1984-1989 continue to the works
This is not an Exhibition but the Opposite of it!!!
Through its eclectic pieces, This is not an Exhibition but the Opposite of it!!! presents an intricate tapestry of works that challenge the boundaries of art, history, and perception. The exhibition explores the fluid dialogue between art movements, the influence of political power on creative expression, and enduring questions of authenticity, repetition, and observation. Each piece provokes the audience to confront not only the historical forces shaping art but also the ways we engage with and interpret it.
Light and Legacy in Shining Square
Kazimir Malevich’s Black Square (1915) remains a cornerstone of art history, a simple yet profound depiction of a black square on a white canvas. In 1987, FILOART reinterpreted this work with Shining Square, a video installation on a Commodore 64, where a square and its background shifted colors on a TV monitor, creating 25 two-dimensional color combinations. While Black Square absorbs and reflects light, Shining Square shines and transmits, using the additive RGB color model to explore the nuances of light and color. Placed in a corner like Malevich’s original, Shining Square invites reflection on whether the TV monitor, with its glowing imagery, has become a modern-day icon akin to religious or cultural symbols.
A Contemporary Venus de Milo?
This young, girl-like, disabled figure—standing with no hands and covered eyes—raises questions about its purpose. Is it a contemporary Venus de Milo, a nod to antique sculpture, or a representation of an underage model on a runway? In this artwork, two abstract styles converge: Kazimir Malevich’s Suprematism and Piet Mondrian’s Neo-Plasticism, forming an eclectic blend called “Supremaneoplast.” The interplay between 2D and 3D surfaces—the panel on the ground and the figure above—explores their artistic dialogues, with Mondrian’s continuity stretching across dimensions and Malevich’s fragmented elements warping and transforming the body.
Historical Oppression in Art: Dictatorship versus Suprematism
“Dictatorship versus Suprematism” highlights the era when the state actively opposed Abstract Art for the first time. Between 1928 and 1933, Stalin restructured Soviet museums, turning them into tools of propaganda and platforms for condemning Avant-garde art under labels like “talking museums.” Avant-garde works by Malevich, Kandinsky, and others were exhibited in degrading contexts to educate the masses on “good” versus “bad” art, echoing slogans denouncing bourgeois formalism. A decade later, Hitler’s “Entartete Kunst” exhibition in Munich bore striking thematic and visual parallels to these Soviet efforts, showcasing the shared authoritarian disdain for modernist movements.
The Altamira Cave Copy: Context and Authenticity
At the entrance of This is not an Exhibition but the Opposite of it!, a copy of a 16,000-year-old cave drawing from Altamira is presented, provoking questions about the absurdity of starting a contemporary art exhibition with such an ancient image. This choice challenges visitors to reflect on the act of copying: what purpose does a copy serve, and what value does it hold compared to the original? The juxtaposition of the cave drawing with works like Joan Miró’s The Bullfight—an abstract representation of similar themes—raises deeper questions about the nature of copying abstract art. Is a copy of an abstract work still abstract, or does it become something else entirely, and what does this say about the meaning and function of the copied image?
FILOART’s Copy of La Corrida
Throughout art history, the bull has appeared as a motif in works ranging from ancient cave drawings to creations by artists like Goya, Picasso, and Miró. FILOART’s Copy of La Corrida reimagines Miró’s depiction of a bull, not as a mere mechanical reproduction, but as a hand-painted reinterpretation that alters the original’s rectangular form into a square, blending the boundaries between copy and original. This transformation raises questions about the nature of copying: is it simply replication, or does it create something entirely new by adding layers of meaning and context? Ultimately, Copy of La Corrida challenges us to reconsider how we observe art—not just what we see, but the process and implications of viewing itself.
Dead Nature of the Year 1984: Frames of Transformation
In some languages, “still life” is called “dead nature,” but the installation Dead Nature of the Year 1984 disrupts this concept by combining a classical still life arrangement with empty frames. These frames, placed around and within the still life, blur boundaries between inside and outside, observer and observed, creating an unstable and layered viewing experience. As the frames absorb their surroundings, including visitors, the work becomes dynamic and ever-changing, challenging the notion of stillness or death. Ultimately, the installation questions perception itself, suggesting that the act of observing transforms both the observer and the observed, merging past and present into a continuous, self-referential loop.
Tautology
This work bridges art movements from Impressionism to Conceptual Art, yet does not belong to any of them, instead using these styles as its subject. By citing elements from Picasso’s Jacqueline with Flowers and integrating abstracted lines inspired by Monet and van Gogh, the work layers references to create a dialogue between art history and its reinterpretation. The outlined portrait of Jacqueline is juxtaposed with an undefined background where yellow and red lines evoke Abstract art while also suggesting a Pop Art aesthetic through minimalism and a bold palette. This tautological piece, blending styles and eras, ultimately reflects on art itself, where “the apple stays a model for the apple.”
