Kazimir's-cat-by-Stellt-R.NYC-2015

(2) SMGO

If realistic pictures of great execution were described as paintings that only luck voice, the superflowing plastic Gleitzeit painting only luck the tune.

The attempt to communicate visual art through speech is a continuation of an art experiment that started as long ago in ancient Egypt, in archaic Greece, in medieval art where scrolls come out of the mouths from figures to show what they were saying.

When Jaisini paints straight on canvas without preliminary sketch he is close to a transitory moment of creation that becomes an apogee of human effort when an artist doesn’t premeditate art but pushed himself to make future visible not yet existing in any other form or ready sketch.

The artist’s mind is a container of his picture’s idea.

At this moment of art making many factors contribute to the execution of the painting. Questioning this many times anyone will hardly get the final answer because of the nature of inquiry to explain the moment of high inspiration. How a man could paint complex paintings that allow endless topics to write about? Meanwhile Jaisini paints in short time duration of few hours bringing out something never seen before and of immediate production, not the result of prepared studies and sketches.

Watching Jaisini speaking I try to see anything that could connect to his art.

Language of gestures and words could explain the artist’s language of color and imagery. Jaisini seems to be tense and relaxed simultaneously.

His human condition overcomes regular norms of life. He is instantly analytical and frivolous and like a great actor doesn’t need a mask or a make-up to enforce his transition in a role. For him paintings are like roles where he can explore ambiguities through faces of the images and linear plastic. A skillful master he in fact never contributed time to polish his skills.

The mastery comes from another source. The freshness of his approach maybe explained by the authentic method and refusal to overdo or over practice that often is an enemy of creativity substituting productivity for inspiration. An artist who is a mass producer of his one discovery is not an artist but a craftsman manufacturing artifacts automatically. Jaisini had never repeated himself in predictable way. The artist pointed out that he can’t repeat any of his painting when he might even intent to adding that it is too complicated and impossible to remember the way it was once painted, the layer of colors, the spontaneity of the line is unattainable for repetition.

I was interested to create a connection with thoughts and visual subjects of complexity because of their strong potential to communicate.

Communication with these paintings has resulted in desire to write and even to start a new art of imagination.

I think that Jaisini’s entanglement of lines and thoughts, colors and images had trapped me. The plasticity of line is something programmed to catch the attention. When you think that you just caught the line it runs away as flirtatious suitor. The plastic configuration of line that allures you with superflowing outlines is as potent in words and in vision as for instance a succulent fruit, a seductive nude, and aroma of flowers. The plasticity invites you to puzzle out hidden content as if it was a personal secret.

You might not stop even if it takes time as in my case after my curiosity was never satisfied with finding explanation.

First I wanted to see the pictures and with time I was seeing in them more and more. But when I tried to establish meaning of the paintings the things I saw were changing. With time I returned to the stage of pure seeing but it was not the same as if I was already a different person. Apparently the mind is so avid to learn and find meanings that it will go on searching and integrating as if it is hungering for new all the time ready to devour new food for mind and uncover mysteries. Based on cognitive psychology people perceive reality and think through clusters of meanings. The style of Jaisini is based on creation of such clusters with information for the eye, mind, and instinct.

The picture offers certain clues and the picture’s puzzle adjusts to viewer’s capacity of understanding and seeing the idea in connection between reality and puzzle-like artistic formula.

The coherence of the picture can be reached by different approaches either through thinking, or seeing, by intuitive comprehension, or knowledge.

Jaisini’s line clusters do not claim to construct reality. They aim to present us with alternative connection to reality. And it is a self-conscious exercise of seeing but not believing, believing but not feeling, feeling but not knowing. The artist motivates us to experience many levels of this self-conscious exercise. Jaisini places more force of signification on linear spontaneity such as free flow, causality of the line that compete with conceptual activity of meaning creating that is a brain teasing game.

It was set up by the artist to bring out such a creation that when you are tired of looking you can think and read. The special achievement of Jaisini is his mastery over causality and non-tension of line that is a great tool to cultivate subconscious comfort and willingness to further understanding.

The original impulse of Show Must GO On creation drove the artist’s hand to build the meaning and idea, but at the same time the overall compositional elements of this painting are hardly explainable or meaningful.

