Dedicated to my friend and illustrator Raja Schwahn-Reichmann, who provided worthwhile insights 

At the Winterpalais of the Belvedere there currently is an exhibition revolving around Baroque sculptor Johann Georg Pinsel. Whilst his biography largely remains obscure – he likely was of German or Bohemian descent, he worked in Red Ruthenia/Lvov which had a vivid cultural life and art scene at that time, and he died 1761 or 1762 presumably at the age of around 40 – and many of his works were destroyed during the anticlerical Soviet era, the radiation of his genius will remain alive and well. Genius is transgressive, explosive, protuberant, aiming at the transformation of forms, alongside invisible dimensional axes, to reveal inner truth. Whilst in perfect stasis and undifferentiated in the spheres he inhabitates his apparition seems flamboyant and extravagant in the man´s world. And so Pinsel´s sculptures carry a (usually paradoxical) expressiveness concerning pantomime and, moreover, dress, with their dresses flushing, folding and unfolding into the infinite, hyper-protuberating, highly exaggerated. One of the most striking impressions/revelations you get from the exhibition is Abraham´s oceanic beard. Needless to say, in the richness of Pinsel´s vision, artistic integrity and artistic force there is the anticipation of expressionism and even abstraction (notably when he depicts folds in dress as geometric shapes with a little unevenness carved in). Metaphysical convulsions. Ringing from the heavens.

In the exhibition there are also some paintings by Franz Anton Maulbertsch (1724-1796). Fuseli hailed Maulbertsch as a „fiery genius“, but critisised lack of historical sense and execution. Such a reflection may come from the perspective of Classicism, Maulbertsch however was the final climax of Baroque painting and therefore, somehow, consequently, a loner who could not be style-forming in a direct way (but he has been so in an indirect way, Kokoschka relied on him). Technically and artistically his work revolves around the question and the interplay of colour, light, darkness and the shadowy realms. You have a lot of phantasy in his paintings and semi-paradoxical juxtaposition: Maulbertsch was able to see the phantastic in the natural and vice versa, ahhh, the versatile intellect and sensuality <3 Metaphysically, you seem to have captured the depth of reality (and religious higher reality) via pronounced contour and colour in the foreground and suggested dissolution linked to the background. Maulbertsch´s signature was a thistle – a plant that is thorny and a misfit, but lasting and undestroyable.

Though Maulbertsch was, in general, respected and acclaimed during his lifetime he was denied becoming a professor at the academy. Reasoning was that his transgressive, rule-breaking genius would do more harm than good to the students, and that is likely correct. Geniuses usually are fascinating and enriching, but not actually good teachers. How should they be good teachers when students are interested in answers to questions, but the genius is interested in questioning the answers once he provided them, therefore seemingly permanently collapsing over himself, in stasis? How should tradable forms or textbooks materialise, based on stability and rationality, when the genius lives in a state of meta-stability and is meta-rational? The genius will usually seek a kind of socratic dialogue and will, due to lack of congeniality, solipse into a difficult to decypher socratic monologue. Communication is impaired. This is often difficult to bear for the genius, and for others.

I don´t want to sweep it under the table that Maulbertsch´s paintings did not immediately strike me that much at first glance at the exhibition, also since I was more focused on Pinsel. I had never heard of Maulbertsch before and I found his paintings, though idiosyncratic, a bit irritating. Though that´s what they actually are and I did not have a lot of knowledge about Baroque painting before it tought me a lesson in humility I shall never forget. I did not recognise a fellow genius on the spot and his magic had to be explained to me! (However I bought a book about him and borrowed a big, comphrehensive, a sort of ultimate book about him at the library afterwards.) Remember that Otto Weininger, who probably was the greatest genius of all time and had the most penetrating (though occasionally misguided) intellect and intellectual empathy of all said, that the philospher needs to refrain to think that the symbols of the artist may easily to be deciphered. In trying to do so, the philosopher needs to be careful and prudent. I also don´t want to sweep it under the table that Maulbertsch remains a bit of a mystery to me, genius means objective subjectivity, in the case of Maulbertsch the subjective element seems to dominate excessively above the objective element (but that´s what easily may be the fate of the late comer in an era). Despite that it may be that I will happen to take a look and study the paintings of Maulbertsch more often than those of, for instance, Titian. I also find Maulbertsch´s depictions of Mary´s ascension to heaven cooler than that of Titian, and his Mary more gracious and lovely (unfortunately I could not find a lot of them on the internet).

