Radionica V

169AA NN AA LL II ZZ AA -- KK OO MM PP AA RR AA CC II JJ AAEKSTERIORIZACIJA GGRRAANNIICCEE

AA NN AA LL YY SS II SS -- CC OO MM PP AA RR II SS OO NNEXTERIORISATION OF BBOOUUNNDDAARRIIEESS

KIPARSTVO SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

konkavno-konveksne masaconcave-convex mass

PRATI GRANICU FOLLOWS THE BOUNDARY

probušena masapenetrated mass

UKIDA GRANICU ABOLISHES THE BOUNDARY

linijski i plošno istanjene mase linear mass, planar mass

SLOBODNE OD ZADANE GRANICEFREE FROM ANY GIVEN BOUNDARY

zbijena masamonolithic mass

SSEENNEEFFEERR//SSEENNNNEEFFEERR,,((XXVVIIIIII.. DDIINNAASSTTIIJJAA//XXVVIIIIIITTHH DDYYNNAASSTTYY,, OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 11445500.. PPRR.. KKRR..//BB..CC..))SSIIJJEENNIITT//SSIIEENNIITTEE,, 8833 CCMM,, LLOONNDDOONN

LL.. BBEERRNNIINNII//UU^̂EENNIIKK//PPUUPPIILL::AANN\\EEOO//AANNGGEELL,, 11666688..--7711..,, KKAAMMEENN//SSTTOONNEE,,RRIIMM//RROOMMEE

AA.. PPEEVVSSNNEERR:: DDIINNAAMMII^̂KKAA PPRROOJJEEKKCCIIJJAA ZZAA 3300º/

DDYYNNAAMMIICC PPRROOJJEECCTTIIOONN TTOO 3300º,

11995500..,, BBRROONNZZAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, 115500 XX 225500 XX 110000 CCMM,, PPAARRIIZZ//PPAARRIISS

plošnoistanjenamasaplanarmass

linijskiistanjenamasalinearmass

zbijena masamonolithic mass

DEBLO IMITIRANO U MRAMORU (xoan)

TRUNK IMITATED IN MARBLE

INTERAKCIJA UNUTARNJEG IVANJSKOG PROSTORA

INTERACTION OF INNER AND OUTER SPACE

HHEERRAA SSAA SSAAMMOOSSAA//HHEERRAA FFRROOMM SSAAMMOOSS,, OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 553300.. PPRR..KKRR..//BB..CC..,,MMRRAAMMOORR//MMAARRBBLLEE,, 119922 CCMM,,PPAARRIIZZ//PPAARRIISS

BB.. HHEEPPWWOORRTTHH:: EELLEEGGIIJJAA IIIIII//EELLEEGGYY IIIIII,, 11996666..,, BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, OOTTTTEERRLLOO

unutarnja granicainner boundary

vanjska granicaouter boundary

probušena masahighly penetratedmass

zadani vanjski okvir the given outer frame(prizmati~ni kameni blok) (the prismatic stone block)

168

KIPARSTVOVV//11

II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AASTVARALA^KI PROCES POGLEDA OSTVARUJE SE KAO GGRRAANNIICCAA

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNTHE CREATIVE PROCESS OF THE GLANCE REALISED AS

AA BBOOUUNNDDAARRYY

SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

"JA SAM KIPAR, TVORAC OBLIKA,U SVAKOM TRENU OBLIKUJEM JEDNOG IDOLA.ALI ONDA PRED TOBOM JA IH RASTOÎM."

(RUMI, PERZIJSKI PJESNIK 13. ST.)

"I AM A SCULPTOR, A MOULDER OF FORM, EVERY MOMENT I SHAPE AN IDOL.

BUT THEN, IN FRONT OF YOU, I MELT THEM DOWN”. (RUMI, PERSIAN POET, 13TH C.)

"…STVARAM NANOVO I NANOVO" (BHAGAVAD-GITA 9.8) "…I CREATE AGAIN AND AGAIN" (BHAGAVAD-GITA 9.8)

izoštravanjesharpening

are shown (pebble, gourd, iris, tree etc.) simulatingbut also making the participants aware, that we cre-ate the world every day usually unaware of it. Wesimulate the blur and become aware of it as thebasis and starting point of our vision. Creation meanscreating a boundary and separating light and dark-ness. The great Persian poet Rumi (13th Century) isquoted: “I am a sculptor, a moulder of form / Everymoment I shape an idol / But then, in front of you, Imelt them down.” By turning the lens repeatedly, theprerequisite of transformation is simulated.Instructions are given about the difference betweenthe literal and schematic perception, between anopen and closed one. The important things are not torepeat the scheme but to create a new magic again,and so avoid the restoration of the same thing.2. From the left to the right the following is project-ed: Sennefer (XVIIIth Dynasty, approx. 1450 B. C.,black sienite, height: 83 cm, British MuseumLondon), Hera from Samos (approx. 530 B. C.,marble, height: 192 cm, Louvre Paris), C. Brancusi:The Kiss (1908, lime-stone, 58.4 x 33 x 25.4 cm,Philadelphia) and other of Brancusi’s variations onthe same subject: small one (27 x 25 x 16 cm,Bucurest) and a big one (height: 125 cm, Paris).Attention is drawn to the shapes of the frame in allthe three examples (stone block in the case of theSennefer and Brancusi, trunk - xoan imitated inmarble in the case of Hera from Samos) and thefact that all three pieces of artwork respect the sup-posed boundary to the maximum degree.3. There is then an exploration of the presentedpieces of artwork through carving in chalk. The par-ticipants get prismic and cylindrical shaped piecesof chalk and with screwdrivers (“chisels”) try to takeoff its layers in order to get ratios/proportions similarto those in the presented artwork. The instructorshelp by measuring the projected sculptures and giveinstructions on the ratios and proportions, how theyare articulated (the mass-space relation).4. Sections are drawn (one vertical and the otherhorizontal) to make the participants aware of thetransitions in the relations of mass and space - ofhow the initial monolithic mass is transformed.5. There is then another exercise with “carving”. Theparticipants try to get cuttings similar to those seenin the presented sculptures and they draw the side-view of these.6. The workshop leader asks questions about theexperience before the projected artworks to help theparticipants gain an awareness of the experience.

Studenti kontroliraju omjere/razmjere kipova naprojekcijama/The students-instructors control theratios/proportions of the sculptures in the projections

“Kle{e” se i “bu{i”/“Carving” and “perforation”

Crtaju se presjeci/Sections are drawn

Prva izvedba radionica: 1995.-96.

Kao i u slu~aju radionica C r t e û i S l i k a r s t v o i u radionicama K i p a r s t v o se opet radi ospecijaliziranim radionicama. Sudionici se isklju~ivo bave upoznavanjem kiparskih djela i to, kao i uprethodnim radionicama, ~ine na svestran na~in, razli~itim metodama, povezujuæi kiparska djela sdrugim podru~jima.Kao i u svim specijalisti~kim radionicama, naglasak je na individualnom istraûiva~kom radu svakogsudionika, pri ~emu pomaûu studenti-instruktori. Struktura radionice je opet trodijelna. U svakomdijelu-bloku postoji sredi{nja tema. Novost predstavlja to da se na zid simultano projiciraju tri repro-dukcije. Temeljna je namjera i sada, kao i uvijek, pove}ati razlikovnu mo} u sudionika. Polazi{te supovijesna djela i ona se uspore|uju s modernim djelima.

U p r v o j radionici namjera je ste}i iskustvo da pogledom stvaramo, i uvijek iznova stvaramo svi-jet; ste}i iskustvo o stvarala~kom procesu na{ega pogleda koji se stalno i iznova ostvaruje u kiparskimdjelima, i to u prvom redu kao granica (vanjska i unu-tarnja); da kiparska djela ili vjerno prate granicu (zadani okvir) ili je ukidaju ili su posve slobodna uodnosu na nju; ste}i neposredno iskustvo o kiparenju kao oduzimanju od puno}e ~vrstog materijala,lju{tenjem/bru{enjem; osvijestiti da je glavni osjetilni sadrûaj kiparskih djela preobrazba iz jednogodnosa mase i prostora (vizualno-taktilnog pojma) u drugi, i da se transformacija uvijek doga|a umjerama, omjerima/razmjerima (oblicima).

Ambijent: Stolice i stolovi su okrenuti prema zidu. Koriste se tri dijaprojektora. Potrebne su kredeprizmati~nih i valjkastih oblika, olovke, papiri i odvija~i.

Struktura doga|anja1. Radionica zapo~inje ponavljanjem pojmova odnosa mase i prostora (vizualno-taktilnih pojmova)polaze}i od nejasne mrlje (zamu}ena projekcija) do oblika jasnih granica (izo{travanje) i, obrnuto, odvr-tanjem le}e vra}aju}i se do nejasne mrlje. Pokazuju se primjeri iz radionica P o ~ e l a i n a ~ e l a(oblutak, tikva, perunika, stablo itd.) simuliraju}i, ali sada i osvje{tavaju}i, svakodnevno ali neosvje{tenokreiranje svijeta. Simulira se i osvje{tava nejasna mrlja kao temelj i polazi{te na{ega vi|enja. Stvaranjeje stvaranje granice i odjeljivanje svjetlosti od tame. Citira se Rumi, veliki perzijski pjesnik iz 13. st.: “Jasam kipar, tvorac oblika / u svakom trenu oblikujem jednog idola / ali onda pred tobom ja ih rasto~im.”Ponovnim odvrtanjem le}e simulira se preduvijet preobrazbe. Upu}uje se na razliku doslovnog i she-matskog opaûaja, otvorenog i zatvorenog. Vaûno je ne ponoviti shemu, izbje}i da se uvijek obnovi istastvar i uvijek iznova stvoriti novu ~aroliju.2. S tri dijaprojektora projiricaju se istodobno slijeva nadesno Senefer (XVIII. dinastija, oko 1450. pr. Kr.,crni sijenit, visina: 83 cm, British Museum u Londonu), Hera sa Samosa (oko 530. pr. Kr., mramor,visina: 192 cm, Louvre u Parizu), C. Brancusi: Poljubac (1908., vapnenac, 58,4 x 33 x 25,4 cm,Philadelphia) i jo{ dvije Brancusijeve varijante s istom temom: manja (27 x 25 x 16 cm, Bukure{t) ive}a (visina: 125 cm, Pariz). Usmjerava se pozornost na oblike kadra u sva tri primjera (kameni blok uslu~aju Senefera i Brancusijevih kipova, deblo - ksoan imitiran u mramoru u slu~aju Here sa Samosa) ina to da sva tri djela u najve}oj mjeri po{tuju pretpostavljenu granicu.3. Slijedi istraûivanje predo~enih djela radom u kredi. Sudionici dobivaju kredu prizmati~nog ilivaljkastog oblika i odvija~em (“dlijetom”) poku{avaju skidati slojeve tako da dobiju omjere/razmjere{to sli~nije pokazanim kiparskim djelima. Instruktori pomaûu tako da na projekcijama mjere kipove iukazuju na omjere i razmjere njihove razra|enosti (odnosa mase i prostora).

First performance of workshops: 1995.-96.

As well as the workshops Drawing and Painting, thisworkshops are also specialized. The participants areexclusively occupied with sculptural works of art butas in the previous ones, they do it in a multisidedway, through different methods connecting sculpturalworks with other fields.As in all specialized workshops the accent is on theindividual exploratory work of each participanthelped by the students/instructors. The structure ofthe workshop is again tripartite. In each part-blockthere is a central theme. What is new is thatthrough all the workshops we project slides fromthree projectors simultaneously. The main intentionas always is to increase the discriminative possibili-ty of perception. Comparisons are made betweenhistorical works of art which are the starting points,and modern ones.

The intention of the f i r s t workshop is to gainthe experience of creating and recreating the worldwith our gaze; that the creative process of our gazebecomes materialised in sculptural artworks alwaysand repeatedly at first as a boundary (outer andinner); that sculptural artworks either faithfully followthe boundary (the given frame), or they abolish it, orthey are entirely free in relation to it. Further, theintention is to gain a direct experience of sculpturingas a departure from the fullness of a hard materialthrough peeling / carving into / in order to becomeaware: the main sensory content of sculptural art-works is a transformation from one relation of massand space (the visual-tangible concept) into anotherand that the transformation always happens in mea-sures, ratios/proportions.

Ambience: The tables are turned around to face thenarrower side of the room. In use are three projec-tors. We need prismic and cylindrical pieces ofchalk, pencils, paper and screwdrivers.

Structure of the activity1. The workshops begins by repeating the conceptsof mass-space relations (visual-tangible concepts)starting from a blur (the blurred projection) to theclear shapes of boundaries (sharpening) and viceversa, returning to the blur by turning the lens. Someexamples from the workshops Origins and Principles

170

VV//11

171

KIPARSTVO SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE KIPARSTVO SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

created connecting imaginary points in spacethrough linear masses. The boundaries are createdinside, in a space which becomes visible throughthem.11. In conclusion there is a summary. Each sculp-tural artwork creates boundaries in its own way,either accepting the given ones or establishing itsown. The boundary is our own creation whichitself determines the medium (surrounding) and inwhich surrounding concepts are formed (the rela-tions of mass and space in definite shapes - themeasures by which we think - see - create theworld).

4. Crtaju se presjeci (jedan okomiti i jedan vodoravni) da bi se {to bolje osvijestili prijelazi u odnosi-ma mase i prostora - to, kako se transformira po~etna zbijena masa.5. Jo{ jedna vjeûba s “klesanjem”. Sudionici poku{avaju dobiti usjekline sli~ne onima u pojedinihkipova i crtaju njihov profil.6. Voditelj pred projekcijom djela propituje o iskustvima, nastoje}i razgovorom pomo}i osvje{tavanjuiskustava.7. S lijevog projektora pokazuje se An|eo s mosta San Angelo u Rimu, rad Berninijeva u~enika premamajstorovom crteûu (1668.-1674., kamen, ljudska veli~ina). Pokazuje se s pet snimaka i u razgovoruse osvje{tava postupak bu{enja i rezultat takvog tehni~kog postupka - penetrirana, visoko penteri-rana masa, plo{no i linijski istanjena masa, ukidanje bloka putem probu{enja, razbijanja, pokrenu}a.8. Sa sredi{njeg projektoru (dok na lijevom ostaje zadnji snimak kipa Berninijeva u~enika) pokazujese s pet snimaka Elegija III. (1966., bronca, Otterlo) B. Hepworth. Osvje{tava se kako se uz ~uvanjevanjske granice stvara unutarnja, i tako interakcija unutarnjeg i vanjskog prostora (polazi{te je zbije-na masa elipsoida - usporedba s imitiranim deblom kod Here sa Samosa).9. Sudionici poku{avaju bu{iti i probu{iti zbijenu masu (kreda), isku{avaju}i odnose koji vladaju uBerninijevom i Hepworthi~inom kipu.10. S tre}eg (desnog) projektora pokazuju se dvije snimke Dinami~ke projekcije za 30° A. Pevsnera (1950., bronca, 100 x 250 x 100 cm, Muzej moderne umjetnosti, Pariz). Osvje{tava sekako u Pevsnerovom kipu vlada sloboda u odnosu na bilo kakvu unaprijed zadanu granicu. Kip nasta-je povezivanjem imaginarnih to~aka u prostoru putem linijski istanjenih masa. Granice su iznutrastvorene u prostoru koji, putem njih, postaje vidljiv.11. Na kraju se sumira. Svako kiparsko djelo na svoj na~in stvara granice, bilo pri-hva}anjem danih, bilo uspostavljanjem vlastitih. Granica je na{a vlastita tvorevina koja sebi odre|ujesredinu (medij), i u toj sredini nastaju pojmovi (odnosi mase i prostora odre|enih oblika - mjera,kojom svijet mislimo - vidimo - stvaramo).

