FROM BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN INTO THE
METROPOLITAN
Neo Rauch (° 1960) grew up in the former DDR. After accomplishing his
three-year military service, he studied under Arno Rink and Bernhard Heisig
at the Leipzig academy, where he became assistant after the fall of the
Iron Curtain in
1989. In 1993, he starts his career as a painter in the gallery Eigen+Art in Leipzig,
to arrive in the Metropolitan in New York in 2007 - a blitz ascent that
can only be explained by the renewed interest in painting in the
nineties, at least in the official art world, where painting had been
declared dead for the umpteenth time, although it was alive and kicking
all the time, especially in the DDR.
We already answered some critical questions about two other surfers on this
wave:
Luc Tuymans and
Michael
Borremans. What should be our stance on Neo Rauch?
NARRATIVE?
Just like with Luc Tuymans, not only the 'return to
painting' was welcomed here, but above all the return of the narrative,
especially the political narrative. Whereas Luc Tuymans seduced many a
progressive heart with paintings that - al least in the comments -
seemed to handle themes like the holocaust and Imperialism, the work
of a painter 'who
came from the cold' seems to tackle other popular topics, especially
that of
'really existing socialism'.
As a matter of fact, the many people at work cannot fail to catch the
eye, although it is often outdated activities like handling a pickaxe,
forging in a smithy, or rather peripheral activities like vacuum
cleaning, spraying insecticides, fighting fires, sweeping streets, yes
even emptying latrines (Höhe 2004) or controlling borders. Sometimes the
workers are replaced with machines: cranes ('Fang' 1998), silos ('Lieferung'
2002), or working places, often in desolate industrial landscapes ('Das Neue' 2003).
But, whether they are at work in outdated or peripheral branches, the
workers do not look exploited, but rather alienated.
Other figures are engaged in political activities: meetings ('Vortäger'
2006, 'Ordnungshüter' with a booklet above and a stick below the table),
demonstrations ('Demos' 2004), celebrations (Jacobins waving Phrygian
caps in 'Neue Rollen', 2005) and commemorations. More violent
forms of political activity are represented with - although merely
marching - soldiers ('Schmerz' 2004, 'Mammut' 2004), executions with the
guillotine ('Kommen wir zum Nächtsen', 2004), but above all with -
equally not actually used - weapons, reaching from mythical ancestors
like sticks, swords, spears and armour (Die Lage,
2006), over industrial items like a bomb (Vorort, 2010), a tank
('Der Vortäger', 2006), a gun ('Korinthische Ordnung, 2003 and 'Der Vorhang' 2005),
and missiles, to the do-it-yourself-version of suicide bombers with bomb
girdles ('Demos', 2004 and 'Ordndungshüter',
2008).
Even more important is the depiction of apolitical violence between
individuals. A transitional stage is violence that is political, but
performed in an individual interaction: people abducted in shackles (Verrat 2003, Hinter dem
Schifgürtel), a man roped up on a chair (Konspiration
2004), two women reprimanding a kneeled man (Vorhang, 2005), a woman
whipping a crucified man (Ordnungshüter 2008). But in other, really
private situations sadomasochism blooms unencumbered, like in the
drawings of Michael Borremans:
a man riding another man on hands and knees (Der Ritt, 2007,
Revo 2010), a naked man who is whipped, a woman piercing her hand with a
knife (Anima 1995), a woman holding a man with a sefiroth on his back
with a leach (Das alte Lied, 2006). And, next to the mistreatment of men,
there is also that of animals, withhybrids as an
intermediary stage: hunting and maltreating beetles (Nest 2012).
But people are not always doing something on these 'history paintings'.
Perhaps more often they are mere passive onlookers: they just come
along (Vorführung 2006), gesticulate at somebody (Schöpfer 2002), have a
look (Haus des Lehrers 2003,
Stickerin 2008, Revo 2010), or smoke a cigarette (Der Nächste Zug 2007).
Still other figures do not even look, but withdraw in themselves (exemplary
in his self-portrait, from which a detail below the heading to this
text), or seem to be sleepwalking or falling asleep ('Diktat'2004, 'Chord' 2011
and 'Ware' 2011). In still other cases, finally, the figures have fallen
asleep or are dead: no longer able to act, they are sometimes
brought into position as if it were marionettes (Interview 2006, Bon Si
2006, Crooning I 2008, Fluchtversuch 2008).
Even though these actions are perfectly understandable in themselves, we
nevertheless cannot read them as parts of some coherent 'history''.
Either the actor does not fit to the action, as when hunters are
wielding golf sticks instead of shotguns (Hatz 2002), or when an 18th
century soldier handles a drill ('Scheune', 2003). Or the action has no
object, as when firemen are handling fire hoses where no fire is to be
seen ('Die Fuge', 2007), or when two people are gaping into a empty corner in
the room ('Paranoia', 2007). Or
the instruments of the action are undetermined ('Pressebild',
2010). Or the action has no apparent use, as when people are holding a
kind of lianas ('Übergang', 2003) or when a woman is dumping some fluid
over a fence ('Ausschüttung',
2009). Or the action is bluntly impossible, as when inn 'Die Flamme'
someone is walking with planks tightened to his legs in a way that makes
walking impossible altogether. But, above all, there is no relation between what the actors are doing. What kind of story to
construct by
'Die Fuge' (2007): four firemen on the foreground, behind them a
man reading a book on a table, two women and a man floating above
them, and a man who emerges from the earth on their right, all this
against the background of what could be hill of mining waste?
Although its seems, hence, as if Neo Rauch has something to tell us
about the
DDR, the French Revolution, yes even about painting, he only leaves us with mere disparate narrative elements, and it is not at all clear
what these elements are supposed to convey.
ALLEGORICAL?
