23.10.2024 - 20.12.2024
Fait Gallery, Ve Vaňkovce 2, Brno
Curator: Denisa Kujelová
Opening: 23rd October, 7 pm
The artists of the collective exhibition The Other Side of a Photograph share unusual visuality, the consistency of light and the concept of individual photographs that challenge conventions. Selected works by the tandem of Lukáš Jasanský and Martin Polák, Michal Kalhous, Alena Kotzmannová, Marie Kratochvílová and Markéta Othová, in dialogue with Jan Svoboda's personal approach to photography and Jiří Kovanda's subtle interventions, allow us to glimpse, through their shared sensitivity, the hidden reality of the world in unexpected detail.
The selection of analogue, mostly black-and-white photographs seemingly captures what almost all of us see. In many cases, banal and sometimes even unphotogenic situations, often emphasised in a deliberately unprofessional manner to the point of amateur photography, are sometimes embarrassing. However, the mundane in them opens up wide boundaries of beauty that we probably would not have thought of without their help. Susan Sontag descrines it in the chapter The Heroism of Vision: “No one has ever found ugliness through photography. But many have discovered beauty in this way. Except when the camera is used for documentation or as part of a social ritual, what makes people take photographs is a desire to find something beautiful..."[1]
All of the artists, like Jan Svoboda (1934-1990) from the late 1960s, have in various ways transcended the established principles and canons of photography and in their distinctive approach deliberately questioned its supposed message and formal perfection, expanding it with new possibilities of treatment and perception. "The things I do show no artistry. And I want them not to. I want them not to be pretty, to be as ordinary as possible, not to dazzle, not to shock, not to surprise...”[2] Just like Svoboda's work, the works of the mentioned artists have never aspired to conform to standard photographic practices, and like him, some of them have also expressed their opposition to the very term photographer. The theorists Pavel Vančát and Jan Freiberg introduced for their broader thinking and grasp of the medium the fitting tem of "nonphotography"[3] referencing the term anti- or non-photography coined by Nancy Foote in 1976 in relation to postmodern photography.[4]
What makes their photographs so similar is their sophisticated work with technical imperfection, the peculiar tonality of the narrow grey scale and often the use of large formats in sharp contrast to the intimacy and apparent banality of the chosen subjects. Like Svoboda, they focus on their immediate surroundings such as the environment of their homes and the ordinary objects with which we share our private space. In a photograph constructed as an autonomous surface, the role of light in its reflection and absorption is essential, and so is the relationship between objects and their background, with its demarcation often so subtle that the two planes almost merge. This is of course enhanced by the narrow tonality of grey in the choice of black-and-white photography: "Since black-and-white configurations are theoretical, they cannot really exist in the world. But black-and-white photographs do exist. They are in fact the images of the conceptions of the theory of optics, which means that they arose from this theory. [...] Therein lies their strange beauty, identical to the beauty of the conceptual universe. This is why many photographers prefer black-and-white photographs as they reveal more clearly the true meaning of photography, i.e. the world of conceptios."[5]
In regard to the legacy of Jan Svoboda and his exceptional sensitivity, the exhibition shows selected photographs from the broader oeuvres of the individual artists in which forms and procedures more or less referring to Svoboda's work can be recognized. Due to the very narrow theme scope of the exhibition concept, images from various cycles and in some cases diptychs have been selected in collaboration with the artists, and it should be noted that their meaning, which was established in the original context through the composition of their units, has been altered for this specific event.
[1] SONTAG, Susan. O fotografii. Brno, Praha a Litomyšl: Barrister & Principal a Paseka, p. 80.
[2] OTHOVÁ, Markéta; CÍSAŘ, Karel; JANÍČKOVÁ, Adéla, a NOVOTNÝ, Michal. Markéta Othová: již brzy. V Praze: Národní galerie, 2022, p. 7.
[3] VANČÁT, Pavel, a FREIBERG, Jan (eds.). Fotografie?? / Photography?? (exh. cat.). Klatovy: Galerie Klatovy / Klenová, 2004.
[4] FOOTE, Nancy. The Anti-Photographers. Artforum, September 1976, year 15, no. 1., pp. 46–54. Also here:
Douglas FOGLE (ed.). The Last Picture Show. Artists Using Photography, 1960–1982 (exh. cat.). Minneapolis: Walker Art Center 2003, pp. 24–31.
[5] FLUSSER, Vilém. Za filosofii fotografie. Prague: Fra, 2013, pp. 48–49.
-
Fait Gallery, Ve Vaňkovce 2, Brno
Opening: 5. 6. 2019 at 7pm
Curator: Domenico de Chirico
“There is virtually no difference between biological and psychic formations. As a plant produces blossoms, so the psyche produces symbols.”
C. G. Jung
Psychoanalysis and Analytical Psychology
The word “syrup” is derived from the Old Arabic sharāb, and its tendency towards taking different forms indicates holiness and mystery as it is inherently typified by blending — a “magic” mixture taken in order to achieve the state of bliss. This concoction is probably emerald green, precious and holy — the Holy Grail has an impenetrable green glow resembling absinth. This life-giving substance also works as a fuel, a life-giving sap presenting the human ego with the most disquieting questions, the most radical illogical codes, i.e. the energy which is the essence of life. A plant originating in this way is not simply a plant; it represents a seed from which forests will grow: paintings, in which the internal response surfacing in all its dialectics of return is manifested. These responses are not generated by emotive internality; they are close to rituals and sense but are shrouded in hints and always in a permanent tension with interstellar phases discernible between a distant leaf and a hand, a close sound and velvet.
According to C. G. Jung, the opposites of the persona and the ego are the inhabitants of the unconscious, aka archetypes. These are defined as the archaic relics of the psyche and as such are present from birth. They are connected with the mythical subjects of the primal spirit, have their own independent energy and initiatory character. They are strongly characterized by magic and emotions so exceptional that they are present in every human being. The Self is an authority rooted in natural forces and represents the inner controlling centre, while the task of the ego is to bring this unity to the light of consciousness so that it could aim at the constant maturing and growth of the personality. The Self changes into creative energy if the ego is devoid of any purpose-oriented thoughts and calculations, and its natural drives are at the same time the carriers of energy and a very high potential of evocation. These drives do not correspond to our individual wishes and will, as the Self requires obedience. With the ego, no contracts apply. The Self represents what is typical of the human being as such, or the essence which can only manifest as a symbol. Symbols constitute a specific language, they are natural and spontaneous forms, which is why they cannot be created.
The function of the archetypes is to give rise to the Self and enable it to shake the trees in the Orchard of promises, to hurt it and thus acquire metaphorical symbols of victory, like resin from
a tree. Igor Hosnedl’s paintings rooted in drawing and employing the archetypes as automatic drawing exist even before the brush is dipped in paint.