__MAIN_TEXT__
feature-image

Page 1

Prostori krajolika


Nakladnik / Publisher: Hrvatsko društvo likovnih umjetnika / Croatian Association of Fine Artists Trg žrtava fašizma 16, 10 000 Zagreb, hdlu@hdlu.hr, www.hdlu.hr Za nakladnika / For the Publisher: Tomislav Buntak, Predsjednik / President Upravni odbor HDLU / Executive board of HDLU: Tomislav Buntak (predsjednik/president), Josip Zanki (dopredsjednik/vicepresident), Ida Blažičko (dopredsjednica/vicepresident), Fedor Fischer, Monika Meglić, Alen Novoselec, Melinda Šefčić Ravnateljica / Director: Ivana Andabaka Voditeljica galerije / Gallery coordinator: Martina Miholić Koncepcija izložbe / Exhibition concept: Igor Loinjak, Domagoj Sušac Predgovor / Preface: Igor Loinjak, Zlatko Kozina Likovni Postav / Exhibition set up: Igor Loinjak, Domagoj Sušac Urednici kataloga / Catalogue editors: Martina Miholić, Mario Matoković Grafičko oblikovanje kataloga / Catalogue design: Mario Matoković Fotografija reprodukcija radova/ Photographs of reproductions: Juraj Vuglač, Robert Matić, arhiv autora / Artist-contributed Prijevod i lektura / Translation and proof-reading: Ivan Horvat Tisak / Printed by: Cerovski Naklada / Edition: 200 ISBN 978-953-8098-39-0 CIP: zapis je dostupan na računalnome katalogu Nacionalne i sveučilišne knjižnice u Zagrebu pod brojem 001040408.  CIP: record is available on the computer catalogue of the National and University Library in Zagreb under 001040408. Organizator / Organiser:

Uz potporu/Suported by


Koncepcijska izloĹžba Prostori krajolika Galerija Prsten 4. - 25. rujna 2019.

Conceptual exhibition Landscape Spaces

Prsten Gallery September 4 - 25, 2019

3


Krajolik kao prostor imaginacije _ Igor Loinjak Pojam krajolika uzima se kao poznat i razmjerno jasan termin koji često koristimo u svojoj komunikaciji s drugima bez razmišljanja o nizu impliciranih značenja koja on u svom opsegu može podrazumijevati. Krajolik se u „Hrvatskom leksikonu“ izjednačuje s pojmom pejzaža koji se definira kao likovni i geografski fenomen. U likovnom se smislu pod pejzažom misli na sliku ili grafiku koja prikazuje krajolik nekoga područja, dok se u geografskom radi o prostoru koji se prema određenim prirodnim ili društvenim značajkama i izgledom razlikuje od drugih predjela. U kontekstu se geografije govori i o kulturnim pejzažima (krajolicima) koji su u jednom trenutku promijenili izgled zbog djelovanja ljudskog faktora. Don Mitchell pišući o pojmu krajolika navodi da mu moguća značenja ovog pojma raznolika. U svakodnevnoj upotrebi krajolik označava specifično uređenje ili odnos stvari (drveća, livada, kuća, tvornica, otvorenoga prostora itd.) u nekom kraju. Nadalje, krajolik se odnosi na izgled ili stil nekog kraja pri čemu se ne misli samo na vrstu kuća ili drveća i red koji među njima vlada, nego i na društvene i kulturne implikacije toga reda. U geografskoj se znanosti pod krajolikom podrazumijeva morfologija izgrađena od oblika i strukture nekoga predjela. Naposljetku, krajolik je i oblik reprezentacije u smislu umjetničkog prikaza ili složenoga sustava značenja. Sva ponuđena značenja1 riječi krajolik na različite načine otkrivaju određene segmente ovoga polisemantičkog pojma. Kada se govori o temi krajolika, za našu su temu osobito važni oni kulturni. Kulturni su krajolici postali bitna tema u geografskoj znanosti unutar koje se na prijelazu iz 19. u 20. stoljeće na njemačkom govornom području počinje razvijati posebna grana ove znanosti nazvana Kulturlandschaft ili kulturna geografija. Pojam Landschaft bio je također nejednoznačno korišten, a od početka se prošloga stoljeća koristio u dva značenja – u teritorijalnom koje je podrazumijevalo ograničeno područje ili regiju i u estetskom u kojem se mislilo na sliku, odnosno izgled nekog predjela i način na koji ga se percipira. U potrazi za povijesnim značenjima pojma geograf Kenneth R. Olwig zaključio je da Landschaft ne označava samo teritoriji ili sliku predjela, nego da se u teritorijalnom smislu odnosi i na društvene zajednice koje su živjele u nekom predjelu s vlastitim identitetom, tradicijom i običajnim pravima2. „Landschaft su činili“, navodi Laura Šakaja, „povezanost unutar zajednice, običajno pravo koje je definiralo tu zajednicu te prostor na koji se proširivao utjecaj zajednice i na kojem [je] vrijedilo njezino običajno pravo3. Pojam Landschaft-a je, dakle, u svom opsegu ispreplitao društvenu zajednicu, običaje i teritorij. Olwig nastavlja kako su i u estetskom smislu prvi prikazi krajolika, poput oni Brueghelovih s jedne strane prikazivali „logiku mjesta“, a s druge „logiku aktivnosti“ prenoseći 1 Mitchell, D. Krajolik, u: D. Atkinson, P. Jackson, D. Sibley, N. Washbourne (ur.), Kulturna geografija: Kritički rječnik ključnih pojmova, Disput, Zagreb 2008, 81 2 Olwig na temelju povijesnih značenja riječi u raznim jezicima ističe kako je krajokik u početku označavao „područje prokrčeno sjekirom i plugom koje pripada ljudima koji su ga prokrčili.“ Isto, 83-84. 3 Šakaja, L. Uvod u kulturnu geografiju, Leykam, Zagreb 2015, 64.

.

4


duh prostora te služeći kao podsjetnik na običaje i običajno pravo4. Iz toga, ali i niza drugih razloga, geografi su u sklopu kulturne geografije posebnu pažnju počeli posvećivati krajoliku (Landschaft-u u ovom posljednjem značenju) i pokušaju njegove definicije ne samo na temelju geografskih, odnosno materijalnih komponenti, nego iz rakursa kulture koristeći se pri tome suvremenim dosezima humanističkih znanosti. Iako začeta na njemačkom govornom području, rođenje se kulturne geografije kao subdiscipline vezuje uz anglosaksonsko podneblje, osobito uz ime američkoga geografa Carla O. Sauera. Sauer je u knjizi „Morfologija krajolika“ (1925.) isticao kako je krajolik areal (regija) sastavljen on fizičkih i kulturnih determinanti. Budući da je kultura bitan čimbenik preobrazbe krajolika, Sauer spominje i termin kulturnoga krajolika. Kulturni se krajolik u koncepciji njegove škole označavao kao konkretan skup složenih odnosa između zajednice i niza prirodnih fenomena. Šakaja piše kako se u Sauerovoj koncepciji kulturni krajolik određuje kao „oblikovan kulturni areal“ kojega „oblikuje ljudska prisutnost i djelatnost“. On je „rezultat preobrazbe prirodnoga krajolika pod utjecajem kulture“, odnosno „manifestacija kulture koja ga je stvorila i koja se sama mijenja tijekom vremena.“5 Krajolik ne čini samo ono što promatrač može vidjeti, zbiljski prostor oko njega. On, naime, ne uključuje svu cjelinu vidljivih elemenata, nego samo onaj dio vidljivoga koji se ističe i na temelju kojega nastaje generalizacija koju promatrač oblikuje na temelju pojedinačnih scena viđenoga. Budući da je generalizacija uvijek subjektivna, subjektivni je element pri promatranju i estetskom zoru krajolika neizbježan. Subjektivan zor, pak, karakterističan je i za umjetnički prikaz i doživljaj nekoga fizičkog ili mentalnog (imaginarnog) predjela. Subjektivan doživljaj krajolika i pokušaj njegova predočavanja u objektivnu realnost osobito je zanimao Johna Kirtlanda Wrighta i Williama Kirka koji su u svojim tekstovima sredinom prošloga stoljeća u području geografije potaknuli promišljanje o odnosu ljudske subjektivnosti i prostora. Wright je smatrao kako geografija treba proširiti svoje područje i na druge pristupe tumačenju krajolika kao što su putopisi, proza, poezija, umjetničke slike... Takav je oblik geografije nazivao geozofijom, a materijalni objekt njezina bavljenja nije trebao biti samo puki fizički prostor i njegove specifičnosti, nego osjećaj koji čovjek ima prema određenom prostoru. Paralelno je s Wrightovim promišljanjima na sličnom planu djelovao Kirk. On je smatrao da pojavna struktura krajolika ne ovisi jedino o fenomenima koji se percipiraju, već da veliku važnost ima i čovjek koji tu stvarnost motri. Iz toga je razloga u svoja promišljanja uveo pojam bihevioralnoga okoliša kojeg definira kao „psiho-fizičko polje unutar kojega su pojavne činjenice organizirane u uzorke ili strukture i dobivaju sadržaje ovisno o kulturnim kontekstima.“6 Zasluga je Wrighta i Kirka što su neovisno jedan o drugome unutar geografije potaknuli „proučavanje ljudske prostorne imaginacije i subjektivnosti u tumačenju okoliša.“7 4 5 6 7

Isto. Isto, 73. Isto, 87. Isto.

