volkan diyaroglu in tuck magazine

volkan_meta2_ volkan diyaroglu

 

 

tuckmagazine

Here you can read Michael Organ’s article in Tuck Magazine —->

http://tuckmagazine.com/2012/12/14/december-art/

Advertisements

Wormholes_Exibart_Ginevra Bria (text in Italian)

pubblicato giovedì 8 aprile 2010


Wormhole è la definizione scientifica (pubblicata nel 1916) che più si avvicina alla metodica surrealista delle rappresentazioni di Volkan Diyaroglu (Istanbul, 1982). Intraducibile in italiano, ‘wormhole’ è il nome conferito a un esperimento mentale, a un tunnel che connette due differenti punti nella dimensione spazio-temporale. Risucchiati all’interno di questo ‘buco cavosi potrebbe addirittura viaggiare impiegando molto meno tempo di un tragitto che comprende, nello spazio “normale”, lo stesso punto di partenza e di arrivo.
I diversi terminali del wormhole, in teoria, potrebbero anche essere intra-universali (cioè esistenti e insistenti sullo stesso universo) oppure inter-universali (portali impiantati in differenti universi, dei quali ci si può servire come punto di connessione tra le due diverse dimensioni). È da ricordare, inoltre, che l’espediente di wormhole è sorta come parte della soluzione delle equazioni di Einstein, a proposito della teoria della relatività.

Volkan Diyaroglu - Hole - 2009 - collage e inchiostro su carta - cm 27x37I wormhole sono cadute dello spazio da usare per il viaggio ad alta velocità nel tempo.
Seguendo lo stesso processo dirappresentazione spaziale, gli undici lavori – tra collage e inchiostri su carta – di Diyaroglu sono una sorta di riflesso simbolico e compositivo di queste teorie. Sintetici, piacevoli e divertenti, sono “la trasposizione figurativa” dei suoi enormi murales, progetti già sviluppati fuori dall’Italia ma che, per questa personale milanese, sono stati ridotti fino al nocciolo, appiattiti in un cortocircuito (spazio)temporale.
Nelle tele e nei collage, Diyaroglu gioca a inserire elementi improbabili all’interno di sfondi che sembrano imperituri, a causa di texture ancestrali e di cromie inspiegabilmente di un’altra epoca. Secondo Diyaroglu, noi “veniamo da dove andremo”: il futuro e il passato sono nella stessa direzione all’interno della sua opera. Guardare avanti significa guardare come nello specchio retrovisore di un’immensa macchina per il tempo e nella notte affianco, viaggiarci dentro.Nelle opere allestite negli spazi della nuova galleria, il presente e il passato e il passato e il futuro si incontrano cadendo, attraverso botole temporali che portano l’elemento vita (terminazioni umane e animali) all’interno della fissità dello scenario compositivo. Definiti tra scienza e letteratura fantasy, i wormhole sono ipotesi intuitive che mantengono al loro interno il buio, per riversare luce di contrasto all’interno di paesaggi naturali e prospettive urbane.

Volkan Diyaroglu - Inekler gelirken - 2009 - collage e inchiostro su carta - cm 18x30
Nelle immagini sovrapposte, spazi e tempi sono collegati da passaggi improvvisi e onirici, di evocazione surreale. Finestre e armadi segnano la strada, aprendo una crepa nella realtà. Mucche, uomini, pesci e mani appaiono o cercano la fuga, e falle perdono acqua. Il meccanismo figurativo-compositivo di Diyaroglu scherza e permea immagini selezionate per il gusto dell’assurdo, ma anche pregne della drammatica ricerca di una fuga, di un ingresso, di un wormhole.

ginevra bria
mostra visitata il 19 marzo 2010

al primo febbraio al 15 aprile 2010
Volkan Diyaroglu – Wormholes

a cura di Francesco Clerici
AR Contemporary Gallery
Via Marco Polo, 11 (zona Repubblica) – 20124 Milano

Orario: da martedì a sabato ore 11-19.30
Ingresso libero
Info: tel. +39 0245498902; fax +39 0245498354; info@contemporarygallery.it;www.contemporarygallery.it

[exibart]

you can see the text——-> http://www.exibart.com/notizia.asp/IDCategoria/57/IDNotizia/31141

the visual artbeat magazine… "The Art of Volkan Diyaroglu", Nicholas Forrest


download the magazine ———>

The Art of

Volkan DIYAROGLU

By Nicholas Forrest

When I was asked to write this article about the work of the 27 year old Turkish born, Spain

based artist Volkan Diyaroglu I was excited and honoured because Volkan is one of the most

talented artists I have ever come across. An artist whose use of colour and form suggests a

heightened visual-spatial intelligence and an extra-sensory perception of the visual language.

However, no matter what I write I cannot do his work justice because it is not the sort of work

that should be written about, it is the sort of work that should be experienced. Neither can I

really explain his work as it is the result of a process that even the artist himself cannot

explain – a process where Volkan surrenders himself to his work and allows intuition to guide

his every move. It is a very personal and intimate process which is driven by the subconscious

mind and is more about the artists own journey than anything else.


Just like with a piece of music, Volkan’s paintings take you on a journey that can evoke

emotional and psychological reactions even though you have no idea why or for what purpose

those reactions are being evoked. In order to appreciate or enjoy a piece of music one does

not have to know who the composer was, what the music is about or, for that matter, anything

about the piece of music what so ever. If you or I were to hear a piece of music that we had

never heard before and knew nothing about, we would still be able to experience and

appreciate that piece of music on a purely sensory level. In much the same way, Volkan’s work

is to be experienced on a purely sensory level.


It is normal for the viewer of a work of art to search for an ultimate truth or an obvious

meaning in an image as that is what our minds are trained to do, but as an abstract

artist in the purest sense, Volkan produces paintings that defy logic and reject reality.

There is nothing wrong with looking for an answer or a meaning in Volkan’s paintings

as long as you do not expect to find what you are looking for because, with his work,

there is no ultimate truth, and no beginning or end. The characteristic array of shapes

and colours that form the basis of Volkan’s paintings are the culmination of a series of

thoughts, feelings and movements. Each individual form represents a moment of

meditation which is the product of what has been, and an influence on what is to come.

Each painting represents a period of time during which Volkan surrenders himself to

the moment and immerses himself in his own thoughts and feelings. During that

time, the artist exhibits what I can only describe as an amazing ability to translate

his thoughts and feelings into colours and forms. It is these colours and forms that

engage the sub-conscious of the viewer and make his work so engaging.


Just like his latest body of work which includes works with titles such as

‘Catastrophe’, ‘A Beautiful Bomb’ and ‘Hortum’ (Turkish for Tornado), Volkan’s

paintings are spontaneous and chaotic events that have a momentary effect on the

participant’s perception of time and space. At first the viewer may be overwhelmed by

the chaos and energy, but the hypnotic qualities of Volkan’s paintings encourage the

viewer to surrender themselves to the experience and go beyond the purely visual.

An endless number of possibilities are available to the viewer, with each movement

of the eye revealing yet another path to follow and another experience to be had.


You might even come across one of the faces or familiar forms that are sometimes

hidden in his works. These familiar elements evoke a momentary sense of

disorientation and uncertainty during which the viewer is suspended between two

alternate realities. As to which reality is the true reality, well, that is up to you.

I think that the final word should come from the artist himself so here is a quote by

Volkan taken from a recent interview: “When we look at something, depending on

our point of view, we may find something beyond what’s represented, or not. That’s

something about ourselves, not something in the work, or in the objects or things that

we believe exist. What I know is I don’t lie when working on a canvas, and this attitude

doesn’t permit me to understand my paintings, what more can I say, my painting

represents all that has happened, all that will happen, all that can or could happen in

the moment that it is created and in the space that it is created”


END


**Nicholas Forrest is an art market analyst, art critic and journalist based in Sydney,

Australia. He is the founder of http://www.artmarketblog.com, writes the

art column for the magazine Antiques and Collectibles for Pleasure and Profit and

contributes to many other publications.

unreleased 2003 _ 3




jason anaya text about Volkan Diyaroglu

VRV Gallery Interview, and Paintings From Another World..

