Personally, the Dada Movement really gained my attention. Their attempts to degrade the “meaning” of art and what society would pass as art, through creating more art, seems rather contradictory. Especially if their whole point was to emphasis that art in itself had no meaning; “every pictorial or plastic work is unnecessary”. The Dada manifesto was defined as one of the earliest “anti-art” movements, because of their rejections of what society defined as beauty, and what the traditional meaning of “art” seemed to be. Art was focused on the aesthetic, the techniques and the meanings that were behind a certain work of art but the Dada artists defied many of these traits. Marcel Duchamp’s Bicycle Wheel is a readymade with a bicycle wheel mounted upside down on a stool, and this piece of “art” is an example of why the Dada Movement was considered anti-art. The items were found in everyday life, simply put together without great alteration. This piece, like the Dada Movement promotes, means absolutely nothing. Ready-mades were easily put together, and hence easily discarded of or thrown away. This can be seen in how these “art pieces” were actually recreated for viewers. This act in itself shows how the art piece in itself was not worth a high value, working along the lines of the Dada Movement aims. However the fact that they were recreated shows their value as a symbol of “art”, even though it seems like a contradiction to what the manifesto argues for. This provoked thought into the idea of whether the Dada Movement was intending to draw response in order not to prove that a response should not always be drawn.