5


Velike je promjene u načinu tumačenja krajolika donio kulturni materijalizam nastao krajem sedamdesetih godina prošloga stoljeća u Velikoj Britaniji. Kulturni je materijalizam naglašavao povezanost kulturnoga krajolika s povijesnim okolnostima koje su ga obilježile kroz epohe, a među kojima su osobito važni društveni, ekonomski i politički elementi te odnos moći. Denis Cosgrove, jedan od glavnih predstavnika ovoga pravca, u knjizi „Društveni poredak i simbolički krajolik“ krajolik je definirao kao specifičan „način viđenja“. Vlastitu je tezu temeljio na rezultatima istraživanja promjena koje su se dogodile u europskom renesansnom pejzažnom slikarstvu. Iako je bilo poznato još u antici, u europskom se kontekstu pejzažno slikarstvo razvija u 15. stoljeću u Flandriji i sjevernoj Italiji, dok dva stoljeća kasnije dobiva svoj puni zamah. Cosgrove smatra da je krajolik „buržujski i individualistički ‘način viđenja’ koji je povezan s primjenom vlasti nad prostorom“, a „nastao je kao dimenzija svjetonazora europske elite“.8 Na vrhuncu razvoja humanizma na europsku je kulturnu scenu došla renesansa čiji je temeljni i jedini uzor bila antika. Važnost proporcija i sklada koji vlada u starogrčkom Kozmosu bilo je moguće razumjeti zahvaljujući ljudskome intelektu koji se manifestirao kao „proizvod intelektualnog razmišljanja“.9 Geometrija koja je bila odraz harmonije Kozmosa počela se tražiti i u ovozemaljskome Kaosu, kako u arhitekturi (F. Brunelleschi) tako i u slikarstvu (Masaccio), ali i na drugim područjima poput kartografije. Bio je to krucijalan okret od teocentričnoga srednjovjekovnog shvaćanja svijeta i prirode prema renesansnom antropocentričnom u kojem krajolik kao odraz mudrosti Boga Oca biva gledan očima čovjeka, subjekta koji ima samo svoje, jedno jedino motrište. Bio je to početak ere subjektivizma i individualizma koja će zapadnu civilizaciju pratiti do današnjih dana. U vizualnom smislu geometrijska (linearna) se perspektiva pokazala najadekvatnijim načinom da se taj subjektivizam izrazi kroz sliku. Erwin Panofsky i Rudolf Arnheim u geometrijskoj su perspektivi vidjeli odraze individualističkih težnji humanizma. Međutim, i ovakvo je viđenje svijeta obilježeno nekim paradoksima. Arnheim piše kako je problem geometrijske perspektive u tome što nastoji proizvesti „točan“ i „realističan“ prikaz deformirajući normalan oblik stvari „kompliciranim matematičkim kalkulacijama“.10 Realizam je geometrijske perspektive iluzija jer se na temelju matematičkih i optičkih zakonitosti stvari u prednjem planu prikazuju uvećanima, a one u stražnjim planovima proporcionalno udaljenosti promatrača umanjenima što nije u skladu s njihovom stvarnom vizualnom manifestacijom u prirodi. Drugi je problem ovakvoga pristupa pokušaj da se objektivizira nešto što je subjektivno. Naime, iskustvo viđenoga pretvara se u brojčane odnose, a subjektivan se dojam prevodi u matematičke omjere utemeljene u pravilima geometrije.11 Iz navedenoga bi se moglo reći kako je pokušaj objektivizacije i ovoga puta podlegao pred subjektivnošću pogleda, iako je nepobitno da je korištenje geometrijske perspektive u likovnim umjetnosti sve do druge polovice 19. stoljeća bilo bez presedana. Prikazi krajolika nisu bili samo prikazi svijeta kakav možemo vidjeti. Oni su isto tako i konstruirali „viđeni“ svijet djelovanjem subjekta koji je 8 9 10 11

6

Preuzeto iz: Šakaja, Uvod u kulturnu geografiju, 115. Isto. Isto, 116. Isto, 117.


generalizacijom vidljivoga racionalizirao perceptivne datosti krajolika koji je promatrao. Osim krajolika na slikama, slična je situacija bila i sa stvarnim, prirodnim krajolicima koji su kao i oni prvi bili način viđenja. Šakaj na temelju analize Cosgrovih teza zaključuje kako se uvođenjem geometrijske perspektive, razvojem pejzažnoga slikarstva te kultiviranjem i racionalnim oblikovanjem krajolika u vrijeme renesanse razvio novi odnos između čovjeka i njegova okoliša te je krajolik u tom smislu zadržao svoje značenje unutar zapadnih društava.12 Konačno, Cosgrove smatra da se koncepcija krajolika kao „načina viđenja“ treba shvatiti kao način na koji se vanjski svijet geometrijskim zakonima slaže u vizualnu cjelinu što će reći da on označava stvaranje vizualnog prizora djelovanjem osjetila i intelekta: „Krajolik je dakle način viđenja, sastavljanje ili strukturiranje svijeta tako da ga može prisvojiti odvojeni pojedinačni promatrač kojem je preko kompozicije prostora, u skladu s geometrijskim pravilima, ponuđena iluzija reda i kontrole“13 pri čemu način viđenja podrazumijeva odnose moći unutar društva. Pri tome ne treba zaboraviti da ni interpretacija krajolika nije uvijek jednoznačna te da i ona ovisi o prostornom i vremenskom kontekstu u kojem je krajolik nastao ili je prikazan, kao i o društvenom sustavu unutar kojega se interpretira.14 Iz do sada navedenoga uočava se kako umjetnička vizualizacija nekoga krajolika podliježe najmanje dvostrukoj ideologizaciji. Prvu proizvodi sam umjetnik odabirom nekog (stvarnog ili imaginarnog) predjela i načinom na koji će ga prikazati u skladu s vlastitom pozicijom i intelektualnim pogledom na svijet. Druga je ideologizacija rezultat interpretacije kojom se u prikaz upisuju određena značenja stvarajući ideološki semantički konstrukt sklon daljnjim reinterpretacijama. Kako god ovaj proces shvatili, teško se oteti dojmu da je reprezentacija nekoga krajolika u svim vrstama umjetnosti slobodan konstrukt umjetnika što ne potvrđuju tek slikani pejzaži, nego i brojni književni i neknjiževni putopisi u kojima subjektivna generalizacija pisca cjeline otkriva mnogo, ali još više toga ostavlja skrivenim.

12 Isto, 118. 13 Isto, 121. 14 Isto, 122.

7


Landscape as a Space of Imagination _ Igor Loinjak The concept of landscape is considered to be a familiar and a relatively clear term that we often use in our communication with other people without considering a series of implicated meanings which it can convey in its purview. In the “Croatian Lexicon” landscape is equated with the term of scenery which is defined as both an artistic and geographic phenomenon. In the sense of visual art, landscape is used to signify a painting or a print that depicts the scenery of a certain area, while in a geographical sense it is a space which differs from other areas by virtue of certain natural or social characteristics and appearance. In the context of geography there is also talk of cultural landscapes (scenery) that had changed their appearance at a certain moment due to the agency of the human factor. Writing on the term of landscape, Don Mitchell states that this term carries with it many different meanings. In its everyday use landscape signifies a specific organization of objects or a relationship between them (trees, meadows, houses, factories, open space, etc.) in a particular area. Furthermore, landscape refers to the appearance or style of an area, which does not only infer the kind of houses or trees and the way they are ordered, but also the social and cultural implications of that order. The geographical science considers landscape to be a morphology constructed from the form and structure of a particular area. Finally, landscape is also a form of representation in the sense of an artistic depiction or a complex system of meanings.1 All of the proposed meanings of the word landscape reveal certain segments of this polysemantic term in various ways. When we talk about the topic of landscapes, those of the cultural variety are of particular importance to our theme. Cultural landscapes became an important subject of the geographical science within which, in the German speaking area at the turn from the 19th to the 20th century, a special branch began to develop under the name of Kulturlandschaft or cultural geography. The term Landschaft was also used in ambiguous ways, and from the beginning of the last century was used under two meanings – a territorial one, referring to a limited area or a region, and an aesthetical one which meant an image, i.e. the appearance of an area and the way it is perceived. Searching for the historical meanings of the term, geographer Kenneth R. Olwig concluded that Landschaft does not merely signify a territory or an image of an area, but that in a territorial sense it also refers to social communities that lived in a particular area with their own identity, tradition, and common laws.2 As Laura Šakaja states “Landschaft consisted of the connectedness of the community, common law that defined that community, and the space into which the influence of the community spread and where its common law was 1 Mitchell, D. Krajolik, in: D. Atkinson, P. Jackson, D. Sibley, N. Washbourne (ur.), Kulturna geografija: Kritički rječnik ključnih pojmova, Disput, Zagreb 2008, 81.] 2 Based on historical meanings of the word in various languages Olwig points out that in the beginning landscape used to signify “an area cleared by axe and plow, belonging to the people who had cleared it.” Ibid, 83-84

8


practiced.”3 The term of Landschaft, therefore, interwove social community, customs, and territory in its domain. Olwig continues that in the aesthetical sense as well, the first depictions of landscape, like those from Brueghel, depicted “the logic of place” on the one hand, and the “logic of activity” on the other, conveying the spirit of the space, and serving as a reminder of custom and common law.4 From this, as well as from a series of other reasons, geographers started paying particular attention to landscape (Landschaft in this last meaning) as a part of cultural geography, and to the attempts to define it not only based on geographical, i.e. material components, but also from the viewpoint of culture, thereby applying the contemporary advances in the humanities. Although conceived in the German speaking area, the birth of cultural geography as a subdiscipline is linked to the Anglo-Saxon area, especially to the name of American geographer Carl O. Sauer. In the book “Morphology of Landscape” (1925), Sauer pointed out that landscape is an areal (region) made up of physical and cultural determinants. Since culture represents an important factor in the transformation of landscape, Sauer also mentions the term cultural landscape. In the concept of his school of thought cultural landscape was defined as a concrete sum of complicated relationships between the community and a variety of natural phenomena. Šakaja writes that Sauer’s concept determines cultural landscape as “a formed cultural areal” which “is shaped by human presence and agency.” It is “a result of the transformation of the natural landscape under the influence of culture,” i.e. “a manifestation of the culture that had created it and which had also changed as time went by.”5 Landscape does not only constitute that which an observer can see, the tangible space around them. It does not include the entirety of the visible elements but only that part of the visible which stands out and according to which a generalization is made that the observer forms based on the individual scenes of the perceived. Since a generalization is always subjective, the subjective element during observation is inevitable to the perception of the landscape. The subjective perception is also a characteristic of an artistic depiction and experience of a physical or mental (imaginary) area. The subjective experience of landscape and the attempt of its visualisation into the objective reality was the subject of particular interest to John Kirtland Wright and William Kirk who encouraged in their texts from the middle of the last century the contemplation on the relationship between human subjectivity and space. Wright thought that geography should extend its range to other approaches to the interpretation of landscape such as travel records, prose, poetry, artistic paintings… He named such form of geography geosofy, and the material object of its work was not supposed to be a mere physical space and its specificities, but the feeling that a person has towards a particular space. Parallel to Wrights contemplations, Kirk acted on a similar plan. He considered that the phenomenal structure of landscape does not depend solely on the phenomena which are perceived, but rather that the man who is beholding this reality is of great importance. From this reason 3 Šakaja, L. Uvod u kulturnu geografiju, Leykam, Zagreb 2015, 64.] 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid, 73.

