Slikarstvo zdaj! Slovenija 2021/ Painting now! Slovenia 2021

SLOVENIA 21

Mestna galerija Nova Gorica, 7.–28. 5. 2021 Galerija Monfort Portorož, 24. 6.–29. 8. 2021

Pour une éthique problématique

SLIKARSTVO ZDAJ! SLOVENIJA 21

SLOVENIA 21

THE PAINTING NOW!

Kdaj je vprašljiva etika sodobnega slikarstva?

Zakaj je zdaj vprašljiva slika?

Katera etika je sploh vprašljiva?

When is the ethics of contemporary painting questionable?

Why is the painting questionable now?

Which ethics is questionable at all?

Andrej Medved O SLIKI IN SLIKARSTVU Takoj opazimo, da slikar ne gradi na linearnosti, ki bi naš pogled usmerjala strogo v vertikalno ali horizontalno gledanje, kot je značilno za klasično umetnost. Smer pogleda je vezana na razkrivanje slikovnega labirinta, ki je gotovo temeljni simbol teh slik.

Gre torej za čisto razporeditev slikarskih znakov, za avtonomno kompozicijo amebnih in včasih geometričnih prvin, ki imajo svoje idealistično opravičilo in zagovor. Opraviti imamo s transcendentalno zasnovo, ki nima nič skupnega s takojšnjo naturalistično referenco. Namesto figuralnosti so v ospredju reprezentativni efekti različnih form in kromatičnih nabojev, ki delujejo le na nivoju lastnega sprotnega preverjanja, na nivoju verifikacije, ki je odvisna od spekularnega sistema avtor – delo. Stilizirane konture preplavljajo sliko in učinkujejo kot razdrobljeni figurabilni znaki, ki reducirajo poudarjeno dramatičnost podob, v tem ko zavzamejo celotni plan slikovnega ekrana.

Podoba se zgošča v globino, barvitost del se spremeni in postaja vse bolj subjektivna.

Pomembna je ekspresivnost, ki jo gradita linija in barva. Praznega prostora ni, podoba sama proizvaja kromatičnost kot edino realiteto podobitve. Celovitost barv se predstavlja našemu očesu kot objekt, lastna aktivnost slike se nam kaže kot resničnost, ki ni več omejena na določeno vsebino. Vsaka transformacija podobe se dogaja v kromatičnem prostoru, ki določa ali omejuje avtonomnost dela. Barvna materija, ki proizvaja sliko, zdaj ne nastopa več samo kot realni predmet, temveč simbolna, ponovljiva struktura, tj. matrica površine in prostor njene ekspresivnosti gradita samosvoj reprezentativni slikarski model. Naturalistična resničnost površine mora biti razkrojena, očitna pa vse bolj postaja sama označevalna praksa podobitve, ki ekstenzivno zapolnjuje prostor slike in ji je naš pogled v celoti podrejen. (Iz nekega zapisa o slikarstvu) V tako razumljenem slikovnem nosilcu je novo pojmovanje svetlobe in pogleda; podoba ni več preslikan nótranje-zunanji svet niti samo zrcalna slika avtorja, njegove podzavesti, temveč je vmesni prostor, ki ni prevedljiv v drug jezik, saj je poetični zaslon kot pregrinjalo, ki nam sporoča sámo stvar slikarstva. Torej ne gre za nikakršen prevod predmetnosti v figure, temveč za kázanje prostorov, ki jih v resnici ni, pa vendar vrejo in vstajajo od vsepovsod kot živa in mobilna tvar. Prostor torej, v katerem ni še nič oblikovano, v katerem je še vse na meji med objektom in subjektom. Zato lahko govorimo o negotovosti nosilca, ki predstavlja nekaj nerojenega, nekaj kot fetus, nekaj, kar ima inkubacijsko dobo. In kjer smo vedno tam, kjer se pokaže skrito in zakrito. Prav to pa je (prav) tisto, se pravi bistvo, stvar slikarstva, ko zdrav razum ne more skozi, do tega, da bi podobo razložil, upovedal.

7

Podoba s slikanjem postane prostor naglice, »prešitja«, in usedanja, usedline. Nosilec je membrana, za katero se zdi, da ni naslikana, da je v resnici komajda obstojna. Kako vstopiti vanj, kako ga naseliti? S pogledom, da, s pogledom. Lacan na primer ostro ločuje funkcijo očesa in pogleda. Videno (vu) je, pravi, pred tistim, kar nam je dano v pogled (donné-a-voir). Podoba ali slika lahko deluje kot zaslon, v katerem se subjekt – opazovalec – gleda in se vidi kot v zrcalu. Oko je vrnjeno očesu, pogled pa seže dlje, za sliko, v prostor drugega, v prostor nezavednega in želje; kjer več ne vlada zakon perspektive in okulocentrizma. Pogled presega videz, ki ga slika podobitev. Pogled »me preseneti v toliko, kolikor spremeni vse perspektive, vse silnice mojega sveta; kolikor iz točke nič, kjer sem, ta svet ureja […] v nekakšno mrežo organizmov. Kot kraj odnosa med jazom – ničečim subjektom – in vsem, kar me obdaja, naj bi pogled imel tolikšen privilegij, da bi me celo prisilil, da jaz, ki gledam, oslepim za oko tistega, ki me gleda kot objekt […]. Ali ni jasno, da pogled tu seže samo, kolikor ob njem ne občuti presenečenja ta ničeči subjekt, ki je korelativen s svetom objektivnosti, pač pa subjekt, ki ga nosi neka funkcija želje? […] Privilegij pogleda v funkciji želje torej lahko dojamemo samó, če se spustimo, da se tako izrazim, vzdolž žil, po katerih se je področje videnja vključilo v polje želje.«* V takem postopku gre v bistvu za oplodnjo, za fécondation artificielle, za slikanje, ki je odlaganje semen, sejanje in brizganje semenske lave v nosilec in iz njega. Celotna površina slike in nosilca je korelat figuri – kot pejsažu –, ko temeljnik prevzame vlogo forme in zasičenosti z barvo. Zabrisanost in zameglitev, nettoyage, delujeta kot avtonomna ploskev. Materialna struktura nosilca se združi v istem planu s kromatično substanco. Ob tem doživljamo absolutno bližino in je znova pomemben patos vživetja, ne le mukotrpna teoretična distanca. Podoba je popolnoma enoten prostor, s svojo čistostjo in jasnostjo in nótranjo jasnino.

V tem smislu gre za pravo appropriation, za prilastitev slike in slikarskega telesa. Telo slikarstva se v kromatični strukturi združuje in odmika v trenutnih hitrih vzgibih. Likovnost je gosta in naelektrena ter skuša vdreti skozi živi organizem slike, navzven, v prostor: a vendarle o(b)staja v nosilcu, v subjektu, v subjektilu.

(Odlomek iz besedila o nosilcu slike)

*

Jacques Lacan, Štirje temeljni koncepti psihoanalize, Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana 1980, str. 115.

8

Andrej Medved ON THE PAINTING AND THE ART OF PAINTING The first thing we notice is undeniably that the painter is not building on linearity, which would direct our gaze strictly into the vertical or horizontal view, as is typical of classical art. The direction of the gaze is tied to the unveiling of the visual labyrinth, which is undoubtedly the fundamental symbol of these images. This is therefore a matter of pure arrangement of painting characters, of the autonomous composition of amoebic and at times geometrical elements, which possess an idealistic excuse and justification. We are dealing with a transcendental design that has nothing in common with any immediate naturalist reference. Instead of figurality, what takes centre stage are representative effects of different forms and chromatic charges operating solely at the level of their own simultaneous self-authentication, at the level of verification dependent on the specular author-work system. Stylised contours flow through the painting and function as fragmented figurable characters, which reduce the emphasised drama of the images by filling the entire image screen.

The image condenses inward, the colourfulness of the artworks is transformed, growing ever more subjective. The expressivity created by the line and colour is important. There is no empty space, the image itself produces chromacity as the image’s sole reality. The unity of colours presents itself to our eye as an object while the image’s own activity presents itself to us as reality, a reality no longer limited to a specific subject matter.

Each of the image’s transformations occurs in chromatic space, which determines or limits the artwork’s autonomy. The colour matter producing the painting no longer functions merely as a real object, but also as a symbolic reproducible structure; that is to say, the matrix of the surface and the space of its expressivity are constructing its own representative painting model. The naturalist reality of the surface must be disintegrated, while the designating practise of imaging itself, which extensively fills the space of the image and wholly commands our gaze, grows ever more obvious.

(From a certain text about painting.)

Understood in this way, the image’s medium puts forth a new conception of light and gaze; the image is no longer a reproduction of the inner-outer world, nor is it merely a mirror image of the author, of his subconscious; rather, it is an intermedial space that cannot be translated into another language because the poetic screen is like a covering which communicates the very matter of painting. Consequently, this is no translation of materiality into figures, but rather a showing of spaces, which actually are not, but which yet simmer and rise from all around like a living and mobile 9

substance; this is space, therefore, where nothing is formed yet, where everything is still suspended between object and subject. This is why we can speak of uncertainty of the medium, which presents something un-born, something like a foetus, something that has an incubation period. A space in which we are always where the hidden and concealed appears. And the /very/ thing, i.e. the essence, the matter of painting occurs when common sense is unable to get through, unable to explain the image, unable to communicate.

Painting renders the image a space of haste, of “quilting”, and of sedimentation, a sediment. The medium is the membrane, which appears unpainted, barely sustainable in reality. How can it be entered, inhabited? With the gaze, yes, gaze. Lacan, for example, strictly distinguishes the functions of the eye and the gaze. The seen [vu], he says, is before that which we are given to see [donné-a-voir]. The image or the painting can function as a screen in which the subject – the observer – views themselves and sees themselves as in a mirror. The eye is returned to the eye, while the gaze reaches further, beyond the painting into the space of the unconscious and desire, where the law of perspective and ocularcentrism no longer reigns supreme. The gaze surpasses the appearance painted by the depiction. The gaze “by which I am surprised, surprised insofar as it changes all the perspectives, the lines of force, of my world; orders it, from the point of nothingness where I am, in a sort of radiated reticulation of the organisms. As the locus of the relation between me, the annihilating subject, and that which surrounds me, the gaze seems to possess such a privilege that it goes so far as to have me scotomized, I who look, the eye of him who sees me as object. In so far as I am under the gaze, Sartre writes, I no longer see the eye that looks at me and, if I see the eye, the gaze disappears … Is it not clear that the gaze intervenes here only in as much as it is not the annihilating subject, correlative of the world of objectivity, who feels himself surprised, but the subject sustaining himself in a function of desire? … We can apprehend this privilege of the gaze in the function of desire, by pouring ourselves, as it were, along the veins through which the domain of vision has been integrated into the field of desire.”*

*

Jacques Lacan, J-A Miller ed., A. Sheridan transl., The Four Fundamental concepts of PsychoAnalysis, (London and NY, 1977), pp. 84–85.

10

This kind of process is essentially about fecundation, about fécondation artificielle, about painting as laying seeds, seeding and spraying seminal lava into the medium and from the image’s medium. The entire surface of the image and its medium is a correlative of the figure – as landscape – when the cornerstone assumes the role of form and colour saturation. Blurring and clouding, nettoyage, function as an autonomous plane. The material structure of the medium comes together on the same plane as the chromatic substance. This lends us the experience of absolute vicinity and is, again, a significant pathos of immersion rather than merely an agonizing theoretical distance. The image, with its purity, clarity, and inner clearing, is an entirely uniform space.

In this respect, this is true appropriation, the appropriation of the painting and painting body. The body of painting merges and retreats in the chromatic structure in quick momentary impulses. The figure-visuality is dense and electrified and attempts to break in through the living organism of the painting outwards into space, and yet exists/remains in the medium, in the subject, in the subjectile. (A fragment from the text about the “medium” of the painting)

11

SUZANA BRBOROVIĆ

12

SLIKA KOT MREŽENJE PODOBE – UPOČASNJENI RITEM ARHETIPOV Pri Brborovićevi je v ospredju risba, v načelu enostavna in heteroklitna, in »uniformna« in pomnožena, enotna in enkratna in različna. A nikdar in nikoli razpršena in banalna. Risba je vmesni prostor med likovno pisavo, gramatiko, strukturo, kodom, s katerim se ukvarja čista znanstvena metoda (semeiologija), in med belino platna, na katerem »zaigra« posebna »metafizika beline« (blancheur), mitologija praznega, a ne odsotnega prostora; prostora, ki še ni dotaknjen, izpolnjen s končnim smislom, nadgrajen; v katerem je še vse mogoče, v katerem so vse možnosti neskončnih »prostoritev«. Risba, ki je pisava (kakor »vložek«, se pravi »vloga« kot l’enjeu, kot v-igra) v najrazličnejših zunanjih podobitvah, od skoraj geometričnih in strogih do skrajnosti razgibanih, baročnih. Risba, ki nosi perspektivo in likovni konstrukt, geometrijo slike in slikovno iluzijo, in dekoracijo, scenografijo. Risba je kot pisava »dvojna scena« likovne podobe in njen refleks, pozrcalina. V njej je nevarnost odtujenosti in preimembe (metonimije), v njej je nevarnost idealizacije in teorije, ki vstopa skozi zadnja vrata v sliko, da izniči, da ubije njeno sporočilo. A v njej je tudi možnost čiste prepustitve, prostor za igro in ecrire automatique in za telesne, čutne ter duhovne seizmografične zapise. V njej je upodobitev – likovnost – kot Identität ali Verfremdung.

Belina platna, njena »meta ta« je »le terrain matériel des pulsions« (Pleynet), ki ne pusti prestopov, stranpoti, ponavljanj, niti odsotnosti in vračanj, niti demonske razdvojenosti na sence in svetlobo, na skrajno željo, poželenje, slo in njeno ubijalsko potešitev. V belino platna moraš nem, brez dispozicije vnaprejšnjega sistema, brez jezika. Kot je zapisal že Matisse: »Qui veut se donner à la peinture, doit commencer par se faire couper la langue,« kar naj pomeni, v prenesenem smislu, da je v začetku, pri osnovni odločitvi za slikarstvo, treba rezati, odrezati jezike; odreči se je treba »jezikovnim piramidam« in znakovnim kodom. V belino platna moraš nem in brez jezika. Kajti v njej realnost (kot figurabilnost) nima prav nobenega pomena, vse je abstraktno, abstrahirano, odsotno; vendar ne kakor ničes, izničitev, temveč kot čista možnost podobitve. Belina platna je izvir podobe, forme (kot eikones), belina sama je oblika »sostva«, prisotnosti, prisostvovanja kot forme de presence; kajti v risbi (kot aistheton) je vedno tudi neprisotnost, skrivanje, odsotnost. Zdaj je v ospredju hitra gesta, ki nas vodi v nove in ponovno obujene slikarske labirinte; kjer liki niso zamegljeni, zastrti kot s tančico, ampak žarijo v barvitosti poteze, v čistem žaru barvnega nanosa. Podoba, ki postavlja prostor, se pravi »brezprostorje« (kajti slikarstvo danes ne pozna globine, opornih točk, realnosti odnosov; prav nič prostorskega naturalizma), ima tu svojo lastno perspektivo ali, če hočete, arhitekturo, lastno interiornost. Kjer vlada nekakšen »manierizem«, pri čemer mislimo seveda na pozicijo slikarja, ki – kot v manierizmu – sistemu zoperstavlja individualno skušnjo in se na ta način spet vrača k »notranji ekonomiji«, v objektivnost samega slikarstva.

