Actual event
Duett
October 10, 2003Targu - MuresAbout the Project
The main project of the Foundation in 2003-2004 was a series of exhibitions embracing the Romanian and Hungarian art scene, called Duet. The project had two main phases. In the first phase 3 Romanian and 3 Hungarian curators (Judit Angel, Irina Cios, Attila Tordai, Dora Hegyi, Zsolt Petranyi, Hajnal Somogyi) and 25-25 Romanian and Hungarian artists were involved.
The visit of the curators to Budapest, Cluj, T?rgu Mure? and Bucharest in October 2002 resulted in putting side-by-side different curatorial points of view, and the judgment of the works by different criteria. By the end of January each of the curators has chosen a pair of artists (one Romanian and one Hungarian) and therefore six exhibitions of these pair of artists will take place. When pairing the artists the fact that they will have to make an exhibition together had to be considered, therefore common points had to be found in their works to motivate the association.
The aim of these series of exhibitions is to strengthen the relationships between the Hungarian and Romanian contemporary artists by the personal contacts at the exhibitions and by working together. The exhibition is motivated by the isolation of some contemporary artistic tendencies at regional level and it draws the attention to new ways of organizing art events.
J?zsef Bartha, director of ARTeast Foundation
Szabolcs KissPál`s Exhibition
      | KissPál Szabolcs Say what you will as long as it does not prevent you from seeing things as they are. L. Wittgenstein Szabolcs KissP?l was born in Marosv?s?rhely/Tg-Mures (Romania) in a Hungarian family. He has been livingin Budapest since 1993. He is one of the most representative and active artists of the Budapest art scene.At the same time was on of the Romanian artists exhibiting at the 2001. Venice Biennial Festival A project organized on ethnic criteria will inevitably raise questions that tackle the relevance of the organizing principle itself: that is questions referring to the development of national consciousness as well the social criteria of such an identity. These enquiries would lead us to shaky ground in the situation of two countries like Romania and Hungary, the targets of the DUET project. The topic exceeds by far the proposed aims of this writing, but I felt compelled to touch it, since the selection of Szabolcs KissP?l could be interpreted as a reaction to it, a striking or opportunistic curatorial answer closing the sceptic struggle with the dilemma. The artist being thus "put in position" chose, in a very fortunate and typical way, not to pursue the line of thought leading to his selection, but to return to the title of the project and to "toy with" an entirely different group of dualities. The instalation exhibited at Tg-Mure? is composed of three works, or rather three groups of works.The earliest work, executed before the selection is a videoinstallation frist presented by the artist during an exchange program in Finland in 2002. There is a neutral image exhibited on both sides of the outstretched screen: the view of a house and a pertruding bough, as if we were looking to the building from a window on the opposite side of the street. But our vision seems to get dim as minutes pass, as if the window misted up. Actually the image is a reflection on water, exhibited upside down. It fades slowly, while the letters of the expression "HERE IN THE FARAWAY" appear one by one in different points of the frame and at the end of the sequence joined together, but "inversely", readable only on the other side of the screen. The three photos exhibited on lightboxes were made for DUET. They show a summer landscape, forest, meadow, lake, view of a creek. Sunset, light, shadow. And in the landscape, here and there, lit flourescent tubes. Debatably, the tube is not the depicted object, but the material of the art work propped against the wall of the exhibition hall, a ladder composed of flourescent tubes being another source of light in the otherwise dark space. The starting point of the video-work is a linguistic construction, a word (here) and an expression (in the faraway). The oddity comes from the fact that both are subjective space definitions: the former designates the place where the subject is, the latter a distant in space. But since it is common in speech for the indicator "here" to be followed and explained by a more objective space definition, the two elements of the linguistic construction refer to each other. The expression is not problematic on a stricly linguistic level, yet forces our mind into a logical tumble. According to the existentialist conception space is nothing else but the distance between meaningful places. Nevertheless, in this work the very system of reference collapses or is concentrated in one point. All this beside offering the possibility of interpretation as a subtle allusion to the identity-question mentioned in the introduction, by suggesting that, simultaneously with concrete physical presence, a human being postions himself in other systems of relations also compels the artist to capture the expression and its meaning with the help of another sign system, that of imagery. I do not know if the paradox could be expressed in abstract mathematical form. KissP?l did not work with that, but with the documen-tative media most closely related