Z L A T A NV E H A B O V I Ć

TE

ME

LJ

I U

BL

AT

U

15

. 0

9.

- 4

. 1

0.

20

15

.

FO

UN

DA

TIO

NS

IN

MU

DN

O G

ALE

RIJ

A

NO

GA

LLE

RY

Mary, take the child, the river’s rising Muddy water’s changing all I know Lord, this muddy water is taking back my home

Muddy Water, John Douglas “Rabbit” Bundrick

Slika podrazumijeva slike, višestrukost bivanja sli­kom. Slike nestaju uz mali prasak, njihovo je unište­nje prekrasno kao i njihovo postojanje, one su u biti sredstvo mučenja koja eksplodiraju kroz bešćut­nu sposobnost pojedinca da osjeća snažne nedi­ferencirane emocije prepune čežnje, nezadovolj­stva i veličanstvenosti. Nemaju društvenu svrhu.

The Book of Daniel, E. L. Doctorow

Sve

slik

e: Z

LA

TA

N V

EH

AB

OV

IĆ “

TE

ME

LJI U

BL

AT

U”

Foto

grafi

je: D

amir

Žiž

ić

3

TEMELJI U BLATU

L E I L A T O P I Ć

SVIJET POČETKA 21. STOLJEĆA je, ne­dvoj beno, posve raz-središten, bez zna­čajnog i moćnog centra koji bi funkcionirao kao „prirodna“ umjetnička datost. Stoga je sasvim logično da umjetnici (i ne samo oni) moraju neprestano, uvijek iznova, stvarati vlastiti smisao i značenje, vlastiti kontekst, osobno referencijalno i/ili teorijsko polje. Zbog toga mi je bilo zanimljivo promatra­ti novi slikarski ciklus Zlatana Vehabovića na slovljen Temelji u blatu koji se referira na nekoliko činjenica. Važan inicijalni impuls Zlatanova je skorašnja potreba da rastače fo rmu karakterističnu za prethodne rado­ve, da stvara novi kontekst. Naime, u pre t -hodnom ciklusu izloženom 2011. godine naslovljenom Sweepenig Confetti from the Floor of the Conrete Hole, predstavljenom u Kući Lauba, pripovijest, odnosno određe ni događaj, diktirao je formu. Slike su nastajale uglavnom prema fotografskim pre dlošcima, a Zlatan je svojim tumačenjima na vlastitom blogu donekle kontrolirao njihovo znače­nje. Kritičar i kustos Marko Golub pisao je o „projektantskoj sustavnosti“ slika u kojoj su forme poprimale voluminoznost, kompakt-nost i gotovo opipljivu čvrstoću. Tonski pri­jelazi su bili suptilni, nježno gradirani a opći je dojam, kako je zapisao kritičar Feđa Ga­vrilović komenti rajući ciklus Zauvijek ću te pamtiti (također iz 2011), nadrealan. No, Zlatan ovaj put ustraje na voljnom i svje­snom napuštanju čvrste forme, te ih u no-čvrste forme, te ih u no-e, te ih u no­vom ciklusu rastače. Tijekom razgovora u studiju, napomenuo je da se naziv novog ci­klusa odnosi ponajprije na njegov subjekti­van osjećaj pomanjkanja osno vnog slikar­skog znanja, nedosta tnost gradiva stečenog tijekom studentskih godina, odnosno osje­ćaja da isključivo vlasti tim slikarskim napo­rima mora graditi temelje slikarske vještine. U tome je porije klo pojma „blata“ koji, zna­mo, može biti vezivni element i jamči odre­đenu trajnost, ali istodobno ima sklonost