V ospredje, iz beline, je stopila mreža linij, ki zdaj povsem prepreda platno; znakovna mreža, ki določa slike. Ta mreža, ti izrastki in končiči, satje ter šarasti zapisi so temelj, fundament, ozadje, ki zdrži slikovno površino. Tekstura, ki se linearno ali micelično razrašča vsepovsod, je torej »vmesnost«: medij, ki prinaša jasno in razvidno sliko, v tem ko zabriše in onemogoča vsako dvojnost, metaforo, metonomijo.

13

PAINTING AS THE NETTING OF THE IMAGE – THE SLOWED RHYTHM OF ARCHETYPES Brborović’s art is centred around drawing, which is essentially simple and heteroclitic, “uniform” and multiplied, homogenous, singular, and varied. But it is never ever dispersed and banal. A drawing is the space between the visual artistic script, grammar, structure, code subject to pure scientific method (semiology), and the whiteness of the canvas, where a special “metaphysics of whiteness” (blancheur) begins to “play” – a mythology of empty but not absent space, space which is yet untouched, unfilled with the final meaning, upgraded. Here everything is still possible, there is still every opportunity for infinite “enspacements”. A drawing, which is like a script (like a “stake”, as l’en-jeu, as in-play) in a variety of external depictions ranging from near-geometrical and strict, to extremely animated, baroquesque. A drawing conveys perspective and a visual-artistic construct, the geometry of a picture, and pictorial illusion, and decoration, scenery. As script, it is a “double scene”of the visual-artistic image and its reflection, silvering. It holds a danger of alienation and going by-another-name (metonymy); it holds a danger of idealising and of a theory entering the picture through the back door to annihilate, kill its message. But it also holds the possibility of pure surrender, a space for play and ecrire automatique, and for corporeal, sensory, and spiritual seismographic writing. It holds depiction – visual artistry – as Identität or Verfremdung.

The whiteness of the canvas, her “meta ta” is “le terrain matériel des pulsions” (Pleynet), which does not allow transgressions, detours, repetitions, nor absence or returns, nor demonic division into shadow and light, into extreme desire, concupiscence, lust and its murderous gratification. One must venture into the whiteness of the canvass mute, without the disposition of a predetermined system, without a tongue. As Matisse wrote long ago: Qui veut se donner à la peinture, doit commencer par se faire couper la langue, meaning, figuratively, that in the beginning, when the first decision to paint is made, it is necessary to cut, to cut off tongues; “language pyramids” and character sets must be renounced. One must venture into the whiteness of the canvas alone and without a tongue, for in it, reality (as figurability) has no meaning whatsoever, everything is abstract, abstracted, absent; but not as nothingness, annihilation, but rather as pure capacity of depiction. The whiteness of the canvas is the source of the image, of form (as eikones); the whiteness itself is a form of “-sence”, presence, attendance as a forme de presence; the drawing (as aistheon) always also contains nonattendance, concealment, absence. Now a quick gesture steps to the fore, which leads us to new and reawakened painting labyrinths, where shapes are not hazy, veiled as by a shroud, but ardent in the colourfulness of the strokes, in the pure glow of colour coating. Here, the image setting the space, i.e. “spacelessness” (for painting today knows no depth, no points of reference, no reality of relations; absolutely no spatial naturalism), has its own perspective, or – if you will – architecture, its own interiority. This space is governed by a certain “Mannerism”, referring of course to the position of the painter, who – as is characteristic of Mannerism – counters the system with individual experience, and so returns to the “internal economy”, to the objectivity of painting itself.

Now, a grid of lines steps out of the whiteness to the fore and entirely envelops the canvas; a character grid that defines the images. This grid, these growths and endings, honeycomb, and varicoloured inscriptions are the fundament, background that support the pictorial surface. The texture linearly or mycelially branching out everywhere is therefore the “intermediacy”: a medium that brings a clear and discernible picture by obscuring and preventing any and all duality, metaphor, metonymy.

14

Porcelan | Porcelain, 2020 akril na platnu | acrylic on canvas 40 x 30 cm 15

16

Tla so lava | The Floor is Lava, 2020 akril na platnu | acrylic on canvas 140 x 280 cm 17

NINA ČELHAR

18

ZELENO, KI TE HOČEM ZELENO Te slike, te poetične oaze so zbirne točke našega telesa in zavesti; in točke ponovitve, neracionalnega obujanja stvari na novo; nove obuditve bitja. Ninino slikarstvo deluje torej proti logični razlagi, proti teoriji, ki je vseskozi bistveno zunanja, zopernaravna, kastracijska; le sredstvo, dvojnik, »delovanje v razliki«; zanikanje, prepoved plesa; postavljanje v oklepaj, prikrivanje resnice, maska, silhueta; življenje senc, privid, nebistvo.

Zato ta slika povsem zavrača stare miselne načine in vsako hierarhičnost, razlikovanje. Zato pristaja le na stalno notranje iskanje, večni vitalizem in željo po vrnitvi polnega slikarskega telesa. Na željo po izvornem liku, gesti in obliki, ki so mogoči le skozi »ostrganje« vseh vrednostnih, kulturnih in socialnih mehanizmov.

Slikarstvo oblikuje prostor, v katerem vlada estetska avtonomnost in stilistična svoboda, neomajna domišljija in osvobojena fenomenološkost; prostor, v katerem se srečujejo pradavna videnja in sanje, osebni, senzualni znaki. Tako nastaja intuitivna in skrajno ekspresivna slika, ki je identična s slikarsko, z domišljijsko skušnjo; in so predmeti, geste in pojavi izenačeni s slikovno površino. Slika postane proizvajanje in varovanje bitja in vseh pozabljenih odnosov; svet samoponovitve, v katerem se ničesar ne izgubi. Vse je spojeno, vlito v en sam znak, ki je odprt in razumljiv, a vendar že (že še) skrivnosten. Juksta pozicije so mrtve; čista samovolja. Nobenega enotnega stališča, okulocentrizma. Slika je zdaj ekstaza in obredni ples, primarna zveza med materijo in sliko. In bližja je vzhodnjaški raztrositvi tisoč bitij, stanju zasnulosti, ki je prebujanje-v-védnost in skrajna zbranost; in odsotnost, ki je vsa prisotnost; ko individuum ni več ločen, ampak spojen z naravo, z doživljanjem, s pojavnostjo, z zavestjo; in v globini zažari praznina, ki je polnost; stanje nejaza, kjer je vsak predmet enak subjektu; izvorna moč in bitje vseh stvari.

Ninina slika je zgrajena na polnih in zgoščenih likih, ki ravno, brez globine, zasegajo celotno površino platna; na linearni mreži globoko psihično zaznamovanih znakov, ujetih v zračnost, ki ni odvisna od okolja, temveč narašča z notranjo genezo slike. Naslikan svet tako ni niti daleč niti blizu, nekako vodoraven, brez ozadja. In vendar so podobe plastične, voluminozne, kajti vsak znak in vsaka gesta sta neposredna – dobesedna in v istem hipu večpomenska. Slika postane pot nazaj, pot vase, pot iskanja; brez cilja in določene smeri; popotovanje, »blodnja«. Nekakšen plaz neskončno drobnih doživetij, spontan, alogičen diskurz, ki se nikoli ne konča, čeprav se venomer začenja in ponavlja.

In res so te skrivnostne magične podobe metafore mentalnega prostora – harmonične, univerzalne –, v katerem je mogoče le duhovno, psihično popotovanje, ožarjene z nadzemeljsko lepoto, ki ni le metaforična, ampak je tudi sama znak; kot mreža znakov, ki niso prazni, temveč so povezani s slikarjem, z njegovim vidom in prividi. Podobe, ki jih gledamo, tako nikakor niso prispodobe, temveč realni liki, vendar »obrnjeni« in »premeščeni«, saj služijo le čisti Želji.

19

GREEN, HOW I WANT YOU, GREEN These paintings, these poetic oases, are our body’s and consciousness’s assembly points; they are also points of recurrence, of the non-rational reawakening of things, the new awakening of being. Nina’s painting therefore works against logical explanation, against theory, which is throughout essentially external, counter-natural, castrational; a mere means, doppelganger, “working in difference”; denial, interdiction of dance; putting in brackets, concealing the truth, a mask, a silhouette; the life of shadows, a mirage, non-essence. Thereby, this painting entirely rejects the old ways of thinking and any hierarchy, all differentiation. It only submits to constant inner seeking, to eternal vitalism, and to the desire for the return of the full painting body, the desire for the original figure, gesture, and form, which are only possible through “scraping off” all value-, cultural, and social mechanisms. Painting generates a space governed by aesthetical autonomy and stylistic freedom, unwavering imagination, and the liberated state of phenomenology, a space, where prehistoric visions and dreams, personal, sensual signs, meet. This results in an intuitive and extremely expressive painting, identical to the painter’s imaginational experience, where objects, gestures, and phenomena become equal to the pictorial surface. The painting becomes the production and protection of being and of all the forgotten relations, a world of self-recurrence in which nothing is lost. All is melded, fused into a single sign, which is open and comprehensible, yet already (already still) mysterious. Juxtapositions are dead, pure arbitrariness.

There is no unified stance, ocularcentrism. The picture is now ecstasy and ritualistic dance, a primary union of matter and painting. Moreover, it is closer to the Eastern concept of the scattering of a thousand beings, a state of somnolence, which is the awakening-in-knowing and extreme concentration, and absence which is all of presence; the individual is no longer separated from, but rather one with nature, one with experiencing, incidence, consciousness; and, in its depth, a void comes ablaze which is fullness – a state of non-self, where each object is the same as subject, the original power and being of all things.

Nina’s painting is built on full and condensed figures, which seize the entire surface of the canvas linearly, without depth; on a linear grid of profoundly psychologically impacted signs caught in airiness, which is not dependent on the environment, but which increases with the paintings inner genesis. The painted world is thus neither far nor near, it is somehow horizontal, with no background. And yet, the images are dimensional, voluminous, as each sign and each gesture are direct – literal and at the same time polysemous. The painting becomes a way back, a path inward, a path of seeking with no aim or set direction, a journey, a delusion. It becomes a sort of avalanche of infinitesimally tiny experiences, a spontaneous, alogical discourse that never ends though it is ever beginning and recurring.

And truly, these mysterious magical images are metaphors for mental space – harmonious, universal – among them only a spiritual, psychological voyage is possible; they are irradiated with otherworldly beauty, which is not merely metaphorical, but also itself a sign; a grid of signs that are not empty but linked to the painter, his vision and hallucinations. The images we are observing are thus not allegorical, but real figures, only “inverted” and “transferred”, as they serve only pure desire.

20

Soba (Stuck) | Room (Stuck), 2021 akril na platnu | acrylic on canvas 145 x 205 cm 21

22

Pogled I, II, III, IV | View I, II, III, IV, 2018 akril na platnu | acrylic on canvas 70 x 40 cm (2x), 70 x 35 cm (2x) 23

MATEJ ČEPIN

24

SLIKA KOT UPODOBITEV Realnost upodobljenih krajín ni v posebnosti naslikanih predmetov, temveč v specifičnosti, v intenzivnosti, v čustvenem pristopu. Krajina je nevtralna, netipična, celo neobjektivna; pomemben, v ospredju pa je čustveni naboj, s katerim je upodobljena. Psihično in psihološko Čepin filtrira svojo čustvenost kar neposredno v sliko, ki prav zato prejme takojšnjo, neodložljivo danost in prezenco, brez vsakršne potrebe po določeni distanci; ki zavezuje vsakega gledalca v hipno konzumacijo, v užitek v gledanju podobe, v užitek-v-pogledu. Distance ni, pomembno je samo vživetje, ki je po svojem bistvu vedno neposredno, brez vsake omejitve. Kjer je pomen podobe skrit, določen z avtorjevim psihičnim pristopom, ki je za nas in za slikarja zdaj dokončen in zavezujoč.

Emocionalna skušnja je torej tista, ki utriplje v teh podobah in – nam – dopušča psihično in fizično vživetje. Čepinova upodobitev krájin in pomanjšanih figur, ki jih ni nikdar portretiral v smislu fizičnih lastnosti, tako rekoč ne dopusti kritične presoje, da bi jih kritik in opazovalec primerjala z realnim stanjem, z izsekom iz resničnega sveta, saj je njegov izbor – izbor umetnika – povsem irelevanten. Slikar ne potrebuje »živega modela«, čeprav lahko odkrivamo značilne, tipične vedute; pomemben ni pogled-od-zunaj, ki bi fiksiral znane, prepoznavne scene iz umetnikovega okolja. Pomembna je napetost med slikarjevo zabrisano zavestjo o krajini, ki jo slika, in ekspresivnostjo upodobljenega vmesnega prostora. Ta »vmesnost« je podoba sama: koprena platna, na katero Čepin naslika psihično predelani dogodek, iz podzavestne konstitucije umetniškega zrenja proizvedena stanja, ki niso več realna in niti že simbolna, temveč imaginarna doživetja kot poduhovljena posledica določenega, povsem osebnega, subjektivističnega gledanja na svet.

Naš vid prodre v sliko vedno s strani, v posebni perspektivi, v zasuku našega pogleda, tako da je uravnoteženost v zgradbi dela vedno mejna, a vendarle, s ponavljanjem, stabilna. Predmeti so »spotegnjeni«, v spirali, v lebdenju; figure so v resnici nepomembne, pritrjene v prazno, neznatne in zanemarljive. Podoba je zastala, a vendar le trenutno in začasno; v naslednjem hipu se bo celotna scena zopet zavrtela v neskončno gibanje stvari, predmetov in ljudi. Ki jih odnese veter, strašen piš, prepih, ki je še vedno psihičen, duhoven, a vendarle načelen, se pravi kozmogoničen in filozofski, saj je povezan s slikarjevim osnovnim, bistvenim dojemanjem stvari. Tu sta doma igrivost: igra kot simbol – gibalo – eksistence, odsotnost višje zakonitosti, instance, ki ureja svet; in smeh, posmeh kot ironija, kot svojska »kritična distanca« in kot merilo v razumevanju odnosov, naj si bodo človeški ali popredmeteni.

