The Chiffonier: Sergei Sviatchenko - Art, Archetypes and Philosophy

Written by Sviatchenko, Sergei

Sergei Sviatchenko: Art, Archetypes and Philosophy �Sergei Sviatchenko is an artist constantly in flux. His shape-shifting art draws on the world around him, harnessing the cultural tides with twenty-five years of image-making. Sviatchenko speaks a unique creative language. His art sits somewhere between the known and the unimaginable � merging pop culture with politics, personal memory with collective histories, or architecture and science with the logic of dreams.� (Faye Dowling, curator and photographic editor at Dazed & Confused, London) Sergei Sviatchenko strikes me as an artist who is comfortable with the fusion of contrasting elements. That is, an artist whose vision does not carve the world up into mutually exclusive categories. An artist whose vision speaks to people across time and space. Sviatchenko states that the �purpose of [his] work is to find some sort of code�, that resonates on an �unconscious level� within people from both his generation and the �new internet generation�, in order to �create the act of communication�. More specifically, he intends to �create� this �new visual language� by combining traditional collage methods with the new �digital medium� of the internet. In his project entitled �LESS� (a collection of multimedia photo collages), he encourages us as spectators to �reflect upon the power of images and think about how meaning is attributed, exchanged and constantly contested�. That is, he encourages us to view an artwork�s �meaning� as a fluid concept; subject to different perspectives from different individuals and perhaps even within the same individual. His artworks thus seem to merge the familiar with the unfamiliar, the essential with the particular, and the traditional with the modern. In particular, Sviatchenko refers to the notion of �archetypes�, as outlined in the Analytical Psychology of Carl Jung, as a primary source of inspiration, believing that it provides a �nourishing basis for the creative imagination�. There are some who share Sviatchenko�s interest in symbols, myths, dreams and the realm of the unconscious in general. For example, Michael Stratton, in his article �Akira Kurosawa�s dreams: creating an unconscious autobiography�, examines the significance of eight dreams presented in the film Akira Kurosawa�s Dreams. For Stratton, this film not only provides revealing insights into Kurosawa�s life, but it also enables us to �further explore our own lives through the viewing of the most primitive yet advanced aspects of ourselves � our dreams�. Furthermore, he promotes the concept of �dream appreciation� rather than �dream interpretation� as he believes that the latter approach is somewhat �reductive�, �leaving us with simplistic answers for symbols that may have many layers and resonate in different ways in response to different tones�. According to Stratton, the �shift in perspective� that occurs when we view the world and ourselves through the �lens of a work of art� or �our dreams�, �can offer us a cornucopia of options for perception�. He thus seems to share Sviatchenko�s view that an artwork�s �meaning� (for want of a better word) is fluid, rather than merely static and unequivocal. On a broader level, perhaps what is most striking about Sviatchenko�s artworks is his fusion of the eternal and immutable aspect of existence with its changeable and contingent aspect. On the one hand, he draws upon the Jungian notion of archetypes, that is, the symbols, myths and images that are embedded in the �collective unconscious� and that thus transcend time and place. On the other hand, he is also concerned with the evolution of these �archetypes� through their confrontation and intertwining with the empirical aspects of existence, that is, the continually changing social, political and historical environment in which they are embedded. As Sviatchenko states, �My memory keeps and reflects the historical and political events, music, style and art of the 1960s-1970s. Those powerful and important years break through from the unconscious and stimulate action�. While Sviatchenko�s artworks seem to seamlessly fuse change with changelessness, this fusion between these two apparently contradictory elements has not always been seamless in the philosophical tradition. It would perhaps be interesting to explore these notions of archetypes, change and changelessness (that are suggested in Sviatchenko�s artworks) by tracing them back to their philosophical roots. To this end, I will discuss the philosophy of Plato, Heraclitus and Nietzsche. Plato�s �Theory of Forms�, which is crucial to his Metaphysics and Epistemology, presents us with one of the earliest notions of archetypes. For Plato, �forms�, being divine, immutable and eternal, are �special entities� that �exist outside of space and time and that are both the objects of knowledge and somehow the cause of whatever transpires in the physical world�. These �forms� are �universals�, in other words, �feature[s]� or �propert[ies]� that can be �shared� by �many� or a few things. A paradigm example of a Platonic �form�, which is particularly relevant to art, is Beauty. According to Plato, only those who are able to differentiate between the �idea� (i.e. the �form�) of �absolute beauty� and �objects which participate in the idea� (e.g. beautiful paintings, flowers, people, etc.) possess �knowledge� (rather than mere �opinion�). Furthermore, only these people may be called �true philosophers� or �lovers of the vision of truth�. In contrast with Plato�s emphasis upon the realm of eternal and immutable forms, Heraclitus (as he was interpreted by Plato) presents us with the �flux doctrine� or the idea that the �material� or physical world is continually changing. (Please note that Plato�s interpretation of Heraclitus has been the subject of much debate over the years.) Nietzsche�s notion of �becoming� bears Heraclitus� imprint. For Nietzsche, �movement� possesses �real immortality�, in other words, what is unchangeable is change itself. He thus (rather poetically and cryptically) describes �becoming� as the �everlasting and exclusive coming-to-be, the impermanence of everything actual, which constantly acts and comes-to-be but never is�. In fact, it is probably Nietzsche who links art, change and changelessness in the most interesting way. He encourages us to view the �world� in which we live as a �painting� that is continually �evolving� and ourselves as the �painters� of this �world�. Unlike Plato who views painters unfavourably as being �imitator[s]� who are far removed from the �truth�, Nietzsche thinks that this �world� that we have painted with our �moral, aesthetic, and religious claims� is the �result of a number of errors and fantasies�, but nevertheless contains a �collected treasure of our entire past�. As the abovementioned statement suggests, Nietzsche is not overly concerned with the dichotomy between truth and illusion. Truth, for him, is simply a human creation or construct, the �sum of human relations which have been poetically and rhetorically intensified, transferred, and embellished, and which, after long usage, seem to a people to be fixed, canonical, and binding�. The question remains as to where we could situate Sergei Sviatchenko�s artistic vision in this philosophical collage. As an artist who, in Faye Dowling�s words, �is constantly in flux�, perhaps Sviatchenko is attempting to capture this ever-changing and fundamentally human world of art in his collages and films. A world wherein meanings and symbols are simultaneously solidified, eroded and propelled along the ever-flowing river of time. A Heraclitean world wherein �You cannot step twice into the same river�, but also a world containing both eternal, Platonic forms and tangible, sensuous delights.