{"id":16798,"title":"Walter Swennen - 2016 - Ne Quid Nimis [NL, essay]","dimensions":"55 p.","date_begin":null,"material":"","art_status_id":13,"legal_status_id":47,"category_id":25,"platform_id":1,"deleted":false,"asset_count":2,"stream_count":0,"collection":"Hans Theys Archive / Archief Hans Theys","cached_tag_list":"","publishing_process_id":1,"annotation":"","date_end":null,"reference":"","stream_count_app":16,"permalink":"walter-swennen-ne-quid-nimis-nl","description_ca":"","short_description_ca":"","description_it":"","short_description_it":"","cached_primary_asset_url":null,"cached_actor_names":"Hans Theys","hide_from_json":true,"prev_platform_id":null,"description_uk":null,"short_description_uk":null,"description_tr":null,"short_description_tr":null,"mhka_works":false,"category":{"en":"Text","nl":"Tekst","fr":"Texte"},"poster_image":null,"poster_credits":null,"translations":[{"locale":"en","short_description":"","description":"\u003cp style=\"text-align: justify;\"\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n__________\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHans Theys\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cstrong\u003eNe Quid Nimis\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAbout Walter Swennen\u0026rsquo;s Work\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe primacy of the text (Franz Kafka)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen I was studying Franz Kafka\u0026rsquo;s novels and short stories in the mid-1980s, it struck me that all attempts to interpret his work seemed to overlook the fact that it can never be reduced to one meaning or conclusion and always seems to speak of an unknowable world and impenetrable texts. At the same time, the text\u0026rsquo;s form imposes itself as necessary. In this sense, one can consider Kafka\u0026rsquo;s work to be a continuation of the Talmud and the Midrash. In the never-ending, Jewish biblical exegesis, our interaction with an unknowable world and an intangible God is doubled by incoherent, contradictory, symbolic and unfathomable texts. The texts themselves, however, are not called into question, but cherished. The core of Jewish culture consists of an essentially endless series of interpretations or hypotheses that can be formulated, questioned and tested. \u0026lsquo;When two or three Jews studied the Torah together, God was in their midst\u0026rsquo;, summarised Karen Armstrong. Strangely enough, all of this can also be read in Kafka\u0026rsquo;s texts: \u0026lsquo;Don\u0026rsquo;t misunderstand me\u0026rsquo;, says the priest to Joseph K. in \u003cem\u003eThe Castle\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026lsquo;I\u0026rsquo;m only telling you the different opinions there are about it. You mustn\u0026rsquo;t pay too much attention to them. The scripture is unalterable and the opinions are often merely an expression of despair about this.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e In the novel The Castle, in which the suspected swindler K. pretends to be the new village surveyor, the only piece of evidence upon which he can depend is a letter from an unattainable official. The clearest pronouncement about this missive is made by Olga, the messenger\u0026rsquo;s sister: \u0026lsquo;Assessing the letters correctly is impossible because their value changes continuously, they give rise to endless contradictions, and only chance decides where we stop, that\u0026rsquo;s to say, opinion is a matter of chance.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMy study of Kafka\u0026rsquo;s writings left me with the impression that his oeuvre was not an attempt to express anything more than what was in the text, which was sufficient. Everything is there, in black and white.\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e There is no need for anyone else to offer an explanation or interpretation. When I first met Walter Swennen in October 1988, I understood that the same holds true for paintings. If they have something to \u0026lsquo;say\u0026rsquo;, then it is in a material sense, not in the form of a code that needs to be deciphered.\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings articulate their form. Their thinking takes place in the way they are constructed, even if they contain images or words.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe primacy of texture (Viktor Shklovski)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen\u0026rsquo;s views on the primacy of texture have evolved considerably since the late 1980s. Back then, he was interested in a collection of essays by Viktor Shklovski, which was published in French in 1973 under the title La marche du cheval.\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e For Shklovski, a work of art does not provide a translation of an artist\u0026rsquo;s inner language into one that can be understood by the viewer. \u0026lsquo;In art\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;new forms appear to replace old forms that have lost their artistic value.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e But what constitutes this artistic value? In order to explain this, he cites Broder Christiansen who noted in his book The Philosophy of Art: \u0026lsquo;When we experience anything as a deviation from the usual, from the normal or from a certain guiding canon, we feel within us an emotion of a special nature (\u0026hellip;) Why is the lyrical poetry of a foreign country never revealed to us in its fullness even though we have learned its language? We hear the play of its harmonics; we apprehend the succession of rhymes and feel the rhythm. We understand the meaning of the words and are in command of the imagery, the figures of speech and the content. We may have a grasp of all the sensuous forms, of all the objects. So what\u0026rsquo;s missing? The answer is: differential perceptions. The slightest aberration from the norm in the choice of expressions, in the combination of words, in the subtle shifts of syntax\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;all of this can only be mastered by someone who lives among the natural elements of his language, by someone who, thanks to his conscious awareness of the norm, is immediately struck, or rather, irritated by any deviation from it.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFurthermore: \u0026lsquo;In order to transform an object into a fact of art, it is necessary first to withdraw it from the domain of life. We must extricate a thing from the cluster of associations in which it is bound. It is necessary to turn over the object as one would turn over a log in a fire.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFrom this it follows that you cannot make a work of art without shifting, repeating, multiplying or compressing things\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e in order to achieve artistry. Both the form and the \u0026lsquo;content\u0026rsquo; of a work of art are the result of technical necessity and the potential of the material available.\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e Thus Shklovski contends that Dido did not conquer an island by cutting a cowhide into a circle, because this ruse belonged to the narrator\u0026rsquo;s culture (as ethnologists and sociologists believe), but because this ruse is a \u0026lsquo;priom\u0026rsquo;: a device that facilitates the telling of a surprising story. (For how else could the narrator astonish his or her own people with this tale?) Likewise, it is nigh on impossible to write a story that does not involve love or murder. (This is an example I concocted myself.) But who do you love, or murder? Someone you know, like the postman\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e, neighbours or family members, or a random passer-by? Because the latter is highly improbable, except in The Phantom of Liberty by Bu\u0026ntilde;uel, protagonists will either kill their relatives or sleep with them. Proof of Sophocles\u0026rsquo; genius lies in the fact that Oedipus took the life of a stranger who later turned out to be his father, not in the Freudian interpretation of this priom.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf this reasoning were applied to a painting, then all so-called references to the external world (whether it be ideas or perceptible things) could be regarded as mere material which can be used to construct a painting. And this is precisely what Shklovski did. \u0026lsquo;Paintings are not at all windows onto another world\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;they are things\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;the artist clings to depiction, to the world, not in order to recreate the world, but rather to be able to use complex and rewarding material in his art.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e C\u0026eacute;zanne echoed his words. His paintings were attempts to give form, through colour, to the spatial and optical effects of the perceived world (le \u0026lsquo;motif\u0026rsquo;). For him, painting was not about the perceived object, nor about his own way of seeing (his specific \u0026lsquo;optique\u0026rsquo;, which was certainly essential), but rather about the manner in which he transformed his experiences into colour, his own way of doing things, which he described as his temperament,\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e or his \u0026lsquo;petite sensibilit\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;A picture doesn\u0026rsquo;t represent anything. It doesn\u0026rsquo;t need to represent anything in the first place but the colours\u0026rsquo;, said C\u0026eacute;zanne to Gasquet.\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e Shklovski wrote that \u0026lsquo;the outside world does not exist. Things replaced by words do not exist and are not perceived (\u0026hellip;). The outside world is outside of art. It is perceived as a series of hints (\u0026hellip;) devoid of material substance and texture.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;For a painter, colour is the only truth\u0026rsquo;, asserted C\u0026eacute;zanne.\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e And he added: \u0026lsquo;I detest all these stories, this psychology, and all this intellectual humbug about them. For God\u0026rsquo;s sake, it\u0026rsquo;s all in the paintings, painters are no imbeciles. But you have to see it with your eyes\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;with your eyes\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;do you understand!\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e18\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The whole effort of a poet and a painter\u0026rsquo;, says Shklovski \u0026lsquo;is aimed first and foremost at creating a continuous and thoroughly palpable thing, an object with a texture (\u0026hellip;) Good and bad in art is a question of texture. (\u0026hellip;) Texture is the main distinguishing feature of that specific world of specially constructed objects, the totality of which we are used to calling art.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat does this mean? What is the significance of these words? Of what do they speak? Firstly, it concerns the idea that the value of a painting is not to be sought in what it represents, but in the manner in which it was created. In the case of C\u0026eacute;zanne, it is about the way that he attempted, for example, to model by means of colour, while simultaneously trying to avoid his paintings disintegrating (become inharmonious or incoherent). In the case of Swennen, it involves the specific way in which he combines techniques, supports, materials, colours, inflated drawings, words and letters, and weaves them together in order to arrive at new objects or concrete thoughts.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe aesthetic and the artistic existence of the painting\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn the mid-1990s, Swennen discovered a reference to \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson\u0026rsquo;s work L\u0026rsquo;\u0026ecirc;tre et l\u0026rsquo;essence in Deleuze\u0026rsquo;s book on Spinoza. He also discovered Gilson\u0026rsquo;s treatise Painting and Reality, which was based on a lecture series, and the related book that followed some years later, Peinture et r\u0026eacute;alit\u0026eacute;. In these works, Gilson distinguishes between three forms of existence of a work of art: the purely physical, the aesthetic and the artistic. As a physical object, a work of art is no different from any other object. As an aesthetic object, it is dependent upon the viewer\u0026rsquo;s relationship with it. A gallery attendant, a transporter, an insurer, a painter or a philosopher will all have their own individual way of looking at a painting.\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e As an aesthetic object, the work of art presents itself to the viewer as a \u0026lsquo;modus\u0026rsquo;, as a representation, which everyone views differently. Because these representations are infinite, Gilson considers the aesthetic point of view to be a hopeless approach.\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e The aesthetic form of existence of the work of art is phenomenological in nature because it tells us nothing about the object itself, but only about how it appears to us (and how this appearance is determined by our abilities and expectations).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo define a work of art (as distinct from any other object) without using aesthetic criteria, Gilson described it as an object that is created by an artist in the context of his artistic activity. This artistic form of existence is therefore determined ontologically, from its cause. For Swennen, Gilson\u0026rsquo;s distinction implies that the artistic value of an work of art does not depend upon the eye of the beholder. It affirms the autonomy of the artist and liberates the work of art from the expectation that it needs to express or mean something.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn addition, Gilson\u0026rsquo;s distinction is obviously and inextricably linked with a profound focus on the material existence of a work of art. One of the consequences of taking an aesthetic approach towards a work of art is that people will inevitably equate reproductions or images with the authentic object, rendering the original imperceptible to the eye and diminishing the experience. Thus a leading art historian recently defined Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, in all innocence, as \u0026lsquo;final images\u0026rsquo;. Not only are paintings often experienced as \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo;, but there is also the supposition that the goal of a painter is to make images. Gilson warned of the dangers of reproduction as early as 1957. He drew attention to the folly of reducing paintings to images, and the tendency to absorb the world of art in books. He called this the \u0026lsquo;dictatorship of literature\u0026rsquo;. \u0026lsquo;A printed word is still a word\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;but a printed painting is not a painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e Moreover: \u0026lsquo;To be part of a book, a painting must rid itself of its materiality.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nReproductions have always existed. But those who once looked at an engraving of a work of art did not forget that it was an engraving. And the least that can be said about black-and-white reproductions is that they do not pretend to be true to the actual colours. \u0026lsquo;The style of painting is inseparable from the technique\u0026rsquo;, wrote Gilson, \u0026lsquo;we know that it is inseparable from matter. Eliminating the material comes close to negating the work of art. Any study of styles based upon reproductions of visual works is based upon ghosts.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThis gives rise to the misunderstanding that art historical learning and knowledge of art are one and the same thing. An understanding of art is acquired through practical effort. \u0026lsquo;Is the knowledge of art history\u0026rsquo;, said Gilson, \u0026lsquo;in any sense of the term, a knowledge of art? It certainly is knowledge about art, but its object is not art, it only is its history. (\u0026hellip;) To limit ourselves to painting, it is not rare to see parents of goodwill undertake the artistic education of their children as early as possible, dragging them to art galleries\u0026hellip; This is not the beginning of an artistic education; it is the beginning of a historical education.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAuthors such as Giorgio Agamben and Boris Groys have spoken in recent publications about the possibility of devising an approach to art that starts from the makers and the making, although they themselves have not risen to the challenge. \u0026lsquo;Perhaps nothing is more urgent\u0026rsquo;, writes Agamben, \u0026lsquo;than a destruction of aesthetics that would, by clearing away what is usually taken for granted, allow us to bring into question the very meaning of aesthetics as the science of the work of art. The question, however, is whether the time is ripe for such a destruction, or whether instead the consequence of such an act would not be the loss of any possible horizon for the understanding of the work of art and the creation of an abyss in front of it that could only be crossed by a giant leap.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003e I admire Agamben\u0026rsquo;s work, but the idea of annihilating the aesthetic approach seems somewhat childish. Let us acknowledge, instead, that it would be wise to remember that we are always viewers and that, as such, we should occasionally endeavour to look at a work of art from the perspectives of the maker, the techniques and the materials used.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nPainting whatever\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOn his fortieth birthday, Swennen decided to stop thinking of himself as a poet, and to consider himself a painter. The difference being, he told Bart De Baere, that poetry is fundamentally concerned with nostalgia, and thus with the past and transience. Painting, he continued, is about the future. I believe that we should take this statement literally, in the sense that, for Swennen, a painting is an object that needs to be lured into existence through actions. It does not pre-exist.\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFor Philip Larkin, \u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; to write a poem is to construct a verbal device that would preserve an experience indefinitely by reproducing it in whoever reads the poem.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e This was not the case for Mallarm\u0026eacute;. His poems were trying to conjure new events. But what next? How much further can you go? Paul Celan, whose thinking evolved from Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s, attempted to articulate atrocities via such hermetically sealed texts that it was impossible to imagine when reading them, or afterwards, that one had actually \u0026lsquo;seen\u0026rsquo; these things. But then? Broodthaers made poems with objects.\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e And Swennen starts to write and draw upon canvas. He begins to create paintings. And he discovers and formulates a way of painting that is not focused on the past, but takes place in the present: \u0026lsquo;Done with nostalgia, nostalgia is good for the young. (\u0026hellip;) Painting interests me, because it has nothing to do with the past. It is more epic than lyrical. Each painting is a story that unfolds in the present.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e30\u003c/sup\u003e Only now. Just for today.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nLater that same year, in October 1986, Swennen wrote a letter in which we read, \u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; succeed in painting whatever; that is the ideal. Whoever lacks experience in saying whatever, can interpret this statement as a witticism. Yet it is my ideal, the most difficult thing imaginable. (\u0026hellip;) The key: premeditation is always an aggravating circumstance.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea to try to paint whatever reminds me of Nietzsche\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;discovery\u0026rsquo; of the eternal return. It is an absurd image, but it works. If you imagine that all of your actions will be repeated infinitely, they acquire an unexpected gravitas, perhaps even meaning. Some ideas seem to strengthen our grip on reality. Of course, you cannot create ex nihilo, but if you can find a way to enable objects to \u0026lsquo;think\u0026rsquo; in your place, then you do not have to perpetually steer them\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea of painting whatever comes from the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, who replaced Freud\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;ground-rule\u0026rsquo;, whereby patients were requested to share with their analyst \u0026lsquo;whatever they thought of\u0026rsquo;, with an invitation \u0026lsquo;to say anything, without fear of stupidity\u0026rsquo;. It was an exhortation based on the rationale that the source of a patient\u0026rsquo;s discomfort is unknowable and unimaginable. We comprehend that this discomfort is intimately bound up with language, because we are speaking beings, but this is precisely the reason why language lets us down as a conscious and focused research tool. The analyst and the patient set sail on a sea of directionless, interwoven stories, shifting and inverting words, until something happens. Because the patient\u0026rsquo;s conscious use of the language is insufficient, words are considered to be sounds that can have alternative meanings. They become hollow shells, which might lead to new experiences or insights through fresh associations and connections.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen tries to make paintings that remain \u0026lsquo;unimaginable\u0026rsquo; until they actually exist. He employs materials, tools, techniques, colours, shapes, inflated drawings, words and letters, and he strives, as far as practicable, to keep them separate from a \u0026lsquo;meaning\u0026rsquo;, thus deploying them as hollow forms or signifiers. For example, letters have beautiful shapes that are quite independent of the sound they represent, or the meaning that is associated with the sound. A triangle can be read as a flag, as a roof or a hat. A top hat can be read as an inverted \u0026lsquo;T\u0026rsquo;.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;, explained Mannoni in Clefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne (1969), \u0026lsquo;was undoubtedly a poet, even though he had nothing to say; consequently, the poetry was to be found elsewhere, rather than in what was said. From the very outset, it was an experiment about language, not an existential one.\u0026rsquo; \u0026lsquo;What makes literary criticism so awkward in the case of Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;, he continued, \u0026lsquo;is that the treasure is concealed behind the meaning (as he himself has literally said) while an \u0026ldquo;ingrained habit to want to understand\u0026rdquo; compels us to search for meaning behind the words. The treasure is the richness, the jewels and the pearls of language effects in all their unembellished glory\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;puns, assonance, ambiguity, metaphors, metonyms and so forth.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e32\u003c/sup\u003e And if there is still a clear meaning to be found within the poem, says Mannoni, then that is only in order to render it tolerable as a play with words. Thanks to this recognisable element, the poet and the reader can bid a satisfied farewell to one another, because they are both free to do as they please (create something or discover a meaning).\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his essay Po\u0026eacute;sie et pens\u0026eacute;e abstraite, Val\u0026eacute;ry recounts an anecdote that Edgar Degas has conveyed about Mallarm\u0026eacute;. One day, in a conversation with the poet, Degas had emphasised his admiration for Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s mastery by mentioning that he himself had a great many ideas for poems, but was unable to develop them. \u0026lsquo;You do not make poems with ideas, my dear Degas\u0026rsquo;, Mallarm\u0026eacute; had replied, \u0026lsquo;but with words\u0026rsquo;. Two pages later, Val\u0026eacute;ry describes how a phrase, which has cropped up in ordinary conversation, has acquired a life of its own in his head. \u0026lsquo;It has obtained a value\u0026rsquo;, he says, \u0026lsquo;a value at the expense of its limited meaning\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e34\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Mannoni, one should not search for specific meanings in Mallarm\u0026eacute;, which would be hidden behind the abstract and evocative use of language, but for the effects created by the word play, syntax, spelling and typography. Whoever clings to meaning will fail to find the treasure. This not only applies to Lacanian analysis, but also to art historians, and especially to the makers of paintings and poems.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHaving been in analysis, Swennen immediately realised that his new \u0026lsquo;method\u0026rsquo; (to try to paint whatever) was little more than a crutch, because it is very difficult to say or do whatever. Of crucial importance is that this idea provided him with a way of creating work that was wholly conceived from the point of view of the maker (as opposed to that of the spectator), freed from the so-called necessity to express, share or demonstrate something.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAt the same time, we know that everything we do is inevitably coloured by the traces of our past, our education and our upbringing, the things we have seen, those we have rationalised or repressed, and the seemingly ordinary things that we might have forgotten.\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e All of our words, creations, actions, and even our inactions, speak of something, whether we like it or not. But this is hardly a problem, so long as we do not confuse their story with a so-called meaning or, worse, with an intention or an idea that might have been at their origin.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nProvoked accidents\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;For the artist\u0026rsquo;, wrote Shklovski, \u0026lsquo;the external world is not the content of a picture, but material for a picture. The famous Renaissance artist Giotto says: \u0026ldquo;A picture is \u0026mdash; primarily \u0026mdash; a conjunction of coloured planes.\u0026rdquo; (\u0026hellip;) The realistic painter Surikov used to say that the \u0026ldquo;idea\u0026rdquo; of his famous picture The Boyar\u0026rsquo;s Wife, Morozova occurred to him when he saw a black bird on the snow. For him this picture was primarily \u0026ldquo;black on white.\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e36\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;One of the pictures I did in 1946\u0026rsquo;, Francis Bacon tells David Sylvester, \u0026lsquo;the one like a butcher\u0026rsquo;s shop picture, came to me as an accident. I was attempting to make a bird alighting on a field. And it may have been bound up in some way with the three forms that had gone before, but suddenly the lines that I\u0026rsquo;d drawn suggested something totally different, and out of this suggestion arose this picture. I had no intention to do this picture; I never thought of it in that way. It was like one continuous accident mounting on top of another.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e37\u003c/sup\u003e Time and time again, Bacon does his best to impress upon Sylvester that he is striving to paint likenesses, but without using anatomically correct or mimetic elements. It is difficult, he explains, because you do not know what the searched for elements should actually look like.\u003csup\u003e38\u003c/sup\u003e Sylvester\u0026rsquo;s resistance to this idea is strange, but we need not attach much importance to his attitude here. The bottom line is that a beautiful book exists, one in which a practitioner attempts to explain that it is the act of painting itself that leads to unpredictable results.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Things always happen differently to what you expected.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e This statement, quoted occasionally by Swennen, is taken from a book by the German physician Viktor von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, who sought to develop a dynamic theory of medicine and to prove that a great many insoluble medical problems are linked to inadequate questioning which, in turn, leads to obsolete, paradoxical conclusions. A dynamic theory, he seems to say, would take account of the fact that physiological symptoms are dynamic themselves, because they respond (via the brain) to a world that is in constant movement and, in turn, is influenced by the physiological reactions in question. A scientist needs to think like a chess player, he states, a person who, even if he knows the rules, can never predict what will happen, and whose every move has an impact upon his opponent\u0026rsquo;s possibilities.\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e Chess is perhaps an unduly static example and, furthermore, one that immediately conjures up negative connotations in an artistic context. Nevertheless, it encapsulates the idea of ever-changing unpredictability. A better illustration, and one which Swennen has quoted in a different context, is of someone who crosses the street and, in order to avoid an oncoming car, either slows or quickens his pace.\u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e Unfortunately, both of these examples also describe conscious processes, while Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, instead, is concerned with the countless invisible, impalpable and unconscious agents of perception that might influence physiological processes. Moreover, he is concerned about the way in which scientists unconsciously distort the subject of their research through the processes by which it is viewed and formulated. Scientists ought to be aware of the fact that they create reality through the way they measure it or think about it.\u003csup\u003e42\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBoth of these levels can naturally be found in painting. In the first place, at the moment when a painting is created from a series of mutually influencing observations, actions and events (for example, the way in which the paint behaves: flows, covers or dries), and subsequently when an outsider thinks about the said painting and, by reducing it to a simple relationship between cause and effect (original idea and result), for example, misapprehends the work.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; Many things are only seen by humans after a learning process, and what we do not learn to see is indeed not seen\u0026rsquo;, writes Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker. \u0026lsquo;Painters and sculptors know more about this apprenticeship than physiologists.\u0026rsquo; At the same time, Weizs\u0026auml;cker continues, painters are unable to depict an epileptic seizure or a person who is suffering, because they do not know how a man moves in an objective sense (in physical or pathological terms). \u0026lsquo;When simply looked at, the body and movement are revealed differently to the artist, the tailor, the gymnast and the physician.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e43\u003c/sup\u003e In these sentences we recognise Gilson\u0026rsquo;s ideas about the phenomenological or aesthetic approach to art, and the difficulty of seeing things from the perspective of their objective \u0026lsquo;cause\u0026rsquo;. Painters, gallery attendants, removal men, removal men, insurance clerks and art historians will all see a painting differently.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf you have not learned to look at a painting as a painter, then you cannot see it as a painter. The artistic manifestation remains invisible. This is what Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker teaches us. But, of course, this is no bad thing. You can also look at a painting as a bookworm who has never made anything with his hands. But you would need to remember that a large part of it falls outside your field of vision.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhoever wishes to learn to see paintings from the standpoint of their makers, will encounter an obstacle, which we will now consider from the perspective of Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker\u0026rsquo;s ideas about the perception of a world in motion by a moving observer. \u0026lsquo;Many scholarly books have been written about poetry\u0026rsquo;, said Czesław Miłosz, \u0026lsquo;and those books find, at least in the West, more readers than the poems themselves. (\u0026hellip;) A poet who wishes to compete with these mountains of erudition should pretend to have more self-knowledge than is allowed for poets. (\u0026hellip;) Honestly, I have spent my whole life in thrall to a daemon, and how the poems he dictated came about, I have no idea.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhenever we wish to consider the artistic existence of a work of art (the work considered from the standpoint of the maker and the making), we are hindered by the fact that an artist rarely knows exactly what happened during the creative process.\u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003e He or she, in some cases, might remember something. But independent of the question as to whether or not an experience is mutilated by the memory through the process of classyfying and \u0026#39;saving\u0026#39; it, there is always the problem that \u0026ndash;because it involves a multidimensional occurrence, both in psychological and physical terms (during which the material and the maker are equally active) \u0026ndash; the creative moment can never be articulated without conferring a one-dimensional, linear and seemingly teleological character to it. One immediately discerns that ideas, intentions, decisions and criteria seem to have been involved, which might indeed all be present, even if only out of habit, but these play less of a guiding role than you might imagine, especially when, as an outsider, you think about it afterwards.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe painter does not know why he or she makes certain decisions. To make something happen? Or to avoid it? The man who slows or quickens his pace to avoid a car when crossing the street does so because of a collision that has only existed in his head. According to Swennen, Deleuze was interested in the fact that C\u0026eacute;zanne noted that a painter\u0026rsquo;s work mostly took place before putting a brush to the canvas, namely in determining what will not be painted. It goes without saying that a painter who wishes to make innovative work must constantly shy away from things (pictures, compositions, textures, connotations) that will suggest or impose a solution. You do not know what has to happen, but you know what you don\u0026rsquo;t want to happen. \u0026lsquo;A painting\u0026rsquo;, says Swennen, \u0026lsquo;changes in relation to a state that has already been reached, not to a state you want it to have in the future.\u0026rsquo; You react to what is already there, and hope to elicit an event that will carry you further along.\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nActing tactically (System D)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHerbie Hancock tells us how, during a tight concert in Stuttgart, he played a wrong chord in the middle of a solo by Miles Davis. Terrified, he covered his face with his hands. In that split second, he heard Davis hesitate for one second, and then start to play a series of notes that turned his \u0026lsquo;wrong\u0026rsquo; chord into a right one.\u003csup\u003e47\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea of a multi-dimensional space in which the artist simultaneously moves, thinks and acts brings to mind the challenges faced by dancers, actors, musicians and singers during public performances. For they too are dealing with ever-changing, never entirely predictable factors: the character and potential of their instrument; the interpretation of the score or the text; the renditions by the other players, the architecture of the theatre, the reactions of the public and so forth. The pleasure in being part of a mobile space, which is affected by your own movements, decisions and actions, undoubtedly adds to the lure of any musical, dance or theatre performance, or sport, and perhaps also painting. Not in a \u0026lsquo;gestural\u0026rsquo; way, which is what Sylvester seems to do when he compares Bacon\u0026rsquo;s actions with the speed of a tennis player\u0026rsquo;s arm (already moving before a decision has been made).\u003csup\u003e48\u003c/sup\u003e The resemblance between these several fields is not a matter of speed (or expression), but of a particular way of spatial thinking, which can also be a very slow process, as is usually the case with Swennen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA painting by Swennen occurs as the result of a limited range of interventions, usually staggered over time, and in which each new action is a response to the results of the preceding actions and events. Born from a strategic desire to provoke unimaginable and unpredictable accidents as part of a multidimensional interaction with the materials of matter and thought, this way of proceeding can only be tactical. The painter has initiated a practice that allows for accidents and manifests itself in a form of vigilance, one that ensures that the opportunities that present themselves are correctly appreciated. Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings are built up slowly, and involve long periods of apparent inactivity, during which time he primarily reviews what has emerged. This slowness is not in contradiction with a tactical approach beyond preconceived ideas or intentions.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA pertinent example of this type of tactical thinking is bricolage\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e, as defined by Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss: the accumulation of a wealth of objects, which are hoarded without any knowledge of what they might be needed for. Even though the use to which the stored object is ultimately put might be determined by an earlier function or a number of associated attributes, it is nevertheless deployed in a new and surprising manner. This entire process, in terms of both the collection and the use of objects, is tactical. Levi-Strauss employed this concept to explain the way in which myths were probably composed out of fragments of other, older cultures, where \u0026lsquo;something that used to be a goal now assumes the role of means: the \u0026ldquo;signified\u0026rdquo; becomes the \u0026ldquo;signifier\u0026rdquo; and vice versa.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e50 \u003c/sup\u003eRadical, tactical action sets no store by traditions, functions and meanings. It reacts. It puts things straight. It seeks solutions for self-inflicted problems. \u0026lsquo;My paintings\u0026rsquo;, said Swennen during a lecture in April 2016, \u0026lsquo;evolve from repair to repair, from patch to patch\u0026rsquo;. \u0026lsquo;When you paint\u0026rsquo;, he told Bart De Baere in 1990, \u0026lsquo;you should always respond to the things that penetrate from outside, something that you yourself established but a moment before. You respond to what is already there. You have brought it forth yourself, but it is there, and all you can do is enter into a dialogue with it. So it constantly changes.