UPDATE 03012017: I made some pics of Maulbertsch letting Mary ascend to Heaven out of a book, Hallelujah.

(Dedicated to my friend and illustrator Raja Schwahn-Reichmann, who provided useful insights)

One of the most intriguing, phenomenal eras in human history, where the beasts were unleashed, was the Biedermeier era.

Historically, the Biedermeier epoch refers to the era in Central Europe between the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the European revolutions in 1848. Repression by the authority, embodied in the Austrian chancellor Metternich, was a chief characteristic, as well as tiredness from revolutionary upheavals in a period of increasing peace and prosperity, at least for the bourgeoisie. Biedermeier refers to an introversion into the private realm and trying to find prosperity, security and happiness in the private domain and due to simple virtues.

This translated into modes of human expression, and apart from the historical, political and sociological reference Biedermeier denotes artistic styles, although its historical demarcation is less clear. The heyday of Biedermeier art was the period between 1830 and 1860. At the moment we have an exhibition titled „Is that Biedermeier? Amerling, Waldmüller, And More“ at the Belvedere Palace in Vienna (from 21 October 2016 – 12 February 2017), indicating that, to a considerable degree, at the substance of that commonly insulted, derided period there is great, unexpected magic and glory.

In general, what distinguishes Biedermeier from Classicism is its focus of attention on (romanticised) everyday scenes and people. Accuracy of painting was prevalent, it was a field of experimentation of realism, painting in the natural light, the anchoring of natural man, and his virtues, in nature and natural surroundings. Ideally, you have a love for things, for natural things, for small and humble things and a respect for an eternal metaphysical order of the world, a synthesis of content and idea, i.e. not a trivial naturalism but a metaphysical, sensually as well as intellectually tangible naturalism (expressed, for instance, by Adalbert Stifter). Whilst it is true that there are aspects about the period that are clearly annoying – as can be found for any period – the specific shedding of light on those aspects about existence are soothing, beneficial and therapeutic, and they should not be forgotten, they should be integrated in hearts and minds.

As you enter the exhibition you are likely to get spellbound, for instance, by Friedrich von Amerling´s gracious Lute Player (1838). Amerling was a master of portrait, in bringing to life the charme and the beauty of humans. In contrast to Ferdinand Georg Waldmüller, the other most prevalent painter of that period in the Hapsburg monarchy, who was more interested in capturing humans in a specific characteristic moment, Amerling´s primary endeavour was to display the entire charme of the individual or of physiognomy, with his portraits finally being the sum of his studies and his creative empathy for his models. Striking in his portrait of the lute playing girl are the colours and the display of the reflection of light (and while it is true that Amerling´s lute player is less idiosyncratic than Vermeer´s lute or guitar players her beauty is more balanced). Amerling´s Girl with Doves (1840) is equally gracious as the girl seems to be immersed in her own positive vibes, translating in universal empathy for the living creature.

Get intrigued and into the undertow when investigating Rudolf von Alt´s portrait of Saint Stephen´s Cathedral (1832) due to its luminosity and the extreme finesse concerning detail so that you get eager to look at it through a magnifying glass; or of the extreme plasticity of the scene in the Harbour of Naples with Mount Vesuvius (1836) (especially the water and the white tail on the left), reminding us of (the luminosity) of materiality of the world itself (and, if you are lucky, of the secret, the silent magic of materiality).

In Josef Danhauser´s Opening of the Will (1839) there is a splendidly indignant legacy hunting widow (as well as, presumably, her no less innerly deleted lover who sees his hopes dashed behind her), the most beautiful teenage boy accompanying the lucky, innocent heir under the auspices of the deceased devisor (obviously an otherworldy, good-natured scientist or man devoted to a greater cause) – and look, as a signature of mastery and of a receptive mind, how the light is reflected at the floor clock (and also at the keys on the table)!

