A retrospective that does not raise relevant questions or seek to address the challenges of the present can become superficial. The recognition of an artist as a genius loses its meaning if his works are not analyzed and interpreted in modern society. As noted art critic Robert Hughes observed: “The great problem with art retrospectives is that they often become a triumph of the past rather than a challenge to the present.”
After visiting the exhibition “Angelina Banytė: classics of modern frescoes and mosaics” in the Pranas Domšaitis gallery of LNDM, this problem became extremely significant for me. Does this retrospective manage to raise relevant discourses, or does it simply remain a sign of respect for the artist, without a deeper analysis of the contemporary context? Such questions become essential in evaluating the success of the exhibition.
Curator Ramutė Rachlevičiūtė’s approach seems to be more focused on the aesthetic aspects of A.Banytė’s work, losing the deeper social and historical dimension. The author’s work is undoubtedly impressive and worthy of attention, and the organization of the exhibition is a welcome step.
However, curatorial fatigue and a lack of new ideas can be felt in the exhibition. At the center of the exhibition is a work that was already shown five years ago in the project “Angelina Banytė. Monumentality in silence” (curator Neringa Poškutė-Jukumienė, photographer Gintautas Beržinskas) is a reproduced print of the fresco-sgraffito “Gifts of Nature” (1978) in real size.
Although this work dominates the exhibition, perfectly revealing how the master of monumental art is able to master huge scales, the lack of innovation and creative drive of the organizers does not allow the exhibition to stand out and leave a truly memorable impression.
The exhibits placed in front of the mural seal create a sharp visual and conceptual contrast, revealing the more intimate nuances of the creation. These smaller-scale works, exhibited on a light, see-through stand, not only give the exhibition a sense of space and lightness, but also highlight the themes of fragmentation and temporality.
Gabrielė Navickaitė / 15min photo./Angelina Banytė exhibition opening in Klaipėda, 2024 July 11
The exhibition feels the tension between monumentality and intimacy, between what is obvious and what remains hidden. This dynamic interaction allows the visitor to experience the works not only as visual objects, but also as sources of deeper reflection, inviting us to rethink the artist’s relationship with space, time and the viewer.
Wall compositions become a counterpoint to a series of drawings in which the contrast between smaller scale and monumental formats is revealed. This contrast not only intensifies the rhythm of the exhibition, but also subtly reveals the universality of the artist’s work – the ability to skillfully manipulate space, regardless of its scale. But, as in the allegorical battle between Gargantiua and Pantagriuel, monumentality triumphs, emphasizing the primacy of grandeur over intimacy.
There is also the question of how much the aim of this exhibition is to reveal the peculiarities of the fresco artist’s work, which are represented here by the sketches and fresco and mosaic projects from the artist’s workshop. While these elements may be interesting to the audience, they may not adequately convey the complexity of this work.
Perhaps the exhibition would have benefited from the inclusion of video footage demonstrating the artist’s preparation process and the contribution of her energy to each work, as well as a broader discussion of the context of the mural, particularly its role in the deconstruction of Soviet art, and encouraging a more open discussion of these aspects.
Gabrielė Navickaitė / 15min photo./Angelina Banytė exhibition opening in Klaipėda, 2024 July 11
The last forty-five years have been transformative for Lithuanian monumental art. The artist A.Banytė, who finished her studies in the mid-1980s, still had time to experience the “golden age” of monumentalists, when public interiors were decorated with works of monumental art.
However, after the restoration of independence, the system of state commissions for frescoes, stained glass and mosaics ceased, creating serious challenges for artists who were forced to rethink the meaning of their work and fight for survival. Although the art of the Soviet era is considered controversial, it should not be underestimated – despite the censorship, artists often maintained their value beliefs and created authentic art.
The recent amendments to the Law on Architecture, mandating that at least 1 percent of the state-funded objects be dedicated to works of art, offer hope that monumental art will once again become available to the public, not limited to private or commercial spaces.
Looking at the exhibition, one wonders why we are trying to force a long-distance runner to compete in the hundred-meter event. After all, the artist’s strongest side is huge, monumental murals that occupy many square meters in public spaces. Wouldn’t it be better to emphasize this impressive scale and monumentality instead of trying to highlight the artist’s abilities in portraiture or still life art?
In this case, the exhibition is reminiscent of the “Very demure, very mindful” TikTok meme, a careful but slightly muted approach to the creator’s work, when in fact her work deserves not restraint, but majesty and full recognition.
The exhibition lacks detail: visitors never see what the main works of the author are, what they look like and what the true power of her talent is.
Nevertheless, the most curious can take a look at the author’s works on their own, perhaps by visiting them in public spaces, such as universities or hospitals, where they have always been around us. It is important to hope that the artist’s work will not be forgotten and will receive due attention of the younger generation.
After seeing the rolled up rolls of sketch paper on display at the exhibition, I asked a gallery employee if these were the artist’s unexposed sketches. I was told they were just empty rolls.
What do empty sketch rolls do in an artist’s retrospective? Does it symbolize untapped potential, future prospects? Why are these scrolls displayed empty, unwrapped, as if hiding some secret? Perhaps this is the central motif of the exhibition – that something remains hidden and our curiosity is never satisfied. But even in the face of the inevitable veil of mystery, our thirst for knowledge remains unquenchable.
#Rosana #Lukauskaitė #Gullivers #journey #Angelina #Banytė #artist #transcends #scale #time #space #Culture
2024-08-21 10:10:46