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e51\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThinking back to Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker\u0026rsquo;s image of a perception that influences and even shapes the observed reality (whether it concerns a pedestrian crossing the road, an observing physician, a painter at work or an art historian who scrutinises), it becomes clear that the arts have perhaps always developed in a tactical way. There are several good examples of this to be found in the book How Music Works by the musician David Byrne. He points out that certain people claim that African drums owe their unique shape to the availability of materials, which are inevitably poor, and the limited technical resources. Byrne, on the other hand, believes that the instruments are meticulously developed, constructed, handled and played in response to the physical, social and, in particular, acoustic environment. The percussion music that ensues is unsuitable for our stone churches with their echoes. In these places, however, we have developed a modal music that relies upon long, sustained notes. In a comparable way, Mozart\u0026rsquo;s chamber music needed to compete with the noise generated by a crowd in a confined space. The only way of amplifying the sound, at the time, was to expand the size of the orchestra, which is exactly what happened. The ever-increasing scale of the concert halls that were built during the nineteenth century led to greater contrasts and the use of timpani in musical compositions (in order to reach listeners at the back of the auditorium). Around 1900, it became illegal to eat, drink or make noise during a classical concert. As a result, musicians could compose much softer passages. In all probability, the solos and improvisations associated with jazz music arose from the limited musical material available and the need to keep people dancing for a whole night. Also in jazz, the banjo and the trumpet started to play a greater role because they were louder. (Throughout this development, it is also evident that musical evolutions may also have triggered spatial modifications.) Great technological advances have been made in recording techniques since the late nineteenth century and these, in turn, have influenced the way that music sounds. Byrne, for example, notes that the midi technique was more suited to the digitisation of piano and percussion, than for guitar, brass and string instruments. As a result, composers began to create more melodies and harmonies using piano chords. Another key influence is related to the emergence of insulated sound studios and the habit of recording the musicians separately, and so on.\u003csup\u003e52\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn a comparable way, developments in the art of painting were influenced through the invention of portable, enlarged miniatures, the building of museums, art education, the art trade, photography, reproduction techniques and the invention of new materials. Thus, the creation of art books featuring coloured reproductions and, later, the creation of catalogues undoubtedly influenced the development of modern and contemporary art.\u003csup\u003e53\u003c/sup\u003e Watching films and looking at works of art on laptops and smartphones has led to new paintings. With regard to Swennen, we might also suggest the comic book as an influence, but more on this later. The painter stands, therefore, in the midst of a world in movement, a milieu that is affected by his or her own actions and those of everyone else. Yet the reaction to this world does not simply occur within a psychological, actual (as in the exhibition space) or virtual space (of books, television or the Internet). It also occurs, most specifically of all, in the physical space of the painting. It is there that the totality of a world in movement is reprised in a tangible shift, a tangible condensation, a tangible confluence, a tangible obfuscation or revelation, a tangible displacement of the physical, and thus mental, boundaries. Without the development and distribution of comic books, Swennen would not have been able to learn to draw by copying the characters contained within. And if he had not learned to draw by copying comic books, perhaps he never would have developed the habit of drawing with a clear line, or later gone in search for specific techniques through which to transform inflated drawings into paintings in a \u0026lsquo;non-drawn\u0026rsquo; way.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe texture itself\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s poems are not composed of ideas, but words, then Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings are made, in the first place, out of layers of paint that are applied to a support, most usually paper, wood, canvas or metal. It is impossible to compile an exhaustive list of supports, because Swennen, unlike some artists, does not limit himself to certain practices. The first work of art that he exhibited was a beer crate filled with painted bottles. In April 2016, he created a flag by painting upon a piece of rose-coloured fabric; a week later he painted a representation of a brick wall upon a section of a door. Recently, he was given a metal stove cover as a gift because he is fond of painting on them; others have given him failed paintings and wine crates. Ten years ago, he told me that he first used to rub metal stove lids with garlic because he had heard from a restorer that this would facilitate the adhesion of the oil paint. One of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s stovetop paintings comprises a drawing that was made with an electric, metal brush. And so on\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn recent years, Swennen has also taken to painting with acrylic paint, a medium that rivals oils in terms of the range of fascinating effects that can be achieved. The greatest advantage of acrylic is that it dries quickly. As a consequence, there are things that can be done in this medium that cannot be achieved in oil paint. Thus Swennen has made, in recent years, several paintings that feature a type of stain with sharp edges; a shape that is created by removing a puddle of paint that has started to dry. Because the edges dry first, a sort of contour emerges that can be viewed as an abstract form, or a \u0026lsquo;window\u0026rsquo; within the painting. This technique makes it also possible to give letters a differently coloured edge, one that cannot be obtained in any other way: you paint over them using acrylic paint, allow this to dry for a few minutes, and then remove it again. The shorter drying time also makes it possible to take risks that, in the past, were less obvious. Swennen recently obtained a beautiful sky-blue surface by first coating a canvas with Payne\u0026rsquo;s grey and then painting over it with zinc white mixed with a touch of titanium white. In order to obtain a gradated effect in the original, dark grey surface, he tilted the painting four times: the paint flowed slowly towards the centre, becoming thinner and more transparent at the edges. Swennen likes to let the paint stream slowly over the surfaces of his works because it triggers effects that cannot be foreseen (although he tries to avoid drips, which have an expressive connotation). He told me how pleased he was with the background of the painting To Mona Mills (2015), because he had managed to paint a kind of chaos, which is impossible. He had created it by placing the canvas on the ground and applying paint and water, which he subsequently attempted to mix using a squeegee, all the while taking great care to minimise the amount of water and paint that trickled over the edge of the canvas.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA technique that Swennen has developed for the transfer of drawings or letters onto a painting is to first apply the paint with the brush, or directly from the tube, onto a plastic sheet. Using this sheet, the image is then printed onto the painting. The first painting in which this technique was used contained a crude representation of a spruce-fir that had been applied with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife. Because he wished to add a letter to the uneven surface, which would be nigh on impossible using a brush, he first painted the letter onto a sheet of very thin, flexible plastic film. Using a wad of fabric, he was able to press this film into the chinks of the underlying paint. Not only are the effects of this printing technique always different, they are also inexplicable if you don\u0026rsquo;t know how they were made.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAnother specific texture in Swennen\u0026rsquo;s oeuvre stems from his fondness for painting with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife, a technique that he borrowed from Claire Fontaine, with whom he took painting lessons for three years, beginning in 1962. Fontaine painted schematised landscapes in the style of Nicolas de Sta\u0026euml;l in which a tree, for example, is depicted by a rectangular green surface that has been smeared onto the canvas with a knife. From her, Swennen learned that paint can be applied with the knife and then subsequently worked with a paintbrush.\u003csup\u003e54\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife is often used to create a layer which clearly distinguishes itself from the other layers and, via its deviating texture, demonstrates the collage-like, interwoven structure of the painting. In addition, this thicker layer, no matter how it is applied (whether it is dabbed, patch by patch, or smeared in a sweeping gesture), can also provide a diverting optical effect. In \u003cem\u003eBlitz\u003c/em\u003e (2015), a broken yellow stripe, reminding some of lightening, visually comes to the fore. Because this stripe was applied with a trowel between two parallel strips of tape, it bears a close resemblance to the actual tape, which gives rise to an attractive sculptural reversal that is as deceptive as it is funny. For another recent painting an effect was created by repeatedly cleaning the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife against the canvas using broad, sweeping gestures. Executed in different types of red, the result was immediately reminiscent of Diana\u0026rsquo;s red tunic in The Death of Actaeon by Titian (National Gallery, London). Later, as is Swennen\u0026rsquo;s wont, he tempered this stunning effect by applying a layer of white.\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e The work was called \u003cem\u003eTransformations\u003c/em\u003e (2016), referring to the habit to whiten shop windows during a renovation.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo date, Swennen has only used the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife to apply oil paint, principally because he has not yet found a satisfying technique to thicken acrylic paint. This brings us to another textural difference in his paintings, which has nothing to do with the manner in which the paint is applied, but with the employed paint itself. In addition to the difference between oil and acrylic paint, we must also take account of the numerous additives that can lend the paint a glossier, duller, coarser, smoother, more fluid or viscous texture. The addition of oil makes the paint shinier, whereas white spirit deadens its sheen. One of the new qualities of acrylic is that you can dilute it with water and use it to make transparent layers (glazes), which enable the artist to gradually build up his paintings in a quest for the perfect value of a tone. In some of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s works, coffee was added to the white background in order to render it more mottled. Sometimes, he has added ink, gouache, cigarette ash or dust from the vacuum cleaner to the paint. (I quote from memory, this is by no means an exhaustive list.) When, in 2006, he started to paint on top of another artist\u0026rsquo;s abandoned paintings (paper collages on canvas), he attacked them with a broom. As a result, small scraps of paper ended up being mixed into the semi-abraded paint.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAs a final example of the textural differences that Swennen makes use of in his paintings, I would like to discuss the work entitled Pirate (2007), which is based upon a gouache that he painted when he was ten years old. The work consists of three individual panels. The two panels on the left-hand side are made up of two different \u0026lsquo;backgrounds\u0026rsquo; that were waiting in the studio. There are always \u0026lsquo;backgrounds\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;des fonds\u0026rsquo;) in abeyance. Often, they are so beautiful that you hope the artist will leave them untouched. In this particular case, he felt so inclined, and came up with the perfect solution upon noticing that, when placed together, the two works were the same length as the right-hand panel (a piece of board with unusual proportions for a painting). When we take a closer look at the latter, we notice that certain sections of the \u0026lsquo;drawing\u0026rsquo;, such as the lines that suggest the lapels of the jacket, are not painted, but created by leaving them unpainted. This does not hold true for the pirate\u0026rsquo;s shirt collar, however, which is a touching invention of the young boy. The contours of the top of the boots, on the other hand, are indeed \u0026lsquo;drawn\u0026rsquo;, while their surface is spared: another pleasing reversal, which reminds us of the fact that Swennen studied etching at the academy. The drawing contains a somewhat awkward but poignant spatial suggestion, which is enhanced by the splayed legs, the semi-obscured right arm, and the sabre that runs behind the legs. We also discern three solid surfaces, which together provide an additional, haptic or pictorial space: the yellow hilt, the white area of the face and the pale blue \u0026lsquo;background\u0026rsquo;, the latter of which was painted around the figure afterwards. Finally, there are the small black discs that float before the pirate, and which were applied to the places where the board, in the area occupied by the figure, contained knots; yet another example of haptic, pictorial depth. Swennen told me that these black spots reminded him of bullet holes, which also allows us to perceive the figure as a paper human target on a shooting range.\u003csup\u003e56\u003c/sup\u003e Thanks to the material reason for the placement of the black disks, however, we understand that this final \u0026lsquo;image content\u0026rsquo; is not what lies at the basis of the painting\u0026rsquo;s construction. It is the result of a series of successive decisions that are linked to the creation of a beautiful mati\u0026egrave;re, the transformation of an existing drawing that possessed certain physical (and emotional) qualities, the application of graphic reversal techniques in terms of transferring the drawing, the creation of a haptic effect through the addition of areas in white, yellow, light blue and black, and the completion of the painting by uniting three different panels.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFiguration and abstraction\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn 1990, Swennen explained to Bart De Baere that he had struggled for some time with the concepts of figuration and abstraction, but had reached the conclusion that it was a false problem \u0026lsquo;because a painting is always an image of a painting. No matter what it depicts, it is always about a painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e57\u003c/sup\u003e Nowadays, I struggle to understand what he might have meant by that first sentence. I think we can say that things were still confused. In a text from 1994\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e58\u003c/sup\u003e, written after several conversations with the artist, I argued that Swennen created paintings in which figuration and abstraction could meet, and which abolished the so-called differences between the two approaches. In 2007, I refined this further by suggesting that this encounter was made possible through the un-modelled, perspective-less space that is specific to Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings.\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e I still believe this to be true, even today, although I would no longer express it in such a way; simply because the terms are too restrictive to help us think about painting. They prevent us from seeing, in the first place, that Swennen weaves textures, and that it is the materials he uses, be they rectangles, drawings or letters, which primarily determine where to apply paint. That these drawings and letters might also mean something, and can evoke images, narratives, thoughts and feelings within the viewers (and Swennen), and at the same time form part of the painting\u0026rsquo;s genesis, is equally important. But the terminological distinction between figuration and abstraction causes us to forget that it always boils down to material additions. All that the distinction between figuration and abstraction means, ultimately, is that one thing is recognisable and \u0026lsquo;says\u0026rsquo; something while the other does not. But colours, shapes and textures can also say something; they just seem to speak less loudly.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nComposition\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSome painters try to obtain balanced compositions, while other painters try to counter any balanced composition that comes too easily. Swennen endeavours to lure into existence compositions he could not possibly have conceived in advance, by applying both intrinsic and external parameters. If we look at Spider (small) (2014) and Spin van Marius (Marius\u0026rsquo; Spider, 2014), two paintings based on a square drawing by Swennen\u0026rsquo;s grandson Marius, we see that the first time he transferred the drawing to the square cover of a cooker. The second time the part of the canvas that falls outside the square surface was painted blue. How unexpected to find this surface at the top of the painting! In \u003cem\u003eStolen Name\u003c/em\u003e (2016) the vertical lines and then the west-sloping lines of letters were overpainted. (Hence the image of the compass needle.) In \u003cem\u003eLe diamant de Juju\u003c/em\u003e (2016) a drawing is festooned with those short lines used to add force to an extraordinary apparition in a comic strip. Some of these little lines are used as borders of the last layer of paint. In the painting \u003cem\u003eIn the Kitchen\u003c/em\u003e (2016) the proportions of the canvas don\u0026rsquo;t correspond to the proportions of the imitated drawing (a found object). Consequently, the reproduced drawing overlaps with the painted, red border, which follows the proportions of the canvas. The resulting effect reminds us of careless printing. Thus, many compositions comply with laws or agreements which fall outside the field of aesthetics. But not all of them. In \u003cem\u003eMature\u003c/em\u003e (2016) a certain yellow colour appears three times: once as the imitation highlight of an abstract, oval form, once as an oval form and once as a strip of colour. When I point to the amusing highlight and the equally amusing recurrence of the colour in the strip of colour, the painter tells me that Claire Fontaine believed every colour used should reappear somewhere else in the same painting. The oval, he added, was the simplest, non-angular form he could make if he wanted to obtain a nicely edged area with a painter\u0026#39;s knife.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Scrumble 2 (2006), the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife was used to hide the bad parts of a painting (a dirty criss-cross of different coloured lines).\u003csup\u003e60\u003c/sup\u003e The resulting composition is reminiscent of the way in which gallery walls are repaired after an exhibition: all of the holes are filled and hidden under a smooth, rectangular plane. Because this \u0026lsquo;composition\u0026rsquo; is controlled by an unpremeditated, but ultimately inevitable structure, Swennen calls this an \u0026lsquo;autogenetic\u0026rsquo; composition.\u003csup\u003e61\u003c/sup\u003e Thus we see how the particular state of a painting (coloured criss-crossing lines that form dirty junctions), combined with a certain technique (the application of paint with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife), can result in a non-random, new composition.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDrawings\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMany of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings consist of enlarged reconstructions of found or self-made drawings, of which the figurative elements are usually described, even by the artist himself, as \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo;. I suspect he does this because, of course, they are not drawings: they are not drawn, but reproduced with paint. Some authors think that the drawings are derived from comic books, but this is rarely the case. Nor can you say that they resemble \u0026lsquo;comic-book drawings\u0026rsquo; because, after all, not every comic book is drawn using clear lines. The drawings used by Swennen nearly always possess great linear clarity (without shading or shadows), and often feature solid silhouettes. One of the overriding characteristics is their lack of perspective or modelling, so that they seem to exist within a flat space. If the drawings depart from this formula, then it is because the very first paintings are an exception to this \u0026lsquo;rule\u0026rsquo; (see for instance the reproduction on p. 164) or because the used drawing was found and contains a particular flaw. For example Nan\u0026#39;s Still Life (2015), which is based on a drawing by Swennen\u0026rsquo;s wife, in which the splitting of the word \u0026lsquo;fran\u0026ccedil;ais\u0026rsquo; into syllables indicates that the draughtsman was thinking instead of looking. (As a comment, Swennen added a blunt shadow.) Some drawings come from book covers, game boxes, stickers, packaging and so on. Others are derived from doodles or related, small-scale works on paper.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nCertain writers enumerate and organise these drawings by theme, in much the same way that others add up the number of metaphors in the work of Mallarm\u0026eacute;. Of this, Mannoni writes: \u0026lsquo;The mistake of thematic analysis lies in (\u0026hellip;) the fact that images are approached in the first place, as a signified, and only afterwards as a signifier, when it\u0026rsquo;s too late.\u0026rsquo; And a few pages later he adds: \u0026lsquo;We cannot imagine how thematic analysis (\u0026hellip;) can give an account of irony.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e62\u003c/sup\u003e Some exegetes see, for example, an image of a king holding a lit cigarette in the vicinity of his genitals. Others see a flat drawing based on a playing card that has been embellished with the depiction of two moving objects: a burning, glowing cigarette and a plume of smoke. Some people see, for example, a ghost. Others see a figure whose non-painted eyes offer a glimpse of the painting\u0026rsquo;s background. As I mentioned above, in a note, Swennen says today that he might add \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo; to his paintings to satisfy the viewer, so that he can go on painting (just like Mallarm\u0026eacute; who, according to Mannoni, introduced recognisable images into his work just to be able to play with words). This remark, however, ignores the role played by the drawings and letters in the creation of the painting, as coincidental but essential indicators of where to apply the paint. In this sense, it concerns very literal \u0026lsquo;signifiers\u0026rsquo;: empty shapes that can be filled with colours and textures.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOf course, none of this means that the drawings cannot, or may not, mean anything to the artist and viewer. It is precisely this unusual convergence of forms, textures and meanings that lends Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings their richness. What it amounts to, however, is the complex interweaving of all these layers, and the continuous attempts to do this in a new way for each painting. Each painting is trying to be different; each painting strives to disclose, once more, how it is made; each painting endeavours, at the same time, to remain beyond our reach.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nColour\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen mainly uses black, white, grey, yellow, light blue, red and variations of red, such as orange, English red and brown. Very often he mixes these colours with small amounts of other colours to make them slightly impure. \u0026lsquo;There are no primary colours\u0026rsquo;, he once told me. In practice, this means that if a type of paint contains a shade that is reminiscent of the primary colours, it will suffice. In retrospect, you could say that Swennen mostly paints with the colours of Mondrian, although he has replaced dark blue with light blue. I write \u0026lsquo;in retrospect\u0026rsquo; because this was probably not the intention, and perhaps more the result of a desire to ude mainly the primary colours (or shades that resemble them). Sometimes, when finishing a painting, he spoils the applied colours. Two Egyptians (2015) was finished by adding colours directly from the tube, mixing them with water and afterwards cleaning the canvas, scrubbing more around the figures. The red spot resembling a love bite was an unforeseen result of this action. A few years ago, Swennen set himself other boundaries by defining a colour spectrum, the shades of which he would always use in the same order. This spectrum was hung on the studio wall in the form of a strip, to remember the order. It is typical of how he works: he defines rules, endeavours to apply them and then cheats. The use of a limited number of colours lends great consistency to his oeuvre, which makes a vivid and uncluttered impression. It is precisely these limitations that facilitate an impressive, but readable diversity.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWords and letters\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn earlier texts, I pointed out that when Swennen was five, his parents decided to speak another language and send him, accordingly, to a different school. This meant that, from one day to the next, his world became incomprehensible. In all probability, the spoken language must have made an absurd and hostile impression upon him. And at school, the written language probably seemed very strange, or at least at first, when he was unable to link the written characters with a familiar sound or meaning. These circumstances have had an undeniable impact upon his relationship with language, but I do not think they provide a sufficient explanation for his virtuosity.\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The Belgian is afraid of conceitedness\u0026rsquo;, Simon Leys writes in an essay on the \u0026lsquo;belgitude\u0026rsquo; of Henri Michaux, \u0026lsquo;especially the conceitedness of spoken or written words. Hence his accent, and the famous way of speaking French. The secret is this: Belgians think that words are conceited.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e64\u003c/sup\u003e While Leys has a point, he is also mistaken. What seems to characterise the Belgians (and not only French-speakers, but also the Flemish with their supposedly droll kind of Dutch) is probably common to all people who speak or write a language which, in a different geographical location, is linked to a dominant culture (with its specific social, economic and political influence). This place need not be nearby, like France and the Netherlands in the case of the Belgians. I suspect that some English-speaking inhabitants of North America, in centuries past, deliberately rejected the standard linguistic norms in their use of the language, just as today, Canadians, Australians, and English-speaking South Africans and Indians will resist the influence of American English. Wherever an element of language is associated with social, economic, political or cultural dominance, a deviant version will emerge. This is certainly true in the ghettos of the United States, also in Brittany, Alsace, Provence, the French Basque Country and French-speaking Canada. A deviating use of language expresses a different set of values.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen Swennen speaks, you sometimes hear that his Belgian accent becomes more pronounced. In sociolinguistics, the act of switching to a language variant that deviates more from the norm is described as downward divergence. It is used, for instance, to emphasise the pedantry of your interlocutor. Swennen, who is fascinated by argot (as in French translations of American crime novels, for example), is annoyed by the fact that his French-speaking acquaintances listen to French radio stations. Deviating language is not irrational, it just gives shape to a different set of values. What Leys noted is a phenomenon that undoubtedly exists in China as well, but which we cannot hear. You can only probably hear it in your own language, just as you can only truly grasp literary works that are written in your mother tongue. And herein lies the truth of Leys\u0026rsquo; remark, for a poetic language can only be appreciated as a deviation from a standard language. Every literary language is perverse, capricious or, at the very least, unusual.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat Swennen does with words is wonderful. He allows them to collide and merge, he isolates or suppresses them, turns them upside down or mirrors them (or mirrors only the letters, which remain in the usual order). He deploys all of the techniques described by Freud and Shklovski: shifting, inversion, duplication, repetition and condensation.\u003csup\u003e65\u003c/sup\u003e He uses words for their sound and for their shape, and he uses them because of their meaning. He lets them turn and tilt, he uses and abuses them, he tells lies and he says what he thinks. Language has become form: a collection of unreliable sounds that can always mean something else, as in our dreams, but also an almost endless collection of typographies and characters (Roman, Cyrillic, Chinese\u0026hellip;). We see the words, and we read them. We think we see words, but in fact we see coloured surfaces that no \u0026lsquo;abstract\u0026rsquo; painter could ever imagine or justify. \u003cem\u003eConnard\u003c/em\u003e (2014) contains three invectives, in which some of the letters are upside down or mirrored. \u0026lsquo;I thought that if I made the words a little less legible\u0026rsquo;, Swennen told me, \u0026lsquo;I could buy the painting a few seconds of extra time during which it could prove itself. Because when people recognise an image in a painting, or read a word, they walk straight on past. Now, the husband will pause for a few seconds to decipher the words, so his wife will have just enough time to poke him in the ribs with her elbow and whisper: \u0026ldquo;Look at the beautiful colours!\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhoever looks at these fragmented remains of our languages might consider them to be a form of resistance to rationality and related, life-threatening moral forces. This would reflect the views of Freud, who believed that fulfilling sexual experiences were incompatible with the conditions of civilisation, making it mandatory for our unconscious urges to resort to secrecy (for instance, by hiding the truth in illogical jokes). If we look at portmanteaus such as \u0026lsquo;famillionaire\u0026rsquo; (Heine quoted by Freud) or \u0026lsquo;beggar-millionaire\u0026rsquo; (Shklovski) they might indeed seem illogical but, in my view, they are constructed according to laws which are also used by \u0026lsquo;rational thought\u0026rsquo;, or any other form of productive thinking. They are the result of the same \u0026lsquo;condensation\u0026rsquo; that leads Francis Bacon to tell Sylvester that Michelangelo and Muybridge have become one and the same artist in his mind. Ultimately, even the laws of nature, which are amongst the highest fruits of rational thought, are forms of condensation, because they bring together at least two different physical units in the form of an equation. It does not matter how you arrive at an idea or a formulation, so long as the thought or formulation bears fruit.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf we do not consider these language games to be an irrational opposition to reason and morality, but as an unreliable, stubborn, irritable, stained, tainted, messy, quirky, idiosyncratic and independent way of thinking that, above all, is inextricably linked to the material concepts of the painting, then we see a connection with the philosophy of Max Stirner, from whom Swennen recently gained a new maxim: \u0026lsquo;Mein Widerwille bleibt frei\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;My disinclination remains free.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e66\u003c/sup\u003e In contrast to general reasoning, Stirner defended the right to a personal \u0026lsquo;unreason\u0026rsquo; which was real to him, because he himself felt real. Heralding Gombrowicz\u0026rsquo;s plea for immaturity and opposition to Form, he wrote: \u0026lsquo;The thought of right is originally my thought; or, it has its origin in me. But when it has sprung from me, when the \u0026ldquo;Word\u0026rdquo; is out, then it has \u0026ldquo;become flesh\u0026rdquo;, it is a fixed idea. Now I no longer get rid of the thought; however I turn, it stands before me. Thus men have not become masters again of the thought \u0026ldquo;right\u0026rdquo;, which they themselves created; their creature is running away with them.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen\u0026rsquo;s recalcitrant language can also be set against the background of Lacan\u0026rsquo;s belief that we are made of language, and that language has alienated us from both our bodies and the world. Man would be a \u0026lsquo;language-being\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;parl\u0026ecirc;tre\u0026rsquo;) with a hopeless, irreparably distorted sexuality, exiled in a world of unreliable, manipulative words, which cannot touch the core of reality, le r\u0026eacute;el. Reading Lacan is a wonderful, amusing adventure, and it is not without significance that Swennen has been influenced by him, but I prefer not to delve into this here.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAbout flat paintings and pictorial space\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe lack of modelling and (correctly applied) perspective in the drawings used by Swennen would seem to suggest that he wishes to create flat paintings. Strictly speaking, this is not the case. His paintings are not all-over or polyfocal. Nor do they evoke a flat image that seems to hover in front of the canvas, as wished for by Greenberg. So what does, in fact, happen? The drawings themselves are flat, constituting one of the planes that are combined into a painting. Sometimes these planes seem to situate themselves at different distances from the viewer, thus creating a pictorial space, but at other times not.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his book on Bacon, Deleuze distinguishes between the optical and haptic use of colour. Optical use of colour segues from light to dark, includes shades (values) of the same tone, and is used in what Greenberg called \u0026lsquo;sculptural\u0026rsquo; painting (which reached its apogee in the seventeenth century). Haptic use of colour does not involve shades of the same tone, but juxtaposes different colours in the knowledge that their \u0026lsquo;cold\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;warm\u0026rsquo; character will create an impression of lightness or darkness, and closeness or distance.\u003csup\u003e68\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBecause Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings lack perspectival elements and do not rely upon the optical use of colour (values of the same tone, shadows), unless as a joke (for example, the shadow of a letter, or the shadows in found drawings which are usually selected because they contain a flaw), one might say that his work is an innovative variation on the artistic traditions that consciously renounced \u0026lsquo;modelling\u0026rsquo; (by way of lighting effects) as an approach to reality, and that \u0026lsquo;went on reducing the fictive depth of painting\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e69\u003c/sup\u003e Greenberg noted that such a deliberate negation of the \u0026lsquo;realistic\u0026rsquo; approach had only occurred twice: first in Byzantine art and, secondly, as a result of the radical, late-Impressionist paintings (including those by Monet) that can be considered as the first \u0026lsquo;all-over\u0026rsquo; paintings. According to Greenberg, painters such as C\u0026eacute;zanne, Gauguin, Matisse, Picasso, Braque and Klee were the first to adopt this approach, with Mondrian following later. But since it aimed \u0026lsquo;to reaffirm the flatness of pictorial space\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e70\u003c/sup\u003e, the approach was only fully realised, in his view, in the work of the painters that he personally championed such as Pollock, Rothko, Newman and Still.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSome people claim that Mondrian strove to make \u0026lsquo;flat\u0026rsquo; paintings: works in which, to the eyes of the viewer, the blue and red surfaces do not appear to recede or advance but, thanks to the addition of a black or grey grid, all of the coloured fields appear to situate themselves at the same pictorial depth. I do not know if this was actually Mondrian\u0026rsquo;s intention because I have not read his writings, but it is undeniably true that the red and blue do indeed seem to be at the same depth in some paintings. For Greenberg, however, Mondrian was but a precursor, whose work but signalled all-over painting: \u0026lsquo;Dominating and counter-posed shapes, as provided by intersecting straight lines and blocks of color, are still insisted upon, and the surface still presents itself as a theater or scene of forms rather than as a single, indivisible piece of texture.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e71\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGreenberg did not appreciate paintings in which certain areas stood out and thereby resembled a \u0026lsquo;figure\u0026rsquo;, or those in which patches of colour were strewn around in a contrapuntal way. Nor did he like paintings that seemed to retreat into the wall, like a window. He preferred paintings in which the \u0026lsquo;pictorial effect\u0026rsquo; was uniformly dispersed and appeared to hover in front of the canvas.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf we use Greenberg\u0026rsquo;s criteria as a way of better understanding Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, we find that the artist does, in fact, play with all of these elements. The absence of modelling and (correctly applied) perspective might create the impression that Swennen wants to make flat paintings, but they often contain prominent elements that seem to leap to the fore. He does not use modelling or perspectival depth, but evokes pictorial depth through the haptic use of colours (tonal contrasts). In a conversation that was published in 2007, he says: \u0026lsquo;I have always found the condemnation of illusion and depth to be deplorable. Even a blank canvas has depth. The good thing about painting is that you can decide whether or not you want to utilise that depth.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e72\u003c/sup\u003e In April 2016, when Swennen and I looked at an unfinished painting that contained four different shades of white, it seemed obvious that one of these, an ivory-toned hue, came more to the fore than the others. I asked Swennen if this was intentional, and whether he had observed the effect. Twice he answered negatively. If anything, he was annoyed by the question. Didn\u0026rsquo;t I know that paintings are flat? And that they have a texture like puff pastry?\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe point is that Swennen will always oppose the habit of confusing the result of a practice with a so-called intention. It is not because a finished painting contains a certain image that this image found itself at the origin of the painting. The same applies to texture and pictorial space. It is certainly enlightening to see Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings from the stance of Greenberg, but at the same time we must realise that what we see has never been pursued by the painter as part of a programme. He has always tried to paint whatever. Rejecting any kind of programme in terms of content or personal expression,\u003csup\u003e73\u003c/sup\u003e Swennen has devised a free way of working in order to come up with unprecedented paintings. Even if we have the impression that he is \u0026lsquo;playing\u0026rsquo;, this is not the result of an intention. His paintings are not anti-perspectival or anti-modelling in a programmatic way, but they are, in a very concrete sense, pro-painting. They are not the result of intentions, but the results of a number of parameters that he uses to construct his painting-objects.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat are these parameters? Actually, it mainly comes down to habits. In 1990, he told Bart De Baere that his drawings remind us of comic books because he learned to draw by copying them. For the specific \u0026lsquo;space\u0026rsquo; of his paintings, it seems essential that Swennen uses a clear line and makes line drawings that do not suggest volume (the opposite of Chinese painting). But he himself will never call it a clear line. He will never formulate it as an objective. It is simply a habit that can be put to good use.