A Dreco Manifesto
         By Paul Drexler

Since the emergence of Art Dreco as a distinct art movement, a storm of controversy has surrounded this hitherto ignored and detested art form. Is Art Dreco "a persistent tumor upon the art world," as some critics charge, or is it a significant and enduring mode of aesthetic expression? As a leading Dreco exponent and the Director of the Art Dreco Institute, I will try to answer these questions and unravel some of the misconceptions that surround Art Dreco.

Art Dreco is art that "shines and stinks, like a rotten mackerel by moonlight." Yet to the novice observer it may appear offensive, deformed, bizarre, hideous, homely, ill-made, ill-shaped, even repulsive. To the connoisseur, however, such works have passed through the crucible of unique and nonpareil "bad taste" and have been alchemized by some 'philosopher's stone of the mind' into works of great artistic merit. Although there are few pieces that meet the touchstone of Art Dreco, the variety of these pieces is large, since Dreco permeates our entire culture. Thus many Dreco pieces are "found" or utilitarian objects, rather than consciously created works of art.

There is no room in Art Dreco for mediocrity, for in this art form the standards are stringently low. The work must have a certain purity of intent. Attempts to simulate bad taste will not suffice, nor does shoddy workmanship in itself qualify.
The mere grotesque or ugly is not Dreco. True Art Dreco must possess that "je ne sais quos" quality that rivets one's attention, that repels and attracts at the same time.

Art Dreco is not Kitsch. Kitsch is a mass produced pseudo art, intended to satisfy the growing appetite for instant culture and sophistication. It is meant to be inoffensive. Kitsch, according to Gille Dorfles, a noted authority, appeals to people who feel art should produce pleasant, sugary feelings; or even that art should form a kind of condiment, a kind of 'background music'; a decoration, a status symbol even, as a way of shining in one's social circle' in no case should it be a serious matter, a tiring exercise, an involved or critical activity." Kitsch is a saccharine, pre-digested muzak for the soul.

Dreco is not Camp, although there are superficial similarities between them, such as a taste for the excessive and the unnatural. Camp, however has far too much style and technical artistry; it is too glamorous, has too much redeeming merit. One needs only to compare a Beardsely print with Scheissmacher's Déjà vu to see the difference between Camp and Art Dreco.

The Concept of Art Dreco has an Eastern aspect lacking in traditional Western Art. In India, artistic opposites are often paired. Shiva represents both the creator and the destroyer. The ascetic and the sensual are represented in the same sculpture. In Eastern thought, everything is transmuted on the wheel of life. In aesthetics, beauty transmuted becomes Art Dreco on the wheel of art.
In Western art, beauty is transitory. "Gather ye rosebuds while ye may." True Dreco, howevere stands the test of time. Indeed, the ravages of time and fortune will occasionally transform a piece that is merely mediocre into one that is triumphantly Dreco. "Beauty's only skin deep, but ugly is deep down to the bone."

In a classic piece of Art Dreco, one sees ugliness transformed into beauty; a kind of beauty that can elude all but the most sensitive and observant. Dreco has a fascination which draws one beyond screaming adoration, beyond the ecstasy of loathing, to emerge finally at aesthetic satori. When one has experienced the gaze of "Blanche Du Bois" and languished in the depths of vapidity of those opaque quaaludesque eyes, one is certain this satori exists. From that moment on, nothing looks quite the same.

Dreco opens our eyes to an entire pantheon of art and experience, for it is the stony ground upon which the art world must one day fall.

A final observation about Art Dreco.

Some scholars have criticized the frequent use of frogs, rodents, and other woodland creatures as Dreco motifs. This criticism rings with human chauvinism. "Has not a frog eyes? Has not a frog hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; hurt with the same weapons, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as are we all?
If you prick them will they not bleed? If you poison them will they not croak?

Lastly, let us pay homage to the Drecoist's monomaniacal devotion and dedication to their art, to their total disregard for public taste and fashion. One can picture Augustus Scheissmacher working alone and unheeded in his ramshackle studio outside Skowhegan, putting the final touches on "Déjà vu"' or Chester Eggart calmly sweing the last buttons on his masterpiece "Yes We Have No Bananas;" or Clarice Henry prowling the Bayous for frogs to be one day immortalized in her inspired "American Neolithic." One can sense the quiet satisfaction of those giants who toiled not for fame and fortune, but to express their own polemic view of life, thus ensuring a continued Dreco heritage for us all.