Empathy provoking, like many of Peter Fendi´s paintings, is his Scene from the Deluge of 1830 (1830), which refers to a dramatic flooting which took place in February 1830 in Vienna. In his dramatic scenery there are people trying to help others or to help themselves, crying for help, or drowning. The young woman with the red headscarf at the right, the drowned maid at the left, behind her another young woman trying to save a child, among other figures, make the abstract horror tangible. The whole scenery is an illuminated triangle (by the lantern), in the background you can (barely) see the Church of St. Leopold, in the interior of the house which is cracked open at the left you can see (when looking especially close) an icon with the eternal light as a, somehow, enigmatic comment.

Personal drama you have in Francesco Hayez´ Secret Accusation (1847): via the barely controlled inner turmoil you have a strong narrative element, a face that indicates a thousand words, you have colour, a clever handling of light and, via the slightly protuberant breasts, eroticism and a prophecy of eruption in general.

In Massimo d`Azeglio´s Vendetta (1835) you have an interplay of drama, vividness, wildness, temper, romanticism, morbidity and, seemingly, a final resolution into cosmic indifference concerning the entire scene and the nature it is set into.

Piety, relating to an intellectually and ethically superior instance, you have, of a collective of people embedded in nature, in Josef Höger´s Chapel in the Forest (1835), and of the devoted individual of Waldmüller´s Girl decorating the Mother of God with a Rose (1836).

The resignated (or resentful) mournfulness of Joszef Borsos´ Widow (1853), and the painting in itself, is somehow enigmatic and intransparent, open to interpretation, respectively, since all the interpretations remain open, creates an atmosphere of thoughfulness; in contrast to Giuseppe Molteni´s young woman viscerally Deeply Saddened about the Loss of the Beloved (1850); touching and thoughtful are both paintings, with Moltani primarily touching the empathy of the heart and Borsos primarily touching the empathy of the mind; in Molteni´s you have a striking luminosity of the black dress which you will remember forever (and which would have provoked the recognition, perhaps the envy of Ad Reinhardt).

Domenico Induno´s Melancholia (1849) shows a careworn, crestfallen girl with rumpled hair (which was maybe cut off violently), you sense that her depression and inactivity, her being made mute by external circumstances is an active, multifaceted inner process with resentment and anger becoming prevalent, although the unusual oval form of the painting indicates a condition encircled in itself and in its own hopelessness – it portrays not only a personal situation but also the mourning about a heteronomous, defeated Italia, respectively, maybe, the insulted Italia herself.

Franz Eybl´s Girl Reading (1850) is of above average but not of splendid beauty which makes her even more beautiful since due to this she becomes tangible, and look at the masterful reflection of light in her black hair, the a bit unreal and eccentric but underlining portrayal of the book pages (i.e. a girl holding a book in a specifically lucky moment), the dress falling from her shoulder provoking an interplay of the nuances between the aesthetic, the sensual and the erotic. Delicious is how her hand is reflected in the leather binding of the book and, in general, the soft contours due to use of a contuser. Johann Baptist Reiter´s Boy Reading (1860), beautiful as he is, magnificent the reflection of light, he both seems to be dazzled by the enlightening content as well as somehow autonomous in relation to it, he gets impressions and maybe he accumulates and forms thoughts in his mind, maybe a young genius (not as somehow pious like Eybl´s girl, though there is also a somehow sovereign distance between the book and the girl).

Leonie Gräfin Lanckoronska, as portayed with her son Karl  by Karl von Blaas (in 1852) has a somehow interesting, slightly marked and idiosyncratic face (where what is interesting is that it is slightly marked, a decent aberration from the norm, the markedness and idiosyncracy is suggested and does not come in vulgar opulence – which I find very good, since the small thing, not the vulgarly opulent one is the locus of truth and beauty, and where the universal whole becomes tangible (or so)).

Karoly Markó´s Southern Landscape with Sunset (1847) and Albert Zimmermann´s Sunset at Hintersee in Berchtesgarden (1858) are ideal, transhistorical landscapes.