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo me, Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings reflect\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e74\u003c/sup\u003e upon the possibilities of flat paintings and pictorial space. This thinking is free. It is not bound to intentions, stylistic principles, or a programme. It stems from the radical principle of painting whatever, from a number of habits and from a tactical approach that allows for provoked accidents.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nStill Life\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Swennen\u0026rsquo;s work we find moving cars, smouldering cigarettes, falling men and sprinting athletes. I always see these figures as funny allusions to the impossibility of representing movement in a painting.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMalcolm Morley -\u0026ndash; a painter whom Swennen admires (for instance because of the white borders, which indicate that he does not depict three-dimensional space in his work, but two-dimensional images)\u003csup\u003e75\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026ndash; describes his paintings, which are based on models, postcards and other pictures, as still lifes.\u003csup\u003e76\u003c/sup\u003e Gilson considers the still life to be a genre \u0026lsquo;in which painting reveals its very essence and reaches one of its points of perfection.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e77\u003c/sup\u003e He describes The Intervention of the Sabine Women by David as an unsatisfactory attempt to suggest movement. But probably, he continues, this was never the artist\u0026rsquo;s intention. Accepting the immobility of paintings, he probably sought to evoke an illusion of movement through a play with lines: not the depicted people move, but the composition. This effect is even more pronounced, says Gilson, when we compare David\u0026rsquo;s painting with Vel\u0026aacute;zquez\u0026rsquo;s The Surrender of Breda. \u0026lsquo;In this masterpiece\u0026rsquo;, he writes, \u0026lsquo;there is hardly a trace of motion left. Time seems to have come to a standstill. Human beings themselves, however well painted they may be, are only second in importance to the patterns of the lines and to the balance of the masses.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e78\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen I recently asked Swennen to elucidate two paintings that contain the image of a propeller, he said that they were still lifes, because they were based on an existing fan. In \u003cem\u003eSchroef\u003c/em\u003e (2014), we discern a number of white spots along the edge of the blades. Why are they there? Ruminating upon the existence of left- and right-handed propellers, Swennen had the idea of covering the image of a propeller (an outline drawing) with a white drawing of the same object, but mirrored. Not happy with the result, he erased the second outline. At the points where it intersected with the first outline, which was still wet, the paint could not be erased, so the white spots remained. Why a propeller? Probably because the object that ended up in Swennen\u0026rsquo;s studio has a pleasing shape. Perhaps because it reminded him of his father, who was an engineer and worked in the docks for a long time. Perhaps because the propeller is an invitation to engage in bricolage. Finally, because a propeller is essentially a moving object and paintings cannot depict motion. The movement is not depicted, but it is contained within the painting, which bears traces of an obliterated gesture.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe imperfect perspective\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe irreverent way in which Swennen deals with perspective is reminiscent of the tricks that Rogier van der Weyden employed in The Seven Sacraments Altarpiece and The Descent from the Cross. In the first painting, the central figures are much larger than the others. If we compare the size of Christ with the architecture, he would, in actuality, be five metres tall. The result of van der Weyden\u0026rsquo;s trickery is an impression of great proximity that, in an incomprehensible way, seems quite obvious.\u003csup\u003e79\u003c/sup\u003e In the Descent, the entire narrative takes place within an altarpiece cabinet that is approximately a shoulder-width deep. Yet this scene plays itself out in five successive layers: closest to the viewer is the apostle John, who supports Mary. Behind Mary, already a little deeper within the scene, we see the body of Christ, which has been passed to Joseph of Arimathea and is already being carried away by Nicodemus. Behind these men stands the cross and, deeper still, the servant who, on top of a ladder, has freed Christ and lowered him. While this servant should, by rights, be situated two metres further behind, the nail that he holds in his right hand advances out of the altarpiece cabinet.\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e This use of perspective to create a phantasmagorical space probably had a symbolic function related to a specific world view.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to the art historian Dirk De Vos, there was no clarity of meaning to the symbolism of the Middle Ages. \u0026lsquo;Everything could be used or interpreted in multiple directions. Indeed, the multifaceted world was God\u0026rsquo;s Being in multiple disguises. If we read the philosophical, theological or moralistic tracts, or the mystical writings, then we are faced with a profusion of images and symbolism, as the only means by which to communicate the unspeakable. (\u0026hellip;) As the mastery of this technique advanced, insight into the world became increasingly complex and ambiguous, which would ultimately lead to divine revelation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e81\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Erwin Panofsky\u0026rsquo;, writes De Vos, \u0026lsquo;has called this \u0026ldquo;disguised symbolism\u0026rdquo; because of the underlying events that the depiction does not immediately divulge. Through too literal detective work into these symbols, however, this term often leads to a system of iconographic statements that actually negate the spirit of the visual revelation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e82\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nNo one knows the technical and stylistic origins of the oil painting techniques used by the Flemish Primitives. Sometimes it seems as though these painters were possessed of a sudden urge to depict polychrome sculptures in a flat manner, at other times it would seem that the similarities between these two art forms is more related to the desired ambiguity of the paintings. According to De Vos, the paintings probably originated out of the flourishing studios of the Flemish-French miniature painters, whose \u0026lsquo;nature and perfection can explain for (the beginnings of) panel painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e He points to formal factors such as the \u0026lsquo;illusionistic, anti-decorative and anti-hieratic evolution of the miniature: the small size, for example, that implies a clarity that intensifies the possibilities of imagery; the fact that a miniature always resembles a \u0026ldquo;window\u0026rdquo; as a result of the prominent frame, which serves to highlight the illusory nature of the image.\u0026rsquo; Anyway, whatever its origin, \u0026lsquo;the independence of the painted image has finally manifested itself in material form. A portable \u0026ldquo;wall unit\u0026rdquo; was created, especially designed to house a painted representation. It is a form common to fifteenth-century painting: a filled and mounted panel, as smooth and flat as a mirror, set like a piece of glass in a window frame, a kind of flat viewing box that allowed the visual enchantment to be carried from room to room.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e84\u003c/sup\u003e In other words, these paintings were not born of a desire to detach frescoes from their architectural supports, or as a way of creating flat reproductions of polychrome sculptural groups, but as ingenious illustrations from books turned into monumental paintings. Could it be a coincidence that something similar happened with Walter Swennen? Perhaps the specific, flat space of his paintings, in which coloured surfaces meet words and drawings with clear lines, spring from the doodles of a distracted reader? This is probably too strong. Yet there must be a grain of truth in it. The amazing freedom of his works, on a material, compositional and \u0026lsquo;non-programmatic\u0026rsquo; level, can, in part, best be explained from the perspective of the freedom within certain comic books, the doodles in the margins of ponderous writings and the scattered words and phrases that are left over from the reading of an inspiring book.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFinally, I would like to share some nonsense about the perspective-less, pictorial space of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, starting with some reflections by Daniel Arasse on the invention of perspective in the fifteenth century. According to Arasse, perspective cannot simply be considered as a symbol for a world without God, as Panofsky has proposed, nor merely as a prerequisite for a place that facilitates action (as Pierre Francastel posited). In Arasse\u0026rsquo;s opinion, perspective, which was originally called \u0026lsquo;commensuratio\u0026rsquo;, was used to shape the world to the scale of the human figure, a world that was measurable. For that reason, perspective was often used to give form to the mystery of the Incarnation: the infinite God becoming measurable and tangible. He points, for example, to a pillar in an Annunciation by Ambrogio Lorenzetti that is dated to 1344. This pillar, a common symbol of Christ, is rendered with perspective at the base, but while it ascends, it gradually merges into the Divine gold leaf of the background.\u003csup\u003e85\u003c/sup\u003e In the perspective-less space of Swennen, it seems, no Incarnation is possible. Fortunately, Lacan would sigh, since the Incarnation is the source of all misery.\u003csup\u003e86\u003c/sup\u003e And we remember that Freud, according to Lacan, was drawn to the God of the Old Testament because He stood for the Word and an invisible, masculine Law, in contrast with the feminine Reality, which is round and made of flesh. In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s work seems to be no place for the feminine reality: everything seems to be spectral and thin, like a pneumatic, spiritual adventure (cosa mentale). Everything? No, in this ghostly world, there is something that offers resistance, like a gallstone. And that something is the painting.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTurning the nonsensical into an enigma\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn the collected wordings Hic Haec Hoc, Swennen describes making paintings as transforming the nonsensical into an enigma.\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e Before we take a closer look at this statement, we would do well to recall what Mannoni wrote about Baudelaire: that it was his destiny to \u0026lsquo;incessantly touch upon obscure questions, without promising explanation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e88\u003c/sup\u003e This is reminiscent of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s remark that the art historian Paul Ilegems was correct to describe him as \u0026lsquo;a pain in the neck\u0026rsquo;. Just as the enigma is a challenge thrown to the people by a god\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e89\u003c/sup\u003e, so Swennen presents us with paintings as aporias, works that compel us to accept a kind of \u0026lsquo;deferred meaning\u0026rsquo;, of the type that Mannoni found in Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s poetry. \u0026lsquo;From the first reading,\u0026rsquo; Mannoni writes, \u0026lsquo;there is a promise of meaning, there is the mystery of the twenty-four letters: as long as the sentence is incomplete, we supposedly still have multiple meanings... this state, in which we are more undecided than lost, continuously coalesces and disintegrates as we proceed. This is called the reading. Only Mallarm\u0026eacute; makes this a state without end...\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e90\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat does an experience of the nonsensical actually entail? Swennen\u0026rsquo;s first exposure to meaninglessness probably occurred his parents decided, from one day to the next, to speak a different language as a way of breaking with the wartime past. Many a child has been forced to learn a new language. But how many people, during their childhood, suddenly found that they could no longer understand their parents? The experience must have been abysmal.\u003csup\u003e91\u003c/sup\u003e Yet it seems that Swennen survived this situation by not taking it seriously, by giving it a twist. Disconnected letters, sounds, words and meanings may have engendered an ever-shifting inner world, a realm that few discover.\u003csup\u003e92\u003c/sup\u003e This is what I suspect, for the very reason that it lays the foundations for a second crucial experience of \u0026lsquo;meaninglessness\u0026rsquo;, namely his discovery that the \u0026lsquo;non-representative\u0026rsquo; elements of a painting (\u0026lsquo;between the terra cotta saucer and the signature\u0026rsquo;) do not \u0026lsquo;mean\u0026rsquo; anything anymore; it is only a \u0026lsquo;painting\u0026rsquo;. A pleasurable, endless activity suddenly opened up to him, one that extended beyond language and meaning.\u003csup\u003e93\u003c/sup\u003e \u003csup\u003e94\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nObjects have something to say, not because they speak to us, but because we start talking to ourselves when we see them. We consequently experience them as meaningful. Works of art can also have meaning; only the significance does not have to result from an intention of the artist. The meaning does not derive from the things, but from a human need. Meaning watches over us in the depths of the night.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMannoni noted that the point of a joke makes the wordplay (out of which the witticism is born) bearable.\u003csup\u003e95\u003c/sup\u003e We seem to find it intolerable when words are confused. The disorder makes us feel uneasy. Jumbled words lose their meaning. A world that is named with meaningless words seems just that, meaningless. But if we weren\u0026rsquo;t able to tinker with words, we would become trapped in them. The psychoanalyst tinkers, the poet tinkers, the painter tinkers. But they rarely admit this. And quite often, they do not know it themselves.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his book Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, Freud endeavours to show, in elaborate detail, that jokes are established in the same way as dreams, driven by the unconscious. Via a subtle detour he tries to lead us towards new evidence for the existence of the unconscious, which is something that he regards as a given, as he admits at the end of the volume. If we set Freud\u0026rsquo;s topological meanderings aside (the question where the drives are actually located, how they are repressed, which site is \u0026lsquo;occupied\u0026rsquo; by the psychic energy and through which gaps this energy escapes in order to satiate a still forbidden lust), then we understand that he views the joke as a statement that initially seems to make sense, then turns out to be senseless, but ultimately possesses a deeper hidden meaning. This meaning, which differentiates the joke from the games of children and the noncommittal jest, would reside in the fact that it disarms rational criticism and allows for the utterance of obscene, aggressive, cynical and sceptical thoughts because of a witty formulation (that briefly makes sense and subsequently turns out to be nonsense).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Freud the joke always targets the prevailing morality, the principles of which prevent us from giving free reign to pleasure because all forms of society call for the delayed gratification of our personal desires. The beauty of Freud, in my view, is that he doesn\u0026rsquo;t merely stop there and seems to want to upend the entire world. \u0026lsquo;What these jokes whisper,\u0026rsquo; he writes, \u0026lsquo;may be said aloud: that the wishes and desires of men have a right to make themselves acceptable alongside of exacting and ruthless moral values. And in our days it has been said in forceful and stirring sentences that this morality is only a selfish regulation laid down by the few who are rich and powerful and who can satisfy their wishes at any time without any postponement\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e96\u003c/sup\u003e To introduce his chapter on the hidden purposes of the joke, he reminds the reader of Heinrich Heine\u0026rsquo;s witticism, in which the latter compares Catholic priests and Protestant clerics, respectively, to supermarket employees and independent shopkeepers. Freud writes that he had hesitated about including this joke in his book because he realised \u0026lsquo;that among my readers there would probably be a few who felt respect not only for religion, but also for its CEOs and management personnel.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e97\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Freud the joke is directed against authority figures, sexual rivals and institutions such as marriage, of which he wrote: \u0026lsquo;One does not venture to say aloud and openly that marriage is not an arrangement calculated to satisfy a man\u0026rsquo;s sexuality...\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e98\u003c/sup\u003e The reader is left with the impression that it always must have been Freud\u0026rsquo;s motivation to defend the right to be different: the right to be a poet, a painter, a homosexual or a Jew. Freud is a blessed crook. The whole of Freud\u0026rsquo;s psychoanalysis is a sort of joke, aimed at the formulation of social criticism but which, at the same time, bypasses any authoritarian or moral resistance. Still in the chapter on the underlying purposes of jokes, Freud analyses a joke about a deaf Jew who is told by his doctor that his lack of hearing is due to an excessive consumption of alcohol. The Jew decides to stop drinking. When it transpires that he has fallen off the wagon, he admits that his hearing had improved when sober, but he decided that he was better off drinking because he heard such terrible things. And Freud concludes: \u0026lsquo;In the background lies the sad question whether the man may not have been right in his choice. It is on account of the allusion made by these pessimistic stories to the manifold and hopeless miseries of the Jews that I must class them with tendentious jokes.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e99\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAlthough the joke has a higher purpose, according to Freud, the remarkable thing is that its origins lie in a childlike desire for gratification, which takes the form of a lust for words and a hankering for nonsense (the condensation of words or the exploitation of similarities, for example, would save psychic energy in a way that is tantamount to experiencing lust). \u0026lsquo;But the characteristic tendency of boys to do absurd or silly things\u0026rsquo;, Freud writes (he is silent about girls), \u0026lsquo;seems to me to be directly derived from the pleasure in nonsense.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e100\u003c/sup\u003e Children (just like adults \u0026lsquo;in a toxically altered state of mind\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e101\u003c/sup\u003e) would love to play with thoughts, words and sentences. Later, a price is paid in the name of reason, and \u0026lsquo;only significant combinations of words remain permitted.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e102\u003c/sup\u003e Thus the desire would stay buried and seek gratification through joke-telling, thus facilitating the expression of criticism.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThis does not sound convincing. Rather it seems that jokes are made possible, and have been drawn into our existence, through our disproportionate need for meaning. When our meaning-seeking brain falsely detects a sexual or other interest in a combination of sounds or shapes, we find this combination funny. Ultimately, we laugh at this rummaging brain and, by extension, at all of the institutions that have emerged from our dangerous need for precisely-defined, specific meanings: rules of games, sports clubs, social rituals, fashions, schools, churches, political parties and so on.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThrough its disturbing character, the joke is related to the Greek oracle, as described by Giorgio Colli in Naissance de la Philosophie: ambiguous, elusive pronouncements by an apparently malicious and cruel God. Oracles are passed on to us by seers. Often they take the form of riddles. Only the wise can solve or interpret these conundrums. \u0026lsquo;For the Greeks\u0026rsquo;, Colli writes, \u0026lsquo;the wording of an enigma carries in itself tremendous hostility.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e103\u003c/sup\u003e The gods reveal their wisdom through words, he writes, \u0026lsquo;hence the external nature of the oracle: ambiguity, obscurity, allusiveness, uncertainty\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e104\u003c/sup\u003e For Colli, the divine origin of the oracle is a sufficient explanation for its obscurity. But why must God\u0026rsquo;s word be obscure (ambiguous, uncertain and allusive)? Does God have a speech impediment? Or is it simply that the words, being fundamentally skewed and of human origin, are unfit for divine thoughts? We know the true words of the Christian God; that is a fact. But why is the word of our almighty and infallible God so ambiguous, contradictory and confused? There are several answers to this question. Firstly, the holy books would never have survived, nor have inspired so many people, if they were unambiguous. The inconsistency and muddle-headedness of spiritual texts is a prerequisite for their viability and efficacy. Secondly, the word of God is contradictory and confused because it was aimed at preventing us from believing that we know God. Gods are useful as an instrument of power when their words can only be understood and translated by a select few. Also, spiritually minded people see gods as images representing the unknowable nature of the world and the inadequacy of knowledge. A knowable God cannot be a God.\u003csup\u003e105\u003c/sup\u003e Only as an unknowable construction God can guide us towards humility and a constant awareness of our imperfect knowledge. Societies were made possible through the invention of unknowable gods. Man does not stop being an animal when he learns to speak, but when he keeps remembering that his perceptions are relative, that his words are inadequate and that his thoughts can never claim to be based on a universal truth. Thirdly, therefore, the words of gods are nebulous in order to remind us that our own observations, words and thoughts are muddled and relative.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGradually, however, the enigma was uncoupled from the divine oracle and came to assume the form of a person-to-person intellectual challenge. And later still, says Colli, it gave rise to dialectics. A dialectical conversation in ancient Greece always departed from two contradictory statements (The Being is and the Being is not). The opponent was invited to side with one of these propositions and it was subsequently demonstrated that his position (no matter which side he took) was untenable. The challenger, who formulated the contradiction, always won. For Colli, the dialectic culture of the ancient Greeks was destructive because it undermined all forms of certainty or conviction. Yet it seems to me that in order to overcome prejudice, stupidity, demagogy, dictatorships, absolute monarchies and religious mania, this destruction is indispensable. The predetermined \u0026lsquo;victory\u0026rsquo; of the challenger in the dialectical conflict depended not upon his arguments, but upon the fact that it sprang from a contradiction. No single reality can be approached only from two perspectives. In almost all sciences, progress is the result of a cross-fertilisation between approaches that previously pretended to be exclusive. Does this prevent us from adopting positions? Certainly not, but is it so hard to remember that each position is fundamentally relative? \u0026lsquo;Heraclitus had no criticism of the senses\u0026rsquo;, wrote Colli\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e106\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;on the contrary, he praised sight and hearing, but he condemned the tendency to transform our perceptions into something stable that would exist outside of us.\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The essence of the enigma\u0026rsquo;, said Aristotle, \u0026lsquo;lies in putting together apparently inconsistent and impossible things.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e107\u003c/sup\u003e As Shklovski demonstrated, the same can be said of a narrative that is crafted through the use of prioms: the devices that permit unexpected twists. It is also true for the dream-work and joke-work, which seem to speak about a hidden knowledge that guides our behaviour. And Lacan\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;le r\u0026eacute;el\u0026rsquo; also speaks in riddles.\u003csup\u003e108\u003c/sup\u003e Attempting to guess the nature of Schopenhauer\u0026rsquo;s Will or Freud\u0026rsquo;s Unconscious is ridiculous if one believes that these Things actually exist. But the puzzling itself, the playing with words and images, the rearranging of sentences and the weaving of alternative narratives can turn an unmanageable life into a manageable one. Not because the neurotic has been tamed by his psychiatrist, as the Lacanians believe, and not because the true nature of his or her desires has been revealed, but because a fruitful interaction with a shifting (internal or external) reality requires a constantly self-renewing language game.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen, who undoubtedly discovered a \u0026lsquo;right to nonsense\u0026rsquo; in the writings of Lacan, does not believe in the existence of the unconscious. \u0026lsquo;All we can say is that there\u0026rsquo;s thinking\u0026rsquo;, he says.\u003csup\u003e109\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, there is thinking. \u0026Ccedil;a pense. Colours, shapes, textures, letters, words and figures are woven together to form a new, concrete thought. Not in order to report on a reality that is located beyond the painting, but in order \u0026lsquo;to be\u0026rsquo;: to be visible, to have been made, to have been thought through action, and thus, as an enigma, to indirectly give an account of the miracles of thinking (through action).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Basic research is what I am doing when I don\u0026rsquo;t know what I am doing\u0026rsquo;, wrote Wernher von Braun in The New York Times.\u003csup\u003e110\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;There is no idea, however ancient and absurd, that is not capable of improving our knowledge\u0026rsquo;, wrote Feyerabend.\u003csup\u003e111\u003c/sup\u003e Some tribes or nations in the Brazilian rainforest did not need western science to achieve peace, as Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss has demonstrated, but a collection of concepts, images and associated rituals that, in their own way, led to harmony.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen gives form to concrete thoughts that reveal the prioms and the collage-like structure of all thinking. The young Swennen wanted to become a philosopher. He eventually became a painter to be able to think in a free way. Or so I see it. Everybody is free to think differently.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMontagne de Miel, 30 June 2016\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n"},{"locale":"nl","short_description":"","description":"\u003cp style=\"text-align: justify;\"\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n__________\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHans Theys\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cstrong\u003eNe Quid Nimis\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEnkele woorden over het werk van Walter Swennen\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet primaat van de tekst (Franz Kafka)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nToen ik halverwege de jaren tachtig de romans en verhalen van Franz Kafka bestudeerde, viel het mij op dat alle pogingen tot interpretatie van zijn oeuvre voorbij leken te gaan aan de omstandigheid dat dit zich opzettelijk als ongrijpbaar opstelt en telkens weer lijkt te berichten over een onkenbare wereld en ondoorgrondelijke teksten. Tegelijk leek de tekst zich op te dringen als een noodzakelijke vorm. In die zin zou je Kafka\u0026rsquo;s werk kunnen beschouwen als een voortzetting van de Talmoed en de Midrasj. In de nooit eindigende, Joodse Bijbelexegese wordt de omgang met een ongrijpbare wereld en een ongrijpbare God verdubbeld in een omgang met onsamenhangende, contradictorische, zinnebeeldige, ongrijpbare teksten. Toch worden de teksten zelf niet in vraag gesteld, maar gekoesterd. De kern van de Joodse cultuur bestaat uit een principieel eindeloze reeks van interpretaties of hypothesen die geformuleerd, bevraagd en uitgetest mogen worden. \u0026lsquo;Als twee of drie Joden de Torah bestuderen, is God in hun midden,\u0026rsquo; vat Karen Armstrong samen. Het vreemde is dat al deze zaken ook in Kafka\u0026rsquo;s teksten te lezen zijn. \u0026lsquo;\u0026ldquo;Begrijp me niet verkeerd,\u0026rdquo; zegt de geestelijke tegen Jozef K. in \u003cem\u003eHet proces\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026ldquo;ik leg je alleen de opvattingen voor die daarover bestaan. Je moet niet teveel waarde aan opvattingen hechten. De tekst is onveranderlijk, en de opvattingen zijn dikwijls alleen maar een uiting van wanhoop daarover.\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e In de roman \u003cem\u003eHet slot\u003c/em\u003e, waarin de vermoedelijke oplichter K. zich voordoet als de nieuwe landmeter van het dorp, is het enige bewijsstuk waarop hij zich kan beroepen een brief van een onbereikbaar ambtenaar. De duidelijkste uitspraak die over deze brief wordt gedaan, is afkomstig van Olga, de zus van de bode: \u0026lsquo;De brieven juist te beoordelen is onmogelijk, zij veranderen zelf voortdurend van waarde, de overwegingen waartoe zij aanleiding geven zijn eindeloos, en waar men dan precies ophoudt, wordt slechts door het toeval bepaald, dus ook de betekenis is een toevallige.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAan mijn omgang met het werk van Kafka hield ik de indruk over dat zijn werk niets anders tot uitdrukking wilde brengen dan wat er in de tekst stond en dat dit voldoende was. Alles stond er, zwart op wit.\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e Er was helemaal geen behoefte aan iemand die de zaak kwam uitleggen of duiden. Toen ik Walter Swennen voor het eerst ontmoette, in oktober 1988, begreep ik dat hetzelfde gold voor zijn schilderijen. Als ze al iets \u0026lsquo;zeggen\u0026rsquo;, dan is dat op een materi\u0026euml;le manier, niet in de vorm van een code die ontcijferd moet worden.\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e De schilderijen van Swennen zeggen hun vorm. Hun denken speelt zich af in de manier waarop ze geconstrueerd zijn, ook als ze uitvergrote tekeningen of woorden bevatten.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet primaat van de textuur (Viktor Sjklovski)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAan het eind van de jaren tachtig bracht Swennen het idee dat de textuur primeert nog niet tot uitdrukking zoals vandaag. In die tijd verwees hij naar een essaybundel van Viktor Sjklovski, die in 1973 in het Frans verschenen was onder de titel \u003cem\u003eLa marche du cheval\u003c/em\u003e.\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e Voor Sjklovski is een kunstwerk geen vertaling van een innerlijke taal van de kunstenaar naar een taal die verstaanbaar is voor de toeschouwer. \u0026lsquo;In de kunst,\u0026rsquo; schrijft hij, \u0026lsquo;ontstaan nieuwe vormen\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nom oude vormen, die hun artistieke waarde verloren hebben, te vervangen.\u0026rsquo; \u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEn waarin bestaat dan die artistieke waarde? Om ons dit uit te leggen citeert hij Broder Christiansen, die in zijn \u003cem\u003eFilosofie van de kunst\u003c/em\u003e het volgende zegt: \u0026lsquo;Wanneer iets als een afwijking van het gebruikelijke, van het normale, van een geldend canon ervaren wordt, dan ontstaat een emotionele indruk van bijzondere kwaliteit. (\u0026hellip;) Waarom blijft de lyriek van een ander volk altijd gedeeltelijk voor ons gesloten, ook al hebben we hun taal geleerd? Wij horen het klankspel van de woorden, we ondergaan het rijm als rijm en voelen het ritme, we begrijpen de betekenis van de woorden en maken ons beelden, vergelijkingen en inhoud eigen: we kunnen alle zintuiglijke vormen, al het tastbare begrijpen. Wat ontbreekt er dan nog aan? Welnu, wat ontbreekt zijn de differentieel-indrukken: zeer kleine afwijkingen van het gewone taalgebruik, in de keuze van de uitdrukkingen, in de combinatie van woorden, in de schikking en wendingen van zinnen. Dat alles kan slechts iemand begrijpen die in de taal leeft, die dankzij een levendig bewustzijn van het normale, door elke afwijking daarvan onmiddellijk getroffen wordt als door een zintuiglijke prikkel.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Om een voorwerp tot kunstfeit te maken moet het losgemaakt worden uit de reeks der levensfeiten. (\u0026hellip;) Het ding moet worden omgedraaid als een houtblok op het vuur.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHieruit volgt dat je geen kunstwerk kan maken zonder dingen te verschuiven, herhalen, verdubbelen of verdichten\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e om een artistiek effect te bekomen. Zowel de vorm als de \u0026lsquo;inhoud\u0026rsquo; van een kunstwerk vloeien voort uit technische noodwendigheden en uit de mogelijkheden van het beschikbare materiaal.\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e Zo wijst Sjklovski erop dat Dido geen eiland verovert door het tot een cirkel verknippen van een dierenhuid omdat dit tot de cultuur van de verteller behoorde (zoals etnologen en sociologen geloven), maar omdat de door Dido toegepaste list een \u0026lsquo;priom\u0026rsquo; is: een kunstgreep die het vertellen van een verrassend verhaal mogelijk maakt. (Hoe anders had de verteller de mensen van zijn of haar eigen volk kunnen verrassen met dit verhaal?) Zo kunnen we ook nauwelijks een verhaal schrijven waarin geen liefde en moord voorkomt. (Dit is een voorbeeld van mezelf.) Maar wie kan je liefhebben of vermoorden? Ofwel iemand die je kent, zoals de postbode\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e, de buren of je familieleden, ofwel een toevallige voorbijganger. Omdat dit laatste weinig waarschijnlijk is, tenzij in \u003cem\u003eLe Fant\u0026ocirc;me de la libert\u0026eacute;\u003c/em\u003e van Bu\u0026ntilde;uel, zullen romanhelden hun familieleden vermoorden of met hen slapen. Het genie van Sofokles blijkt hieruit, dat hij Oedipus een vreemdeling laat vermoorden die nadien zijn vader blijkt te zijn, niet uit mogelijke Freudiaanse gevolgtrekkingen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAls je deze redenering toepast op een schilderij, dan zou je elke zogenaamde verwijzing naar de buitenwereld (of het nu gaat om gedachten of waarneembare dingen) kunnen beschouwen als een vorm van materiaal dat je nu eenmaal nodig hebt om een schilderij op te bouwen. En dat is precies wat Sjklovski deed. \u0026lsquo;Schilderijen zijn helemaal geen vensters op een andere wereld, het zijn dingen,\u0026rsquo; schrijft hij. \u0026lsquo;Een kunstenaar houdt vast aan de afbeelding van de wereld, niet om de wereld te herscheppen, maar om in zijn werk wat ingewikkelder en dankbaarder materiaal te kunnen gebruiken.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e C\u0026eacute;zanne zei net hetzelfde. Zijn schilderijen waren pogingen om met kleur vorm te geven aan de ruimtelijke en optische werking van het waargenomen \u0026lsquo;motief\u0026rsquo;. Het ging hem niet om het waargenomen voorwerp en eigenlijk ook niet om zijn manier van kijken (zijn specifieke \u0026lsquo;optique\u0026rsquo;, die wel noodzakelijk was), maar om de manier waarop hij zijn ervaringen omzette in kleur, zijn eigen \u003cem\u003emanier van doen\u003c/em\u003e, die hij omschreef als zijn temperament\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e of zijn \u0026lsquo;petite sensibilit\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Een schilderij stelt niks voor en moet niks anders voorstellen dan kleur,\u0026rsquo; aldus C\u0026eacute;zanne tegen Gasquet.\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;De buitenwereld bestaat niet,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Sjklovski. \u0026lsquo;De voorwerpen die worden vervangen door woorden bestaan niet, worden niet waargenomen. (\u0026hellip;) De buitenwereld staat buiten de kunst. Ze wordt waargenomen als een reeks toespelingen (\u0026hellip;) ontdaan van materialiteit en textuur.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Alleen kleuren zijn waarachtig voor een schilder,\u0026rsquo; zegt C\u0026eacute;zanne tegen Gasquet.\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e En hij voegt eraan toe: \u0026lsquo;Ik heb een hekel aan al die verhalen, die psychologie, die geleerde theorie\u0026euml;n daarrond. Verdorie, het zit toch in het schilderij, schilders zijn toch geen idioten, maar je moet het met de ogen zien, met de ogen, begrijpt u.\u0026rsquo; \u003csup\u003e18\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Al het werk van de kunstenaar \u0026ndash; schilder of dichter \u0026ndash;,\u0026rsquo; aldus Sjklovski, \u0026lsquo;gaat er uiteindelijk om een samenhangend, volledig tastbaar voorwerp te maken \u0026ndash; een texturaal voorwerp. (\u0026hellip;) In de kunst zijn goed en kwaad een kwestie van textuur. (\u0026hellip;) De textuur is het onderscheidende teken van die aparte wereld bestaande uit opzettelijk geconstrueerde voorwerpen die we zijn gaan omschrijven met de algemene term \u0026ldquo;kunst\u0026rdquo;.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e19 \u003c/sup\u003eWat betekent dit alles? Wat is het belang van deze woorden? Waar gaat het om? In de eerste plaats gaat het om de gedachte dat de waarde van een schilderij niet moet worden gezocht in wat het voorstelt, maar in de manier waarop het is gemaakt. In het geval van C\u0026eacute;zanne gaat het om de manier waarop hij, bijvoorbeeld, tracht te moduleren of modeleren (hij scheen beide woorden te gebruiken) door middel van kleur en tegelijk tracht te voorkomen dat zijn schilderij uiteenvalt (disharmonisch of onsamenhangend wordt). In het geval van Swennen gaat het om de specifieke manier waarop hij technieken, dragers, materialen, kleuren, tekeningen, woorden en letters met elkaar combineert en door elkaar vlecht om tot nieuwe dingen of \u0026lsquo;concrete gedachten\u0026rsquo; te komen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet esthetische en het artistieke bestaan van het schilderij\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHalverwege de jaren negentig ontdekte Swennen in Deleuze\u0026rsquo;s boek over Spinoza een verwijzing naar \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilsons werk \u003cem\u003eL\u0026rsquo;\u0026ecirc;tre et l\u0026rsquo;essence\u003c/em\u003e. Zo ontdekte hij ook diens \u003cem\u003ePainting and Reality\u003c/em\u003e, dat gebaseerd is op een lezingenreeks, en het jaren later verschenen \u003cem\u003ePeinture et r\u0026eacute;alit\u0026eacute;\u003c/em\u003e dat hierop is gebaseerd. In deze werken maakt Gilson een onderscheid tussen de louter fysieke, de esthetische en de artistieke bestaansvorm van een kunstwerk. Als fysiek voorwerp verschilt een kunstwerk in niets van elk ander voorwerp. Als esthetisch voorwerp is het afhankelijk van de relatie die de beschouwer ermee heeft. Een zaalwachter kijkt anders naar een schilderij dan een transporteur, een verzekeraar, een schilder of een denker.