|

|

seize obscurs objets
de désir |
Art does not reproduce the
visible,
it makes visible'.
Paul Klee |
BEYOND THE HUMAN FIGURE
After having staged the human nude in 'Sans tête(s)', and the human mass
in 'Auguries of
Innocence', in my new series 'Seize obscurs objets de désir', I
wanted to explore an entirely different domain: that of imaginary,
non-existent entities.
Which does not imply that I turned away from the human as such. I rather set
myself the task of revealing dimensions of human existence
that cannot be transmitted by the human figure, through the staging of
entities of my own creation. For, after all, the human body has its
shortcomings: not only is it susceptible to illness and decay,
even more than words, it often utterly fails when it comes to
transmitting what is moving it internally. That is why I inscribed
myself
in a trend in the history of painting, that is moving away
from the human figure and in so doing first discovered the possibilities
of having the landscape and the still life speak, to, eventually,
conjuring up self-created, geometric or organic entities in abstract art. Although
the potential of this latter domain have largely remained
unexplored, due to the anti-mimetic fervour, which withhold the abstract
painters not so much from deploying the required formal richness, as
rather from providing the required anthropomorphic clues. In 'Seize obscurs objets de
désir', I wanted to explore this virgin territory.
THE DOUBLE IMAGE
There is some irony in the fact that, of all things photography,
that lies at the roots of the above mentioned anti-mimetic fervour,
provides an exquisite method for finding non-human bearers for the
staging of the human drama, without having to relapse in the
reductionism of abstract art. For, the photographer can also resort to
what I call 'mimetic reality': instead
of merely having himself inspired by a mossy wall, like da Vinci, he can
just photograph the wall itself. I resorted to this method already in 'Sans tête(s)'. But, whereas in 'Sans tête(s)' the double nature of the image
has been retained deliberately - there is a meaningful contentual
relation between a body in decay and the images in which it is
transformed - I now deliberately eradicated every trace of the starting
point. A first reason why I called my 'objects of desire' 'dark': it
is impossible to find out from which part of the real world they are
derived. This time, I wanted to create simple - unbroken - images in
their own right. The technique of the double image had merely to enable
me, without resorting to all too cheap methods of the dark chamber or of
Photoshop - to escape from the impotence of the existent to reveal
in its outer appearance what is moving it in its inner being.
ATTRAPE- DéSIR
In the technique of the double image, reality works like a magnet that
attracts images. These images are not projected consciously into the
real world, they rather seem to emerge unasked from it. In that sense,
such 'found reality' works like an ''attrape-désir'. What leads an often
hidden life in our inmost being, suddenly looms up as an outer
appearance before our eyes.
In a first phase, we experience such an epiphany as a discovery, as an 'image trouvée'.
But, that this images continues to intrigue us, makes us recognise that
we only found what we have previously hidden.
And, what
our self-created entities thereby bring to light, is immediately
recognised as something that also moves us in our deepest inner being, although
it is all the more estranging to establish that that deepest inner being
is expressed, there before our eyes, in the outer appearance of an alien
entity. As if we would have descended in these alien entities as in our
true body. Second reason why I called my 'objects of desire' 'dark'...
NEITHER "PAINTING" NOR "PHOTOGRAPHY"
In so doing, I not only criticise a photography, that, as a result of
the development of painting, let itself all too easily reduce to a mere
'rendering of the existent world', but also of painting itself, that,
conversely, opposed itself to photography through entrenching itself in
the domain of (expressionistically) 'deformed', 'surreal', or 'abstract'
reality. Thereby, painting not only denied itself the charms of the
natural beauty of the appearances in the natural world, but above all
annihilated the tension between 'organic appearance' and 'geometric
essence' through reducing it to the staging of one-dimensional geometric
forms (see
'Mimesis and abstraction')
In
'Seize obscurs objets de désir', I rather wanted to, conversely,
heighten the tension between the organic outer appearance of imaginary
entities and the 'secret' underlying geometric construction, as well on
the level of the composition of the frame, as on the level of the
composition of the plane within that frame. Although the staged entities
are imaginary, they look as if they could live in the real world.
Because I resolutely opted for the meanwhile as 'photographic'
experienced 'academic' tradition, and for the optical seductiveness of
the natural appearance, that is often scorned
as the 'glitter' of advertising. In se, there is nothing wrong with a ''Rafaelesque'
look: it sounds only hollow when it goes hand in hand with an inner void. In 'Seize obscurs
objets de désir', the often alluring beauty of the appearances only
heightens the opposition to the sometimes repellent desire that they
embody, or it fuels the fascination with what could all too easily repel
us. And it is to such dialectics, that joins the dialectic between
organic appearance and underlying geometrical pattern, that - as I dare hope -
my 'Seize obscurs objets de désir' owe
their often intense inner tension.
OH! CES OBSCURS OBJETS DE DESIR...
An often intense inner tension: for, in this series, I wanted to stage -
the often all-consuming inner emotion that moves the living world of
which we are part. For, the often ambivalent desire to contemplate desire
in all its ambiguity is itself the
deepest desire of the eye, and the central, most originary motive for
making an image.
Whence the title of this series, to which you only have to add the 'oh!'
of pure aesthetic astonishment, and to change the number 'seize'
(sixteen) into the pronoun 'ces' (these), to have the words
phrased that come over the lips of all those who are fallen under the
spell of the fascinating image.
©
Stefan
Beyst, November 2006 
Bruno Blais 'J'apprécie cet univers abstrait qui révèle, parfois dans
des noirs profonds, une poésie de l'ailleurs qui flirte avec
l'inconscient pour nous propulser dans cet autre monde qui nous
questionne tant.'
Tim Atherton: 'Something about it made me go back two
or three times to look again...'...'
.
|