Пейзаж как сцена. Landscapes/Landescapes
Landscape
My “landscape” of the landscapes is not about frozen beauty, musical Goethe’s beauty, but about a voice of the Omnitudo realitatis, Gaea’s, ‘kollektives Unbewusstes’ and Umwelt, acousmatic voice of the atopic portraiture of them. For me, the landscape is like that ‘opening door’ of J. Renoir, a confluence of many accidents, photogenic, artificial and not quite captured, seen, caught on film. Perhaps, these are fragments of the one whole, maybe it is the focus of all relative and complex, and obviously alive, generalized by that rule of a universal life and the Universe. It is interesting that in the “landscape” in this potential matter of eternity, I want as nowhere, to catch something unique, super accidental, the phenomenon of the phenomenon, to understand it by the reduction, not by generalization as I am taking a portrait of a man. To find grains of the voice of the stealing life, is the art of the landscape, withal is the ideation. The ears of the Earth have no eyelids — I am attentive and wakeful try in portrayal of her.
The eudaimonic happiness of the frame.
Unbound, unconnected — what does that mean? In my view, it is not a loss of identity, but rather a legal or social unrecognisability, anonymity, the possibility of being anyone within the frame; a blending not for the sake of blending itself, but to generate something new. My flowers are portraits, landscapes are portraits, and portraits are, in fact, landscapes. A ‘stilllife’ that changes its appearance the moment it is observed, becoming a portrait in the eyes of the observer, intensifying all the more as the gaze grows more intense. ‘Unbound’ is not deconstruction, not anarchy, not left-wing demagoguery; it is a holistic and eudaimonic, generative shift. Vibrant alife.
One of the main positions, the vital question of the universal art history is rhizome of the definition and term of the mimesis as a process and “anthropomorphism” as high phenomenon, as appearance etc., and for me here is much more interesting not the aspects of that ‘why’ but some nuances of this ‘how’. For what is this very first not-a-zero sign/touch/grain/sememe, semantical-visual trigger, chiasmus which has started processes of distinguishability and the eye/the eye-of-the-hole-body begin recognize a “recognizable” — blinking mark of a proto-face/trace of the something native or birthing, or of the metaphor — in semiotic/poetic notation. Be brief this series is about/fulfillmentness by Grains of a Voice. Hearing by eye, visible by ear. Was written by the body to be read by the Eye, of the hand. It is all about simultaneous reading and writening by light and silver halides as letters-grains-semens-significants.
Put in other words, if R. Barthes would be R. Mapplethorpe this theorien image’s horizons, of this series would be bewritten: by being exist and discerned in polarity space flowing and conjoinedly splitting between such epifocuses:
The unnullable least/The unnullable utmost
Residual resemblance/sedimentary effigiateness
Nature/culture
Homonymy/ phenomenon
Morphology of the text / Photogénie
Sameness and otherness.
