Zdeněk Sýkora - Line no.50, 1988, oil on canvas, 200x200 cm
AS INTERVIEWED BY VÍTEK ČAPEK
The turning point in your work was "Grey Structure," 1962-63. What gave you the idea for it? I found my way to structural work via a gradual process of "objectivisation" and the reduction of expressional means to colored flat geometric patterns which were set in balance. This sign - element - which I restricted to white, grey and black so that I could get as far away from associativeness as possible, directly lent itself to line arranging, revolving and grouping. Klee's definition of structure as a separable, divisible system, then laid down the path for my next work. I arrived at the further development of combinatory possibilities with primary elements in their own and mutual positions until I reached a phase where my intuitive work with the elements seemed illogical and the computer began to take over.
The result of several years' collaboration with mathematician Jaroslav Blažek was a very well thought-out system which we described in detail in the Leonardo review.
What opportunities opened up to you with the use of computers?
I started using computers with the influence of various circumstances which probably had the following sequence: I have already clarified my route to structural paintings, and another factor was the period around the year 1960 which meant for us the chance to use computers in our work. In the art world, this was and still is understood as heresy, like something dangerous for this "fragile realm of feelings."
Art which doesn't feel or isn't capable of perceiving the spiritual pathos of contemporary scientific knowledge and actual work, is not the art of today or the future. I am continually intrigued by the possibilities of New media and knowledge so long as it deepens or clarifies the expression of my life emotions.
Let us return to the computer which functions within the working process. It assists you in your work. Do you allow for the fact that its language also influenced you?
I have to make a few things clear concerning my relationship with computers. During the phases where one decides to use the computer, the material has to be set into elements which can be brought into the binary language of computers. This applies in all fields. My "Grey Structure" was even construed by instinct. The basic rule was the attempt to ensure that the vicinity of the same elements would, as far as possible, never be repeated. I didn't ever think of using a computer at that time.
Later, when I started working with Dr. Jaroslav Blažek, I was forced to accept a consistent rational logic which in no way impoverished my ideas, on the contrary, in fact.
The first works using the computer showed that consistent adherence to a set system disturbed a number of artistic conventions, composition or otherwise, which would, for example, probably not allow for the same element to be repeated ten times one after the other. The computer then can influence one's thinking in that it behaves more logically and accurately.
Your structures manifested the character of general relational character. What, then, was the relationship between the development itself within the divided structure and the format of the canvas? What was the motrvation of irregular formats?
The sense was really the maximum exhaustion of the combinatory possibilities of mutual and individual positions concerning the basic line of elements. The structure itself developed around several starting elements and continued outside the format of the canvas. It did not provide a resolution of the area. In order to capture the maximum number of mutual relations, it was necessary to use large formats. So that I could emphasise these characteristics I later set down an axis of lines and columns running along at angles with the axis of the canvas format...
After structures followed macrostructures where you began to take an interest in outlines - the borders between equal quantities of black and white. Finally, you worked with lines which no longer created the entire area but were positioned in emptiness. Could you explain this in greater detail?
The macrostructures emerged at the close of programmed structures. They were an expression of my endeavors to show their combinatory nature unambiguously. Macrostructures also emphasised the elementary base. It was a coincidence that in this way I showed myself the expressional and significant force of the lines which emerged with the joining of the spherical parts of the individual elements as borders between their black and white areas. The lines continued to fascinate me. I still concentrated on a rational method which appeared to me as the mainstay of the work. The starting point was still the square, complemented with diagonals. The perpendicular, horizontal, and diagonal lines functioned as tangents of a future line. Each line had its chance sequence of tangents, each following on from one another. The result of this method were lines of a sufficiently stereotypical character where the restrictive role of the lines was too prominent.
I later developed a new possibility. The connecting line of the centre of the dial with the individual numbers of the clock created the fundamental directions for the new tangents. Each subsequent tangent began at the end of the previous one, and could orient itself in twelve different directions. The relevant arc corresponded to each angle which the tangents formed. These new lines already had the natural character of independence. The restrictive bars of the lines and columns disappeared, therefore also the connection with the area of the canvas. Its white colour now represents emptiness as the natural surroundings for coincidence.
Your work relies on reason, what departs from its structural character. It is work which anticipates the nature of its possibilities. From the limitations of set regulations comes optimum totality.
Each work knows the nature of its potential, whether it relies on reason or instinct. The form, among other things, is a product of its own limitations. The complement and continuation of this limitation is art.
The structural principle isn't new; it was already quite prominent in the past: Michelangelo, Bach, Cézanne-these are examples among many others. The structural principle is always bound to the certain typological quality of the artist. The relationship between the rational and emotional realms can be considered as a natural characteristic of human psychology. I don't know of any artistic manifestation whereby one or the other would be missing. It's obviously a question of their mutual proportion and sequence. What is probably important is the question asking which element is the defining one in the creative process and when.
It would seem that chance phenomena, too, are governed by law. One and the same phenomenon can be described as chance while, from another point of view, it appears as the determining factor. In what way is chance applied in your work?
There are situations and phenomena, unassumed and inexplicable, which we necessarily have to define as chance. It seems paradoxical that it is in exact sciences that the concept of chance has taken on such plasticity. Randomness conditions too many situations. We are forced to prove it with more and more faith. Each incidence of randomness is bound to elements which are capable of creating relationships. This isn't a chance "per se"; they are only extremely complex changeable relationships which cannot be seen in advance. It's a kind of "higher order" which we cannot understand, but can feel all the more. I think that the relationship of understanding-feeling is decisive for the sense of freedom.
The use of chance in my work is of key importance at this time. In 1960, I tried to acquire greater objectivity. During that period, strict programming was relevant to my work where randomness was almost eliminated. Now I see in chance a higher level of objectivity. I have the feeling that randomness would be one of the qualities of the possibility of direct contact with the universe. Randomness in the broader sense enlightens my instinctive relationship to Zen and Tao to date.
What, then, is the value and sense of randomness? Since the beginning of the century it functioned as the purifying instrument in art. It was the basis of the logic of Dadaism and Surrealism. There has not been any field of art which it did not affect to a considerable degree. The concept of chance contains more philosophical, semantic and mathematical deusion than any other. It does not provide any certainty. However, even in its most problematic form, it is a rich source of freedom.
1985
translated by Karolína Vočadlo
NOTES:
1 ) Vol. 3, p. 409-413, Pergamon Press, Oxford-New york 1970
Zdeněk Sýkora, born 1920 in Louny. Studied at the High School of Architecture and Building and at the Pedagogical Faculty in Prague 1945-47. 1960, geometrical paintings, 1961-62, hard-edge paintings, 1962-63, first structures, 1963 member of the group Křižovatka (Crossroad), 1964, first coputer-aided structures - collaboration with the mathematician Jaroslav Blažek, 1967-69, realizations in architecture, 1972-73 end of his period of structures and development of a new system of line works based on accidental nature. Lives and works in Louny.