It seems that this picture is a contest of subject matter against pure form, pure spatial balance with only purpose of space elaboration. Jaisini seems to consciously use his emotion of sorrow, emotion from musical stimulation to find unusual combinations of images, colors, and linear patterns. The painting’s ensemble of images is the most surprising in relation to title and original motive. The central main image of man in SMGO is being pulled by two opposing forces of creation and destruction, most likely self-destruction if read into the picture’s context. There is also a complex subject of rape that is presented in the painting.

In our minds and epoch rape symbolic seems to completely loose its original artistic context when the heroic rape was produced during the 15th through 18th centuries in pursuit of marital doctrine and to serve as erotic stimulation, sometimes to assert political authority.

Jaisini’s impulse to suggest a “heroic” rape from comes from an ingrain artistic reaction to the outside world as eternal antagonistic power to creativity. In such art as of Jaisini the symbolic of sexual nature transforms into yet another level of meaning. In classical art sexual subjects and images of rape were meant to justify violence against woman in a high fashion of submissiveness to husband and sacrifice for family. In Gleitzeit art presence of sexual symbolic is disinherits social quality.

It is a tool for creating figurative contrasts and points of higher sensibility.

At the same time imagery inherit a history of meaning in art and therefore can emit additional aspect of possible meaning. In that capacity Jaisini’s paintings are magnets for the mind. The line reminds a lasso that traps the prey. Jaisini’s visual manner of creating a tangled line derives from the deep-seated character of a hunter who has to capture his subject and tighten it up. But the picture’s composition is never strained. It is at the moment of creation and capture. The prey that could be the artist’s thought of an image is not restricted to one meaning, one vision. It is on a brink of new development. Just as interpretation of the picture.

Tradition in art to portray scenes of hunting traces back to ancient Greek but is transformed now in purely formal development of line that is not easily comprehended because in the art of Jaisini there is no figurative scenes of hunt or pursuit, no heroes with role ranks.

In Show Must Go On a central figure of a man non-ambiguously enters a figure of submissive person. It looks like a “heroic” rape scene but not as a classical representation of a god or a hero chasing a woman or a youth.

The painting doesn’t represent metaphorically sexual desire of Greek art’s sample where sexual relations were transformed in a metaphor of hunt.

This version is easily eliminated as the scene in Show Must Go On is homoerotic and the violated figure is not of youth or of an attractive appearance. As in many traditional images of “heroic” rape in the one in SMGO no one suffered great harm. A classical happy ending of marital story doesn’t apply to the concept of Show Must Go On that puts attacker in a position of victim. He is a victim of a personal creative urge of an artist who sacrifices something not known to majority of people shown by the unusual development when the raper in turn is violated by a portrayed predator (a sword-fish) who enters from the back and aims at his heart.

The image of submissive man might take on a role of bride who doesn’t resist the event of rape. His role of a silent victim seems to be a bigger burden then a role of transgressor or the rapist. Jaisini creates unique transformations in each of his work. The singer is this central man-rapist is not accidentally depicted as athletically build one to highlight a sensation of attractiveness worthy of assault. The transgressor is more worthy the assault then his victim. The prototype of a singer, Freddie Mercury, is not athletic.

The central man’s visual image doesn’t correspond to the initial inspiration.

The transformation changes percept of things when the prototype of the singer originally is not the body builder type.

The victimization by creative process is a complex subject taking in account the process of spontaneous painting style. In the works of Jaisini there are no pornographicall images, but sensuality is intense. It is achieved by the curvilinear plastic entrapping with line’s contact points accented by special symbolism making sensuality tangible without realistic portrayals.

One of the painting’s concepts is to show a victim of creative urge.

The mechanism of the offered role change is even more complex taking in account process of painting when the artist starts his work from a fleeting vision from mind finishing his painting in one session. It means that Jaisini executes inner thought and formulates it even before he fully understands what is done. That may explain mastery of the fresh and brisk approach of painting and unusual associations.

The main image of male in the painting who is rushing forward seems to be a deliberately provocative indication of an intercourse in bizarre set up. But the figure of aggressor is vulnerable by the depiction of a sward-fish attack.

Is this predator is a truer portrayal of maleness than of the central man meant to be masculine and aggressive but renewed in meaning with additional context of victimization. This image is going through immediate unusual change into a new type of androgen.

The man (creator) has attractiveness of female as recent popular incarnations of the androgen images in popular culture singers with strong sexual charge such as Alice Cooper, Freddie Mercury, Robert Plant.

The expression of sexual ambivalence in the artist establishes a fascinating game that exploits the confusion surrounding the male and female roles.

 

 

 

Done