Constantin Xenakis was born in Cairo, Egypt, in 1931. He studied decoration, interior design (Ecole Supérieure des Arts Modernes) and painting (Académie de la Grande Chaumière, Notre Dame des Champs). He taught in Germany and France. He has exhibited all around the world; his works are to be found in numerous public and private collections in Greece and abroad. His multi-faceted body of work points out the ambivalence, the impossibility of communication –amongst other things– in a society ruled by the Media.
Myrto Digoni: Your solo exhibition Structures + Codes, which includes artworks from your different periods –kinetic constructions, semiological works, book-objects, etc. –, is on view at the private Herakleidon-Experience in Visual Arts Museum at Thesseion from December 08, 2006. For the first time you have chosen an exhibition title, which combines different sorts of signifiers (two words and an arithmetical symbol) –something that has been happening for some time in your artworks. Why have you chosen that title? Do you think it best summarizes your constant, for the past decades, research field, namely space and communication codes? How did this exhibition come about?
Constantin Xenakis: In 2006 I had a solo exhibition at the Rhodes Museum of Modern Greek Art. Its subject matter emanated from my entire body of work. From the sixties up to present day: «Highway Code». Of course, it wasn’t a retrospective exhibition, but a theme-based exhibition. The selection of artworks concerned road signs and codes. Later, I thought about bringing this exhibition in Athens. I already had the support of the Athens French Institute, which put me into contact with Paul and Belinda Fyros (the Herakleidon - Experience in Visual Arts Museum owners). After a visit to the exhibition in Rhodes and our warmest encounter, –I must tell you at this point that the couple are genuine art lovers who desire to offer Greece a lot– we agreed on part of the Rhodes exhibition and on the title «Codes + Structures»; I would then add some artworks that could fall under this title that covers and highlights an important part of my work. But even so, I would like to stress that it is not a retrospective, since it does not include many periods of my work, especially the environments, the happenings, etc. As far as the title is concerned, I’d like to repeat what a philosopher friend of mine, Thanassis Kitsopoulos, once stated: «Constantin Xenakis’s painting is a transformation of existing structures and codes into visual structural arrangements, which illustrate the transition from a material / experiential approach into a conceptual order. The abstractive power of his work leads to the representation of the structure of structures and codes and establishes a new, self-sufficient, original and unique “conceptualizing” approach, not only of the cosmic environment, but also of art itself. »
M.D.: Do you consider yourself as an artist, a creator, a scientist, a philosopher? Which of these functions describes you best?
C.X.: Certainly as a creator –this includes the artist– with two main axes of interest: science and philosophy. I have to admit that most of the times I can understand a researcher/scientist better than the artist who «praises» a sunset.
M.D.: Do you think that there is a potential artist in everyone of us? During the seventies you started using stencils. Stencils, as Yona Friedman pointed out in the catalogue of your 1976 exhibition at the Zoumboulakis Gallery in Athens, theoretically provide everybody with the opportunity to make one’s very own work of art. You even made the following experiment: you asked the visitors of an art gallery in Germany to use different industrial templates for reproduction and to create artworks. In the end, however, you were quite unsatisfied with the result.
C.X.: An artist maybe, certainly not a creator. Our education and the conditions of life, the general system in which we live, do not yet allow us that kind of brain evolution that would make man less of a fighter/conqueror and more of a thinker. It is true that in 1971, in Berlin, I put my sketches, crayons, and blank sheets of paper on a table full of stencils and I asked of the audience to play, to create, to draw whatever they wanted. It was a small experiment that led to disastrous results. Back then, I had even promised myself, had the results been satisfactory, to quit being an artist. In the same spirit, in 1971, I created a 4 page-journal by employing codes, signs, and symbols of contemporary technology. I printed it and distributed it in the streets of Zagreb and asked the pedestrians the following question: was it a work of art or a spoken language? The answer was that it was a strange, unrecognizable language, from somewhere near Tibet. Then and there I realized how powerless Fine Arts Schools are!
M.D.: Do you believe that artworks should raise some sort of «aesthetic pleasure»?
C.X.: The aesthetical experience is a complex state, in-between intellect and sentiment. The dialogue the viewer and the Work of Art develop, or even their confrontation, can lead to a deeper joy –maybe the word «pleasure» is not in this case quite adequate. Artworks constitute events which involve messages, thoughts, and feelings. The greater the artist’s as well as the viewer’s education are, the higher our civilization’s level. As a Kantian maxim goes: the innocent eye is blind and the virgin mind is empty.
M.D.: You are Greek; but you were born in Cairo. You have lived in France, Germany, and the United States. You have produced a polysemous body of work, in which the writing’s pluralism is more than evident. At this very moment we are having a conversation in French. You are a citizen of the world, beyond doubt. Do you believe that, nowadays, in the era of the so-called globalization, in Greece, Europe, the US, people are multi-dimensional, multi-cultural as yourself, or, unfortunately, «one-dimensional»?
C.X.: Before and after Alexander the Great, numerous conquerors have either propagated or destroyed civilizations, our planet has expanded with the good and evil brought about by this internationalization. Globalization is a natural evolution of human nature; but I do react to mindless acts, such as the devaluation of man, the one-dimensional man, whatever results from the exploitation and the mismanagement of the multiple goods offered to us by culture and technology. The airplane certainly makes for easier transport and carrying; the transportation of an atomic bomb however does not sound like a very good idea.
In our times, two factors play an important role in the creation of the one-dimensional man: lack of time (for the acquisition of a broader culture) and specialization, which, because of the overproduction of idioms and signs for internal use, has contributed to the scattering of knowledge and led to a new form of seclusion among scientists.