9


he introduced the term of behavioural environment in his contemplations that he defined as a “psycho-physical field within which phenomenal facts are organized into patterns or structures and are given substance depending on the cultural contexts.”6 Wright and Kirk’s merit lies in the fact that they have, independently from one another, encouraged in geography “the study of human spatial imagination and subjectivity in the interpretation of environment”.7 Great changes in the way landscape is interpreted were brought by cultural materialism that appeared at the end of 1970s in Great Britain. Cultural materialism emphasised the connection between cultural landscape and the historical occurrences which had marked it through the epochs, among which particular importance is given to social, economic, and political elements and the balance of power. In his book “Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape,” Denis Cosgrove, one of the main representatives of this school of thought, defined landscape as a specific “way of seeing”. He founded his hypothesis on the results of examining changes that had occurred in European landscape painting. Although it was known as early as the age of antiquity, in a European context landscape painting developed in the 15th century in Flanders and northern Italy, and achieved its full momentum two centuries later. Cosgrove considers landscape to be a “bourgeois and individual ‘way of seeing’ which is connected to the application of rule over space,” and “was created as a dimension of the worldview of the European elite”.8 At the peak of the development of Humanism, Renaissance, whose fundamental and sole role model was the antiquity, entered the European cultural scene. The importance of proportions that rule the ancient Greek Cosmos was possible to understand thanks to human intellect which manifested itself as a “product of intellectual thinking”.9 Geometry, which served as a reflection of the harmony of the Cosmos, was beginning to be sought in this world’s Chaos, in architecture (F. Brunelleschi) as well as in painting (Masaccio), but also in other fields such as cartography. This constituted a crucial turn from the theocentric medieval understanding of the world and nature towards the anthropocentric view of the renaissance where landscape as a reflection of the wisdom of God, the Father, was seen through the eyes of man, a subject who has only his own singular viewpoint. This was the beginning of the era of subjectivism and individualism which followed the western civilization to this day. In a visual sense, the geometrical (linear) perspective was shown to be the most adequate way of expressing this subjectivism through painting. Erwin Panofsky and Rudolf Arnheim saw in the geometric perspective the reflection of aspirations of Humanism towards individualism. However, this kind of worldview is marked by certain paradoxes. Arnheim writes that the problem of geometric perspective can be found in that it is attempting to create a “correct” and “realistic” depiction by deforming the normal shape of objects through “complicated mathematical calculations”.10 The realism of geometric perspective is an illusion because, based on mathematical and 6 7 8 9 10

10

Ibid, 87. Ibid. Taken from: Šakaja, Uvod u kulturnu geografiju, 115. Ibid. Ibid, 116.]


optical laws, objects in the forefront are shown as enlarged, and those in the back, proportionately to the distance of the observer, are smaller, which is not in accordance with their real visual manifestation in nature. The second problem of this kind of approach is the attempt to objectify something that is subjective. The experience of the seen turns into numerical relationships, and the subjective impression is translated into mathematical ratios based on the rules of geometry.11 From the above stated one could conclude that the attempt of objectification once again succumbed to the subjectivity of one’s viewpoint, although it is irrefutable that the use of geometric perspective in visual art was unprecedented until the second half of the 19th century. Depictions of landscape were not merely depictions of the world that we can see. They also constructed the “seen” world through the agency of the subject who, by generalizing the observable, rationalized the perceptive absolutes of the landscape they were observing. Just like landscapes in paintings, the real, natural landscapes that, like the former ones, also represented a way of seeing, found themselves in a similar situation. Based on the analysis of Cosgrove’s hypotheses, Šakaj concludes that the introduction of geometric perspective, development of landscape painting, as well as refinement and rationalization of landscaping during the times of the Renaissance, brought forth a new relationship between man and his environment, and that landscape in this sense had kept its meaning within western societies.12 Finally, Cosgrove feels that the concept of landscape as a “way of seeing” should be taken as a way to put the outside world into a visual whole using geometric laws; that is to say, he defines the creation of a visual scene as the interaction of one’s senses and their intellect: “Landscape is a way of seeing, a composition or structuring the world so that it may be appropriated by a detached individual spectator to whom an illusion of order and control is offered through the composition of space according to the certainties of geometry”13 where the way of seeing includes the balance of power within society. Here one should not forget that the interpretation of landscape is not always unambiguous, and that it also depends on the spatial and temporal context in which the landscape was formed or is depicted, as well as the social system within which it is interpreted.14 Based on the above stated, it is notable that a visualization of landscape yields to at least a twofold ideologization. The first one’s created by the artist themselves by their choice of a (real or imaginary) area and the way they are going to depict it in accordance to their own position and intellectual outlook on the world. The second ideologization is the result of the interpretation through which certain meanings are written in the depiction creating a semantic construct prone to further interpretations. In whatever way one might understand this process, it is hard not to get the impression that the representation of a particular landscape in all types of art is a free construct of the artist, which is not only corroborated by painted landscapes but also numerous literary and non-literary travel records in which the subjective generalization of the whole by the author reveals much, but leaves 11 12 13 14

Ibid, 117. Ibid, 118. Ibid, 121. Ibid, 122.

11


much more hidden away. Through insight into the preserved remains of art history matter one can conclude that the depictions of landscape in western art appear as far back as paintings on the insides of Egyptian pyramids, and similar themes were found in the palaces of Aegean civilizations as well. Landscape painting was also known during the Antique period and it still nurtured mimicry in the representation of a scene, and it was especially important in the times of Roman domination when it was used for decorating room walls of wellstanding citizens’ villas. While in the 14th century the all-encompassing dematerialization of depicted reality pushed the depiction of landscape into the background, making it, as a rule, an exception, painters such as Cavallini, Duccio, or Giotta gradually started to abandon the Byzantine and medieval tradition of building composition using the figuratively neutral golden backgrounds, and introduced landscape scenery in their religious scenes, instituting it as a backdrop for the main theme. During the Renaissance, landscape painting was still developing on the margins of visualizing religious themes until it had achieved its full momentum in the 17th century, especially in the Protestant countries of northeast Europe. Although they pointed to man’s power to tame nature in their intertext, depictions of landscape were often a reflection of the Almighty’s glory, which was most prominent during the period of Romanticism when, on the wings of pantheistic hypotheses, landscape was viewed as the visual materialization of the divine. In the 20th century depictions of nature as a reflection of the connection between the divine and man lost its power, remaining merely a reminder of human agency which is threatening the landscapes of the world, and putting the happy future of the planet into question. Partially along those lines, and partially from the desire and need to break the shackles of institutionalized gallery spaces, in the wake of minimal art, land art started developing on American soil. In land art artists started to use landscape as a stage and the framework for their own artistic expression, pointing to the potential that a particular area possesses not only as part of nature, but also as a space where art that is completely fused with landscape and with its morphology can and should be created. The “Landscape spaces” exhibition presents works whose authors have touched upon the subjective contemplation and getting the feel of a particular space, especially the one within, the physically non-existent one. In most part, those are imaginary landscapes, void of objective absolutes. The visual representations that each of the selected works brings give us an opportunity for a different consideration of landscape and space which does not only represent a dive into the visible reality, the scenery which is created en plein by the artist’s hand, but is intrinsically created by virtue of artistic imagination. Landscape spaces, in this sense, are the spaces of uninhibited intercourse with the potential which landscape as space, and landscape painting as a genre, gives within the absolute space of freedom.

12


Prostor, osjetila i iskustvo _ Zlatko Kozina Prema tumačenjima Europske konvencije o krajobrazu iz dvijetisućite godine „krajobraz je određeno područje viđeno ljudskim okom, čija je narav rezultat međusobnog djelovanja prirodnih i ljudskih čimbenika, a predstavlja bitnu sastavnicu čovjekovog okruženja, izraz raznolikosti zajedničke kulturne i prirodne baštine, te temelj identiteta područja“.1 Krajobraze se dakako može razvrstavati na mnoštvo načina. Kulturni krajobraz bio bi neka vrsta seizmografskog crteža razvitka određene ljudske zajednice u nekom određenom vremenu i prostoru, bilo iz estetskih pobuda bilo preobražavanjem samog krajobraza u svojevrsnom kulturološkom evolucijskom procesu. S druge se pak strane u tradicionalnoj interpretaciji unutar likovne umjetnosti, krajolik/pejzaž definira tek kao „estetsku komponentu viđenog, njegovu interpretativnu vrijednost“ prikazane prirode, urbanog odnosno urbanog u prirodi.2 Očekivano, za većinu ljudi ta će se dva pojma najčešće koristiti kao istoznačnice. Pozornijom analizom spomenute definicije može se uočiti kako se cijela stvar dodatno usložnjava sintagmom „viđeno ljudskim okom“, čime je kodifikacija djelomično postala upitnom. Srećom, ta je upitnost od one vrste koja ne umire u samoj sebi nego, štoviše, postaje mogućnost u otvaranju prostora umjetnosti koji nadilazi decidirano navođenje ljudskog oka kao jedinog spoznajnog aparata u percepciji krajobraznog prostora. Prema mišljenju psihologa Roberta Ornsteina i biologa Paula Ehlricha ljudski um neprestano i na svim razinama – od osjetilnih reakcija do donošenja važnih odluka – stvara pojednostavljenja (što također čini i u procesu vizualnog opažanja) da bi tako uz što manji utrošak energije mogao odgovoriti na zahtjeve svijeta u kojem živi. Iz toga je evidentno kako je apsolutna samodostatnost bilo kojeg osjetila gotovo nemoguća.3 K tome, krajobraz u vizualnim umjetnostima može biti i imaginarno konstruiran na neviđene načine. Jedan od takvih je i svedenost na koncept, odnosno situaciju u kojoj se percepciju takvog prostora ostavlja na razini ideje koja se može, ali i ne mora, realizirati. U tom bi se kontekstu moglo postaviti i pitanje razlikuje li se rekreiranje promatranog prostora promatrano s distance od rekreiranja tog istog prostora iznutra isključivo posredstvom proživljenog iskustva odabranog motiva. Na postavljeno pitanje neki od umjetnica/umjetnika koji izlažu na ovoj izložbi odgovaraju iz vlastite perspektive koja je ponekad takva da sve izgleda razgrađeno na mnoštvo slomljenih dijelova, atomizirano do šutnje nakon koje krajobraz više ništa ne govori. S druge strane, ti fragmentarni prikazi prostora u stvari mogu biti doživljeni i kao odbijanje scenografske pozornice i atmosfere neodređenosti u kojem događanja ne oživljavaju promatranu kulisu. Koji je rezultat svega toga? Složeno tkivo percepcije krajobraza (ono opaženo) naizgled postaje sve kompleksnije, dok sam subjekt (onaj koji opaža) kao da sve više gubi 1 Radman , Jelena.“ Pojam i značenja krajobraza“.Projekt Perivoj. http://projekt-perivoj. hr/pojam-i-znacenje-krajobraza/ (pristupljeno 20.kolovoza 2019.) 2 Ibid 3 Radman, Zdravko.“Pogled iz pozadine“ .Filozofska istraživanja 102 ,26(2006):423-437.

