allowing a true hidden order of things to surge forth" (135). Ironically, at the moment

when Giacometti encounters his lucky find, his mask, the mask is torn away, for the order

that surges forth is not one of causality-as Breton put it, a lucky find "could not come to

us along ordinary logical paths" (MadLove 13)-but of irrationality, or, we might say, of

chance.

 For Breton, chance was not just a singular moment that disrupted the "natural"

order of things. Instead, it enabled surrealists like himself to imagine another order,

wherein one gave oneself over to the seemingly arbitrary. Even as early as 1920 in "Pour

Dada," Breton asked, "when will one give the arbitrary the place that falls to it in the

formation of works and ideas" (qtd. in Cohen 134-35). Only by giving oneself over to

chance can one create a new order that enables unforeseen juxtapositions. But the

Dadaists were much less interested in discovering these juxtapositions. "If the Dadas

called attention to the value of chance," Cohen rightly argues, "they did so in negative

fashion, as a force capable of destroying habitual conceptual order" (135). Deeply

disturbed by the mass destruction of the Great War, the Dadaists were a group of young

artists and writers who worked spontaneously and collaboratively on pamphlets and

publications, paintings and collages, not only to proclaim the rupture between art and

logic but also to advertise a kind of destructive anarchism. From Tristan Tzara and

Marcel Duchamp, to Andre Breton, Philippe Soupault, and Aragon, they became what

Fiona Bradley calls "the randomly christened expression of revolt which exploded into

simultaneous life in Zuirich, Cologne, and New York" (12). In 1920, Aragon announced,

"No more painters, no more writers, no more musicians, no more sculptors, ..

NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING" (qtd. in Bradley 19).