Finally, you proceed to Waldmüller´s charming scenes depicting people and children from the countryside, symbolising the natural and the innocent (and, of course, particularly provoking criticism about suggested lack of critical attitude; Waldmüller, however, did make social commentary as well, and with Exhausted Strengh (1854), portraying the situation of single mothers, it comes in in a striking, upsetting way). Waldmüller is depicting people in characteristic moments, his paintings are particularly dynamic. As probably the most eminent artist of his time in Vienna he was exploring new horizons in art, depicting people and scenery in natural light, which caused anger and irritation, respectively envy and hostility among the academics due to which he fell from grace later in life and was rediscovered only at the turn of the 20th century as the master painter of that period. The most breathtaking example of his mastery of his later period may be Country People Resting (1859) where every inch of the painting is perfect; and especially in the trees in Early Spring in the Vienna Woods (The Violet Pickers) (1861) you seem to have an anticipation of Klimt and Schiele.

Aaahhhh… how rührselig, how sentimental, all that! But that´s how, at least, I am, rührselig, and sentimental, and I like it that way. I think all problems in the world, about which people commonly like to mourn, without usually ever being interested or able to get a clear idea about their nature, and why they evolve, could be solved – or at least taken to another level of problem solving capability – within minutes with everyone being considerably more like that. If the question Is that Biedermeier? does not make you revolve a lot, you´re as good as dead. You may think you´re cooler than Biedermeier, but you are not.

Ahhh, the good August Macke! Highly receptible as he was, he refuted Kandinsky´s intellectualism, and the Ideenmalerei (of the Blue Rider) in general. In his short life he resonated to all the stylistic and intellectual tendencies and the new developments in art in this extremely vivid era (at the turn of the 20th century), he approached them all and experimented with and included them all. As a true genius he paved his own way. His objection to Ideenmalerei was marked, but not outspoken and aggressive. His temperament was not like that. He had a pleasant personality. Instead of being overly intellectual and intellectualised, he was interested in the sensual pleasures of colour and in the melodious sound of form. He was attracted to earthly beauty. His endeavour was to paint people in paradise.

See how his people seemingly float through the Garden of Eden! You usually see them a bit from behind, or their faces are (relatively) empty. They have lost their individuality, they have evaded the personality principle. They have left behind what is bad and what seperates us from each other and from the direct contact to nature, and to beauty (commonly referred to as the „ego“).

A friend of mine, Tanja, who teaches children how to dance said to me: in order to get children to like you, and that they accept your authority, you have to call them by their names, and adress them personally. Indeed, people are very fond of that. Evil leaders give the lead the impression that they do (that they personally adress people), and usually it works, and then they can do whatever they want. In the ficticious Q Continuum (from the Star Trek series), the nearly omnipotent, god-like Q, who are referred to as the highest point of evolution, have NO names and obviously do not place any importance on having names. In Macke´s paradise, his floaters also seem to have left that behind. – It is true that Macke´s floaters through paradise don´t seem to really notice the beauty of their surroundings (often they just look down and seem to have a limited, egocentric, purely functional perspective), but let us say it is a reference to the real world, let us say they are occupied with their inner processes which are of a higher nature, let us say they´re simply at one with their surroundings, and let us say we do not actually understand it and we should just celebrate it.

Look at how Macke´s young women are attracted to hats, clothes, boutiques! Some say, this is evil, and mistake it for evil. I, however, have always resonated a lot when someone has bought a new thing – a mobile phone, for example – and then sits in the park, unpacks it and gets immersed into it, tries it out, tries to get into contact with it and to handle it. I like this because this person has made herself happy and is happily curious. This is the best part of the human experience! I say, anyone unable to resonate to that, very likely has very shitty mirror neurons, and no empathy – fuck that. Macke´s woman Before the Hat Shop has cleared her individuality and resonates (in a sovereign way) to the hat she might like. Practically everything that is good about humanity is in that painting.