What are the “postkaraoke” and “bomatik” concepts?
I first created the “postkaraoke” concept. Its explanation is simple and you can find the meaning in its name. But everybody around me began to ask me about that “postkaraoke” concept and I decided not to explain it. I wanted people to discover it. With “bomatik”, same thing… Of course they have an explanation and they are the concepts about the new way of life that we live in. This is all I can tell. No more! It is like a game.
As an artist, how do you contrast painting and sculpture?
Firstly, I want to say that I don’t feel myself like an artist. I am a man who goes to his studio every day and kills his time playing with the things that he likes. That’s all. I don’t know and I can’t imagine how somebody can realize that he/she is an artist. I don’t think sculpture and the painting are different. They are the same thing. Maybe the way that you create artworks changes –not always- but finally they are the same. And I also think for video, installation, cinema…
What would make your life as an artist easier?
Really, I don’t know. I don’t want an easier life or a more difficult one. I want to pass my time then finish it like everybody. Life is difficult now, in the actual world, for everybody. I want to see, to hear, to taste, to understand, to feel and to create as much as I can.
What did you think when one of your pieces got bought for the first time?
I thought that this person was a crazy. I was living in Turkey and one week before I moved to Spain, somebody wanted to buy my painting “All About the Advertisement”… Now, when I think of it from the financial perspective, the same painting would cost at least 15 times more. Then, he was not that crazy. It is funny. And I want to tell this. It is important for me. I always think and say that: “I don’t sell my paintings, they buy”. Because I can’t create relaxed if I begin thinking about selling something. It is my personality. It is so simple and real. If I really wanted to sell something in this life, I could take another job and earn more money in an easier way than selling paintings. A painting is one of the most difficult thing to sell in this world.
Does the idea of collaborating with other painters on one piece appeal to you?
Not really, but of course I can. I have already collaborated with my friends but that was made in the moment. We didn’t think that we might paint together. At times, it was funny because, me or other painter, would begin erasing or painting over what the other did.
Is it important for you to get feedback from art amateurs and professionals?
Of course not, because I am all the day in my studio and I don’t care what the other people do. Because if I begin caring about this, I begin losing my time.
Are you disappointed by photographs of your work versus the real thing?
Sometimes I think the same thing. When I look at a photograph of my work, I see a photograph of my work. A good photograph or a bad one. When I see my work directly, I see my work. So they are different things. But of course I prefer to see my paintings directly, not from a photography image. A painting is not an image that you can transfer to an another surface. It’s like poems… When you translate them into other language, they are completely different.
You went to a few art schools (Fine Arts Faculty of Mimar Sinan University and at the Facultad de Bellas Artes de San Carlos de Universidad Politecnica in Valencia). What did you learn there? What do you think is the most important feature of an art curriculum?
In reality, I went to these art schools for the studios that they offered me for free. I think that they don’t have anything special to offer to someone for his/her artistic life. You may have a good professor… rarely, but it is fine. It is not so simple to find them. If somebody wants really to create, he/she creates. With the school or without the school. Before, the art schools didn’t exist and people created amazing things. The art curriculum is not important. The professional life wants and insists on it but the most important thing is, if the person who creates is happy with his/her creation or not. That’s all.
Have you tried other forms of art like photography?
Before painting, I was playing music, and I still do. And, of course, I have made photographies, videos, installations etc. But for me, the most important thing in my creation is the relation between my time and my body. If I begin to be bored when I create, -in the process- I cannot create or I create boring things for me. The way that I create cannot be boring for me. And the painting is a direct and primitive form to express the things that I feel or think… Sometimes, I have many ideas for a film or a video, but when I begin to think on how to realize them with the people around me, the computers…I don’t want to do it anymore. Maybe one day, when I will have more patience, I will try to make something like this. I write poems too. It is similar with the painting, really. And I enjoy it.
Who is your favorite artist on vrvgallery.com?
It is difficult to choose somebody in VRVGallery, because there are so many people I think make good work. But if I have to choose somebody, I like the “Collages” of Matthew Rose.
Your exhibition on vrvgallery.com is named “delik”; what does this name mean? Why did you chose it?
“Delik” means in Turkish “the hole”. The “delik” exhibition was realized in the real life, in 2007, in Espacio Forja, Valencia, Spain. The idea of the exhibition was to paint 19 4mX5m paintings and complete all over the walls of a huge exhibition space. And the place was finally like a “hole” that the people could dig in and lose or find themselves. Or none of those options.
Could you talk about the creative process that you used to produce those paintings?
It is difficult to explain this. I’m so inside my work and I can’t explain it. If I could explain, maybe I could be writer.
When you were working on that series, were you working only on it or you were also working on quite different artworks?
Normally, I work at the same time on many different works, but, in this case, I was living in Paris and I had two studios, one in Paris and one in Valencia. I decided to paint all of them in Valencia and I did not have so much time for to create them because I had to be in Paris for an other exhibition and for this reason, I had to lock myself in my Valencia studio and I concentrated and painted only for that project.
I have always thought that a good abstract painting could be rotated and still be good. A portrait, on the other hand, cannot be rotated. What do you think of that test?
I still don’t know what is a good abstract painting. Maybe a bad abstract painting for someone can be rotated and can be better. I think a portrait can be rotated too. Baselitz did it with interesting results. It is all about our esthetic habit. When I paint, I don’t think about the direction of the painting and I don’t want to specify how the people have to look at the painting. Maybe we have to close our eyes for to look at a painting. Finally, I don’t believe the directions. Maybe we are all born rotated.
Which music would you like to be played as a background of this “Delik” exhibition?
Coltrane? Radiohead? Boris Vian? Monk? Sonic Youth? It is so difficult to decide …
At first, I got rebuked by the similarity of the paintings, but I started paying attention to the details and I found myself traveling and exploring a world in itself. Each time I go back to those paintings, I need a few seconds for me eyes to adjust and find peace with with the artwork. Is my reaction typical?
I don’t really know if it is typical. I try to not to think so much what the people think of my paintings. Of course, it is so interesting and funny that everybody says different things about my paintings. I listen but I don’t think so much about them. It is impossible that you think the same thing as me when you see my paintings. It is similar when we look at the same stone… Are we sure that we see the same stone? But it is good that you travel in my paintings!
The first three paintings are named “buzul cagi”, “buzul cagi II”, and “buzul cagi III”. My Turkish is rusty (I am assuming this is the language here, pardon my ignorance); what do those titles mean? Why three pieces? Is there at buzul cagi IV? Would you mind to have a different buyer for each?
They mean “Ice Age”. There are four “Buzul Cagi”. They are different paintings. I don’t mind if there are different buyers. Neither do I mind if there are buyers.
How did you know that each of those paintings was finished? For instance “yavas”; why is it finished?
Good question. I think it is impossible to know if a painting is finished in the meaning that you talk about . Maybe they will be finished when I die, maybe not. We always want to explain a painting. Why? I think always you can continue to put more in a painting. It does not exist a “perfect” concept for the painting. It does not exist a concept for the painting.

PS. You can see the other part of the show at:
http://www.vrvgallery.com/volkan_diyaroglu

artiz magazine, volkan’s article in the turkish art magazine..



"NEVER_INTIM" PAINTINGS AND PAU ANDRES TEXT…

strange trip mixed technique on canvas 2008 private collection

NEVER INTIM

Cuenta Orhan Pamuk en Estambul. Ciudad y recuerdos que nunca ha podido dejar la ciudad en la que nació. Otros, dice, como Conrad, Nabokov o Naipaul pudieron apartarse de ella e incluso escribir en otras lenguas, pero Pamuk sintió que no podría alejarse de aquellas calles que lo vieron nacer en la antigua Constantinopla. A Volkan Diyaroglu, que de bien joven salió de esa ciudad para recorrer medio mundo antes de llegar a Valencia, alguna vez le preguntaron sobre las influencias de su obra. ¿Quizá el action painting, tal vez el expresionismo abstracto? Y tras meditarlo un poco, respondía que puede que en la Mezquita Azul de Estambul residiera el embrión de su práctica pictórica.

Repletas de mosaicos, las paredes de la Mezquita Azul aturden al espectador que vislumbra, avasallado por el impacto visual, el orden de las cenefas y las flores que se multiplican casi hasta el infinito. No es extraño reconocer ante la obra de Volkan un impacto semejante al que proporcionan aquellos muros. Sea por su magnitud, por su colorido, el rojo, el azul, al amarillo sobre los que se incrustan multitudes de dibujos o quizá por el orden que se intuye tras la algarabía de los pequeños objetos que en ella aparecen, lo cierto es que su obra consigue quedarse con la mirada de quien a ella se acerca.