\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e Het kunstwerk doet zich aan de toeschouwer voor als een \u0026lsquo;modus\u0026rsquo;, als een verschijningsvorm, die voor iedereen verschillend is. Omdat deze verschijningsvormen oneindig zijn, beschouwt Gilson de esthetische benadering als een hopeloze onderzoekspiste.\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e De esthetische bestaansvorm van het kunstwerk is van fenomenologische aard, omdat ze ons niets vertelt over het voorwerp zelf, maar alleen over de manier waarop het aan ons verschijnt (en de wijze waarop die verschijningsvorm wordt bepaald door onze vermogens en verwachtingen).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOm een kunstwerk te kunnen defini\u0026euml;ren (te onderscheiden van om het even welk ander voorwerp) zonder zijn toevlucht te nemen tot esthetische criteria, omschrijft Gilson het als een voorwerp dat is gemaakt door een kunstenaar binnen de context van zijn artistieke bedrijvigheid. Deze artistieke bestaansvorm wordt dus ontologisch bepaald, vanuit zijn oorzaak. Voor Swennen impliceert dit onderscheid van Gilson dat de artistieke waarde van een kunstwerk niet afhangt van de blik van de toeschouwer. Het bevestigt de autonomie van de kunstenaar en het maakt het kunstwerk vrij van de verwachting dat het iets moet uitdrukken of betekenen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDaarnaast hangt Gilsons onderscheid natuurlijk samen met een grote aandacht voor het materi\u0026euml;le bestaan van een kunstwerk. Een van de gevolgen van een esthetische benadering van een kunstwerk is immers dat mensen reproducties of afbeeldingen gaan gelijkschakelen met het origineel, waardoor dit origineel onmerkbaar aan het oog en de ervaring onttrokken wordt. Zo werden Swennens schilderijen onlangs nog, geheel onschuldig, door een vooraanstaand kunsthistoricus omschreven als \u0026lsquo;eindbeelden\u0026rsquo;. Niet alleen worden schilderijen vaak ervaren als \u0026lsquo;beelden\u0026rsquo;, er wordt zelfs verondersteld dat het einddoel van een schilder erin bestaat beelden te maken. In 1957 waarschuwt Gilson al voor de gevaren van de reproductie, de vergissing schilderijen te herleiden tot beelden en de tendens de kunstwereld op te zuigen in boeken. Hij noemt dit de dictatuur van de literatuur. \u0026lsquo;Een gedrukt woord is nog altijd een woord,\u0026rsquo; schrijft hij, \u0026lsquo;maar een afgedrukt schilderij is geen schilderij.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e En: \u0026lsquo;Om deel te kunnen uitmaken van een boek, moet een schilderij zich ontdoen van zijn stoffelijkheid.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEr zijn altijd reproducties geweest. Maar wie vroeger keek naar een gravure die een kunstwerk voorstelde, vergat niet dat het om een gravure ging. En over zwart-wit reproducties kan je zeggen dat ze tenminste niet voorwenden kleurecht te zijn. \u0026lsquo;De stijl van een schilderij is onscheidbaar van de gebruikte techniek,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Gilson, \u0026lsquo;waarvan we weten dat hij zelf onscheidbaar is van de materie. De materie uitschakelen komt neer op het opheffen van het kunstwerk. Stijlstudies op basis van afbeeldingen van plastische werken zijn dus gebaseerd op spoken.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEen misverstand dat hieruit voortvloeit, is de gelijkschakeling van kennis van de kunstgeschiedenis met kennis van de kunst zelf. Kennis van de kunst verwerf je door dingen te doen. Kunstgeschiedenis, schrijft Gilson, biedt \u0026lsquo;ongetwijfeld een vorm van kennis over kunst, maar haar onderwerp is niet de kunst, maar haar geschiedenis. (\u0026hellip;) Als we ons beperken tot de schilderkunst, is het niet ongebruikelijk ouders te zien die de artistieke opvoeding van hun kinderen zo vroeg mogelijk willen laten beginnen door hen mee te sleuren naar tentoonstellingen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026nbsp;Toch gaat het hier niet om een artistieke opvoeding, maar om de aanzet tot een geschiedkundige opvoeding.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTal van auteurs, waaronder Giorgio Agamben en Boris Groys, bespreken in recente boeken de mogelijkheid van een benadering van de kunst vanuit de makers en het maken, maar zelf doen ze het niet. Als we het kunstwerk \u0026eacute;cht willen zien, in zijn eigenlijke, bedreigende angstaanjagende hoedanigheid, schrijft Agamben, dan dringt zich een vernietiging van de altijd vrijblijvende esthetische benadering op. \u0026lsquo;Het is echter de vraag,\u0026rsquo; vervolgt hij, \u0026lsquo;of de tijd rijp is voor zo\u0026rsquo;n vernietiging, en of zo\u0026rsquo;n daad ons niet elke mogelijke horizon voor het begrip van een kunstwerk zou ontnemen.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003e Ik hou van het werk van Agamben, maar het beeld van een vernietiging van de esthetische benadering lijkt mij enigszins studentikoos. Laten we het erbij houden dat het de moeite waard kan zijn niet te vergeten dat we ons altijd als toeschouwers gedragen \u0026eacute;n tegelijk te trachten af en toe naar een kunstwerk te kijken vanuit het standpunt van de maker en de gebruikte technieken en materialen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOm het even wat schilderen\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOp zijn veertigste verjaardag besliste Swennen zichzelf niet langer te beschouwen als een dichter, maar als een schilder. Het verschil was, vertelde hij aan Bart De Baere, dat po\u0026euml;zie zich fundamenteel bezighoudt met nostalgie: met het verleden en met de vergankelijkheid. Schilderkunst, daarentegen, houdt zich bezig met de toekomst. Ik denk dat we deze verklaring letterlijk moeten opvatten, in die zin dat een schilderij voor Swennen een voorwerp is dat in het bestaan wordt gelokt door handelingen te stellen. Het bestaat niet \u003cem\u003evooraf\u003c/em\u003e.\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVoor Philip Larkin, bijvoorbeeld, was een gedicht geslaagd als het een bijzondere ervaring uit het leven van de dichter toegankelijk kon maken voor een buitenstaander.\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e Bij Mallarm\u0026eacute; was dat niet het geval. Zijn gedichten poogden nieuwe gebeurtenissen te zijn. Maar wat nadien? Hoe ga je nog verder? Paul Celan, die dacht vanuit Mallarm\u0026eacute;, heeft getracht verschrikkelijke ervaringen zodanig hermetisch te verwoorden dat we ze tijdens of na onze lectuur niet zonder meer voor \u0026lsquo;gezien\u0026rsquo; konden houden. Maar dan? Broodthaers maakte gedichten met voorwerpen\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e. En Swennen begint te schrijven en te tekenen op doek. Hij begint schilderijen te maken. En hij ontdekt en formuleert een manier van schilderen die niet op het verleden is gericht, maar die zich voordoet in het heden. \u0026lsquo;Gedaan met de nostalgie, nostalgie is goed voor de jeugd. (\u0026hellip;) De schilderkunst interesseert mij, omdat ze niets te maken heeft met het verleden. Ze is eerder episch dan lyrisch. Elk schilderij is een verhaal dat zich in het heden ontrolt. \u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e30\u003c/sup\u003e Alleen vandaag. Alleen nu. En altijd trachtend naar het nieuwe, want anders word je weer opgeslokt door het verleden.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn oktober 1986 schrijft Swennen een brief waarin we lezen: \u0026lsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; erin slagen om het even wat te schilderen, ziedaar het ideaal. Wie geen ervaring heeft met het zeggen van om het even wat, kan deze uitspraak voor een geestigheid houden. Toch is het mijn ideaal, de hoogste moeilijkheidsgraad. (\u0026hellip;) De sleutel:\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nvoorbedachtheid is \u003cem\u003ealtijd\u003c/em\u003e een verzwarende omstandigheid.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMij doet deze gedachte denken aan Nietzsches \u0026lsquo;ontdekking\u0026rsquo; van de eeuwige terugkeer. Het is een onzinnig beeld, maar het werkt. Als je je voorstelt dat al je handelingen oneindig herhaald zullen worden, verkrijgen ze een onverhoopte zwaarte en misschien zelfs een zin. Sommige gedachten lijken ons meer greep te geven op de werkelijkheid. Natuurlijk kan je niet ex nihilo cre\u0026euml;ren, maar als je een manier kan vinden om de dingen in jouw plaats te laten denken, hoef je ze toch al niet te sturen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet idee om het even wat te schilderen, is afkomstig van de psychoanalyticus Jacques Lacan, die Freuds \u0026lsquo;grondregel\u0026rsquo; (die erin bestond zijn pati\u0026euml;nten uit te nodigen te vertellen wat in hen opkwam) verving door de uitnodiging \u0026lsquo;om het even wat te vertellen, zonder angst voor stommiteiten\u0026rsquo;. De achterliggende gedachte van dit verzoek is de overtuiging dat de bron van het ongemak van de pati\u0026euml;nt onkenbaar en onvoorstelbaar is. We weten dat dit ongemak verknoopt is met de taal, omdat we talige wezens zijn, maar juist daarom schiet de taal tekort als bewust en gericht onderzoeksinstrument. De analyticus en de analysant zoeken zonder richting, verhalen wevend, woorden verschuivend en omkerend, tot er iets \u003cem\u003egebeurt\u003c/em\u003e. Omdat het bewuste taalgebruik van de analysant ontoereikend is, worden woorden ook beschouwd als klanken die iets anders kunnen betekenen. Het worden holle vormen, die door nieuwe associaties en verbanden tot nieuwe ervaringen of inzichten kunnen leiden.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen tracht schilderijen te maken die onvoorstelbaar blijven (\u0026lsquo;inimaginable\u0026rsquo;) tot ze er zijn. Hij gebruikt daarvoor materialen, instrumenten, technieken, kleuren, vormen, tekeningen, woorden en letters die hij zoveel mogelijk tracht los te zien van een \u0026lsquo;betekenis\u0026rsquo; en inzet als holle vormen of betekenaars. Letters hebben bijvoorbeeld een prachtige vorm, los van de klank die ze voorstellen of de betekenis die met die klank wordt verbonden. Een driehoek kan gelezen worden als een vlag, een dak of een hoedje. Een hogehoed kan gelezen worden als een omgekeerde \u0026lsquo;T\u0026rsquo;.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Mallarm\u0026eacute;,\u0026rsquo; aldus Mannoni in \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e (1969), \u0026lsquo;was ongetwijfeld een dichter, ook al had hij niets te zeggen; bijgevolg bevond de po\u0026euml;zie zich elders dan in wat je kan zeggen\u0026rsquo;. Van bij de aanvang ging het om een taalervaring, niet om een levenservaring. (\u0026hellip;) Wat de literaire kritiek zo onwennig maakt tegenover Mallarm\u0026eacute;,\u0026rsquo; vervolgt hij, \u0026lsquo;is dat de schat achter de betekenis verborgen zit (zoals hij het zelf letterlijk zegt), terwijl een \u0026ldquo;vastgeroeste gewoonte te begrijpen\u0026rdquo; ons een betekenis achter de woorden doet zoeken. De schat, dat is de rijkdom, dat zijn de juwelen en de parels van de taaleffecten zonder meer \u0026ndash; woordspelingen, gelijkluidendheid, dubbelzinnigheden, metaforen, metonymie\u0026euml;n enzovoort.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e32\u003c/sup\u003e Als er toch een duidelijke betekenis in het gedicht voorkomt, aldus Mannoni, dan is dat om het gedicht als taalspel verdraaglijk te maken. Dankzij het herkenbare element kunnen de dichter en de lezer tevreden afscheid van elkaar nemen, omdat ze allebei hebben kunnen doen waar ze zin in hadden (iets maken en een betekenis vinden of een zin ervaren).\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn het essay \u003cem\u003ePo\u0026eacute;sie et pens\u0026eacute;e abstraite\u003c/em\u003e, vertelt Val\u0026eacute;ry een anekdote over Mallarm\u0026eacute; die hij had gehoord van Edgar Degas. Op een dag had die in een gesprek met Mallarm\u0026eacute; zijn bewondering voor diens vakmanschap ge\u0026iuml;llustreerd door te zeggen dat hij zelf veel idee\u0026euml;n voor gedichten had, maar ze niet kon uitwerken. \u0026lsquo;Gedichten worden niet gemaakt met idee\u0026euml;n, mijn beste Degas,\u0026rsquo; had Mallarm\u0026eacute; geantwoord, \u0026lsquo;maar met \u003cem\u003ewoorden\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rsquo; Twee pagina\u0026rsquo;s verder beschrijft Val\u0026eacute;ry hoe een zinnetje, voortgekomen uit een banaal gesprek, een eigen leven gaat leiden in zijn hoofd. \u0026lsquo;Het heeft een waarde gekregen,\u0026rsquo; vertelt hij, \u0026lsquo;een waarde \u003cem\u003eten koste van zijn eindige betekenis\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e 34\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVolgens Mannoni moet bij Mallarm\u0026eacute; niet gezocht worden naar een betekenis, die zich zou schuilhouden achter een abstract en beeldend taalgebruik, maar naar de effecten van een spel met woorden, syntaxis, spelling en typografie. Wie zoekt naar een betekenis, zal de schat niet vinden. Dat geldt voor de lacaniaanse analyse, maar ook voor kunsthistorici en zeker voor de makers van schilderijen en gedichten.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAls voormalig analysant besefte Swennen meteen dat zijn nieuwe \u0026lsquo;methode\u0026rsquo; niet meer was dan een lapmiddel, omdat het heel moeilijk is om het even wat te zeggen of te doen. Het belangrijkste was echter dat deze gedachtekronkel hem een manier verschafte om werk te maken dat volledig voortkwam uit het maken (niet uit de verwachtingen van de toeschouwer), los van de zogezegde noodzaak iets uit te drukken, mee te delen of aan te tonen.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTegelijkertijd weten we dat alles wat we doen onvermijdelijk sporen draagt van ons verleden, onze opvoeding en onze vorming, de dingen die we hebben gezien, de dingen die we hebben gerationaliseerd, de dingen die we hebben verdrongen en de dingen die we schijnbaar gewoon zijn vergeten.\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e Al onze woorden, maaksels, handelingen en zelfs ons niet handelen vertellen toch iets, of we nu willen of niet. Dat is echter geen probleem, zolang we dit onbewuste verhaal niet verwarren met een zogezegde betekenis of, erger nog, met een bedoeling of een idee waaruit onze handelingen en voortbrengselen zouden zijn voortgevloeid.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nUitgelokte ontsporingen\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Voor een beeldend kunstenaar,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Sjklovski, \u0026lsquo;vormt de buitenwereld niet de inhoud van een schilderij, maar materiaal ervoor. De beroemde renaissance-\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nschilder Giotto zegt: \u0026ldquo;Een schilderij is in de eerste plaats een samenstel van kleurrijke vlakken\u0026rdquo;. (\u0026hellip;) Soerikov, een realistisch schilder, vertelt dat het \u0026lsquo;idee\u0026rsquo; voor zijn beroemd schilderij \u003cem\u003eBojarenvrouw Morozowa\u003c/em\u003e bij hem opkwam toen hij een kauwtje in de sneeuw zag zitten. Voor hem is dit schilderij namelijk \u0026lsquo;zwart op wit\u0026rsquo;.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e36\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Een van mijn schilderijen uit 1946, het werk dat doet denken aan een slagerij,\u0026rsquo; vertelt Francis Bacon aan David Sylvester, \u0026lsquo;kwam voort uit een poging een vogel te schilderen die op een akker landde. (\u0026hellip;) Plotseling suggereerden de lijnen die ik had getekend iets dat helemaal verschillend was, en uit die suggestie is het schilderij voortgekomen. Het was niet mijn bedoeling dat schilderij te maken; ik had er nooit zo over gedacht. Het vloeide voort uit een voortgaande reeks ontsporingen die zich opstapelden.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e37\u003c/sup\u003e Telkens weer tracht Bacon Sylvester duidelijk te maken dat hij gelijkende portretten tracht te schilderen zonder anatomisch correcte of mimetische elementen te gebruiken en dat dit moeilijk is, omdat je niet weet hoe de gebruikte elementen er dan eigenlijk moeten uitzien.\u003csup\u003e38\u003c/sup\u003e De weerstand van Sylvester tegen deze gedachte is merkwaardig, maar hoeft ons verder niet aan te belangen. De hoofdzaak is dat er een mooi boek bestaat waarin een maker tracht uit te leggen dat het schilderen zelf je naar onvoorspelbare voortbrengsels voert.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Het verloopt altijd anders dan je verwacht had.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e Deze uitspraak, die af en toe geciteerd wordt door Swennen, is afkomstig uit een boek van de Duitse geneeskundige Viktor von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, waarin die een dynamisch denken over de geneeskunde tracht te ontwikkelen, aantonend dat veel onoplosbare medische problemen te wijten zijn aan een inadequate vraagstelling die leidt tot onbruikbare, paradoxale bevindingen. Een dynamisch denken, zo schijnt hij te zeggen, houdt rekening met de omstandigheid dat fysiologische reacties zelf dynamisch zijn, niet louter mechanisch, maar (via het brein) reagerend op een werkelijkheid die zelf in beweging komt en verandert onder invloed van de fysiologische reacties in kwestie. Een wetenschapper zou moeten denken als een schaker, zegt hij, die, ook al zijn de spelregels bekend, nooit weet wat er zal gebeuren, en bij elke eigen zet de mogelijkheden van de tegenspeler be\u0026iuml;nvloedt.\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e Het voorbeeld van de schaker is een beetje statisch en roept in een artistieke context meteen negatieve connotaties op, maar het biedt wel een helder beeld van een wisselende onvoorspelbaarheid. Een mooier voorbeeld, dat Swennen eens aanhaalde in een andere context, is dat van iemand die de straat oversteekt en zijn passen vertraagt of versnelt om een aankomende auto te ontwijken.\u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e Helaas hebben beide voorbeelden het ook over bewuste processen, terwijl von Weizs\u0026auml;cker het in werkelijkheid heeft over tal van onzichtbare, onvoelbare, onbewuste factoren die vanuit de waarneming fysiologische processen be\u0026iuml;nvloeden \u0026eacute;n over de onbewuste manier waarop wetenschappers hun onderzoeksonderwerp vervormen door hun manier van waarnemen en formuleren. De wetenschapper zou zich bewust moeten zijn van de omstandigheid dat hij de werkelijkheid cre\u0026euml;ert door te denken.\u003csup\u003e42\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBeide niveaus keren natuurlijk terug in de schilderkunst. Ten eerste op het moment waarop een schilderij ontstaat uit een reeks elkaar be\u0026iuml;nvloedende waarnemingen, handelingen en gebeurtenissen (bijvoorbeeld de manier waarop de verf zich gedraagt: stroomt, dekt of droogt) en vervolgens wanneer een buitenstaander over dit schilderij gaat nadenken en het, bijvoorbeeld door het te herleiden tot een eenvoudige relatie tussen oorzaak en gevolg (oorspronkelijk idee en resultaat), verkeerd gaat waarnemen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; tal van zaken worden door de mens slechts gezien na een leerproces, en wat we niet hebben leren zien wordt inderdaad ook niet gezien,\u0026rsquo; schrijft von Weizs\u0026auml;cker. \u0026lsquo;Schilders en beeldhouwers weten meer over dit leerproces dan fysiologen.\u0026rsquo; Tegelijk zijn schilders echter niet in staat om een epileptische toeval of een lijdende persoon te schilderen, vervolgt hij, omdat ze niet weten hoe de mens objectief (fysiek of pathologisch beschouwd) beweegt. \u0026lsquo;De gewone blik toont het lichaam en de beweging anders aan de kunstenaar, de kleermaker, de turner en de medicus.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e43\u003c/sup\u003e In deze zinnen herkennen we Gilsons idee\u0026euml;n over de fenomenologische of esthetische benadering van het kunstwerk en de moeilijkheid naar een ding te kijken vanuit zijn objectieve \u0026lsquo;oorzaak\u0026rsquo;. Zaalwachters, verhuizers, verzekeraars en kunsthistorici kijken anders naar een schilderij dan een schilder.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWie niet geleerd heeft naar een schilderij te kijken zoals een schilder, kan het niet zien zoals een schilder. De artistieke verschijningsvorm blijft onzichtbaar. Dat is wat von Weizs\u0026auml;cker ons leert. Erg is dat natuurlijk niet. Je kan ook naar een schilderij kijken als een boekenwurm die nog nooit iets met zijn of haar handen heeft gemaakt. Maar je zou wel moeten onthouden dat een groot deel van het schilderij zich buiten jouw gezichtsveld ophoudt.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWie toch wil leren kijken naar schilderijen vanuit het standpunt van hun makers, stuit echter op een obstakel, dat we eveneens kunnen beschouwen vanuit von Weizs\u0026auml;ckers gedachten over de waarneming van een beweeglijke wereld door een bewegende waarnemer. \u0026lsquo;Er zijn veel geleerde boeken over po\u0026euml;zie geschreven,\u0026rsquo; aldus Czeslaw Milosz, \u0026lsquo;en die boeken vinden, althans in het westen, meer lezers dan de gedichten zelf. (\u0026hellip;) Een dichter die zou willen wedijveren met deze bergen van eruditie zou moeten voorwenden meer zelfkennis te bezitten dan is toegestaan voor dichters. (\u0026hellip;) Eerlijk gezegd, ben ik mijn hele leven in de macht van een daimonion geweest, en hoe de gedichten die hij heeft gedicteerd tot stand zijn gekomen, begrijp ik niet echt.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEen struikelblok voor de studie van de artistieke bestaansvorm van het kunstwerk (het kunstwerk beschouwd vanuit de maker en het maken), bestaat hierin dat een kunstenaar niet \u003cem\u003eweet\u003c/em\u003e wat er precies is gebeurd tijdens het maken van een werk.\u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003e Hij of zij kan het zich in sommige gevallen misschien wel herinneren, maar los van de vraag of het geheugen de zaken misschien heeft verminkt door ze te ordenen en op te slaan, blijft er altijd het probleem dat je het verloop van een multidimensionaal, zowel psychisch als fysiek gebeuren (waarbij het materiaal evenzeer handelt als de maker) allicht nooit onder woorden kan brengen zonder er een eendimensionaal, lineair en schijnbaar teleologisch karakter aan te verlenen. Meteen lijken er idee\u0026euml;n, intenties, beslissingen en criteria bij betrokken te zijn geweest die misschien allemaal wel aanwezig zijn, al was het maar uit gewoonte, maar de zaken veel minder sturen dan je, vooral als buitenstaander, \u003cem\u003eachteraf\u003c/em\u003e geneigd bent te denken.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDe schilder weet niet waarom hij of zij bepaalde beslissingen neemt. Om iets te realiseren? Of om iets te ontlopen? De man die de straat oversteekt, vertraagt of versnelt zijn pas om een botsing te voorkomen die uitsluitend, heel even, als beeld in zijn hoofd heeft bestaan. Deleuze vertelt ergens, aldus Swennen, dat C\u0026eacute;zanne vond dat een groot deel van het werk van de schilder vooraf gebeurt, namelijk om te bepalen wat er \u003cem\u003eniet\u003c/em\u003e geschilderd zal worden. Het spreekt vanzelf dat een schilder die vernieuwend werk wil maken voortdurend dingen (beelden, composities, texturen, connotaties) moet ontwijken die zich voordoen of opdringen als oplossing. Je weet niet wat er moet komen, maar je weet wel wat er niet mag komen. \u0026lsquo;Een schilderij,\u0026rsquo; aldus Swennen, \u0026lsquo;wijzigt in functie van een al bereikte toestand, niet van een resultaat in de toekomst.\u0026rsquo; Je reageert op wat er al is en hoopt een gebeurtenis te kunnen uitlokken die je verder zal brengen.\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTactisch handelen (Syst\u0026egrave;me D)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHerbie Hancock vertelt in een documentaire dat hij ooit, tijdens een prachtig, strak concert, tijdens een solo van Miles Davis, een verkeerd akkoord aansloeg en van ontzetting zijn handen voor zijn gezicht bracht. Tegelijk hoorde hij hoe Miles Davis een tel aarzelde en vervolgens een reeks noten speelde die van de \u0026lsquo;foute\u0026rsquo; noot van Hancock een juiste noot maakten.\u003csup\u003e47\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDe gedachte van een multidimensionale ruimte waarbinnen de kunstenaar tegelijk beweegt, denkt en handelt, herinnert ons eraan dat de uitdaging van publieke voorstellingen er voor dansers, acteurs, musici en zangers juist in bestaat dat ze te maken hebben met steeds wisselende, nooit geheel voorspelbare factoren: het karakter en de mogelijkheden van hun instrument, de interpretatie van de partituur of de tekst, de vertolking van de medespelers, de architectuur van de theaterzaal, de reacties van het publiek enzovoort. Het genot deel uit te maken van een beweeglijke ruimte, die be\u0026iuml;nvloed wordt door je eigen verplaatsingen, beslissingen en handelingen, maakt ongetwijfeld deel uit van de aantrekkingskracht van het muzikale optreden, de dans, het theater en de sport, maar waarschijnlijk ook van het schilderen. Het is belangrijk deze overeenkomst niet in \u0026lsquo;gestuele\u0026rsquo; zin op te vatten, zoals Sylvester lijkt te doen wanneer hij de handelingen van Bacon vergelijkt met de arm van een tennisser die al vertrokken is voor de atleet daartoe een beslissing heeft genomen.\u003csup\u003e48\u003c/sup\u003e Waar het om gaat is het ruimtelijk denken zelf, dat evengoed heel traag kan verlopen, zoals meestal het geval is bij Swennen.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEen schilderij van Swennen ontstaat als een, meestal in de tijd gespreide, beperkte reeks van ingrepen, waarbij elke nieuwe handeling een reactie is op het resultaat van de vorige handelingen en gebeurtenissen. Een manier van werken die vertrekt vanuit het verlangen onvoorstelbare en onvoorspelbare ontsporingen uit te lokken in een multidimensionale omgang met materie en gedachtenmateriaal kan, afgezien van het strategisch karakter van dit verlangen, alleen maar tactisch zijn. De schilder brengt een praktijk op gang die ontsporingen mogelijk maakt en oefent zich in een vorm van waakzaamheid die ervoor zorgt dat de mogelijkheden die zich aandienen juist ingeschat worden. Swennens schilderijen komen traag tot stand, met lange periodes van schijnbare inactiviteit, waarbij vooral wordt gekeken naar wat ontstaan is. Deze traagheid is niet in tegenspraak met een tactisch, niet door idee\u0026euml;n en intenties gestuurd handelen.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEen mooi voorbeeld van dit soort tactisch denken is het bricoleren\u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e, zoals het wordt omschreven door Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss: het bewaren en oneigenlijk gebruiken van een schat aan voorwerpen die worden bijgehouden zonder te weten waarvoor ze ooit nog kunnen dienen. Ook al wordt het uiteindelijke gebruik van het bewaarde voorwerp bepaald door een vroegere toepassing en sommige daarmee verbonden eigenschappen, toch wordt het op een gegeven ogenblik op een nieuwe, verrassende manier ingezet. Deze hele operatie, zowel het verzamelen als het inzetten van de voorwerpen, is tactisch van aard. L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss gebruikt dit begrip om te verklaren hoe mythes vermoedelijk werden samengesteld uit brokstukken van andere of oudere culturen, waarbij \u0026lsquo;iets wat vroeger een doel was nu de rol van middel moet gaan spelen: de \u0026ldquo;betekenis\u0026rdquo; wordt \u0026ldquo;betekenaar\u0026rdquo; en omgekeerd.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e50\u003c/sup\u003e Radicaal tactisch handelen houdt geen rekening met tradities, functies en betekenissen. Het reageert. Het bereddert. Het zoekt naar oplossingen voor zelf veroorzaakte problemen. \u0026lsquo;Mijn schilderijen,\u0026rsquo; vertelde Swennen tijdens een lezing in april 2016, \u0026lsquo;ontwikkelen zich van reparatie naar reparatie\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;de rustine en rustine\u0026rsquo;). \u0026lsquo;Terwijl je schildert,\u0026rsquo; vertelde hij aan Bart De Baere in 1990, \u0026lsquo;moet je altijd reageren op iets dat van buitenaf komt, iets dat je een ogenblik eerder zelf hebt tot stand hebt gebracht. Je reageert op wat er al is. Je hebt het zelf tot stand gebracht, maar het is d\u0026aacute;\u0026aacute;r, en je kan er alleen nog mee discussi\u0026euml;ren. Het verandert dus zonder stoppen.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e51\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTerugdenkend aan von Weizs\u0026auml;ckers beeld van de waarneming die de waargenomen werkelijkheid be\u0026iuml;nvloedt en zelfs vormt (of het nu gaat om een overstekende voetganger, een observerende medicus, een schilderende schilder of een observerende kunsthistoricus), wordt het duidelijk dat kunsten zich waarschijnlijk altijd op een tactische manier ontwikkelen. Mooie voorbeelden hiervan vinden we in het boek \u003cem\u003eHow Music Works\u003c/em\u003e van de musicus David Byrne. Hij wijst erop dat sommigen beweren dat Afrikaanse trommels hun vorm danken aan het beschikbare, povere materiaal en de beperkte technieken, terwijl hij denkt dat deze instrumenten zeer nauwgezet ontwikkeld, gebouwd, verzorgd en bespeeld werden als antwoord op de fysieke, de sociale en vooral de akoestische omgeving. De resulterende percussiemuziek is ongeschikt voor onze kale kerken met hun trage echo\u0026rsquo;s. In deze kerken werd daarentegen een modale muziek ontwikkeld die gebruik maakt van lang aangehouden noten. Op vergelijkbare wijze moest de in kleine ruimtes opgevoerde kamermuziek van Mozart opboksen tegen het geroezemoes van het publiek. De enige manier om de muziek luider te maken, in die tijd, was het vergroten van het orkest, wat ook gebeurde. De steeds grotere concertzalen van de negentiende eeuw leidden ertoe dat de muziek zich ging aanpassen door meer reli\u0026euml;f en paukenslagen toe te voegen (om de luisteraars achterin de zaal te bereiken). Rond 1900 werd het echter ongeoorloofd tijdens een klassiek concert te eten, te drinken en lawaai te maken. Daardoor konden de componisten zachtere passages componeren. De solo\u0026rsquo;s en de improvisaties van de Jazzmuziek ontstonden waarschijnlijk uit de behoefte de mensen met beperkt muzikaal materiaal een hele nacht aan het dansen te houden. De banjo en de trompet kregen in de jazz ook een grotere rol omdat ze luider waren. (In heel deze ontwikkeling is het duidelijk dat de veranderende muziek bovendien zelf de ruimtelijke veranderingen kan hebben voortgestuwd.) Sinds het eind van de negentiende eeuw werden ook steeds meer verfijnde opnametechnieken ontwikkeld, die op hun beurt de klank van de muziek hebben be\u0026iuml;nvloed. Zo wijst Byrne er bijvoorbeeld op dat de MIDI-techniek geschikter was voor het digitaliseren van piano en percussie, dan voor gitaar, blazers en strijkinstrumenten. Daarom cre\u0026euml;erden componisten vaker melodie\u0026euml;n en harmonie\u0026euml;n vanuit pianoakkoorden. Een andere grote invloed ging uit van de ge\u0026iuml;soleerde geluidsstudio\u0026rsquo;s en de gewoonte alle muzikanten apart op te nemen enzovoort.\u003csup\u003e 52\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOp een vergelijkbare manier werd de ontwikkeling van de schilderkunst onder meer be\u0026iuml;nvloed door het opblazen van miniaturen tot monumentale schilderijen, door het bouwen van musea, door het kunstonderwijs, door de kunsthandel, door de fotografie, door de reproductietechnieken en door de uitvinding van nieuwe materialen. Zo heeft het ontstaan van kunstboeken met kleurenreproducties en later het ontstaan van catalogi, de ontwikkeling van de moderne en hedendaagse kunst zonder twijfel be\u0026iuml;nvloed.\u003csup\u003e53\u003c/sup\u003e Ook het bekijken van films en kunstvoorwerpen op laptops en smartphones heeft al geleid tot nieuwe schilderijen. In verband met Swennen zouden we ook kunnen wijzen op een invloed van het stripverhaal, waarover later meer. De schilder staat dus in het midden van een bewegende wereld die wordt be\u0026iuml;nvloed door de handelingen van hemzelf of haarzelf en alle anderen. De plaats waar op deze bewegende wereld wordt gereageerd is echter geen louter mentale plek, het is ook niet alleen de fysieke plek van de tentoonstellingsruimte, of de meer virtuele plek van het boek, de televisie of het internet, het is ook, en vooral, de fysieke ruimte van het schilderij. Daar herhaalt de hele beweeglijke wereld zich in een tastbaar verschuiven, een tastbare verdichting, een tastbaar ineenvloeien, een tastbaar bedekken of blootleggen, een tastbaar verleggen van fysieke en daardoor ook mentale grenzen. Zonder de ontwikkeling en de algemene verspreiding van het stripverhaal, zou Swennen niet hebben leren tekenen door figuren uit stripverhalen te kopi\u0026euml;ren. Als hij niet zo had leren tekenen, was hij er later misschien niet toe gekomen zelf met een klare lijn te gaan tekenen en was hij later niet op zoek gegaan naar specifieke technieken om uitvergrote tekeningen op een niet getekende manier te verwerken in schilderijen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDe textuur zelf\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAls Mallarm\u0026eacute;s gedichten niet met idee\u0026euml;n zijn gemaakt, maar met woorden, dan zijn Swennens schilderijen in de eerste plaats gemaakt met laagjes verf die worden aangebracht op een drager die meestal van papier, hout, doek of metaal is. Een uitputtende lijst van dragers kunnen we niet opstellen, omdat Swennen zich niet beperkt tot bepaalde praktijken, zoals sommige kunstenaars doen. Het eerste plastische werk dat hij heeft tentoongesteld bestond uit een bierkrat die gevuld was met beschilderde flesjes. In april 2016 maakte hij een vlag door een roos stuk textiel te beschilderen, een week later schilderde hij een voorstelling van een bakstenen muur op een stuk deur. Onlangs kreeg hij van iemand een metalen deksel van een fornuis cadeau, omdat hij daar graag op schildert, anderen schenken hem mislukte schilderijen of wijnkistjes. Tien jaar geleden vertelde hij mij dat hij de metalen fornuisdeksels eerst met look inwreef omdat hij van een restauratrice had gehoord dat dit de hechting van de olieverf zou bevorderen. E\u0026eacute;n van zijn schilderijen op een fornuisdeksel bevat een tekening die werd gemaakt met een metalen borstel die werd aangedreven door een boormachine. Enzovoort.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSinds enkele jaren schildert Swennen ook met acrylverf, waar je tegenwoordig even boeiende effecten mee kan bekomen als met olieverf. Het grootste voordeel van acrylverf is dat ze snel droogt. Daardoor zijn effecten mogelijk, die je met olieverf niet of nauwelijks kan bereiken. Zo maakte Swennen de voorbije jaren verschillende schilderijen met een vorm of vlek die is voortgekomen uit een gedeeltelijk opgedroogde en dan verwijderde plas verf. Doordat zo\u0026rsquo;n plas eerst opdroogt aan de rand, bekom je een soort van contour (eventueel met bijbehorende d\u0026eacute;grad\u0026eacute;) die gezien kan worden als een abstracte figuur of een venster binnen het schilderij. Deze techniek maakt het ook mogelijk letters te voorzien van geschilderde randen die op geen enkele andere manier verkregen kunnen worden: je overschildert ze met acrylverf die je een paar minuten laat drogen en dan weer verwijdert. De kortere droogtijd maakt het ook mogelijk risico\u0026rsquo;s te nemen die vroeger minder voor de hand lagen. Onlangs verkreeg Swennen een mooie hemelsblauw oppervlak door een schilderij eerst te bedekken met Payne grijs en nadien te overschilderen met een mengsel van zinkwit en een beetje titaanwit. Om ook binnen het oorspronkelijk donkergrijze oppervlak een verloop te bekomen, heeft hij het schilderij vier keer gekanteld zodat de verf traag naar het midden stroomde en de boorden transparanter werden. Swennen laat verf graag stromen om onvoorziene effecten te krijgen (meestal het liefst zonder dat er druipers ontstaan, omdat die een expressieve connotatie hebben). Zo vertelde hij mij heel tevreden te zijn over de achtergrond van het schilderij \u003cem\u003eTo Mona Mills\u003c/em\u003e (2015), omdat hij erin was geslaagd een soort van chaos te schilderen, wat nagenoeg onmogelijk is. Hij had dit gedaan door het doek op de grond te leggen en er verf en water op aan te brengen die hij nadien trachtte te mengen met een trekker, erop lettend dat er zo weinig mogelijk water en verf over de rand van het doek stroomden.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEen techniek die door Swennen werd ontwikkeld om tekeningen of letters over te brengen op doek, bestaat erin de verf eerst met het penseel of rechtstreeks uit de tube aan te brengen op een plastic zeil en dit vervolgens af te drukken op het schilderij. Het eerste schilderij waarin dit is gebeurd, bevatte al een ruwe, met het schildersmes aangebrachte voorstelling van een spar. Omdat hij op dit oneffen oppervlak een letter wilde aanbrengen en dit nooit zou lukken met een penseel, schilderde hij de letter eerst op een dunne, soepele plasticfolie, die hij met behulp van een prop textiel in de kiertjes van de onderliggende verflaag kon drukken. De effecten van deze druktechniek zijn niet alleen steeds anders, meestal leveren ze ook een textuur op die onverklaarbaar is als je niet weet hoe ze tot stand is gekomen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEen andere, specifieke reeks texturen in het werk van Swennen vloeit voort uit zijn voorliefde voor het schildersmes, die hij heeft overgenomen van Claire Fontaine, bij wie hij vanaf 1962 drie jaar lang schilderles heeft gevolgd. Deze dame schilderde geschematiseerde landschappen in de stijl van Nicolas de Sta\u0026euml;l, waarbij een boom voorgesteld werd door een met het schildersmes uitgestreken, rechthoekig groen oppervlak. Swennen leerde van haar dat je met het schildersmes verf kan aanbrengen die je nadien met een penseel bewerkt.\u003csup\u003e54\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennens schilderijen wordt het schildersmes vaak gebruikt voor een ingreep die zich van de andere ingrepen onderscheidt door zijn textuur en zo het \u0026lsquo;samengesteld zijn\u0026rsquo; of de weefstructuur van het schilderij toont. Daarnaast kan zo\u0026rsquo;n dikkere, anders aangebrachte (gemetselde of gestreken) laag ook voor een afwijkend optisch effect zorgen. In \u003cem\u003eBlitz\u003c/em\u003e (2015) komt een gele, gebroken streep voor die sommigen aan een bliksem zou doen denken. Doordat deze streep gemetseld is tussen twee parallel aangebrachte stroken kleefband, gaat ze echter zelf op kleefband lijken, wat neerkomt op een fraaie sculpturale omkering met zowel een illusionistisch als grappig effect. Voor het schilderij \u003cem\u003eTransformations\u003c/em\u003e (2016) bestond \u0026eacute;\u0026eacute;n bewerking erin het schildersmes met wijde, strijkende bewegingen herhaaldelijk schoon te maken tegen het doek. Door het gebruik van verschillende soorten rood, riep het resultaat meteen een herinnering op aan de rode tuniek van Diana in Titiaans schilderij \u003cem\u003eDe dood van Actaeon\u003c/em\u003e (National Gallery, Londen). Later werd, zoals Swennen vaak doet, dit prachtige effect getemperd door er een witte laag over aan te brengen. De titel \u003cem\u003eTransformations\u003c/em\u003e verwijst naar de gewoonte winkelruiten wit te schilderen tijdens een renovatie.\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn \u003cem\u003eScrumble 2\u003c/em\u003e (2006) werd het schildersmes gebruikt om lelijke partijen van een schilderij (de vuile kruispunten van verschillend gekleurde lijnen) te verbergen.\u003csup\u003e56\u003c/sup\u003e Omdat deze \u0026lsquo;compositie\u0026rsquo; gestuurd wordt door een niet vooraf geplande, maar uiteindelijk wel onvermijdelijke structuur, heeft Swennen het hier over de \u0026lsquo;autogenese\u0026rsquo; van de compositie.\u003csup\u003e57\u003c/sup\u003e Zo zien we hoe een bepaalde toestand van een schilderij (elkaar kruisende, gekleurde lijnen die vuile kruispunten vormen), gecombineerd met een bepaalde techniek (het uitstrijken van verf met een schildersmes), tot een onvoorspelbare, maar toch noodzakelijke compositie kan leiden. Ontegensprekelijk zitten hier ook opvattingen door verweven, zoals Swennens appreciatie voor de toevallige, uit rechthoeken opgebouwde composities die ontstaan als een galeriemuur wordt hersteld. Maar deze appreciatie is natuurlijk zelf een gevolg van zijn ervaringen als schilder.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTot nog toe gebruikt Swennen het schildersmes alleen maar voor het toevoegen van olieverf, omdat hij nog geen techniek heeft gevonden om acrylverf voldoende \u0026lsquo;pasteus\u0026rsquo; te maken. Dit brengt ons bij een ander textuurverschil in zijn schilderijen, dat niet te maken heeft met de manier van aanbrengen van de verf, maar met de verschillende soorten verf zelf. Behalve met het verschil tussen olie- en acrylverf, hebben we hier ook te maken met tal van mengsels, die de verf een meer glanzende, matte, ruwe, gladde, vloeibare of stroeve structuur kunnen verlenen. Het toevoegen van olie maakt de verf glanzender, het toevoegen van white spirit maakt haar matter. Een van de nieuwe kwaliteiten van acrylverf is dat je haar kan aanlengen met water en gebruiken om doorzichtige lagen (glacis) te maken, zodat de schilder de schilderijen geleidelijk kan opbouwen, zoekend naar de juiste intensiteit van een kleur. Voor sommige schilderijen van Swennen werd koffie toegevoegd aan de witte grondlaag, zodat die minder neutraal en vlekkerig werd. Soms heeft hij inkt toegevoegd aan zijn verf, soms gouache, soms sigarettenas, soms stof uit de stofzuiger.