4

očvršćivanju, pa i petrificiranju te suprotno: nestajanju, iskliznuću, dola­skom, na primjer, vodenih bujica. Kao svojevrsnu misiju, Zlatan si je uzeo u zadatak da će graditi, učiti i spoznavati formu, onu koja se pojavljivala još tijekom studiranja te odr­žavala posljednjih petnaestak godina. Taj zadatak je razrađivao i uvje-žbavao s namjerom da slikarsku vještinu (Zlatan je naziva toolboxom) dovede do krajnjeg savršenstva eda bi mu naposljetku priskrbila stano-vitu slobodu. Preciznije, Vehabović svoje prethodne cikluse doživljava kao svojevrsni temelj (u blatu) jer uviđa da mu figuracija, kao slikarska odrednica, više nije bitna. Dakle, genezu rasapa čvrstih volumena, ali i pripovijedanja priča, u no­vom ciklusu valja tumačiti kao umjetnikovu namjeru, potaknutu zamo­rom od narativnih određenja, da se oslobodi okova stanovitih slikarskih konvencija. Stoga, ciklus je ispunjen prizorima koji nemaju čvrsto sidrište u zbilji, središnja perspektiva se gubi, a rubovi pojedinih platnâ nagriženi su slojevima sastrugane boje iza koje proviruje golo platno. Tematski, novi ciklus problematizira ulogu i važnost ljudskih skloništa, ističući moćan psihološki aspekt mjesta u kojima tražimo zaklon. Vođen nagonom za konstrukcijom, ali bez želje da prepriča neki događaj, on stvara slikarske predloške od pronađenih fotografija koje potom računa-lno kolažira i generira u novi značenjski sklop. Takav kompjutorski stvo­ren predložak, odnosno motiv, i dalje sadržava središnju ideju skloništa, ali na neki je način Zlatan u slikarskoj izvedbi negira. Naime, zbog ubrza-ne diseminacije slika u suvremenoj kulturi, jednostavno je uzeti zdravo za gotovo prizore ekoloških katastrofa i kriznih situacija. Stoga su, čini se, Zlatanova skloništa metaforičan prikaz razdoblja antropocena u ko­jem ljudska težnja za napretkom postaje mračna geološka sila što na­karadno preoblikuje svijet. Nastambe ili skloništa sa Zlatanovih platnâ postoje, ali njihovi su temelji u „blatu“, u njima ili oko njih nema ljudi, ona su nestalna, krhka ili poharana. Privlačna kataklizmičnost prizora potje­če zbog umjetnikove, za ovaj ciklus specifične, kolorističke avanture. Na jednoj od slika prikazana je kuća koja kao da lebdi na linijski istanjenim, vijugavim formama predstavljenima u prvom planu. Međutim, pogled koji klizi prema središtu platna otkriva kovitlace boja (bijele, zelene, sive, za­gasito crvene) koje pak čine apstraktnu formaciju na koju kompozicijski nasjeda kuća naslikana čvrstim plohama tamnomodre boje. Već u slje­dećem kompozicijskom polju Zlatan opet napušta reprezentacijsku for­mu te se na slici pojavljuje eksplozija zasićene i intenzivne zelenomodre boje, amorfni koloristički vrtlog koji, ponešto prijeteći, obuhvaća viso­ko stablo i kao da prijeti proždiranjem nastambe. Temelji reprezentacij­skog slikarstva su nagriženi i rastočeni. Druga slika prikazuje razrušenu drvenu nastambu s precizno naslikanim posuđem kao znakom ljudske prisutnosti ili na zid obješenu dotrajalu zemljopisnu kartu (ljudska težnja za osvajanjem novih prostora), međutim, krajolik oko nastambe poha­