Predmeti so vsajeni v prazen in izpolnjen prostor, v neprostorskost, vsi so v prednjem planu, na zastoru, ki je zaprt-odprt, sam-v-sebi, v istem hipu vsebnost in prisebnost. Tu se ponovno potrjuje čustvena usklajenost forme in vsebine, ki neposredno odgovarja različnim piktoralnim zgodbam, konceptu psihičnih podob, ki ga slikar zdaj vedno znova ponovi, ponavlja, »portretira«. Igrivo, v odprtosti izbire, z neomajno domišljijo jih premešča sem ter tja po platnu.

25

PAINTING AS DEPICTION The reality of the depicted landscapes does not lie in the particular nature of the painted objects, but rather in the specificity, intensity of the emotional approach. The landscape is neutral, atypical, even non-objective, while, what’s important, in the forefront, is the emotional charge with which it is depicted. Mentally and psychologically, Čepin filters his emotionality directly into the picture, which is precisely what gives it its immediate, urgent state, and presence, absent all need for a specific distance; this compels every observer to consume it instantaneously, to enjoy observing the image, compels to enjoyment-in-gaze. There is no distance, the only important thing is the immersion itself, which is, in its very essence, always direct, without all limitation. Here, meaning is hidden, determined by the author’s mental approach, which is final and binding for both the painter and for us. Therefore, the emotional experience is what pulsates in these images and allows for – our – mental and physical immersion. Čepin never portrayed his representation of landscapes and reduced figures in the sense of their physical attributes. They virtually do not allow for critical assessment, for a critic and observer to compare against actuality, against an excerpt from the real world, because his selection – the artist’s selection – is entirely irrelevant. The painter does not require a “live model”, even though his work contains identifiable characteristic, typical, skylines; the external gaze, which would affix known, identifiable scenes from the artist’s environment is unimportant. What is important, is the tension between the painter’s blurred awareness of the landscape he is painting and the expressivity of the portrayed intermedial space. This “intermediality” is the image itself, the haze of the canvas upon which Čepin paints a mentally transfigured event – states, produced from the subconscious constitution of the artistic gaze, which are no longer real, nor yet symbolic – they are imaginary experiences, resulting from a certain entirely personal, subjectivist view of the world.

Our eyesight always penetrates the painting from the side, from a particular perspective, in the twist of our gaze, so that the structure of the work is always only partly balanced, yet, in its repetition, stable. The objects are “stretched” in a spiral, in levitation; the figures are actually unimportant, affixed to emptiness; minute and negligible. The image stalls, but only for an instant and temporarily; in a moment; the entire scene will begin spinning again in unending motion of things, objects, and people. All of these are carried away by the wind, a terrible gust, a draft, which, though still mental, spiritual, is nonetheless principled; that is to say, it is cosmogonic and philosophical, being that it is tied to the painter’s fundamental, essential perception of things. Here, playfulness resides: play as the symbol – driver – of existence, absence of a higher governing principle, an instance regulating the world; this is the home of laughter, ridicule as irony, as its own kind of “critical distance”, and as a measure of understanding relations, be it human or objectified.

The objects are implanted into empty and fulfilled space, into non-spatiality; they are all in the forefront, on the screen, which is closed-open, in-and-of-itself, simultaneously substance and self-containment. Here, another confirmation of the emotional reconciliation of form and content appears, corresponding directly to different pictorial stories, to the concept of mental images, which the painter restates, repeats, “portrays” over and over again; which he playfully, in the openness of choice, shifts here-and-there across the canvas with unyielding imagination.

26

Zlobni sestri Grimm | Evil Sisters Grimm, 2019 olje, smola na platnu | oil, pitch on canvas 240 x 190 cm 27

Naslednji dan | The Next Day, 2019--2020 olje, smola, vosek na platnu | oil, pitch, wax on canvas 240 x 190 cm 28

Sreda, ko so palčki zlobni | Wednesday When the Dwarfs are Evil, 2019 olje, smola na platnu | oil, pitch on canvas 230 x 191 cm 29

BARBARA DREV

30

V ROBU (RAZ)PUSTITVE Pri Drevovi so aktualne vse oblike: micelične, amebne in abstraktne, figuralne in ornamentalne, a tudi ilustrativne v več slojih, v več ravninah, perforiranih ali zapolnjenih do skrajnih zmožnosti nosilca (pri čemer gre za horror vacui kot tipično izkušnjo njene slike); igriva, duhovita in groteskna, natrpana, preobložena in baročna, arabeskna. Kjer ni nič teorije in ne podzavesti, kjer je vse vidno – kot na dlani – in komentar v smislu razlaganja ni več potreben. Oblika, sestavljena iz najrazličnejših, v osnovi čistih likovnih potez; kot paravan, zaslon in maska, celo kot totem, kot ikona in simbolno prizorišče; ali v dobesednem smislu brez metonimične nadgradnje, se pravi kot vsebinska in slogovna likovna minornost, ki pa jo v principu avtorica vedno posploši v univerzalno temo. Kjer so mogoči najrazličnejši mišljenjski, domišljijski in čustveni pristopi (divji in krotki, lirični in pastoralni), tako da v resnici botrujejo nastanku slike mnogoteri vzgibi in pobude, v prvi vrsti pa osebna imaginerija, avtoričina fantazma in halucinatorna stanja ter ekstatični preblisk, t. i. »željni, imaginarni stroji«, ki vodijo Barbarino roko, kjer sta na delu neomajani subjektivizem in naslada.

Matisse pravi: »Opazuj to veliko kompozicijo: listje, sadje, škarje, vrt. Belo podlago določa arabeska iz izrezanega pisanega papirja, ki daje beli atmosferi redko in neotipljivo kvaliteto. In ta kvaliteta je kontrast. Vsaka posamezna skupina barv ima posebno atmosfero. Imenoval jo bom kar ekspresivna atmosfera. Proces prilagajanja se ni zaključil, vse dokler se vsi liki različnih barv niso zlili v celoto in skupaj vztrepetali v edinstvenem eteričnem razpoloženju.« V teh slikah je magičnost – magija, ki v trenutku zavzame prostor okrog »skrčenih« potez, ki so naslikane z nekakšno vehemenco, namenoma »robate«, »toge«, v resnici pa prefinjene, narisane (saj gre primarno za neko Sled, za notranje-zunanji »vgreb« v površino lista) z mojstrsko potezo; v načelu posvečene (neki) duhovniški eliti.

31

IN THE EDGE OF (DIS)SOLUTION Drev makes use of all forms: mycelial, amoebic, and abstract, figural, and ornamental, but also illustrative in several layers, on several plains, and perforated or filled-in to the utmost potential of the medium (where the representative experience of her painting is horror vacui); playful, humorous, and grotesque, packed, overladen, and baroquesque, arabesque. There is no theory or subconscious, everything is visible – clear as day – and explanatory commentary is no longer necessary; it is a shape comprised of the widest variety of fundamentally pure artistic strokes, like a screen, and mask, even like a totem, like an icon and symbolic setting; or in the literal sense without the metonymic upgrade, i.e. like contentual and stylistic artistic inconsequence, which, however, the author in principle always generalizes into a universal theme. Here, a variety of thought-, imaginational, and emotional approaches are possible (wild and meek, lyrical and pastoral); so, what actually brings about the painting’s creation is a multitude of impulses and initiatives, and primarily, personal imagery, the author’s phantasm, and hallucinatory states, and an ecstatic flash, so-called “desiring, imaginary machines”, which guide Barbara’s hand in unwavering subjectivism and pleasurable gratification.

(Matisse states:) “Observe this big composition: foliage, fruit, scissors: a garden. The white intermediary is determined by the arabesque of the cut-out coloured paper which gives this white atmosphere a rare and impalpable quality. This quality is that of contrast. Each particular group of colours had a particular atmosphere. It is what I will call the expressive atmosphere. The process of adjustment was not done until all differently coloured shapes blended together into a whole and came to vibrate together in a singular ethereal mood.”

These paintings possess a magical property – magic that instantaneously occupies the space around the “contracted” strokes, painted with a kind of vehemence, purposefully “coarse”, “rigid”, but actually refined, drawn (as it is primarily a matter of a kind of Trace, an internal-external “carving” into the surface of the leaf ) in a masterful stroke, principally dedicated to (a certain) ecclesiastical elite.

32

weave, 2020 olje, sprej na platnu | oil, spray on canvas 135 x 175 cm 33

up, up _, 2021 olje, sprej na platnu | oil, spray on canvas 150 x 180 cm 34

september, 2021 olje, sprej na platnu | oil, spray on canvas 155 x 160 cm 35

MARKO JAKŠE

36

SLIKA KOT EROTIC FIGURE V Jakšetovih novih slikah ni klasičnega erotizma, erotične vsebine, na meji čutne ali (celo) opolzke zastranitve. Slikar je ekshibicionist v realnem svetu in naslikana telesa hipostazira, izproža njihove telesne ude in postave, tako da jih »suka«, »zapogiba« in preobrača v nekem svojskem figuralnem disproporcu. A to hipostaziranje telesnih delov je mogoče gledati in »brati« samo v zaprtem polju metaforične – slikovne in osebnostne – fantazme. Rekli smo: v teh slikah ni klasičnega erotizma, obstajajo erogene cone, če uporabimo ta le približen, a vendarle ustreznejši izraz. Erotičnost v slikah je (prav) tam, kjer se podoba »guba« in podvaja, razmnožuje; v vmesnem likovnem prostoru, v »presledkih«, v sami, zdaj otrpli in drugič spet razgibani figuri ter v »strdkih«, ki skupaj z osrednjim likom polnijo slikovno površino, njeno »ozadje«. Četudi v resnici podoba ne priznava teh razsežnosti, globine in širine, ampak samo osrednjo – osrediščeno – dokončno ploskev in ravnino, se pravi horizont, v katerega so ujeta posamezna telesa, skupaj z »zapisi«, z znamenji in »linijami bega«, ki so namenjeni pogledu.

Erotičnost je v odstiranju figur, ki (skupaj) z raztrosenim znamenjem v platnu zdaj tvorijo zravnano, pozunanjeno celoto, brez profondeur – globine –, a s sporočilom, ki ga gledalec bere z odlogom, z zamikom in post festum, kot neko le v sliki poprisoteno vsebino. Slika se giblje in pregiblje, »guba« le navznoter, skozi utripanje značilnih znakov, ki osvetljeni (kot nekakšni ognji in svetilke) predstavljajo zopyro in so v resnici anagram njegovega slikarskega telesa. Sestavljeni iz živih organizmov, ki nadomeščajo semina aeternitatis: »semena večnosti« na nebu Jakšetove pradomišljije, njegovo prvo in primarno »dušo«. Erotičnost teh platen je torej v telesu slike, v njegovih delih kot celoti, in je ni mogoče zvesti na slikarsko znanje, kot tudi našega, resničnega in pristnega užitka (ob pogledih na podobe) ni mogoče zvesti na »potrebo«. Ko govorimo o užitku, je ta v gledanju podobe, v (po)uživanju v »razklenjenem ovoju« slike, ki zaobjame platno, navznoter in navzven, kot (neka) dobesednost in kot fikcija, ki nima svoje funkcije, temveč je v vlogi podvojenega in pomnoženega užitka; in spet tako v neskončnost.

Markovo slikarstvo je nekakšno protislovje, nekakšno »živo protislovje«, ki temelji v dvojni ekspoziciji ozadjain-ospredja na njegovi sliki, saj omogoča celostni, v delnosti celoten psihofizični profil slikarstva, v katerem zdaj uživamo v »izgubljenosti« figure in podobe v celoti, v njeni rasti in v njenem padcu, padanju k robovom slike. Užitek – pravi, eshatološki, praužitek – mu je dejansko prepovedan, saj ga sprejema kot način (slikarjeve) resnice, skozi izrekanje osebnih sporočil in pa osebnostne vsebine. In prepovedan mu je prav zato in v toliko, »da ga izreka med vrsticami«, po J. Lacanu, se pravi nepopolno, skozi ugodje neke slikovne govorice.

37

PAINTING AS AN EROTIC FIGURE There is no classical eroticism in Jakše’s new paintings, no erotic content bordering on the sensual or (even) lascivious deviation. The painter is an exhibitionist in the real world and hypostasizes the painted bodies, extends their limbs and physiques by “twisting” and “folding” them, inverting them in a certain individual figural disproportion. But this hypostasizing of body parts can only be viewed and “read” in a closed field of metaphorical phantasm – of both the image and personality. We said: there is no classical eroticism in these paintings, however, there are erogenous zones – to use this merely approximate, though still more fitting, expression. The erotic in these paintings lay (precisely) where the image “folds”, doubles, multiplies – in the intermedial visual artistic space, in the “gaps”: in the very figure, which is rigid one moment and animated the next, and in the “clumps”, which fill the surface alongside the main shape – its “background”. Even though the image actually repudiates the dimensions of depth and width, and only acknowledges the central – centred – final surface and plane, i.e. the horizon in which individual bodies are caught, along with “writings”, signs, and “lines of escape” intended for the gaze.

The erotic lay in the unveiling of the figures, which, (along) with the scattered sign in the canvas, now form a flattened, externalised whole without profundeur – depth. It does, however, hold a message, which the observer reads with a lag, a delay, and post festum, like some content, which is only presenced in the painting.

The image only moves and modulates, “folds”, inward, through the pulsating of the characteristic signs, which, illuminated (like some kind of fires or lamps), present zopyra. They are actually merely an anagram of his painting body, which is comprised of living organisms that substitute the semina aeternitatis: “seeds of eternity” in the skies of Jakše’s primordial imagination, in his first and primary “soul”. The erotic of these canvases therefore lay in the body of his painting, in his works as a whole, which cannot be reduced to mere knowledge of painting, just as our true and genuine enjoyment (in gazing at the images) cannot be reduced to a “need”. The enjoyment of which we speak lay in gazing at the images, in savouring the “unclasped clam”, which enfolds the canvas inwardly and outwardly, as (something) verbatim, and as fiction with no function of its own, but rather in the role of the doubled and multiplied enjoyment; and again, thus into infinity Marko’s painting is a kind of contradiction, a kind of “living contradiction”, founded on the double exposition of the background-and-foreground in his painting because it allows for a comprehensive psychophysical profile of the art of painting, integral in its partiality, wherein we are now enjoying the figure and image getting “lost” in its entirety, in its growth and its fall, falling towards the edges of the painting. Enjoyment – the true, eschatological, primordial enjoyment – is actually forbidden to him; he accepts it as the mode of (the painter’s) truth, through saying personal messages and through personality content. And it is also forbidden to him because, and insofar as, “he says it between the lines” – according to J. Lacan, that is to say, imperfectly, through the delight of a certain pictorial language.

