After analyzing the general and differences of The Sower (Millet, van Gogh and others), I reviewed my approach to copying. Indeed, before, replication means one to one paint the work according to the example - this is a way of learning. But, if you use composition from a famous work, then you are considered as a thief. But after all, new work on the existing subject gives a new interpretation and perhaps a new reading of the old work.
During a trip to the mountains, I saw an incredible rhythm in the movement of skiers and associations led my mind to Deineka. In “Skiers”, speed is a race, but in my case, it’s not athletes, but people on vacation, enjoying snow and sports. Everyone is focused on himself, probably in his thoughts, but in the process of movement.
Skiers 1926 A.A. Deineka [Painting] At: http://www.deineka.ru/work-lyjniki1926.php (Accessed on 06.02.20)
But going further along the course and studying the theories of Deleuze, Derrida and comparing the work from a dialectical point of view, I decided to still take Deineka’s rhythms as a basis and combine them with my developments with projections (here you can check the Drawing 1 course ). Thus, I contrast the differences - that which is static and material (a painting on the wall) and that which is impermanent and moving. Such a solution for a museum or exhibition, but not for life. In this regard, the final version of the work with the elements of monotype.
I create one original sample from paints and then print it until the original sample disappears. This technique, in my opinion, perfectly reflects the philosophical question of repetition. So there was the first, true object, then it begins to be copied, it naturally deforms, changes, even if it is the same first template and as a result disappears. In its place, silhouettes of skiers come to the surface, or the real situation. To start a new repetition, this object must return, it must be recreated by someone again. But will it be the same, or will it be a new object?
Comments