|
|
 Rebelling in the wisdom of Lewitt* Jānis Borgs, Art Critic An insight into Sol LeWitt’s ‘Paragraphs on Conceptual Art’ and ‘Sentences on Conceptual Art’ | |
| Sol LeWitt, one of the founders and great theoreticians of conceptualism – and also minimalism – announced in the 10th “commandment” of his ‘Sentences on Conceptual Art’: “Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical.” We know of Solomon, who eventually became Sol, as a purely American artist, whose Jewish parents immigrated to the New World from Russia, and also as a late 20th century grand master of the world avantgarde. Nevertheless, disregarding the doubts expressed by Sol LeWitt, this time the transformation into the physical which has materialized in the brochure published by kim? has turned out to be extremely beneficial. It is exactly the type of product of enlightenment that a contemporary art centre should be releasing to the public. An undertaking truly worthy of missionaries. Because for a majority of the public who consider themselves to be art lovers, it is specifically conceptualism that might be the hardest “to swallow”. Its “diffusiveness”, the possib¬ility of creative automatism, the nonmateriality already mentioned, and, often, the complete rejection of any kind of aestheticism leads many people into deep confusion – but where is the beauty then? Through our cultural experience, the “unshakable” conviction and realization that art can only be expressed through aesthetics has been deeply ingrained in the community’s consciousness. The wise writer of classics Fyodor Dostoevsky even believed that beauty would save the world. Although, observing how people despise it with the greatest fervour in their greed and obscurantism, it must be concluded that only some properly organized concept could be more of assistance here. And it is doubtful if it would only come from the lodes of art... Carefully reading Sol LeWitt’s paragraphs and statements, any open mind can gain many answers to more than just one uncertainty regarding questions of contemporary art. LeWitt’s texts, through very clear formulations, encourage us to rethink once again our only seemingly self-evident and traditional assumptions about art. Sol LeWitt reminds us about the relativity oscillating in this area in his 18th Statement, in that “one usually understands the art of the past by ap¬plying the convention of the present, thus misunderstanding the art of the past”. We could, of course, argue here too. Conceptualists quite strictly cut themselves off from “non-conceptual” art, bringing the dominance of the “idea” to the fore: “The artist’s will is sec¬ondary to the process he initiates from idea to completion. His wilfulness may only be ego.” (7th Statement). Quite logically it should be accepted that art is only a form of thinking, which at the outset is solely intangible (like a project for something in the mind). All of the other visual expressions which we usually perceive as art are only the physical fulfilment of this thinking “project”, which could just as well not take place at all. The fact of art could just as easily remain in the realm of the non-material, without becoming an act of art, an object. However, being aware that initially a “conceptual project” is necessary for even such an elementary biologically motivated activity as “going for a piss”, it should be acknow¬ledged that the “concept” is automatically also at the basis of any kind of artistic act. Which artefact is not rooted in an idea? Maybe only the monkeys that are mentioned in Sol LeWitt’s introduction to Paragraphs. Consequently, some conceptualism guidelines could even prove to be dubious, if we still don’t allow in all of these theories some possibility of conditionality, a change of emphasis from the primary to the secondary, in this case heightening the priority of the concept and idea or “conception” as a working method. Paradoxically, perhaps, as opposed to the countless conceptualists who operate at the level of a telephone book “idea”, the apostle of this direction, Sol LeWitt, has proved to be an unexpectedly visual and monumental artist. And on top of this – nearly all of his art is imbued with a fascinating aestheticism. In the 1980s, the author of this article was lucky enough to experience a comprehensive Sol LeWitt solo exhib¬ition at the Kunsthalle Basel, which remained in his memory as one of the greatest artistic experiences in his life, and one which will be taken to the grave. Through his art, Sol LeWitt has proven the vitality of the theory and its ability to transform into physical excellence, at the basis of which, one would think, is the totally indisputable conceptual “granite” of geometry. Researchers of LeWitt’s work also rightly find here Russian sources of inspiration and parallels. Firstly, the eminent Kazimir Malevich is mentioned, then the Russian Constructivists as well, whose cultivated geo¬metricism shook the world. It could be said that Sol LeWitt has grown up on and from the Black Square – the 20th century art super-concept. And his “impact” on today’s culture cannot be overestimated either, if, for example, we transport LeWitt’s revelations about minimalism to contemporary architecture and design. Sol LeWitt’s ‘Paragraphs on Conceptual Art’ and ‘Sentences on Conceptual Art’ also uncover for us some cornerstones of post-modernism, which are vital to the whole construction of this culture and reveal possible directions for the development of artistic thought. Thanks to this translation by and comments from philosopher Jānis Taurens, LeWitt’s teachings are now also available in Latvian. /Translator into English: Uldis Brūns/ * Priest, servant of the temple in Judaism. | |
| go back | |