13


raznolikost uvida. Štoviše, konstantno prijeteći, bujica kompleksnosti (čitaj relacionalnost radi relacionalnosti) kao da pokušava prekriti korice zajedničke knjige namećući i samim umjetnicima priču iz sredine, vječitu sadašnjost poput elgrekovskog toledskog neba kratkotrajno osvijetljenog im života kao pejzaža satkanog od iskustava, čije je utonuće u sjenu svakodnevne anksioznosti neizbježno. Predstavljena umjetnička djela na ovoj izložbi (crteži, slike, fotografije, videa, instalacije, skulpture itd.) dokumenti su nastanjivanja krajobraza ljudskim tijelima i svim njihovim konačnim bitcima istkanima i utkanima u prostor čak i kad to nije eksplicitno vidljivo. „Dokumenti“ koji uvijek krenu s namjerom da bi bili osvijetljeni jasnom difuznom svjetlošću, poput primjerice one delafrančeskovske, žele li u tome i uspjeti morali bi za početak odustati od svake namjere, pa čak i umjetničke, u trenutku kada se ista počne pretvarati u lažni, konvencijama izbrazdani palimpsest.

Space, Senses and Experience _ Zlatko Kozina According to the definition from the European Landscape Convention from the year 2000 “landscape is a certain area seen by the human eye, whose nature is the result of the interaction between natural and human factors, and it represents an important component of man’s environment, an expression of the diversity of common cultural and natural heritage, as well as a foundation for the identity of an area”.1 Landscapes can, of course, be sorted out in a variety of ways. A cultural landscape would be a certain type of seismographic drawing of the development of a particular human community in a particular time and space, either from aesthetical motives or by transforming the landscape itself in a cultural evolution process of sorts. On the other hand, in the traditional interpretation within fine arts, landscape/scenery is defined merely as an “aesthetic component of the seen, its interpretative value” of the depicted nature, of urbanity, i.e. of urbanity in nature.2 As would be expected, for most people those two terms will, in most cases, be used as synonyms. A more detailed analysis of the abovementioned definition might reveal that the whole thing gets more complicated through the phrase “seen by the human eye”, which brings its codification into question. Luckily, this questionability is of a sort which does not die within itself, but becomes a possibility to open the space for art which overcomes the decided guidance of the human eye as the sole apparatus of cognizance in the perception of a landscape space. According to the psychologist Robert Ornstein and biologist Paul Ehlrich, the human mind constantly and on all levels – from sensory reactions to making important decisions – makes simplifications (which it also makes in the process of visual perception) so as to be able to answer to the demands of the world which it inhabits with as little energy expenditure 1 Radman , Jelena.“Pojam i značenja krajobraza“. Projekt Perivoj. http://projekt-perivoj. hr/pojam-i-znacenje-krajobraza/ (accessed on 20 August, 2019.) 2 Ibid

14


as possible. From this it is evident that the absolute self-sufficiency of any of our senses is virtually impossible.3 Additionally, landscape in visual arts can also be imaginarily constructed in previously unseen ways. One of such is the reduction to concept, i.e. a situation in which the perception of such a space is left on the level of idea which can, but does not have to, be realized. In this context one could raise the question of whether the recreation of an observed space viewed from a distance differs from the recreation of the same space seen from within, solely through the personal experience of the chosen motif. Some of the artists who are presenting their works in this exhibition give answers to this question from their own perspectives which are at times such that everything appears deconstructed into a multitude of broken pieces, atomized to the level of silence after which the landscape does not tell us anything. On the other hand, these fragmented depictions of space can, in fact, be experienced as the rejection of the scenographic stage and the atmosphere of indeterminateness in which events do not breathe life into the observed backdrop. What is the result of all this? The complex tissue of the perception of landscape (that which is observed) seemingly becomes more and more complex, while the subject himself (the one who is observing) seems to start losing the diversity of insight. Moreover, the torrent of complexity (i.e. relationality for the sake of relationality) threatens constantly, as if trying to encase the cover of a book which belongs to everyone, forcing upon artists a story told from the middle, an eternal contemporaneity like an El Grecian Toledo sky, their briefly illuminated lives as a landscape woven from experiences, whose immersion into shadow of everyday anxiousness is inevitable. The works of art presented in this exhibition (drawings, paintings, photographs, videos, installations, sculptures, etc.) represent documents of settling the landscape with human bodies and all of their final beingness woven from and inwrought into space, even when this is not explicitly obvious. “The documents” which always start with the intention to be illuminated by a clear diffuse light as, for example, della Francesca would have had them, would, if they wish to succeed in it, have to, from the very beginning, abandon any intentionality, even an artistic one, the very moment it starts to transform into a false palimpsest wrought by conventions.

3 Radman, Zdravko. “Pogled iz pozadine“. Filozofska istraživanja 102, 26 (2006): 423-437.

15


Stranice / Pages 18 - 19 20 - 21 22 - 23 24 - 25 26 27 28 - 29 30 - 31 32 33 34 - 35 36 - 37

16

Umjetnici / Artists Katarina Kardum Ivanišin Miron Milić Davor Vrankić Igor Čabraja Tanja Deman Damir Babić Igor Ruf Mirjana Vodopija Mario Matoković Gordana Bakić Domagoj Sušac Mario Čaušić


Stranice / Pages 38 - 38 40 41 42 43 44 - 45 46 47 48 - 49 50 - 51 52 - 53 54

Umjetnici / Artists Josip Brandis Kristina Lenard Sebastijan Dračić Zlatan Vrkljan Ivona Jurić Kljajo Josip Alebić Zdravko Milić Hrvoje Duvnjak Marko Tadić Zlatko Kozina Zlatan Vehabović Davor Sanvicenti

17


18


Katarina IvaniĹĄin Kardum

Still Landscape Series: Mountains I, poviĹĄe izvora, 2018. grafit na papiru 3 (192 x 152 cm)

Still Landscape Series: Mountains I, above a spring, 2018 graphite on paper 3 (192 x 152 cm)

19


Miron Milić

Bez naziva, 2013. akril na lesonitu 200 x 200 cm Untitled, 2013. acrylic on hardboard 200 x 200 cm

20


Bez naziva, 2013. akril na lesonitu 200 x 200 cm Untitled, 2013. acrylic on hardboard 200 x 200 cm

21


Davor Vrankić

Je t’aime beaucoup, 2008. olovka na papiru 28 x 190 cm Je t’aime beaucoup, 2008 pencil on paper 28 x 190 cm

Prolaz, 2014. / 2019. olovka na papiru 112 x 77,5 cm Passage, 2014 / 2019 pencil on paper 112 x 77,5 cm

22


23


Igor Čabraja

Bez naziva (Interferencije 2), 2013. poliptih – pet grafičkih listova, akvatinta 5 x (120 x 80,5 cm) papir - Hahnemuhle 300 g/m2 Untitled (Interference 2), 2013 polyptych - five graphic sheets, aquatint 5 x (120 x 80,5 cm) paper - Hahnemuhle 300 g/m2

24


25


Tanja Deman

Dvorana, 2014. serija Hramovi kulture arhivski pigment print 145 x 95 cm Geology Hall, 2014 series Temples of Culture archival pigment print 145 x 95 cm

26


Fotografija: Robert Matić Rad iz zbirke Galerije umjetnina, Split.

Damir Babić

Kako se dešava obrat u prostoru mogućeg?, 2014. ulje na platnu 172 x 120 cm How Does a Reversal Happen in the Space of the Possible?, 2014 oil on canvas 172 x 120 cm

27


Igor Ruf

Kofer sa krajolikom i banana suncem, 2013. kombinirana tehnika LED rasvjeta, kofer, poliesterska smola, 64 x 70 x 68 cm Suitcase with Landscape and a Banana Sun, 2013 mixed media LED lighting, suitcase, polyester resin 64 x 70 x 68 cm

Banana na brdu na gumi, 2013. kombinirana tehnika, auto guma, Ĺželjezo, poliesterska smola, LED rasvjeta, 150 x 53 x 70 cm Bannana on a Hill on a Tyre, 2013 mixed media car tire, iron, polyester resin, LED lighting 150 x 53 x 70 cm

28


29


Mirjana Vodopija

Vibrirajući pejzaž, 2018. kinetički objekt metalna kontrukcija, elastične niti, elektromotori, procesor, CPU 220 x 40 x 106 cm Vibrating landscape, 2018 kinetic object metal construction, elastic strings, electric motors, CPU 220 x 40 x 106 cm

30


Šatorplanina, 2019. objekt polietilen 300 x 300 x 300 cm Tent-mountain, 2019 object polyethylene 300 x 300 x 300 cm

ostali radovi na izložbi / other works on the exhibition

Tranzicija, 2017. / 2019. instalacija pjenasti beton, aluminijski profili, suho bilje, model automobila, trokanalna videoprojekcija, 2’00“, loop, 1’30“ loop, dvokanalni zvuk duljina instalacije oko 1100 cm Transition, 2017 / 2019 installation aerated concrete, aluminum profiles, dried plants, three-channel video projection, 2’00“, loop, 1’30“ loop, two channel sound installation length approx. 1100 cm

31


Mario Matoković

Neizvjesni prostori I, 2018. trokanalna video instalacija 6’00” loop Uncertain Spaces I, 2018 three-channel video installation 6’00” loop

32


Gordana Bakić

Infinitive plates, 2019. drvo, platno, plastika, papir dimenzije promjenjive Infinitive Plates, 2019 wood, canvas, plastic, paper dimensions variable

33


Domagoj Sušac

Side View Spaces II, 2019. C-print 157 x 238 cm Side View Spaces II, 2019 C-print 157 x 238 cm

ostali radovi na izložbi / other works on exhibition

Side View Spaces, 2019. C-print 157 x 238 cm Side View Spaces, 2019 C-print 157 x 238 cm

34


35


36


Mario Čaušić

Art is Beautiful, 2011. gumeni žig, tuš, papir 208 x 168 cm Art is Beautiful, 2011 rubber stamp, indian ink, paper 208 x 168 cm

37


Josip Brandis

Paper polis, 2019. prostorna instalacija dimenzije promjenjive Paper polis, 2019 spatial installation dimensions variable

38


39


Kristina Lenard

Black Mirror, 2011. light box 40 x 120 cm Black Mirror, 2011 light box 40 x 120 cm

40


Sebastijan Dračić

Brujería, 2015. ulje na platnu 150 x 150 cm Brujería, 2015 oil on canvas 150 x 150 cm

41


Zlatan Vrkljan

ostali radovi na izloĹžbi / other works on the exhibition

Slikar, 1996. enkaustika na platnu 195 x 145 cm Painter, 1996 encaustic on canvas 195 x 145 cm

42

Kuti, 1996. enkaustika na platnu 195 x 145 cm Kuti, 1996 encaustic on canvas 195 x 145 cm


Ivona Jurić Kljajo

Ogledalo pronađenog unutarnjeg prostora, 2019. ulje na platnu 110 x 130 cm Mirror of the Found Inner Space, 2019 oil on canvas 110 x 130 cm

