ABSTRACT
The first avant-garde of this century (surreaiism, dadaism, and futurism) is commonly viewed as diametrically opposed to the second avant-garde of the 1960s and 1970s. Many critics, such as Krysinski, consider the former to be more violently hostile towards artistic tradition, whose language it seeks to destroy, while the latter is more preoccupied with aesthetics, offers new forms and expressions of the existing tradition, and attempts to re-shape its language instead of rejecting it.1 The difference, according to Peter Wollen, lies in the treatment and privileging of signifier over signified: "One tendency reflects a preoccupation with the specificity of the signifier, holding the signified in suspense or striving to eliminate it. The other has tried to develop new types of relation between signifier and signified through the montage of heterogeneous elements."2