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n(Ik citeer uit het geheugen, zonder volledigheid te betrachten.) Toen hij in 2006 schilderde op afgedankte schilderijen die door de vorige kunstenaar met papier bedekt waren, ging hij ze te lijf met een schuurborstel, zodat er zich kleine stukjes papier gingen vermengen met de half weggeschuurde verflaag.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAls laatste voorbeeld van de manier waarop textuurverschillen worden ingezet in Swennens schilderijen, zou ik het willen hebben over het werk \u003cem\u003ePirate\u003c/em\u003e (2007), dat is vertrokken van een gouache die de schilder op tienjarige leeftijd heeft gemaakt. Het schilderij bestaat uit drie verschillende delen. De twee luikjes aan de linkerzijde waren twee afzonderlijke \u0026lsquo;achtergronden\u0026rsquo; die in het atelier stonden te wachten. Er staan altijd zo\u0026rsquo;n werken te wachten. Vaak zijn ze zo mooi dat je zou willen dat de schilder ze gewoon onaangeroerd liet. In dit geval was hij daartoe al geneigd en vond hij een oplossing toen hij zag dat ze samen even lang waren als het rechterluik (een plank met ongebruikelijke verhoudingen voor een schilderij). Bekijken we dit rechterluik even van naderbij, dan zien we dat bepaalde \u0026lsquo;getekende\u0026rsquo; partijen van de afbeelding, zoals de lijnen die de revers suggereren, niet geschilderd zijn, maar uitgespaard. Dit geldt niet voor de hemdskraag van de piraat, die een vertederende vondst van de jonge knaap zal zijn. De contouren van de bovenzijde van de kaplaarzen zijn daarentegen wel \u0026lsquo;getekend\u0026rsquo;, terwijl hun oppervlak uitgespaard is: opnieuw een mooie omkering, die ons eraan herinnert dat Swennen aan de academie een grafische opleiding heeft genoten. De tekening bevat een enigszins onhandige, maar ontroerende ruimtelijke suggestie, die versterkt wordt door de gespreide benen, de verdwijnende rechterarm en de sabel die achter de benen doorloopt. Verder zien we drie effen vlakken die voor een bijkomende, picturale of haptische ruimte zorgen: het gele gevest, het witte vlak voor het gelaat en de lichtblauwe \u0026lsquo;achtergrond\u0026rsquo;, die achteraf rond de figuur is geschilderd. Tot slot zijn er de zwarte schijfjes die voor de figuur zweven en die werden aangebracht op de plekken waar de plank, op de oppervlakte die wordt ingenomen door de figuur, wieren bevatte. Ook hier weer een bijkomende, haptische ruimte. Swennen vertelde mij dat deze zwarte schijfjes hem aan kogelgaten deden denken, waardoor de figuur aan ons verschijnt als een opklapbaar silhouet van een schietbaan.\u003csup\u003e58\u003c/sup\u003e Dankzij de materi\u0026euml;le reden voor de plaatsing van de ronde vlakjes, begrijpen we echter dat deze uiteindelijke \u0026lsquo;beeldinhoud\u0026rsquo; niet aan de basis lag van de opbouw van het schilderij. Het schilderij is voortgekomen uit een reeks elkaar opvolgende beslissingen die te maken hadden met het cre\u0026euml;ren van een mooie mati\u0026egrave;re, het overnemen van een bestaande tekening met bepaalde ruimtelijke (en gevoelsmatige) kwaliteiten, het toepassen van grafische omkeringen bij het overnemen van deze tekening, het cre\u0026euml;ren van een haptisch effect door de toevoeging van de witte, gele, lichtblauwe en zwarte vlakken en het voltooien van het schilderij door drie verschillende doeken te laten samenkomen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFiguratie en abstractie\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn 1990 verklaarde Swennen tegenover Bart De Baere dat hij enige tijd had geworsteld met de begrippen figuratie en abstractie, maar dat hij tot de conclusie was gekomen dat het om een vals probleem ging \u0026lsquo;omdat een schilderij altijd een beeld is van een schilderij. Wat er ook op staat, het gaat altijd om een schilderij.\u0026rsquo; Vandaag heb ik er moeite mee te begrijpen wat hij bedoeld kan hebben met die eerste zin. Ik denk dat we mogen stellen dat de zaken nog verward waren. In een tekst uit 1994\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e heb ik, na tientallen gesprekken met hem te hebben gevoerd, betoogd dat Swennen schilderijen maakte waarin figuratie en abstractie elkaar konden ontmoeten, waardoor de zogenaamde verschillen tussen deze benaderingen werden opgeheven. In 2007 heb ik deze gedachte verfijnd door te stellen dat deze ontmoeting mogelijk werd gemaakt door de perspectiefloze ruimte zonder model\u0026eacute; die specifiek is voor Swennens schilderijen.\u003csup\u003e60\u003c/sup\u003e Vandaag lijkt mij dat nog steeds juist, maar ik zou het niet meer schrijven, omdat de termen \u0026lsquo;figuratie\u0026rsquo; en \u0026lsquo;abstractie\u0026rsquo; te beperkend zijn om mee te denken en ons uiteindelijk beletten te zien dat Swennen in de eerste plaats texturen weeft en dat het materiaal dat hij daarvoor gebruikt, of het nu gaat om vlakken, tekeningen of letters, voornamelijk bepaalt waar hij verf moet aanbrengen. Dat die tekeningen en letters ook iets kunnen betekenen of voorstellen, en beelden, verhalen, gedachten en gevoelens kunnen oproepen bij de toeschouwers (en bij Swennen) is natuurlijk ook belangrijk, en maakt ook deel uit van het tot stand komen van de schilderijen, maar het terminologische onderscheid tussen figuratie en abstractie doet ons vergeten dat het \u003cem\u003ealtijd\u003c/em\u003e om materi\u0026euml;le toevoegingen gaat. Het onderscheid tussen figuratie en abstractie, ten slotte, kom er gewoon op neer dat het ene herkenbaar is en iets \u0026lsquo;zegt\u0026rsquo; en het andere niet. Maar kleuren, vormen en texturen zeggen ook iets, alleen spreken ze blijkbaar minder luid.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nCompositie\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSommige schilders zoeken naar composities die ze als evenwichtig ervaren, andere schilders trachten er juist aan te ontsnappen. Zoals we al zagen in verband met \u003cem\u003eScrumble 2\u003c/em\u003e (2006), tracht Swennen composities te laten ontstaan die hij vooraf niet kon bedenken. Als we kijken naar \u003cem\u003eSpider (small)\u003c/em\u003e (2014) en \u003cem\u003eSpin van Marius\u003c/em\u003e (2014), twee schilderijen die gebaseerd zijn op een vierkante tekening van Swennens kleinzoon Marius, dan zien we dat hij deze tekening de eerste keer op het vierkantige deksel van een fornuis heeft overgezet. De tweede keer wordt het deel van het doek dat buiten het vierkante oppervlak valt, blauw geschilderd. Zo ontstaat een specifieke compositie. In \u003cem\u003eStolen Name\u003c/em\u003e (2016) werden de verticale strepen en nadien de naar het westen wijzende schuine strepen van letters overschilderd. (Vandaar de aanwezigheid van de kompasnaald.) In \u003cem\u003eLe diamant de Juju\u003c/em\u003e (2016) wordt een tekening omkranst door korte streepjes die in stripverhalen een bijzondere verschijning kracht bijzetten. Sommige van deze streepjes worden gebruikt als grenzen van de laatste verflaag. In het schilderij \u003cem\u003eIn the Kitchen\u003c/em\u003e (2016) stemmen de verhoudingen van het doek niet overeen met de verhoudingen van de nagebootste tekening (een gevonden voorwerp). Om die reden overlapt de gereproduceerde tekening met de geschilderde, rode boord (die de verhoudingen van het doek volgt) op een manier die doet denken aan onzorgvuldig drukwerk. Veel composities beantwoorden aan wetten of afspraken die buiten het domein van de esthetica vallen. Soms juist niet. In \u003cem\u003eMature\u003c/em\u003e (2016) komt drie keer een gele partij voor. E\u0026eacute;n keer als namaak-hooglicht van een abstracte, ovalen vorm, \u0026eacute;\u0026eacute;n keer als ovalen vorm en \u0026eacute;\u0026eacute;n keer als kleurstrook. Als ik wijs op het grappige hooglicht en het even grappige terugkeren van de kleur in de kleurstrook, vertelt de schilder dat Claire Fontaine van oordeel was dat elke kleur die je gebruikte elders moest terugkeren. Een ovaal, voegde hij eraan toe, is de eenvoudigste, niet hoekige vorm die je kan maken als je een mooi afgeboord vlak wil bekomen met een schildersmes.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTekeningen\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVeel schilderijen van Swennen bevatten uitvergrote reconstructies van gevonden of zelf vervaardigde tekeningen. Meestal worden die figuratieve elementen omschreven als \u0026lsquo;beelden\u0026rsquo;, ook door Swennen zelf. Ik vermoed dat hij dit doet, omdat het natuurlijk geen tekeningen zijn: ze zijn niet getekend, maar gereproduceerd met verf. Sommige auteurs denken dat deze tekeningen afkomstig zijn uit stripverhalen, maar dat is zelden het geval. Je kan ook niet zeggen dat het tekeningen zijn \u0026lsquo;zoals de tekeningen van stripverhalen\u0026rsquo;, omdat er immers ook stripverhalen bestaan die niet met een klare lijn zijn getekend. De tekeningen die Swennen gebruikt, bestaan meestal uit een klare lijn (zonder arceringen of schaduwen). Vaak zijn het ingevulde silhouetten. Hun voornaamste eigenschap is dat ze geen perspectief of model\u0026eacute; bevatten, waardoor ze zich in een vlakke ruimte lijken af te spelen. Wijkt de tekening af van dit patroon, dan gaat het om een zeer vroeg schilderij (zoals het werk dat wordt afgebeeld op pagina 115) of om een gevonden tekening waarin zich een bepaalde tekenfout bevindt. Bijvoorbeeld \u003cem\u003eNan\u0026rsquo;s Still Life \u003c/em\u003e(2015), dat gebaseerd is op een tekening waarin het gesplitste woord \u0026lsquo;fran-\u0026ccedil;ais\u0026rsquo; erop wijst dat de tekenaar meer dacht dan keek tijdens het tekenen. (Voor zijn schilderij voegde Swennen een forse schaduw toe aan de tekening.) Sommige tekeningen zijn afkomstig van boekkaften, speldozen, zelfklevers, verpakkingen enzovoort. Andere tekeningen zijn afkomstig van droedels of daarmee verwante, kleinschalige werken op papier.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSommige auteurs gaan deze tekeningen tellen en ordenen per thema, net zoals anderen de metaforen van Mallarm\u0026eacute; gaan tellen. Mannoni schrijft hierover: \u0026lsquo;De vergissing van de thematische analyse bestaat erin (\u0026hellip;) het beeld in de eerste plaats als betekende te benaderen om daarna vast te stellen dat het om een betekenaar gaat, maar eigenlijk te laat.\u0026rsquo; En een paar pagina\u0026rsquo;s later voegt hij eraan toe: \u0026lsquo;We kunnen ons niet voorstellen hoe de thematische analyse rekenschap kan geven van ironie.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e61\u003c/sup\u003e Onze exegeten zien bijvoorbeeld een afbeelding van een koning die een rokende sigaret vasthoudt op de plaats waar zijn geslacht zich zou kunnen bevinden. Anderen zien een platte tekening op basis van een speelkaart, die verrijkt is met de voorstelling van twee bewegend voorwerpen: een opbrandende, gloeiende sigaret en opstijgende rook. Exegeten zien bijvoorbeeld een spook. Anderen zien een figuur waarvan de uitgespaarde ogen een blik bieden op de achtergrond van het schilderij. Zoals ik hierboven vermeldde in een noot, zegt Swennen vandaag dat hij misschien \u0026lsquo;beelden\u0026rsquo; aan zijn schilderijen toevoegt om de toeschouwer tevreden te stellen, zodat hij zelf verder kan gaan met het maken van schilderijen (net zoals Mallarm\u0026eacute; volgens Mannoni herkenbare beelden inlaste om te mogen spelen met woorden). Die opmerking gaat echter voorbij aan de functie die de tekeningen en de letters hebben bij het tot stand komen van het schilderij, als toevallige \u0026eacute;n noodzakelijke indicatoren van waar verf moet worden aangebracht. In die zin gaat het werkelijk om \u0026lsquo;betekenaars\u0026rsquo;: om lege vormen die gevuld worden met kleuren en texturen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nNatuurlijk betekent dit alles niet dat deze tekeningen niets kunnen of mogen betekenen voor de schilder en de toeschouwer. De rijkdom van Swennens schilderijen vloeit immers juist voort uit deze ongewone ontmoeting tussen vormen, texturen en betekenissen. Uiteindelijk gaat het echter om de complexe verwevenheid van al deze lagen \u0026eacute;n om de onafgebroken pogingen dit voor elk schilderij op een nieuwe manier te doen. Elk schilderij probeert\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nanders te zijn, elk schilderij probeert opnieuw te tonen hoe het is gemaakt,\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nelk schilderij tracht tegelijk buiten ons bereik te blijven.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nKleuren\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen gebruikt vooral de kleuren zwart, wit, grijs, geel, lichtblauw, rood en varianten van rood zoals oranje, Engels rood en bruin. Vaak zijn deze kleuren een beetje onzuiver gemaakt. \u0026lsquo;Er bestaan geen primaire kleuren,\u0026rsquo; vertelde hij mij ooit. In de praktijk komt dit erop neer dat een verfsoort volstaat als ze een kleur heeft die aan de primaire kleuren doet denken. Achteraf beschouwd, kan je stellen dat Swennen vooral schildert met de kleuren van Mondriaan, waarbij hij donkerblauw heeft vervangen door lichtblauw, zodat de gelijkenis met Mondriaan niet opvalt. Ik schrijf \u0026lsquo;achteraf\u0026rsquo;, omdat dit allicht nooit de bedoeling is geweest, het is waarschijnlijk gewoon een resultaat van de wens vooral primaire kleuren te gebruiken (of kleuren die daarop lijken). Soms werkt hij een schilderij af door het \u0026lsquo;grauwer\u0026rsquo; maken. Zo finaliseerde hij het schilderij \u003cem\u003eTwo Egyptians\u003c/em\u003e (2015) door er rechtstreeks uit de tube rode en blauwe verf op aan te brengen, dit al vegend met water te mengen en het schilderij vervolgens weer schoon te schrobben, harder boenend rond de figuren. De zuigplek in de hals is een onvoorspelbaar resultaat van deze handeling. Enkele jaren geleden bepaalde Swennen een kleurengamma, waarbij hij de kleuren altijd in dezelfde volgorde moest gebruiken. Dit gamma hing als een strip aan de muur van het atelier, omdat hij de volgorde anders niet kon onthouden. Hij gaat vaak op zo\u0026rsquo;n manier te werk: hij bepaalt spelregels, probeert ze toe te passen en speelt dan vals. Het gebruik van een beperkt aantal kleuren maakt dat zijn oeuvre een grote samenhang vertoont en heel helder en overzichtelijk overkomt. Net de beperking maakt een grote, leesbare verscheidenheid mogelijk.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWoorden en letters\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn vroegere teksten heb ik erop gewezen dat de ouders van Swennen toen hij vijf was, besloten hebben een andere taal te spreken en hem naar een andere school te sturen, waardoor hij van de ene dag op de andere niets meer begreep. Allicht heeft de gesproken taal in die tijd een onzinnige en vijandige indruk op hem gemaakt. Op school moet de geschreven taal een heel concreet karakter hebben gehad, omdat hij de gebruikte tekens aanvankelijk niet met een bekende klank of een betekenis kon verbinden. Die omstandigheid heeft ongetwijfeld een invloed gehad op zijn verhouding tot de taal, maar ik denk niet dat ze een voldoende verklaring is voor zijn virtuositeit.\u003csup\u003e62\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;De Belg is bang van pretentie,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Simon Leys in een essay over de \u0026lsquo;belgitude\u0026rsquo; van Henri Michaux, \u0026lsquo;vooral de pretentie van gesproken of geschreven woorden. Vandaar zijn accent, die beroemde manier om Frans te spreken. Het geheim is dit: de Belg denkt dat woorden pretentieus zijn.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e Ik denk dat Leys gelijk heeft, maar dat hij zich vergist. Wat de Belgen lijkt te typeren (en niet alleen de Franstaligen, maar ook de Vlamingen met hun zogenaamd koddig taalgebruik) is allicht een algemeen kenmerk van alle mensen die een taal spreken en schrijven die op een andere plek verweven is geweest met een bloeiend cultureel tijdperk en het daarmee samenhangende economische en politieke overwicht. Deze plek hoeft niet nabijgelegen te zijn, zoals voor de Belgen het geval is met Frankrijk en Nederland. Ik vermoed dat sommige Engelstalige bewoners van Noord-Amerika zich de voorbije eeuwen in hun taalgebruik opzettelijk hebben afgezet tegen de Engelse taalnorm, net zoals sommige Canadezen, Australi\u0026euml;rs, Engelstalige Zuid-Afrikanen en Engelstalige Indi\u0026euml;rs zich vandaag zullen afzetten tegen de invloed van het Amerikaanse Engels. Overal waar een taalvorm geassocieerd wordt met een economisch, politiek of cultureel overwicht, zal een afwijkend taalgebruik ontstaan. Dat is zeker zo in de getto\u0026rsquo;s in de Verenigde Staten en dat moet ook zo zijn in Bretagne, de Elzas, de Provence, Baskisch Frankrijk, Franstalig Canada en de buitenwijken van Parijs. Afwijkend taalgebruik geeft gestalte aan een ander waardensysteem.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAls Swennen spreekt, hoor je soms hoe zijn Belgisch accent zwaarder wordt. In de sociolingu\u0026iuml;stiek wordt gesproken over neerwaartse divergentie, wanneer een taalgebruiker tegenover zijn gesprekspartner overschakelt naar een taalvariant die verder verwijderd is van de norm, bijvoorbeeld om de bekaktheid van de gesprekspartner in de verf te zetten. Swennen, die gefascineerd is door het argot (bijvoorbeeld in Amerikaanse misdaadromans die vertaald werden in het Frans), liet zich tegenover mij al verschillende keren ontvallen dat het hem ergert dat zijn Franstalige kennissen naar Franse radiozenders luisteren. Wat Leys vaststelt, is een fenomeen dat zich ongetwijfeld ook in China voordoet, maar dat wij niet kunnen horen. Allicht kan je het alleen in je eigen taal horen, net zoals je alleen literaire werken die in je eigen taal geschreven zijn volledig kan vatten. En hierin schuilt juist de waarde van Leys\u0026rsquo; opmerking, want een literaire taal kan alleen zichtbaar zijn als afwijking van een taalnorm. Elke literair taalgebruik is dwars, grillig of op zijn minst ongewoon.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWat Swennen met woorden doet, is wonderlijk. Hij laat ze botsen en versmelten, hij isoleert ze of dompelt ze onder, hij plaatst ze ondersteboven of spiegelt ze (of spiegelt alleen de letters, die in de gebruikelijke volgorde blijven staan). Hij gebruikt alle technieken die door Freud en Sjklovski beschreven worden: omkeringen, verschuivingen, verdubbelingen, herhalingen en verdichtingen.\u003csup\u003e64\u003c/sup\u003e Hij gebruikt woorden omwille van hun klank, hij gebruikt ze omwille van hun vorm, hij gebruikt ze omwille van hun betekenis. Hij laat ze wentelen en kantelen, hij gebruikt en misbruikt ze, hij liegt en hij zegt wat hij denkt. De taal is vorm geworden: een verzameling onbetrouwbare klanken die altijd iets anders kunnen betekenen, zoals in onze dromen, maar ook een bijna eindeloze verzameling van lettertekens (Romeins, Cyrillisch, Chinees\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;) en typografie\u0026euml;n. We zien woorden en we lezen. We denken dat we woorden of letters zien, maar eigenlijk zien we gekleurde vlakken die geen enkele \u0026lsquo;abstracte\u0026rsquo; schilder zou kunnen bedenken of rechtvaardigen. Op een van zijn schilderijen staan drie scheldwoorden waarvan enkele letters ondersteboven staan of gespiegeld zijn. \u0026lsquo;Ik bedacht dat als ik die woorden een beetje minder leesbaar maakte,\u0026rsquo; vertelde Swennen mij, \u0026lsquo;ik het schilderij een paar seconden extra tijd kon geven om zich te tonen. Want als mensen in een schilderij een beeld herkend of een woord gelezen hebben, wandelen ze meteen verder. Nu blijft de echtgenoot toch enkele seconden staan om de woorden te ontcijferen, zodat zijn eega de tijd heeft om met haar elleboog in zijn ribben te porren en hem toe te fluisteren: \u0026lsquo;Kijk eens wat een mooie kleuren!\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWie naar deze verbrokkelde resten van onze talige cultuur kijkt, kan hierin een verzet zien tegen de rationaliteit en daarmee verbonden levensvijandige morele krachten. Dit zou aansluiten bij de opvattingen van Freud, die van oordeel was dat een bevredigende seksuele beleving onverenigbaar was met de voorwaarden voor de beschaving, waardoor het door driften gestuurde onbewuste van de beschaafde mens verplicht was zich op geheime wijze te manifesteren. Misschien zijn verdichtingen zoals \u0026lsquo;familionair\u0026rsquo; of \u0026lsquo;bedelaar-miljonair\u0026rsquo; onlogisch, maar ze lijken mij niet in strijd met de gewone wegen van het rationele of anderszins vruchtbare denken. Als Francis Bacon aan Sylvester vertelt dat Michelangelo en Muybridge in zijn geest met elkaar zijn versmolten, dan lijkt mij dat een vorm van vruchtbare verdichting. Uiteindelijk zijn zelfs alle natuurwetten, die tot de hoogste vruchten van het rationele denken gerekend kunnen worden, vormen van verdichting, omdat ze in de vorm van een vergelijking minstens twee verschillende natuurkundige eenheden samenbrengen. Het doet er niet toe hoe je tot een idee of een formulering komt, zolang die gedachte of formulering maar vruchten afwerpt.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBeschouwen we deze taalspelen niet als een irrationeel verzet tegen rede en moraal, maar als een onbetrouwbare, koppige, dwarse, bevlekte, onzuivere, slordige, spitsvondige, eigenzinnige, autonome manier van denken, die bovendien onlosmakelijk verbonden is met het materi\u0026euml;le denken van het schilderij, dan zien we het verband met de filosofie van Max Stirner, die Swennen onlangs een nieuw devies bezorgde: \u0026lsquo;Mein Widerwille bleibt frei\u0026rsquo; of \u0026lsquo;My disinclination remains free.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e65\u003c/sup\u003e Tegenover de algemene rede, verdedigde Stirner het recht op een persoonlijke \u0026lsquo;onrede\u0026rsquo;, die voor hem echt was, omdat hij zelf echt was. Gombrowicz\u0026rsquo; pleidooi voor de onrijpheid en verzet tegen de Vorm aankondigend, schrijft Stirner: \u0026lsquo;De gedachte van het recht is oorspronkelijk mijn gedachte; of, ze heeft haar oorsprong in mijzelf. Maar zodra ze is voortgebracht, en het \u0026ldquo;Woord\u0026rdquo; eruit is, dan is het \u0026ldquo;vleesgeworden\u0026rdquo;, is het een \u0026ldquo;idee-fixe\u0026rdquo;. Nu kan ik mij niet meer losmaken van de gedachte; hoe ik mij ook keer, ze staat voor mij. Zo zijn de mensen geen meesters geworden van de gedachte \u0026ldquo;recht\u0026rdquo;, die ze zelf hebben geschapen; hun schepping gaat aan de haal met hen.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e 66\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet recalcitrante taalgebruik van Swennen kan natuurlijk ook beschouwd worden tegen de achtergrond van Lacans overtuiging dat wij van taal gemaakt zijn en dat de taal ons heeft vervreemd van ons lichaam en de wereld. De mens zou een \u0026lsquo;parl\u0026ecirc;tre\u0026rsquo; zijn met een hopeloze, onherstelbaar verwrongen seksualiteit, verbannen in een wereld van onbetrouwbare, sturende woorden, die de kern van de werkelijkheid, \u003cem\u003ele r\u0026eacute;el\u003c/em\u003e, niet kunnen beroeren. Lacan lezen is een wonderlijk, vermakelijk avontuur, en het is niet zonder belang dat Swennen door hem is be\u0026iuml;nvloed, maar ik wens er hier liever niet op in te gaan.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOver platte schilderijen en picturale ruimte\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDoor de afwezigheid van model\u0026eacute; en (correct toegepast) perspectief in de gebruikte tekeningen, lijkt het alsof Swennen platte schilderijen wil maken. Strikt genomen is dat niet het geval. Zijn schilderijen zijn niet \u003cem\u003eall over\u003c/em\u003e of polyfocaal. Ook lijken ze zich niet als \u0026eacute;\u0026eacute;n vlak beeld net voor het schilderij af te spelen, zoals Greenberg het wenste. Wat gebeurt er dan wel? De tekeningen zelf zijn plat, omdat ze deel uitmaken van een aantal vlakken die gecombineerd worden tot een schilderij. Soms lijken deze vlakken zich op verschillende afstanden van de toeschouwer te bevinden, waardoor een picturale ruimte ontstaat, en soms niet.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn zijn boek over Bacon maakt Deleuze een onderscheid tussen een optisch en een haptisch kleurgebruik. Het optische kleurgebruik glijdt van licht naar donker, hanteert schakeringen (waarden) van dezelfde toon en wordt aangewend voor wat Greenberg \u0026lsquo;sculpturale\u0026rsquo; schilderkunst noemt (met als hoogtepunt de schilderkunst van de 17\u003csup\u003ede\u003c/sup\u003e eeuw). Het haptische kleurgebruik hanteert geen schakeringen van dezelfde kleur, maar plaatst verschillende kleuren naast elkaar, rekenend op hun \u0026lsquo;koude\u0026rsquo; of \u0026lsquo;warme\u0026rsquo; effect, dat zich uit in een indruk van licht of donker en nabijheid of afstand.\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOmdat Swennens werk geen perspectivische elementen of optisch kleurgebruik (waarden van dezelfde toon, schaduwen) bevat, tenzij als grap (bijvoorbeeld de schaduw van een letter of de schaduw in een gevonden tekening, die in dat geval meestal geselecteerd wordt omdat ze een tekenfout bevat), zou je kunnen stellen dat zijn werk zich voordoet als een vernieuwende variant van schilderkunstige tradities die bewust hebben verzaakt aan de op lichteffecten gebaseerde, \u0026lsquo;modellerende\u0026rsquo; benadering van de werkelijkheid die typerend is voor de westerse schilderkunst en \u0026lsquo;die de fictieve diepte van het schilderij\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e68\u003c/sup\u003e zoveel mogelijk trachtten te reduceren. Greenberg wijst erop dat zo\u0026rsquo;n bewuste verwijdering van een \u0026lsquo;realistische\u0026rsquo; benadering nog maar twee keer heeft plaatsgevonden: een eerste keer in de Byzantijnse kunst en een tweede keer ten gevolge van de radicale, laat-impressionistische schilderijen (onder meer van Monet), die de eerste \u003cem\u003eall over\u003c/em\u003e of polyfocale schilderijen werden. De eerste uitingen van deze benadering waren volgens Greenberg te zien bij schilders als C\u0026eacute;zanne, Gauguin, Matisse, Picasso, Braque, Klee en de late Mondriaan, maar deze benadering, die \u0026lsquo;de vlakheid van de picturale ruimte omarmde\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e69\u003c/sup\u003e, kwam volgens hem pas tot een volledige verwezenlijking in het werk van de schilders die hij zelf probeerde aan te prijzen: Pollock, Rothko, Newman, Still en anderen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOver Mondriaan wordt soms beweerd dat hij trachtte \u0026lsquo;platte\u0026rsquo; schilderijen te maken: schilderijen waarin het blauwe vlak zich niet van de toeschouwer lijkt te verwijderen en het rode vlak niet naar voren treedt, maar waar alle vlakken, door de toevoeging van de zwarte of grijze rasters, zich op dezelfde picturale diepte lijken op te houden. Ik weet niet of dit echt Mondriaans bedoeling was, want ik heb niets van hem gelezen, maar het is onmiskenbaar zo dat rood en blauw zich in sommige schilderijen inderdaad op dezelfde diepte lijken te bevinden. Voor Greenberg, echter, was Mondriaan slechts een voorloper, in wiens werk het polyfocale schilderij alleen maar aangekondigd werd: \u0026lsquo;Het spel van overheersende vormen en hun tegengewicht dat wordt opgeroepen door de rechte lijnen en de kleurvlakken is nog te nadrukkelijk. Het oppervlak doet zich nog voor als een theater, een ruimte waar de vormen plaats nemen: het gaat niet om een uniek en ondeelbaar stuk textuur.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e70\u003c/sup\u003e Greenberg hield niet van schilderijen waarin bepaalde partijen prominent werden en daardoor als een \u0026lsquo;figuur\u0026rsquo; leken op te treden of waarin kleurvlakjes op een contrapuntische manier in het rond gestrooid werden. Hij hield niet van schilderijen die als een venster een diepte in de muur leken te slaan. Hij gaf de voorkeur aan schilderijen die een over de volledige oppervlakte verspreid \u0026lsquo;picturaal effect\u0026rsquo; opriepen dat voor het doek leek te zweven.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn een gesprek dat in 2007 werd gepubliceerd, zegt Swennen: \u0026lsquo;Ik heb die veroordeling van de illusie en de diepte altijd betreurenswaardig gevonden. Zelfs een onbeschilderd doek heeft al diepte. Het goede aan schilderkunst is juist dat je kan beslissen of je die diepte al dan niet wil aanwenden.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e71\u003c/sup\u003e Toen ik in april 2016 met Swennen keek naar een onaf schilderij waarin vier verschillend getinte, witte partijen voorkwamen, leek het mij onmiskenbaar dat een van deze witte vlakken, door de ivoorkleurige tint, meer naar voor leek te treden dan de andere. Ik vroeg Swennen of dit de bedoeling was en of hij dit ook zo waarnam. Twee keer antwoordde hij negatief. De vraag ergerde hem ook. Of ik niet wist dat schilderijen plat zijn? En dat ze de structuur hebben van bladerdeeg?\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWaar het om gaat, is dat Swennen zich altijd zal verzetten tegen de gewoonte het resultaat van een praktijk te verwarren met een intentie. Het is niet omdat een voltooid schilderij een bepaald beeld bevat, dat dit beeld aan de oorsprong lag van het schilderij. Hetzelfde geldt voor de factuur en de picturale ruimte. Het is ongetwijfeld verhelderend Swennens schilderijen te bekijken vanuit het standpunt van Greenberg, maar tegelijk moeten we beseffen dat wat we zien, vooraf nog niet bestond als onderdeel van een \u0026lsquo;programma\u0026rsquo;. Altijd heeft Swennen geprobeerd \u0026lsquo;om het even wat\u0026rsquo; te schilderen. Elke vorm van programma of persoonlijke expressie verwerpend,\u003csup\u003e72\u003c/sup\u003e heeft hij een vrije werkwijze ontworpen om tot nieuwe schilderijen te kunnen komen. Zelfs als we de indruk hebben dat hij \u0026lsquo;speelt\u0026rsquo;, is dat niet het gevolg van een bedoeling. Zijn schilderijen zijn niet op een programmatische manier anti-perspectief of anti-model\u0026eacute;, maar op een concrete manier pro-schilderij. Ze zijn niet voortgevloeid uit een bedoeling, ze zijn het gevolg van een aantal parameters die hij hanteert bij het opbouwen van zijn schilderij-voorwerpen.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWat zijn dan die parameters? Allicht zijn het vooral gewoontes. Zo vertelt hij in 1990 aan Bart De Baere dat zijn tekeningen aan stripverhalen doen denken, omdat hij heeft leren tekenen door stripverhalen te kopi\u0026euml;ren en de dingen vervolgens zo is gaan zien. Voor de specifieke \u0026lsquo;ruimte\u0026rsquo; van zijn schilderijen lijkt het onontbeerlijk dat Swennen een klare lijn hanteert en lijntekeningen maakt die geen volume suggereren (zoals wel het geval is in de Chinese schilderkunst). Maar zelf zal hij dat nooit een klare lijn noemen. Hij zal het ook niet als doel formuleren. Het is eenvoudigweg een gewoonte die vruchten afwerpt.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVoor mij denken\u003csup\u003e73\u003c/sup\u003e de schilderijen van Swennen over de mogelijkheden van een haptische, picturale ruimte. Dit denken is vrij. Het is niet gebonden aan intenties, stijlfiguren of een programma. Het vloeit voort uit het radicale uitgangspunt \u0026lsquo;om het even wat\u0026rsquo; te schilderen, uit een aantal gewoontes en uit een tactische omgang met uitgelokte ontsporingen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nStillevens\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Swennens werk treffen we rijdende auto\u0026rsquo;s, rokende sigaretten, vallende mannen en rennende atleten aan. Altijd zie ik deze figuren als grappige\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nallusies op de onmogelijkheid beweging weer te geven in een schilderij.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMalcolm Morley, een door Swennen bewonderd schilder (onder meer omwille van de witte boorden in zijn schilderijen, die aangeven dat hij geen driedimensionale ruimte, maar tweedimensionale beelden omzet in schilderijen\u003csup\u003e74\u003c/sup\u003e), omschrijft zijn schilderijen op basis van maquettes, prentbriefkaarten en andere afbeeldingen als stillevens.\u003csup\u003e75\u003c/sup\u003e Voor \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson is het stilleven een genre \u0026lsquo;waarin de schilderkunst haar essentie blootgeeft en een van haar hoogtepunten bereikt.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e76\u003c/sup\u003e Als suggestie van werkelijke beweging, schrijft hij, is de \u003cem\u003eSabijnse Maagdenroof\u003c/em\u003e van David onbevredigend. Maar vermoedelijk, vervolgt hij, is dit nooit de bedoeling geweest van de schilder. Vertrekkend van de onbeweeglijkheid van het schilderij, heeft hij getracht een illusie van beweging op te roepen door het lijnenspel. De personages bewegen niet, maar de compositie lijkt in beweging. Dit effect is nog duidelijker, zegt Gilson, als we Davids schilderij vergelijken met \u003cem\u003eDe overgave van Breda\u003c/em\u003e van Vel\u0026aacute;zquez. \u0026lsquo;In dit meesterwerk,\u0026rsquo; betoogt hij, \u0026lsquo;is nauwelijks een spoor van beweging overgebleven. De tijd lijkt tot stilstand gekomen. De menselijke figuren, hoe goed ze ook zijn geschilderd, zijn bijkomstig geworden ten opzichte van het lijnenspel en de proporties.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e77\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nToen ik Swennen onlangs vroeg iets te vertellen over twee schilderijen waarin het beeld van een schroef voorkomt, vertelde hij dat het om stillevens ging, omdat ze gebaseerd waren op een ventilator die zich in zijn atelier bevindt. Op een van deze schilderijen bevat de rand van de schroef enkele witte vlekjes. Hoe zijn die daar gekomen? Tobbend over het bestaan van links- en rechtsdraaiende schroeven, kwam Swennen op het idee een afbeelding van de schroef (een tekening van de omtrek) te overdekken met een gespiegelde, witte tekening van dezelfde schroef. Toen het resultaat niet bevredigend bleek, werd de tweede omtrek uitgewist. Waar deze omtrek de eerste omtrek kruiste, die nog niet droog was, kon de verf echter niet gewist worden, zodat er witte stippen overbleven. Waarom een schroef? Waarschijnlijk omdat dit voorwerp in Swennens atelier is beland en een mooie vorm heeft. Misschien ook omdat het voorwerp hem doet denken aan zijn vader, die ingenieur was en lange tijd in de haven heeft gewerkt. Zeker omdat de verdwaalde en bewaarde schroef uitnodigt tot bricolage. Tenslotte omdat een schroef in principe een bewegend voorwerp is en schilderijen geen beweging kunnen weergeven. De beweging wordt niet uitgebeeld, maar zit vervat in het schilderij, dat sporen draagt van een uitgewist gebaar.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet gebrekkige perspectief\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDe oneerbiedige manier waarop Swennen met het perspectief omspringt, doet denken aan de manier waarop Rogier Van der Weyden een loopje neemt met het perspectief in de \u003cem\u003eTriptiek van de Zeven Sacramenten\u003c/em\u003e en de \u003cem\u003eKruisafneming\u003c/em\u003e. In het eerste schilderij zijn de centrale personages veel groter dan de andere. Als je de gekruisigde Christus vergelijkt met de architectuur, zou hij in werkelijkheid vijf meter lang zijn. Het resultaat is een indruk van grote nabijheid die op een onbegrijpelijke manier heel vanzelfsprekend lijkt.\u003csup\u003e78\u003c/sup\u003e Het gehele tafereel van de \u003cem\u003eKruisafneming\u003c/em\u003e speelt zich af in een retabelkast die ongeveer een schouderbreedte diep is. Toch speelt dit tafereel zich af in vijf elkaar opvolgende lagen: het dichtst bij de toeschouwer bevindt zich de apostel Johannes die Maria opvangt. Achter Maria, die zich al een beetje dieper bevindt, zien we het lichaam van Christus, dat wordt opgevangen door Jozef van Arimathea en al wordt weggedragen door Nicodemus. Achter deze mannen bevindt zich het kruis en nog dieper zien we de knecht die, op een ladder staand, Christus losmaakt en naar beneden laat zakken. Hoewel deze knecht zich minstens twee meter verder zou moeten bevinden, komt een nagel die hij in zijn rechterhand houdt, voor de retabelkast uit.\u003csup\u003e79\u003c/sup\u003e Dit gebruik van het perspectief om een fantasmagorische ruimte te cre\u0026euml;ren, had vermoedelijk een symbolische functie, die samenhing met een specifiek wereldbeeld.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVolgens de kunsthistoricus Dirk De Vos hadden symbolen in de Middeleeuwen nooit een eenduidige betekenis. \u0026lsquo;Alles kon in meerdere richtingen worden aangewend of uitgelegd. De wereld der dingen was immers een veelvoud van vermommingen van Gods wezen. Lezen we er de filosofische, theologische of moraliserende traktaten of de mystieke geschriften op na, dan worden we geconfronteerd met een overdaad aan beeldspraak, aan symboliek, het enige middel om over het onzegbare te spreken. (\u0026hellip;) Naarmate de kennis van die techniek toenam, kon de wereld naar eigen inzicht steeds complexer en dubbelzinniger worden aanschouwd, wat uiteindelijk tot goddelijke revelatie moest leiden.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Erwin Panofsky,\u0026rsquo; schrijft De Vos, \u0026lsquo;heeft dit \u0026ldquo;disguised symbolism\u0026rdquo; genoemd vanwege de achterliggende gebeurtenissen die de voorstelling als zodanig op het eerste gezicht niet oproept. Door een al te literair speurwerk naar symbolen heeft dit begrip echter dikwijls geleid tot een systematiek van iconografische verklaring die eigenlijk de geest van de visuele revelatie ontkracht.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e81\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nNiemand kent de ontstaansgeschiedenis van de techniek en de vorm van de olieverfschilderijen van de Vlaamse Primitieven. Soms lijkt het erop dat deze schilders plotseling gepolychromeerde sculpturen op een vlakke manier zijn gaan afbeelden, maar dan weer lijkt het alsof de gelijkenis tussen beide kunstvormen veeleer te maken heeft met de gezochte dubbelzinnigheid van de schilderijen. Volgens Dirk De Vos zijn deze schilderijen vermoedelijk ontstaan uit de bloeiende productie van de Vlaams-Franse miniaturistenateliers \u0026lsquo;die door hun aard en perfectie een verklaring kunnen geven voor (het ontstaan van) de paneelschilderkunst\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e82\u003c/sup\u003e Hij wijst op formele factoren die de \u0026lsquo;illusionistische, antidecoratieve en antihi\u0026euml;ratische evolutie van de miniatuur in de hand hebben gewerkt: het kleine formaat bijvoorbeeld, dat door zijn overzichtelijkheid een veel intensere kijk op het verschijnsel van de afbeelding verleent; het vensteraspect dat een miniatuur door haar duidelijke omlijsting altijd heeft en dat het illusionaire karakter van de afbeelding beklemtoont.\u0026rsquo; Wat de oorsprong van deze schilderijen ook moge zijn geweest, het \u0026lsquo;zelfstandig worden van het geschilderde beeld heeft zich uiteindelijk ook materieel gemanifesteerd.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nEr ontstond een verplaatsbaar \u0026ldquo;wandmeubel\u0026rdquo;, speciaal ontworpen ten dienste van een geschilderde voorstelling. Het is het ons nu zo vertrouwde vijftiende-eeuwse schilderij: een met plamuur spiegelglad gemaakt paneel, ingewerkt in een lijst zoals glas in een vensterraam, een soort platte kijkdoos die op elke wand en in elke ruimte dezelfde beeldende betovering met zich meedraagt.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e Met andere woorden, deze schilderijen zijn niet ontstaan als fresco\u0026rsquo;s die zich hebben losgemaakt van de architectuur, en ook niet als platte reproducties van gepolychromeerde beeldengroepen, maar als toonkast geworden, vernuftige illustraties uit boeken. Zou het toeval zijn dat iets soortgelijks is gebeurd met Swennen? Is de specifieke ruimte van zijn schilderijen, waarin kleurvlakken, woorden en klare lijntekeningen elkaar ontmoeten, niet ontstaan uit de schetsen van een afgeleide lezer? Allicht is dit te sterk uitgedrukt. Maar toch moet er iets van waar zijn. De verbluffende vrijheid van zijn werken, zowel op materieel, compositorisch als \u0026lsquo;non-programmatisch\u0026rsquo; vlak, zou best ten dele verklaard kunnen worden vanuit de vrijheid van sommige stripverhalen, de droedels in de marge van zwaarwichtige geschriften en de her en der genoteerde woorden en zinsneden die de naarstige lezer soms overhoudt aan zijn lectuur.