43


Josip Alebić

Ljeto 2, 2007. ulje na platnu 129 x 189,7 cm Summer 2, 2007 oil on canvas 129 x 189,7 cm

ostali radovi na izložbi / other works on exhibition

44

Ljeto 1, 2008. ulje na platnu 120 x 100 cm

Srž ljeta 3, 2009. ulje na platnu 190 x 129 cm

Summer 1, 2008 oil on canvas 120 x 100 cm

Essence of Summer 3, 2009 oil on canvas 190 x 129 cm


SrĹž ljeta 2, 2009. ulje na platnu 189 x 129,5 cm Essence of Summer 2, 2009 oil on canvas 189 x 129,5 cm

45


Zdravko Milić

Tehno Uluru - Ayers Rock, 2000. kombinirana tehnika na papiru 173 x 274 cm Tehno Uluru - Ayers Rock, 2000 mixed media on paper 173 x 274 cm

46


Hrvoje Duvnjak

Sjever, 2014. ulje na platnu 200 x 280 cm North, 2014 oil on canvas 200 x 280 cm

47


Marko Tadić

We Used to Call it: Moon!, 2012. kolaĹž na staroj razglednici 9 (15 x 10 cm) We Used to Call it: Moon!, 2012. collage on old postcard 9 (15 x 10 cm)

48


We Used to Call it: Moon!, 2012. kolaĹž na staroj razglednici 9 (15 x 10 cm) We Used to Call it: Moon!, 2012. collage on old postcard 9 (15 x 10 cm)

49


Zlatko Kozina

Richard Serra u Posavini, 2016. ulje i srebrni marker na medijapanu 24 x 33 cm Richard Serra in Posavina, 2016 oil and silver marker on mediapan 24 x 33 cm

50


Donald Judd pomaĹže poplavljenoj Slavoniji, 2012. ulje i srebrni marker na medijapanu 26 x 35 cm Donald Judd Helps the Flooded Slavonia, 2012 oil and silver marker on mediapan 26 x 35 cm

51


Zlatan Vehabović

Kozmonautov arhiv, 2017. ulje na platnu 173 x 290 cm Cosmonaut’s Archive, 2017 oil on canvas 173 x 290 cm

52


Gerats & Star, 2017. ulje na platnu 173 x 280 cm Gerats & Star, 2017 oil on canvas 173 x 280 cm

53


Davor Sanvicenti

Stabilni oksid, 2013. digitalna fotografija 150 x 100 cm Stable Oxide, 2013 digital photography 150 x 100 cm

54


Biografije umjetnika / Artist CV

55


Biografije umjetnika / Artist CV Katarina Ivanišin Kardum

Katarina Ivanišin Kardum je umjetnica iz Dubrovnika. Diplomirala je slikarstvo na City and Guilds of London Art School 1998., a 2000. na Royal College of Art u Londonu završila dvogodišnji Master of Arts poslijediplomski studij slikarstva. Od 2000. do 2008. radi kao slobodna umjetnica i predavačica na diplomskom studiju koledža City and Guilds of London Art School. Nakon preseljenja u Hrvatsku, uz umjetnički rad, od 2009. do 2014. radi kao muzejska pedagoginja Prirodoslovnog muzeja Dubrovnik, a od 2014. kao muzejska pedagoginja Tehničkog muzeja Nikola Tesla u Zagrebu. Sudjelovala je na brojnim izložbama u Hrvatskoj i inozemstvu. 2015. dobitnica je 1. nagrade na natječaju T-HT nagrada@msu.hr za rad Still Landscape Series III. Radovi su joj korišteni u filmovima: Second Act, redatelj Peter Segal (2018.); Holy Lands, redateljica Amanda Sthers (2017.) i Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, redatelj Simon West (2001.) Majka je četvoro djece: Ivana (2004.), Magdalene (2008.), Marina (2012.) i Petra (2017.). Živi i radi u Dubrovniku, Zagrebu i na Draču.

Miron Milić

Miron Milić rođen je 1980. godine u Vinkovcima, Hrvatska. 2006. godine diplomirao na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu ( grafika, klasa prof, Miroslava Šuteja), a trenutno se bavi crtanjem autorskih radova, ilustracijom i street art-om. Sudjelovao je na nekoliko umjetničkih rezidencija; Mural Arts Residency u Ljubljani 2015. godine kada je imao priliku slikati mural u centru grada Ljubljane i mural u Moskvi iste godine. Dobitnik je glazbene nagrade Porin za ‘’Najbolje likovno ostvarenje’’ 2017.godine. Član je HZSU-a te art kolektiva AKC Medika iz Zagreba. Davor Vrankić

Davor Vrankić, rođen je 1965. godine u Osijeku. Studirao je na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Sarajevu (Odjel grafike) od 1986. do 1988., a potom na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, gdje je i diplomirao 1991. u klasi

56

Katarina Ivanišin Kardum is an artist from Dubrovnik. She graduated Fine Art Painting at the City and Guilds of London Art School in 1998. In 2000 she completed a two-year Master of Arts postgraduate Fine Art Painting Course at the Royal College of Art in London. From 2000 to 2008 she worked as a freelance artist and a lecturer on the graduate level at the City & Guilds of London Art School. After moving to Croatia, along with her artistic work, she worked as a museum educator at the Dubrovnik Natural History Museum until 2014, and since, as a museum educator at the Technical Museum Nikola Tesla in Zagreb. She has participated in numerous exhibitions in Croatia and abroad. In 2015, for her piece Still Landscape Series III, she won the 1st prize, T_HT Award at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb. Her artworks were used in the following films: Second Act, directed by Peter Segal (2018); Holy Lands, directed by Amanda Sthers (2017), and Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, directed by Simon West (2001). She is a mother of four children: Ivan (2004), Magdalena (2008), Marin (2012) and Petar (2017). She lives and works in Dubrovnik, Zagreb and Drače. Miron Milić was born in 1980 in Vinkovci, Croatia. In 2006 he graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb (Graphic Arts, class of professor Miroslav Šutej), and he is currently engaging in drawing, illustration, and street art. He participated in several art residences; Mural Arts Residency in Ljubljana in 2015, where he was given the opportunity to draw a mural in the city centre of Ljubljana, as well as a mural in Moscow in the same year. He was awarded the Porin musical award for “Best art design” in 2017. He is a member of the Croatian Freelance Artists Association (HZSU), as well as the art collective AKC Medika from Zagreb. Davor Vrankić, born 1965 in Osijek. He studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Sarajevo (Department of graphics) from 1986 to 1988, continuing at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb, where he graduated in the class of professor


profesora Ante Kuduza. Na fakultetu Paris VIII, odsjek Arts Plastiques, studira od 1995. do 1999. godine. Njegov osnovni medij je crtež na papiru, a olovka 2B, 0,9 mm glavno izražajno sredstvo. Kolekcije u kojima se nalaze umjetnikova djela: Muzej Overholland (Amsterdam), MOMA (New York), TANG Muzej (Saratoga Springs, New York), Muzej umjetnosti Ningbo (Ningbo), Kolekcija Cognacq-Jay (Pariz), Centar za suvremenu umjetnost ACMCM ( Perpignan), Muzej moderne i suvremene umjetnosti (Rijeka), Muzej suvremene umjetnosti (Zagreb), Moderna galerija Zagreb, Muzej Slavonije (Osijek) i Muzej likovnih umjetnosti (Osijek). Živi i djeluje u Parizu. Igor Čabraja

Ante Kuduz. From 1995 to 1999 he studied Art Plastiques at the Paris VIII University. His main medium is drawing on paper, and his primary means of artistic expression is pencil lead 2B 0.9mm. His works can be found in the following collections: Museum Overholland (Amsterdam), MOMA (New York), TANG Museum (Saratoga Springs, New York), Ningbo Museum of Art (Ningbo), Cognacq-Jay Museum (Paris), Centre for Contemporary Art ( Perpignan), Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art (Rijeka), Museum of Contemporary Art (Zagreb), The Modern Gallery (Zagreb), Museum of Slavonia (Osijek) and the Museum of Fine Arts (Osijek). He lives and works in Paris.

Rođen u Slavonskom Brodu, Hrvatska. Maturirao na matematičkom smijeru gimnazije „Matija Mesić“ u Slavonskom Brodu 1994. Tijekom devedesetih i dvijetisućitih živi i radi u Slavonskom Brodu, Rijeci, Zagrebu, Osijeku. Trenutno zaposlen na Nastavničkom odsjeku Akademije likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu u zvanju docenta.

Born in Slavonski Brod, Croatia. Completed liberal arts school (gymnasium) in Slavonski Brod (majoring in the mathematics) in 1994. Lived and worked in Slavonski Brod, Rijeka, Zagreb, Osijek during the nineties. Currently employed as an assistent professor at the Art education department at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb.

Tanja Deman je vizualna umjetnica koja radi u mediju fotografije, fotokolaža, videa i instalacija u javnom prostoru. Rođena je u Splitu, gdje živi i radi. Diplomirala je na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu. Njezini radovi su izloženi na velikom broju izložbi, između ostalog na 15. Venecijanskom bijenalu arhitekture / u Kunstmuseum Bonn / Muzeju suvremene umjetnosti Zagreb / Muzeju moderne i suvremene umjetnosti, Rijeka / Fotogalerie Wien, Beč / The Central House of Artists, Moskva / MUNTREF Centro de Arte Contemporáneo, Buenos Aires / TENT, Rotterdam / Unseen, Amsterdam / International Film Festival Rotterdam / Galerie Reflex, Amsterdam / Museum of African Design, Johannesburg. Samostalne izložbe je imala između ostalog u Galeriji Dulčić Masle Pulitika i Ateljeu Pulitika od Umjetničke galerije Dubrovnik / Witzenhausen Gallery, Amsterdam / CCA Galleries International, Jersey / Galeriji MKC Split / Museo Revoltella, Trieste. Godine 2015. Tanja je ostvarila fotografsku instalaciju u javnom prostoru pod nazivom Sommerfreuden na Ringturm tornju na obali Dunava u centru Beča.

Tanja Deman is a visual artist working in the medium of photography, collage, video and public art. She was born in Split, Croatia. She obtained a BFA (hons) and MFA (hons) in Fine Arts at the Academy of Fine Arts Zagreb. Her work has been exhibited in a large number of exhibitions including, 15th Venice Biennial of Architecture, National Croatian Pavilion / Kunstmuseum Bonn / Museum of Contemporary Art Zagreb / Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Rijeka / Fotogalerie Wien, Vienna / Central House of Artists, Moscow / MUNTREF Centro de Arte Contemporáneo, Buenos Aires / TENT, Rotterdam / Unseen, Amsterdam / International Film Festival Rotterdam / Galerie Reflex, Amsterdam / Museum of African Design, Johannesburg. Among others, she had solo exhibitions in Gallery Dulčić Masle Pulitika and Atelier Pulitika of the Museum of Modern Art Dubrovnik / Witzenhausen Gallery, Amsterdam / CCA Galleries International, Jersey / Gallery MKC Split / Museo Revoltella, Trieste. In 2015 Tanja realised a large public art project Sommerfreuden by wrapping the Ringturm tower in the centre of Vienna.