1737. On the left projector an Angel is shown from thebridge of San Angelo in Rome, the work of aBernini’s pupil according to the Master’s drawing(1668.-74., stone, human scale). Five slides areprojected and during the discussion we becomeaware of the procedure of carving into and theeffect of this technical procedure - the penetratedand highly penetra-ted mass, linear and planarmass, abolishing the block through bruising, break-ing and motion.8. Five slides of B. Hepworth’s Elegy III (1966,bronze, Otterlo) are projected from the projector inthe middle (while on the left there is still the lastslide of Bernini). We become aware that besideskeeping the outer boundary, an inner one is createdand in this way an interaction of the inner and outerspace is achieved (the initial is an ellipsoidal mono-lithic mass - a comparison with the imitation of thetrunk at Hera from Samos).9. The participants try to drill into and make holes inthe monolithic mass (chalk) exploring the relationswhich dominate in Bernini’s and Hepworth’s sculp-tures.10. From the third (right) projector two slides of theDynamic projection of 30° by A. Pevsner (1950,bronze, 100 x 250 x 100 cm, Museum of Modern artParis) are projected. The participants become awareof the domination of freedom in relation to any givenboundary in Pevsner’s sculpture. The artwork is

172

VV//11 KIPARSTVO SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE KIPARSTVO SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

KIPARSTVO

175

SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

AA NN AA LL II ZZ AA -- KK OO MM PP AA RR AA CC II JJ AA AA NN AA LL YY SS II SS -- CC OO MM PP AA RR II SS OO NN

prvi slojfirst level

drugi slojprema unutrasecond level

towards inside

treæi slojthird level

SSAANNTTOO DDOOMMIINNGGOO,, 1111.. SSTT..//1111TTHH CC..,, ((KKAAPPIITTEELL//CCAAPPIITTAALL)),,SSIILLOOSS

DDUU@@DDEEVVAA PPAALLAA^̂AA//DDOOGGEE''SS PPAALLAACCEE,, 1144.. SSTT..//1144TTHH CC..,,KKAAPPIITTEELL//CCAAPPIITTAALL,,VVEENNEECCIIJJAA//VVEENNIICCEE

horror vacui

prostorni zakonspace law

plošni zakonplanar law

30 cm60 cm

slobodafreedom

iluzija prazninethe illusion of a void

FF.. LLAAUURRAANNAA ((FF.. VVRRAANNJJAANNIINN))::IIZZAABBEELLAA AARRAAGGOONNSSKKAA//IIZZAABBEELLLLEE DD''AARRAAGGOONN,, OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 11447700..,, MMRRAAMMOORR//MMAARRBBLLEE,, BBEE^̂//VVIIEENNNNAA

ÛVA OBLIK ZADANE PLOÊ A IPAK JE SLOBODAN KEEPING THE FORM OF THE GIVEN PLATE YET IT IS FREE

mekane sjenesoft shadows

opklesavanjehewing, carving around

174

VV//22 KIPARSTVO SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AAZAKON KADRA

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNTHE LAW OF FRAME

VLADA PLOŠNI ZAKON KADRApoštuje se plošni oblik pravokutnika, veli~inom, poloûajem, kretnjama prikazanih likova

DOMINATES THE PLANAR LAW OF FRAMErespects the planar shape of rectangle

with measures, positions, gestures of the figures

VLADA PROSTORNI ZAKON KADRApoštuje se prostorni oblik prizme ujedna~enom visinom reljefa

DOMINATES THE SPATIAL LAW OF FRAMErespects the prismatic form with an even height of relief

OOLLTTAARRNNAA PPRREEGGRRAADDAA//AALLTTAARR PPAARRAAPPEETT,, 1111.. SSTT..//1111TTHH CC..,, KKAAMMEENN//SSTTOONNEE,,9988 XX 118833 CCMM,, SSVV.. NNEEDDIILLJJIICCAA,,ZZAADDAARR

AA.. DDEELLLLAA RROOBBBBIIAA:: PPOORRTTRREETT DDJJEEVVOOJJKKEE//PPOORRTTRRAAIITT OOFF AA GGIIRRLL,,MMAAJJOOLLIIKKAA//MMAAJJOOLLIICCAA,,KKRRAAJJ 1155.. SSTT..//EENNDD OOFF 1155TTHH CC..,, FFIIRREENNCCAA//FFLLOORREENNCCEE

7 cm

OKVIR JE SAMOSTALAN, APSTRAKTAN THE FRAME IS INDEPENDENT, ABSTRACTRELJEF JE SAMOSTALAN, NE OVISI O OKVIRU, SLOBODAN JE THE RELIEF IS INDEPENDENT OF THE FRAME AND IS FREE

Aphaia (the Unseen) temple in Aegina, today in theGlyptothek in Munich (height: 47 x 240 cm length:15 m, approx. 510 B. C.) are projected. Attention isdrawn to the relation, to the architectonic frame ofthe tympanum, to the relation of mass and space inevery figure (penetration, thinning, concave-convexmass), to the rules which dominate in the relationsof the parts of the bodies, to the characteristics ofthe boundaries (surface, outline), to the form ofspace. From the projectors a large number of slidesare projected (the whole seen from different anglesand some details).5. From the first (left-hand) projector the whole ofthe Temple in Aegina is shown and from the twoothers a series of slides are projected of the altarparapet from St. Nediljica in Zadar (11th Century.,height: 98 cm; length: 183-235 cm, ArcheologicalMuseum Zadar). In the centre we can see The Flightto Egypt, the whole and the details and on the rightThe Visitation also the whole and details. Webecome aware of the different tempo in the articula-tion of the frame into three zones through anacoustic exercise. The participants in three groupsbeat at the same time with a different frequency(the speed: 8-10-24) to become aware that threearticulations are simultaneously offered to the eyeswhich ask for different speed movements of thegaze. The attention is drawn: a) to the spatial law of the frame: the reliefs notleaving the initial real boundary of the slab, respec-tively the imaginary plane parallel to the plane of thebackground; b) to the rule of repetition which domi-nates the whole, in the macro and micro shapes; c)to the relation of mass and space (textural surface -sunken relief).6. Leaving the slide of St. Nediljica on the centre ofthe wall, we present a slide of the cloister of SantoDomingo in Silos (end of the 11th Century.) on theright, some slides of the capitals out of the 64 thatthere are and eventually we rest on one of them (the17th one from the south east corner or the 2nd oneround the east-north corner). We become aware ofthe initial form of a truncated pyramid (dim: 60 x 30x 30 cm). We analyse the better preserved, narrowerside - an ornamental composition - interlaced birdsand lions represented in a reflexive symmetricalarrangement, the spatial law of the frame and horrorvacui, and a peculiar spaciallity (the plans createdby the parts of the animals’ bodies) which isevolved towards the interior in layers.7. The slides of all the three pieces of artwork areprojected onto the wall and the participants begintheir research helped by the students-instructors.The first group gets photocopies of Fürtwangler’sreconstruction of the tympanum in Aegine.

Namjera u d r u g o j radionici je osvijestiti po{tivanje ili ukidanje zakona kadra u reljefnim djelima- bilo plo{nog, bilo prostornog; istraûiti razradu kadra (razli~ita sintakti~ka pravila: zrcaljenje, rotacija,translacija i razli~ite razine - odnos detalja i cjeline); ste}i taktilno iskustvo o radu u tvrdom materi-jalu, iskustvo o variranju izbo~enja i o materijaliziranju linije.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnoj radionici. Potreban je ne{to ve}i prostor ispred radi izvo|enjapredstave. Sredstva su uûe, plahte, kaciga, tronoûac, trokuti, olovke, paus-papir, fotokopije djela itelevizor i video sa strane.

Struktura doga|anja1. Voditelj poziva jedanaest sudionika da se postave u red tako da je u sredini najvi{a osoba (“Atena”)i po pet osoba sa svake strane. Osoba u sredini }e odrediti visinu okvira pomo}u uûeta kojeg }e stu-denti-instruktori drûati na jednom i na drugom kraju tako da }e u sredini biti pri~vr{}eno na“Ateninu” kacigu. Kada se zategne uûe, govori se o zakonu izokefalije (realizira se samo u idealnimuvjetima predstave). Uûe se na jednom i na drugom kraju spusti tako da nastaje trokutasti okvir.Sudionici se pozivaju da se svojim poloûajima, kretnjama, ali u prvome redu visinom prilagodenovonastalim uvje-tima - promjeni okvira i da svojim tijelima demonstriraju plo{ni zakon kadra.2. Voditelj poziva jednog sudionika da se smjesti na tronoûac postavljen izme|u dvije plahte koje stu-denti-instruktori drûe paralelno s jedne i s druge strane. Kako se plahte sve vi{e pribliûavaju masanjegova tijela str{i i izbo~uje se kroz njih. Prvo se regulira odnos prema straûnjoj plahti, plahti poza-dine, nakon toga se poku{ava navesti sudionika-glumca da se smjesti tako da njegovo tijelo ni naprednjoj plahti ne stvara izbo~enja. Stalno se suzuje me|uprostor i sudionik-glumac sve teûe moûeudovoljiti zahtjevu.3. U razgovoru se osvje{tava {to se poku{alo odglumiti - plo{ni zakon kadra u prvoj sceni i prostorniu drugoj. U prvom se slu~aju po{tivao plo{ni oblik trokuta, a u drugom prostor izme|u plohe poza-dine i imaginarne, s pozadinom paralelne plohe.4. Sa svih triju projektora projiciraju se istodobno snimci timpana zapadnog pro~elja hrama Afaje(Nevidljive) u Egini koji se danas nalazi u gliptoteci u Münchenu (oko 510. pr. Kr., visina: 47-240cm, duljina: 15 m). Pozornost se usmjerava na odnos prema arhitektonskom okviru timpana, naodnose mase i prostora u svakom liku (penetracija, istanjenje, konkavno-konveksna masa), nazakonitosti koje vladaju u odnosima pojedinih dijelova tijela, na karakter granice (oplo{je, obris), naoblike prostora. S projek-tora se izmjenjuje ve}i broj snimaka (cjelina gledana iz razli~itih kutova i detalji).5. U prvom (lijevom) projektoru ostaje snimak cjeline hrama u Egini, a s drugim i tre}im projek-torom projicira se slijed dijapozitiva oltarne pregrade iz Sv. Nediljice u Zadru (11. st., visina: 98 cm;duljina: 235 cm i 183 cm; debljina: 7 cm, Zadar, Arheolo{ki muzej). Sa srednjeg se projicira Bijeg uEgipat, cjelina i detalji, a s desnog Vizitacija, cjelina i detalji. Zvukovnom vjeûbom osvje{tava serazli~iti tempo u razradi kadra u tri pojasa. Sudionici u tri grupe udaraju razli~itom u~estalo{}u(brzinom 8-10-24) istodobno, da bi se osvijestilo da su o~ima ponu|ene istodobno tri razrade kojetraûe razli~ita kretanja pogleda. Usmjerava se pozornost: a) na prostorni zakon kadra: reljefnost nenapu{ta po~etnu realnu granicu plo~e, odnosno imaginarnu plohu paralelnu s plohom pozadine; b)na zakonitost ponavljanja koja vlada u cjelini, u makro i mikro oblicima; c) na odnos mase i prostora(teksturalna povr{ina - uleknuti reljef).6. Ostavljaju}i snimak Sv. Nediljice projiciran na sredi{njem dijelu zida, na desnoj se strani projicirasnimak samostanskog dvori{ta Santo Domingo u Silosu (kraj 11. st.) nekoliko snimaka kapitela, odsveukupno 64 i kona~no se ostaje na jednom (17., kre}u}i od jugoisto~nog ugla tj. 2. izasjeveroisto~nog ugla). Osvje{tava se polazni oblik krnje piramide (veli~ina: 60 x 30 x 30 cm).Analizira se bolje sa~uvana uûa strana - ornamentalna kompozicija - preplet prikazanih ptica i lavovau zrcalnosimetri~nom rasporedu, prostorni zakon kadra i horror vacui, te naro~ita prostornost(planovi koje tvore pojedini dijelovi tijela ûivotinja) koja se razvija prema unutra u slojevima. 7. Snimci sva tri djela su projicirani na zid, i sudionici zapo~inju istraûivanje uz pomo} studenata-instruktora. Prva grupa dobiva fotokopije Fürtwanglerove rekonstrukcije timpana u Egini. Sudionici

177The intention of the s e c o n d workshop is tobecome aware of respecting or abolishing the lawof the frame in reliefs - either planar or spacial; toexplore the articulation of a frame (different syntac-tic rules: reflection, rotation, translation and differentlevels - the relation between a detail and the whole);to gain a tangible experience of working on hardmaterial, of varying convexities and of the materiali-sation of lines.

Ambience: The same as in the former workshopwith however a larger space in front because of theperformance. The means: cord, sheets, a helmet, atripod, triangles, pencils, tracing paper, photocopiesof the artworks, a TV set and a video player.

Structure of the activity1. The workshop leader invites eleven participants tostand in a row so that the tallest one is in the centre(“Athene”) and five of them on each side. The per-son in the centre will define the heights of the frameby the cord which the students-instructors hold atone end and the other so that it will be fixed on“Athene’s” helmet in the centre. When the cord istightened we talk about isokephalia, (which can berealised only in optimal conditions). The cord is low-ered at one end and the other so that there remainsa triangular frame. The participants are invited toadapt the movements of their bodies with their posi-tions, but in the first place with their height to newconditions - the transformation of the frame and todemonstrate with their bodies the planar law of theframe.2. The workshop leader invites one participant totake his/her place on a tripod put between twosheets which the students hold parallelly on bothsides of it. As the sheets are put closer and closerto each other, the mass of his/her body projectsand protrudes through them. First the relation to theback sheet, the sheet of the background is defined,afterwards the participant-actoraccommodates/locates him/herself so that his/herbody does not cause any bulges not even in thefront sheet. The interspace gets closer and closerand the participant-actor finds it more and more dif-ficult to achieve the task.3. During discussion we become aware of what wehave tried to perform - the planar law of the frame inthe first scene and the spatial one in the secondone. In the first case the planar shape of the trianglewas respected and in the second the space betweenthe plane of the background and an imaginary one,parallel, to the background plane.4. Simultaneously, from all three projectors theslides of the tympanum of the western façade of

176


Reûira se razmje{taj likova na timpanu uEgini/A composition of the figures in tympanum inAegina is directed

Reûira se razmje{taj likova na timpanu uEgini/A composition of the figures in tympanum inAegina is directed

Isprobava se prostorni zakon kadra (jedansudionik sjedi izme|u dvije plahte)/The spaciallaw of the frame is tried out (one participant sitsbetween two sheets)

Folijom se skida otisak sa reljefa Sv.Nediljice/A “print” of the relief of Saint Nediljica ismade with foil

Alkom i vrpcom se oprostoruje ornamantalnimotiv sa Sv. Nediljice/The ornamental motive fromSaint Nediljica is tried out in space with a ring and acord

Poku{ava se urezivati u gipsanoj plo~i / Cuts arecarved into a plaster plate

Aragon, approx. 1470 is projected. It is a peculiarrelief which respects the shape of the given slab,but the spatiality is evolved towards the inside,making all the plastic possibilities visible and tangi-ble. A special way of carving around it was usedwith the effect of soft shadows, over the whole, theeffect of free spreading into space. One participantfollows the boundaries of the protrusions in theprojected detail (on a piece of paper format A3)during which the workshop leader describes thecharacteristics of the curve. d) From the right pro-jector A. della Robbia: A portrait of a girl (end of the15th Century, majolica, Opera del Duomo, Florence)is projected. The difference from the altar parapet atSt. Nediljica is here the greatest. The frame hasbecome independent, it partly functions as a planarshape, but concerning the represented figure, whichprotrudes into the environment is a full abstraction,nothing plastical happens in it. In relation to theframe there is total freedom. e) From the same rightprojector a slide of a capital from the Doge’s palacein Venice (14th Century) is projected. In compari-son with the capital from Silos here the basic frameof cylinder/cone is not respected, even more of anillusion of void is present.

unose korekcije s obzirom na dana{nju postavu i crtaju glavna usmjerenja u postavi masa - zrcaljenje,rotacija - na razini cjeline i pojedinih likova. Druga grupa istraûuje oltarnu pregradu iz Sv. Nediljice,crta kadar i razradu kadra u tri pojasa i unosi glavne kompozicijske linije. Tre}oj grupi je prire|enarasklopiva krnja piramida od kartona. Sudionici rekonstruiraju kapitel, na sve plohe ucrtavaju glavnekompozicijske linije. Studenti-instruktori pomaûu u prvom redu tako da mjere kipove i timeolak{avaju poga|anje pravih omjera.8. Svi sudionici rade tri vjeûbe naizmjence. a) Aluminijskom folijom “skidaju” reljefnost s gipsanog odljeva Sv. Nediljice, istraûuju}i dodirom razli~ita udubljenja i izbo~enja i isku{avaju}i uvijek istu visinuizbo~enja. b) U gipsanoj plo~i, s odvija~em (“dlijetom”), isku{avaju razli~ite vrste ureza (iskustvo otvrdo}i materijala, njegovu otporu, alatu - ruci). c) Sudionici konkretiziraju liniju reljefa dobivenu ure-zom u linijski istanjenu masu i alkom i uûetom ponavljaju jedan motiv s oltarne pregrade.9. Vodi se razgovor o iskustvima.10. Pokazuju se kontrastni primjeri. a) S lijevog projektora projiciraju se: Dje~aci koji pjevaju L. dellaRobbije, s firentinske Cantorie (1430., Opera del Duomo u Firenzi), gdje se reljef postupno u planovi-ma osloba|a od pozadine, visoki reljef koji slobodno prodire u prostor ispred i na nekim se mjestimaposve osamostaljuje. b) Zatim se projicira snimak Bron~anih vratnica krstionice u Firenzi L.Ghibertija, tzv. Zlatne vratnice (1425.-1452.), detalj Legenda o Josipu. Ne samo {to se izbo~enja neravnaju prema zadanom prostoru, nego je ukinuta i pozadina, razra|ena u niskom reljefu, kojiiluzionira planove. c) Sa sredi{njeg projektora projicira se Izabela Aragonska F. Laurane (F. Vranjanin),oko 1470. Radi se o osobitom reljefu koji ~uva oblik zadane plo~e, ali }e prostornost razviti premaunutra, ~ine}i vidljivim, dodirljivim, sve plasti~ne mogu}nosti, i to posebnim na~inom obklesavanja,kojim se postiûu mekane sjene - u cjelini efekt slobodnog rasprostiranja u prostoru. Jedan od sudionikaprati granice izbo~enja na projiciranom detalju (format papira A3). Pritom voditelj opisuje osobinekrivulje. d) S desnog projektora projiciraju se: Portret djevojke A. della Robbije (kraj 15. st., majolika,Opera del Duomo, Firenza). Razlika prema oltarnoj pregradi iz Sv. Nediljice ovdje je najve}a. Okvir seosamostalio, djelimice funkcionira kao plo{ni oblik, ali u odnosu na prikazani lik, koji str{i u okolniprostor, ostaje kao ~ista apstrakcija, u njemu se ni{ta plasti~no ne zbiva. U odnosu na kadar vlada potpuna sloboda. e) Zatim se projicira snimak kapitela iz Duûdeve pala~e uVeneciji (14. st.). U usporedbi s kapitelom iz Silosa, ovdje se osnovni okvir valjka/sto{ca vi{e ne ~uva,dapa~e, iluzionira se njegova praznina.