The suspicion arises that these narrative elements are not to be read
literally, but allegorically - that Neo Rauch rather seeks to create
an allegory than to tell a story, That suspicion is reinforced in that,
as we shall amply demonstrate below, many motifs recur in different
paintings, which suggests that they are part of a kind of symbolic
lexicon. That suspicion is further reinforced when also the title
suggests a symbolic reading, as when in 'Krönung I' the substitution of
a crown by a head suggests that, after the French Revolution, the bourgeois has
become a king. Only seldom does the title thus invite to an allegorical
reading, but that single example incites us to read otherwise
incomprehensible representations as elements of an allegory, as when in 'Bon Si' (2006) what
in a first phase is an insect, unfolds in a second phase into an
man-insect, that in a third phase stands up, whereas elsewher on the
painting moths are attracted to the light of a lantern.
This reading suggests
that the many man-animal hybrids may refer to the animal -
an then mostly evil - nature of man. And an allegorical lecture equally
imposes itself for the patients in their bed ('Aufstand', 2004, 'Puls', 2005),
for the volcano in 'Das alte Lied' (2006), for the metal detector with
which the painter scans the ('telluric'?) earth in 'Sucher' (1997),
for the recurring theme of the windmill or the mushroom, and what have
you.
But an allegorical lecture does not provide us the key to an adequate
understanding of these images either. To begin with, it is not at all
clear what the meaning of the diverse symbols is. To be sure, many of
them are more or less universal: the guillotine, the sefiroth,
the mandragora on 'Konspiration' (2004) and 'Kûhlraum' (2002), or the
windmills on 'Neue
Rollen' (2005) and 'Reaktionäre Situation' (2003) which, although they
are rather 'nordic', cannot fail to remind of Don Quichotte. Somewhat less universal are symbols
like the ears of the donkey which, in Germany, refer to stupidity, or
the tail coat like on Prozession (2004)
for capitalists, or bourgeois or..... But other symbols are bluntly
idiosyncratic, not otherwise than, Beuys' fat, felt and copper: think of
the crossed sticks, swordfish, rhinos, falcons and owls, not to mention
the diverse hybrid beings. We could try to find the meaning through an
'intertextual' investigation of all the paintings with the same motif.
But this will be of no avail. To begin with, it appears that the motifs
are undergoing a continuous metamorphosis. Just take the motif of the
cross. A painting like 'Tal' (1999) contains three versions of it: the
crossed girders of the trough, the wings of the mill, and the sticks of the
fighters. But we recognise the motif also in the crossed strips on the
uniforms of soldiers (Scheune (2003), the crossed planks on 'Die Flamme'
(2007), the crossed legs in 'Die Afunahme' (2008) or just the letter X (Nexus, 2006).
On other paintings, the constituting lines do not cross in the middle,
but join each other at the ends, like in the tripod of the camera in 'Lichtspiele' (1997),
the legs of the easel
('Parabel', 2008), the ladder (equally on 'Parabel', 2008), or the
ramification on 'Front' (1998) and on 'Fundgrube' ( 2011). Or they are
concatenated in a zigzag or the up-and-down of the gabble roofs, or added individually like the golf sticks on 'Hatz'" (2002) or
the stick in 'Seewind', (2009). In addition, the metamorphosed motifs
may occur in ever changing contexts where they acquire new meanings.
Thus, by both being measured with a stick, the 'Scheisse'
on 'Höhe' (2004) is brought into relation with the dog-men on ''Platz' (2000).
But, above all, also the symbolic lecture does not result in a coherent
whole.
Just like literal reading did not yield a story, but rather isolated
narrative elements, allegorical reading does not provide a closed allegory, but
rather an
accumulation of disparate symbols.
VON PUNKT, ZU LINIE, ZU FLÄCHE, ZU WÜRFEL, ZU ORGANISMUS....:
PLAY?
The relentless metamorphosis of motifs raises, in its turn, the
suspicion that the choice of the representations is not determined by a
narrative, nor by an allegorical, but by a combinatory logic: it seems as
if Neo Rauch fills his paintings with figurative elements that are
derived from each other through a continuous transformation.
For, what we described above was only the beginning of the metamorphosis
of the motif of the cross. Variations on ever new aspects of this motif
are the starting point of ever new metamorphoses. Through bending
one of the lines of the cross, we get a pickaxe, like onWeiche (1999),
a crossbow like on 'Jagdzimmer' (2007), a wheel with spikes like on 'Fluchtversuch' (2008), or
the chandelier in 'Das Kreisen' (2011). Elsewhere, a straight line is
no longer contrasted with a bended line, but as a one-dimensional line
opposed to a
two-dimensional plane. That surface can be inflexible like the signs on Demos (2004),
flexible in one dimension like on 'Ware' (2011), or flexible in all
dimension like the flags on 'Vorort' (2007) of 'Die Stickerin' (2008).
The one-dimensional line can also unfold into a three-dimensional tube:
from the strings on 'Wahl' (1998), 'Füller' (1999), or 'Presse' (2010), over
the snakes
in 'Scheune' (2003), 'Die Fuge' (2007) or 'Diktat' (2004), the twisted
tree trunks on 'Das Plateau' (2008) or 'Abendmesse ('2012), the twisted heaps of paint or 'Scheisse' ('Hausmeister' 2002, 'Quecksilber'
2003), the elephant's teeth in 'Mammut' (2004), to the swordfish
in 'Vorhang' (2005). Diverse metamorphoses can be combined with each
other, as when the drill is combined with the air hose.
