Plastic body, permanent body: Czech representations of corporeality in the early twentieth century Charlotte Sleigh Centre for History of Science, Technology and Medicine, School of History, Rutherford College, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NX, UK article info Article history: Received 3 December 2008 Keywords: Josef and Karel C ˇ apek Evolution Henri Bergson Literature Cubism Artisanship abstract In the early twentieth century, the body was seen as both an ontogenetic and a phylogenetic entity. In the former case, its individual development, it was manifestly changeable, developing from embryo to matu- rity and thence to a state of decay. But in the latter case, concerning its development as a species, the question was an open one. Was its phylogenetic nature a stationary snapshot of the slow process of evo- lution, or was this too mutable? Historians have emphasised that the question of acquired inheritance remained open into the twentieth century; this paper explores how various constructions of the individ- ual as a phylogenetic episode—a stage in the race’s evolution—related to representations of the body in the same period. A discussion of the work of the brothers Josef and Karel C ˇ apek offers a contextualised answer to the question of bodily representation. Karel C ˇ apek (1890–1938) explored the nature of the ‘average man’ through two different organisms, the robot and the amphibian, epitomes respectively of corporeal per- manence and plasticity. Josef C ˇ apek (1887–1945), along with other members of the Group of Plastic Artists, explored visual representations of the body that challenged cubist Bergsonian norms. In so doing, he affirmed what his brother also held: that despite the constrictions imposed by the oppressive political conditions in which the Czechs found themselves, the individual body was a fragile but fluid entity, capa- ble of effecting change upon the future evolution of humankind. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. When citing this paper, please use the full journal title Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 1. Introduction Josef C ˇ apek’s painting Man with box (1921; Fig. 1) teases the viewer with its mysterious narrative. Has the man (eponymous, anonymous) perhaps made the box for Josef? The box is labelled ‘JC ˇ ’, so it seems plausible that he is its intended owner or recipient. Or is the man in fact Josef himself, and the picture a self-portrait of C ˇ apek and the things that he makes? The man has in his hand a hammer, symbol of craftsmanship, and wears the clothes of an artisan; perhaps he has labelled the box with his own initials. As a third alternative, has the man made the box, labelled it with its intended contents, and placed Josef inside? In favour of this most perturbing possibility, the viewer notes that the box appears to have a breathing-hole cut into its side. In essence, the problem presented by the painting is the rela- tionship between maker and made, painter and painting, creator and creation. Is the relationship between them strictly one-way? Can the two even be separated satisfactorily? In their historical context, these artistic questions can also be seen to mirror prob- lems of evolution. Though a Paleyite designer was no longer in con- tention, important issues remained open about the nature of evolution throughout the 1910s, 20s, and arguably even the 1930s. Neo-Lamarckian accounts battled pure selectivity; a vitalist emphasis on development rivalled mechanistic genetics. Mean- while, the ubiquitous science of eugenics—whether in environ- mentalist or hereditarian mode—contemplated taking over the reins of evolution for the benefit of the human race (or selected portions thereof). For the artistically inclined, there was one more question: how should creativity be understood in a world which no longer possessed a Creator? In this scientific-cultural context, we can understand the phylo- genetic nature of the body portrayed by the artist in two modes: as 1369-8486/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2009.09.001 E-mail address: C.L.Sleigh@kent.ac.uk Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 40 (2009) 241–255 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/shpsc