179The participants insert corrections concerningtoday’s setting; draw the main directions in the set-ting of the masses - reflection, rotation - on the levelof the whole and on the level of particular figures.The second group explores the altar parapet from St.Nediljica and draws the frame and an articulation ofthe frame into three zones, inserts the main compo-sitional lines. An unfoldable truncated pyramid madeof cardboard is prepared for the third group. Theparticipants reconstruct the capital, they draw themain compositional lines of the surfaces. Students-instructors help in the first place by measuring theartworks and make the noticing/guessing of the realratios easier.8. All the participants do three exercises in turn a)with some aluminium foil they “take off” the relieffrom the plaster cast of St. Nediljica, tangiblyexploring the concavities and convexities andalways finding out the same heights of the protru-sions. b) In a plaster slab they try different sorts ofcuts with screwdrivers (“chisels”) they experiencethe hardness of the material, its resistance, the tool- the hand. c) The participants concretise a line ofrelief which is made by a cut and they repeat in lin-ear mass, with a ring and a cord one motive fromthe altar parapet.9. We discuss the experience.10. We show some contrasting examples. On theleft wall: a) L. della Robbia: The Singing Boys, fromthe Florentine Cantoria (1430, Opera del Duomo,Florence) where the relief is gradually, in the plans,liberated from the background, a high relief whichfreely breaks into the facing space and in severalplaces it is fully detached. b) After, L. Ghiberti's TheBronze Door of the Baptistery in Florence, the socalled Golden Door (1425-52), the detail of TheLegend of Joseph is shown. Not only does the pro-trusion not accept the given space but also thebackground is abolished, articu-lated in low reliefwhich gives an illusion of planes. c) From the cen-tral projector F. Laurana’s (F. Vranjanin): Isabelle d’

178


181



jo{ jednom: KRŠENJE ZAKONA once again: BREAKING THE LAW SLOBODA FREEDOM

NN.. GGAABBOO:: LLIINNIIJJSSKKAA KKOONNSSTTRRUUKKCCIIJJAA//LLIINNEEAARR CCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN,,11994422..--4433..,, PPLLAASSTTIIKKAA//PPLLAASSTTIICC,,WWAASSHHIINNGGTTOONN

ISTOST (NEODVOJIVOST) KADRA I KIPA SAMENESS (INSEPARABILITY) OF THE FRAME AND THE SCULPTURE

nositelj zakona je u potpunom JEDINSTVU s kipomthe carrier of law is in total UNITY with the sculpture

linijski istanjena masalinear mass

plošno istanjena masaplanar mass

180

KIPARSTVOVV//33 SSCCUULLPPTTUURREE

II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AAPOUNUTRENJE KADRA (GRANICE)

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNINTERIORISATION OF THE FRAME (BOUNDARY)

kadar se ne vidithe frame is invisible

vidi se u~inak the effect can be seen

u poloûaju likain the figure's position

IIMMEERREETT NNEEBBEESS,, EEGGIIPPAATTSSKKAA SSTTAATTUUAA//EEGGYYPPTTIIAANN SSTTAATTUUEE,, XXIIII .. DDIINNAASSTTIIJJAA//XXIIIITTHH DDYYNNAASSTTYY,, OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 11880000.. PPRR..KK..//BB..CC..,, DDRRVVOO//WWOOOODD,, 8866 CCMM,, LLEEYYDDEENN

neboheaven

zemljaearth

pove

zuje

conn

ects

ovanjštena osexteriorised axis

pounutren zakoninteriorised law

kadar se ne vidithe frame is invisible

BBEERRNNIINNII

PPEEVVSSNNEERR

SSVV.. PPEETTAARR//SSTT.. PPIIEERRRREE,,1122 SSTT..//1122TTHH CC..,, MMOOIISSSSAACC

because we would be punished if we did). b)Details are shown and a discourse is lead aboutthe mass-space relationship (concavity-convexity,different grades of relief, texturality), c) a filmabout St. Pierre is shown. The film registers themovements of the gaze and accentuates the manylevels of the relief and how they are interconnect-ed d) The participants get a photocopy and usingtracing paper draw the outlines. e) We announcethe theme of the next workshops, the theme ofaxis with the instruction about peculiarity: the axis,which symbolically connects Heaven and Earth inthe case of St. Pierre is exteriorised (the line fromthe head to the legs), while as we have seen thelaw is interiorised (reference: the end of theRomanesque is the beginning of the world whichends these days!).4. a) From the left projector we project Angel byBernini’s pupil again and from the right one A. dellaRobbia’s relief, and in the centre of the wall we cansee the Linear construction (1942-43, plastic,heigth: 61 cm, Washington) by N. Gabo. In front ofBernini’s statue the instruction is given again aboutabolishing the frame (block), about breaking thelaw, and in front of A. della Robbia's relief about lib-erating from the frame (slab). We change Bernini’ssculpture for Pevsner’s one in the projection todirect the attention onto the full freedom from theframe - and in the case of the new example, theLinear construction by N. Gabo, we become awareof the unity (non-separability) of the frame and thesculpture itself in discourse. The carrier of the lawis in total unity with the sculpture. Attention isdrawn to the mass-space relationship (linear mass,planar mass of transparent materiality). b) The par-ticipants trace the frame using tracing paper.5. Another example of the frame-sculpture unity: C.Brancusi: The Endless Column (1937, height: 30 m,gilded steel, Targu Jiu). It is compared with theHera from Samos (the balance between the givenhuman figure and the imitated trunk). In Brancusi’ssculpture there are no divided elements, no particu-lar dual condition, there is only the frame = thesculpture and the sculpture = the frame.

Namjera u t r e } o j radionici je osvijestiti pounutrenje zakona kadra i jedinstvo kiparskog djela ikadra; ste}i neposredno iskusto o granici-obrisu.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnoj radionici. Potrebna je prizmati~na kutija dovoljno {iroka i viso-ka da bi u nju stao ~ovjek. Tako|er su potrebne olovke, paus-papiri i fotokopije kiparskih djela.

Struktura doga|anja1. Na postolju u sredini stoji jedan student-glumac s kutijom u ruci, ostali ga obilaze u krugu. Redomnavla~i kutiju na svakoga od njih. Kada skine kutiju, svaki student-glumac ostaje stajati u poloûajuna kojega ga je kutija “prisilila”, ostali se dalje kre}u u krug, sve dok svi ne do|u na red. Na koncuglavni glumac navu~e kutiju i na sebe. Pita se {to se poku{alo odglumiti? Verbaliziraju se dojmovi.2. a) Sa sredi{njeg projektora pojavljuje se snimak egipatske statue Imeret-Nebes (XII. dinastija, oko1900.-1700. pr. Kr., drvo, visina: 86 cm, Leyden). S lijeva se ponovo pokazuje statua Senefera, a sdesna Hera sa Samosa. Pozornost se usmjerava na sli~nosti i razlike u odnosu prema kadru.Usporedba s predstavom - u slu~aju statue Imeret-Nebes ne vidimo vi{e kadar, ali na poloûaju likaosje}amo njegov u~inak. Zamu}uje se projekcija, podsje}a se na to da svakim danom iznova stvaramosvijet. Iako granice stvaramo mi, u povijesti umjetnosti (osjetilnom samoodgoju ~ovje~anstva)susre}emo eksteriorizaciju granice kojoj se djela prilago|avaju neposredno ili tako da se njihov oblikinteriorizira. Razgovor se vodi o odnosu mase i prostora kod Imeret-Nebes, i uspore|uje se s odnosomkod Senefera i Here sa Samosa (konkavnost-konveksnost, penetracije, visoke penetracije, istanjenja),pozornost se usmjerava na raznolikost u odnosima mase i prostora i poku{ava se prikazani lik “stavitiu zagradu”. b) Sudionici dobivaju fotokopiju statue Imeret-Nebes i na pausu izvla~e obris.3. S lijevog projektora opet se projicira snimak Sv. Nediljice, s desnog snimak kapitela iz Silosa, a sasredi{njega snimak portala Sv. Petra u Moissacu (12. st.). a) Tri se reljefa uspore|uju sa stajali{taodnosa prema kadru. Upozorava se na poloûaj, na omjere. Kadar se ne vidi, ali se vide u~inci kadra(jedna usporedba: stvara se zakon, onda ga ~ovjek eksteriorizira i ravna se po njemu, ili ga kr{i, ondaga pounutruje i npr. ne ubija vi{e, ali ne radi toga {to bi zbog toga bio kaûnjen). b) Pokazuju se detaljii vodi se razgovor o odnosima mase i prostora (konkavnost-konveksnost, razli~iti stupnjevi reljefnosti,teksturalnost). c) Gleda se film o reljefu koji prikazuje Sv. Petra. Film zapisuje kretanje pogleda iosvje{tava slojevitost reljefa, te na~in kako se slojevi nadovezuju jedan na drugi. d) Sudionici dobivajufotokopiju i na pausu izvla~e obris. e) Najavljuje se tema sljede}ih radionica - os - time da se upu}ujena osobitost: os, koja simboli~ki povezuje nebo i zemlju, u slu~aju prikaza Sv. Petra eksteriorizirana je(linija od glave do nogu), dok je, kako se vidjelo, zakon pounutren (uputa: kraj romanike je po~etaksvijeta koji upravo u na{e doba dotrajava!).4. a) S lijevog projektora se opet projicira An|eo Berninijeva u~enika, s desnog Portret A. dellaRobbije, a sa srednjeg Linijska konstrukcija N. Gaboa (1942.-1943., plastika, visina: 61 cm,Washington, privatna zbirka). Pred kipom Berninijeva u~enika ponovo se upozorava na ukidanjekadra (bloka), na to kako se kr{i zakon, a pred djelom A. della Robbije kako se osloba|a od kadra(plo~e). Kada se snimak kipa An|eo zamjenjuje sa snimkom Pevsnerove Dinami~ke projekcije za 30°ukazuje se na potpunu slobodu od kadra i u usporedbi s novim primjerom, Linijskom konstrukcijomN. Gaboa u razgovoru se osvje{tava ne samo potpuna sloboda nego i jedinstvo (neodvojivost) kadra ikipa. Nositelj zakona je u potpunom jedinstvu s kipom. Usmjerava se pozornost na odnos mase iprostora (linijski istanjena masa, plo{no istanjena masa prozirne materijalnosti). b) Sudionici izvla~e okvire na pausu.5. Slijedi jo{ jedan primjer jedinstva kadra i kipa: C. Brancusijev Stup bez kraja (1937., pozla}eni~elik, visina: 30 m, Targu Jiu). Uspore|uje se s Herom sa Samosa (ravnoteûa danosti ljudskog lika iimitiranog debla). U Brancusijevoj skulpturi nema razdvojenih elementa, dvojne danosti, postojikadar = kip, kip = kadar.

183The intention of the t h i r d workshop is tobecome aware of the interiorisation of the frameand the unity of the sculptural work and the frame;to gain direct experience of the boundary/outline.

Ambience: As in the former workshop. We need aprismic box wide and tall enough for a human fig-ure. Pencils, tracing paper, photocopies of pieces ofsculptural artworks are prepared.

Structure of the activity1. A student-actor stands on a pedestal in the cen-tre with a box in his hands, the others go aroundhim. He puts the box on each of them one by one.When he takes the box off, the students-actorsstay in their positions which the box has “forced”them, the other ones continue all around till theyhave all had their turn. In the end the main actorputs the box on himself. What was the intention ofthis performance? The impressions are verbalized.2. From the central projector Imeret-Nebes, Egiptianstatue (XIIth dynasty about 1900-1700 B.C; height86 cm, wood, Leyden) is projected. The statue ofSennefer is presented again on the left and on theright Hera from Samos. Attention is drawn to thesimilarities and diffe-rences in relation to the frame.It is compared with the performance - in the case ofthe statue of Imeret-Nebes we cannot see the frameanymore, we only feel the effect in the position ofthe figure. The projection is blurred, we are remind-ed that we create the world from the beginningevery day. Although we create the boundaries byourselves in the history of art (in the sensory self-education of mankind) we find an exteriorisation ofthe boundary to which the artworks adapt directlyor by interiorising their shape. There is a talk aboutthe relation of mass and space in the case ofImeret-Nebes and a comparison is made withSennefer and Hera from Samos (concavity-convexi-ty, penetration, high penetration, thinning) the atten-tion is drawn to the diversities in the relationshipwith an attempt “to put” the represented figure “intobrackets”. The participants get a photocopy of thestatue of Imeret-Nebes and they draw the outlineson tracing paper.3. A slide of St. Nediljica from the left projectorappears again, from the right that of the capitalfrom Silos and on the central part of the wall aslide of the portal of St. Pierre in Moissac areseen. a) The three reliefs are compared concern-ing their relationship to the frame. Instructions aregiven about their position and their ratios. Theframe cannot be seen, but we can see the effectsof the frame (a comparison: A law is created, thenit is exteriorised and we behave according to it orwe break it. Then it is interiorised and obeys it. Forexample we do not kill anybody anymore but not

182


Studenti izvode predstavu o u~inku prostornogzakona kadra/The students-instructors perform aplay about the effects of the spacial law of the frame

Preko pausa se izvla~e obrisi/The outlines aredrawn through tracing paper

Studenti/voditelj tuma~e/The students-instruc-tors/workshop leader explain

Preko pausa se izvla~e obrisi/The outlines aredrawn through tracing paper

185



WWOOLLFFRRAAMM II HHIILLTTIIBBUURRGG::SSVVJJEE]]NNJJAAKK//CCAANNDDEELLAABBRRUUMM,,1122.. SSTT..//1122TTHH CC..,, EERRFFUURRTT

konkretizirana os KIP = OSthe materialised axis SCULPTURE = AXIS

AA.. GGIIAACCOOMMEETTTTII:: VVOOZZAA^̂//WWAAGGOONNDDRRIIVVEERR,,11995500..,, BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, BBAASSEELL//BBAASSLLEE

rubedge

""VVEENNEERRAA"" IIZZ LLEESSPPUUGGUUEEAA//""VVEENNUUSS"" FFRROOMM LLEESSPPUUGGUUEE,,AAUURRIIGGNNAACCIIEENN,, KKOOSSTT//BBOONNEE,, 1144 CCMM,, PPAARRIIZZ//PPAARRIISS

NIJE POSTAVLJENA NO SETTING

184


II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AAOOSS (AXIS MUNDI, BRAHMA SUTRA) IZNUTRA ODREÐUJE ODNOSE MASE I PROSTORA TE NJIHOVO OÎTOVANJE NA OPLOŠJU

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNAAXXIISS (AXIS MUNDI, BRAHMA SUTRA)

DEFINES FROM INSIDE THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MASS AND SPACEAND THEIR MANIFESTATION ON THE SURFACE

yoga mudra

frontalni stav likafrontal posture

uspravnostuprightness

zrcalnosimetri~nakompozicijareflexive symetriccomposition

postava = ugra|eno o~ištesetting = installed viewpoint

zrcalnosimetri~na kompozicijareflexive symetric composition

BBUUDDDDHHAA IIZZRRII^̂EE ZZAAKKOONN//BBUUDDDDHHAA AANNNNOOUUNNCCIINNGG TTHHEE LLAAWW,, 99.. SSTT..//99TTHH CC..,, BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, 6699 CCMM,, TTAAJJLLAANNDD//TTHHAAIILLAANNDD,, NNEEWW YYOORRKK

UUPPRRAAVVLLJJAA^̂ KKOOLLAA//,, WWAAGGOONNDDRRIIVVEERR,,OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 447700 PPRR.. KKRR..//BB..CC..,,BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, 118800 CCMM,,DDEELLFFII//DDEELLPPHHII

sljemepeak

istanjena masalinear mass

emajlenamel

postava na postoljesetting on the base

pieces of wire. c) Using tracing paper they drawthe outlines and the lines of the axis/axes. Duringthe work the students measure the sculptures andgive the data about their ratios to the participants.5. Summarizing the experience gained by the explo-ration.6. We present some details of the same sculpturesand we explore the surfaces: a) by observing andtalking we compare the representation of the hair,face, drapery. Attention is drawn to some tiny dif-ferences in the stylisation, towards a large numberof different directions of the forms which are in aninterior balance (the unity of diversities - a hiddenaxis which keeps all of them together); b) by work-ing in clay: the participants try to get linear cuts, linear masses spirally curved etc. They gain anawareness of the gesture/movement with whichthey work and the gesture/movement which is suggested. Attention is drawn to the differencesbetween their own attempts and the surfaces in theobserved sculptures.7. From the left projector the paleolithic Venus fromLespugue (bone, 14 cm, Musèe de l'Homme, Paris)is presented. We see two axes, one longer the othershorter (double reflection), but no setting exists, noincorporated viewpoint. We compare it with theWagon-driver from Delphi and with theCandelabrum from Erfurt. The Greek statue is set,but the original basis is lost while in the case of theRomanesque sculpture it is well preserved and isan integral part of the artwork. Attention is drawn tothe relation between the axes (the composition ofthe statue), the setting and the basis (compositionof the basis).8. From the left projector a detail of the Royal Portalof Chartres Cathedral is shown (12th Century). It isa personification of the axis and also a detachmentfrom the exteriorised axis (architectonic element ofthe column). In the centre of the wall TheWagondriver can still be seen and on the right sidewe project A. Giacometti’s Wagondriver (1950,bronze, Basle). It is an extraordinary example wherethe hidden essence of the sculptural artwork - theaxis is concretised, and becomes equal with theartwork itself - the unity of the space-mass relation-ship and the law (Instructions about the analogy: N.Gabo’s Linear construction is the unity of theboundary - frame and the sculptural artwork).

