Man Ray's Montparnasse

There are a few almost legendary places whose draw reaches across the centuries of time and space and makes people wish that they could hop into a time-machine and go for a vacation or visit. For me, one of those fabled eras is Montparnasse Paris at the turn of twentieth-century. I've always thought of this location at this historical period as the "Paris Camelot of Art" and for me its draw is stronger than say the "Camelot of King Arthur." Lottman has done a marvelous job of combining the many important artists and art movements that mark this time and place into a single readable, but informative book. It makes a nice companion to "KiKi's Paris: Artist and Lovers 1900-1930" (see my review). Unlike that book, which is like a huge family album of photographs of the people who passed through the area at that time in history, this book delves deeper into the personalities that formed the knights of the "rustic wine barrels" serving as the round tables of the "passage de l'Opera" in 1919. The author picked Man Ray as his connection to all the people described in the book because the gregarious American visitor did what few of the other personalities described could do. He was able to get along with the various stratum of society that inhabited Montparnasse at the time. His camera opened the doors of the Dadaists as well as the mansion gates of high society and the rich aristocrats. Once his reputation with a camera was established, every important visitor to the area wanted to have their portrait made by the American living in Paris. Since he also did a lot of assignments for many of the most important news and fashion magazines of the era, his reputation and location was soon known worldwide. Much to his disgust, but to the benefit of his wallet, having him take your portrait became a status symbol. Despite this economic success he was still able to remain a part of the anti-society, anti-everything Dada movement. People liked Man Ray and they liked having their pictures taken too. Everyone it seemed liked to have him take his or her picture. May Ray of course, didn't consider photography an art and considered himself to be primarily a serious painter. The strength of this book is how the author manages to paint so many interesting biographical portraits and yet have them all interact in the geographic jumble that was Montparnasse. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this book.

It was merely coincidence that one day after returning from Paris (I always stay in a small hotel on rue Delambre in Montparnasse) I was in a bookstore in Colorado and picked this up just for the title. Little did I know it would explode with stories and much interesting stories (I'm no historian and cannot verify their accuracy) and anecdotes about the photographer Man Ray and all his notorious friends & lovers in the pre WWII era of Montparnasse when Dada and Surrealism were taking hold. As I had spent so many hours wandering the same streets and sitting in the same cafes it really grabbed me and was a very interesting read. In short, if you: (any or all of the below)- Love Paris; plan to go there; have interest in the "lost generation/cafe society" era of Paris and particularly Montparnasse (one of my favorite areas in Paris); then you are crazy if you don't at least check this book out. I'll use it for reference on my Montparnasse cafe crawls when I return next year.

Although I cannot attest to the scholarly quality of "Man Ray's Montparnasse", I believe that Lottman provides insight into this Parisian art district.The reader learns about the different bars/clubs that were important. He learns who met where; the locations of various artist studios; and the general feel of the era. The dissent in the da da movement and the surrealist movement was significant.Man Ray's neutral role in all of this is interesting. Lottman makes it appear that obtaining portrait sitters was one of Ray's primary goals. That along with women and his cars.I enjoyed the book and believe that there is much to be learned from it. Caveat: If there are historicals errors as the other reviewer mentions, then it is difficult to know what you can and cannot believe.