Tanja Deman

57


Dobitnica je Archisle International Photographer in Residence Award, Jersey / nagrade Novi fragmenti 5 / nagrade publike na T-HT nagrada@msu.hr / nagrade Akademije likovnih umjetnosti Zagreb / Rektorove nagrade Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, te je bila finalistica nagrade Radoslav Putar. Njezini radovi su dio nekoliko javnih i mnogih privatnih zbirki. www.tanja-deman.com

She received several awards for her work, including Archisle International Photographer in Residence Award, Jersey / New Fragments 5 Award / Audience Award at T-HT Award / Award of Academy of Fine Arts / Rector’s Award and she was a Radoslav Putar Award finalist. Many of her works are part of public and private art collections. www.tanja-deman.com

Damir Babić rođen je 1962. godine u Zagrebu. Diplomirao je slikarstvo na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu 1991., u klasi profesora Đure Sedera. Od početka izlagačke aktivnosti 1989. godine njegova umjetnička djelatnost uključuje različite medije (objekti, instalacije, fotografije). 2003. godine započinje slikati, a 2010. godine asocijativno slikarstvo zamjenjuje prikazivačkim. Do sada je izlagao na više od petnaest samostalnih i dvadesetak skupnih izložbi. Umro je 2018. godine.

Damir Babić was born in 1962 in Zagreb. He graduated in painting from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb in 1991, in the class of professor Đuro Seder. From the time he began exhibiting his works in 1989, his works included various media (objects, installations, photographs). In 2003 he began painting, and in 2010 he switched from associative painting to representational painting. Up to the present day he exhibited his works in over fifteen solo and about twenty group exhibitions. He died in 2018.

Damir Babić

Igor Ruf

Igor Ruf rođen je 1984. godine u Virovitici. Magistrirao je kiparstvo na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu u klasi prof. Stjepana Gračana 2010. godine. Izlagao je na izložbama u zemlji i inozemstvu. Od 2012. godine radi kao asistent na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, a od 2018. je u zvanju docenta. Član je HDLU-a. Živi i radi u Zagrebu. Mirjana Vodopija

Mirjana Vodopija diplomirala je 1987. godine na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Od 1985. do danas ostvarila je 34 samostalne izložbe i sudjelovala na više od 200 skupnih izložbi, kustoskih koncepcija i rezidencijalnih projekata. Dobitnica je brojnih likovnih nagrada kao što su Plaketa HAZU na 4. hrvatskom trijenalu grafike u Zagrebu 2006. godine, 1. nagrada na International Triennial of Graphic Arts u Pragu 2001. i Godišnja nagrada HDLU-a mladom umjetniku 2000. godine. Djela su joj uvrštena u zbirke važnijih hrvatskih muzeja i galerija. Od 1987. godine do danas radi kao vanjski suradnik Hrvatske televizije kao autorica scenografija i vizualnih identiteta emisija u njihovoj produkciji. Od 2007. godine predaje na Grafičkom odsjeku

58

Igor Ruf was born in 1984 in Virovitica. He received his M.A. degree in Sculpture from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb in the class of professor Gračan in 2010. He has exhibited his work in Croatia and abroad. Since 2012 he has worked at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb, first as a teaching assistant and in 2018 he became an assistant professor. He is a member of the Croatian Association of Artists. He lives and works in Zagreb. Mirjana Vodopija graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts, University of Zagreb 1987. Since 1985 she has had 34 solo exhibitions and taken part in more than 200 collective exhibitions, curatorial conceptions and residential projects. She has received numerous art prizes, such as the Croatian Academy for Sciences and Arts Plaque at the 4th Croatian Graphic Triennial in Zagreb in 2006, the 1st Prize at the 3rd International Triennial of Graphic Arts in Prague in 2001 and the Annual Croatian Artists Association Prize for a young artist in 2000. Her works are included in the collections of major Croatian museums and galleries. Since 1987 she has worked part-time for Croatian National Television as set and visual identity designer for its shows. Since 2007 she has taught at the Printmaking department of


ALU u Zagrebu, trenutno u zvanju redovne profesorice. Važnije recentne samostalne izložbe: 2019. Lutajući krajolik, MSU Zagreb, 2016. Mentalni sklop: Mirjana Vodopija - Miroslav Šutej, Galerija Kranjčar, Zagreb / Pet godišnjih doba, Kabinet grafike HAZU, Zagreb; 2015. Jedan na jedan: Damir Babić i Mirjana Vodopija, Galerija umjetnina, Split; 2013. Nepovratno, Umjetnički paviljon, Zagreb. Važnije recentne grupne izložbe: 2018./2016./2014./2009. HT nagrada@msu. hr, MSU, Zagreb / 2015. In the Absence of Self, Woodstreet Galleries, Pittsburgh (Astala, Franke, Ragnarsdottir, Vodopija) / Nepokorena šuma i Radovan Ivšić, MSU, Zagreb / Strukture nevidljivog, Kovićevi dvori, Zagreb i Fondation Vasarely, Aix-en-Provence / 2009. EchigoTsumari Art Triennial, Echigo – Tsumari region, Japan.

Mario Matoković

Mario Matoković rođen je u Osijeku 1985. godine. Diplomirao je 2010. na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku na Odsjeku za likovnu umjetnost. Profesionalno se bavi umjetničkom djelatnošću u području suvremene vizualne i likovne prakse kroz medij grafike, videa, instalacije te umjetničke fotografije. Izlagao je na brojnim domaćim i nekoliko međunarodnih izložbi. Sudjelovao na više umjetničkih radionica i projekata u domovini i inozemstvu. Dobitnik je Rektorove nagrade Sveučilišta Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku. Finalist nagrade Radoslav Putar, nagrade za mlade umjetnike do 35 godina u organizaciji Instituta za suvremenu umjetnost. 2017. nagrađen je 3. nagradom na „5. Biennalu suvremene umjetnosti u Novorossyisku“ u Rusiji za rad „Zastava“ te 2018. nagrađen nagradom „Ex Aeuqo“ nagradom na 26.slavonskom Biennaleu u Osijeku. Inicijator umjetničke rezidencije u sklopu projekta MMML Studija. Živi i radi u Osijeku. Gordana Bakić

Rođena u Zagrebu 1972. Završila Školu primijenjenih umjetnosti i dizajna u Zagrebu 1990. godine. Iste godine upisala Akademiju likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, studij likovne kulture na Nastavničkom odsjeku. Diplomirala u klasi prof. Zlatka Kesera 2001. godine. Članica HDLU-a od 1996. godine. 2004. – 2012.

the Academy of Fine Arts, University of Zagreb, currently as a Full Professor. Major recent exhibitions / solo: 2019 The Wandering Landscape, Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb / 2016 Mindset: Mirjana Vodopija - Miroslav Šutej, Kranjčar Gallery, Zagreb / 2016 Five Seasons, Department of Prints and Drawings of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb / 2015 One on One: Damir Babić and Mirjana Vodopija, Fine Arts Gallery, Split / 2013 Irreversible, Art Pavilion, Zagreb. Major recent exhibitions / collective: 2018 / 2016 / 2014 / 2009 T-HT award@msu.hr, Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb / 2015 In the Absence of Self, Woodstreet Galleries, Pittsburgh USA (Astala, Franke, Ragnarsdottir, Vodopija) / 2015 Forest Unbowed and Radovan Ivšić, Museum of Contemporary Art, Zagreb / 2014 Structures of the Invisible, Kovićevi dvori Gallery, Zagreb and Fondation Vasarely, Aix-enProvence / 2009 Echigo -Tsumari Art Triennial, Etsigo-Tsumari region, Japan. Mario Matoković was born in 1985 in Osijek, Croatia. He graduated from the Academy of Arts in Osijek, Department of Fine Arts in 2010. He is professionally engaged in artistic activities in the field of contemporary arts through graphics, video, installations and art photography media. He has taken part in many fine arts workshops, and has exhibited in numerous Croatian and in few international exhibitions. He is a holder of the Rector’s Award of the J.J. Strossmayer University in Osijek. In 2016 Mario was one of the finalists of Radoslav Putar Award, award for young visual artists in Croatia up to 35 years of age, in 2017 received 3rd award 5th International Biennale of Contemporary Fine Arts in Novorossyisk, Russia and in 2018 received Ex Aeuqo Award on 26th Slavonian Biennale in Osijek, Croatia. Founder of MMML Studio - Artist in Residence program . Lives and works in Osijek, Croatia.

Born in Zagreb in 1972 . She attended the School of Applied Art and Design in Zagreb (ŠPUD). Graduating in 1990, she enrolled in the Academy of Fine Art in Zagreb (ALU) the same year, in the visual culture course of the educational department; she graduated in the class of Zlatko Keser in 2001. She has been a member

59


godine zaposlena u Hrvatskom narodnom kazalištu u Zagrebu na oslikavanju scenografija (kazališna slikarica). 2011. magistrirala na Akademiji likovne umjetnosti u Ljubljani, smjer slikarstvo, u klasi prof. Bojana Gorenca Predaje na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu u umjetničko-nastavnom zvanju izvanredne profesorice. Domagoj Sušac

Domagoj Sušac (1974. Zagreb), akademski slikar-grafičar, diplomirao je na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti Zagreb 2000. godine u klasi prof. M. Šuteja. Od 2005. godine zaposlen je na Likovnom odsjeku Umjetničke akademije u Osijeku. Nagrađivan je za svoj umjetnički rad. Živi i radi u Osijeku. Mario Čaušić

Mario Čaušić rođen je u Osijeku 1972. Diplomirao je grafičko slikarstvo 2001. na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu 2001. u klasi profesora Ante Kuduza. Profesionalno se bavi suvremenom vizualnom umjetnošću izražavajući se u različitim medijma, a poglavito u medijima grafike, crteža, slikarstva, videa i instalacije. Temeljna preokupacija njegovog rada su istraživanja različitih područja prostora te proširivanje područja vizualnog izraza. Umjetnik aktivno izlaže od 1998. te je do sada sudjelovao u više od sto skupnih i samostalnih izložbi u zemlji i inozemstvu. Za svoj rad je dobio više nagrada, kao što su: 2010. Posebno priznanje, 22. Slavonskog biennala, Osijek, 2009. Nagrada HDLU-a Zagreb na 5. hrvatskom triennalu grafike, Zagreb, 2008. Ex aequo, 21. Slavonski biennale, Osijek, 2007. Nagrada UNICA na Festivalu jednominutnog filma Požega, 2004. Ex aequo, 19. Slavonski biennale, Osijek, 2000. druga nagrada na IVth Student International Art Biennale, Skopje, Makedonija. Organizirao je i sudjelovao u više likovno-grafičkih radionica. Od 2005. je zaposlen na Akademiji za umjetnost i kulturu u Osijeku na Odsjeku za likovnu umjetnost na kolegiju grafike gdje i danas radi u zvanju izvanrednog profesora. Radovi mu se nalaze u različitim fundacijama u zemlji i inozemstvu. Član je HDLUa Osijek. Živi i radi u Osijeku.