Macke was a master of colour. His colours are contrasting, but not in an aggressive way. Rather, you have an emphasis on the colourfulness of nature. Macke was a master of illustrating the gracefulness of form. It can be said that Macke´s most personal style which evolved in his later years is set in the continuum between absolute geometric clarity and impressionistic dissolution. Macke managed the conflict between individualisation and generalisation, he managed the objectification of the subjective, and the subjectification of the objective. This is never a trivial problem in art, and was not a trivial problem at his time. In doing so, Macke navigated his way through the probably deepest intellectual problem of art.

August Macke had a very pleasant, charming, optimistic personality. Unlike many other artists he did not particularly display quasi-depressive ruminativeness and getting lost in one´s own inner complexity. Although an idiosyncratic outsider, he was not an isolated loner. He liked high life but did not succumb to alcoholism, drugs, or other shit. He remained an innocent hedonist. He found his sweethart, Elisabeth, at a young age, and they lived a happy marriage. He loved to go to the theater, the cinema, the circus, he loved all things horseplay and slapstick and felt especially attracted to clowns. He reportedly was always moved to tears when he was watching a scene in which a woman was miserable.

August Macke died at age 27 in Perthes-lès-Hulus in the Champagne on Sept. 26th, 1914, in the Great War. In his letters he depicted the horrors of war, but he did not display resentment. Maybe because he always was actually inhabing the Elysian Fields. He is buried in a mass grave at a soldier´s cemetary in Souain. In the obituary Franz Marc mourned Macke´s transformation as an irredeemable loss, with no one ever being able to continue alongside this specific trajectory. Soon thereafter the two friends reconciled in the Valhalla.

“Hervorragende Kunstwerke zu machen ist für gewöhnlich eine beschwerliche Arbeit. Doch im Modernismus wurde nicht nur das Herstellen, sondern vor allem das Betrachten von Kunst noch anstrengender, musste man sich die Befriedigung und die Freude, die die beste neue Kunst vermitteln kann, mühsam erringen. In den letzten mehr als einhundertfünfunddreißig Jahren waren die beste neue Malerei und die beste neue Skulptur (und die beste neue Dichtung) zu ihrer Zeit für den Kunstliebhaber eine Herausforderung und eine Prüfung, wie sie es früher nicht gewesen waren. Doch gibt es den Drang sich auszuruhen, wie es ihn immer gegeben hat. Er ist eine permanente Bedrohung der Qualitätsmaßstäbe. Dass dieser Drang auszuruhen sich in immer anderer Weise ausdrückt, bezeugt nur seine Dauerhaftigkeit. Das Gerede von der „Postmoderne“ ist eine weitere Ausducksform dieses Dranges. Und es ist vor allem eine Art, sich dafür zu rechtfertigen, dass man weniger anspruchsvolle Kunst bevorzugt, ohne deswegen reaktionär oder zurückgeblieben genannt zu werden (was die schlimmste Befürchtung der neumodischen Philister der Avantgarde ist).”

(Modern und Postmodern, 1980)

“Für die Menschen der Antike war das Quadrat ein Ausgangspunkt für ideale Proportionen – das eine Struktur mit Beständigkeit und Stabilität versieht und sie dadurch zu einem konstanten Faktor in einer kurzlebigen und korrumpierbaren Welt macht.”

Lucy Lippard

“Mir genügt das Quadrat, weil es so akkurat ist. Das Rechteck und die Bogenform werden von der Sensibilität diktiert wird. Das Quadrat befindet sich in der Gegenwart, unveränderlich.”

„Strange and Unproductive Thinking“ is a chiffre for (quasi-)introspective endeavour to find genuine modes of expression. It is likely to run counter the mainstream or contemporary cultural hegemony, as a sort of untimely meditation, yet not for the simple sake of rebellion but in order to establish new master signifiers. The so-called mainstream will strike the strange and unproductive thinker not as an enemy per se, rather as a mindless neutrality (which, of course, also contains hostile elements). The strange and unproductive thinker will be a kind of rebel against it, but an apparently conservative rebel who is inclined to think that the genuine, the elementary, authentic idea is already out there, or has been formulated in the past, but has been submerged and spilled by contemporary mainstream. In order to rediscover them, to get down/up to the elements, the strange and unproductive thinker will wander along an „eccentric pathway“ (as Hölderlin calls it), respectively he will, like a mole, dig an underground pathway (as Nietzsche puts it, and Kafka can obviously relate to it), in the dark. If he succeeds, he will finally gain access to the Continuum, where the elements, the immortal archetypes reside, which he then can redesign. For the strange and unproductive thinker the contemporary „mainstream“ will be a material in order to gain access to that which is both the highest abstraction as well as the most concrete, the most elementary, the most natural; he will understand the contemporary „mainstream“ as a black hole through which a wormhole to additional dimensions can be discovered, or established. His visions will be both highly personal and idiosyncratic as well as they are formulated at such a high level of analysis and integration as that his visions become solidified in the „primal ground“ as well as in the „spheres“ in „space“ and „eternal“ in „time“ (which means that they then belong to the Continuum). – Meditate about that.

