of it。 Because he framed their paintings； he knew personally； and well； most of the other firsts of the war and postwar years。〃
〃He was a picture framer？〃
〃At first； yes。 Miró； De Chiico； Man Ray； Pierre Roy； and many other painters found it expedient to visit him in his tiny framing shop。 He gave them credit； and until they started to make money with their work； they sorely needed credit。 Debierue's name is brought up in the studies published on every important postwar development because he was there…and because he knew all the artists involved。 But his only monality with other innovators is the fact that he was a first in his own right as the acknowledged father of Nihilistic Surrealism。 Debierue； by the way； didn't coin this term for his work。
〃The Swiss essayist and art critic； Franz Moricand； was the first writer to use this term with reference to Debierue's art。 And the label； once attached； stuck。 The term appeared originally in Moricand's essay； 〃Stellt er nur？〃 in Mercure de France。 The article wasn't penetrating； but other critics were quick to snatch the term 'Nihilistic Surrealism' from the essay。 An apt and descriptive bridge was needed； you see； to provide a clear dividing line between Dada and Surrealism。 Both groups have attempted at various times to claim Debierue； but he was never in either camp。 Dada and Surrealism both have strong philosophical underpinnings； but no one knows what Debierue's leanings are。
〃Chance is an important factor in the discovery and recognition of every artist； but what many modern critics fail to accept is that Debierue's many artist…friends paid off by sending people to see Debierue's one…man show。 In his Montmartre hole…in…the…wall framing workshop he had mounted many paintings at cost； and others absolutely free； for poor young painters whose work sold a few months later for high prices。 Those 'crazy boatloads' of Americans； as Fitzgerald called them； ing to France during the boom period； always carried more than fifty dollars in cash on their person。 They bought a lot of paintings； and the selling painters didn't forget their obligations to Debierue。
〃Despite Hauptmann's book； an aura of mystery about Debierue's first and only one…man show remains。 No invitations were issued； and there were no posters or newspaper ads。 He didn't even mention the show to his friends。 One day； and the exact date is still unknown； a small； handlettered card appeared in the display case behind the street window of his framing shop。 'Jacques Debierue。 No。 One。 Shown by request only： It was spelled Capital N…o…period。 Capital O…n…e。〃
〃Why didn't he use the French Nombre une？〃
〃That's a good point； Berenice。 But no one really knows。 The fact that he used the English No。 One instead of Nombre une may or may not've influenced Samuel Beckett to write in French instead of English； as the literary critic Leon Mindlin has claimed。 But everyone concerned agrees that it was an astute move on Debierue's part when American tourists； with their limited French； began to arrive on the Paris scene。 Using a number as a title for his picture； incidentally； was another first in art that has been indisputably credited to Debierue。 Rothko； who uses numbers exclusively for his paintings； has admitted privately； if not in writing； his indebtedness to Debierue。 The point's important because several art historians falsely attribute the numbering of paintings as a first for Rothko。 Debierue hasn't said anything； one way or another； about the matter。 He's never mented on his picture； either。
〃This much is certain。 No。 One postdated Dada and predated Surrealism； thereby providing a one…man bridge between the two major art movements of this century。 And Debierue's Nihilistic Surrealism may； in time； turn out to be the most important movement of the three。 In retrospect； it's easy enough for us to see how Debierue captured the hearts and minds of the remaining Dadaists who were gradually； one by one； dropping out of Dada and losing their hard…earned recognition to the burgeoning Surrealists。 And you can also realize； now； why the Surrealists were so anxious to claim Debierue。 But Debierue stood alone。 He neither admitted nor denied membership in either movement。 His work spoke for him； as a work of art is supposed to do。
〃No。 One was exhibited in a small and otherwise empty room…once a maid's bedroom…one short flight of stairs above Debierue's downstairs workshop。 An environment had been created deliberately for the picture。 The visitor who requested to see it…no fee was asked…was escorted upstairs by the artist himself and left alone with the picture。