5

ran je nepoznatom prirodnom silom, možda uraganom. Nema pripovije­sti, središnja je perspektiva izglobljena, oblici su rastočeni, izvor svjetlo­sti je nevidljiv, a središnji motiv guta nedefinirana forma dok su, primje­rice, visoka palmina stabla prikazana kao iskrivljena digitalna slika. Pro­boji slojeva čiste boje obrubljuju gotovo sve središnje motive skloništa što hotimice upozorava na Zlatanovo ideju da su prizori konstru irani te da je slika naposljetku samo slika. Jednako tako naoko „priro dni“ pejza­ži nisu uistinu prirodni nego su dani (naslikani) posredno i frag mentarno, u zrcaljenu prethodnih Zlatanovih ciklusa (kao i prethodne tradicije kon­strukcije vizualnosti poznate iz povijesti umjetnosti), to jest njegovim pre­okupacijama formom (gradnjom toolboxa) i sadašnjom dezintegracijom, a što on koristi kao određenu autoreferencijalnu arhivu. Zlatan Vehabović zauzima jasnu vodeću poziciju u kontekstu svog na­raštaj i prepoznatljiv je po sustavnom prekoračivanju matičnog podru-čja slikarstva, odnosno svojevrsnom razvodnjivanju disciplinarnog sre­dišta, kao i zbog specifičnog posezanja za računalno ili fotografski stvo­renim predlošcima. Želja za digitalnim konstrukcijama motiva, smatram, potječe isključivo iz želje za autentičnošću prizora ali iz umjetnikove svi­jesti o voljnom napuštanju prethodnih paradigmi. Iz slobode koju poku­šava dosegnuti usavršavajući slikarski métier on konstruira novu vizual­nost (nazovimo je i rukopisom) koja se nerijetko, prema riječima kusto­sa i teoretičara Klaudija Štefančića, referira na film ili, svojim evokativ­nim učincima, na glazbu. Upravo to široko vizualno polje Vehaboviće­ve prakse preispitivanja medija slike čini ga neobično zanimljivim umje-tnikom. Temelji u blatu nisu ništa drugo doli refleksija umjetnikove svije­sti da je središte njegova pikturalnog prostora razoreno te da je površi­na slikarskog prostora oslobođena reprezentacije vanjskog svijeta. Pri­tom nije bitan umjetnikov razvoj u vještini, nego upravo Zlatanova svijest o vlastitoj slikarskoj autoreferencijalnosti. K tomu, upotrebom računa lno stvorenih predložaka, kao i zbog slikarske simulacije učinaka kompju-terske slike (poput promjene rakursa gledanja, kolorističkih bljeskova, upotrebe hladnih i naoko tehnološki manipuliranih boja) ili efekta začu-dnosti zbog slutnje katastrofa, Vehabović možda i nehotice priziva uspo-redbu slikarove i kompjutorski generirane slike. Tehničkom sofisticirano­šću i razvijenim toolboxom (ne bez razloga termin iz područja informa-tičkih tehnologija), Zlatan ukazuje na to da manualni postupci gradnje slikarove slike automatski znače kako je više nije moguće reproducira­ti, a što je differentia specifica kompjutorski stvorene slike. Na koncu, Vehabovićeva praksa pokazuje da slikarstvo u doba masovnih medija valja isključivo procjenjivati sukladno samosvojnosti izričaja jer je slika umjetnikova spoznaja o tome što je slikarski prostor, kako se on gradi i rastače, duchampovska cosa mentale. Samo slika, ali i dalje sposo-bna izazvati snažne, nediferencirane emocije prepune čežnje, nezado­voljstva i veličanstvenosti.

6

AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST century the re is no doubt that the world is completely de-centered, lacking a significant and po werful core which could function as a “natural’’ artistic given. It is therefore entirely logical that artists (among others) must constantly remake their own meanings and contexts, as well as their own personal referential and/or theoretical field. This is why I found it interesting to view Zlatan Vehabović’s new artistic cycle, Foundations in Mud, which references several facts. An impo r -tant initial impulse came from Vehabović’s re­cent need to dissolve the form characteristic of his previous works, to create a new context. In his earlier cycle Sweeping Confetti from the Floor of the Concrete Hole, exhibited in 2011 in Lauba House, form was dictated by a narra tive or a specific event. The paintings were mostly based on photographs, their meanings partly controlled by Zlatan himself who published his own interpretations on his blog. Curator and critic Marko Golub wrote about the “design consistency’’ of the paintings, in which forms acquired volume, compactness and an almost tangible firmness. Changes in tone were subtle and gently graded, while the overall impression, as critic Feđa Gavrilović noted in his comment on the cycle I Will Always Remember You (also from 2011), was surreal. But this time Vehabović insists on an intentio-nal and conscious rejection of the solid form, which he dissolves in his new cycle. During a conversation in his studio, he said that the title of the new cycle primarily refers to his subje-ctive feeling that he lacks basic painting know-ledge, that he did not acquire sufficient train­ing during his years as a student, the feeling that he must build the foundations of his skill as a painter through his artistic efforts alone. This is the origin of the term “mud’’, a mate rial which, as we know, may be used as a binding element and guarantees a degree of durabi lity. At the same time it is a material prone to har-de ning, even petrifying, but also to the oppo-

