Somogyi Néplap [Somogy People’s Daily], Kaposvár, 13 August 1970
/excerpts/
... they turned crumbling walls, broken windows, a neglected and dilapidated building into a shrine. Why? I asked, and this was their answer:
“Artistic creation itself is sacrifice, a desire to give.”
A nice thought.
And what else is behind it?
They formed a group. They have shared approaches and ideas and ... they want to redeem the world.
I know this statement can be ambiguous, and it may well be, and for good measure. While I’d want to passionately talk about this undertaking, about the desire to give, despite wanting to enthusiastically praise beauty, goodness and action, I have serious concerns and not mainly in connection with the exhibition but much rather because of the events organised around it and the message they convey.
But more about that later.
They are young. And just like anyone else their age, let’s say even in the 13th century or in later periods, they want to break down barriers. But what barriers do they want to break down exactly? Their works and their messages barely give us a clue in this regard, while it’s also true that even visitors not so well-versed in the fine arts can enjoy and be inspired by the stylistic attributes they encounter here, which are not exactly new but regarded as modern in today’s art scene. I believe in tense energy, I love and appreciate the urge to do something new, actions inspired by youthful passion and dedication, and I respect ambition even when it is aimed at dismantling barriers. Let me stress: it is the ideology and the implicit content of this undertaking that I’m disputing.
On Sundays various events are held in the chapel. The most recent invitation card advertised the poet Tibor Gyurkovics, who gave an introductory speech about “the connection between modern painting and poetry”. Well, his speech began like this: “Unlike it’s stated on the invitation, I see no connection whatsoever between modern painting and modern poetry.” This was the overture to such intellectual chaos that, to say the least, raises doubt in the listener in regard to the undertaking. It’s not the inclusion of the officially accepted cultural policy that I’m missing – even though these events are organised for large crowds –, nor that there is no official jury to evaluate the exhibited works. I regard all this as home shows or studio visits, and it is good, innovative and interesting. I wish I could say it with conviction that our young artists do not wish to do away with the “limitations of our cultural policy” but much rather to address the subjectivity and the occasional manifestation of ill will that can be seen in implementation and jurying (and so forth). But there is no time for debate. There are only performers and an audience listening quietly.
I’ve read it: the Catholic weekly ÚJ EMBER [NEW MAN] wrote an article about Galántai’s project...
Well, I’m aware of it too. I love youthful dynamism and the urge to act, I love the pictures on the wall of the cosy chapel; I enjoyed listening to Attila Nagy, who recited poems, mainly about painters, with a deep sense of inspiration. I was much impressed with the guitar music played by Béla Sztankovics too.
Yet, I must say: it would be better to stick to the fine arts. It would be better to bring to completion the original project, as it was envisioned, and it would be better to first bring down the barriers inside of us, without extra events and great words...
Nevertheless, the chapel exhibition is remarkable.