Neoplasticism in Three Dimensions
This work, Neoplasticism in Space, transforms Mondrian’s two-dimensional compositions into three-dimensional forms, challenging linear narratives of art history. By elevating white rectangles into cubes and placing the work on the ground rather than the wall, it alters the observer’s perspective, shifting from a traditional horizontal view to a bird’s-eye perspective. While Mondrian’s original work sought to reduce reality into abstract two dimensions, this piece reverses that logic, reintroducing the third dimension and posing questions about dimensionality and transformation. Rather than being a continuation or rejection of Mondrian, it exists as an oscillating entity in art history, navigating between linear and non-linear interpretations of progress.
The work
Supremaconst Wedge
Supremaconst Wedge consists of fragile materials—wood, rope, and fabric—evoking impermanence and vulnerability. It references El Lissitzky’s Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge, Tatlin’s Counter-Relief, and Malevich’s Suprematistic Cross, symbolizing the bold yet precarious innovations of the Russian Avant-garde. Despite the promise of a “new vision” in early Soviet art, Stalin’s regime branded abstract artists like Malevich as enemies, suppressing creativity to enforce obedience. Today, the transient nature of the dictators’ monuments contrasts sharply with the enduring legacy of these artists, whose ideas remain foundational to modern art history.
Perception and Illusion in The Square
The work The Square challenges perception by requiring the observer to stand at a specific point and height to transform a trapezoid into the illusion of a square. This interaction blends memory—our mental image of a square—with reality, the trapezoid’s actual perspective, creating a “true-lie” through manipulated visual rules. By questioning human reliance on perspective, the work critiques the anthropocentric worldview, where humans place themselves at the center of their environment. It raises profound questions about observation, the reliability of what we see, and whether focusing on one point of view can distort or even erase broader perspectives.
Minimal Shifts, Profound Narratives: The Yellow, Red, and Black Series
This work presents three pieces featuring the same motif but with changing background colors—yellow, red, and black—creating distinct narratives through minimal shifts. On the red background, a man with a raised hand is drawn in pencil, contrasting with the painted flag, while the other two pieces show only rough silhouettes, resembling abstract monochromes when viewed independently. The sequence of colors—yellow, red, and black—suggests a timeline, raising questions about past, present, and future, though the order remains ambiguous. The use of pencil for the figure in the red work implies impermanence, as the man could be drawn on or erased from any of the pieces, underscoring themes of fluidity and change.
Repetition and Identity: A Portrait of Picasso
Gertrude Stein’s concept of repetition, as seen in “A rose is a rose is a rose,” parallels the layered interpretation of “A Portrait of Picasso is a Portrait of Picasso is a Portrait of Picasso.” Unlike Picasso’s original self-portrait from 1906—painted during his Rose Period, blending layered colors and signed as both author and subject—the 1986 work transforms his image into three stark, unsigned portraits. Created by an anonymous FILOART group, these portraits isolate Picasso as an object, presenting simplified, unmixed colors in contrasting pinks and blues, with bodies omitted, resembling fragmented busts. This piece deconstructs not only the subject but also the act of creation and observation, challenging the singularity of authorship and identity.
From Comics to Conflict
Comics often serve as an escape into a vivid, imaginative world, but what happens when they mirror reality? In 1964, Roy Lichtenstein transformed a comic panel into art, reflecting a world increasingly shaped by commercial imagery and media influence. Over two decades later, FILOART recreated Lichtenstein’s “THAT MY SHIP WAS BELOW THEM…” in a different context, altering it subtly: the machine guns now fire at each other, symbolizing internal conflict in a country on the brink of war. While Lichtenstein’s work became a pop culture icon, FILOART’s adaptation foreshadowed the tragic, chaotic realities that unfolded just a few years later.
Surveillance
Aristotle, Franklin, and Orwell each warned of the dangers of sacrificing freedom, truth, and liberty for security or comfort. In 1984, FILOART’s black-and-white abstract work, stark geometric forms and layered symbols evoke the oppressive surveillance of socialist regimes, where ideological and religious citations—an eye, a sickle, a star—loom ominously. The work’s mirrored sickles form a moving eye, symbolizing constant observation, while the shadowed star and surrender flag emphasize submission within a desolate environment.
Neoplasticism in Time
Art can shift drastically in perception depending on the era and environment; what is celebrated as avant-garde in one moment can be labeled degenerate in another. Neoplasticism in Time, a work referencing Piet Mondrian, critiques this volatile evaluation by reflecting on the treatment of Modern art under Nazi Germany, particularly during the infamous 1937 Entartete Kunst exhibition. Through minimalistic symbols like a swastika and hidden Stars of David, the work connects the persecution of artists and their styles to larger narratives of oppression and control. Tragically, fifty years later in a socialist country, this same piece—intended as a critique of historical atrocities—was misinterpreted and censored, demonstrating that history often repeats its most repressive tendencies.
works:
Copy of the detail from the Cave of Altamira
Portrait of Jacqueline Roque with Claude Monet and Vincent van Gogh
portrait of Picasso is a portrait of Picasso is a portrait of Picasso