38

Bim-Bam-Ne bom! | Ding-Dong-Don’t!, 2017 olje na straguli | oil on stragula 110 x 137,5 cm 39

40

Porini medveda! | Push the Bear!, 2017 mešana tehnika na papirju | mixed media on paper 140 x 467 cm 41

STAŠ KLEINDIENST 42

SLIKA KOT PODOBA, L’IMMAGINE, L’IMAGE Portreti v krajíni, v skoraj nedoločenem prostoru; med sabo ločeni ali v »neki« povezavi, ki je (za nas) lahko banalna ali misteriozna; v pokrajini tako rekoč z razgledniških podob nekje v slovenskem sredogorju. Kjer pa so vendarle v ospredju čistost barv, mehkoba linij in potez ter zlitost – ravnovesje – kromatične substance z likovnostjo (u)podobljencev – portretov –, s pejsažem. V ospredju so postave, figurabilnost, figuralnost, največkrat upodobljena frontalno, od spredaj, ali le v rahlih, komajda opaznih optičnih zasukih in obratih. V resnici skrajno koloristične, nekakšne »svetle sobe« eksterierjev; nekakšna jasa, ki jo preveva notranja jasnina. »Med mojo dušo in pejsažem je skriti dogovor, korespondenca, misteriozna privlačnost, afiniteta,« če citiramo D’Annunzia (po Bachelardu), kjer »me gleda vse, kar gledam«. Kjer sta očitna »intimizem« in pretanjenost osnovnega odnosa, ki (zdaj) prerašča ploskovitost, minimalizem v teh podobah. Lacan v Štirih temeljnih konceptih psihoanalize govori o viru, svetlobnostnem izviru in o svetlobi, »ki me gleda«, tj. figure so bolj »razgibane«, mislim slikarsko, čeprav kakor »vkopane«, kot »pribite«, pritrjene v pokrajino in platno.

Mehkoba intimističnega gledanja na »realistične« podobe slikanih oseb, skupin.

Vendar podobo, ki jo Kleindienst povzdigne, nadgradi v figuro-v-krájini, v kozmično podobo, ki spregovori zunaj lokalne scene, mislim konkretne, tipične, (celo) slovenske scenografije. Peinture d’intimité spreminja vse lokalno, tipično in omejeno, regionalno v tipsko, splošno, kozmično, univerzalno. In brezčasno. In to so tudi te podobe: svojske, tipske – v smislu izvirne Forme –, univerzalne in brezčasne. »Izraz zame ne obstaja v strasti, ki bo izbruhnila na obrazu ali se bo izkazala s silovito potezo. Je v vsej dispoziciji moje slike: v prostoru, ki ga imajo telesa, prazninah, ki so okrog njih, razmerjih; vse to ima svoj delež. Kompozicija je umetnost dekorativnega postavljanja različnih elementov, s katerimi slikar izraža svoja počutja. Na sliki je vsak del viden in odigra vlogo, ki mu je namenjena, glavno ali stransko. Vse, kar na sliki nima koristi, je škodljivo. Delo poseduje harmonijo celote: vsak odvečen detajl bi dobil pri opazovalcu mesto drugega bistvenega detajla. Doseči želim stanje zgoščenosti občutij, ki oblikuje sliko. Lahko bi se zadovoljil s hitro naslikanim delom, a bi se ga kasneje naveličal, zato ga raje retuširam, da bi ga pozneje prepoznal kot predstavitev svoje misli. Zdaj se trudim, da bi bil miren, in jih obdelujem, dokler ne pridem do končnega izdelka.« (H. Matisse, Écrits et propos sur l’art) Prav v kolorizmu, v posebni barvni skali, ki jo uporabi ta slikar in nihče drug ter v resnici ni prav nič posebnega (a prima vista), je bistveni poudarek – in tu je povsem (p)osebna –, da jo lahko pripišemo le tej podobi in slikarstvu.

43

PAINTING AS IMAGE, L’IMMAGINE, L’IMAGE Portraits in landscape, in an almost undefined space; separated from each other or sharing “some sort of” mutual connection, which (to us) can appear banal or mysterious – a landscape, so-to-speak, from postcard scenes somewhere in the Slovenian uplands. However, what remains in the forefront is the clarity of colours, the softness of lines and strokes, and the fusion – balance – of chromatic substance, and the visual artistry of the depicted/imaged persons – portraits – with the paysage. The figures, figurability, figurality, in the foreground, are mostly either shown head-on – from the front, or in slight, barely perceptible, optical twists or turns. In actuality, they are a kind of extremely colourist “bright rooms” of exteriors; a clearing of sorts, pervaded by an inner clarity. “There is a hidden agreement between my soul and the paysage, a correspondence, a mysterious attraction, affinity”, to quote D’Annunzio (according to Bachelard), where “all I watch, watches me”. Here there is an obvious “intimism” and finesse of the fundamental relationship, which is (now) outgrowing the planarity, minimalism in these images. In his Four Fundamental Concepts of Pschoanalysis, Lacan speaks of the source, a light source, and of light, “which watches me”, i.e. the figures are more “animated”, in a painting sense, though they also appear “dug in”, as though “nailed down”, affixed to the landscape and the canvas; a softness of an intimist view of the “realist” images of the painted persons, groups.

Yet the said image, which Kleindienst elevates, upgrades into a figure-in-landscape, into a cosmic image, speaks out beyond the local scene, meaning the concrete, typical, (even) Slovenian scenography. The Peinture d’intimité transforms everything local, typical, and limited, regional, into standard, general, cosmic, universal … and timeless. And the same goes for these images: images of their own, standard – in the sense of the original Form –, universal, and timeless.

“For me, the expression does not exist in a passion that is about to erupt on a face or manifest itself in a powerful stroke. It is in all of my painting’s disposition: in the space of the bodies, in the voids surrounding them, in the proportions; each has their share. Composition is the art of decoratively arranging different elements through which the painter expresses emotion. In the painting, each share is visible and plays the role it is meant to – be it main or supporting. Anything that does not benefit the painting is detrimental.

The work possesses the harmony of the totality: any superfluous detail would take the place of another essential detail in the eye of the beholder. I want to achieve the state of density of sensations, which forms the painting. I could content myself with a quickly painted work, but I would get weary of it later, and so I prefer to retouch it in order to recognize it later as the presentation of my thought. Now I am trying to be calm and work on them, until I arrive at the final product.” (H. Matisse, Écrits et propos sur l’art) The approach to colouring and the special colour scale employed by this painter, which is truthfully nothing special (a prima vista), is the very thing that adds special emphasis, which makes it entirely personal/ exceptional, so that we can only attribute it to this image and this painting style.

44

Amaterska psihoanaliza | Amateur Psychoanalysis, 2020 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 130 x 120 cm 45

Antiarkadija | Anti-Arcadia, 2020 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 120 x 160 cm 46

Krajina s potepuškimi psi | Landscape with Stray Dogs, 2019 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 130 x 200 cm 47

ROBERT LOZAR

48

IGRA RAZLIK, LE JEU DES DIFFÉRENCES Vse se zdi za hip minorno, nedozorelo, mejno. Lozar ni afirmativen v klasičnem razumevanju umetnostne ikonografije, saj ničesar ne poveže, sintetizira. V njem vlada krik, grotesknost, blasfemija; nikjer metafor, vsiljenih vrednot, zavesti. Zato je vedno bolj telesen, neposreden, v nasprotju z znano in priznano, z ustoličeno slikarsko skušnjo, ki je zunanja, nedejavna, protirevolucionarna; le medij, dvojnik, sredstvo, le vmesni prostor in distanca, tj. zanikanje, prepoved plesa, igre. Le forma, skritje, postavljanje v oklepaj; le maska, silhueta in življenje senc. Lozarjeve »slike« so stalna inverzija-reverzija, stalno iskanje, eksplozivnost, vitalizem: sprotno prilaščanje (ped za pedjo, noht za nohtom) svojega, lastnega, združenega, »političnega« telesa; anarhična želja po zrušenju, po razkristalizaciji telesa slike. Pri tem ni nikoli načelen, manifestativen, posreden ali scenografski. V njem je volja po uporu, po mejni akciji, ki zruši vse ograde in strga vse ovoje; da praskaš s sebe vso lepljivost, podlost in ohlapnost; da slečeš kožo prav do notranje golote; da vdreš, izničiš vsak privid, obraz v obrazu, ogledalo.

Treba je razkriti iluzijo; treba je prebosti, prebiti horizont, kjer vlada hermenevtičnost, zakrivanje, strahotni sarkofag. In moramo predreti himen, strgati zaveso, popkovnico, ki nas ločuje, podreja in duši. Zato užitek v prepovedi, v njeni porušitvi. Strah pred goloto je strah pred skrajno mejo, pred vdrtjem materničnega ovoja; da se ponovno združiš, da ni distance, nemoči. Slikar je torej Momos, bog roganja in ironije; divji, dobri bog anarhije, ki zasmehuje svojo naravo; s klopotačo in norčevskim žezlom v roki; nočni glas, poslanec noči, sanja, ki govori, Hermes, dvojnik v norosti sanj: strahotni piš, udarec in veliki preoblikovalec; vedno sam, vedno v življenju; in vračanje človeka, ki je obkrožen z udarci ognja; in mumija, ki hodi, ki zna živeti svojo smrt. Slika je ostrganje telesa, trenutek agonije; in ritmiziran padec, premaganje nasprotij, Heliogabal.

Lozarjeva dela moramo (za)gledati v njihovi trenutni, hipni, enkratni celoti, kajti ne obstaja nobena neukinljiva hierarhija individualnih form, ki bi bile komponirane v medsebojni odvisnosti in povezavi, saj ustrezajo predstavi slike, ki jo sestavljajo predmetne forme na gibljivem nosilcu; da ves okvir – robovi – slike uhaja, beži našemu pogledu in ga ne moremo povezati s tradicionalnim pojmovanjem platna, pa tudi ne s prostorskim delom niti z reliefno sliko. Gre torej za popolno osamosvojitev slikovnega nosilca, za nov pristop v oblikovanju površine, ki zaživi po svojem notranjem impulzu in ne kot urejen, določen organizem, v katerem veš za prostor, ki ga je treba zapolniti z barvo in potezo. Lozarjeve slike so »telesa brez organov« in ta šele omogočajo osvoboditev likovnih segmentov in pristopov, pri katerih je pomembna hkratna diahrona in sinhrona, historična in stukturalna razmejitev na vseh ravneh in v krožnem, sferičnem procesu. Motiv – vsebina – vseskozi in načeloma sledi izoblikovanju temeljnih nosilcev, ki se razširjajo kot labirinti, micelično, kot metastaze.

49

THE GAME OF DIFFERENCES, LE JEU DES DIFFÉRENCES For a moment, everything seems minor, immature, liminal. Lozar is not affirmative in the classical sense of artistic iconography as he does not connect or synthetise anything. A scream dominates his inner world, a grotesquery, blasphemy; no metaphors anywhere, no imposed values no consciousness. This is why he is ever more corporeal, direct, in opposition to the known established, enthroned painting experience, which is external, inactive; counterrevolutionary; a mere medium, doppelganger, a means, mere intermedial space and distance, i.e. negation, interdiction of dance, of play. Nothing but form, concealment, putting in brackets; only a mask, silhouette, and life of shadows. Lozar’s “paintings” are a constant inversion-reversion, constant search, explosiveness, vitalism: real-time appropriation (inch by inch, fingernail by fingernail) of one’s own, united, “political’ body; an anarchic desire for the demolition, for the de-crystallization of the painting’s body. In this, he is never principled, manifestative, indirect, or scenic. Within him, there is a will to rebellion, to a liminal action, which tears down all enclosures and rips all shrouds; a will to scratch off oneself all the tackiness, vileness, and looseness; to remove the skin all the way to inner nudity; to break in, annihilate every apparition, face within a face, mirror.

The illusion must be divulged; the horizon, which is ruled by the hermeneutic, the concealed, the terrible sarcophagus, must be pierced, broken through. And we must lance the hymen, tear the curtain, break the umbilical cord which divides, subjugates, and stifles us. Hence the enjoyment of interdiction, of its demolition. The fear of nudity is the fear of the extreme boundary, of the rupture of the uterine shroud, of reuniting, a fear that there is no distance, a fear of powerlessness. The painter is therefore Momos, the god of ridicule and irony; the wicked good god of anarchy who ridicules his nature; a rattle snake and fool’s sceptre in hand; the night voice, the envoy of the night, he dreams who speaks, Hermes, the doppelganger in the madness of dreams: a terrible gust of wind, a blow, and the great re-shaper; always alone, always in life; and the return of man surrounded by jolts of fire; and the mummy that walks, that knows how to live its own death. The painting is the scraping-out of the body, a moment of agony; and a rhythmic fall, the conquering of oppositions, Heliogabalus.

Lozar’s works must be be/held in their momentary, instantaneous, singular totality, for there exists no unabolishable hierarchy of individual forms, which were composed in mutual dependence and interrelation because they fit the presentation of the painting comprised of object forms on a movable medium; so the entire frame – rim – of the painting escapes, eludes our gaze; we are unable to tie it to the traditional conception of canvas, and to the spatial part or relief painting. It is therefore a complete emancipation of the medium holding the painting, a new approach to forming the surface, which comes to life according to its own inner impulse rather than as an ordered, defined organism, with known quantities of space that needs filling with paint and strokes.

Lazar’s paintings are “bodies without organs”, and they are what finally allows visual segments and approaches to be liberated; here, diachronous and synchronous, historic and structural division matters simultaneously on all levels, and in a circular, spherical process. The motif – content matter – throughout and essentially follows the formation of the fundamental mediums, which expand like labyrinths, mycelially, like metastases.

50

Biloba, 2018 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 170 x 210 cm 51

Jutri ti bom povedal | I’ll Tell You Tomorrow, 2014 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 80 x 70 cm 52

Možnosti | Options, 2018 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 100 x 90 cm 53

IRA MARUŠIČ

54

FIGURA KOT TRANSCENDENTNI PREDMET Slika je in že postaja prostor psihičnih vizij in manualnih ritmov; prostor razširjanja kromatične teksture k robu in preko njega; micelična razrast segmentov, ki pa so vendar vedno zgledno urejeni, uravnoteženi in optično »pravilno« razvrščeni. Celotna površina platna in nosilca je v resnici korelat figuri: ko iz njenega telesa v hipu privrejo najrazličnejše oblike, zasičene z gosto barvo in z de(re)teritorializacijsko silo, ki polje slike krči ali širi v neskončnost. Podoba – haptični pejsaž – v pomenu malerisch je prav zato tudi najizvirnejša Marušičina doba. »Predpostavimo, da je figura v resnici izginila in da je za seboj pustila le bežno sled svoje nekdanje prisotnosti.

