ANDY DENZLER/ GOYA‘S FIRE STEIDL
ANDY DENZLER/ GOYA‘S FIRE STEIDL
My visit in to Museo del Nacional del Prado was the 昀rst time I saw, then felt the power of Goya’s work outside of a history book. When I began my research for this essay, I found myself completely engrossed and steeped in the history of Napoleon’s “great blunder” and the audaciousness of Goya. My determination now is to offer you a contemporary concomitance, as well as share this with utmost con昀dence: great artists slow-dance with those who came decades/centuries before them - the trick being to not step on each other’s toes. Andy Denzler’s re-articulation of “a Goya” is both a courageous and perilous event - he is in a dance with Saturn, a giant in art history. Such risks stand the test of posterity. HISTORY Goya was born in Zaragoza, Spain, on March 30th, 1746 and died in Bordeaux, France on April 16th, 1828. Perhaps the most important thing I learned in re-visiting his life was that he was not the mercurial type that I had previously thought, but rather an active agent. and still, be trying to meld with a global conscience. Goya’s 昀rst commissioned studies of war positioned him as much as a painter as a reporter – both the painter’s desire to portray the fall of his country and to act as a visual journalist. His works convey the brutalities and sufferings of war; works that reach directly into our contemporary modalities. Goya’s series of prints The Disasters of War (1810-1920, also known as Los desastres de la Guerra) visually mapped the existential fall of Spain and were the precursors to The Second of May 1808 (also known as The Charge of the Mamelukes) and The Third of May, 1808 (also known as El tres de mayo de 1808 en Madrid). In 1808, Napoleon Bonaparte‘s French army invaded Spain, forcing Charles IV to abdicate and eventually ensuring that Joseph Bonaparte was made King of Spain. The French troops under Joachim Murat clashed with an untrained Spanish „guerilla“ army which was not suited for battle. Goya represented it well. Goya was given the moniker of „the 昀rst modernist“ artist which is perhaps debatable by experts but what is not is that Goya in昀uenced such works as, Edouard Manet‘s The Execution of Emperor Maximilian (1867-69) and Pablo Picasso‘s Guernica (1937). However, Goya’s The Second of May, 1808 seems to have its critics. Historian Kenneth Clark considered it „an artistic failure“ because it owed so much to Peter Paul Rubens. Paradoxically Robert Hughes proclaimed „There is no higher design, only tyranny replicating itself in the night.“ 1 Hughes went on to claim that Goya’s “…genius for telling truths of suffering without false heroics have made him the patron saint of every war photographer.” 2 The history of war painting and its descendent media, photography/ 昀lm, lend themselves quite differently to visual techniques. Crossing easements and the physical plights of war require may something as liquid as blood itself, although each have their unique qualities. “Goya’s un昀inching cycle of drawings, The Disasters of War, are the most searing works of art ever to deal with con昀ict.“ 3 It has been said Goya was the last of the old masters and the 昀rst of the new. He would likely have been happy with this claim as he had an endless talent for revealing human pathologies, ones that ranged from the opulent and romantic to the profane and atrocious. He was able to rest his 昀ngers on the pulse of Spain and reveal aspects of its humanity or lack thereof. That was his talent: „great art was born of great terror, great loneliness, great inhibitions, instabilities and it always balances them.4 Goya’s goal was to bring order to disorder, to shed light on chaos and bring alignment to those that had lost their way. For example, in a series of aquatint prints titled Los Caprichos, made between 1797 and 1798. Goya’s intent condemned the “universal follies and foolishness in the Spanish society in which he lived”.5 He mastered his instincts and used his works to bring order to disorder. TRANSITION The Second of May, 1808 was completed in 1814, having been commissioned by the newly installed Government of Spain to commemorate the war. “In Goya’s greatest THE THREAT OF THE PRESENT BY DOUGLAS LEWIS
1 2 3 fig. 1 Francisco de Goya, The Second of May 1808, 1814, Oil on canvas, 235 x 266 cm Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid fig. 2 Francisco de Goya, The Third of May 1808, 1814, Oil on canvas, 260 x 340 cm Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid fig. 3 Francisco de Goya, A Procession of Flagellants 1812-1819 Oil on panel, 46 x 73 cm, Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, Madrid 1 2 3
