DOI Heft:
Rozprawy
DOI Artikel:Piotrowski, Piotr: Krytyka obrazu: w stronę neoawangardy Europy Środkowej lat sześćdziesiątych XX wieku
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.28180#0240
238
PIOTR PIOTROWSKI
The present paper analyses particular examples of this complex process. Their diver-
sity is determined both by geography and by the kind of neo-avant-garde artistic practices:
objęci art, happening, conceptual art, etc. The history of Yugoslavian art is represented by
the works of the Croatian Gorgon group and the closely related art of Dimitrije Baśicević,
known by the pseudonym of Mangelos, as well as by the Slovenian OHO circle, especially
Marko Pogaćnik. Of Polish art, the paper discusses the work of Włodzimierz Borowski,
Tadeusz Kantor, Andrzej Matuszewski, Stanisław Drożdż, and Jerzy Rosołowicz. The
work of the Yugoslavian and Polish artists stems from the critiąue of the painting, treated
as a paradigm of modemist culture and of the hierarchies it expresses. It is not so in Hun-
gary. Focusing on the work of Miklós Erdely and Tamas Szentjóby, we can say that the
processes of the emancipation and modernisation of culture occurred in a sort of symbiosis
between the values of neo-avant-garde and modemist art. Furthennore, their common
foundation was of political character as they both expressed strong disagreement with the
state cultural policy or even resistance to the entire system of govemment. Such politicisa-
tion of the neo-avant-garde is uniąue in the whole of Central Europę. The Czechoslovak
artistic scene, on the other hand, here represented both by Czech and Slovak artists: the
conceptual artists active in Bratislava (such as Julius Koller, Stano Filko, or Alex Mlynar-
cik) and the Prague happening artists (such as Eugen Brikcius or Milan Kniżak), has
other distinctive features. Even though abstract modemist art, produced at the same time,
overtly opposed the political system, it was criticised by the Czech and Slovak neo-avant-
garde because the latter did not understand it in terms of institutional opposition (as ob-
jection to socialist-realist painting) but rather as art which in its “essence” supports the
hierarchical order of the world, hence also the structures of government. Thus, related to
the mythology of autonomy, hierarchy, elitist cultnre, etc., the painting, according to the
artists under scmtiny, threatens the freedom of expression. Whether it functions in an of-
ficial state-owned gallery or in a private studio, whether it is abstract or figurative, the
painting as an expression of a particular culture makes impossible transcending the limits
of art and life. As a painting, it is unavoidably involved in conventions and the limitations
of artistic creation.
PIOTR PIOTROWSKI
The present paper analyses particular examples of this complex process. Their diver-
sity is determined both by geography and by the kind of neo-avant-garde artistic practices:
objęci art, happening, conceptual art, etc. The history of Yugoslavian art is represented by
the works of the Croatian Gorgon group and the closely related art of Dimitrije Baśicević,
known by the pseudonym of Mangelos, as well as by the Slovenian OHO circle, especially
Marko Pogaćnik. Of Polish art, the paper discusses the work of Włodzimierz Borowski,
Tadeusz Kantor, Andrzej Matuszewski, Stanisław Drożdż, and Jerzy Rosołowicz. The
work of the Yugoslavian and Polish artists stems from the critiąue of the painting, treated
as a paradigm of modemist culture and of the hierarchies it expresses. It is not so in Hun-
gary. Focusing on the work of Miklós Erdely and Tamas Szentjóby, we can say that the
processes of the emancipation and modernisation of culture occurred in a sort of symbiosis
between the values of neo-avant-garde and modemist art. Furthennore, their common
foundation was of political character as they both expressed strong disagreement with the
state cultural policy or even resistance to the entire system of govemment. Such politicisa-
tion of the neo-avant-garde is uniąue in the whole of Central Europę. The Czechoslovak
artistic scene, on the other hand, here represented both by Czech and Slovak artists: the
conceptual artists active in Bratislava (such as Julius Koller, Stano Filko, or Alex Mlynar-
cik) and the Prague happening artists (such as Eugen Brikcius or Milan Kniżak), has
other distinctive features. Even though abstract modemist art, produced at the same time,
overtly opposed the political system, it was criticised by the Czech and Slovak neo-avant-
garde because the latter did not understand it in terms of institutional opposition (as ob-
jection to socialist-realist painting) but rather as art which in its “essence” supports the
hierarchical order of the world, hence also the structures of government. Thus, related to
the mythology of autonomy, hierarchy, elitist cultnre, etc., the painting, according to the
artists under scmtiny, threatens the freedom of expression. Whether it functions in an of-
ficial state-owned gallery or in a private studio, whether it is abstract or figurative, the
painting as an expression of a particular culture makes impossible transcending the limits
of art and life. As a painting, it is unavoidably involved in conventions and the limitations
of artistic creation.