U ~ e t v r t o j radionici namjera je, putem raznovrsnih iskustava (scenska simulacija,konkretizacija ûicom, linijom), osvijestiti kako imaginarna linija, os (brahma-sutra) iznutra odre|ujeodnos mase i prostora i kako se taj odnos o~ituje na oplo{ju (povr{ina); ste}i neposredno iskustvo oradu u glini radi oboga}enja taktilnog iskustva povr{ine; osvijestiti odnos izme|u osi, postave(ugra|enog o~i{ta) i postolja.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnoj radionici. Potrebno je pripremiti glinu, ûice, paus i fotokopijedjela.

Struktura doga|anja1. Ponavlja se glavna tema triju pro{lih radionica - granica koja izvana odre|uje kiparsko djelo.Najavljuje se nova tema sljede}eg bloka - os, sredi{nja imaginarna linija koju predaja poznaje kaoaxis mundi, brahma-sutru. U indijskoj estetici npr. sutra - nit - linija vezuje se za boûansko, za krajnjiuzrok svega, za transcendentno, upu}uju}i da je transcendentno izvor i utok umjetni~kog. Dok segovori, na sredi{nji dio zida projicira se snimak kipa Upravlja~ kola iz Delfa, dio kvadrige (po~etak 5. st. pr. Kr., bronca, lijevan od {est komada, nekada je bio pozla}en, s inkrustacijama i emajlom,visina: 180 cm), prikazan s le|a. U nastavku se pokazuju snimci sprijeda, iz poluprofila, deta-lja lica.Ukazuje se na mali pomak u odnosu na os.2. Na lijevu se stranu projicira snimak kipa Buddha izri~e zakon (9. st., bron~ani kip s Tajlanda, visi-na: 69 cm, Metropolitan Museum, New York). Uspore|uje se s Upravlja~em kola s obzirom na odnosprema osi, odnosno stav (frontalni), zrcalnosimetri~nu kompoziciju, poloûaj ruku (yoga mudra).3. Na desnu se stranu projicira snimak romani~kog svije}njaka iz Erfurta (12. st.; bronca, ljudskaveli~ina, u katedrali u Erfurtu, potpis: Wolfram i Hiltiburg). Uspore|uje se s ostala dva primjera uodnosu na uspravnost, zrcaljenje, kako se mase organiziraju prema osi/osima i kako se maseuobli~uju iznutra prema van (oplo{je).4. Slijedi istraûivanje: a) Studenti-glumci poku{avaju redom odglumiti stavove sva tri prikazana lika,projekcije snimaka svih triju kipova istodobno su na zidu. Pozivaju se sudionici da ih ispravljaju(reûiraju) i da poku{aju sami poluimaginarno-polustvarno zauzeti odre|eni poloûaj ili kretnju. b) Uzasistenciju studenata-instruktora istraûuju se osi kiparskih djela uz pomo} ûica. c) Preko pausa crtase obris i ucrtava se os/osi. Tijekom rada, studenti mjere kipove i sudionicima pokazuju omjere.5. Saûimaju se iskustva ste~ena istraûivanjem osi.6. Pokazuju se detalji kipova i istraûuje se oplo{je - karakter povr{ine: a) gledanje i razgovor:uspore|uje se prikaz kose, lica, nabora, usmjerava se pozornost na fine razlike u stilizaciji, na velikbroj razli~itih usmjerenja oblika koji se me|usobno uravnoteûavaju (jedinstvo razli~itosti - skrivena oskoja sve detalje drûi na okupu); b) rad u glini: sudionici poku{avaju dobiti linijske ureze, spiralnozavinute linijski istanjene mase itd., osvje{tava se pokret kojim se radi i pokret koji se sugerira, upozorava se na razliku izme|u vlastitih poku{aja i povr{ine u promatranim djelima.7. S lijevog projektora pokazuje se paleolitski kipi} Venera iz Lespuguea (razdoblje Aurignacien, kost,14 cm, Pariz, Musèe de l’Homme). Uo~avaju se dvije osi, dulja i kra}a (dvostruko zrcaljenje), alinema postave, nema ugra|enog o~i{ta. Uspore|uje se s Upravlja~em kola i Svije}njakom iz Erfurta.Gr~ka statua je postavljena, ali nam originalno postolje nije poznato, dok je kod romani~ke skulptureono sa~uvano i sastavni je dio djela. Usmjerava se paûnja na odnos osi (kompozicija statue), postave ipostolja (kompozicija postolja).8. S lijevog projektora pokazuje se detalj s Kraljevskog portala u Chartresu (12. st.). Radi se o per-sonifikaciji osi i odmaknu}u od ovanj{tene osi (arhitektonskog elementa stupa). Na sredi{njem dijeluzida ostaje projiciran Upravlja~ kola, a na desnom se projicira Voza~ A. Giacomettija (1950., bronca,Basel). Radi se o izuzetnom primjeru, gdje se konkretizira os - skrivena bit kiparskog djela, {to zna~ida se ostvaruje jedinstvo odnosa mase, prostora i zakona (upute na analogiju: Konstrukcija N. Gaboaje jedinstvo granice-kadra i kiparskog djela).

187The intention of the f o u r t h workshop is tobecome aware through different sorts of experience(scenic simulation, materialisation with pieces ofwire, with line) of how an imaginary line, the axis(axis mundi, brahma sutra) determines the mass-space relationship from the inside and how thisrelationship is manifested on the surface; to gaindirect experience of working in clay enriching thetangible experience of the surface; to becomeaware of the relation between the axes, the setting(the incorporated viewpoint) and the basis.

Ambience: As in the former workshop. It is neces-sary to prepare some clay, some pieces of wire,tracing paper and photocopies of the pieces of art-works.

Structure of the activity1. We repeat the main topic of the three formerworkshops - the theme of the boundary which,from the outside, determines the sculptural artwork.We announce the new topic of the next part - theaxis, the central imaginary line which is traditionallyknown as axis mundi, brahma sutra. In Indian aes-thetics, for example the sutra-thread-line connectswith the divine, with the utmost cause of everything,with the transcendent, directing to the transcendentas to the source and resource of art. While talking,a projection of the Wagondriver from Delphi is inthe the centre of the wall (beginning of 5th CenturyB.C. height: 180 cm, a part of quadriga; bronze,cast from six pieces, originally covered in gold leaf,the eyes enamel inlay) presented from behind.Some slides from before as well as some sideviews and details are shown. Instructions are givenon the tiny shift in relation to one axis.2. On the left-hand side we project BuddhaAnnouncing the Law (9th Century, bronze, Thailand,height: 69 cm; Metropolitan Museum, New York)and compare it with the Wagondriver from Delphiconcerning the relation to the axis, respectively theposture (frontal), reflex-symmetrical composition,the position of the arms (yoga mudra).3. On the right side we see a Romanesque cande-labrum from Erfurt (12th Century, bronze; humanscale; functioning as a candelabrum in the cathedralof Erfurt; signature: Wolfram and Hiltiburg). Wecompare it with the other two examples: posture,reflection, the organisation of the masses towardsthe axis/axes and how the masses are formed fromthe inside to the outside (surface).4. Exploration follows: a) the students-actors try toperform the postures of all the three figures in thesculptures projected simultaneously on the wall.The participants are invited to correct (direct) themand to try, by themselves, in a half imaginary and ahalf real way to take up these postures or gestures; b) With the help of the students the participantsexplore the axes of the sculptural artworks with

186


@icom se istraûuju os/osi: student-instruktorpomaûe/The axis/axes are explored with copperwire: a student-instructor helps

@icom se istraûuju os/osi/The axis/axes areexplored with copper wire

Rezultati istraûivanja se prenose na fotokopijekipa/The results of the explorations are transferredonto the photocopies of the sculptures

Isku{avaju se urezi u glini/Cuts in clay are triedout

Prstima se glina istanjuje/ Clay is thinned withthe fingers


AA NN AA LL II ZZ AA -- KK OO MM PP AA RR AA CC II JJ AA AA NN AA LL YY SS II SS -- CC OO MM PP AA RR II SS OO NN 189

POKUŠAJ RAZRJE[ENJA DVOJNOSTI AN ATTEMPT TO SOLVE DUALITY

MMIICCHHEELLAANNGGEELLOO:: DDRRUUGGOO OOPPLLAAKKIIVVAANNJJEE//TTHHEE SSEECCOONNDD PPIIEETTAA,,PPOO^̂EETTOO//BBEEGGUUNN IINN 11555500,,MMRRAAMMOORR// MMAARRBBLLEE,, 222266 XX 112233 XX 9944 CCMM,, OOPPEERRAA DDEELL DDUUOOMMOO,,FFIIRREENNCCAA//FFLLOORREENNCCEE

PROSTORNA SCENSKA KOMPOZICIJASPACIALLY SCENIC COMPOSITION

VREMENITA FORMALIZIRANA KOMPOZICIJATIMELY FORMALISED COMPOSITION

188


II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AA II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NN

VIŠE OSI + ŠIROKI KUTOVI = KOMPOZICIJSKA LINIJA SEVERAL AXIS + WIDE ANGLES = COMPOSITIONAL LINE

SSIINNAAGGOOGGAA//SSYYNNAAGGOOGGEE,, 1133.. SSTT//1133TTHH CC..,, KKAAMMEENN//SSTTOONNEE,,

SSTTRRAASSSSBBOOUURRGG,,

mramorni blokmarble block

poliranopolished

odlomljenobroken off

4. Slides (a large number) of the Second Pieta byMichelangelo (begun in 1550, marble, dim: 226 x123 x 94 cm, formerly in the Duomo, now in theOpera del Duomo) are projected from all three pro-jectors. a) Using the slides we describe the scene;describe the spacial-scenic composition, with thepresupposed spectators (it is not one viewpoint buta series of viewpoints). b) The participants are invit-ed to move in their imaginations the figures awayfrom each other. c) Four students-actors directedby a fifth one, perform the scene of Virgin Maryholding the dead body of Jesus with the assistanceof Mary Magdalene and Nicodème. d)The partici-pants get a number of photo-graphs, some pho-tographs of the bozzetto and some analytic draw-ings. e) Attention is drawn to the timely formalisedcomposition. The sculpture is circumambulated(three projectors are used) f) We talk about thetemporality of the spacial composition, the momentof a halted fall (past-future) and about the spatialityof the timely composition (the entire space is nec-essary, the “imagined space” to be able to see thesimultaenity of all the formalized flows). g) We lookat the details. The participants are instructed aboutMichelangelo’s peculiar manneristic procedure tosimultanously offer to the glance surfaces in differ-ent phases of being finished. We talk about how acomplex composition is articulated into details,about “the finished” and “unfinished”, and aboutbreaking as the final act of composition; h) some left side views are shown. We talk aboutthe inseparability of the two compositions andabout Michelangelo’s attempt to solve this duality (a shell-like frame - can be seen in analytic draw-ings), which was not finished. In fact if the Virgin’sand Nicodems’ bodies had been separated fromChrist’s the material connection between themwould be lost and the sculpture could not exist. i) We watch a film by D. Janda aboutMichelangelo’s Pieta made at a time when thesculpture was still on an altar in the Duomo; 5.The participants get a great number of pho-tographs as well as the photocopies of the details:a) they identify the details seen in the photographs;b) they identify the photocopies; c) while observing(the procedure is used because of the protection ofthe photographs) they mark the axes, parts of theaxes and parts of the compositional lines on thephotocopies with felt-tip pens.

Namjera u p e t o j radionici je usmjeriti pozornost na to da se neposrednim istraûivala~kimvjeûbama stekne iskustvo o povezivanju ve}eg broja osi u kompozicijsku liniju, {to se doga|a ueuropskim kiparskim djelima u doba gotike i renesanse; velikim brojem postupaka upoznati jednovrhunsko kiparsko djelo vrlo sloûene maniristi~ke kompozicije.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnim radionicama. Potrebni su ûica, paus-papir, olovke, flomasteri,fotokopije djela i detalja, televizor i video.

Struktura doga|anja1. Projicira se vi{e snimaka s razli~itih strana dvaju goti~kih i jednog renesansnog kipa da bi se ukaza-lo na povezivanje ve}eg broja osi u kompozicijsku liniju. a) Sa sredi{njeg projektora pokazuje se ale-gorijski prikaz Sinagoge (sredina 13. st., kamena statua) nekad na juûnom portalu katedrale uStrassbourgu, danas u muzeju u Strassbourgu. Usmjerava se pozornost na slomljenu, “savijenu” os,odnosno na to da se odnos mase i prostora ravna prema vi{e osi koje se, jer se me|usobno vezuju pod{irokim kutevima, mogu povezati u savijenu kompozicijsku liniju u obliku slova S. b) S lijevog projek-tora pokazuje se Donatellov Jeremija, nekada u ni{i na zvoniku Duoma u Firenci, danas u Opera delDuomo u Firenci (1423.-1426., kamen). Upozorava se na stav lika - kontrapost - iz ~ega jasno proi-zlazi lom osi ili, obrnuto, lom osi nosi sa sobom mogu}nost takvog stava prikazana lika. I u ovom seslu~aju povezuje vi{e osi u kontinuiranu kompozicijsku liniju. c) S desnog projektora pokazuje se drvenikip njema~kog kasnogoti~kog kipara T. Riemenschneidera koji je umro 1531. god. Kip prikazuje Sv.Elizabetu Ugarsku i nalazi se u muzeju u Nürnbergu. Ukratko se opisuje rad u drvu: dubljenje debla,u~vr{}ivanje, iz ~ega i proizlazi obrada samo u polukrugu (bila je namjenjena pogledu samo s prednjestrane). Kao i u oba druga primjera i ovdje se radi o povezivanju osi u kompozicijsku liniju.2. Sudionici dobivaju fotokopije i istraûuju sva tri primjera: a) ûicom poku{avaju mate-rijalizirati osi;b) crtaju preko pausa obris kipa; c) flomasterom u boji ucrtavaju kompozicijsku liniju u obris.3. Sa sva tri projektora redom s lijeva na desno pojavljuju se detalji istih kipova. Usmjeravanjempozornosti na ~itanje oblika oplo{ja poku{ava se osvijestiti njihova osobitost, bogatstvo, raznolikost,me|usobna razli~itost kao i to da se na oplo{ju, u intenziviranom, pove}anom obliku osje}a sve to {tose doga|a uslijed me|usobnog odnosa osi. Naspram raznolikosti razrade, os predstavlja jedinstvo, jersvu tu raznolikost drûi na okupu. 4. Sa sva tri projektora pojavljuju se snimci (veliki broj) Michelangelova Drugog oplakivanja (zapo~eto1550., mramor, 226 x 123 x 94 cm, nekada u Duomu, danas u Opera del Duomo). a) Opisuje se scenai prostorna scenska kompozicija s pretpostavljenim gledali{tem (nije jedno o~i{te nego je slijed o~i{ta). b)Pozivaju se sudionici da imaginarno poku{aju me|usobno odmaknuti likove. c) êtiri studenta-glumca,uz reûiju jo{ jednoga, izvode scenu Oplakivanja. d) Sudionici dobivaju fotokopije ve}eg broja sni-maka,snimke bozetta i analiti~ke crteûe. e) Usmjerava se pozornost na formaliziranu vremenitu kompoziciju.Skulptura se obilazi snimcima (koriste se sva tri projektora). f) Govori se o vremenitosti prostorne kompozicije, trenutak zaustavljenog pada (pro{lost-budu}nost) i oprostornosti vremenite kompozicije (potreban je prostor u cjelini, “imaginirani prostor” da bi se moglavidjeti istodobnost svih formaliziranih tokova. g) Gledaju se detalji. Upozorava se na Michelangelov oso-biti maniristi~ki postupak da istodobno pogledu ponudi povr{ine u razli~itim fazama dovr{enosti.Govori se o tome kako se sloûena kompozicija razra|uje u detaljima, o “dovr{enosti”, “nedovr{enosti”, orazbijanju kao mogu}em zavr{nom ~inu komponiranja. h) Pokazuju se lijevi bo~ni snimci. Govori se oneodvojivosti dviju kompozicija i o Michelangelovu poku{aju razrje{enja te dvojnosti ({koljkasti okvir -vidljiv na analiti~kim crteûima) koji nije izveden do kraja. Naime, da se Nikodemovo i Bogorodi~inotijelo {upljinom odvojilo od Kristovog, izgubila bi se materijalna veza me|u njima i skulptura ne bi bilamogu}a. i) Gleda se film D. Jande o Michelangelovu Oplakivanju snimljen kada je skulptura jo{ bila naoltaru u Duomu. 5. Sudionici dobivaju veliki broj fotografija detalja i njihovih fotokopija Michelangelova Drugogoplakivanja: a) na projiciranim snimcima cjelina identificiraju detalje vi|ene na fotografijama; b)uspore|uju}i fotografije i fotokopije identificiraju fotokopije; c) dok gledaju fotografije na fotokopija-ma flomasterom ucrtavaju osi, dijelove osi i dijelove kompozicijskih linija (radi se na fotokopijamazbog ~uvanja originalnih fotografija).