At the turn of the 20th century new modes of expression had to be found. Urbanised life had become unrepresentable, as well as with the death of God ideals respectively the ineffable spheres have become unrepresentable. The subject as the new demiurge became increasingly questionable as a solid unitarian entity and therefore unrepresentable. Modern art in the 19th century had become much more flexible but therefore also a bit wobbly, and with the concentration on elements (like colour) or demanding specific modes of perception and heuristics the representation of totality had become endangered. Therefore, at least in retrospect, the highest point of analysis and integration and of abstraction became abstraction per se.

Wassily Kandinsky was an outstanding student of economics, but alongside his synaesthetic inner perception he became more attracted to the arts and the possibility of becoming an artist. An epiphany he had when he attended a performance of „Lohengrin“ as a young man: „I saw all my colours in my mind, they were right before my eyes. Wild, terrific lines were drawn in front of me“ – ahhh, that is genuine strange and unproductive thinking, and you will recognise a strange and unproductive thinker when he comes up with inner impressions like that… When you look at Kandinsky´s artistic progress you will sense he somehow tried to penetrate into his own vision ever deeper; you have eccentric „colourful life“ in his early paintings, progessively overwhelmed by autonomous colours/light, a non-symbolic reduction of forms, a hallucinatory disintegrative integration (Sketch for „Composition II“), a charged reduction to elements (Lyrically) – finally the breakthrough and opening of the Continuum (Painting with a Black Arch). The Continuum itself appears as enigmatic, it is the realm of highest objective significance. That which is of highest objective significance cannot be objectively expressed, it is brought to life when it is envisioned by the competent subject, the strange and unproductive thinker. In the vision of Kandinsky it was the disintegrative integrative *****AB—____/7, where you have the dissolution and reconfiguration of forms, the permanent swirl, the permanent bubble, amalgamation of elements that signify objects, ideas, forms, geometry and colour that equals sounds etc., a shattered geometry in space, a perfect geometry in hyperspace, the projection of higher dimensions; and so on. – Kandinsky himself was aware of the danger that his approach might lead to a simple gaining of independence of artistic means, others, like Carl Einstein, dismissed the notion that a representation of intellectual processes in a quasi-scientific way would ever be possible, and it is true: we don´t know very much about their logics or mechanics of intellectual processes (although Einstein himself obviously was, as a child of his time, too occupied with mechanical and linear notions, at least he was not completely aware of the more network-like nature of intellectual architectonics). Kandinsky made theoretical eleborations (which I have not read so far), in which he tried to give to his emanations an underlying structure, a universal translation of the meanings of his artworks, of colours, etc. As I said I have not read them so far, yet I guess they´re not the best part of his work (as far as I know Kandinsky acknowledges the primordial role of the privileged subject, the strange and unproductive thinker, and the processes, and the condensation as well as logical loosing of the processes inside him, but he seems too eager to give a purely objective, quasi scientifically/rationally grounded structure of meaning to his emanations, he wants to establish objectivity where there is privileged subjectivity, respectively wants to give the a-rational, the meta-rational, a rational structure, which is likely to be inadequate, and, to such an extent, not necessary (respectively he seems to forget that Kant already refuted objective categories for that which is rooted in aesthetics, because it primarily belongs to the realm of the sensual, not to the realm of reason) – yet proneness to dogmatism was infectious those days bygone and only very protean artists like Picasso or Klee could ever do without it). Kandinsky, as an artist, did not display logics or mechanics of what is, essentially, strange and unproductive thinking, but established allegories. And in the case of Kandinsky, they carry high inner truth (and the inner truth is the locus of aesthetic truth). Over time, Kandinsky enriched his visions as he became more geometrical or, in his last period, introduced quasi-representations of small, bacteria-like life forms, but it is true that Kandinsky remained trapped in abstraction, respectively – seemingly – in the inner realm, which was, then, his personal shortcoming (take into consideration, though, that shortcomings and reductions are an ingredient to deepen and solidify vision and ideas). It can be said (and Carl Einstein said it) that the highest point of art is Gestaltbildung, new, innovative creation of objective forms (respectively the forms of the object world) – maybe this is true (yes, it is likely to be true) but such a viewpoint would appear dogmatic, a dinosaur from the past when you have undergone postmodernity – Post-postmodernity shall amalgamate modern dogmatism and stringency with postmodern playfulness, rejection of authoritarian center, etc. New Gestaltbildung is what Paul Klee did.