M.D.: In 2004, the same year the Olympic Games were hosted in their birthplace, you conceived the monumental work ΔΙΙ ΟΛΥΜΠΙΩ for the outdoor exhibition Athens by Art. How did you function in relation to the surroundings?
C.X.: It was a challenge for me, regarding the subject and the environment into which the work would have had to be exhibited. I believe the setting I had chosen was the proper one for me to express elements of memory, time, and script. The general public and the art community reacted positively and the majority suggested ΔΙΙ ΟΛΥΜΠΙΩ should stay in that place[1] forever; that did not happen, I am sorry to say. At the present time the artwork lies idle, away from Athens, in the manufacturer’s warehouse! This is certainly telling something!
M.D.: Are we witnessing an era of crisis? Is it a global crisis? Does it affect all fields? Is art also hit by it?
C.X.: The crisis is obviously global and enduring; it penetrates all spheres and the domain of art is especially vulnerable –unless we believe that art’s role should be amusement, in other words ESCAPE. I believe that during a period of crisis many artworks of profound importance are being made, but, alas, they are not always put in the limelight in time. Unfortunately, we do not create the right circumstances for them not to sink in oblivion.
M.X.: Let’s change the subject. Let’s consider the Museum institution. I have seen, in an older catalogue, the photography of a table with a penis in a state of erection placed on it; and there was the following caption under it: «Museum of Modern Art». At that time, which subjects did you want to raise?
C.X.: Museums also follow the various «trends» that come and pass. The Art Stock market has somehow damaged the meaning of Art. There is no doubt that the most trivial object when introduced into the museum space changes not only its own significance but also the meaning of the structured space. In 1970, I transferred traffic cones from the streets and into the Malmö Museum of Sweden. The public perceived them as a Work of Art, when it was merely a metaphor. To repeat this experiment of transposition / transference more than once as well as raise it into a system is pointless.
M.D.: So, by using these symbolic images (e.g. your works Museum of Modern Art, Art History), you wanted to state that, after Duchamp, a series of so called «artists» just imitated him without having anything more to say, and who, nevertheless, made their way into museums and scored raving reviews by art critics?
C.X.: That is partly true… Something really positive about Duchamp is his conception of Art, which is something extreme and, in my opinion, should not be imitated. The recent History of Art has been based upon the pre-Duchamp era and post-Duchamp era. The same thing applies on Beuys. His teaching was more important than most of his ‘material’ art production.
M.D.: In Greece, how is Art History registered?
C.X.: In the past there was nothing, but I had hope. Now that many things do happen I have lost faith. If you tie the first knob the wrong way, a domino effect follows... What goes on today is not a crime, it is a Wrong Path. The official art institutions should abide by a more scientific methodology and a spirit of meritocracy in order to contribute with the available material to a truly modern culture. Unfortunately, lack of professionalism and petty self-interests have led us to the present mess.
M.D.: But, let’s go back to you, Xenakis as a creator. You have earlier described yourself as a «baroque» artist. I assume you meant that in relation to baroque music?
C.X.: My work has many baroque aspects, which originate also from baroque music; but it is minimal in many ways, as well. I call myself a modern artist who has introduced semiotics into the field of aesthetic experience. There is a classical dimension inherent in my work that enables me to avoid any kind of «trend».
M.D.: Your works share a common characteristic: they comment on the relativity of language and the failure of communication. Methodical overlay, repetition and juxtaposition in your visual work achieve a graphic representation of the Media and render your work extremely up-to-date – we do live in a period in which an unprecedented overproduction of meaning has contributed to a «communication gridlock». How would you comment on that?
C.X.: In a society, which is incapable of acting and reacting, and which is driven to indifference, the difficulties of communication multiply. Have a look at the television medium worldwide and in Greece in particular in order to have a better understanding of what communicational confusion and crisis actually involves. I am trying to organize this chaos in a rational way. I revolt and resist by exercising criticism, by using my own rational method of work.
M.D.: The problem of communication encompasses the problem of time. How can we register time? Is the visual artist the best «seismograph» of his epoch?
C.X.: I do believe that they are also other ways to register time. The painter, the poet, the scientist, the philosopher, each uses a different idiom. Time has always played an important role in my work and in my life since I was a child – it penetrates ancient times and the various civilizations up to present day. I «frieze» time in my visual work and I arrange (structure) it into movements (moments) which the eye can gaze and the ear can hear, from the Book of Life up to 126 hours, my last work.
M.D.: According to you, each artwork can be interpreted in various ways. But each interpretation/reading presupposes the viewer’s active participation. Do you still believe in it? And what about your book-objects, «where the message, as a carrier of meaning, abandons its communicative role and becomes a mere object»?
C.X.: A genuine work of art involves numerous potential readings. This is what enables it to transcend its present time limits and to achieve longevity. Obviously this presupposes an active spectator.
The carrier of meaning is the object itself, whatever communicative role is inherent in it and born by it.
M.D.: Let’s talk about politics. You have mentioned to me that you admire Bakounin…
C.X.: Bakounin promotes an ideal –its sole value lies in the effort one undertakes to approach it. Politicians should first serve the public, and by doing so they would also serve themselves. Unfortunately the opposite applies today. That is the reason why our world has come to what it is today.
M.D.: Can art change the world? Can it reverse the pyramid?
C.X.: Art cannot change the world. Besides, I do not believe it is art’s function. What it can achieve is to conceive its present world in a poetical way and contribute, along with numerous factors, to the articulation of a finer, better civilization.
[1] The Dionysiou Areopagitou promenade
Εγκαταλελειμμένοι στη λευκότητα
Il y a 2 semaines
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire