|
|
| Industrial ache Santa Mičule, art critic Review of Andris Eglītis’ Dirty Modernism exhibition at the Alma Gallery 06.05.–06.06.2014. | |
| By coincidence and via mutually unconnected circumstances, two exhibitions that are connected thematically with renovation work were opened almost simultaneously in riga at the beginning of may: māra brašmane’s photographic exhibition a Time Of Change at the arsenāls exhibition hall’s creative workshop and andris eglītis’ Dirty Modernism at the alma gallery. brašmane’s exhibition offered viewers an excursion to the latvian national museum of art – a place that’s inaccessible to the majority of the public during the reconstruction period – and documented the odd time before and after the changes. eglītis’ ‘renovation’ was of a more domestic nature, not as exclusive, but it also brought up the intangibility and feeling of the unstoppability of time – a renovation symbolises an unusual interval, which inescapably disrupts the usual scheme of things in order to create something. Eglītis has turned the recent trend of holding art exhibitions in abandoned, non-functioning buildings on its head. he has brought rural soil and mud into previous exhibition halls, whereas this time it’s renovation dust and abandoned junk that’s found its home on the red and white walls of the alma gallery. this process, however, can only be observed from the side lines; eglītis has exchanged the characteristic sensual corporeity of his works for intellectual schemes and constructions, which are locked (one could even say neatly packaged) into the face of a painting. in the paintings, desertion and the melancholy groundedness of daily life reign, through trivial items conjuring up an existential ache concerning the loss of the material world, the transience of everything that exists. the message conforms very precisely to the challenges of the classical still life genre, to which the author of the work also alludes, calling the created interior mis-en-scenes industrial still lifes. | |
 View from Andris Eglītis Dirty Modernism exhibition. 2014 Photo: Ansis Starks Publicity photo Courtesy of the artist | |
| Eglītis is justifiably considered to be the most significant representative of the latvian neo-realist trend, transforming the codes of traditional painting into the atmosphere of our era, dampening sentimental emotionality in a slightly reserved, distanced and laconic manner. the ‘traditional’ side of his art is often taken to extremes, where conventional techniques appear in a new light. for example, the fixing of concentration on the surrounding environment, characteristic of realism, in eglītis’ creative work becomes a documentation of personal space, and the colour scheme idea of ‘earthy tones’ is developed into the literal use of geological materials in the painting process. at the same time, the delicate boundary of conceptual painting, according to which the concept for the work dominates the execution, isn’t breached. the first things that we notice in his works are the tonal painting principles, which are taken to the level of virtuosity. eglītis’ realism is meditative ‘in content’ and exquisitely natural ‘in form’. it captivates with its honesty and self-contained vitality. The Dirty Modernism exhibition was created according to the same principle that can be recalled from eglītis’ cult exhibitions, for example, The Order of Things (2009) or earth Works (2011): the painting is supplemented by sculptural forms, mutually continuing what’s expressed by each medium and merging them into a single holistic perspective. body is imparted to what’s painted, whereas the spatial continues in the images. it’s possible to interpret this concept as the result of a very intensive interest in realism, the desire to reach new boundaries within it – realism at a superior level, which isn’t as simple as hyperrealism. a few items from the painted environment that contrasted and obviously didn’t fit in at an art gallery were exhibited at the exhibition. however, this dirtiness did not regenerate; it did not become real, and eglītis’ formula did not work out completely this time. The ‘natural’ renovated environment pictured in the paintings was supplemented by arrangements of geometrical objects that were found in the same spaces and transformed into original installations. the artist interferes in the observed environment, introducing private associations into it. this forces us to rhetorically question whether reality, as an objective, outside-world category independent of us, has become rather boring to eglītis? but the results of its transformation weren’t completely convincing and did not provide an explanation about the motivation for such an artistic gesture through the exhibited works. modernism as a modelling system for a utopian new world and renovation as the most trivial form of improving the world was the only delicate connection that could be associatively developed in trying to understand why specifically abstraction, and in particular an abandoned space, were used. Reminiscences about constructivism seem to be a stilted fabrication that has aggressively intruded into foreign territory. it’s possible that this is