Madness: A Revolutionary Rearguard

From the Futurists and Surrealists, to the Anti-Psychiatrists madness has been used as a tactic of social revolution throughout the twentieth century, and yet, time and again, these movements have been co-opted by the most reactionary social elements. Futurism, after the First World War became an artistic arm of the Fascist Party; Surrealism was commandeered by the Francoist Dalí and Anti-Psychiatry was deployed by the Thatcherites in 1980’s. This paper will examine why the idea of madness has been so appealing to revolutionary movements but also why it has been particularly susceptible to co-option.

The paper will argue, illustrated by historical examples, that at the heart of the tactic of madness is an original contradiction. Madness is always defined by the cultural hegemony. It is the set of behaviours, ideas and modes of thought set outside the limits of culture. It is the accumulation of unsayable statements. This gives the revolutionary deployment of madness its critical strength – the ability to confront society with the reality of its excluded parts and, by extension, its historical contingency. However, this is also the weakness of the deployment of madness as a tactic. If the cultural hegemony defines madness then it is a simple matter to adjust the definition of madness slightly to rob revolutionary actions of their power. Thus, this paper will argue that, far from being at the vanguard of a social revolution, the groups that use madness as a tactic constitute a rearguard. They are in constant retreat always repositioning themselves as they are overrun by the cultural hegemony – withdrawing from positions whose guns may then be turned on these same revolutionaries.