Ploskev se tedaj odpre kot navpično nebo in se napolni z mnogimi strukturalnimi funkcijami. Področje kalnosti, nedoločljivosti, zabrisa, ki je oblikovalo figuro, postane vrednost za sebe; neodvisna od vsakršne oblike nastopa kakor čista moč brez svojega predmeta […]. Obris se spremeni in zdaj deluje kot nekakšen deformator. Figura se skrči ali raztegne kakor zastor, ki se izgublja v neskončnost […]. Vse je krčenje in širjenje, diastola in sistola slikovnega prostora. Krčenje stiska telo od strukture k figuri, širjenje ga razteza in razprši iz figure v strukturo. V krčenju je že prisotno širjenje: telo se iztegne, da bi se bolje zaprlo. In v širjenju je krčenje: ko se telo skrči, da bi ušlo samemu sebi. Tudi ko se telo razblinja, ga v skrčenosti zadržujejo sile, ki ga zgrabijo, da bi ga vrnile okolju. In ritem je sožitje vseh procesov in vseh potez na sliki.« (G. Deleuze, Logika občutja, 1981) Irine »figure« so telesa kot samostojne Forme, se pravi, da naslikana Figura, figuralnost ni podrejena organizmu, sistemu »funkcioniranja« od zgoraj, iz ene same točke, ki jo podreja in določa in opredeljuje, ampak živi kot ločeni organ; izvorno, prvobitno; v vse smeri, navznoter in navzven, duhovno in polteno; gibljivo, spazmično in čutno bitje v nastajanju, le devenir-espace: »Občutje je vibracija, ni kvalitativno ali kvalificirano, ampak predstavlja eno samo intenzivno danost, v kateri ni predstavitvenih – reprezentativnih – danosti, podatkov, temveč le alotropične spremembe. Vemo, da jajce predstavlja prav to stanje telesa pred organsko oblikovnostjo: to so osi in vektorji, padci, kinematična gibanja in dinamične tendence, kjer so oblike le slučajne, neobvezne.« (G. Deleuze, navedeno delo) »Dotik« v »gladino«, mehkoba kromatične preproge, izbrizgana vročičnost, »zvenenje« v kotanje, v »pomladni rez«, v »semenjsko malho«. Čas, trajanje, »časenje« – kot oblazinjanje podob.

55

THE FIGURE AS A TRANSCENDENT OBJECT The painting is, and is already becoming, the space of mental visions and manual rhythms; a space where chromatic texture expands to the edge and beyond it – a mycelial spreading of segments, which nevertheless remain ever ordered, balanced, and optically “correctly” arranged. The entire surface of the canvas and support actually is a correlate of the figure: when, from its body, various shapes instantaneously bubble to the surface, saturated with thick paint and de/re/territorialising force, which contracts or dilates the field of the painting to infinity. This is precisely why the image, – haptic paysage – in the sense of “malerisch”, marks Marušič’s most original period.

“Suppose (so Deleuze in the Logic of Sensation) the Figure had effectively disappeared, leaving behind only a vague trace of its former presence. The field will then open up like a vertical sky, and at the same time will increasingly take over the structuring functions … the scrambled or wiped-off zone, which used to make the figure emerge, will now stand on its own, independent of every definite form, appearing as a pure Force without an object … the contour changes and now works as some kind of deformer. The Figure is contracted or dilated … as a curtain where the Figure shades off into infinity. Everything is contraction and dilation, diastole and systole of the pictorial space. The systole, which contracts the body, goes from the structure to the Figure, while the diastole, which extends and dissipates it, goes from the Figure to the structure. But there is already a diastole in the first movement, when the body extends itself in order to better close in on itself; and there is a systole in the second movement, when the body is contracted in order to escape from itself; and even when the body is dissipated, it still remains contracted by the forces that seize hold of it in order to return it to its surroundings. The coexistence of all these movements in the painting … is rhythm.” (G. Deleuze, The Logic of Sensation, 2003) Ira’s “figures” are bodies as independent Forms, therefore the painted Figure, figurality, is not subject to the organism, to the system of “functioning”, from above, from a single point that subjugates, determines, and defines it, but lives like a separate organ, originally, primordially, in all directions, inwards and outwards, spiritually and sensually – a motile, spasmodic, and sensual being in the making, le devenir-espace: “Sensation is not qualitative and qualified, but has only an intensive reality, which no longer determines with itself representative elements, but allotropic variations. Sensation is vibration. We know that the egg reveals just this state of the body before organic representation: axes and vectors, gradients, zones, cinematic movements, and dynamic tendencies, in relation to which forms are contingent or accessory.” (Ibid.)

The “touch” into the “surface”, softness of the chromatic carpet, squirted feverishness “ringing” into the hollows, into the “spring cut”, into the “seed satchel”. Duration, “time-ing” – as the cushioning of images.

56

Negativen kaktus | Negative Cactus, 2021 olje, vosek, pigmenti na platnu | oil, wax, pigments on canvas 100 x 300 cm 57

58

Rdeča pljuča | Red Lungs, 2020 olje, vosek, pigmenti na platnu | oil, wax, pigments on canvas 160 x 300 cm 59

KATJA PÁL

60

ODKLON V ŽARIŠČE SLIKE Palinih slik ne karakterizira pozunanjen, kričav mediteranski kolorizem, ampak še vedno pritajena »krajina«, ki je nastala kot sublimacija notránjih čustev in občutja, tako da govorimo o psihični krajíni. Vse, se pravi celotni likovni ekran, preveva prav neskončni mir, v katerem ni začudenja in subjektivne stiske, temveč samo samota in tišina neskončnega in večnega trenutka; trenutka, ki se spremeni v sublimno stanje, v katerem vlada »čista poezija«, čisto snovanje izgubljenega in ponovno najdenega paradiža. Vsa likovnost in barvna magma sta tu samo zato, da služita užitku našega pogleda.

Na teh podobah gre za vnos, primarni vnos barvite forme – slikarja, ki na »subjektil« (se pravi na likovno osnovo, slikovni temelj: platno ipd.) odlaga barvno magmo kot semensko lavo, s katero nam pričara svojski svet vizij in videnj. Pri tem opazimo, da se podoba (téma) ponovi, ponavlja v neskončnost; vendar ponavljanje ni reprodukcija, »die Wiederholung ist nich Reproduzieren«, kot je zapisal filozof. V vračanju, v mnogoterosti odtenkov vedno iste slike je tisoče podob, ki se, če jih pokrijemo, če jih vložimo eno v drugo, na koncu zlijejo v vsebinsko pomnoženo podobitev, v nótranjo pokrajino podob, ki učinkujejo z globino (la profondeur) in s psihičnostjo doživetja. To slikarstvo postavlja temeljna vprašanja novega prostora, njegove materializacije, uprizoritve neke skušnje. Potrebo po svetósti, »svetem kraju«. Prepoved igre je od nekdaj prevedena v oblike poezije, plesa in slikarstva, v fantastične oblike, ki po Bataillevih besedah izvirajo v prazniku vseh časov. Govorimo torej o svetem prazniku, ki je religiozen v smislu postavljanja sveta. Svétost postavljanja sveta se kaže v umetnosti, v igri in v transgresiji, ki temeljijo na istih virih. Umetnost, ki je ločena od plesa in ni zaznamovana s praznikom »vseh časov«, ni umetnost.

Barvni nanosi v teh delih poudarjajo iluzionistično poglabljanje, a tudi skoraj »dekorativno« elementarnost. V resnici je to dialog med tradicionalnim slikarstvom in modernizmom, vmesni prostor, ki bo v prihodnje šele pokazal vrednost takšnega pristopa. Slike niso transparentne, ampak so v resnici trdno zaprte ploskve, za katerimi šele nastaja in se oblikuje nov likovni naboj.

V novih Palinih podobah je poudarek na izrazito subjektivnem podajanju osebnih skušenj v analiziranju področja, s katerim se izraža. V resnici gre za skrajno avtonomno delo, za svojsko, subjektivistično interpretacijo modernega slikovnega postopka. Pogled je nótranji in odločilen: umik v prisotnost in prisostvovanje v kontemplaciji pristopa. Pomembna je pristopnost, soprisostvovanje v meji eksistence. Prisostvovanje-v-biti.

61

DEVIATION INTO THE FOCAL POINT OF THE PAINTING Pál’s paintings aren’t characterised by some externalized loud Mediterranean colourist style; they remain a subdued “scenery”, which arose as the sublimation of inner emotions and sensations and can therefore be termed a mental landscape. Everything, meaning the entire artistic screen, is pervaded by a true infinite peace absent any and all wonderment or subjective distress; there is only solitude and silence of an infinite and eternal moment, a moment which transforms into a subliminal state governed by “pure poetry”, by pure devising of a paradise lost and found again. All the artistry and colour magma are here only to serve the enjoyment of our gaze.

These images are a matter of input, primary input of colourful form – by the painter depositing colour magma upon the “subjectile” (i.e. the base of the artwork, painting fundament: canvas et. sim.) like seminal lava and thereby conjuring up its own distinctive world of visions and sights. In the process, we notice that the image (theme) recurs, it is repeated to infinity; yet, repetition is not reproduction – die Wiederholung ist nich reproduzieren, as the philosopher wrote. The recurrences, the multiplicity of shades of one and the same image, hold thousands of semblances, which, if covered, if inserted one into another, in the end, meld into a contentually multiplied depiction, into an inner landscape of images that work through the profundity (la profondeur) and mentality of the experience. This painting style poses fundamental questions about new space, its materialisation, the staging of a certain rehearsal, a need for sanctity, “a sacred place”. Interdiction of play has always been translated into forms of poetry, dance, and painting; into fantastical shapes, which, as Bataille put it, stem from a feast day of all times. We are therefore referring to a sacred feast day, which is religious in the sense of presenting the world. The sanctity of the presenting of the world appears in art, in game, and in transgression, all of which stem from the same sources. Art separate from dance and not marked with a feast day of “all times” is not art.

Colour layers in these works underscore their illusionist deepening, but also their almost “decorative” elementarity. In truth, this is a dialogue between traditional painting and modernism, an intermedial space, which is yet to fully reveal this approach’s value in times to come. The paintings are not transparent, but actually firmly sealed surfaces underneath which a new artistic charge is only just arising and forming.

The emphasis of Pál’s new images is on distinctly subjectively delivering personal experience derived from analysing the field through which she expresses herself. In actuality, this is an extremely autonomous work, a unique subjectivist interpretation of the modern painting procedure. The gaze is internal and decisive: a retreat into presence and presencing in contemplating the approach. What is important is accession, copresencing in the boundary of existence, presencing-in-being.

62

D-MINI:S001, 2021 akril, platno kaširano na les | acrylic, canvas laminated on wood 40 x 28 x 3 cm 63

TTT-07-04a1b, 2021 akril, platno kaširano na les | acrylic, canvas laminated on wood 91 x 106 x 2 cm 64

TTT-05-07b2a, 2021 akril, platno kaširano na les | acrylic, canvas laminated on wood 74 x 72 x 2 cm 65

MIHA ŠTRUKELJ

66

FIGURA/SLIKA KOT UPROSTORITEV Takoj opazimo, da Štrukelj ne gradi na linearnosti, ki bi pogled usmerjala v vertikalno gledanje, dal di sotto in sù, od spodaj gor, ampak njegova slika temelji na kombinaciji t. i. »linearne perspektive, zračne perspektive in perspektive senc«, kot bi dejal H. Focillon (ob Ječah G. B. Piranesija); smer pogleda je zvezana z razkritjem likovnega labirinta, pri čemer gre za čisto razporeditev znakov, za avtonomno kompozicijo (p)osebnih in geometričnih prvin. Namesto čiste figuralnosti so v ospredju »vrivki« in »efekti« najrazličnejših oblik in pa kromatičnih nabojev, ki delujejo le na nivoju lastnega preverjanja, odvisnega od »spekularnega sistema« avtor – delo. Na delu je »transformacijska sila«, ki nadgrajuje sliko z zavestnimi in nezavednimi impulzi, in se tako rekoč spreminja v prepoznaven slog slikarstva. Seveda gre pri tem predvsem za teoretično izkustvo, za teoretsko prakso, da lahko spregovorimo o pravi Štrukljevi »kompozicijski metodi«. Slikar ni slep za oblikovne, tj. formalne likovne učinke, ki jih razvija – proizvaja – slika; z njihovo močjo ustvarja lasten pikturalni red.

Mondrian je v Notesu iz leta 1914 zapisal: »Umetnost je nad vsako realnostjo […]. Med fizično in eterično sfero (podobitve) je meja, kjer se naši čuti zaustavijo.« Lahko bi torej govorili o abstrahirani redukciji simboličnih struktur in pa celo o pravi »metodi razgraditve« figuralnega sistema. Vsekakor je bistven nov, fiktiven element realnosti, ki sliko spremeni v prostor, očiten in pregleden, evidenten. Površina platna je izpolnjena od roba pa do roba in ne dopusti drugačnega učinka, kot je učinek površine. Slika je transparentna in hitro tudi ponovljiva. Praznega prostora ni, podoba sama proizvaja »kromatično vsebino« kot edinstveno realiteto podobitve in tu je pomembna ekspresivnost, ki jo gradijo zgradba, linija, format in pa načini slikanja. V Štrukljevih podobah se celovitost, se pravi izpopolnjenost, celo popolnost novih slik zdaj predstavlja našemu očesu kot objekt, lastna »aktivnost« vsake slike se nam kaže kot resničnost, ki ni več omejena na zunanjost površine. Vsaka transformacija podobe se dogaja v kromatičnem prostoru, ki tu pa tam postaja »figuralen« – figurabilen – in določa ali omejuje avtonomnost dela.

Lahko bi govorili o sublimnosti pristopa, o notranjem razvoju upodabljanja s spremembami v pojmovanju barve, linije, obrisa, senc, načela chiaroscuro, kjer linearno gledanje zamenja pikturalno in oko sledi ne(s) končnim perspektivam in njihovim prazninam; kjer posebna, reprezentativna forma (ki jo spoznavamo za »figuralno«) postaja vedno bolj svobodna, nedoločena, utemeljena le v luminozni, »zračni« – likovni – substanci. Telesa so amorfen predmet, ki ustreza sanjskim, oniričnim motivom. V estetski skušnji teh podob smo zdaj očarani od znakov, od oblik, ne toliko od upodobljenih stvari in občutij. Občutimo nekakšen paradoks telesne forme, ki ne označuje drugega kot sebe samo, se pravi funkcionira kot »označenost«, ki nima svojega označevalca; ki nam sporoča skozi neko formo neko sporočilo in vsebino na meji med figurativnimi, ikoničnimi in pikturalnimi slikarskimi pristopi ter postopki.

67

FIGURE/PAINTING AS ENSPACEMENT We certainly immediately notice that Štrukelj does not build on linearity, which would steer the gaze vertically, dal di sotto in su, “upward from below”, but instead bases his painting on the combination of the so-called “linear perspective, aerial perspective, and the perspective of shadows”, as H. Focillon would put it (referring to G. B. Piranesi’s Imaginary Prisons); the direction of the gaze is tied to the divulgence of the visual-artistic labyrinth, which is a matter of pure arrangement of signs, of an autonomous composition of (special) personal and geometric elements. In the forefront, in place of pure figurality, appear “interpolations” and “effects” of various shapes and chromatic charges, which only function on the level of self-verification dependent on the author-work “specular system”. A “transformational force” is at work here, which enhances the painting with conscious and superconscious impulses, and practically transforms into a signature painting style. Of course it is primarily due to theoretical experience, theoretical practice, that we may speak of actual Štrukelj “compositional method”. The painter is not blind to the formal visual-artistic effects he is developing – producing – painting, by whose power he is creating his own pictorial order.