scenes we seem to see the people of the world exactly at the moment when they 昀rst attained the title “suffering humanity”.6 Depicted are Mamelukes crashing the wall of the city Puerta del Sol as they push forward on horseback with local Spaniards 昀ghting valiantly on foot. First appearing to be successful in their 昀ght against the French cavalry, a freshly stabbed Mameluke is being dragged off his brilliant white steed. Goya positions the body in the middle of the canvas and uses the soldier’s bright red pantaloons to direct the eye to a dagger. These elements form a triangulation to stage the battle and the soft contrasting colours make the work quite overwhelming. The sense of urgency and speed in which the clash was taking place is most apparent. How will Mr. Denzler‘s call-and-response to Mr. Goya’s painting 昀t into the canon of art history? DENZLER To begin, I 昀rst tried to predict what Denzler‘s interests were. Was The Second of May 1808 to be a contemporary veneration? An homage to the master? Or a sign of the times? I wondered if he was attempting to 昀nd a mediated equivalent to the Mamelukes. I opted to ask Andy about his choice of Goya’s painting, he responded by saying “the main reason why I chose it (and not the more popular Third of May, 1808) is (that) the current situation we all live in… The uprising in America feels almost like a civil war.” Artists are at their best when they are re昀exive and able to catch current winds of anticipation. As a photographer for the Swiss Armed Forces, Denzler never saw battle, but arguably, it may have spawned his interest in a contemporary re-introduction of The Second of May. Perhaps his familiarity with the camera in昀uenced the vigour with which he paints - his implicit understanding of the pros-and-cons of each medium provides him with an advantage. The camera is about capturing time (Henri Cartier-Bresson referred to it as “The Decisive Moment”) whereas paint mythologizes it. Curator Daniel Rosenberg wrote, „the artist makes useof his photographs with a Leica -, but also more subtly, in his way of imaging…“.7 The paradox of traditional media being used in depicting war is that it has always been varied in its attempts at representing emotions. Denzler‘s inspiration was made clear to one of my questions: „What struck me the most was a very small painting on wood called A Procession of Flagellants (circa 1812-14) … It captures the religious scene of self-humiliation and hopeless praying about the great plague. Goya was able to paint the human condition in all of it‘s facets“. It could be implied that Denzler knows painting by understanding what cameras cannot accomplish then exploits those vulnerabilities in paint. It is the difference between “logos” and “mythos” - rationality and emotion. WINDING IT IN I thought better than to ask Denzler if he saw the Napoleonic Wars as something metaphoric for the present-day situation and if that was his initial motivation. Of course, it is, and what we seem to be present in, is a global concussion leftover from colonial wars. We are living in the wake of histories that were forged without us. We cannot change our history and it is questionable as to how much we should disavow ourselves from it. Sinking sculptures and burning paintings also have a history, and if nothing else, erasure serves no one. Our battles are against unrivalled opponents and why we are having them should not be forgotten. I posed several questions to Denzler about current global issues: “ The roots of evil run deep with slavery, colonialism and globalization”. Moreover, “It is the result of a privileged capitalist class and the current situation we face today“. My notion of a colonial global concussion is meant to suggest that our history has taken certain blows to the head but I hope we keep our collective memories. Erasure has never accomplished anything and often ends up making things worse. CONCLUDING WITH The act of “taking” without permission has always had consequences. One ends up in jail or at the very least, getting the Play Station taken away for a month. A similar idea appears in the Bible,and likely in most religious texts, THE THREAT OF THE PRESENT BY DOUGLAS LEWIS
that „to covet“ leads to trouble sooner or later and a „wise man“ is not needed to break down the why. Humanity seems instinctually driven to „take” and show little remorse, highlighting the burgeoning issues of today. consumption, fuelled by hypercapitalism (on methamphetamine?) is not so different from the desire to conquer other lands and to pillage their assets. Denzler‘s aesthetic ascription and homage to The Second of May, 1808 reveals muscled gestures yielding elongated grays blacks and whites whose striated “stretch marks that aggressively tear at his canvas; gone are Goya‘s deepest of oranges and earthly browns and what remains appears desaturated like cold ashes days after a glowing 昀re. All as if to say that we are too late, the 昀re is out and the damage is done. “We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the 昀rst duty of intelligent men”.8 Denzler’s work is just that, an aesthetic restatement - transgressions are irreversible but „hope“ is not. His interpretation is not a trope, but a mirror re昀ecting multiple histories and places in which we are not active participants. I believe Denzler’s work to be portraying a new war, an existential one that pits us against ourselves. A war - of our making and one for which we must take certain responsibility. We can choose to adapt our (and not erase) collective histories and re-direct our futures. 