Paul Klee displayed his high genius (which becomes visible also, for instance, in his language) from early on. Likewise, his paintings remained distinctly childish and playful until his death. There is no parallel concerning this childish playfulness in the history of art, as well as there hardly is any parallel to his protean personality and the overwhelming diversity in his output. Of hardly anyone it can be said that he was constantly creating the world anew the way Klee did. – Carl Einstein puts Klee above Kandinsky, because Kandinsky never managed actual and true Gestaltbildung. Klee, however, managed even less the representation of Gestalt, but reached the (supposedly) highest point of painting/the arts: autonomous, fresh and virgin creation of Gestalt. Klee was a creator of worlds. Klee mixed abstraction and figurative elements, he amalgamated the natural, the cosmic, the mathematic (it is true he did not juxtapose them but created a meta-dialectical synthesis). When asked about the nature of his style, he answered: I am my style. Whereas Kandinsky linked his art to the spiritual and became programmatic about it, Klee was mainly interested in the illustration, representation (and, eventually, the productive mimesis) of natural processes – since that´s what the high genius is: an expressive agent of nature. It was programmatic for the Blue Rider to try to establish a connection to the deep structure of the world and a vision of conciliation of art and science; Franz Marc (who died too early) tried to find purity via immersion into and contemplation of the animal realm, Kandinsky in the abstract expression of the spiritual, Klee´s was a „Zwischenwelt“, a world between immediate perception and conscious representation, a world into which „the children, the primitives, the psychotics“ are able to see. Strange and unproductive thinking. The Zwischenwelt is, however, also a kind of stasis, respectively there is not necessarily a dynamic interaction with the macrocosm and the effable spheres, and in a way, it is a world somehow trapped in itself. Klee however introduced dynamics by the shift of lines, mismatchtings; he introduced depth by configuring people and entities via eccentric lines which again get lost in the infinite or by letting them emerge and submerge inside a dynamic enviroment (aaahhh … the multiple layers of reality <3 ). Genie ist der Fehler im System, he annouced; the productive defect which introduces dynamics into the system.

The heraldic animal of the Book of Strange and Unproductive Thinking is the bird which descends into the abyss in front and rises again from the abyss behind, obviously having encircled the dark side/fond of the earth, coming up with new wisdom and vision, to fly into the horizon of the night again, and to rise from it again, forever. This is a nightly vision which occured to me, relating to Finnish ritual drone doom folk project Bird from the Abyss. – Kandinsky gives us an impression of what you may see down there, in the profound sector of the Continuum, the sector of disintegrative integration, the dark fond. Klee gives us an impression of the bird rising from the abyss again, on a forever new day. Kandinsky´s best paintings display hallucinatory depths, which are, however, the deep structure of the network. In Klee´s emanations, frightening depths are actually absent, the relations and correlations of the object world are represented/established, but their solidity is ever loosened, not actually by the means of subversion, but by the means of (tragicomical) humour; the will to the great gesture, to the gigantomaniac is not prominent in Klee (which is something that is actually a missing element in his oeuvre because the great artist has to be gigantomaniac as well). Kandinsky is meditative, Klee practical intelligence of how to overcome shortcomings via ego-less spontaneity and creativity. They´re both messengers from the Continuum.