191The intention of the f i f t h workshop is to directattention to gain experience through exploratoryexercises how a greater number of axes is connect-ed in a compositional line in sculptural artworksthroughout the centuries from Gothic toRenaisance; to learn with a manyfold procedure asupreme sculptural artwork of very complexManneristic composition.

Ambience: As in the earlier workshops and weneed pieces of wire, tracing paper, pencils, felt-tippens, photocopies of the artworks and their details,a TV and a video.

Structure of the activity1. a) From the central projector we present an alle-gorical representation of the Synagogue (middle ofthe 13th Century, stone statue) formerly on thesouth portal of the Strassbourg Cathedral, today inthe Museum in Strass-bourg. Attention is drawn tothe broken “bent” axis, or precisely to the fact thatthe mass-space relationship is defined accordingto more axes which, because of wide angles, canbe joined in a bent compositional line, in an S. b)From the left projector Donatello’s Jeremiah, oncein a niche of the belltower of the Florentine Duomo,today in the Opera del Duomo in Florence (stone,between 1423-26) is projected. Instructions aregiven about the posture of the figure - contrapasto,from which the break of the axis originates or theother way round, the break of the axis carries thepossibility of such a posture of the figure. In thiscase also several axes are connected in a compo-sitional line. c) On the right side of the wall T.Riemenschneider’s wooden sculpture is presented.He is a late Gothic German sculptor who died in1531. The sculpture represents St. Elisabeth fromHungary and is displayed in the Museum inNürnberg. Briefly, we talk about the work in wood:the penetration of the trunk, the fixing, out of whichcomes the elaboration only in a semicircle (it wason display only from the frontal position). As in theformer two examples we got again a compositionalline out of several axis connected. We present allthree artworks with a number of slides from diffe-rent positions.2. The participants explore the examples: a) with a piece of wire they try to materialise theaxis; b) they trace using tracing paper an outline ofthe statue; c) with colour felt-tip pens they draw thecompositional line onto an outlined scheme.3. The details of the same sculptures appear fromall three projectors in sequence, from left to right.Drawing attention to reading the forms on the sur-face we try to become aware of their peculiarities,richness, diversity, differences and also that we canfeel all that occurs in the interaction of the axes onthe surface in an intensive, enlarged way. Contraryto the diversities of the articulation, the axis unifiesall these diversities.

190


Sudionici uz pomo} studenata pretraûujufotografije/fotokopije detalja Michelange-lovog IIoplakivanja/The participants with the help of the stu-dents-instructors search the photographs/photocopiesof Michelangelo’s Second Pieta, details

Rezultati istraûivanja se prenose na fotokopijekipa/The results of the explorations are transferredonto the photocopies of the sculptures

Studenti izvode predstavu: imitiraju scenuMichelangelovog II oplakivanja/The students-instructors perform: they imitate the scene ofMichelangelo’s Second Pieta

193



BEZBROJ OSI NUMBERLESS AXIS NEMA OSI NO AXIS

AA.. RROODDIINN:: @@EENNAA KKOOJJAA ^̂UU^̂II//TTHHEE CCRROOUUCCHHIINNGG WWOOMMAANN,, 11888822..,, BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, 8844 XX 6600 XX 5500 CCMM,, OOTTTTEERRLLOO

CC..OOLLDDEENNBBUURRGG:: GGIIGGAANNTTSSKKII MMEEKKAANNII PPRREEKKIIDDAA^̂//GGIIAANNTT SSOOFFTT SSWWIITTCCHH,, 11996666..,, 113300 CCMM,, KKÖÖLLNN//CCOOLLOOGGNNEE

OBNOVLJENA OS?THE RESTORED AXIS?

OS NO[ENA PRAZNINOMTHE AXIS CARRIED BY A VOID

AA.. PPEEVVSSNNEERR:: EELLAANN,, 11993388..,, BBRROONNCCAA// BBRROONNZZEE,, 113377 XX 1188 XX 2200 CCMM,, PPAARRIIZZ//PPAARRIISS

192


II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AA II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NN

KOMPOZICIJSKA TO^KA COMPOSITIONAL POINTBrahma bindu

SSHHIIVVAA NNAATTAARRAAJJAA,, CCHHOOLLAA,, IIZZMMEE\\UU 1100..--1155.. SSTT..//BBEETTWWEEEENN 1100TTHH..--1155..TTHH CC..,, BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, 9911,,55 CCMM,, BBOOSSTTOONN

BBRRAA]]AA AASSAAMM//AASSAAMM BBRROOTTHHEERRSS:: BBOOGGOORROODDII^̂IINNOO UUZZNNEESSEENNJJEE//TTHHEE VVIIRRGGIINN''SS AASSSSUUMMPPTTIIOONN,,11771177..,, [[TTUUKKOO//SSTTUUCCCCOO,, RROOHHRR

JJ.. AARRPP:: GGIIGGAANNTTSSKKAA KKOO[[TTIICCAA ((PPEEPPIINN))//TTHHEE GGIIAANNTT PPEEPPIINN ((PPIIPP)),, 11993377..,, KKAAMMEENN//SSTTOONNEE,, PPAARRIIZZ//PPAARRIISS

OKAMENJENA POTPUNA NEOSNOSTPETRIFICATION OF TOTAL UNAXIALITY

rotacijarotation

pupaknavel

Michelangelo’s work (there is no such effect thatthe figure will step further, while in Michelangelo’sPieta there is an effect of the moment of holding).3. The participants explore and check the photo-copies of the analysed example, and a series ofSouth Indian sculptures with the same subject andsimilar composition: a) with a piece of wire, b) bydrawing the wings of rotation and the centre.4. A number of slides about the Virgin’sAssumption from Rohr, the work of Asam Brothers(1717, Stucco) are presented from the right pro-jector. Instructions are given about the character-istics of the exclusive Baroque theatre. The ques-tion is posed about the axis, which we try to findtaking into account the great masses and greatinterspaces in the vertical line. The brahma-bindu,the central point is offered as more adequate forsolving the composition, it seems that from it theset of masses (Virgin and the angels) explodes inall directions. Instead of a large number of axeswe notice a large number of compositional linesand the connection with the cosmic is held not bythe vertical line but by the point.5. The participants mark the point and the composi-tional lines on the photocopies.6. A puzzle follows. In the central part of the wallBeatrice d’Aragon by F. Laurana (1487-89, paintedmarble, height: 45 cm, Vienna), appears; on the leftfirst The Head from Cyclade (approx. 3000 B. C.,marble) after C. Brancusi: Mlle Pogány (1931, mar-ble, height: 48 cm), on the right first C. Brancusi:Muse (1912, stone) after The Head from Cyclade(approx. 2500 B. C.). We do not give any dataabout the statues appearing left and right. There arethree marble statues, three busts. We talk about theaxes, about the tiny shifts and about the articulationof the surfaces. We concentrate on the smallchanges and the tiny differences. In the case ofLaurana’s statue we formulate the stylistic defini-tions (realism - idealism), in the case of the restreduction / abstraction. We notice the ge-neral for-mal similarities and fine formal diffe-rences (forexample more axes, a set of axes - radiates inBrancusi’s case and is shifted in the one fromCyclade, the different relation of the convex and the concave on the surface). The question is posed when the two side sta-tues were created. We become aware of the complexity of stylisticproblems.7. From the left projector A. Rodin’s Orpheus(1892, bronze, 150 x 82 x 127 cm, Zürich) is pro-jected with a number of slides. Exploration goesthus: a) the student-actor tries to gain the postureof the represented figure; b) observing the slides wetry to find the axes (countless), compositional lines

Namjera je u { e s t o j radionici pokazati odmak od axis mundi, brahma-sutre ne samopove}anjem broja osi u kompozicijskoj liniji, nego i sklopovima kompozicijskih li-nija po kojima seravnaju masa i prostor; pokazati da se masa i prostor, umjesto ravnanja po osi, mogu ravnati i posredi{njoj to~ki (brahma-bindu); upoznati djela (ikonografski, kompozicijski) iz razli~itih kultura;osvijestiti sloûenost stilske pro-blematike; na primjeru modernog kiparstva osvijestiti kontrast izme|unepostojanja ni osi ni ugra|enog o~i{ta ni postave s jedne strane i restauriranja osi no{ene prazninom- prostorom s druge strane.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnim radionicama. Potrebni su fotokopije, flomasteri i paus.

Struktura doga|anja1. Pokazuje se kip Shiva Nataraja (juûna Indija, dinastija Chola, izme|u 10.-15. st., bronca, visina:91,5 cm, Boston). Govori se o teoriji razlike izme|u indijske i zapadne klasi~ne umjetnosti H. Zimmera.Zapadna klasi~na djela vode pogled, indijska djela namijenjena su unutarnjem pogledu, samodostatnasu, mirna i tiha, ne obra}aju se promatra~u, istodobno dijele prostor s promatra~em i cjelovito izranjajuiz nejasnoga. Kip Shiva Nataraja se prvo pokazuje zamu}enom projekcijom i postupno se slika izo{travada bi simulirali i istraûili efekti cjelovitog zahva}anja.2. Uz o{tru projekciju slijedi: a) ikonografski opis: atribut stvaranja je mali bubanj (zvuk), atributrazaranja (plamen), abhaya-mudra (“ne boj se”, za{tita, mir), podsje}anje na Gane{u (uklanjanjezapreka), gazi po Asuri (demon neznanja), nimb od plamenova (ûivotni procesi univerzuma), pijedestalod lotosa (savr{ena harmonija, receptivnost kozmosa), ples (kozmi~ki plesa~ utjelovljuje stvaranje,odrûavanje, zastiranje, uni{tenje, umirenje); b) opis kompozicije: umjesto osi istraûuje se sredi{nja to~kabrahma-bindu koja se poklapa s pupkom prikazanog lika; c) opis razrade kruga (fragmenti rotacije). d) Isto-dobno se na sredi{njem dijelu zida projicira Michelangelovo Drugo oplakivanje i uspo-re|uje senjegova vremenita kompozicija (vi{esmisleni tok ovalno-kaplji~aste forme) s avremeno{}u kipa ShiveNataraja. Uo~ava se tako|er i razlika u efektu: avremenost kipa Shive Nataraje (ne postoji dojam da }elik koraknuti dalje) i vremenitost prostorne kompozicije u Michelangelovu djelu (postoji dojam trenutkapridrûavanja).3. Na fotokopijama analiziranog primjera i niza drugih juûnoindijskih kipova, s istom temom isli~nom kompozicijom, sudionici ûicom i crtanjem krakova istraûuju i provje-ravaju rotacije i sredi{ta.4. S desnog projektora pokazuje se s vi{e snimaka kip Bogorodi~ina uznesenja iz Rohra, rad bra}eAsam (1717., {tuko). Ukazuje se na karakter ekskluzivnog baroknog teatra i pita se o osi, koja sepoku{ava prona}i uzimaju}i u obzir velike mase i velike me|uprostore u okomici. Nudi se brahma-bindu, sredi{nja to~ka kao prikladnija za odgonetavanje kompozicije. Iz sredi{nje to~ke kao da sklopmasa (prikaz Bogorodice i an|ela) eksplodira na sve strane. Umjesto velikog broja osi primje}ujemoveliki broj kompozicijskih linija, i veza s kozmi~kim odrûava se ne putem okomice nego to~ke.5. Sudionici na fotokopijama ozna~avaju to~ku i kompozicijske linije.6. Slijedi zagonetka. Na sredi{njem dijelu zida pojavljuje se Beatrica Aragonska F. Laurane (1487.-1489., obojeni mramor, visina: 45 cm, Be~), na lijevom prvo Glava s Kiklada (oko 3000. pr. Kr.,mramor, Atena), potom Gospo|ica Pogány C. Brancusija (1931., mramor; visina: 48 cm,Philadelphia), na desnom prvo Brancusijeva Muza (1912., kamen), potom Glava s Kiklada (oko2500. pr. Kr., kamen, Atena). Ne daju se podaci o kipovima ~iji se snimci pojavljuju lijevo-desno. Trimramorna kipa, tri biste. Vodi se razgovor o osima, o neznatnim pomacima koji se pojavljuju i urazradi oplo{ja. Koncentrira se na sitne promjene i sitne razlike. U slu~aju Lauranina kipa formulira-ju se stilske odredbe (realizam-idealizam), u slu~aju ostalih pojednostavljenje/apstrakcija. Uo~avajuse op}e formalne sli~nosti i fine formalne razlike (npr. vi{e osi, sklop osi - zrakasto se {ire uBrancusijevoj i pomaknute su u skulpturi s Kiklada, razli~it odnos izbo~enog i udubljenog na oplo{ju).Postavlja se pitanje kada su nastale dvije skulpture na bo~nim projekcijama. Osvje{tava se sloûenoststilske problematike.7. S lijevog se projektora projiciraju snimci Orfeja A. Rodina (1892., bronca, 150 x 82 x 127 cm,1892., Zürich). Istraûivanje se odvija ovim redoslijedom: a) student-glumac poku{ava zauzeti poloûajprikazanog lika; b) razgledavanjem snimaka traûe se osi (bezbroj), kompozicijske linije (veliki broj) i

195The intention of the s i x t h workshop is to showa detachment from the axis mundi - brahma sutranot only by a larger number of axes in the composi-tional line but also in sets of compositional lines invery complex artworks. Instead of aligning with theaxis it aligns with the central point (brahma bindu).The intention is also to get to know artworks(iconographically and compositionally) from differ-ent cultures; to become aware of the complexity ofa stylistic problem; to become aware of the contrastin modern sculpture between a non-existing axis oran incorporated viewpoint or setting and a restora-tion of the axis carried by an empty space.

Ambience: As in the former workshops.Photocopies, felt-tip pens, tracing paper are available.

Structure of the activity1. The statue of Shiva Nataraja (South India,dynasty Chola, between 10th-15th centuries, bronze,height: 91.5 cm, Boston) is presented. We talkabout H. Zimmer’s theory of the differencesbetween Indian and Western classical art. Westernclassical artworks guide the gaze, Indian artworksare intended to interiorize the sight, they are self-sufficient, quiet and peaceful, they do not refer tothe observer but they share the space with theobservers and as a whole emerge from indistinct-ness. The Shiva Nataraja statue we first show witha blurred projection and gradually we sharpen it tosimulate and explore the effect of perceiving itwholly. 2. In the sharpened projection there follows: a) an iconographical description. The atribute ofcreation is a little drum (sound), the attribute ofdestruction (flame), abhaya-mudra (“fear not”, pro-tection, peace), a reminder of Ganesha (removingof obstacles), dancing on the body of Asura(demon of ignorance), a ring of flames (the vitalprocesses of the universe), the pedestal of lotus(perfect harmony, receptivity of the cosmos), dance(the cosmic dancer is the embodiment of Creation,Preservation, Veiling, Destruction and Release); b) description of the composition: instead of theaxis we explore the central point, the brahma-binduwhich overlaps the navel of the represented figure;c) we describe the articulation of the circle (frag-ments of rotation). d) At the same timeMichelangelo’s Second Pieta is present on the cen-tral part of the wall and a comparison is madebetween, the temporary composition (the polysemicflow of the oval-droplet form) with the timelessnessof Shiva Nataraja, and the difference in effectbetween the timelessness of Shiva Nataraja and theeffect of the temporality of spacial composition in

194


Studentova predstava: lik Orfeja u Rodi-novomkipu/A student-instructor’s performance: Orpheus’figure in Rodin’s sculpture

Zagonetka: koji pogled na Arpov kip?/ Puzzle:which sight on Arp’s sculpture?