1. (https://www.artsy.net/series/-1583427101/artsy-editori al-goyas-third- may-foreverchanged-way-war 2. The Unflinching Eye, The Guardian, Friday October 03, 2003. 3. The Truth Laid Bare - Alastair Sooke, BBC.com Culture, July 16th, 2014. 4. Anais Nin, The Diary of Anais Nin, Vol.4: 1944-1947 https://www. brainpickings.org/2012/09/03/anais-nin-on-emotion- and-writing. 5. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_caprichos). 6. A Coney Island of the Mind, poems by Lawrence Ferlinghetti, A New Directions Book, 1958. P.1 7. Daniel Rosenberg, Andy Denzler -Fragmented Reality, p.7 8. George Orwell, Brainy Quotes Inc, 2020 https://www.brainyquote.com/ quotes/george_orwell_136281, accessed July 21, 2020. 1 2 3
Here I see a photo taken in front of a gallery. The quickly moving viewers were captured as faint spectres. This photo mesmerises me, but not because of the visitors’ ghostlike shadows. Rather, what fascinates me is the uncanny paintings behind those passers-by. The paintings look as if someone ‘took videos of people and paused them at random moments’, and they behold my gaze. At 昀rst glance, they look like Representational-Expressionist paintings based on photographs, stylised by powerful mark-making.But, with each passing moment, the paintings grow stranger and stranger. The image is as distorted as a shaky photo, out-of-focus as if it was obstructed by a veil, and no matter how hard you try to focus, it is impossible to read the expression on the people’s faces. What was the painter trying to depict? Were these done with an intention? Or is the painter trying to obscure something? Swiss-born contemporary artist Andy Denzler is the one responsible for this unique painting signature. He mostly works with oil painting and takes his source images from photos and new media. Most of them are people and surroundings he had encountered in daily life, but in some works he uses a collage-like process; he disassembles various images, picks out speci昀c people and backgrounds, and puts them together in an context. The resulting image is unpredictable and unlikely, but undoubtedly mysterious and enticing. They are scenes of reality, but the sense of unreality prevails in them. Although he approaches his paintings from the angle of representation and sources his paintings from photo and video. His works are not dominated by the human 昀gures in them; instead, his manner and process of depicting 昀gures are what de昀nes his oeuvre. Denzler is a traditional portrait painter in the sense that he builds layers upon layers to sculpt out the face and the body, but his tactile and instant interventions adjust and recreate his people’s identities. First, he illustrates his 昀gure, and before the oil paint dries, he uses brush and knife to rub and push his image, blurring the outlines and boundaries.Then, he builds additional thick layers of paint to reinforce the painting’s texture. Horizontal and vertical spaces are laid on top of each other; each addition further distorting the image. Glitch is a digital phenomenon caused by video playback errors, but ironically, Denzler uses the effect to point to the painterly characteristics of his canvases. The more the glitch and his paintings become that much more painterly. Representational art does provide the foundation of his creative practice, but abstractive implications are what ultimately governs his paintings. Denzler’s artistic expression is formed by these two opposing forces, representation and abstraction. His creative process alone can attest to how his paintings extend far beyond the boundaries of Expressionism. This feat was possible because Denzler had constructed his artistic practice upon a meticulous aesthetic background. During interviews, he mentioned that he strives to overcome the‘slickness’ found in JPEG images and everyday life. There is something counterintuitive in this statement, for ‘slickness’ is an undeniable part of modern aesthetics. Byung-Chul Han claimed that, by the era of early modern aesthetics, ‘slickness’ had already been promoted to a core aesthetic principle (Edmund Burke). The age of mechanical reproduction soon followed, and thanks to the rapid technological advancements, visual images are far more superior even in terms of ‘slick visibility.’ Photo and video are crisp and 昀awless by nature, and while Denzler relies on them for his paintings, he sternly distances himself from their attributes. Slickness guarantees a certain level of aesthetic pleasure and satisfaction. But suppose, if all aesthetic experiences were slanted towards freedom of choice and ful昀lling the needs of self-satisfaction, art would no longer have the chance to provide meaningful experiences. After all, an aesthetic experience is more often found in wounds, cracks, protuberances, and creases than in sleekness. In other words, invasion, trauma, and contradictory movement are essential to art. According to Martin Heidegger, artlanguage (image) originates from the act of puncturing and penetrating — or, ‘making something visible’ by opening a gap. Denzler’s studio practice is quite close to this de昀nition of art. He literally breaks into the surface of the painting, then pushes paint around to sumon sleekness on his canvas. He carves out layers of paint as if he is making a woodcut, or builds thick coats of paint on top. Eventually, his entire painting is turned into a gap, an opening that leads to somewhere else. Numerous three-dimensional collisions PAINTINGS OF DISRUPTION/ PARK KYUM-SOOK
are overlaid on the sleek photographic image, covering the canvas like a thin veil. As the thick paint and crude brushstrokes gradually rise to the surface, the images ebb away like lifting a veil. An image marked by spatial collisions, or an image behind a veil; both phrases imply that the painting’s surface is generating some three-dimensional space, and Denzler’s ‘concealment’ is what creates this sense of distance. After all, concealed beauty is much more tempting than when it is exposed. The paintings arm themselves with both concealment and exposure, thoroughly imbued with suspense. In terms of strategy, they use concealment, delay, and confusion to 昀ght their way through space time. His images are ‘concealed yet hidden,’ and they refuse to manifest any de昀ned shapes. Hesitation is their only action, causing as much delay as possible, and they force the viewers to spend more time looking for the hidden shapes. While the visitors are preoccupied with this task, something suddenly pulls them into another direction. Just a moment before, they were trying to 昀nd something in the painting’s shades — the smudged, faded, and obscure areas. Now they see stories unfolding from those dark corners, and the viewers watch in respectful silence. But Denzler’s goal is anything but telling stories. Now, he challenges his audience with the provocative plot twist he had prepared all along. The 昀gures 昀nally show themselves on stage, visitors at last get to see how fragile and ephemeral they are, and silence. But Denzler’s goal is anything but telling stories. Now, he challenges his audience with the provocative plot twist he had prepared all along. The 昀gures 昀nally show themselves on stage, visitors at last get to see how fragile and ephemeral they are, and they have no choice but to sympathise with those vulnerable beings. And here is another important milestone: take note of how Denzler treated the gazes of his 昀gures. His 昀gures pose themselves in the style of classical portraiture, but they try their best to not meet the viewers’ eyes. Their gaze is seldom straight, and they are mostly looking at something else. Some simply turn their heads away. As they never look back at their audience, the viewers are afforded enough time to observe and scrutinise the 昀gures. Then, an awkward silence 昀lls the canvas, urging you to hold your breath and keep looking on, but the silence is not a soundless one — it is crowde with noises that are yet to reach the stage of language. His images cannot be turned into information or knowledge, and yet they force you to listen to a silence. The experience could be rather disconcerting, but it certainly makes a solid, one-of-a-kind aesthetic journey. Viewers travel through the virtual world created by Denzler — the distortions in his canvas, the fragments of the paused video, the layers of paint exposed yet concealed — project their emotions, and empathy. The paintings are alienating, and the 昀gures are complete strangers, but in the end, what the viewers encounter here is a tale of time, a story of the present moment they are living through right now. Denzler once said that time is his artistic practice as well as one of his subject matters. Something is submerged in the serenity of his images, something exposed yet concealed at the same time. Denzler’s paintings take the viewers to a brief passing moment which reveals that something. “The scenes are familiar, but they take you to an uncharted universe.” The experience is captivating and enchanting, and at the end of this exhilarating tour, the visitor’s ‘personal’ history enters a new era. Thereby his works take seats in the time lived by the viewer, turned into timeless beings that fuel their own existences, living out every moment in full vigour. Park Kyum-Sook National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Seoul PAINTINGS OF DISRUPTION/ PARK KYUM-SOOK
PLATES