Going through all these metamoprhoses, it appears that they are governed by
purely formal variations on purely formal characteristics. That results
in ever new abstract motifs, to which an appropriate embodiment is
sought in the real world: pickaxes, crossbows, flags, snakes, and what
have you. The generation of ever new figurative motifs is not confined
to the motif of the cross. Thus, in 'Regel' (2000) and 'Das Kreisen' (2011),
the straight line is contrasted with the circle, which, through perspectival deformation is transformed into an oval ('Regel', 2000 or 'Das Kreisen'
2011). Through combing the oval with its opposite in the triangle, we get
the balloon of a comic strip, which develops into a kind of clouds on 'Verrat' (2003),
into a canopy on 'Paranoia' (2007), into a guitar on 'Stereo' (2001), and
into an 8-shaped projector on 'Lichtspiele'(1997). Through reading the
circle not as a surface, but rather as a circumference, we get the rings
on 'Fundgrube'
(2011), and through breaking it up in segments, we get the broken wheel
on 'Fluchtversuch' (2008). The straight line develops not only into a
circle, but also into a rectangle, which through perspectival deformation
is transformed into all kinds of parallelograms: tables (Konspiration
2004, Vorhang 2005, Altar 2008, Kalimuna 2010), the painting of Ad Reinhardt on 'Lehre' (1999),
stands (Handel 1999) or walls (Vorhang
2005), yes even lozenges like on 'Vorort' and 'Warten auf die Barbaren'
(2007). Provided with a third dimension, the rectangles turn into cubes,
which are piled up into piles of books (Vorhang
2005) or of stones (Ausschüttung, 2009) or into the 'stacks' of
Donald Judd (Lehre, 1999). Geometric and organic forms are contrasted
with diverse amorphous formations: foliage
(Das Haus 1996, Vorrat 1998), piles of mud or dung
on 'Höhe' (2004) and 'Die Aufnahme' (2008), smoke on 'Verrat' (2003)
and 'Haus de Lehrers' (2003), clouds on 'Reaktionäre Situation'
(2003) and 'Höhe' (2004). Many of these motifs are combined in paintings
like
'Zoll '(2004). There are also angular versions of the amorphous masses,
(exemplary in 'Konvoi' 2003, or in 'Ausschüttung' (2009) and 'Revo'
(2010). The whole array is extended through the addition of clouds on
the one end of the spectrum and sharp wavelets on the other, like in 'Sal' (2010), or
in the opposition of fire and steel on 'Die Lage' (2006). Many of these
motifs are combined in 'Chor' (2011) or on 'Pressse' (2010). These
amorphous and geometrical formations are in their turn merely two steps
on a an scale that can be extended by adding a third step; organic
three-dimensional horizontal quadruped animals and vertical biped
men.
The opposition between two-dimensional and three-dimensional as such is
a new element in the combinatoric - exemplary in the opposition of the
two-dimensional horizontal rectangle and the three-dimensional organic
form: the motif of a figure standing at a table or a stand, ('Handel'
1999, 'Konspiration' 2004, 'Vorhang' 2005, 'Paranoia' 2007 'Aufnahme'
2008), or of the painter opposed to his canvas in 'Parabel' (2008). Also
within the domain of the organic beings, vegetal and animal beings can be
combined - branches like snakes -, just like animal and human beings -
the many hybrids like the insect-man, the dog-man, the rat-man or the
squirrel-man, or even male and female in an androgyny like on 'Kreisen' (2011).
The introduction of organic forms, especially of the human body, leaves a
considerable amount of scope to a new play: that with all kinds of
gestures and postures where arms, legs, trunk and head are combined in
ever new combinations of verticals, horizontals and diagonals. Already Alberti advised to
represent the human body in a whole array of postures.
It seems as is the paintings of Neo
Rauch an example to his recommendations. He extends the range to lying
figures: think of the supine fireman on 'Die Fuge'
(2007), whose posture is the completion of a progression of bending
over, over standing upright, leaning backward standing, and leaning
backwards lying. Living
beings are not only combinations of limbs and trunk, they also have a
front and a back, depending on the direction in which they move and the
corollary place of the eyes. That is why they have also an inherent direction,
which in its turn structures the surrounding space. If the figures on 'Paranoia'
would have been inanimate geometrical structures, they would only bend
to the left; but, since it is humans, we know that they are looking to
the left, so that the whole space before them is animated by their gaze. This is - by the way - the reason why organic and living beings are so
much more interesting blocks to play with than the elements - von Punkt und Linie
zu Fläche - from Kandinsky's geometric building bucket.
This more or less extensive scale of figures has to be combined into an
encompassing composition, which is equally determined by an abstract
combinatoric. On
'Das Kreisen' (2011) the triangle of 'fallen angel' and standing figure
unfolds into a pyramid through the introduction of the man with the dog,
and that pyramid finds an echo in the triangle of figures on the 'painting in the
painting' to the right. On 'Jagdzimmer' (2007), the complex symmetry of
a standing figure in profile with lifted arm and figure in profile
with arms hanging down, is framed in a second complex symmetry of a
sitting woman leaning forward with arms hanging down with a man with
lifted arms leaning backward, whereas, in addition, both symmetries are accompanied
with a pattern of four crossbows.
There is no doubt: this breathtaking
combinatorics is the basic structure of Rauch's work.
Rather than telling a story or creating an allegory, the artist engages
in a play with motifs that derive from each other and are embodied in
concrete representations that can be read narratively or
allegorically. From this play, the entire figurative universe of Neo
Rauch can be
derived: it determines the proliferation of motifs in the entire oeuvre,
as well as the concrete constellation in single works.
THREE LAYERS: PLAY WITH
FORMS, STORY, AND ALLEGORY
It is obvious, then, that Neo Rauch is in the first place interested in
the formal composition of in essence abstract motifs. But, since most of
these motifs are filled in figuratively or are from the beginning complex
organic beings, the formal composition entails narrative or symbolic
relations - germs of a narrative or an allegory.
And, since it is always the formal coherence that eventually
prevails, the story or the allegory remain fragmentary, if it does not
from the beginning consist of mere onsets - bits of stories or local symbols woven
into the fabric of an in essence abstract composition. Of course, such
priority has to be understood in a structural, not in a temporal sense:
in practice, it is possible, even more probable, that Neo Rauch departs
from some narrative intention, or from a fragment of a dream, if not
from a pattern of paint on the floor of his studio like Max Ernst.
But these givens are always eventually caught in a logic of composition, that
can in its turn be a starting point to a further narrative elaboration,
and so on, in a continuous interaction.
