拍品专文
Stabilisation Définitive: What could be a more ironic title for a sculpture, which is neither stable nor defined? The white, irregular shapes that are connected to motors, levers and pulleys on the reverse of the black panel (and thus invisible to the viewer), move at varying speeds, changing the configuation of the composition constantly. As Pontus Hulten remarked: "The shapes might reach the same position after only two months, or it might not happen for hundreds of years. It is relativity in action. There is no beginning and no end, no past and no future, only everlasting change". (Pontus Hulten, "A Magic Stronger than Death", London, 1987)
Irony and humour, however, must be seen as a tactical device by the artist, so as to lull the viewer into a false sense of security. The quirky, amusing aspect of Tinguely's work hides more profound thoughts behind its surface. The machine aesthetic of the 1920's, as exemplified by such varying artistic approaches as Fernand Leger or Francis Picabia, tended to use mechanisms to set apart an aesthetic enclave within an increasingly technological world. Tinguely's approach in the 1950's, on the other hand, was to create anti-machines, whose lyrical and anarchic qualities ran counter to the functionality normally associated with mechanics: an enemy from within, so to speak.
The present work, forming part of the series entitled Relief Oeuf d'Onocrotale takes the basic shape of the egg, symbol of divinity and creation since time immemorial, as its theme. However, the smooth and hermetically sealed shape of the egg appears here in broken, dissected form, the movement of the shapes semmingly caught in a Sisyphean struggle to reconstruct itself. The egg, initiator of life, is here seen battling for its own creation.
Within Tinguely's oeuvre, the Relief Oeuf d'Onocrotale marks a period of increased complexity: "Instead of juxtaposing isolated shapes in slowly changing constellations, as previously, he piled the mobile shapes one above the other, so that they made a cohesive group which was constantly changing in outline. By slightly bending the axles that connected the shapes to the wheels at the back of the relief, he changed the regular rythmic movement of the shapes into spastic jerks. He played the mobile shapes off against large, blank, white or black surfaces and his approach to the decorative possiblities was quite different from before. He grew closer to painting again, but from another angle." (Ibid. p. 42)
Irony and humour, however, must be seen as a tactical device by the artist, so as to lull the viewer into a false sense of security. The quirky, amusing aspect of Tinguely's work hides more profound thoughts behind its surface. The machine aesthetic of the 1920's, as exemplified by such varying artistic approaches as Fernand Leger or Francis Picabia, tended to use mechanisms to set apart an aesthetic enclave within an increasingly technological world. Tinguely's approach in the 1950's, on the other hand, was to create anti-machines, whose lyrical and anarchic qualities ran counter to the functionality normally associated with mechanics: an enemy from within, so to speak.
The present work, forming part of the series entitled Relief Oeuf d'Onocrotale takes the basic shape of the egg, symbol of divinity and creation since time immemorial, as its theme. However, the smooth and hermetically sealed shape of the egg appears here in broken, dissected form, the movement of the shapes semmingly caught in a Sisyphean struggle to reconstruct itself. The egg, initiator of life, is here seen battling for its own creation.
Within Tinguely's oeuvre, the Relief Oeuf d'Onocrotale marks a period of increased complexity: "Instead of juxtaposing isolated shapes in slowly changing constellations, as previously, he piled the mobile shapes one above the other, so that they made a cohesive group which was constantly changing in outline. By slightly bending the axles that connected the shapes to the wheels at the back of the relief, he changed the regular rythmic movement of the shapes into spastic jerks. He played the mobile shapes off against large, blank, white or black surfaces and his approach to the decorative possiblities was quite different from before. He grew closer to painting again, but from another angle." (Ibid. p. 42)