Andrej Medved

˝The Painting as ˝Paysage˝ – The Architecture of the Soul˝

The titles of the paintings from the monochrome /primeval/ darkness and Void – Nika’s “black paintings” talk /to us/ about some fundamental and transcendent – sublime – negativity, mystery of the dark mirror, that is “never, always, and already seen”, of whose “adultery” /trompe l’oeil/ i.e. the screen that displays the hidden horizon of the appearance of the image, in the background, from the background, Void, of a beloved object /del Amor/, which is obscured by a black sun. This is, in fact – in prudentia – a simulacrum, a miracle that swills the area of black paint into ecstasy. Where does this black sun come from? From which galaxy shine its visible and invisible, heavy rays, that push me /according to Kristeva/ into the ground, into denial and into muteness?

The secret comes from the interior, from a remembrance /Erinnerung/ towards the outside, “discarded” in the sense of réjéter, on the side of possibility of something that can still be endured, that is still bearable and can /still/ be thought and felt. It requires some sort of fundamental attention from us that would arouse unrest and fascinate our desire for the image. It is protected by an absolute, which is in the same moment – simultaneously – a /call/ing, “calling” and a reflection that inhabits this mystery, this interior in principle. In this absolute, thoughts are bound by affects, which do not have, to be exact, absolutely no object. But nevertheless Nika’s images are about /some/ Thing, a primeval rudimentary structure, which is actually the Thing of painting. And this is a “tangible” object-game / ob-jeu / with the object which is the correlate of the painting and the painter, as well as being unique and autonomous at the same time.

La peinture est l’expression du peintre. Y. Michaud: De Kooning, Paris, 1984

MORE

Nika’s more recent “paysages” can be classified as pictorial screens, where creativity is at work in the search of a new modern landscape that has been long lost. Melancholy can be felt everywhere at the fundamental loss of the former pictorial object. Both the painter and the viewer experience the /slow/ed rhythm of the revived landscape depiction. But we also notice the highest metaphysical clarity in the approach of the depicted landscape, a primary concern at its loss in modernist painting. The painting tells us that we do not yet know how to lose, that are not yet ready to renounce the depiction of landscape. For the painter, its disappearance represents a modernist experience which she can easily relinquish. Her landscape is therefore not imitative, but a brilliant and at the same time fragile visual illusion, an idealization of love and a melancholy fervour. Its creativity is therefore not a traumatic mania in any way, but an approximation, recognition of the void, which the image of the landscape still evokes.

The chromatic charge on the canvas shows the lack of lost and almost forgotten content. Hence the content, subject, message of the work remain a mystery to us and to the painter, who is in no way torn between the desire to paint landscapes and the abstract, abstracted themes in modernist painting. Despite all, the artist is now resolute in her decision to paint “psychic landscapes”, in which she is now led by a primal internal effect, which are: experience and emotion. These paintings are no longer daydream, that is to say: the regressive internal daydream at the core loss of the painting object, but the infinitely alive pulse of the image. Therefore, it would be difficult to argue that the artistic approach and visual expression are reduced in principle, just the opposite: in no way do they devalue the content-message of the canvas, but enrich it with pleasure, delight, which now lead the artist’s hand. Nika reconstructs the originality of /primeval/ forms and the illusion of the premodernist landscape by creating a visual language, which does not replace realistic objects, but combines pictorial signifiers with impulsive rhythms in the application of paint. Her significant psychic force now joins every structure, all pictorial – object forms – with the subject, that is with the painter, thus preventing the separation of the painted image from nature. The melancholy in her works is otherwise also tied to the past, that is to say to the loss of landscape in modernism (in this sense it seemed that this topic has become exhausted and obsolete), and yet the artistic entity remains true to her, without the possibility of significantly changing or revolutionising the situation. The mental content of the painting is otherwise also filled with a hypertrophic past of the landscape, but the artist is already capable of giving it a renewed sense of meaning. This internalization, this evasion while forgetting nature as an object in contemporary post/post/modernist painting is very much evident, yet the negativity – deficit, forgetting of imitative pictorial processes – is replaced by the positive, postmodern romantic experience that leaves itself open to an emotional rhythm. Where imaginary, existentialist activity is at work, and gesture, condensation holds prominence, and the former discursivity and narration of the image are defeated.