 

never   250X525 cm     mixed technique on canvas   2008   private collection

 

Algún objeto es que el entra de primeras en esa rápida mirada. Una casa, pirámides. A continuación se intuyen otros pocos, aunque unidos sin sentido. La cabeza de un perro, la raspa de un pescado. Aparecen, están ahí, pero podrían no estar. Se combinan con garabatos carentes de sentido desligados de su contexto. En realidad todos perderían su esencia apartados de donde están, pero la verdad es que esa esencia no se vislumbra clara para quien se planta enfrente del lienzo. ¿Importa?

 

intim  300X860 cm   mixed technique on canvas 2008  private collection


Vasos, conos, vasijas, cajas, cubos… Cuesta ver que hay entre tanto ruido. Las trompetas ensordecen al espectador. No es música, no son trompetas. Ruido y más ruido. Las gruesas líneas que salen de los tubos y que con Haring, y con toda la tradición de viñetas y cómics, denotaban movimiento, aquí están más cerca de la artillería onomatopéyica de Marinetti. El futurista conseguía con la tipografía remarcar el ruido de la onomatopeya, como en Zang tumb tumb. Volkan se basta con las rayas para inundar el lienzo de estruendo.

Entre los extraños objetos pintados resaltan unas huellas de zapatos. Aparecen por aquí y por allá. El pintor ha estado trabajando de pie encima del lienzo, y no se ha molestado en ocultar las marcas de su calzado. Quizá sea esta la más rara performance: el proceso de creación de la obra está presente en ella sólo cuando está acabada. Volkan no nos enseña el momento en que crea, pero ese momento, con las huellas, con las pequeñas gotas que le han caído mientras pintaba y que se esparcen por el lienzo, denotan que nos lo quiere enseñar aunque sea después. Son las intimidades de la creación, ¿para qué ocultarlas?

Pau Andrés
Marzo de 2008

 

warning warning 450X200 cm mixed technique on canvas private collection

https://volkandiyaroglu.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/776/

"MI VERTIGO" PAINTINGS AND TONI CALDERON TEXT

 


la posibilidad de ser un loco  220X440 cm    mixed technique on canvas     private collection

 

 

Volkan Diyaroglu. Mestizaje y sincretismo.

“el lienzo es un campo de juego en el que reproducir, rediseñar, analizar o expresar un objeto real o imaginario”
Harold Rosemberg

La obra del joven artista turco afincado en París Volkan Diyaroglu es mucho más que pintura. Para Volkan el proceso, las dimensiones y el espacio forman parte de su trabajo. Si su trabajo se analiza desde un punto estrictamente pictórico se evidencian claras similitudes con artistas universales del arte contemporáneo, en concreto, con los creadores de la “action painting” de los años cincuenta y también con la pintura renovada de principios de los ochenta o lo que es lo mismo, con el expresionismo abstracto de Jackson Pollock o la nueva pintura cuyo máximo exponente es Jean Michel Basquiat. Estas influencias, a priori, pueden definir a Volkan como un artista ecléctico en el sentido literal de la palabra, lo que no presume entenderlo en sentido peyorativo, pues el arte progresa y se anticipa cuando es capaz de conjugar pasado y presente a la hora de recorrer nuevos caminos. Son indiscutibles las influencias formales y procesuales en las que se sumerge y que están muy presentes tanto en su parte más intuitiva como, sobre todo, en su posterior desarrollo creativo. El uso continuado del “dripping” técnica en la que se vierte directamente la pintura del cubo o con grandes brochas en chorros que gotean toda la superficie del lienzo es, sin lugar a dudas, la protagonista formal en un escenario donde prima el impacto visual que provoca la pureza de su paleta de colores. De la misma manera, hay otros elementos que apuntan en esta dirección: el tamaño de sus lienzos, la acumulación de materia y el uso matérico de los pigmentos.

 

 

sin titulo     220 X300 cm     mixed technique on canvas        2007

 

 

Desde un punto de vista conceptual su trabajo está muy próximo a las teorías surrealistas del automatismo. Es un pintor intuitivo, mecánico en su praxis, inconsciente deliberadamente y espontáneo en la medida que se puede ser cuando un proceso se adecua a un guión preestablecido. En esta línea de paralelismos también hay que destacar la ausencia de un punto de vista central hacia el cual se vea forzado a mirar el espectador. Practica lo que se denomina sistema “all over” de representación y que consiste, a grandes rasgos, en la ausencia de composiciones centralizadas, es decir, con un solo punto de vista en el plano, si bien es habitual que en una obra aparentemente abstracta, entendida la abstracción como un proceso de estilización, introduzca elementos representativos que se convierten en referencia objetual hacia la cual dirigir nuestras miradas.

 

 

todo esta roto      225X300 cm       mixed technique on canvas      2007

 

 

En su pintura hay indicios que prueban la horizontalidad del lienzo en su proceso creativo. Volkan crea una superficie habitada, transitada por un artista despreocupado que deposita su huella en la superficie a modo de firma y pone de manifiesto su interés por generar unos residuos que formen parte ineludible del significado de su pintura. La consecuencia es un universo creado por un artista profundamente preocupado por el resultado final, por la apariencia revestida de momentos del pasado. Aunque en apariencia es una pintura azarosa, nada es caprichoso ni escapa de sus planteamientos primigenios. Los motivos que invaden toda la superficie están cuidadosamente seleccionados aunque parezcan fruto del transcurso aleatorio del acto de pintar.

 

 

agua     240X420 cm      mixed technique on canvas       2007

 

 

Una vez hechas las comparaciones y analizada la escena, cuidadosamente elaborada por el artista, cabe resaltar que la originalidad no recae precisamente en la obviedad de sus referencias sino en su capacidad de síntesis. Es hábil al incorporar iconos visiblemente identificadores de la cultura occidental junto a elementos más propios de su cultura de origen, la oriental. Este sincretismo hace que la obra mantenga la energía propia del proceso de un pintar intenso. Incorpora elementos decorativos, minuciosos, delicados, e incluye signos que se repiten sistemáticamente por toda la superficie. Es aquí donde reside la cualidad de su obra. El resultado es un trabajo donde emerge el mestizaje propio de quien conjuga, con extraordinaria destreza, aspectos expresivos y representativos al mismo tiempo. El énfasis en el acto de pintar, la obcecación por cubrir toda la superficie, la intención de crear con técnicas caóticas no es contraria a que broten historias, se narren conceptos y sobre todo enfatiza la inquietud de quien devora la pintura porque es parte íntima de su forma de concebir la vida. Imágenes o sucesos, historias detenidas en el tiempo, instantes emocionales, reproducir o expresar, qué más da si todo es producto de una evolución cuyo final, real o imaginado, sólo está en la mente de quien lo contempla.

Toni Calderón

 

 

col yalniz aksam       mixed technqiue on canvas      2007

"DELIK" PAINTINGS AND JOSE MIR TEXT

 

el coche roto    400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas      2007

 

 

yagmur      400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

katil      400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas      2007

 

 

zaman      400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas    2007

 

 

It is well know that art isn’t produced in a vacuum, that no artist is independent of his predecessors and models, and stemming from a specific tradition. In contemporary art, the paintings of Volkan Diyaroglu have parallels with historical vanguards as well as the legendary painters of the eighties, with references to gesture painting, to the action painters of the fifties such as Jackson Pollock, the art brut of Dubuffet and, closer to home, George Mathie or Jean Michel Basquiat, among others.

Nevertheless, a false sense of deja-vu shouldn’t influence the perception of the artist’s canvases in the least. One can appreciate how he immersed himself in his influences, both formal and those of process, to create experimental and free paintings whose borders continuously move in intuitive fountain of unlimited creativity. The elements are hybrids rather than pure, confused rather than clear, perversely indeterminate, elements that show the artist as a clear and individual personality.

From the purist or formalist point of view, the focus of abstract works such as these should be on the intrinsic values, on what the work of art is in itself, and not on what it represents. An abstract painting does not represent anything nor does it have any representative characteristic. The work is liberated from optical and linguistic suggestions, liberated from the codes of traditional representation, in spite of the fact that in this case we can find certain ironical touches and deceptive displays within the canvas.