60

of the Croatian Association of Visual Artists (HDLU) since 1996. From 2004 to 2012 she was employed in the Croatian National Theatre in Zagreb as a scenographer and set painter. In 2011 she took a master’s in the Academy of Fine Art in Ljubljana, painting major, class of Bojan Gorenc. She teaches at the Zagreb Academy of Fine Art (ALU), where she holds the rank of associate professor. Domagoj Sušac (1974. Zagreb) an academic painter-printmaker, graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb in 2000, in the class of prof. M. Šutej. Since 2005, he has been working at the Department of Fine Arts of the Academy of Arts in Osijek.He has received several awards for his artistic work. He lives and works in Osijek. Mario Čaušić was born in Osijek in 1972. He graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb in 2001 at the Graphic Arts department in the class of professor Ante Kuduz. He has been professionally involved in contemporary visual art expressing himself in different media, primarily printmaking, drawing, painting, video and installation. The main area of his interest is exploring space as well as expanding the area of visual expression. The artist has been actively exhibiting since 1998 and until now has participated in more than a hundred group and solo exhibitions in Croatia and abroad. He has won significant art awards for his work such as: 2010 Special Award at 22nd Slavonian Biennial in Osijek, 2009 HDLU Zagreb Award at the 5th Croatian Graphic Triennial in Zagreb, 2008 Ex aequo Award at the 21st Slavonian Biennial in Osijek, 2007 UNICA Award at the One-Minute Film Festival in Požega, 2004 Ex aequo Award at the 19th Slavonian Biennial in Osijek, Second prize at the IVth Student International Art Biennial in Skopje, Macedonia. Since 2005 he has been employed at the Academy of Arts and Culture, Department of Fine Arts, currently as an assistant professor of graphic arts. His works are included in different art collections in Croatia and abroad. Mario holds membership with the Croatian Association of Artists in Osijek, where he currently lives and works.


Josip Brandis

Josip Brandis, vizualni umjetnik i likovni pedagog, rođen u Đakovu 1989. godine. Diplomirao je 2013. na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku, Odsjek likovne umjetnosti, modul slikarstvo (MA). Svoju umjetničku djelatnost na području suvremene likovne prakse, istražuje u mediju slikarstva i proširenog kiparstva. Kroz samostalne i skupne izložbe aktivno djeluje na domaćoj likovnoj sceni. Autor je nekoliko javnih skulptura u zemlji i inozemstvu. Aktivni je član HDLU-a Osijek. Suosnivač je umjetničke

Josip Brandis is visual artist and art teacher, born in Đakovo, Croatia 1989. In 2013, he graduated with honors from Academy of Arts in Osijek, Croatia. His area of study was Fine art – painting. He explores his modern artistic activity through painting and extended sculpture. Various solo and group exhibitions at home and abroad allowed him to be recognized as an active artist. In order to pursue his passion for arts, he joined Croatian Association

Kristina Lenard živi i radi u Zagrebu. Njena su najnovija djela instalacije koje se zasnivaju na istraživanju krajolika i fotografiji. Do sada je imala pojedinačne i skupne izložbe u Hrvatskoj, Sloveniji, Japanu, Austriji, Njemačkoj, Danskoj i Švedskoj. Sudjelovala je u programima artists in residence u Krakovu (Poljska, Akademija likovne umjetnosti) te u Göteborgu (Švedska, Akademija likovne umjetnosti). Dobila je stipendiju „Kulturkontakt“ u Austriji kao i nagradu publike na 9. trijenalu hrvatske skulpture.

Kristina Lenard lives and works in Zagreb. Her newest works are installations that are based on exploring landscape and photography. Until now she has had solo and group exhibitions in Croatia, Slovenia, Japan, Austria, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden. She participated in artists in residence programmes in Krakow (Poland, Academy of Fine Arts), as well as in Göteborg (Sweden, Academy of Fine Arts). She was the recipient of the “Kulturkontakt” scholarship, as well as the audience award at the 9th Triennial of Croatian Sculpture.

Kristina Lenard

Sebastijan Dračić

Sebastijan Dračić rođen je u Zagrebu 1980. godine. Diplomirao je u klasi Zlatka Kesera na Slikarskom odsjeku Akademije likovnih umjetnosti Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Izlagao je na desetak samostalnih i četrdesetak skupnih izložbi u Hrvatskoj i inozemstvu (Austrija, Njemačka, Poljska, Italija, Srbija, Kina). Dobitnik je stipendije The Pollock-Krasner Foundation 2012. I 2019. godine. Sudjelovao je na rezidencijalnim programima Kulturkontakt Austria u Beču 2009 i One-sided story u Leipzigu 2012. Asistent je na Nastavničkom odsjeku Akademije likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu.

Sebastijan Dračić was born in Zagreb in 1980. He graduated in the class of Zlatko Keser at the Painting Department of the Academy of Fine Arts of the University of Zagreb. He has exhibited at about a dozen independent and forty group exhibitions in Croatia and abroad (Austria, Germany, Poland, Italy, Serbia, China). Grantee of The Pollock-Krasner Foundation in 2012 and 2019. He participated in the art residency programs Kulturkontakt Austria in Vienna 2009 and One-sided story in Leipzig 2012. Assistant Professor at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb

Zlatan Vrkljan je rođen 1955. u Zagrebu. Maturirao 1973. u bjelovarskoj gimnaziji. Godine 1979. diplomirao je slikarstvo na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, u klasi profesora Šime Perića. Od 1979. do 1981. suradnik je Majstorske radionice profesora Ljube Ivančića i Nikole Reisera. Od 1987. do 1994. zaposlen kao asistent i docent na ALU u Zagrebu, gdje je predavao Crtanje na I. godini nastavničkog odjela, Slikanje II. godini nastavničkog odjela

Zlatan Vrkljan was born in 1955 in Zagreb. He graduated in 1973 from the grammar school in Bjelovar. In 1979 he graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb, in the class of professor Šime Perić. From 1979 until 1981 he was an associate of the Master workshop of professors Ljubo Ivančić and Nikola Reiser. Between 1987 and 1994 he was employed as a lecturer at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb, where he taught Drawing to the students of

Zlatan Vrkljan

61


te bio voditelj klase na slikarskom odjelu ALU Zagreb. Inicijator je i jedan od suosnivača galerije Arteria i njezin umjetnički direktor od 1994. do 1999. godine. Od 2006. godine docent je na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu i član suradnik HAZU.

Ivona Jurić Kljajo

Ivona Jurić Kljajo rođena je 1987. godine u Zagrebu. Godine 2005. završila je Školu primijenjene umjetnosti i dizajna. Diplomirala je slikarstvo na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, 2010. godine u klasi profesora Duje Jurića. Tijekom studija boravila je tri mjeseca u Brnu, Češka. Godine 2014. ostvarila je rezidencijalni boravak Cite Internationale des Arts u Parizu, 2015.g. Air Kaunas u Litvi, a 2016. CEEC u Kini. Dobitnica je nagrade Akademije likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu za izuzetan uspjeh tijekom studija i za vrijeme izrade diplomskog rada. Dobitnica je Nagrade Hrvatskog društva likovnih umjetnika za mladog umjetnika 2013.g, Velike otkupne nagrade 7. hrvatskog triennala akvarela 2016. godine i Otkupne nagrade Kabineta grafike HAZU 2018.g. Članica je Hrvatskog društva likovnih umjetnika (HDLU). Sudjelovala je na brojnim skupnim i samostalnim izložbama. Živi i radi u Zagrebu. Josip Alebić

Josip Alebić rođen je 1945. godine u Osijeku gdje je završio osnovnu školu i gimnaziju. Diplomirao je slikarstvo na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Beogradu 1971., a 1974. završio je poslijediplomski studij te stekao naobrazbu magistra slikarstva. Do umirovljenja je bio redoviti profesor Akademije likovnih umjetnosti u Sarajevu i vanjski suradnik na umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku gdje je obnašao i dužnost dekana. Održao je niz samostalnih i skupnih izložbi u zemlji i inozemstvu, a 2017. godine izdana mu je u izdanju Muzeja likovnih umjetnosti u Osijeku i monografija autora Igora Loinjaka. Zdravko Milić

Zdravko Milić rođen je 1953. godine u Labinu. Srednju Školu primijenjenih umjetnosti, odjel grafike, završio je u Splitu 1973. Diplomirao

62

the first year at the Art Education Department, Painting to the students of the second year at the Art Education Department, and he was the head of the class in the Painting Department at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb. He is the initiator and one of the co-founders of the Arteria gallery, and was its art director from 1994 until 1999. Since 2006 he has been a lecturer at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb and an associate member of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Art. Ivona Jurić Kljajo was born 1987 in Zagreb, Croatia. In 2005 she completed her studies at The School of Applied Arts and Design. She graduated painting in 2010 at The Academy of Fine Arts in class of profesor Duje Jurić. She participated in various Residency programs in Europe and Asia. Was awarded An outstanding achievement for her work and presentation of her Thesis theme in 2010, also The Young Artist Award from The Croatian Association of Artists in 2013, The Grand Prix of The 7th Watercolor Triannial in 2016 and The Prize of the Cabinet of Graphic Arts HAZU in 2018. She is a member of The Croatian Association of Artists. Lives and works in Zagreb, Croatia.

Josip Alebić was born in 1945 in Osijek, where he graduated from elementary and grammar school. He graduated in painting at the Academy of Fine Arts in Belgrade in 1971, and in 1974 he finished his postgraduate studies and gained the title of master of arts. Until his retirement he was a tenured professor at the Academy of Fine Arts in Sarajevo and an associate professor at the Academy of Arts and Culture in Osijek, where he also held the position of dean. He has held numerous solo and group exhibitions domestically and abroad, and in 2017 he had his monography written by the author Igor Loinjak and published by the Museum of Fine Arts in Osijek. Zdravko Milić was born in 1953 in Labin. In 1973 he graduated from the Department of Graphic Arts at the School of Applied Arts in


je slikarstvo na Accademia di Belle Arti u Veneciji, 1977. godine u klasi prof. Carmela Zottija. Stručno je usavršavao mozaik na École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts u Parizu u klasi prof. Ricarda Licate (1988.). Od 1978. do 2006. godine djeluje kao samostalni umjetnik. Član je HDLU Rijeka i HDLU Zagreb. Zaposlen je u zvanju redovitog profesora te predaje na kolegijima Slikarstvo i Mozaik na Akademiji primijenjenih umjetnosti Sveučilišta u Rijeci. Intenzivno izlaže od početka 70-ih godina. Izlagao je na 96 samostalnih te sudjelovao na preko 600 skupnih izložbi u zemlji i inozemstvu. Sudionik je velikog broja međunarodnih slikarskih i kiparskih simpozija, a za svoj je rad dobio mnoge nagrade i priznanja. Njegova djela nalaze se u mnogim značajnim privatnim i javnim zbirkama.

