#malevich

"Like it or not, the ancient idea of decomposing the Black Square into prime factors drilled into my head, I found my notes, and there I wrote down something years ago: what is the Black Square after experiencing the division of art into "after Duchamp" and "after Picasso". It can be said that the urinal closed the study of the boundaries of art (because why study the researched?), And Picasso closed the discussion of "performance". But if this is true, the question arises, what opened the Black Square?  These are questions, or rather questions for the stout minds of pearl divers, the task for me is how to paint a picture that "opened" the Black Square. In other words, how to deconstruct it, using the concept of Jacques Derrida. if  "There is nothing but the text" is nothing but the image. Can the Black Square be painted today? How to do it? And why am I confusing Susan Sontag's thinking about art theory with Derrida and about to add Wittgenstein? Because my Black Square will (if I ever paint it) as "mimetic" and as "realistic" as "decorative" was in Malewicz's work. Today's Black Square will be, on the one hand, an image of a painting, and on the other, an attempt at interpretation. It should omit, abandon, as Sontag says (can be scrapped without ever moving outside the problems delimited by the mimetic theory), the problem set by the Platonic mimetic theory, it should be as "realistic" as abstract art is not decorative and as "out of time" "As far as the Black Square was the beginning and the end, it was a point of infinite value".

Marcin Osiowski, notes (exerpt), 2003