|Written by Satoshi KOGANEZAWA|
|Published: November 27 2008|
From the scenary of "OKAMURA Keizaburo" exhibition. Photo provided by The Museum of Modern Art, Kamakura
If we have any difficulties discussing Keizaburo Okamura (born in 1958), the only reason should be the overwhelming quantity of his artworks.
You might think that the only problem was the size, but that is not true. Needless to say, a blank panel does not make sense, and his painting is represented as an artwork by itself even if how he created. Another reason is the labor intensive nature of each artwork. How much time the artist took to produce one artwork is very hard to guess if you have no experience. He burns both sides of the panel, washes out the carbonized material to paint the mixture of glue and alum, paint glue..., all using his special method are only for making the groundwork, and moreover to draw on it by using a scraper as like shaving. The time spent on an artwork is not always proportional to its value, and it is not basically related to art appreciation, but there is a certain world in art which is arisen only when the amount of the drawing exceeds a certain volume. The motifs of these nineteen artworks included an elephant, a lion, a bird, and a rabbit as well as imaginary creatures such as a dragon, an a Kon (large fish), and a Garuda. Almost all have a scale-like pattern, the repeat of which gives an intensive image. The repetition and proliferation of the pattern might have the same meaning as the dots in Jakuchu Ito and Yayoi Kusama, although the essential idea is different. The eyes are also intensive, though not so much as the scales. Because of the keen look of a single eye cast to us and the scales which has a certain effect when repeatedly drawn, the definite contrast of amount – single or plural, creates an exact balance by support of the black background. I wrote above, "It was not appropriate to savor the details by viewing the work close up," which does not mean the details have no importance; on the contrary, the accumulation of the details attracts me.
I have not mentioned a particular artwork, but have described the impression of the total exhibition. My conclusion is that, of course each artwork is recognizable from its motif, composition and size, and I can analyze them if I want; however, I did not want to this time. For this exhibition, the more I discuss each artwork, the more my description diverges from the actual impression. My intention would be similar to the Okamura’s process in which a figure of scale are repeatedly drawn and gradually proliferated into a one single image in his artwork. The waving accumulation of each artwork covers the entire venue. I wanted to express the scene, albeit only a glimpse.
|Last Updated on October 20 2015|