Certainly, in the work of Volkan Diyaroglu, these intrinsic values of painting are essential. He uses large-scale canvases in the style of tapestries or carpets where the tendency toward the horror vacui unfolds, where leiv motive can be found, as much in the background tones as in the form of the brush marks, repeated throughout the surface.

His painting shows a strong gestural quality. The surface of the canvas is splattered in a spontaneous and energetic manner, without any a priori schema. His technique implies the concept of a work as a space of action, where the poured and spread paint and the tracks of the paintbrush on the surface determine the final impact of the canvas.

The creative process is defined in each palpable property of his painting, in the accumulation of the material and in the markings. The traces left horizontally on the large canvas can’t be reduced to the painting itself, but to the act of painting. Footprints, cigarette butts, and multiple attachments enrich the work’s surface.

All these elements converge into a decorative conception of painting. Elements that are usually the opposite to this, like the energy of the mark, the gesture, the track, stains, drips, and stuck-on objects, turn into decorative elements as in a tapestry.

In spite of this, the artist is not averse to introducing small representational elements, icons and forms, all of them done with simplicity and in a schematic form, including linguistic elements that move our gaze over the canvas. These elements make us doubt the existence of a final meaning of the work, one that is totally unknown to us. These relics indicate that we can both look at the canvas as well as through it, as if there exists a finality, a hidden message, a parallel reality beyond the materiality of the pigments.

Usually, we feel that works that do not have denotations can nonetheless refer to or connote an expression, an emotional state. We convert a display of colours, textures, and forms into emotions that we share, or believe to share, with the artist. By placing our attention on these qualities, we move to our own interpretation. When we believe that a form or color has an inherent expressive significance, we start the process of projecting as a spectator, in a way of reorganizing, of assimilating the world that we are accustomed to, or, as Nelson Goodman would say, another way of making new worlds.

In reality, this is not a contradiction, as long as we are not looking for absolute truths where they cannot be found. Beside any concrete, expressive or representative element that a painting may have, they simply represent an instant in the life of the artist, one of his acts, an expression of his personality. The instinctive sources of expression, it immediacy, or its impact, all connote the fragmentation of the self, the emergence of an individual who obeys the diverse logic of compartmentalized juxtapositions, the complex reality of the individual.

The same as the artist cannot hope that his work can duplicate the image he has in his mind, the spectator cannot hope for a concrete message. In both cases, we find that the transpositions of an acquired medium developed by tradition and skill, that of the artist and of the contemplator himself.

In the case of Volkan Diyaroglu, identifiable elements of Eastern culture intermingle with those of Western culture, beginning a meeting point between the two. He mixes intuition and spontaneity with meditated and mechanized processes of creation. The emphasis is on process, the importance of the tracks, the accidents in the creation, the irreverence that this brings to the contemplation of the work itself. They are merely samples, intimate references of a way of conceiving live, society, and art itself.

José Mir, 2007.

Bien es sabido que el arte no se produce en un espacio vacío, ningún artista es independiente de predecesores y modelos, y siempre parte de una tradición específica. En la actualidad, asumidas las vanguardias históricas como referentes omnipresentes, junto a la existencia de pintores ya legendarios de los años ochenta, no es difícil encontrar paralelismos en la pintura de Volkan Diyaroglu. Así pues, observamos referencias al arte gestual, a la pintura de acción de los años 50, con figuras tan conocidas como Jacson Pollock, al art brut de Dubuffet o a los trabajos más cercanos de George Mathie o Jean Michel Basquiat entre otros.

Sin embargo, una falsa impresión de dejà-vu, no debe condicionar, en absoluto, la percepción de los lienzos del artista. Se aprecia, en ellos, una gran capacidad de sumergirse en las influencias procesuales y formales, para crear una pintura experimental y libre, cuyas fronteras se desplazan perpetuamente en una fuente intuitiva de creación ilimitada. Donde los elementos son híbridos más que puros, confusos más que claros, perversamente indeterminados. Elementos que dotan al artista de una personalidad clara e individual.

Desde el punto de vista de la doctrina purista o formalista, en obras abstractas, como las que nos ocupan, deberíamos centrarnos en los valores intrínsecos, insistir en lo que la obra de arte es, y no en lo que simboliza. Un cuadro abstracto ni representa ni tiene en absoluto carácter representativo. Es una obra liberada de sujeciones ópticas y lingüísticas, liberada, por supuesto, de los códigos de representación tradicional, pese a que en este caso podamos encontrarnos con ciertos toques irónicos y engañosos dispuestos a lo largo de la tela.

Ciertamente, en la obra de VolKan Diyaroglu, éstos valores intrínsecos de la pintura son esenciales. Utiliza lienzos de grandes dimensiones a modo de tapices o alfombras donde despliega una preferencia hacia el horror vacui, donde el leiv motive pueden ser, tanto las tonalidades del fondo como las formas de las pinceladas, repetidas éstas, a modo de muestras por toda la superficie.

Su pintura goza de un fuerte carácter gestual. La superficie del lienzo se ve salpicada de forma espontánea y enérgica, es decir, sin un esquema determinado a priori. Su técnica implica la concepción de la obra como un espacio de acción, donde la pintura vertida, esparcida, las propias huellas de las brochas en la superficie, son sin duda protagonistas del impacto final de la obra.

En cada propiedad palpable de su pintura, en la acumulación de la materia, en los trazos, se nos define un proceso creativo. Rastros dejados sobre un gran lienzo en disposición horizontal que no se reducen a la propia pintura, sino a la misma actividad. Huellas de pisadas, rastros de colillas, adherencias múltiples enriquecen el acabado de la obra.

Todos estos elementos convergen en un concepto decorativo de la pintura. Elementos, en principio tan opuestos a esto, como la fuerza del trazo, el gesto, las huellas, las manchas, el goteo, las adherencias, se tornan elementos decorativos, en motivos de un tapiz.

Pese a todo esto, no es ajeno el artista, como indicábamos, a la introducción de pequeños elementos representativos, iconos y formas, todos ellos de una gran simplicidad y esquematismo, o incluso elementos lingüísticos, que dirigen nuestra mirada a lo largo del lienzo. Estos elementos nos hacen dudar de la existencia de un significado último de la obra que nos es totalmente desconocido. Dichos vestigios nos indican que podemos tanto mirar la pintura como mirar a través de ella. Como si existiera una la finalidad, un mensaje oculto, una realidad adjunta, más allá de la materialidad del pigmento.

Habitualmente, consideramos que las obras que no denotan pueden, no obstante, referir o bien connotar una expresión, un estado de ánimo. Convertimos una muestra de colores, texturas y formas, en sentimientos que podemos o creemos compartir con el artista. La atracción de nuestra atención sobre esas cualidades nos induce, al hacerlo, a una interpretación propia. Cuando concebimos, así, una forma o un color “cargados” inherentemente de un significado expresivo, entramos en el proceso de proyección como espectador, en una forma de reorganización, de asimilación al mundo al que estamos acostumbrados, una manera más de hacer mundos, como diría Nelson Goodman.

Realmente, no es una contradicción, siempre y cuando no busquemos verdades absolutas donde no cabe encontrarlas. Al margen de cualquier elemento concreto, expresivo o representativo, que pudieran poseer las pinturas, simplemente representan un instante de la vida del artista, uno de sus actos, una expresión de su la personalidad. Las fuentes instintivas de la expresión, la inmediatez o el impacto connotan la fragmentación del yo, la emergencia de un individuo que obedece a lógicas múltiples a la manera de yuxtaposiciones compartimentadas, a la complejidad real de un individuo.

Al igual que el artista no puede esperar de su obra que esta adopte un duplicado exacto de lo tiene en su mente, el espectador no puede esperar un mensaje concreto. En ambos casos, nos encontramos ante transposiciones de un medio adquirido y de un medio desarrollado por la tradición y la habilidad, la del artista y la del propio contemplador.

En el caso de Volkan Diyaroglu, se entrecruzan elementos identificables de la cultura occidental con elementos de la cultura oriental, punto de encuentro entre ambas como su origen. Mezcla de intuición y espontaneidad con procesos meditados y mecánicos de creación. El énfasis en el proceso, la importancia de las huellas, de los accidentes en la creación, la irreverencia que ello conlleva hacia la consideración de la propia obra. No son más que muestras, referencias íntimas del modo de concebir la vida, la sociedad, y el propio arte.