Mary, take the child, the river’s risingMuddy water’s changing all I knowLord, this muddy water is taking back my home

Muddy Water, John Douglas “Rabbit” Bundrick

7

FOUNDATIONS IN MUD

L E I L A T O P I Ć

Mary, take the child, the river’s risingMuddy water’s changing all I knowLord, this muddy water is taking back my home

Muddy Water, John Douglas “Rabbit” Bundrick

A painting implies paintings, the multiplicity of being a painting. Paintings disappear with a small bang, the­ir destruction is as beautiful as their existence, they are basically means of torture which explode thro­ugh an individual’s heartless capability to experien­ce strong undifferentiated emotions filled with lon­ging, dissatisfaction and magnificence. They have no social purpose.

The Book of Daniel, E. L. Doctorow

All paintings: ZLATAN VEHABOVIĆ “FOUNDATIONS IN MUD” Photographs: Damir Žižić

site: disappearing or sliding away upon the arrival of, for example, water torrents.Vehabović had made it a kind of personal mission that he would continue the task of building, learning and experiencing form, the same form that first appeared du-ring his student days and which had remained present for the last fifteen years. He developed and practised this task with the intention of achieving utmost perfection in his artistic skill (Zlatan calls it his toolbox) so that it might finally provide him with a degree of freedom. More precisely, Vehabović sees his earlier cycles as a kind of foundation (in mud) because he has realized that figuration, as an artistic guideline, is no longer of any importance to him. Therefore, the genesis of the dissolution of firm volumes and storytelling in the new cycle must be interpreted as the artist’s intention, provoked by his weariness of narrative determinants, to free himself from the shackles of certain artistic conven­tions. This cycle is, thus, filled with scenes that are not firmly rooted in reality; the central perspective has been lost, while the edges of some canvasses are eroded by layers of scraped-away paint revealing bits of bare canvas. In terms of themes, the new cycle focuses on the role and importance of human shelters, emphasi zing the powerful psychological aspect of places where we seek protection. Dri ven by his instinct for construction, but without the desire to retell an event, he crea tes artistic prototypes based on found photographs which he then digitally collages, generating a new set of meanings. This type of digitally produced underlying work, i.e. motive, still contains the central idea of a shelter, which Vehabović negates in a way in his painting. The fast dissemination of images in contemporary culture has made it very simple to take for granted various scenes of ecological catastro­phes and crises. It appears that this is why Vehabović’s shelters are a metaphori­cal repre sentation of the anthropocene period, in which human aspiration for pro-gress has become a dark geological force that is grotesquely reshaping the world. The housings or shelters on Vehabović’s canvasses do exist, but their foundations lie in the “mud’’, there are no people inside them or anywhere around them, they are ephemeral, fragile and devastated. The attractively cataclysmic quality of the scenes stems from the artist’s daring use of colour, specific for this cycle. One of the paintings depicts a house which appears to be floating on attenuated, winding forms represented in the foreground. However, the view slides towards the centre of the painting to reveal whirlwinds of colour (white, grey, green, dark red) which create an abstract formation serving as a compositional foundation for the house painted in strong surfaces of dark blue. In the next composition Vehabović again departs from representation and the painting reveals an explosion of satura ted and intense blue-green, an amorphous swirl of colour that somewhat menacing ly enve-lops a tall tree and seems to threaten to devour the shelter. The foundations of re-presentational painting have been eroded and dissolved. Another painting shows a ruined wooden dwelling with carefully painted dishes that function as signs of human presence, and an old, worn map hanging on a wall (the human desire to conquer new spa ces). However, the landscape surrounding the dwelling has been ravaged by an unknown natural force, perhaps a hurricane. There is no story, the central perspective is disjointed, the forms are dissolved, the light source is invisi-