Kandinsky on the Spiritual Element in Art and the Three Responsibilities of Artists

Years ago, in 2001, Finnish metal band Amorphis had an album with the intriguing title „Am Universum“. At that time I did not listen to Amorphis any longer and when I now try to get closer to it I fail because I find that kind of progressive metal into which they have amorphed over time unbearable. I like the title however, and it is true, they have expanded their sound spectrum and elevated their vision, nevertheless I have hitherto been unable to find out exactly about the motivation for that uncommon title. At any rate „am Universum“ is German and it would translate „at the universe“.

I first came across Sarah Sze via Brandon Taylor´s book „Art Today“. Two of her sculptures are featured, Untitled (St. James) (1998) and Second Means of Egress (1998). What comes to mind is that these sculptures/installations/environments seem to relate to a cosmic whole, respectively seem to express something which is infinite and larger than life, but within finite size – maybe we can say that Sarah Sze manages to express, or to give resemblance, to the infinite (or to openness and to anti-closure) with finite means.

It is true that her sculptures transcend categories, and that they are sculptures, installations and environments in equal measure. They are composed of everday objects Sarah Sze buys at 99-cent stores which she then assembles and/or juxtaposes. So you can say you have the whole pseudo-fractal-like geometry of nature in there: when you zoom from the cosmic whole, the sublime, into distinctly smaller scales you have the mundane, the ephemeral, the seemingly insignificant, fabricated, exchangeable but also seemingly innocent, and pieces that are equipped with some distinct, though limited functionality. Indeed, Sarah Sze says she is not interested in objects themselves, but in relations between objects. She asks herself how would the compositional whole grow, alter, transform, and how would it decay, and also how would it look like or need to be rearranged when exposed in (that is to say: interact with) different environments. „For me, meaning is happening in the in-between, in the transistion of things, not the things themselves“, she says.

Sarah Sze´s objects are carefully and skillfully designed. They demand respect both of the vision they express and of the craftswomanship involved. They are quite a counterpoint to nowadays common pieces of art which may consist of a half-inflated rubber raft on a floor, a magnetic tape which displays a „Ha Ha“ in an endless loop and a camera which films the scenery supposedly forever (although it just appeared to me that would actually be a cool piece of art, we could name it („The Illusion of) Permanence“ or so…). And, as mentioned above, their primary strength is that they seem to represent the unrepresentable: the unrepresentable city, the unrepresentable universe. They are finite in size, but allude infinity in scale, they reach out into the depths of the unknown, therefore also cover the unknown. Again, as you have it in all valuable art, behind the world that is directly expressed, another world seems to indicate itself and within that interplay physics is transcended into metaphysics, respectively there is an interplay and an exchange between both the physical and the metaphysical.

„Am Universum“ would translate into „at the universe“. The universe is everywhere, it is equally where we happen to be at the moment and it is forever „out there“. Especially Second Means of Egress gave me the idea of someone having established a tangent between those two „universes“: the total universe which is the all (in a primarily abstract, secondarily concrete sense) and the local universe which equally is the all (in a primarily concrete, secondarily abstract sense) (you can further elaborate this into „where ontology and epistemology meet“… but that is, to be correct, a „message from the future“ of humanity… or so) – and this intersection is where the magic happens and both avatars of the universe seem to merge into a kind of synthesis – at this intersection you are am Universum (with Sarah Sze).

Amorphis released a promising debut in the early 1990s, The Karelian Isthmus. and progressively amalgamated death/doom metal with Finnish folk music; their 1994s Tales from the Thousand Lakes made us very happy those days when we went to school, though I like the follower Elegy even more; it gives a really appropriate impression of elegy and of the northern territories in reality and inside us all. After that they morphed into a cosy progressive metal band, and I do not like such a kind of music. I do not deny sophistication in metal, but, you know, metal has to be the antithesis and uncompromising, or it is not. On that occasion I want to mention that the creativity, the craftsmanship as well as the transcendence involved in and articulated through metal is underrated.