partnereink
MENGYÁN, András
MENGYÁN, András
Designer, Painter, Graphic Artist
(Békéscsaba, 26th March, 1945)
1968: College of Applied Arts, Budapest. Mengyán was a member of the Society of Norwegian Fine Artists; as well as the executive committee of the International Society of Designers, the ICSID, from 1990 to 1993. Between 1969 and 1990 he was a lecturer of the College of Applied Arts in Budapest, and the president of the Basic Training Institute of the College of Applied Arts. Mengyán was furthermore the professor of the College of Applied Arts of Bergen from 1990. He resides in Budapest and Bergen. 1974: 3. Internationale Grafikb., Frechen; 1976: 4. Internationale Grafikb., Frechen; 1978: Krakan 7 Miedzynarodowe B., Krakow; 1983: 8th International Exhibition of Original Drawings, Rijeka. Scholarships: 1981-1982: American Council of Learned Societies, New York; 1982: IBM fellow, International Design Conference, Aspen. He worked at a number of Colony of Artists: 1974: Graz; 1976, 1978: Békéscsaba; 1978: Zsennye; 1979: Interdesign '79, Keszthely; International Systematic Artist, Motuvun (YU); 1981: Design Seminar, Berlin; 1982: Aspen; 1983: Kemi; 1989: Moscow. His conceptual, geometric, serial works are based on mathematical calculations, and upon the strict structure of geometrical design. He has been working consistently on his A formák logikája /The Logic of Forms/, consisting of a series of images and graphical works. He produces combinational forms, which he labels “defined, moveable forms”. These consist of elements varying in number and state, which have unique dynamics, spatiality and movement. By the 1970’s he produced his very own array of forms consisting of colorful artistic-visual elements (Térkoordináták /Space coordinates/, 1966-1970). This he calls the so-called M-formarendszer /M-system of Forms/, the goal of which, with its starting point in mathematics and geometry, is the possibility form the formation of an infinite number of color and form variations into logical and aesthetic combinations, or their workability into spatial movements. Straight lines and curves are the main constituents of his painting, the combinations of which bring forth different permutation lines. During the course of the 1980’s he produced computer works and environments in which light, sound, film, mirrors, and string (as lines or contours) brought about the given spaces, and the phase images of the spatial movements. The series entitled Formák didaktikája /The Didactics of form/ provides more space for the fantasy, therefore producing a larger number of possible visual and logical interpretations. His work entitled Vizuális programok /Visual programs/ provided broadened dimensional, spatial movement, for instance a logical, yet closely poetic rhythm based on opposites (e.g.: black and white, red and green, light and shadow, photograph and moving images, and the movement of the viewer and the observed object) (Programozható environment I. /Programmable Environments I./). In this latter large-scale composition the viewer becomes part of the space-composition, through stepping into the given space. Within the dark space six-meter tall slim pyramids, composed of carton or mirror, stand upright, which gives the given space a crystal-like structure, onto which the moving images prepared of the skyscrapers of New York are projected. His geometrical paintings prepared during the course of the 1990’s, with the transposition of the three-dimensional to a two-dimensional plane, became more and more multi-planed, multi-viewpoint and multi-layered. The images of Mengyán are nonetheless capable of producing spaces: the timely fragments of spaces placed into movement. His paintings painted with sharp, aggressive colors sensitive to ultra-violet light often break forward from the black backgrounds surrounding them.
First of all I warmly intend to invite you for a short imaginary walk into an imaginary town. During our short walk we experience innumerable things simultaneously. As we walk cars, busses rumble, people pass us, pigeons and sparrows fly by, we feel the outflow of good smell from the bakery shop, the grind of the gears make us crazy while we nibble a croissant. As we walk on the streets varieties of impulses have influenced us and we perceive it as beautiful, ugly, fascinating, or charming, giving us a total impression of the city. Regarding these two questions emerges: How could we formulate opinion from something that we have never seen together? What kinds of mechanisms generate this unity and identity? By superficially answering the questions I can say that our brain integrates the experiences and the information sequences and it creates an image about the town tailored to our individuality. - Dreaming a bit further on and we imagine (today this is just fiction, but we have evidences) that the whole town and all of the situations in there are transparent. Transparent like a CT or a PAT/CT instrument generated image. The results, what we perceive look chaotic, and unpredictable; however we can bear on those more or less. We can say that to comprehend, select and organise the matters is the ingenuity of our brains.