In his Notebooks from 1914, Mondrian wrote: “Art is higher than reality … Between the physical sphere and the ethereal sphere (of the imaging) there is a frontier where our senses stop functioning.” We can therefore speak of a certain kind of abstract reduction, a reduction of symbolic structures, and a method of decomposing the figural system. At any rate, what is essential is the fictitious element of reality, which transforms the image into a space that is obvious and clear, evident. The canvas surface is filled from edge to edge and does not allow for any other effect but the effect of surface. The painting style is transparent and can be quickly replicated. There is no empty space, the image itself produces “chromatic content” as the singular reality of imaging, where what is important is expressivity, which is made up of the structure, the line, the format, and the styles of painting. In Štrukelj’s images, integrity, i.e. refinement, even perfection of new paintings now presents itself to us as an object; each painting’s individual “activity” presents itself to us as reality which is no longer limited to the exterior of the surface. Each transformation of individual images occurs in chromatic space, which, here and there, becomes “figural” – figurable – and either defines or restricts the work’s autonomy.

We can term this approach subliminal, we may speak of internal development of depiction through changes in the perception of colours, lines, contours, shadows, and of the chiaro-scuro principle, where the linear view is replaced by the pictorial view and the eye follows in/finite perspectives and their voids, where the special representative form (which we recognize as “figural”) is growing increasingly free, undefined, based only in luminous “airy” visual-artistic substance. Bodies are an amorphous object that corresponds with dream-, oneiric motifs. The aesthetic experience of these images enchants us sooner with signs, shapes than with depicted things and sensations. We feel some kind of paradox of corporeal form, which designates nothing but itself; it therefore functions as “signification” that has no signifier of its own; it is conveying a message to us through some form and content situated somewhere between the figurative, iconic, and pictorial painting approaches and procedures.

68

Ulica XZ | Alley XZ, 2020 akril, črnilo, kraft papir, lepilni trak, grafit, oglje na platnu | acrylic, ink, kraft paper, masking tape, graphite, charcoal on canvas 200 x 140 cm 69

Ulica IX. | Alley IX., 2019 akril, črnilo, grafit, oglje, kraft papir, lepilni trak na platnu | acrylic, ink, graphite, charcoal, kraft paper, masking tape on canvas 220 x 160 cm 70

Trolldomsfjellet, 2019 olje, akril, črnilo, grafit na platnu | oil, acrylic, ink, graphite on canvas 210 x 280 cm 71

MARUŠA ŠUŠTAR

72

SLIKA KOT FIGURALNA RAZTROSITEV Najboljša dela so tista, ki kažejo »notránji tekst«, pralikovnost kot tako, nótranje telo slikarstva in figuralnost; da, figuralnost kot neizmerno mrežo, ki »preži« na določila forme, barve in prostora, da bi jih »razrešila« v osnovne, inteligibilne elemente. Gre za resnično raztrositev – disaminacijo slikovnega telesa in figure, ki sta zabrisana in razgrebena v gube in simetrične cikcake. Gre za izbris anatomije slike in za »prostrtje« linije ter likovnih prvin, ki kot da padajo, visijo, drsijo poševno v prostoru, ki je tekoč in zračen, neoprijemljiv. Pri tem je v pomoč nekakšna erozija barve, ki razplasti celotno površino v nedoločeno brezbarvno gmoto. Barvna tekstura – pikturalni »tekst« – prevzema mesto posvečenega telesa, tako da ne priznava več zunanjega označevalca, tako da likovnost ni nadgrajena z neko ideologijo, temveč prevlada »duša« likovne uprostoritve. Zdaj slika ni več preddoločena s smislom in vsebino, ampak je »prazna« in »obrisna«. Še vedno pa se je drži nekakšen magnetizem – in remanenca – nekdanjih alegoričnih in simbolnih funkcij; še vedno je – slikarstvo, slikanje – sakralno tkanje. Vsa figuralnost, figuralni status se s tem spreminja v mazzocchio, če uporabimo izraz J.-L. Scheferja (v knjigi Le Déluge, la peste, Paolo Uccello, Galilée Paris,1976), besedo, ki predstavlja kij, gorjačo – mazza – in oko – occhio –, se pravi v prenesenem smislu: udarec vidne likovne teksture. Kot tak mazzocchio se v delih Šuštarjeve kaže fenomen primarne »mreže«, ki nosi in drži prav vsako likovno označevanje. Pravilna in vendar tudi ekspresivna mreža zdaj preddoloča naš pogled in vidno polje slike. Ta skoraj toga »draperija« je predpogoj slikarskega prostora in figure, s tem ko utaji – odpravi – perspektivo.

Marušina podoba je torej nekakšna emblematična struktura drsečih, valujočih, razplastenih likov in prostora, ki je v resnici irealen. In v katerem figure in telesa niso otipljivi, to je očitni, evidentni, a tudi ne povsem izpraznjeni, odsotni, medli. Posamezni umetnostni pomen in podobe ter njihova celotna hagiografija tako izginjajo skozi scheferovsko »referencialno igro disperzije označevalca«. Tako imenovana figuralnost je »v suspenzu«: slika se odreka historični valenci, v tem ko ohranja vsakokratno figuralno vlogo in »postavo« v smislu heideggerjanskega Gestella. Bistven je torej figuralni status, entropični sistem podobe, v katerem ni še nič oblikovano in je označevalec – smisel – še razcepljen.

Prav ta vnaprejšnjost, apriornost »konfiguracije« slikovnega ekrana slikarki omogoča različne likovno-stilistične pristope: monokromne in analitične in postmoderne. Zato ker si ob vsakem delu znova zastavlja temeljno vprašanje: Kako prodreti v piktoralno snov? Kje je resnični praoznačevalec in/kot »držalo« slike? Slika v prvotnem stanju je polimorfna, mnogotera »raztrositev«, Derridajeva dissémination ter difuzija možnosti in predstavitev, premeščanj in uprostoritev, kjer metajezik ni mogoč. Kajti le takšna slika, ki je ostrgana vseh vrednostnih, socialnih in kulturnih mehanizmov, lahko postane ključna točka za izviren lik. Rudimentarni tekst, ki dopusti odboj neštetih možnih podobitev, čakajočih, da jih spoznamo za resničnost. Slikarstvo kot sublimnost, »sublimna slika« nima svojega objekta, temveč le možnost, da imenuje predobjektivno in prednominalno stanje.

73

A PAINTING AS A FIGURAL SCATTERING The best works show “the internal text”, the primordial visual-artistry as such, the internal body of painting, and figurality; yes, figurality as an immeasurable grid “lying in wait” to “resolve” the stipulations of form, colour, and space into fundamental, intelligible elements. This is a true scattering – dissemination of the pictorial body and figure, which are blurred and scraped apart into folds and symmetrical zigzags. It is the erasure of the painting’s anatomy and the “spreading” of the line and visual-artistic elements, which appear to be falling, hanging, gliding diagonally in space, which is fluid and airy, intangible. This is helped along by a kind of colour erosion, which is stratifying the entire surface into an undefined colourless mass. Colour texture – pictorial “text” is repudiating the external signifier and thereby taking the place of the sanctified body; thus visual artistry is no longer enhanced by some ideology, but by the “soul” of the visual-artistic enspacement instead. The picture is no longer predefined by meaning and content, but “empty” and “contoured”. However, it remains linked to a certain magnetism – and remanence – of its former allegorical and symbolical functions; it is still – painting – sacred weaving. All figurality, all of the figural status, thereby transforms into “mazzochio” to employ J. L. Schefer’s term (from his Le Déluge, la Peste, Paolo Uccello, Galilée Paris, 1976), the word for mace, club – mazza – and eye – occhio – therefore in the figurative sense: the blow of the visual-artistic texture.

“Mazzochio” in this sense is represented in Šuštar’s works by the phenomenon of primary “grid”, which carries and holds every single visual-artistic signification. This accurate, but also expressive grid now predetermines our gaze and the picture’s visual field. This, nearly rigid “drapery” is the prerequisite for the painting space and figure; by supressing the perspective, it abolishes it.

Maruša’s image is therefore a kind of emblematic structure of gliding, undulating, stratified forms and of space, which is actually irreal. Here, figures and bodies are not tangible, i.e. obvious, evident, but also not entirely emptied out, absent, dull. Individual artistic meaning, images, and their entire hagiography are thus disappearing through a Schefferian “referential game of the dispersion of the signifier”. So-called figurality is “in suspense”: by preserving each recurring figural role and each “enframing” (in the sense of Heidegger’s Gestell), the picture forgoes historical valence. What is essential is therefore the image’s figural status, its entropic system, in which nothing is formed yet and the signifier – meaning – is still split.

This very pre-emption, apriority of the configuration of the image screen, allows the painter to employ different stylistic approaches: monochromatic, analytical, and postmodern, because, each new work poses the fundamental questions: How to penetrate the pictorial matter? Where is the true primordial signifier and/as the “holder” of the painting? The primary state of the picture is polymorphic, multifarious “scattering”, Derrida’s dissémination and diffusion of possibilities and representations, repositionings, and enplacements, where metalanguage is not possible. For, only a painting scraped of all value-, social, and cultural mechanisms can become the key vantage point in inventing an original figure, a rudimentary text that allows the recoiling of countless possible imagings that are waiting to be recognised as reality. Painting as the subliminal, “the subliminal picture” does not have its own object, all it has is the capacity to rename the pre-objective and pre-nominal state.

74

Panoptikum | Panoptikon, 2011 olje na platno | oil on canvas 140 x 170 cm 75

Gomazeči | Crawling People, 2020 olje na platno | oil on canvas 229 x 99 cm 76

Zbirajoči | Assembling People, 2020 olje na platno | oil on canvas 230 x 99 cm 77

JONI ZAKONJŠEK 78

BELINA, ALBUS, RAZSVETLITEV Jonino slikarstvo ne išče pobud zunaj svojega prostora, v teoriji in idejah, v predmetnosti natura naturata & naturans, temveč ostaja varno (skrita? zalezena? vbita?) v notranji izkušnji lastnega razvoja. Kajti le tako si omogoča neomajno »raztrositev« in umeščanje v nikoli raziskane kraje sanj, prividov, znanja in igrivih videnj, zavesti-podzavesti. V tem ni nazadnjaška niti revolucionarna, temveč »v meji«; medialni prostor, v katerem so vse možnosti odprte, a se v resnici prav nič ne zgodi. Jonine podobe se že nekaj let vpisujejo v takšno krizno stanje, in to brez mode, brez hlastanja za tujimi vzorci in spoznanji, kar jo postavlja med vodilne predstavnike slovenskega slikarstva. Posebna senzitivnost, pogovor z umetnostjo kot tako, kat’ exochen, ki jo slikarka docela deteritorializira, da lahko govorimo o nekakšni moderni izgubi središča, kjer upodobljeni svet ni niti daleč niti blizu, ampak nekako vodoraven, brez globine in nerealen, protinaturalen – a vendar združen z našo čustveno predstavo. Govorimo lahko tudi o skupnem (in načelnem, ne pa teoretskem in mentalnem) »manierizmu« in »baroku«, ki sta hkrati zunanja; nekakšna preobloženost in zasičenost. V tistem pomenu, da je danes, kot v manierizmu, slikar prisiljen slikati le po umetnostnem spominu ali pa je, kot v baroku, sposoben gibljivo in razgibano slediti najrazličnejšim vsebinam ter detajlom.

Slikarka postavlja labirint, v katerem ni razlik, nasprotij, v katerem vladajo fragmentarnost, kroženje podob, prelivanje trenutnih stanj in doživetij. Slika labirinta na ta način postaja pot nazaj, pot vase, pot iskanja. V tem ni eklekticizma, čeprav je tu in tam podoba (predvsem na platnih, risbe so mnogo bolj preproste, neposredne) preveč izdelana, »osteklenjena«. Torej nikakor ne moremo govoriti o mehaničnem posnemanju, o sinkreziji, saj je končna, celostna podoba slike – prostor vseh prostorov – svojska in intimna, rešena historične navlake in s čustvenostjo, ki pripada le današnjemu trenutku. Ob njenem slikanju moramo govoriti o dokončni prepustitvi, drsenju v pozabo in o skrajnem preuživanju slikarskega telesa.

Podoba rase iz podobe, dogodek iz dogodka, skoraj avtomatsko, v preobilju in vendarle povsem razvidna; preprosta, brez robov in rezov, brez vsebine in ozadja ter proklamiranih resnic. Nekakšen plaz neskončno drobnih doživetij, ki jim lahko sledimo v nizu – zaporedno – kakor zgodbi ali pa se radostimo ob posameznih prizorih, ki vznikajo od vsepovsod, da se ponovno izgubijo. Erotična lahkotna igra, nevtralno, nediferencirano označevanje, osvobojeno znakov in simbolov, ki ne prizna nikakršne instance. Spontan, alogičen diskurz, ki se nikoli ne konča, čeprav se venomer začenja in ponavlja. In torej slika-opna, ki združi avtorjev in naš pogled v hkratno – čeprav tudi temporalno ločeno – občutje, v katerem se znova znajdeš, oblit z naslado in omamno vnemo.

79

WHITENESS, ALBUS, ILLUMINATION Joni’s painting does not seek initiative outside its own space, in theory and ideals, in the materiality of natura naturata & naturans, but, instead, remains safely (hidden? burrowed? beaten in?) in the internal experience of its own development. Only in this way, does it enable its unwavering “scattering” and positioning in the neverexplored spaces of dreams, apparitions, knowledge, and playful visions, consciousness-sub-consciousness.

In this, she is neither reactionary nor revolutionary, she “borders” in the medial space where all possibilities are open, but where, in truth, nothing happens. Joni’s images have been entering this type of state of crisis for a few years now and doing so with no regard for fashion, without grasping for foreign patterns and realisations, which places her among the leading representatives of Slovenian painting. A special sensitivity, a conversation with art as such, kat’ exochen, which the painter wholly de-territorializes; Therefore, we may speak of a certain modern loss of centre where the depicted world is neither far nor near, but rather somehow horizontal, without depth and unreal, counter-natural; and yet it is melded with our emotive perception. We may also speak of a common (and general, but not theoretical or mental) “Mannerism” and “Baroque”, which simultaneously appear externally; a kind of overload and saturation – in the sense that the painter today is forced, like in Mannerism, to paint only according to artistic memory, or, as in Baroque, has the capacity to nimbly and animatedly follow the most varied content and details.