José Mir, 2007.

"DELIK" PAINTINGS AND INTERVIEW WITH TONI CALDERON

 

kirik zaman      400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

buzul cagi   IV        400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas      2007

 

 

 

Interview a Volkan Diyaroglu.

Toni Calderón. What role does painting have in an art world dominated by digital technologies?

Volkan Diyaroglu. In the first place, we have to look at ourselves and ask what role do the new digital technologies have in our lives and question what role we ourselves play. Do we have control over our lives? I would answer no. In no aspect of our life do we exercise the control that we should, and what’s more, at present digital technology dominates us rather than we dominating it. We’re under a dictatorial power and unable to decide the rhythm of our lives, which in a certain sense is absurd.

I would say that we are swept along in a wild, swirling river where each individual is looking for his place, complicated by swimming against the current. I believe that this structure destroys artistic creation from the start. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t accept new developments; on the contrary, we have to accept it with a wide understanding and ability to see what things have in common and what their differences are. No just looking at surface appearances, but digging a bit deeper.

For me, painting is just painting, no more no less, like poetry – it’s that simple. Asking questions is fine, but one also has to be able not to understand and to continue asking. And if I have to talk about the use of the new digital technologies in art, millions of questions are raised in my mind. Why does something painted in a computer with a 3d programme and then printed on a clean and shiny surface, or a photograph have to be any different than a painting? Or why is a painting any different than, for example, a cup o an apple? I think that what we’re left with is that they simply exist. Personally, I think that before looking at any technical questions, we should look at the context. The truth is that never has it been as difficult to be a painter in a society that moves along to the rhythm of what’s in fashion, like postmodern cannibals, and then run quickly to another objective, thereby creating a disorderly circulation of our own individual selves that is very dangerous, seemingly ordered but subordinate to power and the system.

Nonetheless, I think that never has painting, as we ourselves are, been so interesting, immersed in increasingly complex societies. Bit by bit, the new technologies are distancing humans from their own physical being, converting them into an object of consumption. I like and hate painting for the slow rhythm and its relationship with my physical body. I’m more interested in the time I spend while I paint than the finished work ready to be consumed by the spectator, although the finished result also interests me, but to a lesser degree. But who is to say that painting isn’t another new technology? Every day, I invent a new technology in my painting though I don’t tell anyone about it; it’s a secret surprise for myself and for those, who like me, don’t fit into this world. My paintings are there, as I said, like a table that is now before me, quiet and silent, and in the end I think that painting simply has the role of painting, just as we play the role of ourselves at the same time.

 

 

cuantos niños han muerto hoy en bagdad?     400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas      2007

 

 

T.C. You speak of the relation of painting with the physical. What is more important in your work, the process, the act of painting, or paintings meant to be consumed as objects, or is it possible that you want the element of process to be clearly visible and to become the main element of your work?

V.D. To be honest, I’m not exactly sure which elements is the most important. I think that what I do give importance to is something that I still don’t know, and the day I do discover it will be the day I stop painting. I’m interested in the finished work but that is a product of a process. And this process is closer to myself than is the finished work. Finally, the time that I spend on a canvas is my real or imagined time that passes in my life with its real time and real space. This transition to the final work is what really interests me. But that’s something quite different from the finished work that other people see, but which for me doesn’t exist. Also, the process of a work, after my direct relationship with the painting is over, continues on by itself, away from me, and in life. If I would want to truly finish a work, I would destroy it in some way. In another sense, my visible process isn’t really my process, something that I don’t really understand. This process exists for me alone. What one sees from the outside is totally superficially, or at least I think it is, but at the same time, I’m not especially interested that the process becomes visible.

Speak of painting as object, I don’t know why artists are bothered so much that their art is treated as objects, or why we’re talking only about painting and sculpture as objects in the art world. For me, an installation is also one object more, in some ways decorative and thought of in a three dimensional way, or a video, if it wants to be seen also has to have a certain existence as an object the same as a painting. Even ideas, in order to be explained, have to be objects. Letters have to be written, or leave the mouth and mix with air, and sound in space has a form and that too is an object. Otherwise, it would be enough to think it without explaining it to anyone or to communicate with the outside world.

Today, one can consume anything that exists in the world. To say otherwise is a lie. This is totally outside my way of thinking and my studio. A glass, a sofa can be consumed, and the same thing happens with painting after I spend my time with the work, after the process is over and it continues on without me. I spend more or less eight hours a day working and in the process of this time, I change, I close, I open, I have fun, and I get bored. But all this isn’t in order to have something physical. Otherwise I’d do something more useful. Painting in its existence is absurd. All the work is for myself. Painting is the point at which I touch the exterior world and the world touches my inner world, it ties me to it, and liberates me from it.

 

 

buzul cagi        400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas      2007

 

 

T.C. Your take on painting as an object ready to be consumed is interesting. Do you believe that painting has survived precisely because of the demand for its decorative qualities, and that explains its omnipresence in most art fairs although the world of art critics and many artists, outside of gallery structure, clearly go for what is called new media art?

V.D. No, I don’t care if that happens. What I want to say, as I said before, the importance that painting has for me precedes all of this, especially when I’m doing it. Of course, beyond this there’s a world with million of stories, millions of movements, million of businesses, all happening beyond my existence and at times we have to talk about that as well. But I don’t believe that painting is any more decorative than, as you say, new media art, and that at this moment they are decorating institutions, buildings, museums, which belong to the government and they are politicians, and we have to be careful in all of this, because the danger isn’t in that the paintings may be decorative, but that the ideas are decorative. All that we perceive to be new today I believe is just a new way to decorate. Even with current trends, where it’s hung it very important, maybe even more so than the work itself. And now there’s enough biennales and contemporary art museums that I consider very decorative, no less so than galleries, and the most worrying thing is that even ideas tend to be decorative.

I’ve never seen a poorly decorated museum. A painting is a work in itself; it’s the same to me where it’s hung, and it’s an object, but an object to me isn’t just an object. The art critics and artists can think what they want to. For me, communication is chaos that we like to create and nobody understands this very well. The world outside myself will never understand exactly what I want to say or do. Not even I understand it very well.

My work seems new to them, and they accept it – well, to me it’s not something new – I say new but everyone can also be wrong as we’ve seen many times in history. I don’t believe that today the galleries are backing painting, quite the contrary, and as far as art fairs go, I’d rather not talk about them as all is said in its name – they are fairs and, for me, distant from the natural world and time. The fairs are fairs, just as there are car fairs and technology fairs and which are backed by an incredible business structure, but one that doesn’t interest me in the least. People talk about this a lot, I don’t know why. A fair has its moment, a lot of money is paid to exhibit works in it, and that’s important for the gallery and the artist, more important than the work itself. After all the expenses, they want to sell no matter what, and I don’t know why they talk about it so much. I think that in Spain, it’s talked about even more than in other places. So now I want to ask some questions. Isn’t there something strange in all this? Don’t you think that they want painting to surrender to an art form that is direct, political and made to their taste? Don’t you think that painting is a form too individual and complicated to create in such a mechanized world? In a world so controlled economically and psychologically, do they want us to read less, or read more but about trivial matters? And lastly, do you think that there is something that is going well in the world we live in? I believe that art is a reflection of all of this.

 

 

buzul cagi  II      400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

T.C. Going on to another theme, Volkan, and looking at your work, which are the important points to your painting so that a person with little experience in art can have some understanding of it?

V.D. Each individual is completely free to think and feel as they wish when contemplating my work, although they never will understand it all, but neither does that doesn’t matter much to me. It may not seem that way, but I think that my paintings move and change in form continuously, they have many different faces, and when you believe you understand something, that’s just when you don’t understand anything. I’m only asking people for a bit of humour, nothing else. Maybe you have to close your eyes in front of my work, and look at it like that.

 

 

buzul cagi    III      400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas    2007

 

 

T.C. Continuing with questions inherent to your work, do you think that your painting is filled with symbolism, with elements that substitute in part concepts or questions beyond what is represented?

