Statics 1988

Curator: So, tell me, what strikes you first about Dmytro Kavsan's "Statics" from 1988? It’s oil paint on, what looks like, a heavily worked canvas. Editor: Well, the colors are muted, and the forms are quite blurred, but it's very tactile. It looks like it's trying to say something about the relationship between classical forms and, well, chaos? How would you read this in terms of its materiality? Curator: I think we need to examine Kavsan's process. Notice the application of the paint itself: thick, almost sculptural in places. The material resists easy interpretation, doesn't it? What does that say about the stability, the 'statics' the title promises, or fails to deliver? Editor: That's a great point, I hadn’t thought of it that way! I was too caught up in trying to find a literal representation of 'statics' instead of thinking about what the texture tells us. Curator: Exactly! Kavsan challenges us to look beyond the surface, to consider the labor involved. Oil paint isn't a neutral medium. Think about its history, its associations with wealth and power. Is he embracing or critiquing that history? Editor: I guess I always just thought about the aesthetic qualities rather than where the materials came from, or how they situate the artwork within broader systems. Curator: Right. And consider how readily available oil paint was becoming during that period, moving from artisanal production towards mass manufacture. This, in turn, democratized artistic practice, yet simultaneously threatened traditional craftmanship. This painting is neither slick nor perfectly representational, so what does that tell us? Editor: It pushes me to reconsider art's place in a world of mass production. Curator: Indeed. And remember, the artist doesn’t operate in a vacuum. Investigating the context of its creation might alter the way we view that column... It's all there, within the materials themselves. Editor: I’ll never look at a painting the same way again!