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTot slot zou ik nog iets onzinnigs willen vertellen over de perspectiefloze, picturale ruimte van Swennens schilderijen, vertrekkend van enkele bespiegelingen van Daniel Arasse over de uitvinding van het perspectief in de vijftiende eeuw. Volgens Arasse kan je het perspectief niet louter beschouwen als een symbool voor een wereld zonder God, zoals Panofsky heeft voorgesteld, en ook niet louter als de voorwaarde voor een plek die politieke actie mogelijk maakt (zoals Pierre Francastel heeft voorgesteld). Het perspectief, dat oorspronkelijk \u0026lsquo;commensuratio\u0026rsquo; werd genoemd, werd volgens hem gebruikt om een wereld vorm te geven die zich verhield tot de menselijke figuur, een wereld die meetbaar was. Om die reden werd het perspectief vaak gebruikt om het mysterie van de incarnatie vorm te geven: het meetbaar en tastbaar worden van de oneindige God. Zo wijst hij bijvoorbeeld op een pilaartje in een \u003cem\u003eAnnunciatie\u003c/em\u003e (1344) van Ambrogio Lorenzetti. Dit zuiltje, een gangbaar symbool voor Christus, is onderaan perspectivisch opgevat, maar al opklimmend vervaagt het, zodat het geleidelijk overgaat in het Goddelijke bladgoud van de achtergrond.\u003csup\u003e84\u003c/sup\u003e In de perspectiefloze ruimte van Swennen, zo lijkt het, is geen incarnatie mogelijk. Gelukkig maar, zou Lacan verzuchten, want met de incarnatie is alle miserie begonnen.\u003csup\u003e85\u003c/sup\u003e En we herinneren ons dat Freud zich volgens Lacan aangetrokken voelde tot de God van het Oude Testament, omdat die stond voor het Woord en de onzichtbare, mannelijke Wet, in tegenstelling tot de vrouwelijke Werkelijkheid, die rond is en van vlees gemaakt. In Swennens werk lijkt de vrouwelijke werkelijkheid te ontbreken. Alles lijkt\u0026nbsp; spookachtig en dun te zijn, als een pneumatisch, geestelijk avontuur (cosa mentale). Alles? Neen, in die spookachtige wereld is er iets dat weerstand biedt, als een laag voor laag gegroeide galsteen, en dat iets is het schilderij.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHet onzinnige tot raadsel maken\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn \u003cem\u003eHic Haec Hoc\u003c/em\u003e, omschrijft Swennen het vervaardigen van een schilderij als het omvormen van het zin- en betekenisloze tot een enigma.\u003csup\u003e86\u003c/sup\u003e Vooraleer we deze op het eerste gezicht grappige, raadselachtige uitspraak aan een nadere inspectie onderwerpen, kunnen we ons voor de geest halen dat Mannoni over Baudelaire schrijft dat het diens bestemming was \u0026lsquo;onophoudelijk duistere vraagstellingen aan te raken, zonder een opheldering te beloven\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e Dit doet ons denken aan Swennens opmerking dat de kunsthistoricus Paul Ilegems gelijk had hem in een tekst een \u0026lsquo;pestkop\u0026rsquo; te noemen. Zoals het enigma de mensen wordt toegeworpen door de Goden,\u003csup\u003e88\u003c/sup\u003e zo plaatst Swennen ons voor schilderijen als aporie\u0026euml;n, die ons dwingen tot het accepteren van een soort van \u0026lsquo;uitgestelde betekenis\u0026rsquo;, zoals Mannoni die aantrof in de gedichten van Mallarm\u0026eacute;. \u0026lsquo;Van bij de eerste lezing,\u0026rsquo; aldus Mannoni, \u0026lsquo;is er een belofte van betekenis, is er het mysterie van de vierentwintig letters: zolang de zin niet voltooid is, beschikken we zogezegd nog over tal van betekenissen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; Deze toestand, waarin we eerder onbeslist zijn dan verdwaald, vormt en ontbindt zich onophoudelijk naarmate we voortschrijden. Dat wordt de lectuur genoemd. Alleen maakt Mallarm\u0026eacute; deze toestand oneindig\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e89\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWaarin bestaat eigenlijk de ervaring dat iets onzinnig is? Swennens eerste ervaring van zinloosheid gebeurde allicht thuis en op school, tijdens zijn vijfde levensjaar, toen zijn ouders van de ene dag op de andere een andere taal gingen spreken om te breken met hun oorlogsverleden. Velen hebben als kind noodgedwongen een nieuwe taal leren spreken. Maar hoeveel mensen hebben als kind meegemaakt dat hun ouders van de ene op de andere dag onbegrijpelijk werden? De ervaring moet afgrondelijk geweest zijn.\u003csup\u003e90\u003c/sup\u003e Toch lijkt het erop dat Swennen haar heeft overleefd door haar niet ernstig te nemen of door er een draai aan te geven. Het loskoppelen van letters, klanken, woorden en betekenissen moet een altijd verschuivende innerlijke wereld hebben mogelijk gemaakt die anderen nooit zullen ontdekken.\u003csup\u003e91\u003c/sup\u003e Ik vermoed dit, omdat zo de basis gelegd kan zijn voor een tweede grote ervaring van \u0026lsquo;betekenisloosheid\u0026rsquo;, namelijk zijn ontdekking dat een schilderij in de niet-representatieve partijen (\u0026lsquo;tussen het terracotta schoteltje onder de bloempot en de handtekening\u0026rsquo;) niets meer \u0026lsquo;betekent\u0026rsquo;, maar alleen nog \u0026lsquo;schilderij\u0026rsquo; is. Ineens bleek er een genotvolle, eindeloze bezigheid te bestaan die zich voorbij de taal en de betekenis uitstrekte.\u003csup\u003e92 93\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDingen kunnen ons iets zeggen, niet omdat ze kunnen praten, maar omdat wij tegen onszelf beginnen te praten wanneer we ze zien. Daardoor ervaren we ze als zinvol. Ook kunstwerken kunnen iets betekenen, alleen hoeft die betekenis niet het gevolg te zijn van een intentie van de kunstenaar. De betekenis vloeit niet voort uit de dingen, maar uit een behoefte van de mens. De betekenis en de zin behoeden hem voor de nacht.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMannoni merkt ergens op dat de betekenis van een grap, het spel met woorden (waaruit de grap bestaat) verdraaglijk maakt.\u003csup\u003e94\u003c/sup\u003e We vinden het blijkbaar onverdraaglijk dat aan woorden wordt gemorreld. Het morrelen brengt onrust. Woorden waaraan wordt gemorreld, verliezen hun betekenis. Een wereld die benoemd wordt met betekenisloze woorden, lijkt zinloos te worden. Maar zonder morrelen raken we opgesloten in onze woorden. De analyticus morrelt, de dichter morrelt, de schilder morrelt. Alleen geven ze dit zelden toe. En vaak beseffen ze het zelf niet.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn het boek \u003cem\u003eDe grap en haar relatie met het onbewuste\u003c/em\u003e tracht Freud op een omstandige wijze aan te tonen dat de grap op dezelfde manier tot stand komt als de droom, gestuurd door het onbewuste. Eigenlijk probeert hij zo via een geheime omweg nieuwe bewijzen aan te voeren voor het bestaan van het onbewuste, dat hij echter als gegeven beschouwt, zoals hij aan het eind van het boek toegeeft. Als we Freuds topologische spielereien even terzijde mogen laten (de vraag waar de driften zich nu eigenlijk bevinden, hoe ze worden verdrongen, welke plaats de psychische energie \u0026lsquo;bezet\u0026rsquo; en door welke gaten ze kan ontsnappen om alsnog verboden lust op te wekken), dan zien we dat hij de grap beschouwt als een uitspraak die op het eerste gezicht zinnig lijkt, dan zinloos blijkt te zijn, maar uiteindelijk toch nog een diepere verborgen zin heeft, die hem onderscheidt van het kinderlijke spel en de vrijblijvende scherts: namelijk dat hij de rationele kritiek ontwapent en obscene, agressieve, cynische en sceptische gedachten uitspreekbaar maakt door middel van een geestige inkleding (de slechts heel even zinnige en dan onzinnig blijkende vorm). Volgens Freud is de grap altijd gericht tegen de heersende moraal, die de botviering van onze lusten onmogelijk maakt, omdat elke vorm van samenleving een uitstel van de bevrediging van onze lusten vergt. Het mooie aan Freud, vind ik, is dat hij het daar echter niet bij kan laten, zodat het er soms op lijkt dat hij de hele werkelijkheid het liefst ondersteboven en binnenstebuiten zou willen keren. \u0026lsquo;Men kan hardop zeggen wat deze grappen fluisteren,\u0026rsquo; schrijft hij, \u0026lsquo;namelijk dat de wensen en begeerten van de mens het recht hebben zich te doen horen naast de veeleisende en onverbiddelijke moraal, en het is in onze dagen in emfatische en pakkende taal gezegd dat deze moraal slechts het zelfzuchtige voorschrift is van de weinige rijken en machtigen die te allen tijde zonder uitstel hun wensen kunnen bevredigen.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e95\u003c/sup\u003e Ter introductie van het hoofdstuk over de tendensen (de onderliggende motivatie of betekenis) van de grap, herinnert hij de lezer aan een grap van Heinrich Heine, waarin katholieke priesters vergeleken worden met bedienden van een groothandel en protestantse geestelijken met zelfstandige neringdoeners. Bij het behandelen van deze grap, schrijft hij, had hij enige remming gevoeld, omdat hij besefte \u0026lsquo;dat er zich onder mijn lezers wel enkelen zouden bevinden voor wie niet alleen de godsdienst, maar ook haar beheerders en personeel eerbiedwaardig zijn\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e96\u003c/sup\u003e De grap is gericht tegen gezagsdragers, seksuele rivalen en instituten zoals het huwelijk: \u0026lsquo;Dat het huwelijk niet de geschikte inrichting is om de seksualiteit van de man te bevredigen, durft men niet hardop en openlijk te zeggen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e97\u003c/sup\u003e Nooit kan de lezer zich van de indruk ontdoen dat het Freud juist daarom begonnen is: om het bevechten van het recht anders te zijn, het recht dichter te zijn, schilder, homoseksueel of Jood. Freud is een gezegend oplichter. De hele psychoanalyse is een soort van grap, erop gericht maatschappijkritiek te formuleren en tegelijk elke autoritaire of morele weerstand te omzeilen. Nog in het hoofdstuk over de tendensen van de grap analyseert hij een mop over een dove jood die van de dokter te horen krijgt dat hij doof is omdat hij zoveel drinkt. De jood besluit te stoppen met drinken. Als later blijkt dat hij opnieuw drinkt, verklaart hij dat hij weliswaar beter hoorde toen hij even gestopt was, maar dat de dingen die hij hoorde zo verschrikkelijk waren dat hij liever weer dronk. En Freud besluit: \u0026lsquo;Daarachter wacht de treurige vraag: heeft de man niet gelijk met zijn keuze? Het is de veelsoortige, hopeloze ellende van de Jood waarop deze verhalen zinspelen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e98\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVolgens Freud dient de grap dus een hoger doel, maar het bijzondere is dat ze tegelijk haar oorsprong vindt in een kinderlijk verlangen naar bevrediging, dat de vorm aanneemt van woordlust en lust in onzin (het samenballen van zinnen of het uitbuiten van gelijkenissen, bijvoorbeeld, zou voor een besparing van psychische energie zorgen die gelijkstaat met het ervaren van lust). \u0026lsquo;De voor kleine jongens karakteristieke neiging tot ongerijmd, averechts gedrag,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Freud (hij zwijgt over meisjes), \u0026lsquo;is volgens mij een rechtstreeks derivaat van de lust in de onzin.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e99\u003c/sup\u003e Kinderen (net zoals volwassenen \u0026lsquo;in toxisch veranderde stemming\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e100\u003c/sup\u003e) zouden ervan houden met gedachten, woorden en zinnen te spelen. Later, wanneer de rede en de redelijkheid hun tol eisen en \u0026lsquo;alleen de zinvolle woordverbindingen nog als geoorloofd overblijven,\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e101\u003c/sup\u003e zou dit verlangen ondergronds blijven bestaan en in de vorm van de grap naar een bevrediging zoeken, terwijl het de formulering van kritische gedachten mogelijk maakt.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDit klinkt niet overtuigend. Eerder lijkt het erop dat grappen mogelijk gemaakt en in ons bestaan gezogen worden door een bovenmatige behoefte aan betekenis. Iets wordt grappig wanneer ons betekenis zoekende brein heel even onterecht een seksueel of ander voordeel meent te bespeuren in een combinatie van klanken of vormen. We lachen eigenlijk met dit snuffelende brein, en bij uitbreiding ook met alle instellingen die voortgekomen zijn uit onze kwalijke behoefte aan een nauw afgelijnde, vaststaande betekenis: spelregels, sociale rituelen, sportclubs, modes, scholen, academische instellingen, kerken, politieke partijen enzovoort.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDoor haar verontrustend karakter is de grap verwant met het Griekse orakel, zoals dit wordt beschreven door Giorgio Colli in \u003cem\u003eNaissance de la philosophie\u003c/em\u003e: dubbelzinnige, ongrijpbare uitspraken van een ogenschijnlijk kwaadaardige en wrede God. Orakels bereiken ons via zieners. Vaak nemen ze de vorm aan van raadsels. Alleen de wijze kan deze raadsels oplossen of duiden. \u0026lsquo;Voor de Grieken,\u0026rsquo; aldus Colli, \u0026lsquo;bevat de formulering van een enigma een verschrikkelijk vijandige lading.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e102\u003c/sup\u003e De goden openbaren hun wijsheid door middel van woorden, schrijft hij, \u0026lsquo;vandaar de uiterlijke kenmerken van het orakel: dubbelzinnigheid, duisterheid, onzekerheid en een alluderend karakter die samen de ontcijfering zo moeilijk maken\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e103\u003c/sup\u003e Voor Colli is de goddelijke oorsprong van het orakel een voldoende verklaring voor de duisterheid ervan. Maar waarom zou het woord van God onbegrijpelijk (dubbelzinnig, onzeker en alluderend) moeten zijn? Heeft God een spraakgebrek? Of ligt het aan de woorden, die wezenlijk krom zijn en door hun menselijke herkomst ongeschikt voor Goddelijke gedachten? Van de Christelijke God kennen we het ware woord, dat is een feit. Maar waarom is het woord van onze almachtige en onfeilbare God zo dubbel, zo tegenstrijdig en zo warrig? Het antwoord op deze vraag is zelf meervoudig. Ten eerste zou dit woord nooit bewaard gebleven zijn en had het nooit zoveel mensen kunnen inspireren als het eenduidig was geweest. De tegenstrijdigheid en warrigheid van spirituele teksten is een voorwaarde voor hun levensvatbaarheid en werkzaamheid. Ten tweede is het woord van God tegenstrijdig en warrig omdat het ons moet beletten te gaan geloven dat we God kennen. Goden zijn bruikbaar als machtsinstrument als hun woorden slechts door enkelen begrepen en vertaald kunnen worden. Bovendien zijn goden voor spiritueel ingestelde mensen beelden voor de onkenbaarheid van de wereld en de ontoereikendheid van de kennis. Een kenbare God kan geen God zijn.\u003csup\u003e104\u003c/sup\u003e Alleen als onkenbare constructie kan het ons uitnodigen tot nederigheid en tot een dagelijks besef van onze gebrekkige kennis. Samenlevingen worden mogelijk door het uitvinden van onkenbare goden. De mens houdt niet op een dier te zijn wanneer hij leert spreken, maar wanneer hij gaat beseffen dat zijn waarnemingen relatief zijn, zijn woorden ontoereikend en zijn gedachten nooit aanspraak kunnen maken op een volledige waarheid. Ten derde, bijgevolg, zijn de woorden van Goden warrig, omdat ze ons eraan willen herinneren dat onze eigen waarnemingen, woorden en gedachten warrig en relatief zijn.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGaandeweg heeft het enigma zich echter losgemaakt van het goddelijke orakel en heeft het de vorm aangenomen van een intellectuele uitdaging van mens tot mens. En nog later, aldus Colli, ontwikkelde zich hieruit de dialectiek. Het dialectische gesprek in het antieke Griekenland vertrok altijd van twee tegenstrijdige beweringen (Het Zijnde is of het Zijnde is niet). De tegenstrever werd uitgenodigd partij te kiezen voor een van deze stellingen en vervolgens werd aangetoond dat de gekozen stelling (om het even welke) onhoudbaar was. De uitdager, die de tegenstrijdigheid formuleerde, won altijd. Voor Colli was de dialectiek van de Oude Grieken destructief, omdat ze elke zekerheid of overtuiging ondermijnde. Mij lijkt deze destructie onvermijdelijk om vooroordelen, domheid, demagogie, dictaturen, absolute monarchie\u0026euml;n en godsdienstwaanzin te voorkomen. De vooraf vaststaande \u0026lsquo;overwinning\u0026rsquo; van de uitdager in de dialectische tweestrijd hangt niet af van diens argumenten, maar van de omstandigheid dat vertrokken wordt van een tegenstelling. Geen enkele werkelijkheid kan uitsluitend benaderd worden vanuit twee tegenovergestelde gezichtspunten. In vrijwel alle wetenschappen komt vooruitgang voort uit kruisbestuivingen tussen benaderingen die zich voordien als exclusief voordeden. Moet dit ons beletten standpunten in te nemen? Zeker niet, maar waarom kunnen we niet onthouden dat elk standpunt onvermijdelijk relatief is? \u0026lsquo;Herakleitos had geen kritiek op de gewaarwordingen,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Colli, \u0026lsquo;integendeel, hij prees het gezicht en het gehoor, maar hij veroordeelde de neiging onze zintuiglijke gewaarwordingen om te vormen tot iets stabiels dat buiten ons zou bestaan\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e 105\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;De essentie van het enigma,\u0026rsquo; aldus Aristoteles, \u0026lsquo;bestaat erin te zeggen wat is, door twee onverenigbare termen met elkaar te verbinden.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e106\u003c/sup\u003e Hetzelfde kunnen we zeggen over het verhaal dat, zoals Sjklovski aantoont, ontstaat door priomen te gebruiken die onverwachte wendingen mogelijk maken, en over de droom- en graparbeid, die lijken te berichten over een verborgen weten dat ons gedrag stuurt. \u0026lsquo;Le r\u0026eacute;el\u0026rsquo; van Lacan spreekt in raadselen.\u003csup\u003e107\u003c/sup\u003e Raden naar de aard van de oerwil van Schopenhauer of het onbewuste van Freud wordt potsierlijk als je gaat geloven dat die Dingen ook werkelijk bestaan. Maar het raden zelf, het spelen met woorden en beelden, het herschikken van zinnen en het weven van afwijkende verhalen, kan een leven dat voorheen onherroepelijk onbeheersbaar leek, opnieuw beheersbaar maken. Niet omdat de neuroticus wordt getemd door zijn psychiater, zoals de lacanianen geloven, en ook niet omdat de ware aard van zijn of haar verlangens werd blootgelegd, maar wel omdat een vruchtbare omgang met een beweeglijke (innerlijke of uiterlijke) werkelijkheid een zichzelf voortdurend vernieuwend taalspel of wereldbeeld vereist.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen, die in de geschriften van Lacan een \u0026lsquo;recht op onzin\u0026rsquo; moet hebben ontdekt, gelooft niet in het bestaan van een Onbewuste. \u0026lsquo;Het enige wat je kan beweren, is dat er gedacht wordt,\u0026rsquo; zegt hij.\u003csup\u003e108\u003c/sup\u003e In de schilderijen van Swennen wordt gedacht. \u0026Ccedil;a pense. Kleuren, vormen, texturen, letters, woorden en figuren worden door elkaar gevlochten en vormen samen een nieuwe, concrete gedachte. Niet om te berichten over een werkelijkheid die zich buiten het schilderij zou bevinden, maar om te \u0026lsquo;zijn\u0026rsquo;: om gezien te kunnen worden, om gedacht te zijn, om al handelend gedacht te zijn en vorm gekregen te hebben, en zo onrechtstreeks, als een enigma, te berichten over de wonderlijke vermogens van het (handelend) denken.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Fundamenteel onderzoek verricht ik wanneer ik iets doe waarvan ik niet weet wat ik doe,\u0026rsquo; aldus Wernher von Braun in The New York Times.\u003csup\u003e109\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Er bestaat geen enkele wetenschap, of een andere vorm van leven, die nuttig en vooruitstrevend is \u0026eacute;n die overeenstemt met logische eisen,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Feyerabend. \u003csup\u003e1110\u003c/sup\u003e Sommige volkeren in het Braziliaanse oerwoud hebben geen westerse wetenschap nodig gehad om tot vrede te komen, zoals Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss heeft aangetoond, maar een verzameling begrippen, beelden en daarmee verbonden rituelen die toevallig tot vrede hebben geleid.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen geeft gestalte aan concrete gedachten die de priomen en de collageachtige structuur van elk denken tonen. De jonge Swennen wilde filosoof worden. Uiteindelijk is hij schilder geworden om op een vrije manier te kunnen denken. Althans, zo zie ik het. Iedereen is vrij er anders over te denken.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMontagne de Miel, 30 juni 2016\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003chr /\u003e\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nNOTEN\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e1\u0026nbsp; Franz Kafka, \u003cem\u003eGesammelte Werke. Der Proze\u0026szlig;\u003c/em\u003e, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, 1983, p. 185. Vertaling: Franz Kafka, \u003cem\u003eVerzameld werk\u003c/em\u003e, Athenaeum \u0026ndash; Polak \u0026amp; Van Gennep, p. 155.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e2\u0026nbsp; Franz Kafka, \u003cem\u003eGesammelte Werke. Das Schlo\u0026szlig;\u003c/em\u003e, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, 1983, p. 218. Vertaling: Franz Kafka, \u003cem\u003eVerzameld werk\u003c/em\u003e, Athenaeum \u0026ndash; Polak \u0026amp; Van Gennep, p. 361.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e3\u0026nbsp; Het enige mysterie rond zijn werk is dat zijn exegeten dat niet willen of durven zien. Vergelijk met Mannoni, die schrijft: \u0026lsquo;Mallarm\u0026eacute; is helderder dan wordt beweerd, het volstaat hem letterlijk te nemen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo; O. Mannoni, \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, 1969, p. 253.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e4\u0026nbsp; Schilderijen spreken geen \u0026lsquo;taal\u0026rsquo;, omdat ze geen betekenis-onderscheidende elementen zoals fonemen bevatten. \u0026lsquo;Si la peinture est un langage, on se demande ce qu\u0026rsquo;y voient les sourds.\u0026rsquo; (W.S.)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e5\u0026nbsp; Victor Chklovski, \u003cem\u003eLa marche du cheval\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions Champ Libre, Parijs, 1973. Dit boek bevat andere teksten dan de in het Nederlands gepubliceerde en door Karel van het Reve ingeleide bundel \u003cem\u003eDe paardesprong\u003c/em\u003e, De Haan, Haarlem, 1982.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e6\u0026nbsp; Viktor Sjklovski, \u003cem\u003eDe paardesprong\u003c/em\u003e, De Haan, Haarlem, 1982, p. 89.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e7\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 47. Vergelijk met Bergsons omschrijving van humor als een onverwachte afwijking van het mechanische verloop van de dingen.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e8\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 94.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e9\u0026nbsp; De technieken die volgens Sjklovski door kunstenaars worden gebruikt om hun werk te maken, lijken erg veel op de technieken van de droom- en graparbeid zoals die door Freud worden beschreven. Zo geeft hij het voorbeeld van de verdichting \u0026lsquo;bedelaar-miljonair\u0026rsquo; in een werk van Tolstoj (ibid: 96) die ons meteen doet denken aan de woordspeling \u0026lsquo;familjonair\u0026rsquo; van Heine, waarmee Freuds \u003cem\u003eDe grap en haar relatie met het onbewuste\u003c/em\u003e aanvangt.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e10\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Een vergelijkbaar idee vinden we in \u003cem\u003eL\u0026rsquo;art du roman\u003c/em\u003e van Milan Kundera, waarin hij de gedachte ontwikkelt dat de beste romans werken zijn waarin mogelijkheden worden benut die alleen in een roman mogelijk zijn. Je kan dit criterium toepassen op \u003cem\u003eLost Highway\u003c/em\u003e en \u003cem\u003eMulholland Drive\u003c/em\u003e van David Lynch en op de schilderijen van Swennen, waarin een concrete, met materie vervlochten woord-beeld po\u0026euml;zie wordt ontwikkeld die niet buiten het schilderij kan bestaan.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e11\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u003cem\u003eThe Postman Always Rings Twice\u003c/em\u003e van James M. Cain.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e12\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Viktor Sjklovski, \u003cem\u003eDe paardesprong\u003c/em\u003e, De Haan, Haarlem, 1982, p. 128.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e13\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Laten we trachten ons uit te drukken volgens ons persoonlijk temperament.\u0026rsquo; Doran (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eConversations avec C\u0026eacute;zanne\u003c/em\u003e, Macula, Parijs, 1978, p. 136. Swennen houdt niet van het begrip \u0026lsquo;expressie\u0026rsquo;. Maar dat doet hier niet ter zake. We komen er elders op terug. Dit gezegd zijnde, moet erop gewezen worden dat het Engelse woord \u0026lsquo;expressive\u0026rsquo;, dat bijvoorbeeld gebruikt wordt door Auerbach (in de film die zijn zoon over hem heeft gemaakt), minder te maken heeft met het \u0026lsquo;uitdrukken\u0026rsquo; van een innerlijk leven, dan met de fysieke uitwerking, het levendige effect van een schilderij.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e14 \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 180. Als C\u0026eacute;zanne er tegenover Maurice Denis over klaagde dat Gauguin zijn \u0026lsquo;petite sensibilit\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo; had gestolen, bedoelde hij daar natuurlijk niet zijn manier van kijken mee, maar zijn manier van werken. Later zou Louis Ferdinand C\u0026eacute;line, die van oordeel was dat literatuur niets van doen had met idee\u0026euml;n, en alles met stijl, zijn eigen vorm omschrijven als \u0026lsquo;la petite musique\u0026rsquo;. Cf. Louis-Ferdinand C\u0026eacute;line, \u003cem\u003eLe style contre les id\u0026eacute;es\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions Complexe, Brussel, 1987, p. 90-91.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e15\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Doran (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eConversations avec C\u0026eacute;zanne\u003c/em\u003e, Macula, Parijs, 1978, p. 136. De tekstbezorger, P.-M. Doran, betwijfelde de geloofwaardigheid van deze uitspraak en een groot deel van Gasquets herinneringen, vooral omdat hij tal van uitspraken in lichtjes gewijzigde vorm aantrof in andere interviews. Hij scheen niet te beseffen dat kunstenaars, net zoals wij, heel vaak dezelfde gedachten en woorden herhalen. Zelf ben ik geneigd Gasquet te vertrouwen omwille van de vorm van de gesprekken, die heel overtuigend overkomt. Volgens Doran lijkt die dan weer verdacht veel op de stijl van Gasquets overige werk. Hij beseft niet dat in deze overeenkomst misschien een verklaring gezocht kan worden voor Gasquets sympathie voor C\u0026eacute;zanne of, omgekeerd, dat zijn stijl is voortgevloeid uit zijn bewondering voor C\u0026eacute;zanne. Ik was blij te lezen dat Gilles Deleuze het met mij eens is: \u0026lsquo;De twijfels van de redacteur over de waarde van Gasquets tekst lijken ons niet gegrond\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;. Gilles Deleuze, \u003cem\u003eFrancis Bacon. Logique de la sensation\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1981 (2002), p. 105.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e16\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Victor Chklovski, \u003cem\u003eLa marche du cheval\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions Champ Libre, Parijs, 1973, p. 95.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e17\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Doran (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eConversations avec C\u0026eacute;zanne\u003c/em\u003e, Macula, Parijs, 1978, p. 142.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e18\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 136.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e19\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 95-98.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e20\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Als voorbeeld vertelt hij een anekdote over Ingres die zich eraan ergert dat een verhuizer geen oordeel uitspreekt over een schilderij dat hij moet transporteren en wijst hij op een doek van Tintoretto dat werd gebruikt om in de kelder van een kathedraal een hoop rommel af te dekken. \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson, \u003cem\u003ePeinture et r\u0026eacute;alit\u0026eacute;\u003c/em\u003e, Librairie Philosophique J. VRIN, Parijs, 1972 (1998), p. 22 en 25.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e21\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026laquo;\u0026nbsp;C\u0026rsquo;est ce qui fait la grandeur et la mis\u0026egrave;re de la ph\u0026eacute;nom\u0026eacute;nologie. Elle commence comme une philosophie et finit en litt\u0026eacute;rature.\u0026nbsp;\u0026raquo; Ibid\u0026nbsp;: 23.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e22\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson, \u003cem\u003ePainting and Reality\u003c/em\u003e, Pantheon Books, New York, 1957, p. 227.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e23\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson, \u003cem\u003ePeinture et r\u0026eacute;alit\u0026eacute;\u003c/em\u003e, Librairie Philosophique J. VRIN, Parijs, 1972 (1998), p. 94.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e24\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid\u0026nbsp;: 96. Swennen gebruikt het woord \u0026lsquo;spoken\u0026rsquo; ook voor de platonische uitvergroting van het waargenomen beeld van een schilderij, waarvan wordt verondersteld dat het eraan voorafging.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e25\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson, \u003cem\u003ePainting and Reality\u003c/em\u003e, Pantheon Books, New York, 1957, p. 90.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e26\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Giorgio Agamben, \u003cem\u003eThe Man Without Content\u003c/em\u003e, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1999, p. 6.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e27\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Natuurlijk kan je hetzelfde zeggen over een gedicht, en natuurlijk geldt deze uitspraak niet voor alle schilderijen. Maar we begrijpen wat er bedoeld wordt: Swennen wil proberen nieuwe schilderijen te maken zonder op een rechtstreekse manier gestalte te willen geven aan voorafgaande ervaringen of gedachten.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e28\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; een gedicht schrijven is een verbaal vehikel maken dat een ervaring voor onbepaalde duur zou bewaren door het opnieuw op te roepen in al wie het gedicht leest.\u0026rsquo; Philip Larkin, \u003cem\u003eRequired Writing. Miscellaneous Pieces 1955-1982\u003c/em\u003e, Faber and Faber, Londen-Boston, 1983, p. 83.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e29\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Hij begon daarmee in 1964, toen hij veertig jaar oud was.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e30\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Bart De Baere, \u003cem\u003eWalter Swennen. N\u0026rsquo;importe quoi\u003c/em\u003e, in: \u003cem\u003eArtisti (della Fiandra) / Artists (from Flanders)\u003c/em\u003e, 1990, p. 89-92. (Franse en Nederlandse versie in bijlage.)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e31\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Zie facsimil\u0026eacute; op p. 58.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e32\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; O. Mannoni, \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1969, p. 258-259.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e33\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Swennen denkt dat hij om dezelfde reden uitvergrote tekeningen is gaan verwerken in zijn schilderijen, al is hij daar niet zeker van.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e34\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Paul Val\u0026eacute;ry, \u003cem\u003eVari\u0026eacute;t\u0026eacute; V\u003c/em\u003e, Gallimard, Parijs, 1945, p. 141 en 143. Cursivering van Val\u0026eacute;ry.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e35\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; De idee dat artefacten niet-intentionele sporen dragen van hun makers of de culturen waaruit ze zijn voortgekomen, komt waarschijnlijk van Nietzsche en Marx. Ze vond een mooie uitwerking bij Derrida, die het boeiend vond verhalen uiteen te rafelen om te kijken wat er uiteindelijk aan je vingers blijft kleven. Maar ze heeft ook een uitwerking gevonden bij Freud en Lacan, die onze dromen, onze misstappen, onze grappen of zelfs al onze talige voortbrengselen gingen beschouwen als geheime toegangswegen tot verdrongen seksuele drijfveren en infantiele beelden die ons leven zouden sturen zonder dat we dit in de gaten hebben. \u0026lsquo;Ik betwijfel of wij in staat zijn iets te ondernemen, wat het ook zij, waarbij niet een bepaalde bedoeling een rol speelt,\u0026rsquo; schrijft Freud. \u0026lsquo;Ik vermoed dat dit in het algemeen de voorwaarde is waaraan ieder esthetisch voorstellen onderworpen is, maar ik begrijp te weinig van de esthetica dan dat ik deze stelling zou willen volhouden.\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;Sigmund Freud, \u003cem\u003eDe grap en haar relatie met het onbewuste\u003c/em\u003e, Boom Meppel, Amsterdam, 1988, p. 110)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e36\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Viktor Sjklovski, \u003cem\u003eDe paardesprong\u003c/em\u003e, De Haan, Haarlem, 1982, p. 127.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e37\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; David Sylvester, \u003cem\u003eInterviews with Francis Bacon\u003c/em\u003e, Thames \u0026amp; Hudson, Londen, 1975 (2009), p. 11.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e38\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. ibid: 105.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e39\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Viktor von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, \u003cem\u003eLe cycle de la structure (Der Gestaltkreis)\u003c/em\u003e. Traduit de l\u0026rsquo;allemand par Michel Foucault et Daniel Rocher, Descl\u0026eacute;e de Brouwer, Bruxelles, 1958, p. 124. Eigenlijk wordt de zin ook door von Weizs\u0026auml;cker geciteerd. Enkele hypothesen in verband met bepaalde vormen van agnosie overschouwend, stelt hij vast dat de werkelijkheid, die altijd complexer is dan je kan voorspellen, de wetenschap noopt tot openheid en een groter bewustzijn van de manier waarop haar stellingen de waargenomen werkelijkheid \u0026lsquo;cre\u0026euml;ren\u0026rsquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e40\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;De organische beweging is overdacht, en dat betekent ook dat de handeling het eindresultaat bepaalt.\u0026rsquo; Ibid: 188.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e41\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Als ik een straat oversteek terwijl er een auto nadert, bepaal ik de snelheid van mijn passen niet volgens een feitelijke zintuiglijke stimulus die mijn waarneming be\u0026iuml;nvloedt, \u0026ndash; dus niet reflexmatig \u0026ndash; maar volgens de voorspelling van wat de auto zal doen\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; (\u0026hellip;) De \u0026ldquo;stimulus\u0026rdquo; die mij zou moeten verhinderen van een bepaalde snelheid aan te houden, zou de botsing zijn, die niet plaatsvindt.\u0026rsquo; Ibid: 172.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e42\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;De taak van de wetenschap zou er dus niet in bestaan verschijnselen uit te leggen, maar werkelijkheid te produceren.\u0026rsquo; Ibid: 187.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e43 \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 108-109.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e44\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Geciteerd in Jerome Bruner, \u003cem\u003eActual Minds, Possible Worlds\u003c/em\u003e, Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts and Londen, Groot-Brittanni\u0026euml;, 1986, p. 3.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e45\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Verf is zo\u0026rsquo;n buitengewoon soepel medium,\u0026rsquo; vertelt Bacon, \u0026lsquo;dat je nooit echt weet wat ze zal doen. Ik bedoel, zelfs als je haar doelbewust aanbrengt, bij wijze van spreken, met een penseel, weet je nooit wat er zal gebeuren. (\u0026hellip;) Ik weet niet echt hoe die specifieke vormen tot stand komen. (\u0026hellip;) Ik kijk ernaar, waarschijnlijk vanuit een esthetisch gezichtspunt. Ik weet wat ik wil doen, maar ik weet niet hoe. En ik kijk ernaar als een vreemdeling, niet wetend hoe die dingen tot stand gekomen zijn en waarom de tekens die terecht gekomen zijn op het doek ge\u0026euml;volueerd zijn tot die specifieke vormen.\u0026rsquo; David Sylvester, \u003cem\u003eInterviews with Francis Bacon\u003c/em\u003e, Thames \u0026amp; Hudson, Londen, 1975 (2009), p. 93 en 100. Alle kunstenaars zijn natuurlijk verschillend. Swennen houdt niet van Bacon. En hij wil niet vooraf weten wat hij wil doen. Bacon\u0026rsquo;s uitspraak suggereert dat schilderen iets te maken heeft met brede, onbeheerste gebaren, waardoor de eigenlijke, gezochte onvoorspelbaarheid aan het gezicht dreigt onttrokken te worden. Toch blijven Bacons woorden belangrijk.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e46\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Het schilderij \u003cem\u003eChinese / Yellow\u003c/em\u003e (2014) kwam misschien als volgt tot stand: Swennen bedekt een voornamelijk donkerrode ondergrond met een laag gele verf. In die natte verf trekt hij een verticale streep met een penseel met een ajuinvormige punt. Hij plaatst het penseel eerst voorzichtig op het doek, maar zodra hij begint te bewegen gaat hij iets meer duwen, zodat het spoor in de natte verf breder wordt. Als hij dit waarneemt, beslist hij de lijn op het einde dunner te laten worden. Het is een mooi spoor. Links en rechts heeft zich een mooi boordje gevormd. Hij heeft de verf eigenlijk opzij geduwd en de ondergrond weer gedeeltelijk blootgelegd. Rechts of links van het eerste spoor schildert hij een tweede, dat iets lager van start gaat. Hij besluit het ook iets korter te maken. Hij herhaalt deze beweging verschillende keren\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026nbsp;Kijkend naar het resultaat, denkt hij: \u0026lsquo;Tiens, een exotische vrucht waarvan ik de naam niet ken. Het is een Chinese vrucht.\u0026rsquo; En hij voegt er een driehoek aan toe, die door deze toevoeging een Aziatisch hoedje op een hoofd lijkt te worden. Tot slot schildert hij de Chinese pictogrammen voor de uitdrukking \u0026lsquo;Zonder titel\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;omdat hij de naam van die rare vrucht niet kent\u0026rsquo;). Tot slot nog iets over het wegnemen van verf: in \u003cem\u003eAbstrakzyon\u003c/em\u003e 1 (2016) bestaan de contouren van een \u0026lsquo;hondje\u0026rsquo; uit grote stippels die zijn ontstaan door de bovenste, nog vloeibare verflaag weg te blazen met een verstuiver. (Zie ook p. 148.)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e47 \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Swennen luistert dagelijks naar jazz. Een overeenkomst met zijn schilderijen berust vooral op drie dingen: een contrapuntisch of tegen-ritmisch denken (zoals bijvoorbeeld bij Thelonious Monk), een expressieloze, niet lyrische, bijna neutrale klank (zoals bijvoorbeeld bij Lennie Tristano) en een improviseren rond standards of populaire deuntjes, waarbij het thema af en toe terugkeert zoals een herkenbaar beeld in een gedicht van Mallarm\u0026eacute; of een tekening (of een kleur of een herkenbare textuur) in een schilderij van Swennen (bijvoorbeeld bij Albert Ayler en Sonny Rollins).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e48\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; David Sylvester, \u003cem\u003eInterviews with Francis Bacon\u003c/em\u003e, Thames \u0026amp; Hudson, Londen, 1975 (2009), p. 96.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e49\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ik hou niet van de bewering dat het bricoleren typisch is voor Belgische kunstenaars. Niet alleen omdat elke nationalistische typering van kunstenaars achterlijk is, maar ook omwille van de denigrerende connotaties van het woord bricoleren. Als je het door de ogen van L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss bekijkt, blijkt elke kunstenaar die niet vertrekt vanuit idee\u0026euml;n of intenties noodzakelijkerwijs te bricoleren.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e50\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss, \u003cem\u003eLa pens\u0026eacute;e sauvage\u003c/em\u003e, Plon, Parijs, 1962, p. 28-29. Nederlandse vertaling afkomstig uit Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss, \u003cem\u003eHet wilde denken\u003c/em\u003e, Meulenhoff, 2009, p. 37.