It pays to imagine how the interaction between the three layers may have
contributed to the conception of a painting like
'Parabel' (2008). Let us assume that the artist started from the
resemblance between a guillotine and an easel: next to the easel in the
form of a tripod, there is
also the variant whose profile looks like an inversed T. The white
canvas on the easel reminds of the blade of a guillotine, especially
when opposed to the black cloth draped over the latter. When the
painter is painting guillotine and easel on his canvas, he feels that
something is missing to the left, and fills the gap by adding a third
step in the scale of easel and guillotine: a ladder as a construction of
crossing lines. The ensemble of three vertical constructions asks for a
horizontal counterbalance, which is provided by an element that is
inspired by the guillotine: a supine painter/executed who, as a
three-dimensional horizontal and organic item, contrasts with the
two-dimensional, geometric and vertical props. The scale of
three-dimensional and two-dimensional forms can be completed with a
one-dimensional step: the hind leg of the tripod, which in its turn
finds its opposite in the curved line of the rope, that turns the easel
into a gibbet - on the narrative/symbolic level the handicraft
counterpart of the industrial guillotine. And so on.
This hypothetical reconstruction shows how disparate narrative or
symbolic threads are woven into the more encompassing fabric of
the composition.
But, since the logic of the composition is the ultimate driving force, the
narrative and symbolic elements remain mere partial intrusions, which,
together with the elements that are only there for composition's sake,
never can amount to a coherent whole. A similar analysis applies to all
the paintings of Neo Rauch. In 'Kreisen', a 'fallen angel' is lying on the ground
simply because that posture is a step on a scale of figures in which
further steps are 'standing upright' and 'reaching upward', and the dog is
only there because it allows the resulting triangle to unfold into a
pyramid, and that has its bearings on the narrative
content. And that goes equally for the man who in 'Die Stickerin' (2008)
is seated on a table as a mirror image to the seamstress, who is in her
turn the top of a pyramid of onlookers, or for the man who, in 'Para'
(2007) is staring at a score on a (vertical) piano, as the mirrored
counterpart of the central figure staring at the little dragon on a
(horizontal) table.
THE GLORY OF THE HANDMADE IMAGE
Before proceeding to a closer scrutiny of the dynamics within this
three-layered structure, it pays to dwell somewhat on the purely
painterly qualities of these works, which reveal themselves all the
better when we are no longer distracted by narrative lines or
allegorical
meanings. For, next to the inventiveness in developing a whole network
of motifs and their often ingenious composition, Rauch's paintings have
other intriguing merits.
Let us, first, stress that the insistence with which many a critic
repeats that Neo Rauch, not otherwise than pop art, Richter or
Tuyrmans, recycles images from comic strips or 'socialistic-realist propaganda' -
the 'pop' of the DDR
- only obfuscates what distinguishes Neo Rauch from many of his
contemporaries: precisely that he does not provide a 'painterly' version
of existing images - be it comic strips, photos or other paintings. Neo Rauch
figuration is of his own making, even though he often executes his
imagery in a way that reminds of other technical media.
That is already apparent from the often sophisticated composition of the
figures, not only in space, but also in the plane, within the frame of the rectangle -
just have closer look at ' Die Fuge' (2007), preferably armed with a compass. But
above all the colours are openly unreal -
since chosen in terms of a purely aesthetic logic in view of often sonorous
chords of three or more colours - something you would search in vain with
painters like Michael Borremans or Luc Tuymans. Especially from 2003
onwards, also tone is summoned with increasing mastery. Neo Rauch does
not so much resort to gradual transitions that foreground the roundness
of the objects: all his figures are, when not entirely flat, than at
least not fully three-dimensional. Rauch is rather out at contrasting
figures against other figures and against the background. It is
fascinating to study how the play of tonal plans is counterpoised with
the effect of extended monochrome expanses. Such expanses have a
flattening effect, not only within each monochrome surface itself, but
above all in the painting as a whole. Although coloured expanses have
the propensity to structure themselves in a coloristic space with a logic
in its own right, the depth of coloristic space is far more restrained
than that of tonal space. That effect is enhanced in that Rauch oftenhas coloristic space counteract tonal space in a kind of sophisticated
counterpoint, as when blue, which tends to recede to the background, is
applied to surfaces that tend to come to the foreground in tonal or perspectival space, or the other way round, like in the reversed colour
perspective in Höhe (2004), or, more subtly in the masterly 'Paranoia' (2007).
The deep impact of colour chords in the installation of such dialectic
between tonal and coloristic space is evident from
monochrome works like 'Das Blaue' (2005). No perspectival-tonal space
here, hence, but rather a colour-tone space, that is at the same time deep and
flat, and therein denies the concept of space as a 'window' - or a photo.
It is precisely due to the nature of this space that there is no
composition in the third dimension here - the composition that is seen
when space is seen from above. A reconstruction of three-dimensional
space is seldom possible, mostly because
diverse spaces are penetrating each other like in a kind of collaged
space: either in that an inner space is contained by a surrounding space
that does not fit, like in 'Vorhang' (2005) and 'Zähmung' (2011), or in
that spaces are penetrating each other like in 'Neue Rollen', or in that
the painting contains another painting like on 'Modell'(1998)
'Das Kreisen' (2011) or a scene like in 'Das Alte
Lied' or 'Nexus' (2006).
Although the choice of the colours is above all a question of
structuring space, it is also decisive in determining the emotional
freight of the paintings - just think of works like
'Die Goldgrube' (2007), 'Die Lage' (2006), of 'Vorort' (2007), with that
ominous yellow that breaks through the blueish grey of the sky.