〃At first； as the viewer's eyes became adjusted to the murky natural light ing into the room from a single dirty window high on the opposite wall； all he could see was what appeared to be an ornate frame； without a picture in it； hanging on the wall。 A closer inspection； with the aid of a match or cigarette lighter； revealed that the gilded frame with baroque scrollwork enclosed a fissure or crack in the gray plaster wall。 The exposed wire； and the nail which had been driven into the wall to hold both the wire and the frame； were also visible。 Within the frame； the wire； peaking to about twenty degrees at the apex…at the nail… resembled； if the viewer stood well back from the picture； a distant mountain range。〃
Berenice sighed。 〃I don't understand it。 The whole thing doesn't make any sense to me。〃
〃Exactly！ No sense； but not nonsense。 This was an irrational work in a rational setting。 Debierue's Nihilistic Surrealism； like Dada and Surrealism； is irrational。 That's the entire point of Dada； and of most of the other postwar art movements。 Distortion； irrationality； and the unlikely juxtaposition of objects。〃
〃What did the reviewers say about it？〃
〃What the reviewers said in the newspapers isn't important； Berenice。 There's a distinction between a reviewer and a critic； as you should know。 The reviewer deals with art as a modity。 He's got three or four shows a week to cover； and his treatment of them is superficial； at best。 But the critic is interested in aesthetics； and in placing the work of art in the scheme of things…or even as a pattern of behavior。〃
〃All right； then。 What did the critics say about No。 One？〃
〃A great many things。 But criticism begins with the structure； and often ends there； especially for those critics who believe that every work of art is autotelic。 Autotelic。 That means…〃
〃I know what autotelic means。 I studied literary criticism in college； and l've got a degree in English。〃
〃Okay。 What does it mean？〃
〃It means that a work of art is plete in itself。〃
〃Right！ And what else does it mean； or imply？〃
〃Just that。 That the poem； or whatever； should be considered by itself； without reference to anything else。〃
〃That's right； but there's more。 It means that the artist himself should not be brought into the criticism of the work being considered。 And although I'm a structuralist； I don't think that any work…poem； painting； novel…is autotelic。 The personality of the artist is present in every work of art； and the critic has to dig it out as well as explicating the structure and form。 Take pro football…〃
〃I'd love to。 It's more interesting than painting。〃
〃To you； yes； but I want to make an analogy。 A good critic's like a good football announcer on television。 We see the same play that he does； but he breaks it down for us； reveals the structure and the pattern of the play。 He explains what went wrong and what was right about the play。 He can also tell us what is likely to e next。 Also； because of the instant tape replay； he can even break down the play into its ponent parts for us to see again in slow motion。 We do the same thing in art criticism sometimes； when we blow up details of a painting in slides。〃
〃Your analogy doesn't explain the 'personality' in the football play。〃
〃Yes it does。 This is the quarterback； who caused the play in the first place。 That is； if the quarterback called the play。 Sometimes the coach calls every play； sending in the new play every time with a substitute。 If the announcer doesn't know what the coach is like； what he has done before； or the quarterback； I'll say； his explanation of the structure of the play is going to be shaky； and any prediction he makes won't be valid。 Do you follow me？〃
〃I follow you。〃
〃Good。 Then you shouldn't have any trouble in understanding the success of No。 One。 Only one person at a time was allowed to examine the picture。 But there was no time limit set by the artist。 Some visitors came downstairs immediately。 Others remained for an hour or more； inconveniencing those waiting below。 The average viewer was satisfied by a cursory inspection。 But according to Hauptmann； there were a great many repeats。
〃One old Spanish nobleman from Sevilla visited Paris a half…dozen times for the sole purpose of taking another look at No。 One。 No visitor's log was kept； but the fact that a vast number of people visited Debierue's shop to see the picture is a matter of public record。 Every Parisian artist of the time made the pilgrimage； usually bringing along some friends。 And No。 One was wide