ERIC ANDERSEN, KORAY KANTARCIOĞLU, ALLAN KAPROW, SERHAT KİRAZ, TEOMAN MADRA, SÜMER SAYIN, ALEKSANDAR SRNEC, AHMET ÖKTEM, YAĞIZ ÖZGEN, PINAR ÖĞRENCİ, JOCHEN PROEHL, WOLF VOSTELL
August 19 – September 13, 2014
August 19, Tuesday
18:00 – 20:00
Kuad Gallery kindly invites you to Autumn 2014 Opening Exhibition to review the appearance and the characteristics of the relations between art and technology of our times.
The fact of technology, which had started with mankind’s discovery of nature and ability to sculp and reshape a piece of stone, still prevails with the development of computers and its related technologies designed to replace the human brain and senses. As curiously observing the preceding process and relations between our imagination, creativity, passion for innovation and the opportunities initiated by today’s technology, we see that the mankind has been using his capabilities not only to discover new technologies but also, utilizing those technologies, to accomplish new products. And yet, the question of whether those limitless products and visual objects, the ‘technical images’ as named by Villem Flusser, which serve to reformat our minds and senses, are to be conceived as art objects or not, still remains as an important issue to be answered.
Reciting Lusser’s words as of 1980: ‘They are instruments for turning the messages of texts imaginable. Texts were originally aimed against images, in order to turn them transparent for our concrete lived experience, with the aim of freeing humanity from hallucinatory madness. Technical images have a similar aim: they drive against texts with the aim to turn them transparent for our concrete lived experience, in order to free humanity from conceptual madness. The gesture to codify and decipher technical images takes place at a level that is one step away from the level of writing and two steps away from the level of traditional images. This is the level of post-historical consciousness.’
To decide whether an object is merely an end-product of technology or an art object that utilizes the technology is a question of a highly complicated production process and still remains to be an important issue. To decide if an object has been developed through a certain period of history of art, if it contains any messages and, lastly, whether we can define it as merely a decorative object or not, are the main questions waiting to be answered. Fussler’s post-historical consciousness approach provides a highly enlightening path to the explanation we seek for. If technology itself is defined as the essential apparatus of a product/image, that product/image should be considered and valued as a piece of art if and only if it comprehends all or at least some of the political, social, economical, cultural and philosophical messages and contexts. If not, if left devoid of any of those contexts or messages, that product/image is nothing but only a decorative item which has been produced by use of sheer technology, and serves no more than stimulating a drive just to consume which, in fact, is a human tendency initiated by the neo-capitalist system itself.
There are important differences between the daily routines of populations’ and artists’/designers’ conduct to technology. The nature of an artist’s or a designer’s use and conduct of technology is the expression of his/her personal perspective, his/her feeling of social responsibility or nature of his/her participation in politics. And a designer is the one who conducts his/her ability to utilize technology in order to create a better, more functional and an ecologically friendly environment for people.
With the recent exhibiton, the Kuad Gallery intends to contribute to the issue together with his artists and designers, who are thoroughly conscious of the domination and determination of neo-capitalist-technologies in Turkey’s political, economical and cultural structure, and who utilize those apparatus and processes in their paintings, photographs, videos and installations.
For more information: firstname.lastname@example.org
* Villem Flusser, “Our İmages”, Post History, Univocal, 2013, s.91.v.d.