Not only the figures, their composition, and the use of tone and colour
are rather different from the everyday world as it is captured by the
camera. unreal altogether is the use of various modes of painting, which
stresses unambiguously that we are dealing with a mimetic medium. The
early Rauch (1993-2003) mostly confines himself to flat surfaces
combined with figures the three-dimensionality of which is merely
suggested through the addition of light or shadow in a restricted amount
of plans, whereby the painter often resorts to a black or white
cloisonné, and rather exceptionally also of surfaces with visible brushstrokes
like on 'Haus' (1996). From 2002-2003 onwards, there is an increasing
diversification of the kinds of surfaces - especially the rendering of
clouds, smoke, water and soil as mentioned above, whereby the use of
tonal plans is complicated through the introduction of continuous
transitions (e.g.. 'Der Vorhang' 2005). Nevertheless, the contrast
between surfaces with gradual and scaled transition remains in place (exemplary
in
'Der Vorhang' (2005). The contrast is even enhanced in works where more
or less important surfaces are monotonal, like in 'Demos'
(2004), 'Abstraktion' (2005), 'Der Vorträger' (2006), 'Garten des
Bildhauers' (2008), 'Die Stickerin (2008), 'Vater' (2010), 'Kreisen'
(2011) and the clouds on 'Nest' (2012'.
No paintings, hence, ''à la manière de' like with Odd
Nerdrum or Borremans, and certainly no paintings after photographs, as
has become endemic in the wake of Pop Art, Photorealism with painters
like Gerhard Richter en Luc Tuymans and their countless imitators, but
rather a self-conceived world with a self-conceived painterly idiom that
in many respects is a true heir to a genuine painterly tradition.
FROM PLAYTHING OVER PLAYER TO MALIN GENIE
The question is why,notwithstanding the emphasis with which Neo Rauch foregrounds this
aspect of his work, it is nevertheless so easily overlooked, and hence
seldom properly
analysed. We could remind that, in an era when it is no longer evident
what an image is, the understanding of it cannot but
decrease and the language to deal with it becomes increasingly inadequate.
But, at best, that suffices to explain why critics prefer to dwell on
the narrative and symbolic content, rather than on the purely formal and
painterly qualities.
The proper explanation is, of course, that the narrative and
symbolic content is not at all indifferent or neutral. With painters who
play with figurative elements as if it were abstract forms, like Schlemmer on
his 'Bauhaustreppe', we just look through the figuration to enjoy the
abstract composition. That is no longer the case with works like
Balthus' 'La Rue', where it is not only the composition of the figures
that catches the attention, but also the narrative - erotic -
proceedings on the left. But with Neo Rauch the narrative elements are
so freighted, that it is rather impossible to install the 'aesthetic
distance' needed to fully enjoy the formal qualities of his work. That
is all the more the case, since the impact of this material is only
enhanced precisely in that there is no coherent narrative or allegory: a
swordfish in the net of fisherman is less frightening than one that
appears totally out of context. It seems as if Neo Rauch is drawing
a smoke screen when he contends that his figuration is of no further
concern - although it is purely formal beauty that has the onlooker
continue to admire the paintings, rather than recoil in the face of
often blunt repulsiveness indeed.
Apparently, we did not really hit the mark when contending that the real
logic of Rauch's paintings is a logic of composition. The question
remains why Rauch does not confine himself to a mere abstract
composition stuffed with mere neutral figurative elements.
A first conceivable answer is that the repugnant content is a kind of
defence against or a negation of the strive for beauty that is apparent
in the composition of the figures: it is as if Neo Rauch indulges in a
devilish delight when refusing to adorn the beauty of his compositions
with the beauty of God's Creation - as with say a Raphael - and rather
wrapping it in the rags of an abhorrent figuration like on 'Höhe' (2004)
On the substance, however, it could not be denied that Neo Rauch intends
to tell a story indeed, although it turns out other than intended.
That is, to begin with, apparent from the many paintings in which he
undoubtedly intends to tell something about painting, like with 'Die Wahl'
(1998), 'Unerträglicher Naturalismus' (1998), 'Front' (1998) 'Lehre'
(1999), 'Teer' (200), 'Abstraktion' (2005), 'Pergola' (2005), 'Vorhang'
(2005), 'Rückzug' (2006), 'Nest (2012). Thus, on 'Lehre' (1999), we see
a Donald Judd 'Stack',
painted in Mondrian's three cardinal colours, and contrasted with a
black canvas that cannot fail to remind ofAd Reinhardt. We could
speculate on the meaning of the crossed sticks, or of that of the canvas
that is unrolled by a woman, and so on, but nobody will be able to give
a clear account of what Neo Rauch is trying to tell us here - probably
something on the contrary developments of figuration and abstraction in
the BRD and the DDR. Until it dawns on us that, in any case, we
are dealing here with the familiar play wit abstract motifs: contrasting
with the crossed sticks: the twisted wisp;as opposed to the canvas
unrolled: the tight canvas on the wall; and as an opposition to those
two-dimensional forms, the three-dimensional stacks of Donald Judd. What
was perhaps intended as a statement on painting, ends up as a formal
abstract composition, that holds the onlooker in its grip, and turns the
intended story of the painter into a mysterious riddle.
Something similar holds for the paintings in which the subject is not
painting, but rather the real world. Although many an isolated element
seems to testify to the contrary, it would be a mistake to think that
Rauch intends to say something about the political constellation in
which he grew up. Never been an adept of the 'really existing socialism'
- witness the mentioned interest for the artistic developments on the
other side of the Iron Curtain - after the fall of that curtain Rauch
did not become and adept of the utopias of the 'Free West', like those
of Ayn Rand or Fukuyama, let alone of one of the 'post-Marxist'
alternatives in France. Themes referring to the French Revolution
suggest that Rauch regards the socialist as well as the capitalist
alternatives as embodiments of the spirit of the Enlightenment and the
concomitant belief in diverse kinds of progress, that only ends up in
'really existing' dystopias. No lost Atlantis nor Utopia to be gained in
Neo Rauch's world, but rather the succession on an unrelenting series of
disasters rolling over mankind - especially Germany. And such disbelief
in progress finds its extension in a disbelief in any kind of
cooperation. In Rauchs timeless world of 'das Immergleiche', at best
sadomasochism seems to attract people to each other: no trace of
parental, sexual or communal relations, let alone of the corollary forms
of love - no children, no couples, no convivial drinking or dancing
together, not even celebrating a mass:
apart form some vague silhouettes of churches and a sefiroth on 'Das alte
Lied', any reference to religion is failing. Already more inclined to
cooperate are the individuals when they have to work together,
although the largest group is that of four firemen in 'Die Fuge' ('2007),
which is a rather small group in a world where production is organised
on the scale of multinationals. Even for political or military ends
people - in sharp contrast with the historical Germans, as well in the
Third Reich as in the periphery of the Red Empire - seem not to be able
to form larger groups: apart from a shadowy platoon of soldiers on 'Schmerz"
(2004) and 'Mammut' (2004), the largest formation is that of seven 'red
hats' on 'Der Rückzug' (2006), six activists on Vorort (2007)
and 'Die Stickerin' (2008), four revolutionaries waving Phrygian caps on 'Neue
Rollen' (2005), or a jury of three bureaucrats on 'Quiz' (2002). Although
ever more people appear on Rauch's paintings, they remain fundamentally
solitary, and they seem to act in utter isolation. Nevertheless, it would
be mistake to contend that there are only atoms in the desolate world of Neo Rauch.