Zagonetka: koji pogled na Arpov kip?/ Puzzle:which sight on Arp’s sculpture?

Istraûuju se kompozicijske linije ShivaNataraje/The compositional lines of Shiva Natarajaare explored

Istraûuju se kompozicijske linije ShivaNataraje/The compositional lines of Shiva Natarajaare explored

sculpture is shifted in environment and the largenumber of changes which are difficult to notice.12. On the right part of the wall we see Elan by A. Pevsner (1938, bronze, dim: 137 x 18 x 20 cm,Paris). In the first slide we notice that the axis isrestored, but in the second slide (a 180 turn) wediscover that the axis is fully carried by emptiness.This is an invitation to take part in the next work-shops.13. The participants have to bring two photographsnext time: early ones and those from the middle oftheir lifetime until now and to give it to the work-shop leader in a closed envelope.

ono {to ih sve nosi (upozorava se na otvaranje mase u prostor velikim brojem razli~itih usmjerenja ina uklju~ivanje postolja u kip); c) na fotokopiji se poku{ava odrediti sredi{te/sklop kompozicijskihlinija.8. S nekoliko snimaka za redom na sredi{njem dijelu zida pojavljuje se Rodinova @ena koja ~u~i(1882., bronca; dimenzije: 84 x 60 x 50 cm, Otterlo). Studentica poku{ava odglumiti te{ko izvedivpoloûaj. Zaklju~uje se da je posve nestala os koja bi prikazani lik vezivala u okomici s kozmosom.9. Na desnoj strani zida vidimo Gigantski mekani prekida~ C. Oldenburga (1966., polivinil, 130 cm,Köln). Ustanovljuje se da nema osi (bez obzira na to {to kip visi u muzeju), nema ugra|enog o~i{ta,nema postave.10. Sada se na lijevoj strani pokazuje kip J. Arpa Gigantski Pepin (Ko{tica) (1937., kamena varijanta,Muzej moderne umjetnosti, Pariz). Kao da se radi o u~vr{}enju, okamenjivanju potpune neosnostikao {to je Oldenburgovo djelo.11. Slijedi druga zagonetka. Sudionici dobivaju fotokopiju skupa od dvadesetak snimaka Arpova kipai potrebno je na}i one vizure koje se pojavljuju na projekcijama i ozna~iti ih. Time se osvje{tavakoliko su mase razli~ito razmje{tene prema prostoru, koliko je kip pokrenut u okoli{u i mnogobrojneali i te{ko uo~ljive promjene.12. Na desnoj se strani pojavljuju redom dva snimka Elana A. Pevsnera (1938., bronca, 137 x 18 x20 cm, Pariz). Za prvi se snimak primje}uje da se os restaurirala, dok drugi snimak (zaokret od180°) otkriva da je os potpuno no{ena prazninom. Time se najavljuje tema kojom }e se baviti usljede}im radionicama.13. Sudionici se mole da sljede}eg puta donesu dvije svoje fotografije, jednu po mogu}nosti najraniju,i jednu s polovice dosada{njeg ûivota, i u zatvorenoj omotnici predaju voditelju.

197(a large number) and what carries them.(Instructions are given about the opening of themass into space with a large number of directionsand about incorporating the base into the sculp-ture); c) trying to mark on on the photocopy thecentre / set of compositional lines.8. A. Rodin: The Crouching Woman (1882. bronze,dim: 84 x 60 x 50 cm, Otterlo) appears with severalslides in the central part of the wall. A student triesto perform this very difficult posture. The conclu-sion is that the axis which would vertically connectthe represented figure with the universe, has dis-appeared.9. On the right side of the wall we see C. Oldenburg’s Giant Soft Switch (1966, 130 cmKöln). We assume that there is no axis (despite thefact that the sculpture hangs in a museum) there isno incorporated viewpoint, there is no setting.10. Now we present J. Arp’s Giant Pepin (pip) from1937, (the stone variant, Paris, Museum of ModernArt) on the left side. It seems like a fastening or likea rigid variant of such a total absence of axes as inOldenburg’s work.11. The second puzzle follows: the participants getphotocopies of about twenty photographs of Arp’ssculpture (small format on a sheet of paper) andthe task is to find the sights which appeared in theprojections and to mark them. In this way webecome aware how differently the masses areplaced according to the space and how much the

196


199



sadrûa~container

GG.. RRIIEETTVVEELLDD:: SSTTOOLLIICCAA//CCHHAAIIRR,,^̂EELLIIKK,, KKOO@@AA//SSTTEEEELL,,

Na naljepnici Rietveldovih stolaca:On the labels of Rietveld's chairs:

(C.H. MORGENSTERN)

PRIBLI@AVANJE MASABRINGING THE MASSES NEAR

AA.. RROODDIINN:: KKAATTEEDDRRAALLAACCAATTHHEEDDRRAALL,, 11991100..,, GGIIPPSS//PPLLAASSTTEERR,,PPAARRIIZZ//PPAARRIISS

198


II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AANEVIDLJIVOST PRAZNINE

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNINVISIBILITY OF VOID

prošupljena masahighly penetrated mass

elipsoidni paraboloidelipsoidic paraboloid

VVEELLIIKKAA TTEERRIINNAA//TTHHEE GGRREEAATT EEAARRTTHHWWAARREE,, OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 22000000.. PPRR.. KKRR..//BB..CC..,,PPRROOMMJJEERR//DDIIAAMMEETTEERR 3322 CCMM,, VVIISSIINNAA//HHEEIIGGHHTT 2266 CCMM,, VVUU^̂EEDDOOLL,, AARRHHEEOOLLOO[[KKII MMUUZZEEJJ,,ZZAAGGRREEBB

penetrirana masapenetrated mass

konveksaconvex

konveksaconvex

konkavaconcave

"Sunce""Sun"

"oko""Eye"

"kriû""Cross"

sadrûa~container

hiperboloidhyperboloid

fall, the memory of which is kept by tradition, bythe myths in all cultures in some way. One possi-ble interpretation is: “the space (the cave) is not inme anymore” but “I am in the space (in thecave)”. In this intepretation the vessel is like thecave, but on a more human scale it can be held inthe hands, but it keeps the same primal memoryof the basic turn as the cave does.5. From all the three projectors we show the slidesof the Great Earthen Ware from Vu~edol (approx.2000 B.C., diameter: 32 cm, height: 26 cm,Archeological Museum, Zagreb). We talk about thecult vessel. The shape is described (down an ellipti-cal paraboloid over it a hyperboloid). It was notmade on the potter’s wheel but with linear massesput on top of each other in a spiral / ring-like wayand then transformed into planar masses.6. Photocopies of P. Rawson’s morphology of thevessels - a schematic representation of the genesisof shapes are distributed among the participants.7. We follow the growth and the grounding of thevessel in the projected slides, the variations of thesame shape (paraboloid, hyperboloid, cylinder) andthe interaction between them (the selfreferal shapesof the artwork). We observe the details of the ves-sel, and describe the circular shapes (“Sun”, “Eye”,“Cross”). Instruc-tions are given about a large num-ber of theories about the origins of the shapes anda more recent one is explained (entoptic shapes areuniversal and created by the mechanical stimulationof the eyes).8. On the right side G. Rietveld’s Chair is projected.The participants are invited to try, in their imagina-tions, to sit consciously on it. A text by C. H.Morgenstern which Rietveld put on his chairs is dis-tributed.9. The task is to raise the right fist, the studentsapproach the participants also with a raised righthand and come quite near to them. In a brief gamewe try to become aware – to “see” the space whichis created between the two convoluted and linearmasses.10. From the left projector we show A. Rodin’sCathedral (1910, plaster, Museum Rodin, Paris). Webecome aware of the procedure (The body frag-ments represented – performed in plaster by C.Claudel, Rodin’s cooperator, which Rodin had rotat-ed, and brought closer to each other). Every part cutout from a different angle presents a different, spe-cific shape.11. The workshop ends by drawing the participants’attention to the difference between the invisiblespace of a container and the space of Rodin’sshapes. 12. The workshop leader gathers the photographsin envelopes.

Namjera u s e d m o j radionici je razli~itim postupcima osvijestiti nevidljivost i nedodirljivostpraznine, prostora; ste}i neposredno vizualno iskustvo o nastajanju i preobrazbi oblika oblikovanjemsadrûa~a nevidljive i nedodirljive praznine utemeljenjem i rastom na lon~arskom kolu; uvesti u poljerazmi{ljanja koje u mogu}em zaokretu iz “prostor je u nama” u “mi smo u prostoru” prepoznajepoistovje}enja i porijeklo dalekih uspomena kojima reagiramo na posudu; osvijestiti da sepribliûavanjem masa prostor u kiparskim djelima poku{ava u~initi vidljivim.

Ambijent: Prvi se dio izvodi u lon~arskoj radionici, drugi na uobi~ajenom mjestu. Na stalku jeprire|ena “gotova posuda” M. Hrûi} potrebna za izvo|enje “rituala” i suho cvije}e/li{}e. Potrebne sui fotokopije.

Struktura doga|anja1. Majstor S. Vinkovi} prvo priprema glinu, zatim je vrti na kolu pro{upljuju}i masu i istanjuju}i je ustijenke. Dok radi, tuma~i {to radi. Voditelj povremeno upozorava: a) da je lon~arsko kolo veliki izum~ovje~anstva; b) da se i ovdje radi o imaginarnoj osi smje{tenoj u praznini, kao i kod zadnjeg prim-jera u prethodnoj radionici, gdje je “restauriranu os” u Pevsnerovom kipu nosila praznina; c) kakoposuda raste postupno i kako se preobraûava.2. Sudionici se vra}aju u u~ionicu gdje se na stalku ve} nalazi “gotova” posuda (ispe~ena, glazirana)M. Hrûi}, ~ije je stvaranje majstor imitirao na kolu. Sudionici se pozivaju da stanu u krug oko posudei da zajedno izvedu mali “ritual” odaju}i po~ast velikom izumu ~ovje~anstva, velikom ûenskomizumu. Govore se dva stiha iz 11. pjesme Lao Ceova Tao Te Kinga: “Od gline napravi posudu, koris-nost posude jest u unutarnjoj praznini.” S tim u vezi govori se o uporabivosti apsolutnog. Zatim segovori o poisto-vje}enju sa svakom posudom (razlika: ûenski se svijet preteûno poistovje}uje, a mu{kise odnosi), a to budi daleke uspomene. “Ritual” se sastoji u osvje{tavanju praznine punje-njem,kori{tenjem praznine. Studenti-instruktori donose suho cvije}e i sudionici ga skupa s njima stavljaju uposudu, dok se ona ne napuni. Upozorava se da prazninu ne vidimo. Cvije}e se vadi i tada opet vidi-mo stijenke posude, a ne prazninu: prostor je nevidljiv, ali se punjenjem i praûnjenjem moûe koristiti.3. Sa sredi{njeg projektora pokazuje se Pogrebna kultna skulptura s Krete (kruûni ples). Upozorava seda u tom djelu moûemo vidjeti sebe, neku vrstu zrcalne slike na{eg “rituala”.4. Slijedi snimak glave ~udovi{ta iz maniristi~kog parka u Bomarzu gdje u velikim ustima netko stoji.Govori se o velikom preokretu, katastrofi, padu, o kojima spomen ~uva predaja (mitovi u svim kul-turama, u nekom obliku). Jedna mogu}a interpretacija: “prostor ({pilja) nije vi{e u meni” nego “samja u prostoru ({pilji)”. U tragu te interpretacije posuda je poput {pilje, ~uva uspomenu na isti prastaritemeljni preokret kao i {pilja, ali je po mjeri bliûa ~ovjeku, u nju se ne ulazi, nego se drûi u rukama.5. Sa sva tri projektora pokazuju se snimci Velike terine iz Vu~edola (oko 2000. pr. Kr., promjer: 32cm, visina: 26 cm, Arheolo{ki muzej, Zagreb). Govori se o kultnoj posudi. Opisuje se oblik (doljeelipsoidni paraboloid, a iznad hiperboloid). Nije ra|ena na kolu nego se linijski istanjene masenadostavljaju spiralno/prstenasto i onda se plo{no ista-njuju.6. Sudionicima se dijeli fotokopija morfologije posude P. Rawsone - shematski prikaz geneze oblika.7. Na snimcima se prati rast i utemeljenje vu~edolske posude. Varijacije istog oblika (paraboloida,hiperboloida, valjka) i njihov me|usobni odnos (samoodnosnost oblika umjetni~kog djela). Gledaju sedetalji. Opisuju se kruûni oblici (“sunce”, “oko”, “kriû”). Upu}uje se na veliki broj teorija o porijeklutih oblika i govori se o jednoj novijoj (entopti~ki oblici nastaju mehani~kim stimuliranjem o~iju i uni-verzalni su).8. Na desnoj strani projicira se Stolica G. Rietvelda. Sudionici se pozivaju da u imaginaciji poku{ajusvjesno sjediti u njoj. Dijeli se tekst C.H. Morgensterna koji je Rietveld lijepio na svoje stolice.9. Traûi se da sudionici dignu desnu {aku, prilaze im studenti s tako|er dignutom desnom {akom ipribliûavaju se svakom sudioniku pojedina~no. Kratkom se igrom poku{ava osvijestiti - “vidjeti” pros-tor koji nastaje pribliûavanjem dviju razvedenih i istanjenih masa.10. S lijevog projektora pokazuje se Katedrala A. Rodina (1910., gips, Muzej Rodin, Pariz).Osvje{tava se postupak (fragmente tijela koje je prikazala-izvela u gipsu surad-nica C. Claudel,Rodin je rotirao, pribliûavao me|usobno). Svaki isje~ak iz svakoga ugla pokazuje druga~iji, specifi~nioblik.11. Radionica zavr{ava pozivom na razliku izme|u nevidljivog prostora sadrûa~a i Rodinovih pros-tornih oblika. 12. Voditelj skuplja zatvorene omotnice s fotografijama sudionika.

201The intention of the s e v e n t h workshop is tobecome, through different procedures, aware of theinvisibility and of the intangibility of void, of space;to get a direct visual experience about the creationand transformation of shapes while forming a con-tainer of an invisible and intangible void by its cen-tring and growth on the potter’s wheel; to introduceto a field of thought which in a possible turn from“the space is in us” into “we are in the space” rec-ognizes the identifications and origins of the very farmemories by which we react to the vessels; it isfurthermore the intention to become aware of thepieces of sculptural artworks in which bringing themasses nearer an attempt is made to make spacevisible.

Ambience: The first part takes place in the potter’sworkshop, the second in the usual classroom. A “finished vessel” by M. Hrûiæ which we need forthe performance of a “ritual” is prepared on thepedestal as well as some dry flowers/leaves.Photocopies are available.

Structure of the activity1. The potter S. Vinkoviæ first prepares the clay.Then he rotates it on the wheel, penetrating themass and shaping the clay. While he works heexplains what he is doing. The workshop leadergives instructions from time to time about a) thepotter’s wheel as one of the great inventions ofmankind, b) that here we have again an imaginaryaxis placed in a void, as in the case of the lastexample in the former workshop where we saw thatin Pevsner’s sculpture the axis was carried by avoid; c) how the vessel gradually grows and how itis transformed.2. The participants come back to the classroomwhere the “finished” vessel (fired, glazed) by M.Hrûiæ which was imitated by the potter working onthe wheel is already prepared on the pedestal. Theparticipants are invited to stand in a circle aroundthe vessel and to perform a little “ritual” giving hon-our to the great invention of mankind, which wascertainly made by a woman. We recite two versesfrom the 11th poem of Lao Tzu's Tao Te King: “Wemake a vessel from a lump of clay; It is the emptyspace within the vessel that makes it useful”. Andin connection with it we speak about the usefulnessof the absolute. Afterwards we speak more aboutidentification with each vessel (the difference: thefemale world mostly identifies with it, the maleworld relates to it) and the way we do that revivesold memories. The “ritual” is in gaining awarenessof the void by filling it up, using it. The students dis-tribute dry flowers and all together we put them intothe vessel till it is full. We direct attention to invisi-bility of the void. Then the flowers are taken out andthen we see the walls of the vessel again and notthe void: the space cannot be seen but, filling it andemptying it, we can use it.3. From the central projector A funereal cult sculp-ture from Crete (a round dance) is presented. Weare reminded that we can see “ourselves”, like asort of reflexion of our “ritual”.4. The slide shows the head of a monster from theManneristic Park in Bomarzo where somebodystands in a large opened mouth. We speak about agreat turning point, about a catastrophe, about a

200

Majstor S. Vinkovi} priprema glinu/The potter craftsman: S. Vinkoviæ prepares clay

Posuda raste na lon~arskom kolu/A pot growingon the potters wheel

Posuda je gotova/The bowl is finished Ritual punjenja/praûnjenja/The ritual of filling/emptying

Ritual punjenja/praûnjenja/The ritual of filling/emptying

Pribliûavanjem istanjenih masa prostor postajevidljiv/Space becomes visible by bringing the linearmasses near


203



NEDOVRŠEN KRALJIÎN PORTRET UNFINISHED PORTRAIT OF QUEEN

TTUUTTMMOOSSIISS//TTHHUUTTMMOOSSIISS:: KKRRAALLJJIICCAA NNOOFFRREETTEETTEE//TTHHEE QQUUEEEENN NNOOFFRREETTEETTEE,,OOKKOO//AAPPPPRROOXX.. 11335500.. PPRR.. KKRR..//BB..CC..