POLYPHONIC VISUAL SPACE.
A similar walk to the one mentioned above motivated me to attempt to find the answers to three questions:
- How is it possible (if it is possible at all) to comprehend simultaneously the multifaceted nature and qualitative changes and aspects of a perceived environment? - And
- Whether there is any means of visually expressing this simultaneous perception?
- Whether our three dimensional base is adequate to comprehend all of these?
Let me turn back to our imaginary walk and investigate how we can perceive our environment. It is always doubtful where our perception ends and this is the reason that many concepts exist. I take our perception as a complex process, which is active, kinaesthetic and occur by the internal and external stimulus in our central nerve system. During the walk all of our sensors are active and register the events surrounding us at the same time. Since the events are continuously changing and we are in motion, we perceive only the stimulus by sequences. However during our walk we perceive large number of sequenced stimulus. It means that we perceive our surrounding holistically and by sequences and our brain integrates and supplements the missing information. For an overlook of the town we need thousands of sequences, where our motion is a natural part of the sequences. This supposes vision in motion and multiple-view-points of vision. Examples and our experiences show that our biological apparatus is capable of apprehending and understanding the changes of the events happening in space and time simultaneously and one after the other. Firstly, I would like to say that I investigate the topic according to human visual perception and to avoid misunderstandings I intend to clarify the terms.
The term Polyphony in general is well known and it means the same for all of us. (It is particularly well known in music). For visual arts it is not as well defined. From a visual point of view polyphony means to me: interaction of the related elements and events at the same time and/or after one another.
The term Space in my approach means: finite and infinite “stage”, where things happen and where space itself is a performer.
Visual means: internal and external stimuli that are perceived visually.
Time and light are connected to the previous terms, since they play key rolls.
Time provides an answer for the question “when things happen” and light which is one of the fundamental sources of our visual perception.
Given that the greatest variety of things happen simultaneously in time and space and these continually change, the approach I take for taking into account the relation of the parts in time and space - that is thinking in terms of relationships and alternatives - is predestined. The weighing up of the possibilities of providing an answer led me to a sort of solution, which in short I refer to as: “Polyphonic Visual Space” or “Simultaneous Spatial-View “ For me, “polyphonic visual space” means the harmonization, both simultaneously and one after the other, of the events taking place in a space independently of each other. In order to express visually this polyphony, I had to search for terms, which would help me in providing an answer. For the reason to demonstrate the thoughts mentioned above, let’s go back to our imaginary walk. Looking at our walk from an abstract point of view without completeness we inevitably uses terms such as: stereo-metric, polyphony, simultaneity, segmentation, multidimensionality, multiple viewpoints, and layering. These terms and their visual projections are present in all of my works either individually or together. As philosophical thinking is characteristic of me, I use for the most part the language of geometric forms to make my ideas reality. However, this does not exclude the possibility of the use a thematic (descriptive) language according to the aim and the place on occasion. After contemplating on mention questions I had to create such visual situations in my works that are situated in space and allow each of their elements to be visible from any viewpoint at the same time. Another important aspect was to generate motion by suitably organizing the elements. During our walk in the city we perceived our surroundings only in parts. This led to me the use of fragmented forms in some of my works. In other works I used other methods to express visual polyphony that have three components:
- Dimensions.
In this context I
searched for possibilities to express fractional dimensions and more than three
dimensions visually. The interval between three and four dimensions can be
visualized using polyphony. Above four dimensions visualization is only
possible on a conceptual basis. The reasons for this lie in our biological
limits. An example for a more than three dimensional space can be done in the
following manner. Fragmented forms in two dimensions or forms transformed into
two dimensions are carried on three dimensional space forms. These three
dimensional forms are adequately spaced so that the observer can fill in the
missing parts by observation or motion. This spacing simulates motion by itself
as a given visual object lies on several different forms. In this way time also
becomes a part of the construction without actual physical movement. The result
is a more than three but less than four-dimensional form composition that is
considered to be a fragment dimension. (Figure 1.)