Apparently, also higher entities like the state are at work, although
they never appear in the image. Either we see only its instruments like
tanks and bombs, or solitary individuals who nevertheless seem to be the
executioners of some collective undertaking - what makes their action as
estranged as alienating work ('Verrat', 2003, or 'Rückzug',
2006). On other paintings like 'Quiz 2002', we see representatives of
some authority without knowing which. On still other paintings, we see
planners without assistants or subordinates like in 'Konspiration' (2004) or 'Vorhang' (2005).
Only in 'Warten auf die Barbaren' (2007) is a higher entity called by
name, but it remains outside the painting - in the title, like with
Tuymans - and it is altogether uncertain who the barbarians are. And
it cannot fail to dawn on is that precisely the removal of higher entities
from the image that is the cause of the alienated appearance of what is
allowed to appear in the image: isolated individuals, who do not seem to
act on their own initiative, and hence have something of
sleepwalkers or of puppets. The estranging effect would only disappear
when the encompassing whole would come into view: the higher political,
military, economic or communal entities and the identity of their
leaders and owners. In that respect, the images of Rauch are the negative
of those of say Riefenstahl or Burtinsky.
Meanwhile - just think of the way in which we analysed
'Parabel' - the constitutive role of the abstract play described above in
the construction of this strange world will have become apparent. First,
the activity of isolated figures is turned into a reallyrelationless
performance when the composition integrates what are in essence
isolated sleepwalkers in a more or less complex composition of figures.
In the same breath, the composition turns what otherwise would be an
unlimited continuum into a secluded space within the confines of a
rectangle - which only strengthens the impression of incoherence. And
that is, in its turn, the precondition to a replacement of really
existing malefactors like omnipotent emperors, Nazis, communists or capitalists,
yes even malevolent gods, by an abstract malignant genius that has
figurants play their role in some absurd scenario. And it then dawns on
us that the gesture with which Neo Rauch systematically reduces his
figures to elements of a combinatorics of forms that are subordinated in
a rigid composition in its own right, is his response to the way in
which the dark forces outside the image 'composed' the figures in the
original context as if it were 'secular artists of life' in having them
march in cohorts, work at conveyor belts, recite mantras of all kinds,
and what have you. From plaything to player; after the real players on
the 'Weltentheater' are driven out of the picture, the protagonist from
the real world are transformed into marionettes in the pictorial
theatre where Neo Rauch is pulling the strings. Les us refer in passing
to what we wrote about that in our text on Borremans in the paragraph 'From
relay to matryouska doll'.
Neo Rauch may well have started with the intention of 'mirroring'
reality - to tell a literal or allegorical story about the real world - but
since, apparently, that turned out to be not an easy undertaking,
he unawares transforms himself in a kind of disappointed fallen
creator who rearranges the elements of a world that he cannot understand
nor handle into a kind of derivative
counter-world that is meaningless and hence has not to be understood or
turned for the better. From worldview to hallucination: the canvas as
the theatre of sleepwalking and relationless individuals that are
figurants in some unintelligible proceeding. The move with which loose
figurative elements from a more encompassing spatial and historical whole
are isolated and subordinated into a new immanent coherence where they
get a new meaning, is, hence, the consequence of an inability turned
into reluctance to tell a consistent story that, in that Rauch has to
content himself with playing an abstract game, unawares comes to
disclose the world as it appears to him who is no longer prepared to
understand it and resigns himself to staging it as an inhospitable whole
of disparate fragments.
Only against this background can we understand why these images are so
misleading: lured by the bits of reality that we descry in it, we have
the impression of being treated with a worldview, until, after many
wanderings on sideways, we have to conclude that we only got a
counter-world, which is only an enigma when we misread it as a worldview.
To Rauch, the truth of the world is precisely that it is incoherent and
desolate, and it is an illusion to think that there is something to be
understood or to turned for the better. In that sense, his paintings are
'continuations of the dream with other means' as he uses to phrase it,
indeed. But dreams then in the Freudian sense: the conjuring of a world
where there is no longer any trace of what would otherwise make the dreamer
wake up. In that these images do not stage anything that could motivate
us to whatever undertaking, they release us from the task to change it
on whatever level. Revolution nor Biedermeier here, no romantic ascent
in transcendental worlds like the Greek of Hölderlin or de German of
Wagner, let alone life-giving dreams in the sense
of images that would reveal how the world could be, or what
could be done to make it a better place to live -
rather subsisting at whatever price, even when it has to be in an
impenetrable embryonic fleece. Despite the romantic rhetoric of which
Neo Rauch is so fond, the artist is here no longer the visionary who has
access to the deepest layers of the world or the soul, who he had remained jenseits structuralism on
Rauchs side of the wall, but rather a 'malin
génie', that wants to sell us his private concoctions for reality.
SENSUOUS?
Now that we have finally grasped the true nature of the images of Reich,
we can turn to the question whether we are dealing here with a
restoration of 'figuration' and 'narrativity'.