The painter erects a labyrinth lacking any and all differences, oppositions, where disunity rules along with the circling of images and blending of momentary states and experiences. In this way, the picture of the labyrinth is becoming a way back, a path within, a path of seeking. There is no eclecticism, even though, here and there (particularly on the canvases, sketches are much simpler, more direct), an image is overly perfected, “glazed”. Therefore, we can in no way speak of mechanical mimicry, of syncretism, being as the final overall image of the painting– the space of all spaces – is singular and intimate, delivered from historical clutter, and with an emotionality which belongs solely in the present day. Where her painting is concerned, we must speak of giving in in ultimate abandon, gliding into oblivion, and of extreme overindulgence in the painting body.

Image grows from image, event from event, almost automatically, in overabundance, and yet perfectly evident, simple, without edges or cuts, without content matter, background, or proclaimed truths. A sort of avalanche of infinitesimally tiny experiences, which we can follow in sequence – in succession – like a story, or we can rejoice in individual scenes, which are emerging from everywhere, only to abate again.

An erotic, jaunty game, a neutral undifferentiated signifying – liberated of signs and symbols, a game which acknowledges no instance. A spontaneous alogical discourse that never ends, even though it is ever beginning and recurring. And therefore a painting-membrane that merges the author’s gaze with ours into a simultaneous – though also temporally separate – sensation, in which you find yourself again and again – doused in arousal and intoxicating fervour.

80

Spominjanje, Velika sela | Remembrance, Velika sela, poletje-jesen | summer-autumn 2020 olje na platno | oil on canvas, 20 x 55 cm 81

82

TihoBitje, Velika sela | SilentBeing, Velika sela pomlad-poletje | spring-summer 2020, olje na platno | oil on canvas 50 x 100 cm 83

NIKA ZUPANČIČ

84

PLOSKVE, PLOSKVE V ZRAČNEM TLAKU V določenem trenutku Zupančičine linije, razsute po prostoru, »oživijo« in v sliko vznikne, vstane evidentni lik-telo, metafora telesa, telo – alegorija – vseh svetih in profanih, historičnih in predhistoričnih teles; telo-alegorija in slika kot telo-ikona v ekstazi. Enormno, votlo, nedeljivo, obrnjeno, sprijeto, slečeno telo podobe.

Razkrvavljeno, monokromno, kar je posledica izgube in zatrtja vsakršne vsebine. Odtod »udrtje« – erozija barve. Ni namreč figura suspendirana, odsotna, temveč je »v suspenzu« tudi barva. Barvilo je zamolklo, kromatični nanosi v epidermo platna so prav zato podobni monokromnemu slikarstvu: barva je fikcija telesa in prostora; slika ničesar ne zrcali, odslikava, v njej ni ne temeljev in ne realnega ozadja. Gre torej za nekakšno negativno zvezo med barvilom in figuro, ki jo namerno ohroméva, medlí njen likovni izraz. Celoten korpus slike je izenačen s figuralnim organizmom, ki se spreminja v monokromno ploskev, v »tablo«.

Barva ima pri Zupančičevi mentalno vlogo in ni izraz gorečnosti ali strasti. Njena »filtriranost« sledi (raz)gradnji – (de)kodiranju – podobe. Tako kot figura je tudi barva razplastena; občutimo nekakšen hlad in steresis – »kratenje« – odtujenost; v nasprotju s čustvenim in eksplozivnim pojmovanjem barve. Telo brez sence, a z lučjo in svetlobo. Nobenega realnega svetlobnega izvira. Slika je sebi sama lastna luč, luč barve in poteze in umetnostne reminiscence. Avtoafekcija, pogovor slike s slikarstvom. Lastna iluminacija in osvetlitev. Božanska in narcisoidna forma, brez obraza; skelet – anatomija forme, ki kaže konec vsakega iluzionizma. Božanska, a hkrati animalična podoba – »monstrum«, ki »vzame nase« vso realnost in zgodovino svojih možnih in nemožnih podobitev. Da, kolosalno in edinstveno telo slikarstva. Nemo utopično telo podobe. Telo kot negativ telesa.

Vrtinčenje plasti kot razplastenost slike in vzgibi: vzniki in poniki črt, potez, zavojev in nanosov barve. Vzgon likovne substance v razlistanje kromatične zmesí kot izoblikovanje praprostora. Le devenir-espace, postajanje prostora: v-pro-stor, uprostoritev gub, gub čustev in duha. Čeprav je temeljni motiv preprost, v preproščini (kot vgubanost, kot guba: Einfalt – preproščina in enostavnost – v nemščini pomeni tudi vgubanost in enogubnost), v preprostosti osnovnega izraza zdaj čutimo, da vsak izsek in vsako minimalno čustvo na teh podobah lahko povzdignemo v kozmično resnico. Kromatična gostota v več ravneh, prepletanje in valovanje, ovijanje okrog struktur, pregibanje, presevanje oblik. Drsenje kot raztres(anje), razsev(anje), razgubanost prostora, utripanje sledi v likovnem ekranu: gube v duši, gube v zrcalni igri Bitja.

85

NIKA ZUPANČIČ – SURFACES, SURFACES IN AIR PRESSURE In a certain instant, Zupančič’s lines, scattered across space, come to life; an evident form-body emerges, arises into the painting, a metaphor of the body, body – allegory – of all sacred and profane, historical and prehistorical bodies; body-allegory and painting as body-icon in ecstasy. Enormous, hollow, indivisible, inverted, bonded together, undressed body of the image – exsanguinated, monochrome, as a result of the loss and suppression of all content. Hence the “indentation” – erosion of colour. It is not the figure alone that is suspended, absent, colour is also “in suspense”. The hue is subdued, making chromatic coats injected into the epidermis of the canvas akin to the monochrome painting style: the colour is the fiction of body and space; the painting does not mirror, reflect, anything, it holds neither fundament nor a realistic background. It is therefore some sort of negative relationship between the hue and the figure, which the former purposefully handicaps, dulls its artistic expression. The entire corps of the painting is equalized to the figural organism, which is transforming into a monochrome surface, into a “tableau”.

Zupančič uses colour to a mental end rather than as an expression of ardour or passion. Her “filtering” follows the (de)construction-(de)coding – of the image. Like the figure, the colour is also stratified; we sense a kind of coldness and “steresis” – “restriction” – alienation, in opposition to the emotional and explosive conception of colour. The body without shadow, but with illumination and light. There is no realistic light source; the painting is its own light per se, the light of colour and stroke and artistic reminiscence. Auto-affection, a dialog between the painting and the art of painting. Its own illumination and lighting. Divine and narcissist form, faceless; a skeleton (anatomy of form, which points to the end of any and all illusionism. A divine, yet animalic image – a “monstrum”, which “takes on” all the reality and history of its possible and impossible depictions. Yes, a colossal and singular body of painting. A mute utopian body of the image. The body as the negative of the body.

Swirling of layers, as the stratification of the painting and impulses: the emerging and disappearing of lines, strokes, bends, and colour coats. The lift force of the visual-artistic substance into defoliation of the chromatic mixture as formation of primordial space. Le devenir-espace, the becoming of space: en-spa-ce, the enspacing of folds, folds of emotions and spirit. Though the fundamental motif is simple, the simplicity (as enfolding, as fold: in German, Einfalt – simple-ness and simplicity – also means in-folding and single-fold) of the main expression now gives the sense that we can elevate each of these images’ segments and minimal emotions into cosmic truth. Chromatic density in several layers, shapes: intertwining and undulating, wrapping around structures, folding, eradiating. Gliding as the scatter(ing), radiation/(ing), folding-out of space, the pulsating of traces in the visual-artistic screen: folds in the soul, folds in the mirror play of the Being.

86

F40 (Figure quarante), 2019--2021 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 81 x 100 cm (40x) Del kompozicije | Part of the composition 87

F 40 / 31, 2021 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 81 x 100 cm 88

F 40 / 18, 2020 olje na platnu | oil on canvas 81 x 100 cm 89

Suzana Brborović (Kranj, 1988) Leta 2013 je diplomirala na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani. Med študijem je prejela dve pomembni nagradi: leta 2011 nagrado Essl Art Award CEE za mlade umetnike iz srednje in jugovzhodne Evrope ter leta 2012 študentsko Prešernovo nagrado. Podiplomski študij je nadaljevala na Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst (HGB) v Leipzigu. Leta 2019 je prejela nagrado Riharda Jakopiča za posebne projekte in dosežke v likovni umetnosti za mlajše umetnike. Njena dela so vključena v zasebne in javne likovne zbirke (Moderna galerija Ljubljana, Albertina – zbirka Essl, Bayer Kultur Leverkusen, zbirka Riko). Sodelovala je na različnih razstavah v Sloveniji in v tujini. Samostojno je razstavljala v Sloveniji in Nemčiji. Živi in dela v Leipzigu.

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana in 2013. During her studies, she received two important awards: in 2011 the Essl Art Award CEE for young artists from Central and South-Eastern Europe, and in 2012 the Prešeren Award for Students. She received her postgraduate degree at the Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst (HGB) in Leipzig. In 2019, she received the Jakopič Award for Young Artists for exceptional projects and achievements in fine arts. Her works appear in both private and public collections (Modern Gallery Ljubljana, Essl Museum Collection at the Albertina Museum, Bayer Kultur Leverkusen, Riko Collection). She participated in various exhibitions in Slovenia and abroad and held solo exhibitions in Slovenia and Germany. She lives and works in Leipzig.

Matej Čepin (Celje, 1977) Umetnik nima formalne likovne izobrazbe, izobraževal se je samostojno. Od leta 2017 ima status samozaposlenega v kulturi. Za svoje delo je prejel več nagrad in priznanj, med drugim leta 2006 II. nagrado na 4. Bienalu slik malega formata v Ljutomeru, leta 2008 veliko odkupno nagrado in leta 2009 grand prix Ex-tempora Piran. Njegova dela so vključena v likovne zbirke slovenskih galerij (Obalne galerije Piran, Galerija Murska Sobota, Galerija mesta Ptuj, Galerija sodobne umetnosti Celje, Koroška galerija likovnih umetnosti Slovenj Gradec in Galerija Ante Trstenjak Ljutomer). Sodeloval je na skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji, Avstriji, Italiji in Srbiji.

Samostojno je razstavljal v Sloveniji. Živi in dela v Celju.

The artist does not hold an official degree in fine arts; he educated himself independently. Since 2017, he has the official state’s “self-employed in culture” status. His work won several awards and recognitions, including 2nd place at the 2006 Biennial of Small Format Paintings in Ljutomer, the grand purchase prize at the 2008, and the Grand Prix at the 2009 Ex-tempore Piran. His works are featured in art collections of several Slovenian galleries (Piran Coastal Galleries, Murska Sobota Gallery, Ptuj City Gallery, Gallery of Contemporary Art Celje, Carinthian Gallery of Fine Arts in Slovenj Gradec, and Gallery Ante Trtstenjak in Ljutomer). He participated in group exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, Italy, and Serbia and held solo exhibitions in Slovenia. He lives and works in Celje.

Nina Čelhar (Postojna, 1990) Leta 2012 je diplomirala na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani ter leta 2018 magistrirala pri prof. Marjanu Gumilarju in prof. Juretu Mikužu. V študijskem letu 2013/2014 se je izpopolnjevala na Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst (HGB) v Leipzigu. Leta 2012 je prejela nagrado ljubljanske Akademije za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje za posebne dosežke, leta 2015 je v sklopu Essl Art Award CEE prejela posebno nagrado Collectors Invitation in leta 2016 so ji podelili prvo nagrado bienalne razstave Pogled 8. Njena dela so vključena v različne likovne zbirke (Albertina – zbirka Essl, zbirka Riko, Art Theorema – Luciano Benetton Collection, Miklova hiša Ribnica, Galerija Božidar Jakac Kostanjevica na Krki, Univerza v Ljubljani, AIR Collection). Sodelovala je na številnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji, Avstriji, Nemčiji, Italiji, Grčiji in na Finskem. Samostojno je razstavljala v Sloveniji, Italiji, Veliki Britaniji in na Hrvaškem. Živi in dela v Ljubljani.

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana in 2012 and, having studied with tutors Prof. Marjan Gumilar and Prof.

Jure Mikuž, received her master’s degree there in 2018. In the academic year of 2013/2014, she honed her craft at the Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst (HGB) in Leipzig. In 2012, she received the Ljubljana Academy of Fine Arts and Design’s Special Achievement Award; in 2015, she was awarded the Essl Art Award CEE special Collector’s Invitation, and won first prize at the 2016 Pogled 8 (A Look 8) biennial exhibition. Her works are part of various art collections (Albertina – Essl collection, Riko Collection, ArtTheorema – Luciano Benetton Collection, Miklova hiša Ribnica, Božidar Jakac Gallery in Kostanjevica na Krki, University of Ljubljana, AIR Collection). She took part in numerous group exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, Germany, Italy, Greece, and Finland. She held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Italy, Great Britain, and Croatia. She lives and works in Ljubljana.

90

Staš Kleindienst (1979)

Barbara Drev (Slovenj Gradec, 1986) Leta 2006 se je vpisala na Akademijo za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani, smer slikarstvo pri prof. Hermanu Gvardjančiču. V študijskem letu 2009/2010 je v programu Erasmus nadaljevala semestrski študij na Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst (HGB) v Leipzigu. Med študijem je prejela nagrado in priznanje ljubljanske Akademije za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje za posebne dosežke v slikarstvu. Leta 2014 je diplomirala iz slikarstva pod mentorstvom prof. Zmaga Lenárdiča. Sodelovala je na skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji, Avstriji, Bolgariji, Nemčiji, Srbiji, na Češkem in na Poljskem. Samostojno je razstavljala v Sloveniji. Med letoma 2014 in 2017 je imela status samozaposlene v kulturi, zaposlena je v Muzeju Velenje. Živi in dela v Topolšici.

She enrolled at the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana’s Painting Programme in 2006 to study with Prof. Herman Gvardjančič.

In the academic year of 2009/2010, she studied at the Hochschule für Grafik und Buchkunst (HGB) as part of the Erasmus exchange programme. During her studies, she received the Academy of Fine Arts and Designin Ljubljana’s special achievement award and recognition for significant accomplishments in painting. In 2014, she graduated in painting under the tutorship of Prof. Zmago Lenárdič. She participated in group exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Serbia, the Czech Republic, and Poland. She held solo exhibitions in Slovenia. Between 2014 and 2017, she had the state’s official status of self-employed in culture. She is now employed at the Velenje Museum and lives and works in Topolšica.

91

Leta 2007 je diplomiral ter leta 2009 magistriral na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani. Prejel je študentsko Prešernovo nagrado. V letih 2012 in 2014 se je udeležil umetniških rezidenc Residency Unlimited in ISCP v New Yorku. Leta 2014 je prejel nagrado skupine OHO. Leta 2019 mu je Univerza v Ljubljani podelila Priznanje pomembnih umetniških del. Med drugim je bil leta 2018 kurator študentske razstave 12 razlogov za slikanje v galeriji ŠKUC in leta 2019 razstave Transform:action v +MSUM v Ljubljani. Njegova dela so vključena v zasebne in javne likovne zbirke. V zadnjih letih je sodeloval na različnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji. Samostojno je razstavljal v Sloveniji, Italiji in ZDA. Živi in dela v Vipavi.

