Painting as a visual and three-dimensional artefact (Petr Dub)

I am trying to react on a formality of the process of perception, disposition and composition of the painting in my thesis. “Wide spectrum of historical connections along with automatic features of current historical epoch leads to the loss of ability to react on term „ painting” (doplnit anglický název). From the view of the adept on a degree of practising artist I think, that the author with the knowlegde of this fact is getting into a strange paradox. If perception of the painting became generally automatic, ergo leading to no fundamental change in the field of behaviour of percipient (viewer, expert public, artistic critique, etc.), and the author is still painting, an elemental question offers, why?

The existence of outputs of the art or for example the processional nature of creation not necessarily define its justness, nor quality. At sense of a fact, that the creation itself is able to become an automatic act, limits between perception of artistic creation as a high art (i. e. a field entering to public area and creating qualities) and „therapeutic” function („ the answer to pulsion”, manual discharge, auto – hygiene, development of talent, pursuit of social recognition, etc ..) are wiping for the author in principle.

One way of erosion of this „predefined experience of the tourist- spectator” is for me partial decomposition of merely common experience, that the all paintings hang on walls. In this work and intellectual practice and in undermentioned text I will try to unfold my main intention namely to fulfil the generally valid conception of painting as a three – dimensional and visual artefact with a new regard.

Directions for production of painting

We basically choose rectangular or square pattern from all of possible geometric patterns. We line the wooden blind frame obtained by setting up four special sticks, with various or same longitude, with canvas designed for grafic needs. We will reach unyielding and smooth stretch of the canvas by crosswise straining (we fix the canvas to the frame with cartridge tool or we can use hammer and nails to prevent the canvas to „crinkle”. The next step after straining is impregnation of the outside of the canvas (most often using acrylic or oily foundation paint) to create desirable foundation conditions for in advance selected medium of painting. It is better if we do the impregnation repeatedly in thinner layers after the first one gets dry ideally to avoid subsequent crazing. At last we will eliminate possible remaining asperity with soft abrasive paper to reach a perfectly smooth surface. Then we realize an artistic idea usually determined by our rate of talent, knowledge, taste, diligence and deep-rooted conceptions on this prepared canvas. The graphic product acquired this way, later serves as a mental picture in different physical, social or directly unrelated levels.

The resulting piece, wrought by our craft and collectedness is among others compound of the offer and demand. It is hard to expect from professional artist (a men lifelong solving inner dialogue of shapes, colours and their relations (ideally working in sense of responsibility of evolvoing qualities of his field …), that he will consciously or unconsciously exclude the target group of spectators of his work from his calculation during the creation of his work. The springboard for determination of qualities of particular creative enterprise, suddenly isn’t encumbered only with searching of progression, precising of elegnace of the taste compared to the kitsch (and in historical period, when „ everything is allowed” in the art, still pending issue), background of the creation and purpose, but pretty with simple rebus whom is creative work intended to. If the logically offering thesis, that a painting serves first of all only to needs of its creator, would be accepted, nowhere in the world would be worth a rap sole public building gathering art. The orientation of our Western civilization as rectangular then easily provides one of the first clues of the look of the well publishable (displayable and salable) painting. It offers itself pretty simply to seek the theory of the golg cut in classically poor pattern of the shape of rectangle or square, despite the long-term non-use of classical portrait, landscape and other formats. Even revolutionary altitude of some paintings (accordind to walls) in last years, which ground plan reminds a sort of boxes, causes its authors and curators fairly big difficulties.bOur eye reacting on the flux of light sees them, but our reception of them isn’t still appropriately adpted, this shows the fact, that hardly any author doesn?t use a priori that newly found overlap of the multiplication of the effect of a picture by non formalistic paintwork just on its limit. Then what is the social aim of such pictures?

The Floater or else a piece with a lot of fathers and mothers

Does the painting serve espetially to fill space on the walls of buildings? Could be paintings just leant against the wall instead of being hung? Is the change of the typical form of the painting from square or rectangle able to invoke by the audience so fundamental discomposure of its character, that the it will subsequently gain more attention? How intensively and on the basis of which system is possible to handle the term painting, before its definition apodeictically becomes just criteria used for description of the object? The psychological background, on which we perceive for instance one square metre of yellow surface with the area of 100×100 cm compared to one square metre of yellow surface of 10×1000 cm does not change during direct observation of the work. However it changes nothing on our actual reception of the matters processed like this at the same time. At first I decided to step aside from schematic conception of the classical method in my work – the canvas choicely enlacing the shape of the frame. Then I used a various designed asymmetry achieved by forming hard identifiable items embedded or created below the surface of the canvas to emphasize three-dimesional factor. The process of stretching the canvas, searching a particular pattern, diagonal or vertical composition, even for instance the way to adequate consequentiality against the coincidence found during the creation, often covers with the procedure of a creation of the common painting. But even just cuttings from manufacturing of those works, which for me were from the very beginning defined as major, became an integral part of stimulation for other. I found myslelf in solving another questionsby smashing the scheeme of “rectangle/square” though , namely adequate paintings for instance an object sized 230x15x2O cm slightly ball-shaped. I resisted to keep lined objects in their minimlaist non-conflicting greyness of the canvas, first of all because of my intention to work more on something what I take as a painting, not just an object (hence the used material). If the perspective is a geometric transformation, consisted in the projection of a three – dimensional space into the two – dimensional one (straight surface), it is very interesting for me to watch, what happens when I do simple steps toward visual negation (confusion) of this prescripitve experience.


The advantage of paintings over the words is that they let the social formed understanding to approximate to the direct understanding otherwise the primary perception. The pieces of knowledge that they relay, are more real, more immediate and reach greater depths and effect. “(Paul Johnson, The Enemies of society).” I tried to extricate from at least one of the social conventions controling the production and the consumption of paintings in my work. The convention which can be labeled by the term “a classical painting”. According to Jacquese Aumont the advertising painting works on common marking. In my work I couldn’t impress other cognitional signs than those, which are necessarily connected with the present perception of the artistic painting. I feel it as a logical givenness of the field that I study, but at the same time as its disadvantage. It is certainly possible to take the theme of the painting as a hree – dimensional and visual artefact with the help of a simple zen koan. I am orientating much less in this field than in the art though.

Into the universe of the technical paintings – William Flusser (OSVU, 2001)
The enemies of the society – Paul Johnson (Rozmluvy, 1999)
The art and the kitsch – Tomas Kulka (Trost, 2005)
The painting – Jacques Aumont (AMU, 2005)

Painting as a visual and three-dimensional artefact (Petr Dub, 2007)