later versions authorized by Duchamp or created according to his specifications, raising complex questions about authenticity and reproduction in conceptual art.

The market value of readymades has created ironic situations where objects originally chosen for their ordinariness now command millions of dollars at auction. This commercialization highlights ongoing tensions between Duchamp's anti-commercial intentions and the art market's capacity to absorb and monetize even the most radical artistic gestures.

Educational institutions worldwide use readymades to teach fundamental concepts in modern art theory, making them among the most pedagogically influential artworks of the 20th century. Their continued relevance in art education demonstrates their success in permanently expanding definitions of what art can be and do.

Related Topics

• Dada Movement
• Conceptual Art
• Marcel Duchamp Biography
• Institutional Theory of Art
• Found Object Sculpture
• Anti-Art Movement
• Pop Art Origins
• Museum Studies and Curation

Summary

Marcel Duchamp's readymades were ordinary manufactured objects presented as art between 1913-1923, fundamentally challenging traditional definitions of art by emphasizing conceptual selection over aesthetic creation and establishing the foundation for much of contemporary conceptual art practice.