- Interactions
The basic question to consider is how something like a form changes when it is placed from one reference system into another, and what are the resulting visual interactions connected to the change itself. A simple example demonstrates the question. Time on the Earth is only valid in the given earthly reference system; would we leave the Earth in a spaceship say, then time passes differently in this different reference system. To be able to measure or understand time in the two reference systems simultaneously they have to be somehow harmonized or re-evaluated. This principle is valid for forms, spaces and ideas when their reference systems change as well. Truths and facts change along with the reference systems. (Figure 2.)
- Personal impressions.
I use visual polyphony to express my positive or negative impressions of something, and when I would like to reflect these impressions. The inspiration of my exhibition in Internasjonal Kultursenter og Museum in Oslo was the exhibiting place itself, as the Museum was previously an old jail, and as such induced certain feelings in me. The exhibiting space comprised of fifteen cells with iron doors of size 360x270x180 cm. The surroundings themselves inspired several works to be put into them. I designed one of my installations called Interrupted continuity into such a cell. Another work called Capsizing city was based on cities that grew beyond their limits and became unbearable, while Street was inspired by the street. (Figure 3.)
Let us return once again to our imaginary walk. During daytime we have no difficulty in comprehending the visual impulses, however as night sets in things change for the worse. We hardly see the city except for some frequented monuments making it nearly impossible to find our way around. Details become impossible to discern, we easily get confused. What can we do in such a case? One possibility would be to call the mayor telling him that there is a problem and ask him for more lights. This would turn out to be a bad choice of solving our problem though. Instead we have to find the answer ourselves. Such cases have induced a new question.
- Is it possible to convey the same visual information in the dark as in light conditions, and if so, how?
Trivially, the fundamental requirement of visual expression is that the observer could observe it. This requires light. Without light (as our biological nature does not allow otherwise) we are unable to perceive the visual impulses from outside. (For imagination we do not need actual light, “we can see from the inside”.) The visible spectrum of light seems given. Everyone with healthy eyesight can observe it. But how can we observe and demonstrate colours and forms in the dark? Physicist determined the whole spectrum of light; it was just a question of choosing the most suitable light for my purposes. That choice was Ultraviolet (UV) light. I have been using UV light for more than 20 years now. At first it caused great surprises. My paintings, sculptures and installations transformed completely, they obtained a certain spiritual context. Later, I tried to use this spiritual aspect consciously. In this sense I got an unexpected extra quality, the works could be seen in the light and the dark as well. In the dark the works create a floating effect.
In brief: I build my works on thoughts and they’re appropriated underlying principles. The search for and understanding of thoughts and underlying principles are my primary concern, because this provides the possibility of giving a personal visual answer and of extending and enriching visual presentation. In my reading, this means that underlying principles can be built into any thought and can be expressed in any formal language.
One man shows
1974 • Budapest, Egyetemi Színpad (H)
1975 • Békéscsaba, Tizek Klubja (H)
1976 • Budapest, Józsefvárosi Kiállítóterem (H)
1977 • Pécs, IH Galeria (H)
1984 • Székesfehérvár, Csók István Képtár (H)
1985–86 • Budapest, Műcsarnok (H)
1988 • Budapest, Fészek Galeria (H), (with Attila Kovács)
1990 • Ankara, Attaturk Kultur Merkezi (TU)
1992 • Bergen, Bergen Kunstforening (N)
1995 • Høvikodden, (Oslo) Henie - Onstad Kunstsenter (N)
1995 • Budapest, Műcsarnok (H)
1995 • Budapest, Fészek Galéria (H)
1998 • Budapest, Éri Galéria (H)
2001 • Oslo, IKM (Internasjonalt Kultursenter og Museum) (N)
2002 • Békéscsaba, Békéscsabai Ifjúsági Ház (with János Fajó)
2003 • Budapest, BTM- Fővárosi Képtár (H)
2007 • Eger, Templom Galéria
2009 • Bratislava (Pozsony), Galerii Mesta Bratislavy - Mirbachov Palác.