V.D. I myself am a spectator and when I look at my paintings, I think that the whole work is a question and there are many questions within my paintings that don’t have answers. Maybe I’m wrong. When there’s an answer, life is over. I believe that when I paint, I’m not painting. What does the act of painting consist of, in the end? I believe that concepts don’t exist in human life, we make them exist, give them form and a name, we attach the concept with a label and we give them a force, but at the same time we take away a part of their own existence. When we look at something, depending on our point of view, we may find something beyond what’s represented, or not. That’s something about ourselves, not something in the work, or in the objects or things that we believe exist. What I know is I don’t lie when working on a canvas, and this attitude doesn’t permit me to understand my paintings, what more can I say, my painting represents all that has happened, all that will happen, all that can or could happen in the moment that it is created and in the space that it is create.

 

 

jugamos      400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

T. C. I’m struck by your statement that Volkan is a spectator in front of his paintings. Don’t you think that maybe we’re still asking too many questions about what a painting wants to say and are reductive about the explanations, usually absurd in the way a work is interpreted, in order to give it a didactic meaning and especially a historical one, reducing it to a level of absurdity, or trivial questions when what is happening is an enormous gulf disassociation between the spectator and contemporary art.

V.D. Yes, I agree with you. When I say that I myself am a spectator of my own paintings, I want to say that after the completion of an work, I am at the same distance from it than any other spectator, and certainly I’m a poor spectator. Of course we ask too many questions. A work doesn’t have to say or relate anything. I think that that’s a problem in contemporary life. Society wants to answer all the questions that come up and we think that we have answers to everything, and that everything is in the place it should be, without any problems. Especially in European culture where there’s a tendency to reason and to have answers. There’s not enough mysticism, not enough humour to look outside one’s own self, and at the same, within oneself. European culture, which is the culture that decides history, should be more self-critical. European culture has always wanted, within its own sadness, to create its own legend because it fears of losing itself in time, and thus cultural imperialism begins. I think that everything stems from this problem of a closed rationalization. The same occurs in contemporary art. I think that, outside of the art work itself; we’re all absurd spectators of our own existence. Another factor is the boredom of contemporary, especially European, life. I believe that today more than ever, contemporary art needs spectators more than ever. This is clearly seen. Everyone wants to explain something and understand something that doesn’t exist. I think that soon there’ll be more curators, commissioners, and art critics than there are artists.

 

 

katil II      400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

T. C. In my opinion it is true that Western culture lacks self-criticism, and in all areas, not just in artistic matters. But focusing on your work, what is certain is that the references that you work with are clearly Western, the overall form, the dripping technique, and even part of the symbolism and the composition of your canvases, all have obvious precedents in the Western art of the second half of the twentieth century. Is your painting a sort of mix of the Western and Eastern with a language that incorporates elements of both cultures?

V.D. Good question. I said before that the West is the one that chooses the lineage of the history of art, the one that writes the history of world art, and on top of that, commercializes it. The overall form that your refer to is already in the history of Islamic art, it’s always been there, while we and the West never have wanted to see it while the east never has wanted to name it. On the wall of the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, we can see what in reality is an overall. In the end, it was the Americans and their abstract expressionism that named it to define pictures which covered the totality of the space without a central element or composition to the work. Abstract painting also has been present in the history of Eastern art and especially in Islamic art. We all know that the representation of the figure is forbidden. But the West since the Greeks started to conceptualize and at the same time materialize human life. For this reason when I look at a Pollock I see someone totally influenced by Islamic art. I don’t know if Pollock was conscious of this. The West, contrary to what it believes, is not alone on the planet. The silence of the East has not worked well.

As far as the dripping technique goes, I’d like to say that I don’t use it as a technique per se. Pollock, for example, used it as a totally innovative technique but I wasn’t even aware of it when I started to paint like that. I simply paint on a canvas, on the floor and what you see from the outside as dripping, isn’t really dripping, they are accidents that happen when I am over the canvas. The paint drips a lot while I put on a colour. Of course I realize this afterwards but I don’t do this consciously to create an accident, the drips exist en my time and space, and since gravity also exists, they fall, and I accept them as they are. Many times I like the accidents more that I like what I unconsciously want to do. Lastly, it seems to me that Eastern and traditional art is purer even though this doesn’t mean anything. It’s neither better nor worse. My work at the same time also co-exists with both cultures. That’s normal, because I’ve been in both, in the West and in the East, I was born in the city of Istanbul which is the gateway been east and west.

 

 

karanlik       400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

T.C. I’d like to focus now on the content. It’s obvious that there are figurative references and a series of signs in your paintings. Can you say if a narrative analysis can be found in your work?

V.D. Yes, once in a while figures appear in the paintings. They appear to me in the same way as they do to you, but while I’m working. They’re like ghosts that want to say something but which I can’t understand very well. At the same time, my stains also are figures and the figures are stains as well. I believe that we must never forget that a painting is a painting and at the same time it is nothing of importance, like my ghost figures.

With respect to the analysis, of course one can do as one pleases. As I said before I also am a spectator after finishing the work, and, at times, I myself want to understand if there is something that they want to say to me while I look at them. It’s impossible to create a painting without a narrative element. It all depends on who looks at it and how. As I said before, my paintings might talk of all possibilities in an imprecise time and place. Can you imagine it? It’s immense, infinite. Because of this, I can’t even talk about my painting. You have to take painting very seriously, but at the same time you have to realize that there’s nothing serious about a painting. It’s like schizophrenia, as much for the spectator as for the creator. But why don’t we ever talk about a stone that we find? Doesn’t the stone want to tell things too?

 

 

yavas     400X500 cm    mixed technique on canvas    2007

 

 

T.C. Another characteristic of your work is, without a doubt, the scale of the canvases. In this exhibition the concept of an “environment” is very present. One could say that it underlies the concept of “site specific”, of work created for a specific place. In this sense, what is the relationship between space and your painting?

V.D. Scale as a characteristic of a work is, in a certain way, relative. There are neither large works nor small works. The scale is within the work. My paintings exist with their dimensions and I think that they are as they should be, neither smaller nor bigger. They’re normal, as they should be. But in the Delik exhibition, the works were made specifically for that space. Normally what I do is work freely, without thinking about the space in which I’ll show my pieces. I don’t even think about exhibiting them while I work. But at times it’s interesting to create a specific space, as on this occasion, because if you know beforehand, where and how they will be shown, you start to incorporate the sense of the place as well as their scale. This clearly affects the work, although you don’t want it to, and at the same time they are very related. It’s difficult to explain. In the end, seeing my works in different places is like an optical illusion. Each place has a concrete form and history. In each place, the light is different. A while ago, I exhibited in the thirteenth century Abbey in Paris and that was also work made for a specific place. Between each there’s a connection between work and space. It’s strange to dismount the work from its primary space and see it later in another place; it’s like a cut in time, a small earthquake.

 

 

kirik makine     400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

T.C. I’m struck by the homogeny of the background colours chosen for this exhibition. They can be summed in backgrounds of red, yellow, blues, or greys. Is there some reason to do with style or language that determines the production around a set of determined colours?

V.D. For this exhibition, I worked within a set time enclosed in my studio. Before starting to work I had no idea what I was going to do, I only knew the sizes and number of canvases that I had to create. I got into a Delik which in Turkish means hole, and while I worked I felt, saw, heard and maybe thought. The colours came to me and struck inside my head. I never have understood people who thought about the composition, colours, or form before starting to paint. In regards to the background, I don’t believe that they are present as a concept, and for me the colours are my words that in reality don’t exist. Everything is grey and so are words.

Finally, after finishing these nineteen paintings, I look at them and it seems to me that I’ve excavated a huge hole, each second, each minute, that I spent working. I have taken some things from a place and I thought that maybe there’s a final story, or maybe there is nothing. I’d like to understand it. Maybe you can tell that story?

 

 

kirik su     400X500 cm     mixed technique on canvas     2007

 

 

silencio por favor      400X500 cm      mixed technique on canvas      2007

decalages…





NEDEN BIR RESSAM OLMAMAK GEREK?

NEDEN BIR RESSAM OLMAMAK GEREK?


1. Belki de butun hayatiniz boyunca neden bir ressam oldugunuzu dusunursunuz ve cogu zaman anlam veremezsiniz buna.

2. Yaptiginiz isi sanat kavraminin altina sokarlar, siz daha sanatin ne oldugunu bile kavrayamadan ve yaptiginiz islere ad koyarlar size bile sormadan. Aslinda sizin derdiniz resim yapmaktir basitce.