No doubt, these paintings are figurative and narrative. But, when we
want to tackle the problem more thoroughly, these terms are inadequate.
For, a landscape and a portrait are figurative, but not narrative. The
term narrative applies rather to what use to be called a 'history
painting' - a painting that tells a 'history', Biblical or Ancient,
historical, but increasingly also critical. But, above all, not everything
that is figurative shows us the subject as such. A peace-dove shows a
dove, but not peace. That is why the term 'sensuousness' is more
adequate: a portrait, as well as a landscape, a genre painting or a
history painting are sensuous, whereas an allegory or a sensuous
representation of transcendent beings are figurative, but not sensuous.
It is thereby very important to distinguish the representation of
non-perceptible phenomena like transcendental beings, and the
representation of phenomena that are all too perceptible, but rather
complex and spread over countless temporally and spatially distinct
appearances: just think of phenomena like 'The third Reich', 'really
existing socialism' or 'really existing capitalism". Everything that
has to do with man belongs to the latter kind: for even the most simple
relation between mother and child or two lovers is deeply tainted by the
other - communal, economic, political - dimensions of human existence.
It is part of the metier of image makers to give such phenomena a proper
sensuous appearance: the way in which Leni Riefenstahl succeeded in
visualising certain aspects of the Third Reich, is more artful than
resorting to mere symbols like a swastika, and what Brecht shows us in 'Der gute Mensch von Sezuan'
is more artful than a one-dimensional 'critical' story. Already from the
fact that he zooms out the larger political and economical entities from
the image, and replaces them with an internal logic of composition, it
appears that Neo Rauch prefers to replace a world that is sensuous in
principle with a far less layered, and eventually non-existing world,
that is visible nevertheless, yes even consists of
element from the real world. Instead of making visible what is difficult
to see, Neo Rauch conceals it behind the veil of a hallucination of
something that does not exist. This move is the contemporary counterpart
of that with which the painters of yore had to lend credibility to the
existence of all kind of invisible entities through wrapping them in the
appearance of existing beings. What presents itself as sensuousness, is
merely empty figuration - although, with Neo Rauch, this is obfuscated
by the construction of that private hallucination out of elements that
are borrowed from the real world.
It pays to give a detailed account of how unreal the world of Neo Rauch is.
Unreal is already the mere backdrop to human action: apart from some
scarce leafage, that is there more for the sake of structure than for
its greenness, there is no trace of natural flora and fauna: it is as if
the whole world has been clear-cut, bulldozed and depopulated. Unreal is
the choice of the dramatis personae: no children nor elderly people,
practically no women, let alone young girls and boys, only sour men in
their thirties. Unreal is the kind of interaction; all those middle-aged
male people are caught in geometrical relations that are not to be found
in the real world, whereas, conversely, there is practically no trace of
the countless real relations -
political, economical, communal, parental or sexual. No trace,
hence, of all the modalities of these kinds of relations that are so
close to people's hearts. No trace - and that catches the eye with
someone who has grown up in a 'socialist' country and features so many
'workers' - of what Marxists used to call 'exploitation': no potato
eaters or slaves with Rauch. No trace of the politico-military relations
that have been responsible for the very world in which Neo Rauch
grew up: fascism and
communism, imperialism, the world wars and the holocaust. Apart from
sadomasochism: no trace of the whole array of sexual and parental
relations that have been the focus of so much attention of post-Marxists
diesseits the Wall. No trace altogether of themes like population
growth, globalisation (if only negatively as the omnipresence of a Deutschtum), let alone of the'clash of cultures'. Apart from a
single bare-breasted aboriginal on 'Vorhang' (2005),
only Europeans on the paintings of Neo Rauch. Judging from
their clothes, these Europeans are inhabitants of the DDR. Only sporadically do we
meet more contemporary actors like suicide bombers (Ordnungshüter 2006
and Demos 2004). To begin with the traditional outfit of hunters (Hatz
2002), Rauch increasingly features figurants from more historical times:
the French Revolution and the Biedermeier period. The references to
pre-revolutionary times, however, remain rather scarce: crossbows
(Ordnungshüter 2008), armour (Die Lage 2006), swords and spears. And it
speaks volumes that it is only men that seem to have ancestors: the
scarce women continue to appear in DDR-outfit. It
is very remarkable not only that Rauchs perspective does not reach
further than the French Revolution, but above all that it shows
important gaps: no trace of the 'Zweites Deutsches Kaiserreich', of'Das Dritte Reich', let alone of the Red Empire, in the periphery of
which Neo Rauch grew up. This short and really selective historical
perspective, that is in essence an extrapolation of his experiences with
the 'Wende', contrasts sharply with the reach of more outgrown world
views like that of Christendom, that at least covered the whole period
from Fall to Last Ordeal, or of its more secular descendants with
Hegel-Marx, Darwin and Gobineau, Blavatsky or Rosenberg, with whom
history at least starts from the Greek, the apes or the root races, or
even of the histories-with-a-before-and-an-after so typical of
many contemporary world views on both sides of the political spectre. Although
we cannot blame Rauch for the failure of appropriate models of world history, his perspective is
bluntly myopic. For even in cyclic models like that of Ernst Jünger, Rauchs
favourite author, in which each world fire heralds a new dawn, every
trough is only the announcement of a new beginning. With Rauch, the 'Wiederholung
des Immergleichen' is not more that the extrapolation on the entire
history of what he imaged to experience in de DDR. Such deficient models
of history can only be maintained when, as described above, the concrete
actors are not allowed to appear in the image: there is no difference
then between tribal feuds, migrations, empire formation, feudal and
dynastic wars, religious wars and revolutions, the wars of Napoleon, Bismarck
or the German Emperor or
Hitler, colonial wars and liberation wars: in all cases we see only
villains at work. And the same goes for the 'barbarians' which, like in 'Warten auf die Barbaren'
conquer the civilised world: totally different from
Cavafy, we do not
know which is the civilisation and who the barbarians, just like with Ernst Jünger
and with Coetzee. The attempt at reducing history to a repetition of an
'archetypal' drama with interchangeable protagonists, finds its prolongation in
the shift from political
action as such to pure sadomasochism in private human
relations. To make such shift to the evil human nature credible,
not only all the more or less laudable initiatives for political violence (or for
cooperation) have to be obfuscated, but also all the misery that is not
the consequence of human action: for, next to all the evil that
humankind inflicts itself -
from exploitation to extinction, there are also the countless evils that
befall mankind naturally. And it cannot but catch the eye, then, that,
apart form two people in bed who are rather allegorically ill, and a
single, equally allegorical volcano, there is no trace ofillness,
ageing, death, or of natural disasters of all kinds. And as if the
evil nature of humankind did not suffice, also the world in which humans
are living is thoroughly desolate: the skies are dark and ominous, the
landscape desolate, the earth infertile and barren, the scarce animals
dogs or rats, and the humans ugly and crude. On the countless square
meters of canvas covered by Neo Rauch, you would in vain search for some beauty or kindness -
that is why it comes like a bolt from the blue when he shows a
tender relation in 'Vater' (2007), although it is put on its head, since
it is the son that cuddles the father.