simultaneously the artist’s self-irony and provocation, creating conflict in the mind of the viewer between the desired (concepts about eglītis’ painting) and the existing. the paintings become a way of documenting a constructive installation, at the same time attempting to capture a deeper atmosphere of time and space and its unusual nature. Dirty Modernism became a formal experiment in which new ways of subjectifying the reality portrayed were sought, but the result encompassed only the methods of technical composition. with time, one’s view got used to the strange installations visible in the paintings and focussed on the secondary – delicate nuances of colour, accurately grasping details, through which the mood of the space was revealed. all of this created a slightly naïve joy about how masterfully, and yet surprisingly, impulses from reality and the signs of time could possibly be transferred into the language of painting. these signs and real abstractions are the stamps of colour, the dents, the remains of old items left on the wall, wallpaper designs and piles of rubbish that create a recognisable image of a space for anyone at the sensory level. the modernism added to this background of romanticised generalisation seemed a superfluous diverter of attention from the vanitas moods mentioned at the beginning of this article, which directly embodied the themes of the renovation process and superfluous items so accurately. the iconography of oblivion allowed one to perceive the exhibition as a beautiful but sad story about people’s relationships with the material world and the imperceptible flow of time, which continues between us and objects every day. Eglītis’ art is focused on harmony and a meditative state of peace. it is a kind of realism that copies nature, not as images and objects, but the principle of ingenuousness itself. the kind of language of form dominating his painting is the kind we are used to, for example, when observing natural scenery and enjoying it as self-evident, absolute beauty. the addition of installations to painted objects in eglītis’ exhibitions has allowed the entry of a power that can be compared with the forces of nature – something massive and rustically vital in the best senses of these words. this powerful spontaneity in Dirty Modernism decreased to the level of formal means of expres sion, creating visually interesting and neat artistic effects, but without reaching the scope viewers had enjoyed in previous exhibitions. up till now, eglītis’ exhibitions took place in larger spaces, which in the sense of their scale were more suited to his artistic power. looking at the photo report from his series of works Possible Place,1 which was exhibited in belgium, i confirmed that everything is in order with his artistic scope; one can just hope that it will also have the opportunity to be realised in the more modest art spaces of latvia. Post scriptum In a recent discussion with art historian Kristīne Ogle, i asked for her view on the reasons why there is restraint in latvian art: it doesn’t usually contain loud manifestos, provocations or experiments. radical denials or avant-garde destructive motifs are lacking in classical modernist art as well. one of the dominating explanations for this phenomenon is entirely psychological, namely, the reserved mentality of latvians determines their artistic moderation. it’s possible to come across this presumption not just in informal discussions but also in art history publications, where the desire of the latvian artist to “remain connected with the earth, something real, substantial” is described as typical. ogle pointed out an interesting paradox – the need for something material, real and substantial separates our attempts to modernise schools from the attempts of others; for example, hard work in a rural environment (instead of cafés, boulevards and flowering gardens) is portrayed in latvia’s realistically cultivated impressionism. but outside the homeland, our artists tend to unexpectedly loosen up. having travelled to paris, janis rozentāls, for example, suddenly began to paint cafés, and in italy he began to paint parks. ‘rustic heaviness’ can no longer be sensed in these works. these psycho-geographical paradoxes come to mind when considering Dirty Modernism and the significance of exhibitions in eglītis’ creative journey. up till now, the artist has maintained quite a balanced proportion between maintaining his style and the ability to surprise viewers with something new at every subsequent exhibition. our modern world differs from the impressionist period in its far greater opportunities for travel. therefore, impressions from foreign countries and contact/ experience with other cultural environments no longer leaves such an obvious impression and differences. at the moment, we can only guess whether eglītis’ studies in belgium, at the higher institute for fine arts HISK at ghent, are to blame for his movement away from the archetypes of latvian painting and where these changes, independently of their origin, will lead in the long term. Translator into English: Uldis Brūns 1 accessible on andris eglītis’ home page: www.aeglitis.lv/. | |
| go back | |