3. Butun hayatinizi bir tuvalin ve ya bir nesnenin karsisinda gecirirsiniz (fiziki veya ruhsal olarak.

4. Yaptiginiz isleri bir an olsun begenseniz bile bir muddet sonra begenmeme ihtimaliniz vardir. Uzuntuye kapilirsiniz. Kendinize kizarsiniz niye sevdim ben bu isi diye. Estetige inanmamaya baslarsiniz, bu iyi birsey olsa da kafa karistirici birsey oldugundan, bir daha hicbir zaman yaptiginiz islere guvenemezsiniz.

5. Her zaman daha iyiyi arasiniz ama daha iyi diye birsey yoktur aslinda diye dusunup buyuk iklemlerin icine dalarsiniz.

6. Insanlar, resmi onlara gosteresiniz diye yaptiginizi zannedip sizden ya da resimlerinizden hep birseyler beklerler. Aslinda bekleyecek birsey yoktur ortada.

7. Elleriniz, ustunuz basiniz kirli dolasirsiniz etrafta ve cevrenizden aktif veya pasif tepki gorursunuz. (size belli etmedikleri durumlarda bile)

8. “Senin meslegin ne?” diye sorduklarinda ve cevabinizin ressam oldugunda, 
a. Aa ne kadar ilginc deyip sinirlerinizi bozabilirler
b. O da meslek mi? Gercekte ne yapiyorsun? Diye bir soru yonetebilirler
c. Resimle gecinmek zor diye bir tespitte bulunabilirler biraz da hakli olarak ve siz onlara hak vermek zorunda kalirsiniz sanki bunu yasayan siz degilmissiniz gibi.
d. Resimlerinizin anlamlarini sormaya baslayabilirler
e. Daha da kotusu resimlerinizi yorumlamaya kalkisabilirler ve siz onlari dinleyip cevap mi vereyim ayip olmasin diye sinir olup durursunuz ya da kesip atarsiniz konuyu. Onlar da sizin antipatik, kendisini birsey sanan, halkin diline inemeyen, iletisim sorunlari olan, ise yaramaz kacik,katil diye sifatlandirabilirler.
f. Sadece hava atmak ugruna ressam dediginizi dusunenler bile olabilir. Soylemeseler de siz bazen, o kisinin kafasinin icinde bunu dusunup dusunmedigini dusunursunuz.

9. Yalnizsinizdir.

10. Tanidiklariniz en zor gunlerinizde -maddi ve manevi acidan- size destek olacaklari yerde.
a. Ben sana dedim resimle dogru durust bir hayat kurulamayacagini
b. Bana guzel bir resim yapabilir misin? Su duvara asmak istiyorum, ama guzel olsun, soyle manzara falan –aslinda hic gormemistir ne tip resimler yaptiginizi ancak kafasindaki guzeli dusunerek sizin onun tipkisini resmedeceginizi dusunuyordur- Bu nasil olacaksa?
c. Ayip olmasin diye bir resim yapiyorsaniz bu insanlar icin eger, yaptiginiz resmi gorduklerinde buyuk ihtimalle hoslarina gitmez yine de guzel birseyler ya da ilginc birseyler soylemeye calisirlar ve siz bunun farkindasinizdir

11. Belki de hayatinizi aptal bir objenin karsisinda gecirdiginiz icin git gide daha da hassaslasirsiniz

12. Insanlar sadece ressam oldugunuz icin sizden ya bir cilgin ya da ilginc biri olmanizi beklerler. Ve bu sizi gercekten cildirtir. Her yaptiginiz hareketten sonra ressam damgasi yersiniz.

13. Etrafinizda bir suru sacma sapan insan vardir her zaman.

14. Acilislara gidip sarhos olursunuz ki bu aslinda ressam olmak icin varolan tek sebep belki de ama hep en sonuna kalirsiniz acilisin ve her acilis bir gun bitecektir. Karamsarliga kapilirsiniz.

15. Eger gercekten kendinize has bir tarziniz varsa cevrenizdeki ressamlar sizi kopya etmeye baslarlar, bunu gorunce kizsam mi, aglasam mi, gulsem mi diye ne yapacaginizi sasirirsiniz.

16. Butun gun, butun gece, butun hafta, calisip didinip ortaya bir resim cikardiktan sonra insanlar ona en fazla 2 dakika ayirirlar bakmak icin ve bu normaldir cunku siz de baska ressamlarin resimlerine daha uzun bir sure bakmazsiniz.

17. Butun hayatinizi resme verdikten, aradan 30 yil gectikten sonra bile aslinda hicbirsey ogrenmedim diyebilirsiniz. Hatta resmi unuttugunuzu dusunursunuz ki bu dogrudur. Resim resim yapilarak unutulur.

18. Gercek bir ressamsaniz zaten hastasinizdir aslinda, cunku resim yapmadiginizda, resmi dusunmediginizde, ruyalarinizda, otobuste, yatakta, yemek yerken, alisveriste resim yaparsiniz aslinda.

19. Her zaman, yaptiginiz isin bir an olsun bile iyi oldugunu dusunuyorsaniz mutlaka biri ortaya cikip hayallerini cop kutusuna atacaktir.

20. Resmi birakmayi dusunursunuz belki de, her gun, her saat, ama bilirsiniz aslinda onu birakamayacaginizi ve bu size muthis bir basagrisi ve yorgunluk verir.

21. Resmi birakirsaniz depresyona girersiniz. Artik birakamazsiniz cunku her zaman bir yerlerde bir resim gorup acaba devam etseydim neler olurdu diye dusunursunuz.

22. Atolyenizde calistiginiz zaman hep birseyler mi kaciriyorum disarida diye dusunursunuz ve kendini oraya remin ta icine hapsolmus hissedersiniz.

23. Atolyenizde olmadiginiz zaman, hep, acaba atolyede resim mi yapiyor olsaydim belki de iyi isler cikardi, tembel miyim acaba diye suphelere kapilirsiniz.

24. Sizin olmaniz yetmiyormus gibi bir de bu isin icinde sanat elestirmenleri, galericiler, muze mudurleri, kuratorler, dergiler, sanatseverler, ev sahipleri, atolye sahipleri vardir.Ve herkes bu isten bir pay istiyordur kendine. 

25. Bir resim sattiginizda odediginiz sosyal sigortalar parasi yetmiyormus gibi, bir de sattiginiz resimden buyuk bir payi devlete hibe etmek zorunda birakirlar sizi. Siz hem fabrikator hem iscisinizdir ki bu sonsuz bir savas manasina gelir aslinda.

26. Hep birileri bakacaktir resimlerinize ama siz gercekten de aslinda onlari birileri gorsun istemezsiniz. Utanirsiniz. 

27. Resimlerinizi kendiniz pazarlamaya kalkissaniz yapamazsiniz. Kendinizi fahise gibi hissedersiniz. Ve eger pazarlama yapmazsaniz bir yerlere gelemezsiniz bunu da cok iyi bilirsiniz. 
28. Sizi gercekten destekleyen insanlar varsa bile , bir gun beni birakip gidecekler mi acaba diye korkuya kapilirsiniz.

29. Resimlerinizi bir yerden diger yere cogu zaman hammal gibi tasimaniz gerekir ki bu cok yorucu birseydir.

30. Elestirmeye baslarsiniz ki bu insanlarin pek hosuna gitmez.

31. Baskalarinin islerinden hoslanmazsiniz. Eger hoslanirsaniz kendinizi kotu hissedersiniz, bu dunyada sadece sizin olmadiginizin farkina varip garip bir korkuya kapilirsiniz.

32. Basarisiz bir ressamsaniz –piyasa anlaminda soyluyorum- insanlar size kaybeden bir ressam gozuyle bakarlar ki kendinizi asagilanmis hissedersiniz. Arada sirada bir seyler satarsaniz durum hicbirseyi degistirmez, elinize gecen parayla kiranizi ve yeni malzemenizi odersiniz. Ve hep orta halli bir ressam kalip basarili ressamlara ozenir durur onlardan nefret edersiniz. Ve eger gercekten basariliysaniz, cogu zaman elestirilir, durumunuz icin yetersiz gorulur, gunde 12 saat de calissaniz bile birileri sizi sadece sansli biri gibi gorur ve yeralti dunyasinda hep nefretle anilip, sacma sapan dedikodulara malzeme olursunuz, isteginiz kacar, nefret ettirirler sizi resimden ve ne kadar cok yukselirseniz o kadar da aptal insanlarla karsilasip hayattan ver bu dunyanin anlamindan suphe duymaya baslarsiniz.