Selected group exhibitions organized in the last five years
1998 • Miskolc, Kaposvár, Homage to Echer. Városi Képtár (H); Budapest Homage to Echer. Találmányi Hivatal (H)
1999 • Ljubjana Oil/Canvas. Hungarian Contemporary paintings. Contemporary Art Museum (SL)
1999-2000 • Oslo Glokal Kunst. IKM (International Kultursentrum og Museum (N)
1999 • Budapest, Volt egyszer egy Józsefvárosi galéria. Kévés Galéria (H)
1999 • New York, Hungarian Consulate (USA)
2000 • Győr, Konkrét művészet Közép-Európa 6 országában 1945-től napjainkig. Concrete Art in 6 Countries of Central Europe from 1945 to these Days. Városi Művészeti Múzeum Képtára (H); Amersfoort, The Mondriaanhuis/Archive '9o Reference Collection (NL); Oslo, Riks-utstillinger (N); Gol, Gol Kunstforening (N)
2001 • Øvre Eiker, Eiker Kunstforening (N); Eidsberg, Eidsberg Kunstforening, Mysen (N); Alstahaug, Alstahaug Kunstforening, Sandnessjøen (N); Førde, Sunnfjord Kunstlag, Førdehuset Ålesund, Ålesund Kunstforening (N); Ullensaker, Ullensaker Kunstforening (N); Alta, Alta Kunstforening (N); Sandnes, Sandnes Kunstforening (N); Veszprém, Orbis-Pictus (A megfestett város) (H)
2002 • Győr, Óriás vászon, Győri Kisfaludy Színház (H); Budapest, Architecture and Art. Kévés Studiógaléria (H)
2003 • Budapest, Gutmann Galéria (H); Budapest Szimmetria, Millenniumi Park (H); Pécs, Kepes Társaság kiállítása, Baranya Galéria (H); Moszkva, Kortárs Konstruktív tendendenciák, Magyar Intézet (RUS)
2004 • Győr, Nemzetközi és Hazai Kortárs Képzőművészeti Kiállítás Győri Nemzeti Színház, Hotel Rába Baross (H); Budapest, „Tisztelgés Gruber József emlékének”, Budapesti Műszaki és Gazdaságtudományi Egyetem (H); Budapest, Tér-képzetek, tér-végzetek. Kortárs Művészeti Múzeum-Ludwig Múzeum Budapest (H); Köln, DER 4-ECKIGE BLIK. Design und Kunst im Dialog. (Museum für Angewandte Kunst (D); Budapest, Art and Science. Gallery IX. (H); Budapest, Magyar Festészet napja. Millenáris Park (H)
STUDIES, CRITICS
J. WEICHARDT: Ungarische Kunst`74. Katalog vorwort. 1974. Oldenburg (BRD)
W. FENZ: Werke der IX. Internationalen Malerwoche in der Steiermark. Katalog. Graz, 1974; István HAJDU: Mengyán András kiállítása. Katalógus előszó. Békéscsaba, 1975; Werner KRUGER: Deutschland. Nonsensapparaturen. Neue Ungarische Konstructivisten. Ausstellung. Bonn. Art International. 1975. No. 6. 49. p.; István HAJDU: Mengyán András kiállítása. Katalógus előszó. Józsefvárosi kiállítóterem. Budapest, 1976; István HAJDU: Műhely-Budapest ’76. Bak, Fajó, Hencze, Keserü, Mengyán, Nádler. Kiállítás a Munkácsy Mihály Múzeumban. Katalógus. Békéscsaba, 1976; László BEKE: Szerialitás a Képzőművészetben. Műveszet Évkönyv ’76. Budapest, 1977. 36-37. pp.; István HAJDU: Beszámoló egy Benczúr utcai műhelyről és egy békéscsabai kiállításról. Művészet Évkönyv `76. Budapest, 1977. 244-245. pp.; Dieter HONISCH: Neue Kunst aus Ungarn. Kunst Magazin. 1977. No. 1.; Raimo KANERVA-Matti KOSKELA: Sikkipain. Louva Grafiikka RY. 1979; László BEKE: Mengyán András kiállítása. IH Galeria. Katalógus előszó. Pécs, 1978; Marijan SUSOVSKI: For Systematic Constructive Art. Katalog. Motovun, 1980; Edward LUCIE-SMITH: Art in the Seventies. Phaidon Oxford, 1980; Jurgen WEIHARDT: Kunst in socialistischen Staaten. CSSR, DDR, VR Polen, Ungarische VR. Oldenburg, 1980. 160–161. p.; Lóránt HEGYI: Konstruktiviska tendenser i ungarsk konst. Ungarsk Konst 1905-1980, Liljevalchs katalog, Ljubjana, 1981, 101. 277.p.; Lóránt HEGYI: Mengyán Andrásról. Ungarische Avantgarde Katalog, 1980, 40–42.íp.; Joachim DIEDERICHS: Kunst in Wilhelmshaven verwirklicht. Katalog zu Kunstler aus Ungarn, 1980, 5., 12.p.; Cvetko MALUSEV: Konstruktivisticka stremljenja u Madarskaj umjetnosti, 1981, 14.p. Graficni Biennale. Katalog, Ljubjana, 1981, 101., 277.p.; Meri KAILA: Nåin sen nåkevåt Konstruktivitit. Kaleva, 1983.
