the artwork of zenon gradkowski

click here to email zenon gradkowski

initial statement

In the early formation of these paintings the primarily interest was making semi-abstract figure paintings that were related to much body based work of the time. As the work progressed each form became minimal in comparison to earlier work, via colour reduction and eventual multiplication, allowing the paintings to achieve more in their own work and development.

In terms of art theory there was a combination of text on abstraction and the body informing the work. As the work moved on from these sources it began to occupy a territory of it's own that is still being explored.

The paintings now achieve more within themselves. There is an exploration of painting's artificial depth. More specifically there is interplay between the forms and how they create space. The sense of space used simple rules to create artificial depth. Just as the paintings started to adhere to these rules, they now bend those rules towards the necessity of reaching final outcome. However the search for a final outcome is a continuous loop.

The continuous search for a conclusion led towards influences outside the area of painting. Absorption, recycling and influence of culture and outside sources drive the work forward. Is the continuous search for a conclusion a search for a reality that like the conclusion cannot be reached?

a statement in the form of an email conversation

From: z.gradkowski@ntlworld.com
To: lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk
Subject: The Gradkowski Work.
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 14:05:08 +0100

Lazarus,

I was thinking about my work I have several ideas to run by you.

• Someone said I should use colour to bring more depth to the work. I feel that too much painting revels in colour I feel by being Grey my work is being factual. The work is being reliant upon itself by being grey, there is no hiding it has to work itself?
• Do you feel that there is a dialogue beween abstract and figurative going on?

Zenon

From: lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk
To: z.gradkowski@ntlworld.com
Subject: Re: The Gradkowski Work.
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 14:43:20 +0100

Hi Zenon,

With regards to colour, I think that a move back to full colour, similar to your previous work, would be a mistake at this stage. However I think there is a possibility for the gradual introduction of colour. When I was doing my Foundation Course in Art many years back, we had a module run by John Yeadon, a Fine Art lecturer at what is now Coventry University's School of Art. The exercise in this module was basically based around mixing "greys" which contained small amounts of colour - so we were mixing greys with a hint of blue, and greys with a warm red feel, etc. I think one of the aims of the exercise was to train us to see the subtle nuances of colour which are usually missed - to see the full spectrum of colour which actually makes up the surface of an object which the rest of the world simply labels as "red", "blue" or indeed "grey".

Anyway each of the "greys" we mixed initially looked plain grey on the palette, but when you put a mark of a red-grey next to a mark of blue-grey on a canvas then the differences were immediately obvious. I think that perhaps, rather than bursting into full technicolour, the way forward for your work is to experiment with minute differences between the greys that you use. Use hints of blue within a grey to push elements of the composition "back", and red-greys to bring elements to the foreground. Or any other use of colour theory.

Re. the dialogue between the figurative and the abstract: I'm not sure. I think that as the number of elements (be-tentacled bodies or whatever) in your paintings has increased then I've viewed them far more as figurative rather than abstract (compare the highly figurative piece here with one of my personal favourites here which seems less figurative). And returning to the subject of colour, I think that the introduction of colour would make the battle between abstract and figurative that goes on in your work, more ambiguous again. By that I mean that colour would bring forward the abstraction of your work, giving it a fighting chance against the present dominance of figuration.

Hope this helps

Cheers

Paul

From: z.gradkowski@ntlworld.com
Subject: Re: The Gradkowski Work.
Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 19:34:38 +0100

Paul,

Yes I feel that a gradual colouration is needed. I mixed some red in my grey today and it helped me move a difficult painting. I know about mixing greys with colour I will need to refresh on that one though.

I am too obsessed with music. At present that is what informs the work rather than any other present painting. I wonder if they need re-contextualisin???

Thinking about the abstraction issue I feel that as a form of painting it is far too theory dictated. I do not wish to make work that is overinformed by theory. To me abstraction needs a strong theoretical and conceptual commitment to work well. Theory has it's place in my work. I read in the forums, your reference of the High vs. Low art debate not being relevant to you and I think that with so much present work like mine treading comfortably between Abstract and Figurative. Now to me, it is not rely an issue I should dwell on too much.

Thanks,

Zenon

From: lazarus@lazaruscorporation.co.uk
Subject: Re: The Gradkowski Work.
Date: Sun, 02 May 2004 12:47:01 +0100

Hi Zenon,

I look forward to seeing the new piece with the red/grey.

I don't think you need to be worried about music informing your painting, in fact I think it's a good thing. As well as a startling number of contemporary artists whose work is informed by music, you can also look back to artists such as Wassily Kandinsky who explicitly linked his art with music.

I know what you mean about the overly-theoretical side of abstraction. It seems to me that in an attempt to validate abstraction as a legitimate form of painting, the theorists went overboard. The result was that what could have been an interesting and experimental artform has become shackled by the dull tedium and pomposity of conceptual theorists.

Re. High Art / Low Art - yes, I've never really been interested in maintaining the divide between the two. You can argue that Michelangelo and Raphael were just illustrators or interior decorators - they just produced illustrations on demand of biblical dogma, or decorated rich people's ceilings for them. This whole romanticised myth of the artist is just so much bullshit.

Cheers

Paul

more articles can be found in the articles section