33. Resimleriniz oldugunuz zaman deger kazanir, yasadiginiz zaman hergun oldugunuzu kimse bilmez veya bilmek istemez

34. Bir galeriniz olmasi gerekmektedir.

35. Onemli sanat fuarlarinda bulunmak gerekir

36. Zaman zaman insanlarin kiclarini yalamak gerekir.

37. Neden normal insanlar gibi olamadim diye dusunup aglar sizlayip normal insanlari gordugunuzde iyiki boyleyim ama hep birseyler ters gidiyor diye dusunup sorunu kendinizde ararsiniz. Yani durumunuzdan rahat rahat sikayet bile edemezsiniz.

38. Dunyanin en unlu ressami bile olsaniz sonucta hep ayni seyin karsisindasinizdir. Boslugun, buyuk bir boslugun karsisinda ve atolyenizde her zaman birileri olamaz.

39. Atolyenizde yalnizsinizdir, sikilirsiniz. Ama birileri sizi ziyaret ederse sizi rahatsiz ettiklerini dusunursunuz ve sizofreni hastaliginin temel adimlarini atmaya baslarsiniz.

40. Oldukten sonra mutlaka bir sokaga adinizi koyarlar sanki cok gerekiyormus ve butun hayatinizi bunun icin harcamissiniz gibi. Sanki siz olum yatagindan onlara tesekkur edecekmissiniz gibi. Ve bu sokaga iseyenler, kopeklerini sicmaya cikaranlar, cinayetler olur. Isin en kotu tarafi siz bir oluyken asla karar veremezsiniz sokaktan kimlerin gelip gecebilecegine.

41. Kendisine ressam diyen insanlardan nefret etmeye baslarsiniz, kendinize ressam demekten utanirsiniz.

42. Yaptiklarinizi begenmeye baslarsaniz bitmissiniz demektir, begenmeme durumunu daha onceden belirtmistim zaten.

43. Boyalari parayla satin alip onlari bitirmemeye ozen gosterip, neden bir renk icin para odediginizi dusunebilirsiniz. Ve boylece icinizde pek de acik olmayan bir nefret dogar disariya karsi.

44. Onemli biri oldugunuz dusunmezsiniz aslinda, birileri size onemli demeye basliyorsa neden bana bunu diyor diye dusunursunuz, resimleriniz cok begeniliyorsa hep acaba bir sorun mu var resimlerimde diye dusunup, resimlerinizi kimse begenmediginde ise sessiz kalip uzulursunuz.

45. Insanlar sizin bir seyler satan adam oldugunuzu dusunebilirler ama siz hicbir sey satmazsiniz aslinda. Tek istediginiz birilrinin sizin islerinizi satin almasidir aslinda. Bu da ayni sey degildir kesinlikle.

46. Birileri resimlerinizi salonlarina koyarlar hep. Aslinda siz salona bir ickili yemek icin davet edilmeyi tercih edersiniz.

47. Buyuk hayallere kapilirsiniz zaman zaman, hayal kirikliklarina ugrarsiniz. Eger hayallere kapilmiyorsaniz zaten bitiksinizdir.

48. Donup dolasip hep ayni yere gelirsiniz.

49. Cogu sanatsever sizinle sanat hakkinda konusmak ister ama siz sanatin icine edersiniz veya etmek istersiniz. Kimse sizden futbol hakkinda konusmanizi istemez entellektuel ortamlarda, konusursaniz kendinizi onlarin karsisinda buyuk bir tehlikeye atmissinizdir.

50. Arkanizdan hic bitmeyecek kadar cok konusulur. Kulaklariniz cinlar surekli.

51. Birileri hep gercekci bir portre cizmenizi ister, siz basta istemezsiniz. Biraz heveslenip basladiysaniz eger, sonucu goreceksinizdir. “Bu portre bana benzemiyor ki!” gibi cevaplar alirsiniz sanki siz orada hic bir emek sarfetmemissiniz gibi.

52. Isiklari sondurdugunuzde koca bir hicle ugrasmis oldugunuzu dusunursunuz, ortada resim diye birsey kalmaz.

53. Resimleriniz zamanla zarar gorur ve bu sizin hosunuza gider, koleksiyoncular haric. Bu kucuk bir fikir ayriligi bile olsa endiselendirirler sizi.

54. Belli araliklarla, adi belli olmayan, kimsenin aciklayamayacagi bir krize girersiniz.

55. Bu krizden ciktiginizda, krizin geri donecegini cok iyi bilirsiniz, bunalirsiniz.

56. Kotu bir resim yaptiginizda aslinda kimseye bir zarari olmasa da , cevreye zarari olan bir siyasetciden bile daha kotu elestirilere maruz kalirsiniz. Onca emekten sonra sadece aptal bir elestirmenin tek elestirisiyle butun yaptiklariniz cope atilabilir butun bir hayat boyu insanlarin gozunde. Umursamamaya calisirsiniz.


57. Kirk-kirk bes yasina kadar hep genc sanatci olarak kalir pek saygi gormezsiniz. Elli yasinizda da zaten isiniz de gucunuz de hemen hemen bitmistir.


58.Ozellikle son yillarda, sizi cagdas isler yapmiyor diye suclayabiliyor olabilirler sadece inatla resim yaptiginiz ve resim yapmayi sevdiginiz icin. Siz de hala hayatta oldugunuz icin, ben zaten cagdasim diye dusunursunuz normal olarak ve bu cagda yapilan herhangi bir isin zaten cagdas oldugunu dusunursunuz. Bunu soyleyenler fotograftan bahsederler cagdas diye ki, fotograf eskidir aslinda hem mantik olarak, figurseldir. Video derler ki sanki video yeni bir seymis gibi. Video bindokuzyuz altmislarda ortaya cikmistir ve su ana gore neredeyse bir elli sene gecmis ve kendisini bu kadar zamanda tuketebilme basarisini gosterebilmistir. Siz de acaba bu insanlarin hic mi beyni yok diye dusunup onlar adina bila uzulebilirsiniz, kendi adiniza uzuldugunuz yetmiyormus gibi.

59.Yaptigim resim belki birilerinin ustune duser tipki bir apartman gibi diye bos 
umutlara kapilabilirsiniz. 

60.Ne bu dunyaya ne de obur dunyaya inanirsiniz artik.

61.Tum bunlardan sonra sorunlu birisi olur, buna bir son verme ihtiyaci duyarsiniz. 

62.Bir gun boyle bir yazi yazma geregi hissedersiniz ve bu maddeleri belki de sonsuza kadar cogaltabileceginizi hisseder, gecenin bir saati yorgun duser ve yaziyi bu karamsar maddeyle kapatir, yarin tum bu maddelerin tam icine bir kez daha dalarsiniz. Farkinda olmak sizin sorununuzdur




Volkan Diyaroglu
Aralik 2006-12-23
Paris

¿donde estoy yo?




Cogemos cualquier punto y desconocido de cualquier trozo del tiempo. Y le unimos con otro punto para crear una línea. Y seguimos con la misma acción con los otros puntos desconocidos. Al final todo este acción nos lleva a algo totalmente desconocido también. Tampoco se puede decir que eso es algo, claro,
nada se puede explicar.
Poco a poco la luz se va y no queda nada en el medio.
Las reglas no son claras, pero quizás sus existencias son posibles.
La distancia entre el punto que yo estoy al otro es 0.
Esto es inexplicable. 
Y cuanto hablamos mas sobre eso, se volará hacia el espacio, se hará sonido y se desaparecerá.
Quizás lo que existe es el momento o el espacio, pero no el espacio especifico. 
El espacio es el espacio y no puede ser mas.
Y el tiempo, cuando hablo sobre el, se quita de mis manos, de mi conciencia dolida.
Finalmente todo eso no puede explicar mi pintura.
Yo tampoco puedo explicarme todo eso. 



volkan diyaroglu
2005

https://volkandiyaroglu.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/1012/