Graduated in 2007 and received his master’s degree in 2009 from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana. He won the Prešeren Award for Students. In 2012 and 2014, he took part in the Residency Unlimited and ISCP artist residences in New York. In 2014, he won the OHO Group Award. In 2019, he receivedthe University of Ljubljana’s Recognition of Important Works of Art. Among other exhibitions, he curated the 12 Reasons to Paint student exhibition at ŠKUC gallery in 2018, and the Transform:action exhibition at +MSUM in Ljubljana in 2019. His works are featured in private and public art collections. In recent years, he took part in various group exhibitions. He held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Italy, and the USA. He lives and works in Vipava.

Marko Jakše (Ljubljana, 1959) Leta 1987 je diplomiral na Akademiji za likovno umetnost v Ljubljani. Leta 1992 je prejel nagrado Zlata ptica, leta 2000 mednarodno nagrado Kunstraum Mitteleuropa na Dunaju in leta 2015 nagrado Prešernovega sklada. Sodeloval je na številnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji, Avstriji, Italiji, Srbiji, na Hrvaškem, Madžarskem in na Irskem. Samostojno je razstavljal v Sloveniji, Franciji, Avstraliji, na Hrvaškem in na Nizozemskem. Živi in dela kot svobodni umetnik v zaselku Mohorje.

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana in 1987. In 1992, he received the Golden Bird Award [Zlata ptica], in 2000 the international award at the Kunstraum Mitteleuropa exhibition in Vienna, and in 2015 the Prešern Fund Award. He participated in numerous group exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, Italy, Serbia, Croatia, Hungary, and Ireland. He held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, France, Australia, Croatia, and the Netherlands. He lives and works as a freelance artist in the hamlet of Mohorje.

Ira Marušič (Koper, 1989)

Robert Lozar (Novo mesto, 1967) Leta 1993 je diplomiral na Akademiji za likovno umetnost v Ljubljani pri profesorici Metki Krašovec. Med študijem je leta 1992 prejel študentsko Prešernovo nagrado. Od leta 1995 do leta 2000 je bil glavni urednik revije Likovne besede. Leta 2006 je prejel delovno štipendijo Ministrstva za kulturo RS. Od leta 2015 je podpredsednik Umetniškega sveta ZDSLU v Ljubljani, med letoma 2016 in 2019 je bil član ekspertne komisije za vizualne umetnosti na Ministrstvu za kulturo ter leta 2020 član strokovne komisije za likovne in novomedijske umetnosti za podelitev Prešernovih nagrad v letu 2021. Sodeloval je na različnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji. Samostojno je razstavljal v Sloveniji, na Hrvaškem in v ZDA. Od leta 1994 ima status samozaposlenega v kulturi. Živi in dela na Butoraju v Beli krajini.

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana in 1993 under Professor Metka Krašovec. In 1992, during his studies, he received the Prešeren Award for Students. From 1995 to 2000, he was editor in chief of the Likovne besede [Art Words] magazine. He received the Slovenian Ministry of Culture’s work grant in 2006. Since 2015, he has been vice president of the Arts Council at the Slovenian Association of Fine Arts Societies. He was a member of the expert commission for visual arts at the Ministry of Culture between 2016 and 2019, and a member of the 2020 fine arts and new media expert selection committee for Prešeren Awards for 2021. He participated in various group exhibitions in Slovenia and held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Croatia, and the USA. Since 1994, he holds the official Slovenian Ministry of Culture’s “self-employed in culture” status. He lives and works in Butoraj in the Slovenian Bela krajina region.

Leta 2012 je diplomirala na Accademii di Belle Arti v Benetkah pri profesorjih Carlu di Racu in Eleni Ribero. Podiplomski študij je nadaljevala v Benetkah in leta 2015 magistrirala iz slikarstva pri profesorjih Carlu di Racu in Aldu Grazziju. Njena dela so vključena v različne likovne zbirke (Obalne galerije Piran, Mestna galerija Nova Gorica, Imago Mundi − Luciano Benetton Collection).

Sodelovala je na skupinskih razstavah in samostojno razstavljala v Sloveniji, Italiji in na Hrvaškem. Živi in ustvarja v Kopru.

Graduated in 2012 from the Accademia di Belle Arti under Professor Carlo di Raco and Elena Ribero in Venice, where she also did her postgraduate degree, under the tutorship of professors Carlo di Raco and Aldo Grazzi, and received her master’s in painting in 2015. Her works are featured in a variety of art collections (Piran Coastal Galleries, City Gallery of Nova Gorica, Imago Mundi − Luciano Benetton Collection).

She participated in group exhibitions and held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Italy, and Croatia. She lives and creates in Koper.

Katja Pál (Murska Sobota, 1979) Leta 2005 je diplomirala na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani pri prof. Gustavu Gnamušu. Leta 2003 je študirala v okviru projekta Socrates/Erasmus na National College of Art and Design (NCAD) v Dublinu. Na ljubljanski akademiji je leta 2010 končala magistrski študij pri prof. Lojzetu Logarju. Leta 2009 se je udeležila Residence Instinct v Singapurju. Razstavljala je v Sloveniji, na Madžarskem in v Singapurju.

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana in 2005 under the tutorship of Prof. Gustav Gnamuš. In 2003, she studied at the National College of Art and Design (NCAD) in Dublin as part of the Socrates/Erasmus programme. In 2010, she finished her master’s studies under the tutorship of Prof. Lojze Logar. In 2009, she took part in the Instinct Residence in Singapore. Her works were exhibited in Slovenia, Hungary, and Singapore.

92

Miha Štrukelj (Ljubljana, 1973)

Maruša Šuštar (Kranj, 1977)

Diplomiral je na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani. Leta 2001 je končal magisterij, med katerim je opravil izmenjalni program na IUP – Indiana University of PA v ZDA. Prejel je več nagrad, med drugim štipendijo Pollock-Krasner Foundation Grant 2008/2009 iz New Yorka, Henkel Drawing Award 2008 z Dunaja in štipendijo sklada Trust for Mutual Understanding Grant iz New Yorka leta 2014. Od leta 2007 se redno udeležuje mednarodnih programov umetniških rezidenc. Njegova dela so vključena v številne nacionalne in mednarodne likovne zbirke (Moderna galerija Ljubljana, Mestni muzej Ljubljana, Mestna galerija Nova Gorica, zbirka NLB, slovensko-švicarska zbirka LAH Contemporary, zbirka Riko, zbirka Evropske centralne banke ECB v Frankfurtu, zbirka Ernst Hilger, Siemens, Adrian Riklin fundacija in Uni Credit Bank na Dunaju, Société Générale v Parizu). Njegovo delo je predstavljeno v knjigi Vitamin P - New Perspectives in Painting založbe Phaidon. Leta 2009 je zastopal Slovenijo na 53. Beneškem bienalu.

Sodeloval je na številnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji in v tujini.

Samostojno je razstavljal v Sloveniji, Avstriji, Italiji, Franciji, Nemčiji, Tajvanu, ZDA in Novi Zelandiji. Živi in ustvarja v Ljubljani.

Leta 2006 je diplomirala na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani pri prof. Zmagu Jeraju. Leta 2016 je končala podiplomski študij slikarstva pri prof. Gustavu Gnamušu. Leta 2009 je prejela nagrado Essl Art Award CEE – posebno povabilo Vienna Insurance Group in leta 2014 prvo nagrado ART MUSE za slikarsko delo. Sodelovala je na različnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji in v tujini. Samostojno je razstavljala v Sloveniji, Avstriji in na Hrvaškem. Kot svobodna ustvarjalka živi in ustvarja v Srednji vasi v Bohinju.

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana.

In the course of his master’s studies, which he concluded in 2001, he took part in an exchange programme with the Indiana University of PA in the USA. He won several awards including the Pollock-Krasner Foundation Grant (New York) in 2008/2009, the Henkel Drawing Award (Vienna) in 2008, and the Trust for Mutual Understanding Grant (New York) in 2014. Since 2007, he has regularly participated in international artist residence programmes. His works are featured in numerous national and international art collections (Modern Gallery Ljubljana, City Museum of Ljubljana, City Gallery of Nova Gorica, NLB’s collection, the Swiss-Slovenian LAH Contemporary art collection, the Riko collection, the European Central Bank Art Collection in Frankfurt, the Ernst Hilger collection, Siemens, the Adrian Riklin Foundation and Uni Credit Bank in Vienna, Société Générale in Paris). His work is also presented in: Vitamin P – New Perspectives in Painting, a book published by Phaidon Press. In 2009, he represented Slovenia at the 53rd Venice Biennale. He participated in numerous group exhibitions in Slovenia and abroad. He held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, Italy, France, Germany, Taiwan, the USA, and New Zealand.

He lives and creates in Ljubljana.

93

Graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana in 2006 under Prof. Zmago Jeraj. In 2016, she concluded her postgraduate degree under Prof. Gustav Gnamuš. In 2009, she received the Essl Art Award CEE along with a special invitation from the Vienna Insurance group, and in 2014, won first place at the Art Muse contestin painting. She participated in various group exhibitions in Slovenia and abroad. She held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, and Croatia. She lives and works as an independent creative in Srednja vas v Bohinju.

Nika Zupančič (Ljubljana, 1978) Diplomirala je iz slikarstva in magistrirala iz grafike na Akademiji za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje v Ljubljani. Dvakrat je prejela študentsko Prešernovo nagrado. Študijsko se je izpopolnjevala v Amsterdamu (historične slikarske tehnike) in leta 2016 kot štipendistka Francoskega inštituta na Académie de la Grande Chaumière v Parizu. Njena dela so vključena v različne likovne zbirke (Albertina – zbirka Essl, Muzej sodobne umetnosti Arter v Istanbulu, zbirka Riko). Sodelovala je na skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji, Avstriji, Franciji, Belgiji, na Madžarskem in na Nizozemskem. Samostojno je razstavljala v Sloveniji, Avstriji in Franciji. Od leta 2018 se redno udeležuje umetniške rezidence Artist-in-residence, Leipziger´s Baumwollspinnerei v Leipzigu.

Graduated in painting and received her master’s degree in graphic art at the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana. She is a two-time recipient of the Prešeren Award for Students. She gained further education in Amsterdam (historical painting techniques), and studied at the Académie de la Grande Chaumière in Paris on a full scholarship in 2016. Her works appear in various art collections (Albertina–Essl Collection, Arter Museum of modern Art in Istanbul, Riko Collection). She took part in group exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria, France, Belgium, Hungary, and the Netherlands. She held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Austria and France. Since 2018, she has been a regular participant in the Leipziger´s Baumwollspinnerei Artist-in-Residence programme in Leipzig.

Joni Zakonjšek (Koper, 1974) Po gimnaziji je preživela dve leti v Londonu in na Whitechapel Art School končala študij Foundation Course of Art. Leta 2003 je diplomirala na Akademiji za likovno umetnost v Ljubljani pri profesorjih Emeriku Bernardu in Marku Uršiču. Istega leta je prejela nagrado ljubljanske Akademije za likovno umetnost za posebne umetniške dosežke, leta 2004 grand prix na Ex-temporu Piran in malo plaketo Občine Piran, leta 2007 nagrado za najboljše delo v tehniki akvarela na Ex-temporu Piran in leta 2019 delovno štipendijo Ministrstva za kulturo RS. Sodelovala je na različnih skupinskih razstavah v Sloveniji in v tujini. Samostojno je razstavljala v Sloveniji, Italiji in na Hrvaškem. Od leta 2004 je samostojna likovna ustvarjalka. Po desetletju bivanja nad dolino Dragonje in v drugih primorskih vaseh zdaj živi v Beli krajini.

After secondary school, she spent two years in London, where she finished the Foundation Course at the Art at the Whitechapel Gallery.

In 2003, she graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts and Design in Ljubljana under the tutorship of professors Emerik Bernard and Marko Uršič. In that same year, she received the Academy of Fine Arts and Design’s Special Achievement Award, followed in 2004 by the Grand Prix at the Ex-tempore Piran and a Small Plaque of the Municipality of Piran; in 2007 she won the best watercolour award at Ex-tempore Piran, and, in 2019, the Slovenian Ministry of Culture’s Work Grant. She participated in various group exhibitions in Slovenia and abroad. She held solo exhibitions in Slovenia, Italy, and Croatia. She has been an independent artist since 2004. After a decade of living above the Dragonja valley and in other villages of the Primorska region, she now resides in Bela krajina.

94

CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana 75(497.4)”20”(083.824) SLIKARSTVO zdaj! = The painting now! : Mestna galerija Nova Gorica, 7.-31. 5. 2021, Galerija Monfort Portorož - Obalne galerije Piran, 24. 6.-29. 8. 2021 / [avtor besedil Andrej Medved ; biografije umetnikov Tatjana Sirk ; urednici kataloga Pavla Jarc, Tatjana Sirk ; prevod Jaka Jarc ; fotografije Arne Brejc, Ljubo Radovac, fotoarhiv avtorjev]. - Nova Gorica : Kulturni dom, 2021 ISBN 978-961-6783-29-3 COBISS.SI-ID 60909571

THE PAINTING NOW! Slovenia 21 SLIKARSTVO ZDAJ! Slovenija 21 Mestna galerija Nova Gorica, 7.–28. 5. 2021 Galerija Monfort Portorož – Obalne galerije Piran, 24. 6.–29. 8. 2021 Kurator | Curator: Andrej Medved Katalog izdal | Catalogue issued by: Kulturni dom Nova Gorica, zanj Pavla Jarc Avtor besedil | Texts written by: Andrej Medved Biografije umetnikov | Biographies of the artists: Tatjana Sirk, Obalne galerije Piran Urednici kataloga | Editors: Pavla Jarc, Tatjana Sirk Lektoriranje besedil | Slovene language revision: Ana Kodelja, Alenka Juvan Prevod | English translation: Jaka Jarc Fotografije | Photographs: Arne Brejc, Ljubo Radovac, fotoarhiv avtorjev Grafično oblikovanje in prelom | Catalogue design and DTP: Duška Đukič, Obalne galerije Piran Tisk | Print: Tiskarna Present d. o. o.

Naklada | Nr. of copies: 400 Nova Gorica, maj | May 2021 Razstavni projekt je nastal v sodelovanju med Mestno galerijo Nova Gorica in Obalnimi galerijami Piran.

The exhibition project is the product of collaboration between the Nova Gorica City Art Gallery and the Piran Coastal Galleries.

Izid kataloga sta finančno omogočili | The catalogue has been financially supported by:

Posebna zahvala Vidi Medved Udović za svetovanje pri izboru slik.

Special thanks goes to Vida Medved Udovič, for her counsel about the selection of paintings.

12 A J I N E V O L S