Hrvoje Duvnjak

Hrvoje Duvnjak rođen je 1977. godine u Đakovu. Nakon završene gimnazije upisao je slikarstvo na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu. Godine 2002. diplomirao je u klasi profesora Zlatka Kauzlarića – Atača. Od 2005. godine je asistent, te od 2011. docent slikarstva na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku. Od 2008. do 2012. bio je predsjednik Hrvatskog društva likovnih umjetnosti u Osijeku. Godine 2013. i 2014. bio je voditelj Likovnog odsjeka na Umjetničkoj akademiji u Osijeku. 2017. izabran je za predsjednika Kulturnog vijeća Grada Đakova. Hrvoje Duvnjak izlagao je na samostalnim i skupnim izložbama u zemlji i inozemstvu. Osim slikarstva bavi se dizajnom, animacijom i filmom.

Marko Tadić

Marko Tadić živi i radi u Zagrebu. Diplomirao je na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Firenci, Italija. Izlagao je na samostalnim, grupnim izložbama i filmskim festivalima u Hrvatskoj i inozemstvu, u prostorima u Zagrebu, Ljubljani, Beču, Kasselu, Berlinu, Los Angelesu i New Yorku. Dobitnik je niza nagrada te je sudjelovao na brojnim rezidencijama i studijskim programima. Radi na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu. Zajedno s Tinom Gverović predstavljao je 2017. godine Hrvatsku na 57. Bijenalu u Veneciji.

Split. In 1977 he graduated in painting from the Accademia di Belle Arti in Venice, in the class of professor Carmelo Zotti. He underwent professional development in the field of mosaic art at the École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts in Paris, in the class of professor Ricardo Licata (1988). From 1978 until 2006 he was an independent artist. He is a member of the Croatian Association of Artists in Rijeka and Zagreb. He works as a tenured professor and lectures in the field of painting and mosaic art at the Academy of Applied Arts at the University of Rijeka. Since the early 1970s he has intensively exhibited his works. He has exhibited at 96 solo and over 600 group exhibitions both domestically and abroad. He participated in a great number of international painting and sculpting symposiums, and was awarded numerous awards and recognitions for his work. His works can be found in many significant private and public collections. Hrvoje Duvnjak was born in 1977 in Đakovo. After he had graduated from grammar school, he studied painting at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb. in 2002 he graduated in the class of professor Zlatko Kauzlarić-Atač. Since 2005 he has been a teaching assistant, and since 2011 a lecturer of painting at the Academy of Arts and Culture in Osijek. From 2008 until 2012 he was the president of the Croatian Association of Artists in Osijek. In 2013 and 2014 he was the head of the Department of Fine Art at the Academy of Arts and Culture in Osijek. In 2017 he was elected president of the Cultural Council of the city of Đakovo. Hrvoje Duvnjak exhibited his works in solo and group exhibitions both domestically and abroad. Aside from painting, he also engages in design, animation, and film. Marko Tadić lives and works in Zagreb. He graduated from the Academy of Fine Arts in Florence, Italy. He exhibited his works in solo and group exhibitions, as well as film festivals in Croatia and abroad, at locations in Zagreb, Ljubljana, Vienna, Kassel, Berlin, Los Angeles, and New York. He is the receiver of numerous awards and he participated in numerous residencies and study programmes. He works at the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb. Together with Tina Gverović he represented Croatia at the 57th Venice Biennale.

63


Zlatko Kozina

Zlatko Kozina (1968.Slav.Brod ), prof.likovne kulture, diplomirao je na Filozofskom fakultetu u Rijeci na Odsjeku likovne umjetnosti Od 2000. godine bavi se likovnom pedagogijom u osnovnim i srednjim školama, a od 2016.kao metodičar likovne kulture u zvanju docenta radi na Odsjeku za vizualne i medijske umjetnosti na Akademiji za umjetnost i kulturu u Osijeku. Davor Sanvincenti

Davor Sanvincenti (1979.) multimedijalni je umjetnik čije se područje djelovanja nalazi u fenomenologiji audiovizualnog i antropologiji vizualne kulture, uz fokus na propitivanje različitih stanja i oblika ljudskih osjeta i percepcija. Djeluje u  medijima filma i videa, fotografije, fizičke svjetlosne i zvučne instalacije te audiovizualnog performansa. U radovima se bavi konceptom iluzije, istražujući moguće granice percepcije te konstrukcije iskustva. Dobitnik je mnogih nagrada među kojima su Nagrada Radoslav Putar (2010.) za najboljeg umjetnika do 35 godina i HT nagrade (Muzej suvremene umjetnosti i Hrvatski Telekom, 2008. i 2017.). Izlagao je na brojnim međunarodnim izložbama i festivalima, poput International Film Festival Rotterdam; Rencontres Internationales Paris/ Berlin/Madrid; Device Art Triennale, Montreal; 28. Muzički biennale Zagreb; LOOP, Barcelona; 25 FPS, Zagreb; World Film Festival, Bangkok te na lokacijama poput Centre Georges Pompidou, Pariz; ZKM, Karlsruhe; Lincoln Center, New York; Universalmuseum Joanneum, Graz; Museo de Arte Contemporanea, Oaxaca; Camera Austria, Graz; FRAC Pays de la Loire, Carquefou; NIU, Barcelona; La Triennale, Milano; Filmoteca Española, Madrid; Glassbox, Paris; Haus der Kulturen der Welt, Berlin.

Zlatan Vehabović

Zlatan Vehabović rođen je 1982. godine u Banja Luci, Bosna i Hercegovina. U Zagrebu je 2000. godine završio Školu primijenjenih umjetnosti i dizajna. Školovanje nastavlja na Akademiji likovnih umjetnosti u Zagrebu, gdje je 2006. godine diplomirao slikarstvo u klasi prof. Zlatka Kesera. Iste godine dodijeljena mu je nagrada za najbolji diplomski rad. Na Akademiji likovnih

64

Zlatko Kozina (1968, Slavonski Brod), a professor of fine arts, graduated from the Department of Fine Arts at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Rijeka. Since 2000 he has been engaged in art pedagogy in primary and secondary schools, and since 2016 he has been a lecturer at the Department of Visual and Media Arts at the Academy of Arts and Culture in Osijek. Davor Sanvincenti (1979) is a multimedia artist from Croatia. He is specifically interested in a field of audiovisual phenomenology and anthropology of visual culture, particularly focused on the conditions and forms of human senses and perceptions. His artistic practice takes shape in the variety of media – film and video, photography, physical light and sound installations and live media performances. His work plays with the concept of illusion, exploring the possible boundaries of perception and the construction of experience. In 2010, he was recipient of the Radoslav Putar Award for the best Croatian artist under 35. In 2008 and 2017 he won HT award at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Zagreb.  His work has been exhibited and presented internationally, including festivals Device_Art Triennale - Montreal, 28th Music Biennale Zagreb, International Film Festival Rotterdam;  Rencontres Internationales - Paris/Berlin/ Madrid, LOOP - Barcelona, World Film Festival Bangkok, 25FPS - Zagreb, CineMed - Montpellier and venues including Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris; HfG/ZKM, Karlsruhe; UniversalMuseum Joanneum, Graz; Lincoln Center, New York; Museo de Arte Contemporaneo, Oaxaca; FRAC Pays de la Loire, Carquefou; Camera Austria, Graz; MoCA, Zagreb; La Triennale, Milano; NIU, Barcelona; Filmoteca Española, Madrid; Art Pavilion, Zagreb; Glassbox, Paris; Haus der Kulturen der Welt, Berlin. Zlatan Vehabović was born on March 31, 1982, in Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 2000 he graduated from the secondary School of Applied Arts and Design in Zagreb, in which city he went on with his education, graduating in 2006 from the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb, class of Zlatko Keser, being awarded a prize for the best dissertation piece.


umjetnosti u Zagrebu 2007. godine upisuje poslijediplomski doktorski studij slikarstva, a od 2016. godine na istoj instituciji radi kao asistent na Slikarskom odsjeku. Od 2006. godine do danas izlagao je na desetak samostalnih izložbi u Hrvatskoj i sudjelovao u preko četrdeset grupnih izložbi u Hrvatskoj i inozemstvu (Bosna i Hercegovina, Slovenija, Austrija, Njemačka, Italija, Danska, SAD). Za svoj rad primio je brojne nagrade i priznanja. Djela mu se nalaze u domaćim i stranim privatnim i javnim zbirkama (Zbirka Filip Trade / Lauba – Kuća za ljude i umjetnost, Zagreb; Zbirka Hypo Grupe, Zagreb; Zbirka Erste banke, Zagreb; Muzej Essl, Klosterneuburg, Austrija; Umjetnička zbirka Europskog parlamenta, Bruxelles, Belgija). Član je Hrvatskog društva likovnih umjetnika i Hrvatske zajednice samostalnih umjetnika. Živi i radi u Zagrebu.

In 2007 he enrolled in the Academy of Fine Arts in Zagreb again, this time for the doctoral course in painting, and since 2016 he has been employed at this institution as instructor in painting. Since 2006 he has shown his work at some ten solo exhibitions in Croatia and taken part in over forty collective shows in Croatia and abroad (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia, Austria, Italy, Denmark, the USA). He has received numerous prizes and awards for his work. His works are to be found in domestic and foreign private and public collections (the Filip Trade Collection / Lauba –House for People and Art, Zagreb; the Hypo Group Collection, Zagreb; the Erste bank Collection, Zagreb; Essl Museum, Klosterneuburg, Austria; the Art Collection of the European Parliament, Brussels). He is a member of the Croatian Association of Artists and the Croatian Association of Freelance Artists.

65


Prostori krajolika Landscape Spaces Galerija Prsten / Prsten Gallery Dom hrvatskog druĹĄtva likovnih umjetnika / Home of Croatian Association of Fine Artists Zagreb, Croatia

4. – 22. rujan 2019 September 4 - 22, 2019


Landscape Spaces

Profile for HDLU

Prostori krajolika  

Grupna izložba, Prostori krajolika, Galerija Prsten, 4. - 22.9.2019. Kustosi izložbe: Domagoj Sušac i Igor Loinjak

Prostori krajolika  

Grupna izložba, Prostori krajolika, Galerija Prsten, 4. - 22.9.2019. Kustosi izložbe: Domagoj Sušac i Igor Loinjak

Profile for hdlu6
Advertisement

Recommendations could not be loaded

Recommendations could not be loaded

Recommendations could not be loaded

Recommendations could not be loaded