Liisa RAUTIAINEN: Konstruktivistien symposium Kemin Taidemuseo. Pomolan Sanomat, 1983; Liisa RAITIAINEN: Konstruktivistien tyoskentely pååtty nåyztely alkoi. Lounais Lappi, 1983; Arnulf ROHSMANN: Manifestationsmoglichkeiten von Zeit in der bildenden Kunst das 20. Jahrhunderts. (1984. Georg Olms Verlag, Hildesheim-Zurich-New York); Márta KOVALOVSZKY: Előszó. Mengyán András kiállításához. Katalógus. Székesfehérvár 1984; Ildikó NAGY: Space and Man, András Mengyán`s Environments. The new Hungarian Quarterly, 1986. Vol. XXVII. No. 103. 212-216 p.; István HAJDU: Szemérmetlen magyarázat-próbák. Impudent Attempts at Interpretation. Mengyan Andras Műcsarnoki kiállítása. Katalogus. 1985; Gábor FEUER: Beszélgetés Mengyán Andrással. An interview with András Mengyán. Mengyán András Műcsarnoki kiállítása. Katalógus. 1985; László FáBIÁN: A látvány birodalma-a birodalom látványa. Művészet, 1986. junius, 21-23 p.; József VADAS: Tengerfény. Élet és Irodalom, 1986. január 17.; Ágnes GYETVAI: Bálványok, neonpiramisok, fénybarlangok. Magyar Nemzet, 1986. január 7.; Miklós LOSONCI: Itt a térmozi! Vasárnapi Hírek, 1985. dec. 22. Interju Mengyán Andrással. PRAVDA (USSR) 13. 01, 1989 r. 13., 5. c.; Kakum bydyt Yacu B XXi Beke? Interdesign , Jerevan, 1986/3. 4-13.p. (USSR); Gunnar DANBOLT: En Post-Modernistisk NY-Modernist. Mengyán András exhibition in Bergen (N). Catalogue. 1992.; Sissel Hamre DAGSLAND: Planlagt kaos i Kunstforeningen. Bergens Tidende, 12. november 1992. 33 p.; Bente HOLMEN: Visjoner og Fossiler. Studvest, 18. november 1992.; Ika KAMINKA: Som en forhekset skog. Bergens Tidende, 19. november 1992. 37 p.
Sverre ORSTAVIK, Knut HELBAK: Tredimensjonalt kaleidoskop. Asker Bærums Budstikke. 27. Jan. 1995; Anne-Lise MØRCH VON DER FEHR: Forvirrende vandring blant pyramider. Arbeiderbladet, 23. Jan. 1995; Gunnar DANBOLT: Egy poszt-modernista - Új modernista /A Post-Modernist - New Modernist. Mengyán András monográfia. Ráhatások-Norvégia/Influences-Norway. Katalógus 1995, 9., 17. p.; Ildikó NAGY: Mengyán Andrásrol/András Mengyán. Mengyán András Monográfia. Ráhatások-Norvégia/Influences-Norway. Katalógus 1995, 21.,30. p.