ble, the central motive is swallowed by an undefined form while, for example, the tall palm trees are made to look like a distorted digital image. Breakthrough layers of pure paint frame almost every central motive of a shelter, deliberately pointing to Vehabović’s idea that the scenes are constructs and that the painting is, after all, merely a painting. Similarly, the seemingly ‘’natural’’ landscapes are not really na-tural but have been given (painted) in an indirect and fragmentary manner, mirror­ing Vehabović’s previous cycles (as well as previous art-history traditions in con­structing the visual), i.e., his preoccupations with form (the construction of a tool­box) and its current disintegration, which he uses as a kind of self-referential archive. Zlatan Vehabović clearly takes a leading position in the generational context and is recognizable for systematically going beyond his original field of painting, for dilu-ting in a certain way the centre of the discipline, and also for the specific use of digi-tally or photographically created underlying prototypes. I believe that his wish for digitally constructed motives stems exclusively from the desire for the authenticity of scenes, but combined with the artist’s consciousness about intentionally aban­doning previous paradigms. From the freedom he is trying to achieve by perfecting his painting métier he is constructing a new visuality (we might also call it a signa­ture) which, as curator and theoretician Klaudio Štefančić remarks, often refers to movies or reflects music through its evocative effects. It is this wide visual field of Vehabović›s practice of questioning the painting medium that makes him an unusu­ally interesting artist. Foundations in Mud are no more than a reflection of the artist’s consciousness that the centre of his pictorial space has been shattered and that the surface of the painting has been freed from representations of the outside world. The development of the artist’s skill is unimportant. What matters is Vehabović’s awareness of his own self-referentiality as an artist. Furthermore, the use of digita lly generated underlying works and the simulation in painting of the effects achieved by a computer image (such as a change in viewpoint, flashes of colour, the use of cold and seemingly technologically manipulated colours) or the effect of wonder achieved by the premonition of catastrophe indicate that Vehabović, perhaps unwi-ttingly, invites a comparison between the painter’s and the digitally generated ima-ge. Vehabović’s technological sophistication and developed toolbox (the term from the field of information technology is used with reason) indicate that manual pro­cedures in building an artist’s painting automatically mean that the painting can no longer be reproduced, which represents a differentia specifica from a digita lly crea-ted image. In the end, Vehabović’s practice shows that in the time of mass media painting must be judged exclusively by uniqueness of expression, because a paint­ing represents the artist’s understanding of the meaning of artistic space, of the manner of its construction and dissolution, a Duchampesque cosa mentale. Mere­ly a painting, but nevertheless capable of provoking strong, undifferentiated emo­tions filled with longing, dissatisfaction and magnificence.

PRODUKCIJA PRODUCTION

Grad Zagreb

Republika HrvatskaMinistarstvokultureRepublicof CroatiaMinistryof Culture

• Izdavač Publisher Muzej suvremene umjetnosti Museum of Contemporary Art, Avenija Du bro-v nik 17, 10010 Zag reb; Cro atia; tel: +385 1 605 27 00; E-mail: msu@msu.hr; www.msu.hr • Za izdavača For the publi sher Snježana Pintarić • Urednica kataloga Catalogue editor Leila Topić • Kustosica izložbe Exhibition curator Leila Topić Tekst Text Leila Topić • Prijevod Translation He­lena Šintić • Lektura Language Editing Jadranka Pintarić, Nikolina Jovanović • Autori postava Di­splay Authors Leila Topić, Zlatan Vehabović • Tehnički pos tav Technical Set­up Tehnička služba MSU-a • Produkcija Production Muzej suvremene umjetnosti i Nomad Museum of Contempo­rary Art and Nomad Grafičko oblikova nje Graphic design artmashine (Zubić/Jukić) • Tisak Print Zelina d.d. • Na klada Print run 300 kom

Izložba je realizirana sredstvima Ministarstva kulture Republike Hrvatske i Gradskog ureda za obra­zo va nje, kulturu i sport Grada Zagreba. The exhibition is funded by the Ministry of Culture of the Re­public of Croatia and City Department of Education, Culture and Sport.

IZLOŽBENI PARTNERI EXHIBITION PARTNERS POKROVITELJI SPONSORS