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e51\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Bart De Baere, \u003cem\u003eWalter Swennen. N\u0026rsquo;importe quoi\u003c/em\u003e, in: \u003cem\u003eArtisti (della Fiandra) / Artists (from Flanders)\u003c/em\u003e, 1990, p. 89-92. (Franse en Nederlandse versie in bijlage.) In die tijd sprak Swennen nog over een mentaal beeld dat voorafging aan het schilderij, al vergeleek hij het, zich baserend op een opmerking van Sartre, wel al met een droombeeld van het Parthenon, waarvan je het aantal zuilen niet kan tellen. \u0026lsquo;Maar als je schildert, moet je de zuilen tellen.\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e52\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. David Byrne, \u003cem\u003eHow Music Works\u003c/em\u003e, Canongate, Edinburgh \u0026ndash; Londen, 2013, p. 15-27, 136, 148-154. Byrne beschrijft ook hoe hij met Brian Eno muziek maakte op basis van gevonden gesproken taal die aan muziek werd toegevoegd: \u0026lsquo;Door uitsluitend voort te bouwen op gevonden vocale partijen losten we ook het probleem van de inhoud op: de teksten waren niet autobiografisch en niet gebaseerd op bekentenissen. Wat de vocalisten zongen vonden we niet belangrijk. Het was de \u003cem\u003eklank\u003c/em\u003e van hun stemmen \u0026ndash; de hartstocht, het ritme, de frasering \u0026ndash; die de emotionele inhoud opleverden. (\u0026hellip;) Het doet er niet toe of de liedjesschrijver iets echt heeft meegemaakt. Integendeel, de muziek en de teksten maken de emoties in ons los, niet omgekeerd. Wij maken geen muziek, de muziek maakt ons. Misschien is dat het punt dat ik met dit boek wil maken.\u0026rsquo; (p. 158 en 162) Byrne wijst er ook op dat de textuur (de sound, het arrangement of de \u0026lsquo;groove\u0026rsquo;) van muziek altijd verwaarloosd wordt, bijvoorbeeld in verband met het auteursrecht, omdat die zaken niet of heel moeilijk vastgelegd kunnen worden in een schriftuur. (Cf. p. 166)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e53\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Zie bijvoorbeeld \u0026lsquo;Het spreekt vanzelf dat de reproducties onze visie van de kunst veranderd hebben. (\u0026hellip;) Maar, en dat is van grotere invloed, we zien in de eigenlijke visie van de kunstenaar een opleving van een picturale en sculpturale verbeelding die zich heeft aangepast aan de fotografie (\u0026hellip;) alsof de hoogste verwachting van een schilder of beeldhouwer van vandaag, behalve zijn of haar werken tentoongesteld te zien in een museum, erin bestaat ze gepubliceerd te zien in een systematisch kunstboek, bij voorkeur een ge\u0026iuml;llustreerde overzichtscatalogus. (\u0026hellip;) De catalogus is een esthetische kracht geworden.\u0026rsquo; Edgar Wind, \u003cem\u003eArt et Anarchie\u003c/em\u003e, Gallimard, Parijs, 1985, p. 102-105 en 186.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e54\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Rembrandt schilderde ook met het schildersmes, bijvoorbeeld om de textuur van een tafelkleed of een kledingstuk op te roepen. Kijkend naar de jurk in \u003cem\u003eHet Joodse Bruidje\u003c/em\u003e, dat zich in het Amsterdamse Rijksmuseum bevindt, zag ik dat hij in datzelfde schilderij ook een schilders- of paletmes heeft gebruikt om materie weg te schrapen. Ook Titiaan schilderde met het schildersmes. Over hem las ik ook dat een van de redenen waarom gedacht wordt dat het schilderij \u003cem\u003eDe dood van Actaeon\u003c/em\u003e, in de Londense National Gallery, onafgewerkt is, te maken heeft met de afwezigheid van \u0026lsquo;scumbles\u0026rsquo;: kleine, droge kloddertjes verf die hij met de vingers placht aan te brengen op het oppervlak van het schilderij (om het schilderij af te werken). Cf. Nicholas Penny, \u003cem\u003eThe Sixteenth Century Italian Paintings. Volume II\u003c/em\u003e. Venice 1540-1600, National Gallery Company, Londen. Distributed by Yale University Press, 2008, p. 248-252.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e55\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Hetzelfde gebeurde met het voorheen zeer aantrekkelijke schilderij \u003cem\u003eRed \u0026amp; Green\u003c/em\u003e. Verschillende keren heb ik meegemaakt dat prachtige schilderijen door Swennen vernietigd werden, omdat hij ze als te mooi ervoer, alsof deze schoonheid ons zou kunnen beletten hen te zien.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e56\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Een ander schilderij uit 2006, \u003cem\u003eRed Cloud\u003c/em\u003e, bevat een roos oppervlak dat bestaat uit met elkaar verknoopte, geschilderde strepen. De contouren van dit oppervlak ontstonden door alle geschilderde lijnen die zich solitair aftekenden van de achtergrond te overschilderen met wit. In \u003cem\u003eScrumble 2 \u003c/em\u003egebeurde het omgekeerde door de vuile kruispunten te bedekken en de afzonderlijke strepen te bewaren.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e57 \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. Hans Theys, \u003cem\u003eCong\u0026eacute; annuel\u003c/em\u003e, L\u0026rsquo;usine \u0026agrave; stars, Luik, 2007, p. 48.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e58\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 49.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e59\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. \u003cem\u003eEn avant la musique!\u003c/em\u003e In: Hans Theys, \u003cem\u003eWalter Swennen\u003c/em\u003e, Muhka, Antwerpen, 1994.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e60 \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. Hans Theys, \u003cem\u003eCong\u0026eacute; annuel\u003c/em\u003e, L\u0026rsquo;usine \u0026agrave; stars, Luik, 2007, p. 52.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e61\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; O. Mannoni, \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1969, p. 261.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e62\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; We kunnen hierover eindeloos speculeren, zonder iets te kunnen verifi\u0026euml;ren. Het enige wat we weten is dat de jonge Swennen op een dag tegenover zijn moeder verklaarde dat hij geen rozijnenbrood wilde eten, \u0026lsquo;parce qu\u0026rsquo;il y a des motten l\u0026agrave;-dedans\u0026rsquo;. Het doet er ook niet toe. Iedereen heeft een bezoedeld, verknipt, verstoord, collageachtig zelfbewustzijn, maar daarom wordt niet iedereen kunstenaar. Verknipt zijn is geen voldoende voorwaarde voor het kunstenaarschap.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e63\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Simon Leys, \u003cem\u003eLe studio de l\u0026rsquo;inutilit\u0026eacute;\u003c/em\u003e, Flammarion, 2012, p. 18. Leys\u0026rsquo; afkeer van pompeus woordgebruik lijkt zijn hele denken te doortrekken. Op een andere plek, waar hij vertelt dat zijn pseudoniem afkomstig is van een romanfiguur van Victor Segalen, voegt hij er meteen aan toe dat, als hij geweten had dat deze roman van Segalen opnieuw bekend zou worden, hij liever een \u0026lsquo;banaal Vlaams patroniem\u0026rsquo; als Beulemans of Coppenolle had gekozen. Aan het eind van een essay over Lu Xiaobo en de verwevenheid van de Chinese partij en de maffia, vraagt hij zich af waarom Belgische diplomaten zich alleen officieus durfden te verontschuldigen voor de diplomatieke grofheden die zijn zonen werden aangedaan. Hij had maar minder verfijnd en nederig moeten zijn, bedenk je dan, en een meer gezwollen patroniem als pseudoniem moeten kiezen. Tot slot, nu we toch bezig zijn, wil ik erop wijzen dat Leys, net als Hannah Arendt, Nabokovs boek over Gogol diens beste werk vindt. Zonder schroom sluit ik mij daarbij aan. Er bestaat geen mooier werk over het primaat van de vorm in de literatuur. Ibid: 120 en 156.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e64\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; In de jaren zeventig maakte Swennen een fotoroman over een typende dame. Het werkje bevatte maar \u0026eacute;\u0026eacute;n zin: \u0026lsquo;Je m\u0026rsquo;en vais\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;Ik ben weg.\u0026rsquo;). Een terugkerende figuur in zijn geschriften was Latham Scholes (1819-1890), de uitvinder van de eerste praktische schrijfmachine en het Qwertyklavier. Toen ik Swennen, jaren geleden, vroeg of hij van het werk van Serge Gainsbourg hield, antwoordde hij dat hij wel enige waardering kon opbrengen voor het lied \u003cem\u003eLaetitia\u003c/em\u003e, dat begint met de volgende regels: \u0026lsquo;Sur ma Remington portative / J\u0026rsquo;ai \u0026eacute;crit ton nom Laetitia / Elaeudanla T\u0026eacute;\u0026iuml;t\u0026eacute;\u0026iuml;a.\u0026rsquo; Eigenlijk is een schrijfmachine een zeer geschikt instrument om automatische, concrete po\u0026euml;zie te maken, omdat je je zo makkelijk vergist. \u0026lsquo;Ik hou ook van typemachines omdat ze het mogelijk maken een letter een beetje teveel naar links of naar rechts te plaatsen,\u0026rsquo; vertelde Swennen mij, \u0026lsquo;alsof het om een aanslag van Monk gaat.\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e65\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Max Stirner, \u003cem\u003eThe Ego and His Own\u003c/em\u003e, Verso, Londen, New York, 2014, p. 182.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e66\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. Max Stirner, \u003cem\u003eThe Ego and His Own\u003c/em\u003e, Jonathan Cape, Londen, 1971, p. 137.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e67\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Met deze techniek kan je ook modelleren, zoals C\u0026eacute;zanne heeft aangetoond, maar dat is hier niet aan de orde. Cf. Gilles Deleuze, \u003cem\u003eFrancis Bacon. Logique de la sensation\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1981 (2002), p. 131.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e68\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Clement Greenberg, \u003cem\u003eArt and Culture\u003c/em\u003e, Thames and Hudson, Londen, 1973, p. 155.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e69\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 168.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e70\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 155.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e71\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Hans Theys, \u003cem\u003eCong\u0026eacute; annuel\u003c/em\u003e, L\u0026rsquo;usine \u0026agrave; stars, Luik, 2007, p. 52.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e72\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Le r\u0026eacute;el\u0026rsquo;, dat onvoorstelbaar is, neemt dan zowel de vorm aan van de \u0026lsquo;persoonlijkheid\u0026rsquo; van Swennen als van de schilderijen zelf, die buiten ons bereik blijven. De schilderijen verdubbelen de onvatbaarheid. Ze proberen te ontsnappen aan elke zin of betekenis.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e73\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;En dat is trouwens het hinderlijke aan de schilderkunst: er iets dat denkt doorheen haar materie en haar vormen en ik heb alleen maar woorden om erover te berichten\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo; Daniel Arasse, \u003cem\u003eHistoires de peintures\u003c/em\u003e, Gallimard, 2004, p. 26.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e74\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Ik ben niet gehecht aan onderwerpen op zich of satire of sociaal engagement of om het even wat dat verzwaard is met onderwerpen of inhoud. (\u0026hellip;) Ik tolereer het onderwerp als een bijwerking van het oppervlak.\u0026rsquo; Jean-Claude Lebensztejn, \u003cem\u003eMalcolm Morley, Itineraries\u003c/em\u003e, Reaktion Books, Londen, 2001, p. 51.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e75\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Sinds zijn superrealistische jaren, toen hij het schilderen van een oceaanstomer naar levend model opgaf en verving door prentbriefkaarten, is Morley voornamelijk een schilder van stillevens geweest\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo; Ibid: 182.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e76\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson, \u003cem\u003ePainting and Reality\u003c/em\u003e, Pantheon Books, New York, 1957, p. 26.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e77\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 23.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e78\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ik werd hierop gewezen door Griet Steyaert, kunsthistorica en restauratrice van dit schilderij. Vergelijk met deze opmerking van kunsthistoricus Dirk De Vos over het \u003cem\u003ePortret van Giovanni Arnolfini en zijn vrouw\u003c/em\u003e (Jan Van Eyck): \u0026lsquo;De visie van de kamer beantwoordt aan het beeld dat men ervan zou hebben wanneer men werkelijk in de deuropening stond, zoals de twee personages in het blauw en rood. Toch is dat onmogelijk. Het perspectief is boven meer vluchtend dan beneden, de figuren lijken te dicht tegen de zoldering te komen en de luchter hangt misschien te laag, hoewel dat alles in de reflectie van de spiegel de juiste proporties lijkt terug te winnen. \u003cem\u003eDe schilderkunstige kunstgreep veroorzaakt een ongelooflijke suggestie van nabijheid en ruimtelijke compactheid\u003c/em\u003e, iets wat in de fotografie mutatis mutandis in het beste geval met een telelens wordt bekomen.\u0026rsquo; Dirk De Vos, \u003cem\u003eDe Vlaamse Primitieven. De meesterwerken\u003c/em\u003e, Mercator, Antwerpen, 2002, p. 59. (mijn cursivering)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e79\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Dirk De Vos, van wie ik deze inzichten heb overgenomen, wijst erop dat het schilderij ook een onzichtbaar tijdsverloop uitbeeldt. Cf. Dirk De Vos, \u003cem\u003eDe Vlaamse Primitieven. De meesterwerken\u003c/em\u003e, Mercator, Antwerpen, 2002, p. 77.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e80\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 10. In \u003cem\u003eHerfsttij der Middeleeuwen\u003c/em\u003e zegt Huizinga hetzelfde over de Middeleeuwse kleurensymboliek.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e81\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Dirk De Vos, \u003cem\u003eDe Vlaamse Primitieven. De meesterwerken\u003c/em\u003e, Mercator, Antwerpen, 2002,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; p. 11. In een essay over Michel Fran\u0026ccedil;ois, bracht ik deze gedachte in verband met Freud. Vorig jaar las ik dat Daniel Arasse hetzelfde heeft gedaan: \u0026lsquo;Ik was verrast te lezen in een iconografisch handboek van Vincenzo Cartari, gepubliceerd in Veneti\u0026euml; in 1556 en getiteld \u003cem\u003eDe Beelden van de goden der ouden\u003c/em\u003e: \u0026ldquo;Het moet ons niet verwonderen dat de goden der ouden met elkaar verweven zijn, dat eenzelfde god soms verschillende zaken toont en dat verschillende namen soms eenzelfde ding aanduiden.\u0026rdquo; Dat deed mij meteen aan een tekst van Freud denken\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo; Daniel Arasse, \u003cem\u003eHistoires de peintures\u003c/em\u003e, 2004, p. 309.\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. Hans Theys, \u003cem\u003eMichel Fran\u0026ccedil;ois. Carnet d\u0026rsquo;expositions 1997-2002\u003c/em\u003e, Ursula Blickle Stiftung, Kraichtal, 2002, p. 14.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e82\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Dirk De Vos, \u003cem\u003eDe Vlaamse Primitieven. De meesterwerken\u003c/em\u003e, Mercator, Antwerpen, 2002, p. 14.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e83\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 12-13.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e84\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. Daniel Arasse, \u003cem\u003eHistoires de peintures\u003c/em\u003e, 2004, p. 76.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e85\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;C\u0026rsquo;est quand le Verbe s\u0026rsquo;incarne que \u0026ccedil;a commence \u0026agrave; aller vachement mal.\u0026rsquo; Jacques Lacan, \u003cem\u003eLe triomphe de la religion\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, p. 90.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e86\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Faire un tableau, c\u0026rsquo;est transformer le non-sens en \u0026eacute;nigme.\u0026rsquo; Cf. p. 34, 264 en 282 van dit boek.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e87\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; de toucher sans cesse \u0026agrave; des interrogations obscures, sans promettre aucun \u0026eacute;claircissement.\u0026rsquo; O. Mannoni, \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1969, p. 264.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e88\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Et l\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;nigme est en fait une \u0026eacute;preuve, un d\u0026eacute;fi que le dieu jette \u0026agrave; l\u0026rsquo;homme.\u0026rsquo; Giorgio Colli, \u003cem\u003eNaissance de la philosophie\u003c/em\u003e, Editions de l\u0026rsquo;Aire, 1981, p. 84.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e89\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; O. Mannoni, \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1969, p. 255.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e90\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Behalve deze ervaring, waren er ook twee omstandigheden die Swennens wereld een zinloze of onzinnige aanschijn moeten hebben gegeven: de dood van een zusje, voor zijn geboorte, en de gevangenschap van zijn grootouders van moederszijde. Zoals ik elders schreef, kan dit overleden zusje voor Swennens moeder werkelijker zijn geweest dan het zoontje dat nadien geboren werd en dat later alles in het werk heeft gesteld om zichtbaar te worden voor zijn moeder. Swennens moeder was erg gesteld op een oom die schilder was. In de waan verkerend dat dit in de eerste plaats te wijten was aan diens kunstenaarsschap, ging Swennen ervan dromen schilder te worden. Wat hij echter niet besefte, is dat zijn moeder zich misschien verbonden voelde met deze man omdat die ook een kind had verloren\u0026nbsp;\u0026hellip; Uiteindelijk vindt Swennen een eigen benadering in de schilderkunst door het technisch-tactische denken van zijn vader, die ingenieur is, toe te passen om tot nieuwe vormen te komen. \u0026lsquo;En die vader, was die dan trots?\u0026rsquo; zou je willen vragen. Maar neen! Toen zijn echtgenote overleed, weet hij haar vroegtijdige dood zelfs aan zijn zoons zorgeloze kunstenaarsleventje. Blijkbaar vond hij dat diens leven nog een beetje nachtelijker mocht zijn.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e91\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Swennen houdt niet van de suggestie dat er een \u0026lsquo;innerlijke wereld\u0026rsquo; bestaat, vooral niet als die bovendien ook nog \u0026lsquo;uitgedrukt\u0026rsquo; moet worden. Hij heeft ook een hekel aan het begrip \u0026lsquo;identiteit\u0026rsquo;, op een manier die aan Nietzsche doet denken.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e92\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; De taal die niet alleen zijn absolute, vanzelfsprekende en geborgenheid biedende karakter had verloren, maar die ook verbonden was met een schandelijk verleden, dat paradoxaal genoeg gekenmerkt was door het verwerpen van de taal die uiteindelijk gesproken werd. En als deze taal gesproken wordt, dan blijkbaar nog gebrekkig. Want echt Frans is het niet. Als vader Swennen een opname van de eigen stem hoort, is hij geschokt door zijn accent, dat hij tot dan voor onberispelijk had gehouden.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e93\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Misschien had Swennen de vrijheid van het spelen met woorden toen nog niet ontdekt, en heeft die zich pas geopenbaard na de kennismaking met het \u0026lsquo;betekenisloze\u0026rsquo; schilderen.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e94\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Cf. O. Mannoni, \u003cem\u003eClefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026Eacute;ditions du Seuil, Parijs, 1969, p. 253. Freud neemt de gangbare mening over dat het komische effect van een grap voortkomt uit een aanvankelijke indruk van zinnigheid, die meteen nadien vervangen wordt door een indruk van onzinnigheid: \u0026lsquo;Wat wij een ogenblik lang als zinvol beschouwen,\u0026rsquo; aldus de door Freud geciteerde Kraepelin, \u0026lsquo;staat als iets totaal zinledigs voor ons.\u0026rsquo; (Sigmund Freud, \u003cem\u003eDe grap en haar relatie met het onbewuste\u003c/em\u003e, Boom Meppel, Amsterdam, 1988, p. 20.) Freud noemt dat \u003cem\u003ede zin in de onzin\u003c/em\u003e. Later komt hij hierop terug, stellend dat de grap de lust in het spelen met woorden beschermt tegen de kritiek van de rede door dit spel een ogenschijnlijke betekenis te verlenen. (Cf. ibid: 149.)\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e95\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 126.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e96\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 104.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e97\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 127.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e98\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 130.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e99\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 143.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e100\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 142.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e101\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e102\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 52.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e103\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 15.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e104\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Het godsbegrip van Herakleitos luidde als volgt: \u0026lsquo;Het Ene, de enige wijsheid, weigert en aanvaardt Zeus genoemd te worden\u0026rsquo;. De naam Zeus is aanvaardbaar als symbool, als menselijke benadering van de oppergod, maar niet als adequate aanduiding, omdat de oppergod verborgen en ontoegankelijk is. Giorgio Colli, \u003cem\u003eNaissance de la philosophie\u003c/em\u003e, Editions de l\u0026rsquo;Aire, 1981, p. 73. Colli vraagt zich echter niet af waarom een God onkenbaar moet blijven.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e105\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Ibid: 71.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e106\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Geciteerd door Colli. Ibid: 61\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e107\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Vergelijk met Colli\u0026rsquo;s opmerking (ibid: 42) dat in het Grieks de woorden voor \u0026lsquo;boog\u0026rsquo; en \u0026lsquo;leven\u0026rsquo; uit dezelfde klanken bestaan (alleen de klemtoon verschilt). Daardoor wordt de God met de boog (Apollo) de God van leven en dood. In fragment 51 heeft Herakleitos het over \u0026lsquo;een samengaan van tegengestelde krachten, zoals bij de boog en de lier\u0026rsquo;. De lier, die ook gemaakt werd uit de horens van een bok, was het tweede attribuut van Apollo. We zien waarom: omdat de gelijke klank van de woorden (boog en leven) en de formele gelijkenis tussen een boog en een lier, niet anders konden dan een bruikbaar, meerduidig beeld opleveren.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e108\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; \u0026lsquo;Tout ce qu\u0026rsquo;on peut dire, c\u0026rsquo;est que \u0026ccedil;a pense.\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e109\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Op 16 december 1957. Geciteerd door Hannah Arendt in \u003cem\u003eVita activa\u003c/em\u003e, Boom,\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAmsterdam, 1994, p. 229.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp style=\"margin-left: 12.75pt; text-align: justify;\"\u003e110\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; Paul Feyerabend, \u003cem\u003eTegen de methode\u003c/em\u003e, Lemniscaat, Rotterdam, 2008, p. 206-207.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nVertaald door Marjolijn Stoltenkamp.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n"},{"locale":"fr","short_description":"","description":"\u003cp style=\"text-align: justify;\"\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n__________\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHans Theys\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cstrong\u003eNe Quid Nimis\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAbout Walter Swennen\u0026rsquo;s Work\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe primacy of the text (Franz Kafka)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen I was studying Franz Kafka\u0026rsquo;s novels and short stories in the mid-1980s, it struck me that all attempts to interpret his work seemed to overlook the fact that it can never be reduced to one meaning or conclusion and always seems to speak of an unknowable world and impenetrable texts. At the same time, the text\u0026rsquo;s form imposes itself as necessary. In this sense, one can consider Kafka\u0026rsquo;s work to be a continuation of the Talmud and the Midrash. In the never-ending, Jewish biblical exegesis, our interaction with an unknowable world and an intangible God is doubled by incoherent, contradictory, symbolic and unfathomable texts. The texts themselves, however, are not called into question, but cherished. The core of Jewish culture consists of an essentially endless series of interpretations or hypotheses that can be formulated, questioned and tested. \u0026lsquo;When two or three Jews studied the Torah together, God was in their midst\u0026rsquo;, summarised Karen Armstrong. Strangely enough, all of this can also be read in Kafka\u0026rsquo;s texts: \u0026lsquo;Don\u0026rsquo;t misunderstand me\u0026rsquo;, says the priest to Joseph K. in \u003cem\u003eThe Castle\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026lsquo;I\u0026rsquo;m only telling you the different opinions there are about it. You mustn\u0026rsquo;t pay too much attention to them. The scripture is unalterable and the opinions are often merely an expression of despair about this.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e In the novel The Castle, in which the suspected swindler K. pretends to be the new village surveyor, the only piece of evidence upon which he can depend is a letter from an unattainable official. The clearest pronouncement about this missive is made by Olga, the messenger\u0026rsquo;s sister: \u0026lsquo;Assessing the letters correctly is impossible because their value changes continuously, they give rise to endless contradictions, and only chance decides where we stop, that\u0026rsquo;s to say, opinion is a matter of chance.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMy study of Kafka\u0026rsquo;s writings left me with the impression that his oeuvre was not an attempt to express anything more than what was in the text, which was sufficient. Everything is there, in black and white.\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e There is no need for anyone else to offer an explanation or interpretation. When I first met Walter Swennen in October 1988, I understood that the same holds true for paintings. If they have something to \u0026lsquo;say\u0026rsquo;, then it is in a material sense, not in the form of a code that needs to be deciphered.\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings articulate their form. Their thinking takes place in the way they are constructed, even if they contain images or words.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe primacy of texture (Viktor Shklovski)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen\u0026rsquo;s views on the primacy of texture have evolved considerably since the late 1980s. Back then, he was interested in a collection of essays by Viktor Shklovski, which was published in French in 1973 under the title La marche du cheval.\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e For Shklovski, a work of art does not provide a translation of an artist\u0026rsquo;s inner language into one that can be understood by the viewer. \u0026lsquo;In art\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;new forms appear to replace old forms that have lost their artistic value.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e But what constitutes this artistic value? In order to explain this, he cites Broder Christiansen who noted in his book The Philosophy of Art: \u0026lsquo;When we experience anything as a deviation from the usual, from the normal or from a certain guiding canon, we feel within us an emotion of a special nature (\u0026hellip;) Why is the lyrical poetry of a foreign country never revealed to us in its fullness even though we have learned its language? We hear the play of its harmonics; we apprehend the succession of rhymes and feel the rhythm. We understand the meaning of the words and are in command of the imagery, the figures of speech and the content. We may have a grasp of all the sensuous forms, of all the objects. So what\u0026rsquo;s missing? The answer is: differential perceptions. The slightest aberration from the norm in the choice of expressions, in the combination of words, in the subtle shifts of syntax\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;all of this can only be mastered by someone who lives among the natural elements of his language, by someone who, thanks to his conscious awareness of the norm, is immediately struck, or rather, irritated by any deviation from it.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFurthermore: \u0026lsquo;In order to transform an object into a fact of art, it is necessary first to withdraw it from the domain of life. We must extricate a thing from the cluster of associations in which it is bound. It is necessary to turn over the object as one would turn over a log in a fire.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFrom this it follows that you cannot make a work of art without shifting, repeating, multiplying or compressing things\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e in order to achieve artistry. Both the form and the \u0026lsquo;content\u0026rsquo; of a work of art are the result of technical necessity and the potential of the material available.\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e Thus Shklovski contends that Dido did not conquer an island by cutting a cowhide into a circle, because this ruse belonged to the narrator\u0026rsquo;s culture (as ethnologists and sociologists believe), but because this ruse is a \u0026lsquo;priom\u0026rsquo;: a device that facilitates the telling of a surprising story. (For how else could the narrator astonish his or her own people with this tale?) Likewise, it is nigh on impossible to write a story that does not involve love or murder. (This is an example I concocted myself.) But who do you love, or murder? Someone you know, like the postman\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e, neighbours or family members, or a random passer-by? Because the latter is highly improbable, except in The Phantom of Liberty by Bu\u0026ntilde;uel, protagonists will either kill their relatives or sleep with them. Proof of Sophocles\u0026rsquo; genius lies in the fact that Oedipus took the life of a stranger who later turned out to be his father, not in the Freudian interpretation of this priom.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf this reasoning were applied to a painting, then all so-called references to the external world (whether it be ideas or perceptible things) could be regarded as mere material which can be used to construct a painting. And this is precisely what Shklovski did. \u0026lsquo;Paintings are not at all windows onto another world\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;they are things\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;the artist clings to depiction, to the world, not in order to recreate the world, but rather to be able to use complex and rewarding material in his art.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e C\u0026eacute;zanne echoed his words. His paintings were attempts to give form, through colour, to the spatial and optical effects of the perceived world (le \u0026lsquo;motif\u0026rsquo;). For him, painting was not about the perceived object, nor about his own way of seeing (his specific \u0026lsquo;optique\u0026rsquo;, which was certainly essential), but rather about the manner in which he transformed his experiences into colour, his own way of doing things, which he described as his temperament,\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e or his \u0026lsquo;petite sensibilit\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;A picture doesn\u0026rsquo;t represent anything. It doesn\u0026rsquo;t need to represent anything in the first place but the colours\u0026rsquo;, said C\u0026eacute;zanne to Gasquet.\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e Shklovski wrote that \u0026lsquo;the outside world does not exist. Things replaced by words do not exist and are not perceived (\u0026hellip;). The outside world is outside of art. It is perceived as a series of hints (\u0026hellip;) devoid of material substance and texture.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;For a painter, colour is the only truth\u0026rsquo;, asserted C\u0026eacute;zanne.\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e And he added: \u0026lsquo;I detest all these stories, this psychology, and all this intellectual humbug about them. For God\u0026rsquo;s sake, it\u0026rsquo;s all in the paintings, painters are no imbeciles. But you have to see it with your eyes\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;with your eyes\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;do you understand!\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e18\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The whole effort of a poet and a painter\u0026rsquo;, says Shklovski \u0026lsquo;is aimed first and foremost at creating a continuous and thoroughly palpable thing, an object with a texture (\u0026hellip;) Good and bad in art is a question of texture. (\u0026hellip;) Texture is the main distinguishing feature of that specific world of specially constructed objects, the totality of which we are used to calling art.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat does this mean? What is the significance of these words? Of what do they speak? Firstly, it concerns the idea that the value of a painting is not to be sought in what it represents, but in the manner in which it was created. In the case of C\u0026eacute;zanne, it is about the way that he attempted, for example, to model by means of colour, while simultaneously trying to avoid his paintings disintegrating (become inharmonious or incoherent). In the case of Swennen, it involves the specific way in which he combines techniques, supports, materials, colours, inflated drawings, words and letters, and weaves them together in order to arrive at new objects or concrete thoughts.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe aesthetic and the artistic existence of the painting\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn the mid-1990s, Swennen discovered a reference to \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson\u0026rsquo;s work L\u0026rsquo;\u0026ecirc;tre et l\u0026rsquo;essence in Deleuze\u0026rsquo;s book on Spinoza. He also discovered Gilson\u0026rsquo;s treatise Painting and Reality, which was based on a lecture series, and the related book that followed some years later, Peinture et r\u0026eacute;alit\u0026eacute;. In these works, Gilson distinguishes between three forms of existence of a work of art: the purely physical, the aesthetic and the artistic. As a physical object, a work of art is no different from any other object. As an aesthetic object, it is dependent upon the viewer\u0026rsquo;s relationship with it. A gallery attendant, a transporter, an insurer, a painter or a philosopher will all have their own individual way of looking at a painting.\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e As an aesthetic object, the work of art presents itself to the viewer as a \u0026lsquo;modus\u0026rsquo;, as a representation, which everyone views differently. Because these representations are infinite, Gilson considers the aesthetic point of view to be a hopeless approach.\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e The aesthetic form of existence of the work of art is phenomenological in nature because it tells us nothing about the object itself, but only about how it appears to us (and how this appearance is determined by our abilities and expectations).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo define a work of art (as distinct from any other object) without using aesthetic criteria, Gilson described it as an object that is created by an artist in the context of his artistic activity. This artistic form of existence is therefore determined ontologically, from its cause. For Swennen, Gilson\u0026rsquo;s distinction implies that the artistic value of an work of art does not depend upon the eye of the beholder. It affirms the autonomy of the artist and liberates the work of art from the expectation that it needs to express or mean something.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn addition, Gilson\u0026rsquo;s distinction is obviously and inextricably linked with a profound focus on the material existence of a work of art. One of the consequences of taking an aesthetic approach towards a work of art is that people will inevitably equate reproductions or images with the authentic object, rendering the original imperceptible to the eye and diminishing the experience. Thus a leading art historian recently defined Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, in all innocence, as \u0026lsquo;final images\u0026rsquo;. Not only are paintings often experienced as \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo;, but there is also the supposition that the goal of a painter is to make images. Gilson warned of the dangers of reproduction as early as 1957. He drew attention to the folly of reducing paintings to images, and the tendency to absorb the world of art in books. He called this the \u0026lsquo;dictatorship of literature\u0026rsquo;. \u0026lsquo;A printed word is still a word\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;but a printed painting is not a painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e Moreover: \u0026lsquo;To be part of a book, a painting must rid itself of its materiality.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nReproductions have always existed. But those who once looked at an engraving of a work of art did not forget that it was an engraving. And the least that can be said about black-and-white reproductions is that they do not pretend to be true to the actual colours. \u0026lsquo;The style of painting is inseparable from the technique\u0026rsquo;, wrote Gilson, \u0026lsquo;we know that it is inseparable from matter. Eliminating the material comes close to negating the work of art. Any study of styles based upon reproductions of visual works is based upon ghosts.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThis gives rise to the misunderstanding that art historical learning and knowledge of art are one and the same thing. An understanding of art is acquired through practical effort. \u0026lsquo;Is the knowledge of art history\u0026rsquo;, said Gilson, \u0026lsquo;in any sense of the term, a knowledge of art? It certainly is knowledge about art, but its object is not art, it only is its history. (\u0026hellip;) To limit ourselves to painting, it is not rare to see parents of goodwill undertake the artistic education of their children as early as possible, dragging them to art galleries\u0026hellip; This is not the beginning of an artistic education; it is the beginning of a historical education.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAuthors such as Giorgio Agamben and Boris Groys have spoken in recent publications about the possibility of devising an approach to art that starts from the makers and the making, although they themselves have not risen to the challenge. \u0026lsquo;Perhaps nothing is more urgent\u0026rsquo;, writes Agamben, \u0026lsquo;than a destruction of aesthetics that would, by clearing away what is usually taken for granted, allow us to bring into question the very meaning of aesthetics as the science of the work of art. The question, however, is whether the time is ripe for such a destruction, or whether instead the consequence of such an act would not be the loss of any possible horizon for the understanding of the work of art and the creation of an abyss in front of it that could only be crossed by a giant leap.