Michael Kessus Gedalyovich

 

(from the exhibition catalogue 2002)

 

First translation and then an interpretation, any writing about art is somewhat absurd.

This notion, which I basically believe, applies first and foremost to abstract art, which by its very definition has removed itself as far as possible from narrative, in order to appropriate a new, uncharted territory. This territory has claimed the right to autonomously define a language's zero degree, its point of origin. Through rules, laws and its accumulating histories, it has constructed another internal, inherent narrative, independent of interpretation, which neither requires nor may be translated into another language. In fact, any attempt at such a translation relies on a logical fallacy, necessarily leading to paradox. However, I believe that it is possible to speak of the principles that guide an compel artistic creation, as well as about the artwork's context and underlying worldview. Nimrod Koren's works definitely belong to this category of art or abstract painting. As mentioned by Peter Lievaart in his text published in this catalogue, one of Koren's strongest textual contexts is that of Jewish mystic literature. It should not be understood that he attempts to describe or illustrate these texts in his works, but there is a certain common 'frequency' shared by both, echoed repeatedly with uncompromising consistency.

 

I would like to examine an essential, guiding principle that lies at the very heart of Sefer Yetzirah (The Book of Creation) - a short, enigmatic text that directly addresses the essence and way of creation, which has greatly influenced Jewish mystic literature. The book's world is a dynamic one, and it is not preordained - neither the creator's nor the viewer's world. It is in a constant flux of building and destruction, aware of the body and soul's weaknesses; of the creative impulse, which can never be curbed, thus committing the grave sin of hubris. However, the propensity for expansion, multiplicity and infinity is accompanied by the realization that the most complete work must contain a continuous process of restraint and containment.

 

Thus, possibly the most important principle expounded by The Book of Creation is, paradoxically, that of restraint, discipline and destruction. It seems to mock the creator's self-criticism, his pretension to create and express a logos, while also mocking the critical, interpreting spectator's belief that they can actually understand the creator's worldview and derive from it some relevance to their own lives. This creative principle is expressed in the book as a clear command to the creator and human viewer: "ten Sefirot of Nothingness bridle your mouth from speaking and your heart from thinking and if your heart runs return to the place, it is therefore written, The Chayot running and returning.' Regarding this a covenant was made" (Chapter 1:8, in Theory and practice, revised edition by Aryeh Kaplan, Samuel Weiser, 1997, p.66). This paragraph, like most of The Book of Creation, contains an apparently self-contradictory dialectic.

 

it is aware of and accepts the human weakness for multiplicity, observation and inquiry - "if your heart runs" - and claims explicitly that the true act of creation is containment and restraint: "bridle your mouth from speaking and your heart from thinking." the principle of containment is not a passive stance adopted by creator and viewer, but an existential choice, an active restraint that consists of letting go of the ego embodied in the impulse to multiply and expand.

 

Since this principle, as mentioned above, applies to both creator and viewer, an observation of Koren's paintings must also follow it. We may view the choices that are revealed to us through it. Minimalist abstracts consisting of elusive images, a restrained use of composition and colour , emitting a sense of measure and restraint; a paradoxical attempt to express that which cannot be expressed; and, above all, a strong presence of the containment principle, which is always a step away from being destroyed, on the brink of the abyss.

 

Another look at Koren's paintings raises the big question - how dare he paint such paintings nowadays? the emphasis is on 'nowadays', this period in which there is an inflationary acceleration in all types of information, mainly the visual ones. The violent attempt to define patterns of creativity, observation and consumption by the 'much and fast' model is obviously the result of an erosion of the excitement threshold as well as of  technological developments. It is also the result of scorn, lack of criticism and the collapse of the great ideologies, which were exchanged for marketing strategies. It is a world in which human ability has apparently climbed a step higher on the ladder to multitasking , but this situation necessarily leads to representation relying completely on negation. Koren's choice lies at the other extreme; human existence is present and acquires a form, and the yearning for infinity is also present. Koren's moral stance consists of choosing strength disguised as weakness, operating perhaps according to the containment and restraint bordering on destruction, and self-criticism bordering on mockery.

 

I wish to end this text with a quotation, which may appear irrelevant, from James Joyce's Ulysses (speaking of Bloom's actions ):

 

If he had smiled, why would he have smiled?

 

To reflect that each one who enters imagines himself to be the first to enter whereas he is always the last term of a preceding series even if the first term of a succeeding one, each imagining himself to be the first, last, only and alone whereas he is neither first nor last nor only nor alone in a series originating in and repeated to infinity.

 

(London, Penguin Books, 1992, p.836)