Undeniably Gögel is a painter in the German tradition (which is a much longer and richer tradition than most Dutch art viewers seem to realise).
Painting itself in Europe is an act in which tradition weighs heavily on one’s shoulders.
So if you really want to be a good painter you must take that for granted, whether you like it or not.
Gögel seems to be well aware of that; he survives it and builds his own work on top of it.
His work has very much matured since it was last seen in this city about a decade ago.
Some echoes of the Neuen Wilden of around 1980 are clear in this exhibition, also in his combining of the figurative and the abstract.
But there is a big difference as the sense of life has changed radically since the 1980s.
Today we live in a post-almost-everything culture in which Gögel has chosen to fly the banners of painting, not to be stubbornly traditional or to vehemently jump on the brakes of time, but clearly because it is (probably at least to him) the self-evident way of expression.
The German aspect is especially in the constant battle between content and composition, between imagination and expression.
There are some exceptionally fine portraits on show, but the exhibition on the whole has a lot more to offer, so it is warmly recommended as far as i’m concerned.
A line could be described as the tiniest visible row of particles.
These particles can be anything, they may even be words.
As such a line is both an abstract idea and an abstract visualisation of that idea.
Seven artists from Hong Kong (Tsang Chui Mei, Jamsen Law, Julvian Ho, Lee Suet Ying, Vee Leong, Li Tzimei and Tap Chan) have made a show at Quartair in which different philosophies about the line come together in one installation.
The works – some of which are being developed on the spot – can be seen individually, but the curator Jamsen Law and the other artists clearly stress the idea of one multidimensional installation with drawing, painting, light and sound.
It is an interesting show but a very short running one, tomorrow (Saturday) will be its last day.
The exhibition was first staged last year in Hong Kong, and will later this year be on show in Berlin.
The in-between is probably the biggest part of the World as we see it.
Even bodily contact only seems to underscore that fact.
However, seen as a spiritual space the in-between is a vast reservoir of emotion, thinking, feeling and the unknown between the self and the rest of the world; the in-between is in fact the immaterial Other.
As an artist you are able to materialise these aspects and as such make a vessel for these thoughts.
Joran van Soest (1994), who graduated last year from the arts academy in ‘s-Hertogenbosch, is quite literally working on a vessel at the moment: a zeppelin.
Of course since the Hindenburg disaster civil aviation with zeppelins has come to a dramatic standstill, but the idea of a big ship steadily ploughing the waves of the enormous aerial ocean that surrounds our planet appeals to the imagination, as it does to Van Soest’s.
Whether he will succeed in making an airworthy airship may be doubtful, but that is not really important.
The spin-off of the project, materialising things, physical experimenting in and with the Other will probably be its main result.
As the title implies, the works on show all have a strong sense of place, which results in a kind of inner landscapes, cityscapes and architectural interiors.
Zoete is the only one who explicitly depicts human beings in his landscapes, which seem to be very simple, especially compared to Cornelissen’s and Smits’ works.
However, that simplicity is deceptive as the concepts of his works are extremely balanced, such that there is no place for hidden details, but plenty of room for interpretation.
His figures and animals are very lively and his compositions could be described as both melodic and rhythmic.
Cornelissen’s works, monumental as they sometimes may be, are probably best described as inner spaces.
Knowledge and culture often play a referential role.
Even linear perspective itself retains its more or less intellectual aspect as if inherited from Renaissance artists.
Apart from two sculptures, Smits shows some impressive drawings, most of them cityscapes.
It might be enticing to some to refer to Smits’ empty cities and buildings as dystopias, but i think his architectural capriccios show buildings as individuals and cities as living organisms, which is a much wider scope than the trendy dystopia idea.
Generally it is a very full and brilliant show.
Be sure to take your time when visiting as the works are full of detail.