|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
| “…Susid’s paintings bring to attention matters of vital importance as well as petty ones. The world of politics is intertwined with a reflection on the relation between a painter and the model, while great historical events are linked with architectural details. Not without a sense of humor, he lets us uncover ambiguity everywhere and anywhere we happen to look, and sometimes where we least expect it. His comments overwhelm with accuracy, although they may appear absurd at the first glance. Susid, with the use of his paintings, creates a record of his own experiences, he describes and comments on the world. He deals with current issues, while still avoiding simple journalism. He has faith in painting, and his works are themselves the best evidence of being up-to-date. In order to talk about himself and the world, Susid paints small pictures calculated for individual communication, and even requiring the establishment of an intimate bond. This ironic method aids in building such relations, as it is a friendly wink of an eye or a cordial grimace of a lip…This intimacy of Susid’s paintings is reinforced by the way in which they are exhibited as well as by elements of visual language, which are well-known to everybody. Susid is fascinated by simple forms, monochromatic backgrounds, geometric shapes, plain graphs, visible outlines and long stripes of color. So it is not surprising that he devoted a lot of attention to the geometry of borders and the coloring of flags. Despite using a template for letters and acrylic spray paint, the individual quality of the visual text is emphasized by the draft sketch shining through, by blurred contours and a visible retouch. In this way even the text becomes a patch of color. Behind the set of colorful rectangles, circles, triangles and squares, often known from history, art or religion, there remains an attempt to restore the meaning to culturally and historically burdened symbols, like the cross, the swastika, crescent moon, or star of David. Through these symbols, which are commonly used and strongly rooted in our culture, and with the help of words, Susid constructs the world anew. Therefore, for Susid there are no topics not worth undertaking, no works canonic enough to be immune to being ascribed with new meanings, or language clichés which could not be filled with individual content. This way we learn that reality has not been given to us once and for all, but that its shape is constructed in a process which might be initiated by an artist, but for the course of which we are equally responsible.” text by Lechosław Olszewski Paweł Susid rarely comments on his own paintings. Working on the completeness of the message in its simplest form, the artist believes in us and in our interpretation of the painting. The comments printed below, although provoked by specific paintings, refer to the intellectual journey the artist made in the process of their creation. some qoutes from Susid’s comments : About his works: "When I think about my works I sometimes come to the conclusion that they are intended for someone who isn’t aware of something yet, a lot like a child who slowly gains its first experiences. Or maybe like a young man who learns for the very first time about his sexuality. That’s how I have foretold for myself in the course of painting what the surrounding world is like, and it explains the magnitude of naivety in stating obvious facts; when I speak, for example, of the ratio of beautiful to plain girls or that different girls may be nice. Also, exploring the world of politics and society shocked me so much with its stupidity and boorishness that I went and painted this, in order to know, to remember. That’s the way it was in the case of paintings about the French or the proletariat revolution. About the picture: "The Design of a Table for Four Persons was one of the first projects I began to paint after my disappointment with decorative painting. The painting depicts a black equilateral cross, with a caption in the template technique. Today (2002), when I have think about why I treated the subject in this way, I come to a conclusion that I must have been preoccupied with the vital question of attitude towards religion. It was significantly influenced by the very fact of living in Poland where universally manifested Catholicism plays such a great part. The cross as a design for a table means distance, because it is a simple piece of furniture, but also a positive attitude towards the idea of Christianity, created by a lonely thinker wandering the paths of Israel some two thousand years ago. The black menacing cross which had been a harbinger of so much sorrow later on, overused/abused by autocrats in and out of church for murders and other tragedies. A table for four is also such a simple, but useful piece of furniture for parents with two children. This piece shows a simple change of generations. A black cross is also a significant form in the history of art, and it is enough just to mention Malewicz’s endeavors concerning [the cross]." About the picture: "I paint paintings even a second time, if they're pretty. Malewicz Black Square and Malewicz White Square (1987) are pictures I painted many times. I remember the emotions connected to the discovery of the essence those two works. Many times I acknowledged the significance of Malewicz’s thought in the period in which art found itself at that time. Those two pictures are unique, unlike the figurative art of Malewicz as well as Suprematism and Constructivism. They mark the beginning of a new art movement, Conceptualism, but they also open up to all media. In those pictures there is a separation of art and craft or technique. A child could say about this picture, "I can do this as well," and that makes me realize the importance of knowledge in art. I wanted to express myself fully through my aesthetic taste and also my thoughts and experiences. Things that are crucial and significant, but also trivial and dirty, make up every life. Paying a tribute to Malewicz, for his nice paintings, I could simultaneously show myself. Doing anything I wanted with them, I could paint them my way. About the picture: % of Beautiful Girls to Plain Ones is a picture meant to express the fact that not all girls are beautiful. Looking over the years it is difficult for me to recall all the reasons I wanted to paint the picture. It reminds me of a greater, at that time, interest in sexuality. I remember my struggles with choosing a word opposite to “beautiful”. I remember not wanting to use the word “ugly,” because I did not have this opposition on my mind. “Plain” meant I was indifferent to them, because, although I strain my memory I cannot call a single girl which I have ever met…“ugly.” Regarding the form of the painting, I applied the idea of a so called pie-chart for the very first time. I did it for its beauty, the simplicity of this sign, and the possibility of using beautiful colors. Also the fact that a pie-chart enabled to convey so many meanings simply seduced me. Since then I have used it in many of my works and I’m very happy with it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