János FRANK: Mengyán András új képei/New Pictures by András Mengyán. Mengyán András monográfia. Ráhatások- Norvégia/Influences-Norway. Katalógus 1995, 115., 116.p.; Ildikó NAGY-Ágnes DOBAI: Beszélgetés Mengyán Andrással/Conversation with Andras Mengyan. Mengyan Andras monografia.
Ráhatasok-Norvegia/Influences-Norway. Katalógus 1995, 135., 142.p.; László BEKE: Mengyán András. Természet-Tudomány-Társadalom. András Mengyán. Nature-Science-Society. Leaflet for the exhibition of Influences-Norway, 1995; Ildikó NAGY-Ágnes DOBAI: Ráhatások-Norvégia. Norvégia egy művész nézőpontjából. Mengyán András térinstallaciója 1995. Október-novemberben a Műcsarnokban. Nagyvilág, 1995/9-10, 764., 765. p.; József VADAS: Norvégia sarki fényben, magyar szemmel. Magyar Hírlap, 1995. november 15.; Miklós PETERNÁK: Genius Loci (A hely szelleme). Megnyitóbeszéd. Mengyán András Műcsarnoki kiállítására, 1995; Ernő SZABÓ P: Interjú Mengyán Andrással. Magyar Nemzet, 1995; Boglárka KOVÁCS: Norvég Táj, Magyar ecsettel. Kurir, 1995. november 29.; A. V.: Ibolyántúli Halótermek. Ráhatások-Norvégia. Mengyán András installációja a Műcsarnokban. Demokrata, 1995. november 23.
Ernő SZABÓ P: Interjú Mengyán Andrással. Magyar Nemzet 2003.
Péter FITZ: Mengyán-terek a templomtérben. Mengyán András Kiscelli Múzeumi kiállítása 2003. Katalógus. Mengyán-spaces in the Churchspace. Exhibiton of András Mengyán in the Museum Kiscelli 2003. Catalogue; Péter KOVÁCS: A Varázsos Racionalista. Mengyán András kiállítása a Kiscelli Múzeumban 2003. Katalógus - The Magical Racionalist. Exhibition of András Mengyán in the Museum of Kiscelli, 2003 (Catalogue); Márta KOVALOVSZKY: Mengyán András kiállítása a Kiscelli Múzeumban. Új Művészet 2003. szeptember; Péter LELKES: ArtDesigner, A magyar Formatervezés fél évszázada. (Magyar Design Kultúrális Alapítvány ) 2004. 172-181 p.; László FÁBIÁN: „Varázsos Racionalista”. Életünk. 2004.
WORKS IN PUBLIC COLLECTION
Pécs Janus Pannónius Múzeum (H)
Békéscsaba Munkácsy Mihály Múzeum (H)
Budapest, BTM- Fővárosi Képtár (H)
Budapest, Iparművészeti Múzeum, Museum of Applied Art (H)
Budapest, Ludwig Múzeum, Új Képtár (H)
Budapest, Magyar Nemzeti Galeria, National Fine Art Galery (H)
Székesfehérvár, István Király Múzeum (H)
Miskolc, Herman Otto Múzeum (H)
Sárospatak, Városi Képtár, City Museum (H)
Ibrány, Városi Képtár, City Museum (H)
Paks, Városi Képtár, City Museum (H)
Edmonton, Ring House Gallery (C)
Bonn, Kunstmuseum (D)
Frechen, Kunstverein Collection (D)
Rottweil, Kunstmuseum (D)
Berlin, Staatliche Museum (D)
Graz, Neue Galerie am Landesmuseum (A)
Pazin, City museum ..... (Croatia)
Chrisstchurch, McDoughall Art Gallery (New Zeland)
Zagrab, Museum of Modern Art (Croatia)
London, Art Council Collection (GB)
Kemi, Taidemuseo (Finland)
Buchberg, Castle Museum (A)
Washington DC, Hungarian Ambassy (USA)
Brussel, Museum, Petit Format
Høvikodden (Oslo), Henie-Onstad Kunstsenter (N)
Lodz, Museum of Architecture (P)
Krakow, International Print Triennial Society (P)
Amersfoort, Mondriaanhuis (Nederland)