to reality: photography and film. The house can be seen as the close environment of the artist/viewer while the water surface creates the melancholic impression of infinite distance. In the projected image these are subtly mingled, the result being an intermediate position between still- and moving image. It seems to be a frozen snapshot that could be interpreted as one consistent reality or image. As an inner image, a dimming dream or memory. The letters appearing for a glimpse and later the words enhance this dreamlike impression, while the final, inverted appearance of the whole text hints to another characteristic of the work. It is not by chance that KissP?l projects the image on the outstreched screen and not on the wall. The inversion of the text points to the surroundable character of the screen, to the illusory space and distances of the projected image. The three photos fixed on lightboxes were made for the exhibition. A photograph is automatically perceived as the mechanic capturing of a real past moment. The image of a natural lanscape is also- even if it is part of a video- the least planned or manipulated real environment. It carries the least possible amount of information referring to concrete time, location, cultural or social relations that would "burden" the interpretation of the image. Thus the immediate visual experience prevails, we see "image" as well as "space". The lightbox has a double function: while it enhances space illusion by light, it really transforms the two-dimensional image into a three-dimensional object. The manipulation of perception, the structure of the object is given away by the presence of the light tube. The light tube, which is present in the lightbox as a means to enhance space effect, appears now as an element of the reality represented. We see its image and its light in the background of the image simultaneously. ( The procedure reminds us of Photopath, a work exhibited by Viktor Burgin in 1967. It consisted of a series of photos layed out on the floor, representing the portions of parquet covered by the photos hinting to the simultaneous duality of seeing and thinking as formulated by Wittgenstein.) The fact that one image represents the ligt tube reflected on water seems an almost punch-like extension of the above traced logical structure as well as a return to classical roots. The ladder constructed of light tubes realizes a higher level of objectification. The use of the light tube reminds us of Dan Flavin and the derivates of minimalist sculpture related to it. However, the construction imitating an object with a concrete function concentrates on objectification rather than on the manipulation of space with light-effects. Especially in the environment of the other works it also gives a playful self- and media-referential character to the work The exhibits explore relationships of reality/image, perception and media. In the cluster of works we can observe the different levels of objectification (object, photo, video), their cross-references and logically constructed order, along with the continuos interpretation of the role of light (as the basic element of vision and technical media). The installation brings up such dichotomies from the heritage of conceptual art as that of physical and virtual space, matter and phenomena, material and non-material, reality and illusion. Though the ideological roots of the installation can be traced back to "classical" conceptual art and minimalism, its imagery is richer, more appealing and more concrete due to the illustrative character of the visual information. The motive force of Kissp?l`s works comes from revelative philosophical questions related to perception, representation, the capturing of reality as well as the conscious use and study of media, but when we watch his works it is hard to escape their contemplative, sometimes melancholic effect, suggesting mystery or even miracle. It is just as difficult to deny importance, craftmanship and visceral beauty of the visual representation triggering that effect.( During preparations for the exhibition KissP?l was telling me in relation with a personal story about the basically divine character of unity and the basically satanic character of duality. This reminded me of what Tony Godfrey had written about neo-conceptual art: It almost seems as if God had slipped back in by the back door.2) KissP?l claims that this is a secondary, complementary element of his works, that is something that is not really intentional or controlled. How can this still be related to the consciousness and analitical immersion that characterize his method of creation? We can find an answer by following the direction of his enquiries. KissP?l explores the possibilities of perceiveing, understanding, capturing, "ordering" Reality, Existence by using and mixing different systems of signs ( lingustic, visual, other perceptual). However, the result is not clever text, clear crystal grid, rigid structure or abstract analysis, but a complex visual world, randomized by the mechanic capturing of reality, offering emotional and aesthetic experience more or less willfully. The outcome is precisely the recognition and presentation of the possibilities and limits of such an attempt, of the idea formulated by Wittgenstein that " this is like re-arranging a torn spider web with our fingers." |
Partners, Sponsors