KKVVAARRCCIITT//QQUUAARRTTZZIITTEE,, 2244 CCMM,, BBEERRLLIINN SSMMEE\\II KKVVAARRCCIITT//BBRROOWWNN QQUUAARRTTZZIITTEE,, 3366 CCMM,, KKAAIIRROO//CCAAIIRROO

GGRRAANNIITT,, 2233 CCMM,, KKAAIIRROO//CCAAIIRROO

D. JANDA: Kretanje svjetla 5. lipnja 1986. od 10,30 do 13 sati na Michelangelovoj grobnici Lorenza MedicijaThe movement of light 5th June 1986, between 10.30 a.m. and 1 a.m. over Michelangelo's Sepulchre of Lorenzo Medici

PROMJENA, OSEBUJNA PREDSTAVA PRIMJERENA NA[OJ PA@NJICHANGE, A SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE SUITED TO OUR ATTENTION

202


II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AAPROMJENA

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNCHANGE

PROMJENA KOJA IZMIÊ PA@NJI CHANGE THAT ESCAPES OUR ATTENTION

AA.. WWEEAAVVIINNGG::RRAAZZVVOOJJ LLEEPPTTIIRRAA//DDEEVVEELLOOPPMMEENNTT OOFF AA BBUUTTTTEERRFFLLYY,,FFOOTTOOGGRRAAFFIIJJEE//PPHHOOTTOOGGRRAAPPHHSS

FOTOGRAFIJA FIKSIRA, ZAUSTAVLJA, STABILIZIRA SVIJET THE PHOTOGRAPH FIXES, HALTS AND STABILISES THE WORLD

MM.. SSTTEEIIGGEERR::NNEEBBEESSKKII SSVVOODD ((FFOOTTOOGGRRAAFFIIJJAA,,BBLLEENNDDAA OOTTVVOORREENNAA TTIIJJEEKKOOMM CCIIJJEELLEE NNOO]]II))// SSKKYY ((PPHHOOTTOOGGRRAAPPHH,,WWIITTHH OOPPEENNEEDD SSHHUUTTTTEERR DDUURRIINNGGTTHHEE WWHHOOLLEE NNIIGGHHTT))

PROMJENA JE SADR@AJ MEDIJA CHANGE IS THE CONTENT OF THE MEDIUMBRZA PROMJENA PRIREÐENA NAŠOJ PA@NJI QUICK CHANGE PREPARED FOR OUR ATTENTION

JJ.. TTIINNGGUUEELLYY::VVOODDOOSSKKOOKK//FFOOUUNNTTAAIINNBBAASSEELL//BBAASSLLEE

on different levels but because of our limitation weare late and a crash takes place between being lateand an enormous number of movements and so weexperience chaos or, we establish the meaning onthe conscious level by which we confirm our slow-ness but help ourselves in orientation. A danger exists that meaning can close our percep-tion (scheme), about which we speak all the timeand which we try, endlessly and definitvely to shakeup.4. Research in the changes of a face. a) Everybody receives a photocopy of the photo-graph of one participant taken in the middle ofhis/her lifetime so far. It is necessary that the par-ticipants observe each other throughly and recog-nise the person in the photograph. They areinstructed to be precise in their observation and theresults are checked (it can happen that there arefalse guesses!). The question is how they haverecognised the face (on the basis of functional ele-ments: eyes, nose, ears - or on the basis of theirrelation). What is the same in the photograph and inthe living person today, the elements or the rela-tions? b) E. H. Gombrich’s thesis is explained: whatremains the same in a face is the tonus, the ratio oftenseness and relaxation. Naturally the questionremains how to recognise it. c) We put photocopiesof the photographs made at the beginning of the lifeof each of our participants on the table. The partici-pants are invited to find the other one of the thatthey have in their hands and that they have alreadyidentified. Our experience with sculptural art works,our life experience, our intuition play decisive rollsin the recognition. The question is again: what hasremained the same, on what basis we have recog-nized it, what is carrying tension and what relax-ation.5. We return to the sculptures and try to connect ourexperience gained in the changes of a face with theartworks we shall look at. These are three unfinishedportraits of Queen Nofretete, from the sameThutmosis’ workshop in Tel-el-Amarna (approx.1350 B.C., brown quartzite, granite, height: 24 cm,36 cm, 23 cm, Egyptian Museum in Cairo, EgyptianMuseum in Berlin). Following with our gaze the rela-tions of tension (convexities) and relaxations (con-caves) we also try to feel them with our hands. Wetake into consideration the ratios, for example, wemeasure the eyes (1 : 2), the mouth (2 : 3). We talkabout the differences, about the similarities (ratios)

205204 Namjera u o s m o j radionici je sa {to vi{e aspekata osvijetliti/iskusiti neuhvatljivost promjene uprirodi, u ~ovjekovu izgledu i na koji se na~in promjene uvode u kiparski medij.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnim radionicama. Potrebne su fotokopije djela, fotografije sudioni-ka i cvjetovi gospine jagodice.

Struktura doga|anja1. Prvo se pokazuje preobrazba gospine jagodice/vu~je jabu~ice/pogan~eve trave. Prisje}a se da seupravo isti primjer pokazivao u prvoj radionici P o ~ e l a i n a ~ e l a. Biljka je ubirana u razli~itimmijenama svoje preobrazbe, jer ~ovjek naj~e{}e nema strpljenja da prati i da uûivo prisustvuje tomukako }e se konkavno-konveksna masa postupno pre-tvoriti u mreûu si}u{nih linijski istanjenih masakoje pokazuju zbijenu jezgru u sredini.2. Drugi primjer su ~etiri snimka (sa srednjeg projektora) koji hvataju ~etiri mijene u razvoju leptira(fotografija A. Weaving). Upozorava se: a) Promjene se stalno zbivaju na svim razinama, npr. 60 bili-juna promjena u svakoj stanici svake sekunde. b) Na{e se o~i stalno kre}u razli~itim brzinama narazli~itim razinama ~ega nismo svjesni. c) Mi zapravo naj~e{}e primje}ujemo samo grube promjene ito uvijek one pro{le, “zaustav-ljene”, doûivljavamo svijet kao stabilan, tu zaustavljenost i stabilnostfotografija savr{eno hvata, fiksira. d) Opaûaj izraûava na{u lijenost, ka{njenje, akumulaciju fiksacijakoje sve dovode do odijeljivanja, do iluzije stabilnosti iz ~ega proizlaze zna~enja. Fotografija potvr|ujeapsurd, iluziju da vremenska to~ka, punctum tempori, postoji. O tome su govorili kubisti kada su navodili za primjer prostorno-vremenski kontinuum jedne kutije{ibica umjesto odijeljenosti njene mase od okolnog prostora konturom {to je plod iluzije.3. Slijedi snimak nebeskoga svoda snimljen blendom otvorenom tijekom cijele no}i (fotografija H.Steiger). Trag kretanja zvijezda zabiljeûen je na negativu i zato vidimo savr{en sklop koncentri~nihkrugova svjetla. Naravno, ako bi gledali cijelu no} u nebo ne bismo dobili taj oblik, jer se na{e o~i,da bismo mogli vidjeti, moraju stalno kretati. Pogledom, poku{avamo uhvatiti sve promjene koje sezbivaju na razli~itim razinama, ali zbog na{e ograni~enosti kasnimo i nastaje sudar izme|u togka{njenja i golemog broja kretanja i tako doûivljavamo kaos ili, na svjesnoj razini, uspostavljamozna~enje ~ime potvr|ujemo na{u sporost, ali si pomaûemo u snalaûenju. Postoji opasnost da namzna~enja zatvore opaûaj (shema) o ~emu je stalno rije~, a {to poku{avamo, evo sada, ve} odistadefinitivno prodrmati.4. Istraûuju se promjene lica. a) Svatko dobiva fotokopiju fotografije nekog od sudionika snimljenunegdje na polovici njegova dosada{njeg ûivota. Potrebno je da se sudionici dobro me|usobnopogledaju i da se prepoznaju na fotografijama. Provjerava se jesu li odista pogodili (moûe biti krivihpogodaka!). Pita se na temelju ~ega su prepoznali (na temelju funkcionalnih elemenata: o~i, nos, u{i,ili na temelju njihovih odnosa). [to je isto na fotografiji i u ûivoj osobi danas, elementi ili odnosi? b) Govori se o tezi E.H. Gombricha: ono {to se na jednom licu ne mijenja, jest tonus, omjer napetostii popu{tanja. Naravno, ostaje pitanje kako to prepoznati. c) Na stol se stavljaju fotokopije fotografijasnimljenih na po~etku ûivota svakog sudionika. Pozivaju se sudionici da prona|u par onoj koju su ve}identificirali i koju drûe u rukama. U prepoznavanju, ulogu igra na{e iskustvo s kiparskim djelima,na{e ûivotno iskustvo, na{a intuicija. Opet se pita: {to je ostalo isto, na temelju ~ega se prepoznalo,{to nosi napetost, a {to popu{tanje?5. Vra}amo se kiparskim djelima i poku{avamo povezati iskustva ste~ena u uo~avanju promjenajednog lica s djelima koja }e se gledati. To su tri nedovr{ena portreta kraljice Nofretete iz iste,Tutmosisove radionice u Tel el Amarni (oko 1350. pr. Kr., kvarcit, sme|i kvarcit, granit; visine: 24 cm,36 cm, 23 cm, Egipatski muzej u Kairu, Egipatski muzej u Berlinu). Pratimo pogledom odnosenapetosti (konvekse) i popu{tanja (konkave) i nastojimo osjetiti ih i u rukama. Upozorava se na razlikei sli~nosti (omjeri), mjerimo npr. o~i (1:2), usta (2:3). Upozorava se i na nedovr{enost kipova. Ako se

The intention of the e i g h t h workshop is tothrow light upon / experience the elusive characterof the change in Nature, in man’s appearance andhow the changes are introduced into the sculpturalmedium.

Ambience: As in the former workshops.Photocopies of the pieces of artworks, the partici-pants’ photographs and the flowers of Chineselanterns are available.

Structure of the activity1. First we try to show the transformations of theChinese lantern. The participants are reminded thatthe same example was shown in the very first work-shop of Origins and Principles. The plant was pickedduring different phases of its transformation, becausewe mostly have no patience to follow the transforma-tion and to be present when the concave-convexmass gradually becomes a net of tiny linear massesthrough which we can see a monolithic nucleus. 2. The second example consist of four slides (fromthe central projector) which catch the four phasesin the development of a butterfly (photograph:A. Weaving). Instructions are given concerning: a) the changes which constantly take place on alllevels, for example 60 billion changes in each cellevery second; b) our eyes move all the time at adifferent speed on different levels and we are notaware of it; c) we mainly notice only the veryrough changes and always the past ones, the“halted ones”, we experience a stable world andthe photograph perfectly catches and fixes thishaltedness and stability; d) the perception express-es our laziness, our being late, an accumulation ofthe fixations which all result in separation, in anillusion of stability from which the meanings arise.The photograph confirms the absurd illusion thatthe time point, punctum tempori exists. The cubistsspoke about that when they gave the example ofthe space-time continuum of a match box insteadof isolation of its mass from the environmentalspace through an outline, which is only an illusion.3. The Sky, a photograph taken with a shutter openall night. (M. Steiger) The trace of the star move-ments is fixed on a negative and because of that wesee a perfect set of circles of light. Naturally, if welooked at the sky all night we would not get such ashape, because our eyes, have to move constantly,otherwise we would not see anything. We try withour gaze to catch all the changes which take place

Igra poga|anja (fotografije sudionika iz sredineûivota, iz najranijeg djetinjstva)/ The game ofguessing (the participants’ photographs from themiddle of their lives and from the very beginning oftheir lives)


order to throw out, to spread, to strain the water.They are fixed to the bed of the pool but the impres-sion is that they are on a fluid base which is con-stantly disturbed. The movement is programmed butthe changes, which include water and air (the entirespace) introduce some contingency into it.8. On the screen we watch D. Janda’s films aboutthe sculptures of M. Pan and J. Tinguely. The film isa more suitable medium for following the move-ments than the photograph, which only notes themomentary state.9. Through the extraordinary photographs (D. Janda)we follow the movement of light on 5th June 1986,between 10.30 a.m. and 1. a.m. on Michelangelo’sSepulchre of Lorenzo Medici in Florence. Besidespreparing the sculptures and their setting,Michelangelo built the architecture too, so he definedthe openings through which the light would bethrown onto the sculptures. We identify ourselveswith the light spot and follow its movements. Thechange is here a specific performance suitable to ourattention. The changes of Chinese lantern (Nature)evade but the artwork performs what we can follow. 10. The participants are invited to bring a branch ora flower next time, according to their choice, onlythe size has to be about 50 cm. The photocopiesand the Chinese lantern are distributed and the pho-tographs are returned.

207206 portret dovr{i, moûda je samo maska, a ne lice. [to je lice? Uûivljavamo se u tonus, u “disanje” lica(odnos mase i prostora).6. Sa srednjeg se projektora pokazuje jo{ jedan nedovr{eni, vjerojatno kralji~in portret iz iste radionice(kvarcit, 24 cm, Egipatski muzej u Berlinu) i na detalju se prate fini prijelazi mase i prostora i jedandovr{eni portret iz Memfisa (kvarcit, 18 cm, Egipatski muzej u Kairu) kojega je vrijeme mijenjalo. Bioje dovr{en (ali danas nedostaju o~i, nema krune, djelomi~no je razbijen).7. Moderno kiparstvo uvodi promjenu u medij. Sa sva tri projektora istodobno se iz-mjenjuju snimci:a) Mobil A. Caldera (Zürich). Upozorava se da umjesto postave, kip visi, i da je promjena pove}ana,poja~ana, postala je brûa i tako se lako uo~ljivo doga|a pred na{im o~ima. b) Plutaju}a skulptura M. Pan (Otterlo). Skulptura je postavljena, ali na fluidno i prozirno postolje, pluta po jezeru i tako se ipostava i postolje dovode u pitanje, a mi prisustvujemo laganom, nama primjerenom kontinuitetupromjena. c) Fontana J. Tinguelyja u Baselu. Fragmenti defunkcionaliziranih strojeva ponovo sufunkcionalizirani, da bi izbacivali, raspr{ivali, cijedili vodu. Oni su pri~vr{}eni za dno bazena, ali sedobiva dojam da su na vodenoj povr{ini koju stalno uznemiruju. Kretanje je programirano, ali prom-jene koje uklju~uju vodu i zrak (cijeli okolni prostor) unose u trenuta~ne kompozicije i ne{to slu~ajnosti.8. Na ekranu se gledaju filmovi D. Jande o Plutaju}oj skulpturi M. Pan i Fontani J. Tinguelyja. Filmje dragocijen medij za upoznavanje ovih djela, jer je prikladniji za pra}enje pokreta od fotografije,koja zapisuje samo trenuta~no stanje.9. Iznimnim fotografskim snimcima (D. Janda) prati se kretanje svjetla 5. lipnja 1986., od 10:30 do13:00 sati na Michelangelovoj Grobnici Lorenza Medicija u Firenzi. Osim {to je priredio kipove i nji-hovu postavu, Michelangelo je sagradio i arhitekturu, dakle odredio otvore kroz koje }e svjetlo padatina kipove. Promjena je ovdje osebujna predstava primjerena na{oj pozornosti. Poistovje}ujemo se sasvjetlosnom mrljom i pratimo njeno kretanje. Promjene gospine jagodice (priroda) nam izmi~u, aliumjetni~ko djelo ih prire|uje kao predstavu koju moûemo pratiti.10. Sudionici se pozivaju da sljede}i put donesu granu ili cvijet, po vlastitom izboru, veli~ine oko 50 cm.Dijele se fotokopije, gospina jagodica i vra}aju se fotografije.

and about their unfinished status. If the portrait werefinished, it could be a mask, not a face. What is aface? We try to feel the tonus, the “breathing” of theface (the relationship of mass and space).6. One more unfinished (probably the Queen’s)portrait from the same workshop (quartzite, 24cm, Egyptian Museum in Berlin) is shown from thecentral projector and in detail we follow the finetransitions of mass and space. A finished portraitfrom Memphis (quartzite, 18 cm, EgyptianMuseum in Cairo) is presented, it has beenchanged by time. It was finished but today the eyes are mis-sing, there is no crown, it is partially broken.7. Modern sculpture introduces change into themedium. A series of slides are projected from thethree projectors at the same time of: a) A. Calder: Mobile (Zürich). The participants aretold that instead of being set, the sculpture is hang-ing; the change is enlarged, intensified, it hasbecome faster and so easily perceivable takes placemore easily before our eyes. b) M. Pan: The Floating sculpture (Otterlo). The sculpture floats on the lake, it is set onto amobile and a transparent basis and in that way thesetting and the basis, too, have become doubtful andwe witness an easy continuum of change which issuited to us. c) J. Tinguely: The Fountain in Basle. Fragments ofdefunctionalised machines are again functionalised in