Granted, that is not precisely a 'surreal' world, like many will have
it, but in the first place a really unreal - derealised - world; a world
where everything what could disturb the indifferent distance of an eye
that is not prepared to stop looking to ascertain itself that there is
nothing threatening out there and that nothing will force it to give up its
self-sufficiency, nothing that could motivate to love or hate, to
emulation or loathing, even nothing that could
work like a Schopenhauerians quietum that forces the will to resign -
for, there is an I here that intends to to endureundisturbed. It speaks
volumes that, with Rauch, there is no trace of blood or wounds; military
violence is only present in the form or weapons, not in the form of
mutilated bodies or corpses, like with Dix and Gross, and from all the
delights of the sadomasochistic universe, we get only the bloodless
variants to see. The entire real world reduced to a meaningless
spectacle that at best motivates to a kind of reluctance to look at the
figuration at such and the propensity to further devaluate it to a pure
abstract configuration. Although this world adorns itself with the rags
of the real world, there is no talk here of sensuousness, but rather of
a betrayal of it: the providing of an appearance of sensuousness to
what is in essence a private hallucination that empties and hollows out
the real world and eventually has it evaporate into a purely formal play
of abstract relations - the hallucinatory reversal of the violence with
which the steamroller of reality rolled over us. When we eventually stop
looking, we are left with the vague feeling that someone was out to say something about some reality that surreptitiously escaped from
view under our very eyes.
CIRCLING AROUND THE IMAGE
Neo Rauch does not succeed in telling a clarifying and understandable
story about the real world, not in a literal, nor in allegorical mode,
withdraws in a world where merely shadows are to found of what used to be
an image: empty compositions with figures that are in essence abstract
motifs, only to discover that, like a malevolent demiurge, he can
combine
these motifs into a world as he would like it to be: the staging of the
idle movement of atoms whose orbits at best cross in what then are
evil encounters.
Although eventually we get to see an image, it is not an image in the
real sense of the word: not a sensuously embodied and hence motivating
reality, but rather a private phantasmagoria that pretends to be reality,
whereas it in fact only obfuscates reality. There is no restoration of
the image here, no less than with
Luc Tuymans,
but for other reasons. There is no restoration of the image with
Tuymans, because, apart from the fact that his paintings only speak with the help of the word, past realities are featured in the
erroneous supposition that they contain the essence of what is happening in
our times. Already more of a restoration do we see with
Michael Borremans,
whose images lay bare dimensions of
reality that otherwise would remain invisible, although these images
fail in that this reality is not made transparent - sensuous: it is
misread as
sadomasochism which is then surreptitiously filtered out of the image.
That does not prevent Neo Rauch from deploying all the registers of
painting, unlike Tuymans, who debases painting through resorting to the word, through clumsy strokes, and through using photographs. Al least on this
level is there talk of a 'return', in fact of a return that is not
regressive like with Borremans or Odd Nerdrum, who fall back on
antiquated ways op painting that have been developed with different
intentions. Through his technical skills, Rauch is, on the circuit of
painting, the counterpart of an F-1 driver like
Andreas Gursky on the circuit of the photographers.
And that helps us to explain why it is precisely the shortcomings of
these paintings that contribute to their success. For this kind of
non-sensuous figuration is precisely the stuff needed by all those who
were tired of having to look at white panels hanging on the walls of the
Whit Cube, or of having to solve all kinds of conceptual riddles. In
the figuration of Neo Rauch they descry the remembrance of aneloquent
sensuousness that has been relegated to the background, if not repressed altogether
by modernism, whereas the very emptiness of that same figuration allows
at the same time to continue to dwell in a world where the image releases from
reality rather than being a window on it. The manifest unreality of
images that eventually evaporate into purely formal beauty, leaves them
with mysterious pieces of reality, that have the additional charm that
what is recognisable in them may all too readily be ascribed to the
meanwhile bygone age behind a meanwhile disappeared wall. What remains
is figuration and craftsmanship that can be integrated in the sign-system
of the official art circuit. That does not prevent that not everybody is
a devotee of this art, not the least all those who, drenched in the
tradition of French philosophy, detest the old mythology of art with its
prophets that draw their inspiration from deep unconscious sources, if not
from 'telluric forces', or of parallel - who knows: even Gnostic - worlds.
Or all the Germans who were not particularly fond of an ode to the
East-German academic tradition, and expected dissident artistslike Baselitz and Richter to integrate in the Western art system,
not to mention the leftist hardliners who drop Neo Rauch's painting as a
late-bourgeois skirmish in the rear-guard.
However that may be, the waiting is for a genuine restoration of the image, even
when the longing for it is all the more stirred since with Neo
Rauch - otherwise than with Borremans and Tuymans - behind the
self-destructive urge and the impotence to tell an illuminating story
turned into reluctance to do so, we cannot but descry the splendour of what a reborn image
could be.
© Stefan Beyst, May 2013.