209



vidljivost RAZMAKAthe visibility of THE GAP

prostorna TO^KA spatial POINT

HH.. MMOOOORREE:: TTRRII TTOO^̂KKEE//TTHHRREEEE PPOOIINNTTSS,, 11993399..--4400..,, BBRROONNCCAA//BBRROONNZZEE,, VVIISSIINNAA//HHEEIIGGHHTT:: 2200 CCMM,, PPEERRRRYY GGRREEEENN,, HHOOGGLLAANNDDSS

neutralizirano oplošjeneutralised surface

neutralna nebojaneutral nocolour

PROCJEPGAP

LL.. FFOONNTTAANNAA:: OO^̂EEKKIIVVAANNJJEE//TTHHEE EEXXPPEECCTTAATTIIOONN

NN.. GGAABBOO:: LLIINNEEAARRNNAA KKOONNSSTTRRUUKKCCIIJJAA 22//LLIINNEEAARR CCOONNSSTTRRUUCCTTIIOONN 22,,11995522..,, PPLLAASSTTIIKKAA//PPLLAASSTTIICC,, 9922 CCMM,,AAMMSSTTEERRDDAAMM

208


II DD EE AA LL NN AA RR EE KK OO NN SS TT RR UU KK CC II JJ AAOBLIKOVANJE PROSTORA PRIBLI@AVANJEM MASA

II DD EE AA LL RR EE CC OO NN SS TT RR UU CC TT II OO NNSHAPING THE SPACE BY BRINGING MASSES NEAR

utemeljenjegrounded

linijski istanjena masalinear mass

stupnjevanjegradation

pribliûavanjebringing near

šupljinacavity

PPOOGGRREEBBNNAA SSTTAATTUUAA//FFUUNNEERRAALL SSTTAATTUUEE,,CCEERRVVEETTEERRII,, 66.. SSTT.. PPRR.. KKRR..//66TTHHBB..CC,,TTEERRAAKKOOTTAA//TTEERRRRAACCOOTTTTAA,, 220000 XX 114400 XX 7700 CCMM,, VVIILLLLAA GGIIUULLIIAA,, RRIIMM//RROOMMEE

RJE[AVANJE KONTRADIKCIJE ODVOJENOSTI UNUTARNJEG I VANJSKOGSOLVING THE CONTRADICTION OF SEPARATION OF THE INNER AND THE OUTER

plošno istanjena masaplanar mass

refleks reflex

ukida sebeabolishes itself

pribliûavanjebringing near

beskona~na trakaendless band

MM.. BBIILLLL:: BBEESSKKOONNAA^̂NNAA TTRRAAKKAA//TTHHEE EENNDDLLEESSSS BBAANNDD,, 11994477..,, ^̂EELLIIKK//SSTTEEEELL,, BBAASSEELL//BBAASSLLEE

vidljivostRAZMAKAvisibility ofTHE GAP

pribliûavanje jedva zamjetnih masa osvještava RAZMAKbringing near hardly noticeable masses makes the awareness of THE GAP

RITAM (RTA = ISTINA), BIT SVIJETA RHYTHM (RTA = TRUTH), ESSENCE OF THE WORLD

konkavno-konveksnoconcave convex

istanjenjethinning

a pause from the fullness, but also that the “full” isalso not really “full” because it is transparent.However the medium has to be served (the slide ofthe whole), the boundaries have to be constructed.5. From the central projector H. Moore’s ThreePoints, 1939-40, bronze, height: 20 cm, PerryGreen, Hoglands are presented from one side. Wedescribe the relation between the mass and thespace. The second slide is, similarly to the presen-tation of the Etruscan sculpture, shown from theopposite side. The slide of the wider side and thedetails discover the thinness which by being near toeach other give the illusion of a point in space.6. The participants get a bunch of bamboo and areinvited to throw them, trying to become aware ofthe relation between the hand movement and theresult. Attention is drawn to the affluence/extrava-gance of their creativity (the results are not fixed,they are not displayed but demolished to be createdagain) an interpretation of Michelangelo’s not finish-ing an artwork is quoted: “let the servants finish,they who think it is possible” and B. Hamvas: “theartwork is the last crumb of sacral life”. They aretold about the prognosis of all modern artists: thatart will be realized one day.7. On the right half of the wall L. Fontana’s surfaceExpectation is projected. The procedure is opposite,there is no effect of moving near, but a gap is cutinto the neutral surface of neutral white.8. a) The workshop leader tells the story about an“unwritten poem” of A. Ahmatova (During a visit toModigliani the door was closed, the window openand she threw a bunch of roses which she hadbrought with her through it. Modigliani was sur-prised: it was imposible she had not been inside,the roses were perfectly arranged on the floor.) b) Toget-her we all perform A. Ahmatova’s “unwrit-ten poem”. The students hold the curtain and theparticipants, as they like, one by one throw theirbranches “through the window” behind the curtain.When the curtain is moved we can see the set - thecollective “unwritten poem” - “written sculpture” onthe floor. We look at it for a while - enjoy it and thena reverse process begins, each one of the partici-pants takes back his/her branch, in successionreverse to the throwing-building (by throwing weobtain, by gathering we lose). 9. The workshop leader announces the end of theworkshops Sculpture and invites the participants tojoin the surprise of the last, tenth workshop.

211210 Namjera u d e v e t o j radionici je osvijestiti razli~ite na~ine oblikovanja prostora pribliûavanjemmasa; osvijestiti rje{avanje kontradikcije izme|u unutarnjeg i vanjskog prostora u modernomkiparstvu; osvijestiti aktiviranje i “vizualiziranje” procijepa-razmaka. Namjera je tako|er ste}ineposredno iskustvo o odnosu kretanja i oblika i o rasko{nosti/rastro{nosti kreativnog u nama.

Ambijent: Isti je kao i u prethodnim radionicama. Potrebni su zastor (plahta), suhe grane za slu~ajda ih sudionici zaborave donijeti, {tapi}i od bambusa, flaks, trake papira, selotejp i fotokopije djela.

Struktura doga|anja1. Projiciraju se snimci etru{}anske Pogrebne statue iz Cerveterija (6. st. pr. Kr., terakota, 200 x 140 x70 cm, Villa Giulia, Rim). Prvo se pokazuje cjelina s jedne bo~ne strane (tematski najteûe ~itljive).Razgovara se o odnosima mase i prostora (konkavno-konveksno, utemeljenje, istanjenja). Preddrugim bo~nim snimkom razgovara se o stup-njevanju, o promjenama veli~ina, o stilizaciji i ostr{e}im istanjenim masama - oblicima ruku. Priziva se u sje}anje Rodinova Katedrala i uspore|ujese. Slijede ostali snimci, s prednje strane, i detalji gdje se usredoto~ujemo na prikaze ruku (s dvaistanjenja/prsta: {upljina; s tri istanjenja/prsta: pribliûavanje) putem kojih se, u varijacijama, aktiviraokolni prostor. Upu}uje se da se, kao i ranije, isku{aju kretnje.2. a) S lijevog projektora pojavljuje se snimak Beskona~ne trake M. Billa, 1947., ~elik, Basel.Upozorava se na odnos unutarnjeg i vanjskog i na pribliûavanje masa. b) Sudionici selotejpom spajaju traku papira i dobivaju beskona~nu traku. Pozivaju se da njome“pro|u” i da flomasterom ostave trag tako da budu sigurni da su se kretali ostaju}i na istomoplo{ju. Tako se isku{ava rje{avanje kontradikcije odvojenosti, unutarnjeg i vanjskog. c) Ponovo segleda kip. Osvje{tava se plo{no istanjena masa i razrje{enje kontradikcije unutarnjeg i vanjskogpribliûavanjem i odbljeskom (visoki sjaj poliranog ~elika) ~ime kip ukida samoga sebe.3. Sudionici se pozivaju da tapkanjem po stolovima poku{aju na}i ne{to “jedva vidljivo i jedvadodirljivo” (izme|u stolova su razapete tanke prozirne plasti~ne niti). Osvje{tava se iskustvo ne~egjedva primjetnog.4. Na desnom dijelu zida pojavljuje se detalj Linearne konstrukcije 2 N. Gaboa, 1952., plastika, 92cm, Amsterdam). Pribliûavanjem jedva primjetnih linijskih masa osvje{tava se razmak, on postaje“vidljiv”. Postajemo svjesni da je u izmjenjivanju punog i praznog, od puno}e vaûnija praznina-stanka(ritam = istina), ali i toga da ni “puno” nije posve “puno”, jer je prozirno. Me|utim, medij se morasluûiti (snimak cjeline), moraju se konstruirati granice.5. Sa srednjeg projektora pokazuje se snimak kipa H. Moorea Tri to~ke, 1939.-1940., bronca, 20cm, Perry Green, Hoglands, s bo~ne strane. Opisuje se odnos mase i prostora. Drugi snimak je,sli~no prikazivanju etru{}anske skulpture, s druge, uûe strane. Snimak sa {ire strane i detalji otkri-vaju istanjenja koja svojim pribliûavanjem daju iluziju prostorne to~ke.6. Sudionici dobivaju hrpe {tapi}a od bambusa i pozivaju se da se igraju bacanja, tako da nastoje bitisvjesni odnosa izme|u kretnje i rezultata. Upozoravaju se na rasko{/rastro{nost na{e kreativnosti(rezultate ne fiksiramo, ne izlaûemo, nego razgradimo da bismo nanovo stvarali). Citira se jednainterpretacija Michelangelova nedovr{avanja djela: “Neka sluge dovr{e, koje misle da se moûedovr{iti”, i B. Hamvas: “Djelo je posljednja mrvica sakralnog ûivota”. Upozorava se i na to da sugotovo svi moderni umjetnici predvi|ali: umjetnost }e se jednom ozbiljiti.7. Na desnom dijelu zida projicira se povr{ina O~ekivanje L. Fontane. Postupak je suprotan, nemapribliûavanja, nego je na neutraliziranom oplo{ju, neutralne bijele ne-boje, urezan procijep.8. a) Voditelj pri~a pri~u o “nenapisanoj pjesmi” A. Ahmatove. (Prilikom jednog posjetaModiglianiju, vrata su bila zaklju~ana, prozor je bio otvoren, ona je sveûanj ruûa, koji je donijela sasobom, bacila kroz prozor. Modiglianijevo ~u|enje: nemogu}e da nije bila unutra, ruûe su leûale napodu savr{eno komponirane.). b) Svi zajedno izvodimo igru - “nenapisanu pjesmu A. Ahmatove”.Studenti drûe zastor, a sudionici po naho|enju, jedan po jedan, bacaju svoju granu “kroz prozor” -iza zastora. Kada se pomakne zastor, na podu se vidi sklop - kolektivna “nenapisana pjesma” -“napisana skulptura”. Kratko vrijeme gledamo - uûivamo u njoj, i nakon toga zapo~inje obrnutiproces, svatko uzima natrag svoju granu, obrnutim redoslijedom nego {to je bilo bacanje - gra|enje(bacanjem dobivamo, skupljanjem gubimo).9. Voditelj progla{ava kraj radionica K i p a r s t v o i poziva na jo{ jedno iznena|enje u desetoj,posljednjoj radionici.

The intention of the n i n t h workshop is tobecome aware of the modes of shaping spacethrough bringing the masses near, of solving thecontradiction between inner and outer space in mod-ern sculpture; to gain awereness about an activationand “visualisation” of the gap. The intention is furtherto gain direct experience about the relation of move-ment and shape and of the affluence/extravagance ofthe creativity in us.

Ambience: As in the former workshops. A curtain(sheet) is necessary, dry branches in reserve, incase the participants forget to bring them, bamboo,flax, paper bands, cellotape, photocopies of thepieces of artworks.

Structure of the activity1. The Etruscan Funeral Statue from Cerveteri 6thCentury B.C., Terracotta, 200 x 140 x 70 cm, VillaGuilia, Rome is shown. First the whole is presentedfrom one side (from where it is most difficult to rec-ognize the subject). We talk about the mass-spacerelations (concave-convex, foundation, thinning).Before the second side view slide we talk aboutgradation, about the change of dimensions, aboutstylizisation and about the protruded thin masses -the shapes of the hands. We remind ourselves ofRodin’s Cathedral and compare it. The rest of theslides show the statue from the front and somedetails where we concentrate on the representationof the hands (with two thinnings/fingers: a hole,with three thinnings/fingers: coming near), throughthem the entire space is activated in variations. Theparticipants are instructed, as before, to try out thehand movements.2. a) From the left projector a slide of M. Bill’s Endless Band (1947, steel, Basle) appears.Attention is drawn to the relation of the inner andthe outer and about bringing the masses near. b)The participants perform an exercise joining a stripof paper with cellotape and obtain an endless band.They are invited to “go through” and to leave amark with a felt-tip pen to become sure that theyhave moved not changing the surface. In this waywe explore how the contradiction, between the innerand the outer should be solved. c) We look at thesculpture again and become aware how the solu-tion comes; through the planar mass, through themasses coming near and through reflection (theshine of polished steel) the sculpture abolishesitself.3. The participants are invited to tap on the tables totry to find something “nearly invisible” and “hardlytangible” (thin transparent plastic threads spanbetween the tables). We become aware of some-thing hardly perceivable.4. On the right side of the wall a detail N. Gabo’sLinear construction 2 (1952, plastic, 92 cm,Amsterdam) appears. Through hardly perceivable lin-ear masses near to one another we become aware ofthe gap, which becomes “visible” (rhythm = truth).We become conscious that in alteration of the fulland the empty the emptiness is more important, -

Konstruira se beskona~na traka/An endless bandis constructed

Traûi se ne{to jedva vidljivo i jedvadodirljivo/Something hardly visible and hardly tan-gible is searched

Igra komponiranja linijsko istanjenim masama(osvje{tava se odnos pokret-rezultat)/A gamewith linear masses (the relation of movement-resultbecomes conscious)

Igra komponiranja linijsko istanjenim masama(osvje{tava se odnos pokret-rezultat)/A gamewith linear masses (the relation of movement-resultbecomes conscious)

Pripreme za performance “nenapisana pjesmaAne Ahmatove”/Preparations for the performanceof an “unwritten poem by Anna Ahmatova”

Baca se grana preko ograde/A branch is thrownover the fence

Kompozicija na podu/A composition on the floor Razgradnja kompozicije/Deconstruction of thecomposition


objects on the photopaper; d) enlightening/shuttingetc.Three participants work together. The first one workson the apparatus, the second one puts it into thedeveloper, the third one into the fixer. Then the roleschange so each participant creates his own pho-togram. (Notice: A workshop where somethingthree-dimensional is produced would be moreappropriate, for instance a wickerwork or weavingon a loom with a cord, plastic threads or a piece ofmetal wire.)2. The workshop leader invites the participants andstudents to a final discussion with refreshments.

213212 Namjera u d e s e t o j radionici, kao i u svakoj prethodnoj zavr{noj specijaliziranoj radionici je ste}iiskustvo o nekoj ru~noj proizvodnji - ovoga puta o pravljenju fotograma.

Ambijent: Na nizovima stolova su postavljeni aparati za pove}anje pokraj zdjela s kemikalijama(razvija~, voda, fiksir, voda). Prire|eni su fotografski papiri u posebnim kutijama.

Struktura doga|anja1. Prvo se daju upute o radu: a) isprobavanje; b) va|enje fotopapira u mraku; c) stav-ljanje pred-meta na fotopapir; d) osvjetljavanje/zastiranje itd. Potom po troje sudionika radi zajedno. Jedansudionik radi na aparatu, drugi stavlja u razvija~, tre}i u fiksir. Nakon toga se izmjenjuju uloge takoda svatko kreira svoj fotogram (Primjedba: ako se mogu osigurati sredstva, prikladnija je radionica ukojoj se proizvodi ne{to plasti~no - npr. pletenje od pru}a ili {a{a ili tkanje od razli~itih niti.)2. Na kraju voditelj poziva sve sudionike na zavr{ni razgovor uz ~aj i kola~e.

The intention of the t e n t h workshop is similarto the intention in the last specialised workshopsDrawing and Painting this time to gain experienceabout making photograms.

Ambience: On the rows of tables there are appara-tuses for enlarging, beside the vessels with chemi-cal substances (developer, water, fixer water).Photo-paper is prepared in separate boxes.

Structure of the activity1. The first instructions are given about the work: a)testing b) taking out the paper in the dark; c) putting

Pripreme za pravljenje fotograma/ Preparationsto make photograms


Documents

Radionica V