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003e I admire Agamben\u0026rsquo;s work, but the idea of annihilating the aesthetic approach seems somewhat childish. Let us acknowledge, instead, that it would be wise to remember that we are always viewers and that, as such, we should occasionally endeavour to look at a work of art from the perspectives of the maker, the techniques and the materials used.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nPainting whatever\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOn his fortieth birthday, Swennen decided to stop thinking of himself as a poet, and to consider himself a painter. The difference being, he told Bart De Baere, that poetry is fundamentally concerned with nostalgia, and thus with the past and transience. Painting, he continued, is about the future. I believe that we should take this statement literally, in the sense that, for Swennen, a painting is an object that needs to be lured into existence through actions. It does not pre-exist.\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFor Philip Larkin, \u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; to write a poem is to construct a verbal device that would preserve an experience indefinitely by reproducing it in whoever reads the poem.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e This was not the case for Mallarm\u0026eacute;. His poems were trying to conjure new events. But what next? How much further can you go? Paul Celan, whose thinking evolved from Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s, attempted to articulate atrocities via such hermetically sealed texts that it was impossible to imagine when reading them, or afterwards, that one had actually \u0026lsquo;seen\u0026rsquo; these things. But then? Broodthaers made poems with objects.\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e And Swennen starts to write and draw upon canvas. He begins to create paintings. And he discovers and formulates a way of painting that is not focused on the past, but takes place in the present: \u0026lsquo;Done with nostalgia, nostalgia is good for the young. (\u0026hellip;) Painting interests me, because it has nothing to do with the past. It is more epic than lyrical. Each painting is a story that unfolds in the present.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e30\u003c/sup\u003e Only now. Just for today.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nLater that same year, in October 1986, Swennen wrote a letter in which we read, \u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; succeed in painting whatever; that is the ideal. Whoever lacks experience in saying whatever, can interpret this statement as a witticism. Yet it is my ideal, the most difficult thing imaginable. (\u0026hellip;) The key: premeditation is always an aggravating circumstance.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea to try to paint whatever reminds me of Nietzsche\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;discovery\u0026rsquo; of the eternal return. It is an absurd image, but it works. If you imagine that all of your actions will be repeated infinitely, they acquire an unexpected gravitas, perhaps even meaning. Some ideas seem to strengthen our grip on reality. Of course, you cannot create ex nihilo, but if you can find a way to enable objects to \u0026lsquo;think\u0026rsquo; in your place, then you do not have to perpetually steer them\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea of painting whatever comes from the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, who replaced Freud\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;ground-rule\u0026rsquo;, whereby patients were requested to share with their analyst \u0026lsquo;whatever they thought of\u0026rsquo;, with an invitation \u0026lsquo;to say anything, without fear of stupidity\u0026rsquo;. It was an exhortation based on the rationale that the source of a patient\u0026rsquo;s discomfort is unknowable and unimaginable. We comprehend that this discomfort is intimately bound up with language, because we are speaking beings, but this is precisely the reason why language lets us down as a conscious and focused research tool. The analyst and the patient set sail on a sea of directionless, interwoven stories, shifting and inverting words, until something happens. Because the patient\u0026rsquo;s conscious use of the language is insufficient, words are considered to be sounds that can have alternative meanings. They become hollow shells, which might lead to new experiences or insights through fresh associations and connections.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen tries to make paintings that remain \u0026lsquo;unimaginable\u0026rsquo; until they actually exist. He employs materials, tools, techniques, colours, shapes, inflated drawings, words and letters, and he strives, as far as practicable, to keep them separate from a \u0026lsquo;meaning\u0026rsquo;, thus deploying them as hollow forms or signifiers. For example, letters have beautiful shapes that are quite independent of the sound they represent, or the meaning that is associated with the sound. A triangle can be read as a flag, as a roof or a hat. A top hat can be read as an inverted \u0026lsquo;T\u0026rsquo;.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;, explained Mannoni in Clefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne (1969), \u0026lsquo;was undoubtedly a poet, even though he had nothing to say; consequently, the poetry was to be found elsewhere, rather than in what was said. From the very outset, it was an experiment about language, not an existential one.\u0026rsquo; \u0026lsquo;What makes literary criticism so awkward in the case of Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;, he continued, \u0026lsquo;is that the treasure is concealed behind the meaning (as he himself has literally said) while an \u0026ldquo;ingrained habit to want to understand\u0026rdquo; compels us to search for meaning behind the words. The treasure is the richness, the jewels and the pearls of language effects in all their unembellished glory\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;puns, assonance, ambiguity, metaphors, metonyms and so forth.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e32\u003c/sup\u003e And if there is still a clear meaning to be found within the poem, says Mannoni, then that is only in order to render it tolerable as a play with words. Thanks to this recognisable element, the poet and the reader can bid a satisfied farewell to one another, because they are both free to do as they please (create something or discover a meaning).\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his essay Po\u0026eacute;sie et pens\u0026eacute;e abstraite, Val\u0026eacute;ry recounts an anecdote that Edgar Degas has conveyed about Mallarm\u0026eacute;. One day, in a conversation with the poet, Degas had emphasised his admiration for Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s mastery by mentioning that he himself had a great many ideas for poems, but was unable to develop them. \u0026lsquo;You do not make poems with ideas, my dear Degas\u0026rsquo;, Mallarm\u0026eacute; had replied, \u0026lsquo;but with words\u0026rsquo;. Two pages later, Val\u0026eacute;ry describes how a phrase, which has cropped up in ordinary conversation, has acquired a life of its own in his head. \u0026lsquo;It has obtained a value\u0026rsquo;, he says, \u0026lsquo;a value at the expense of its limited meaning\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e34\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Mannoni, one should not search for specific meanings in Mallarm\u0026eacute;, which would be hidden behind the abstract and evocative use of language, but for the effects created by the word play, syntax, spelling and typography. Whoever clings to meaning will fail to find the treasure. This not only applies to Lacanian analysis, but also to art historians, and especially to the makers of paintings and poems.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHaving been in analysis, Swennen immediately realised that his new \u0026lsquo;method\u0026rsquo; (to try to paint whatever) was little more than a crutch, because it is very difficult to say or do whatever. Of crucial importance is that this idea provided him with a way of creating work that was wholly conceived from the point of view of the maker (as opposed to that of the spectator), freed from the so-called necessity to express, share or demonstrate something.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAt the same time, we know that everything we do is inevitably coloured by the traces of our past, our education and our upbringing, the things we have seen, those we have rationalised or repressed, and the seemingly ordinary things that we might have forgotten.\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e All of our words, creations, actions, and even our inactions, speak of something, whether we like it or not. But this is hardly a problem, so long as we do not confuse their story with a so-called meaning or, worse, with an intention or an idea that might have been at their origin.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nProvoked accidents\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;For the artist\u0026rsquo;, wrote Shklovski, \u0026lsquo;the external world is not the content of a picture, but material for a picture. The famous Renaissance artist Giotto says: \u0026ldquo;A picture is \u0026mdash; primarily \u0026mdash; a conjunction of coloured planes.\u0026rdquo; (\u0026hellip;) The realistic painter Surikov used to say that the \u0026ldquo;idea\u0026rdquo; of his famous picture The Boyar\u0026rsquo;s Wife, Morozova occurred to him when he saw a black bird on the snow. For him this picture was primarily \u0026ldquo;black on white.\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e36\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;One of the pictures I did in 1946\u0026rsquo;, Francis Bacon tells David Sylvester, \u0026lsquo;the one like a butcher\u0026rsquo;s shop picture, came to me as an accident. I was attempting to make a bird alighting on a field. And it may have been bound up in some way with the three forms that had gone before, but suddenly the lines that I\u0026rsquo;d drawn suggested something totally different, and out of this suggestion arose this picture. I had no intention to do this picture; I never thought of it in that way. It was like one continuous accident mounting on top of another.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e37\u003c/sup\u003e Time and time again, Bacon does his best to impress upon Sylvester that he is striving to paint likenesses, but without using anatomically correct or mimetic elements. It is difficult, he explains, because you do not know what the searched for elements should actually look like.\u003csup\u003e38\u003c/sup\u003e Sylvester\u0026rsquo;s resistance to this idea is strange, but we need not attach much importance to his attitude here. The bottom line is that a beautiful book exists, one in which a practitioner attempts to explain that it is the act of painting itself that leads to unpredictable results.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Things always happen differently to what you expected.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e This statement, quoted occasionally by Swennen, is taken from a book by the German physician Viktor von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, who sought to develop a dynamic theory of medicine and to prove that a great many insoluble medical problems are linked to inadequate questioning which, in turn, leads to obsolete, paradoxical conclusions. A dynamic theory, he seems to say, would take account of the fact that physiological symptoms are dynamic themselves, because they respond (via the brain) to a world that is in constant movement and, in turn, is influenced by the physiological reactions in question. A scientist needs to think like a chess player, he states, a person who, even if he knows the rules, can never predict what will happen, and whose every move has an impact upon his opponent\u0026rsquo;s possibilities.\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e Chess is perhaps an unduly static example and, furthermore, one that immediately conjures up negative connotations in an artistic context. Nevertheless, it encapsulates the idea of ever-changing unpredictability. A better illustration, and one which Swennen has quoted in a different context, is of someone who crosses the street and, in order to avoid an oncoming car, either slows or quickens his pace.\u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e Unfortunately, both of these examples also describe conscious processes, while Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, instead, is concerned with the countless invisible, impalpable and unconscious agents of perception that might influence physiological processes. Moreover, he is concerned about the way in which scientists unconsciously distort the subject of their research through the processes by which it is viewed and formulated. Scientists ought to be aware of the fact that they create reality through the way they measure it or think about it.\u003csup\u003e42\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBoth of these levels can naturally be found in painting. In the first place, at the moment when a painting is created from a series of mutually influencing observations, actions and events (for example, the way in which the paint behaves: flows, covers or dries), and subsequently when an outsider thinks about the said painting and, by reducing it to a simple relationship between cause and effect (original idea and result), for example, misapprehends the work.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; Many things are only seen by humans after a learning process, and what we do not learn to see is indeed not seen\u0026rsquo;, writes Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker. \u0026lsquo;Painters and sculptors know more about this apprenticeship than physiologists.\u0026rsquo; At the same time, Weizs\u0026auml;cker continues, painters are unable to depict an epileptic seizure or a person who is suffering, because they do not know how a man moves in an objective sense (in physical or pathological terms). \u0026lsquo;When simply looked at, the body and movement are revealed differently to the artist, the tailor, the gymnast and the physician.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e43\u003c/sup\u003e In these sentences we recognise Gilson\u0026rsquo;s ideas about the phenomenological or aesthetic approach to art, and the difficulty of seeing things from the perspective of their objective \u0026lsquo;cause\u0026rsquo;. Painters, gallery attendants, removal men, removal men, insurance clerks and art historians will all see a painting differently.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf you have not learned to look at a painting as a painter, then you cannot see it as a painter. The artistic manifestation remains invisible. This is what Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker teaches us. But, of course, this is no bad thing. You can also look at a painting as a bookworm who has never made anything with his hands. But you would need to remember that a large part of it falls outside your field of vision.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhoever wishes to learn to see paintings from the standpoint of their makers, will encounter an obstacle, which we will now consider from the perspective of Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker\u0026rsquo;s ideas about the perception of a world in motion by a moving observer. \u0026lsquo;Many scholarly books have been written about poetry\u0026rsquo;, said Czesław Miłosz, \u0026lsquo;and those books find, at least in the West, more readers than the poems themselves. (\u0026hellip;) A poet who wishes to compete with these mountains of erudition should pretend to have more self-knowledge than is allowed for poets. (\u0026hellip;) Honestly, I have spent my whole life in thrall to a daemon, and how the poems he dictated came about, I have no idea.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhenever we wish to consider the artistic existence of a work of art (the work considered from the standpoint of the maker and the making), we are hindered by the fact that an artist rarely knows exactly what happened during the creative process.\u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003e He or she, in some cases, might remember something. But independent of the question as to whether or not an experience is mutilated by the memory through the process of classyfying and \u0026#39;saving\u0026#39; it, there is always the problem that \u0026ndash;because it involves a multidimensional occurrence, both in psychological and physical terms (during which the material and the maker are equally active) \u0026ndash; the creative moment can never be articulated without conferring a one-dimensional, linear and seemingly teleological character to it. One immediately discerns that ideas, intentions, decisions and criteria seem to have been involved, which might indeed all be present, even if only out of habit, but these play less of a guiding role than you might imagine, especially when, as an outsider, you think about it afterwards.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe painter does not know why he or she makes certain decisions. To make something happen? Or to avoid it? The man who slows or quickens his pace to avoid a car when crossing the street does so because of a collision that has only existed in his head. According to Swennen, Deleuze was interested in the fact that C\u0026eacute;zanne noted that a painter\u0026rsquo;s work mostly took place before putting a brush to the canvas, namely in determining what will not be painted. It goes without saying that a painter who wishes to make innovative work must constantly shy away from things (pictures, compositions, textures, connotations) that will suggest or impose a solution. You do not know what has to happen, but you know what you don\u0026rsquo;t want to happen. \u0026lsquo;A painting\u0026rsquo;, says Swennen, \u0026lsquo;changes in relation to a state that has already been reached, not to a state you want it to have in the future.\u0026rsquo; You react to what is already there, and hope to elicit an event that will carry you further along.\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nActing tactically (System D)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHerbie Hancock tells us how, during a tight concert in Stuttgart, he played a wrong chord in the middle of a solo by Miles Davis. Terrified, he covered his face with his hands. In that split second, he heard Davis hesitate for one second, and then start to play a series of notes that turned his \u0026lsquo;wrong\u0026rsquo; chord into a right one.\u003csup\u003e47\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea of a multi-dimensional space in which the artist simultaneously moves, thinks and acts brings to mind the challenges faced by dancers, actors, musicians and singers during public performances. For they too are dealing with ever-changing, never entirely predictable factors: the character and potential of their instrument; the interpretation of the score or the text; the renditions by the other players, the architecture of the theatre, the reactions of the public and so forth. The pleasure in being part of a mobile space, which is affected by your own movements, decisions and actions, undoubtedly adds to the lure of any musical, dance or theatre performance, or sport, and perhaps also painting. Not in a \u0026lsquo;gestural\u0026rsquo; way, which is what Sylvester seems to do when he compares Bacon\u0026rsquo;s actions with the speed of a tennis player\u0026rsquo;s arm (already moving before a decision has been made).\u003csup\u003e48\u003c/sup\u003e The resemblance between these several fields is not a matter of speed (or expression), but of a particular way of spatial thinking, which can also be a very slow process, as is usually the case with Swennen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA painting by Swennen occurs as the result of a limited range of interventions, usually staggered over time, and in which each new action is a response to the results of the preceding actions and events. Born from a strategic desire to provoke unimaginable and unpredictable accidents as part of a multidimensional interaction with the materials of matter and thought, this way of proceeding can only be tactical. The painter has initiated a practice that allows for accidents and manifests itself in a form of vigilance, one that ensures that the opportunities that present themselves are correctly appreciated. Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings are built up slowly, and involve long periods of apparent inactivity, during which time he primarily reviews what has emerged. This slowness is not in contradiction with a tactical approach beyond preconceived ideas or intentions.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA pertinent example of this type of tactical thinking is bricolage\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e, as defined by Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss: the accumulation of a wealth of objects, which are hoarded without any knowledge of what they might be needed for. Even though the use to which the stored object is ultimately put might be determined by an earlier function or a number of associated attributes, it is nevertheless deployed in a new and surprising manner. This entire process, in terms of both the collection and the use of objects, is tactical. Levi-Strauss employed this concept to explain the way in which myths were probably composed out of fragments of other, older cultures, where \u0026lsquo;something that used to be a goal now assumes the role of means: the \u0026ldquo;signified\u0026rdquo; becomes the \u0026ldquo;signifier\u0026rdquo; and vice versa.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e50 \u003c/sup\u003eRadical, tactical action sets no store by traditions, functions and meanings. It reacts. It puts things straight. It seeks solutions for self-inflicted problems. \u0026lsquo;My paintings\u0026rsquo;, said Swennen during a lecture in April 2016, \u0026lsquo;evolve from repair to repair, from patch to patch\u0026rsquo;. \u0026lsquo;When you paint\u0026rsquo;, he told Bart De Baere in 1990, \u0026lsquo;you should always respond to the things that penetrate from outside, something that you yourself established but a moment before. You respond to what is already there. You have brought it forth yourself, but it is there, and all you can do is enter into a dialogue with it. So it constantly changes.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e51\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThinking back to Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker\u0026rsquo;s image of a perception that influences and even shapes the observed reality (whether it concerns a pedestrian crossing the road, an observing physician, a painter at work or an art historian who scrutinises), it becomes clear that the arts have perhaps always developed in a tactical way. There are several good examples of this to be found in the book How Music Works by the musician David Byrne. He points out that certain people claim that African drums owe their unique shape to the availability of materials, which are inevitably poor, and the limited technical resources. Byrne, on the other hand, believes that the instruments are meticulously developed, constructed, handled and played in response to the physical, social and, in particular, acoustic environment. The percussion music that ensues is unsuitable for our stone churches with their echoes. In these places, however, we have developed a modal music that relies upon long, sustained notes. In a comparable way, Mozart\u0026rsquo;s chamber music needed to compete with the noise generated by a crowd in a confined space. The only way of amplifying the sound, at the time, was to expand the size of the orchestra, which is exactly what happened. The ever-increasing scale of the concert halls that were built during the nineteenth century led to greater contrasts and the use of timpani in musical compositions (in order to reach listeners at the back of the auditorium). Around 1900, it became illegal to eat, drink or make noise during a classical concert. As a result, musicians could compose much softer passages. In all probability, the solos and improvisations associated with jazz music arose from the limited musical material available and the need to keep people dancing for a whole night. Also in jazz, the banjo and the trumpet started to play a greater role because they were louder. (Throughout this development, it is also evident that musical evolutions may also have triggered spatial modifications.) Great technological advances have been made in recording techniques since the late nineteenth century and these, in turn, have influenced the way that music sounds. Byrne, for example, notes that the midi technique was more suited to the digitisation of piano and percussion, than for guitar, brass and string instruments. As a result, composers began to create more melodies and harmonies using piano chords. Another key influence is related to the emergence of insulated sound studios and the habit of recording the musicians separately, and so on.\u003csup\u003e52\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn a comparable way, developments in the art of painting were influenced through the invention of portable, enlarged miniatures, the building of museums, art education, the art trade, photography, reproduction techniques and the invention of new materials. Thus, the creation of art books featuring coloured reproductions and, later, the creation of catalogues undoubtedly influenced the development of modern and contemporary art.\u003csup\u003e53\u003c/sup\u003e Watching films and looking at works of art on laptops and smartphones has led to new paintings. With regard to Swennen, we might also suggest the comic book as an influence, but more on this later. The painter stands, therefore, in the midst of a world in movement, a milieu that is affected by his or her own actions and those of everyone else. Yet the reaction to this world does not simply occur within a psychological, actual (as in the exhibition space) or virtual space (of books, television or the Internet). It also occurs, most specifically of all, in the physical space of the painting. It is there that the totality of a world in movement is reprised in a tangible shift, a tangible condensation, a tangible confluence, a tangible obfuscation or revelation, a tangible displacement of the physical, and thus mental, boundaries. Without the development and distribution of comic books, Swennen would not have been able to learn to draw by copying the characters contained within. And if he had not learned to draw by copying comic books, perhaps he never would have developed the habit of drawing with a clear line, or later gone in search for specific techniques through which to transform inflated drawings into paintings in a \u0026lsquo;non-drawn\u0026rsquo; way.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe texture itself\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s poems are not composed of ideas, but words, then Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings are made, in the first place, out of layers of paint that are applied to a support, most usually paper, wood, canvas or metal. It is impossible to compile an exhaustive list of supports, because Swennen, unlike some artists, does not limit himself to certain practices. The first work of art that he exhibited was a beer crate filled with painted bottles. In April 2016, he created a flag by painting upon a piece of rose-coloured fabric; a week later he painted a representation of a brick wall upon a section of a door. Recently, he was given a metal stove cover as a gift because he is fond of painting on them; others have given him failed paintings and wine crates. Ten years ago, he told me that he first used to rub metal stove lids with garlic because he had heard from a restorer that this would facilitate the adhesion of the oil paint. One of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s stovetop paintings comprises a drawing that was made with an electric, metal brush. And so on\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn recent years, Swennen has also taken to painting with acrylic paint, a medium that rivals oils in terms of the range of fascinating effects that can be achieved. The greatest advantage of acrylic is that it dries quickly. As a consequence, there are things that can be done in this medium that cannot be achieved in oil paint. Thus Swennen has made, in recent years, several paintings that feature a type of stain with sharp edges; a shape that is created by removing a puddle of paint that has started to dry. Because the edges dry first, a sort of contour emerges that can be viewed as an abstract form, or a \u0026lsquo;window\u0026rsquo; within the painting. This technique makes it also possible to give letters a differently coloured edge, one that cannot be obtained in any other way: you paint over them using acrylic paint, allow this to dry for a few minutes, and then remove it again. The shorter drying time also makes it possible to take risks that, in the past, were less obvious. Swennen recently obtained a beautiful sky-blue surface by first coating a canvas with Payne\u0026rsquo;s grey and then painting over it with zinc white mixed with a touch of titanium white. In order to obtain a gradated effect in the original, dark grey surface, he tilted the painting four times: the paint flowed slowly towards the centre, becoming thinner and more transparent at the edges. Swennen likes to let the paint stream slowly over the surfaces of his works because it triggers effects that cannot be foreseen (although he tries to avoid drips, which have an expressive connotation). He told me how pleased he was with the background of the painting To Mona Mills (2015), because he had managed to paint a kind of chaos, which is impossible. He had created it by placing the canvas on the ground and applying paint and water, which he subsequently attempted to mix using a squeegee, all the while taking great care to minimise the amount of water and paint that trickled over the edge of the canvas.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA technique that Swennen has developed for the transfer of drawings or letters onto a painting is to first apply the paint with the brush, or directly from the tube, onto a plastic sheet. Using this sheet, the image is then printed onto the painting. The first painting in which this technique was used contained a crude representation of a spruce-fir that had been applied with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife. Because he wished to add a letter to the uneven surface, which would be nigh on impossible using a brush, he first painted the letter onto a sheet of very thin, flexible plastic film. Using a wad of fabric, he was able to press this film into the chinks of the underlying paint. Not only are the effects of this printing technique always different, they are also inexplicable if you don\u0026rsquo;t know how they were made.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAnother specific texture in Swennen\u0026rsquo;s oeuvre stems from his fondness for painting with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife, a technique that he borrowed from Claire Fontaine, with whom he took painting lessons for three years, beginning in 1962. Fontaine painted schematised landscapes in the style of Nicolas de Sta\u0026euml;l in which a tree, for example, is depicted by a rectangular green surface that has been smeared onto the canvas with a knife. From her, Swennen learned that paint can be applied with the knife and then subsequently worked with a paintbrush.\u003csup\u003e54\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife is often used to create a layer which clearly distinguishes itself from the other layers and, via its deviating texture, demonstrates the collage-like, interwoven structure of the painting. In addition, this thicker layer, no matter how it is applied (whether it is dabbed, patch by patch, or smeared in a sweeping gesture), can also provide a diverting optical effect. In \u003cem\u003eBlitz\u003c/em\u003e (2015), a broken yellow stripe, reminding some of lightening, visually comes to the fore. Because this stripe was applied with a trowel between two parallel strips of tape, it bears a close resemblance to the actual tape, which gives rise to an attractive sculptural reversal that is as deceptive as it is funny. For another recent painting an effect was created by repeatedly cleaning the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife against the canvas using broad, sweeping gestures. Executed in different types of red, the result was immediately reminiscent of Diana\u0026rsquo;s red tunic in The Death of Actaeon by Titian (National Gallery, London). Later, as is Swennen\u0026rsquo;s wont, he tempered this stunning effect by applying a layer of white.\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e The work was called \u003cem\u003eTransformations\u003c/em\u003e (2016), referring to the habit to whiten shop windows during a renovation.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo date, Swennen has only used the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife to apply oil paint, principally because he has not yet found a satisfying technique to thicken acrylic paint. This brings us to another textural difference in his paintings, which has nothing to do with the manner in which the paint is applied, but with the employed paint itself. In addition to the difference between oil and acrylic paint, we must also take account of the numerous additives that can lend the paint a glossier, duller, coarser, smoother, more fluid or viscous texture. The addition of oil makes the paint shinier, whereas white spirit deadens its sheen. One of the new qualities of acrylic is that you can dilute it with water and use it to make transparent layers (glazes), which enable the artist to gradually build up his paintings in a quest for the perfect value of a tone. In some of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s works, coffee was added to the white background in order to render it more mottled. Sometimes, he has added ink, gouache, cigarette ash or dust from the vacuum cleaner to the paint. (I quote from memory, this is by no means an exhaustive list.) When, in 2006, he started to paint on top of another artist\u0026rsquo;s abandoned paintings (paper collages on canvas), he attacked them with a broom. As a result, small scraps of paper ended up being mixed into the semi-abraded paint.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAs a final example of the textural differences that Swennen makes use of in his paintings, I would like to discuss the work entitled Pirate (2007), which is based upon a gouache that he painted when he was ten years old. The work consists of three individual panels. The two panels on the left-hand side are made up of two different \u0026lsquo;backgrounds\u0026rsquo; that were waiting in the studio. There are always \u0026lsquo;backgrounds\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;des fonds\u0026rsquo;) in abeyance. Often, they are so beautiful that you hope the artist will leave them untouched. In this particular case, he felt so inclined, and came up with the perfect solution upon noticing that, when placed together, the two works were the same length as the right-hand panel (a piece of board with unusual proportions for a painting). When we take a closer look at the latter, we notice that certain sections of the \u0026lsquo;drawing\u0026rsquo;, such as the lines that suggest the lapels of the jacket, are not painted, but created by leaving them unpainted. This does not hold true for the pirate\u0026rsquo;s shirt collar, however, which is a touching invention of the young boy. The contours of the top of the boots, on the other hand, are indeed \u0026lsquo;drawn\u0026rsquo;, while their surface is spared: another pleasing reversal, which reminds us of the fact that Swennen studied etching at the academy. The drawing contains a somewhat awkward but poignant spatial suggestion, which is enhanced by the splayed legs, the semi-obscured right arm, and the sabre that runs behind the legs. We also discern three solid surfaces, which together provide an additional, haptic or pictorial space: the yellow hilt, the white area of the face and the pale blue \u0026lsquo;background\u0026rsquo;, the latter of which was painted around the figure afterwards. Finally, there are the small black discs that float before the pirate, and which were applied to the places where the board, in the area occupied by the figure, contained knots; yet another example of haptic, pictorial depth. Swennen told me that these black spots reminded him of bullet holes, which also allows us to perceive the figure as a paper human target on a shooting range.\u003csup\u003e56\u003c/sup\u003e Thanks to the material reason for the placement of the black disks, however, we understand that this final \u0026lsquo;image content\u0026rsquo; is not what lies at the basis of the painting\u0026rsquo;s construction. It is the result of a series of successive decisions that are linked to the creation of a beautiful mati\u0026egrave;re, the transformation of an existing drawing that possessed certain physical (and emotional) qualities, the application of graphic reversal techniques in terms of transferring the drawing, the creation of a haptic effect through the addition of areas in white, yellow, light blue and black, and the completion of the painting by uniting three different panels.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFiguration and abstraction\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn 1990, Swennen explained to Bart De Baere that he had struggled for some time with the concepts of figuration and abstraction, but had reached the conclusion that it was a false problem \u0026lsquo;because a painting is always an image of a painting. No matter what it depicts, it is always about a painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e57\u003c/sup\u003e Nowadays, I struggle to understand what he might have meant by that first sentence. I think we can say that things were still confused. In a text from 1994\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e58\u003c/sup\u003e, written after several conversations with the artist, I argued that Swennen created paintings in which figuration and abstraction could meet, and which abolished the so-called differences between the two approaches. In 2007, I refined this further by suggesting that this encounter was made possible through the un-modelled, perspective-less space that is specific to Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings.\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e I still believe this to be true, even today, although I would no longer express it in such a way; simply because the terms are too restrictive to help us think about painting. They prevent us from seeing, in the first place, that Swennen weaves textures, and that it is the materials he uses, be they rectangles, drawings or letters, which primarily determine where to apply paint. That these drawings and letters might also mean something, and can evoke images, narratives, thoughts and feelings within the viewers (and Swennen), and at the same time form part of the painting\u0026rsquo;s genesis, is equally important. But the terminological distinction between figuration and abstraction causes us to forget that it always boils down to material additions. All that the distinction between figuration and abstraction means, ultimately, is that one thing is recognisable and \u0026lsquo;says\u0026rsquo; something while the other does not. But colours, shapes and textures can also say something; they just seem to speak less loudly.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nComposition\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSome painters try to obtain balanced compositions, while other painters try to counter any balanced composition that comes too easily. Swennen endeavours to lure into existence compositions he could not possibly have conceived in advance, by applying both intrinsic and external parameters. If we look at Spider (small) (2014) and Spin van Marius (Marius\u0026rsquo; Spider, 2014), two paintings based on a square drawing by Swennen\u0026rsquo;s grandson Marius, we see that the first time he transferred the drawing to the square cover of a cooker. The second time the part of the canvas that falls outside the square surface was painted blue. How unexpected to find this surface at the top of the painting! In \u003cem\u003eStolen Name\u003c/em\u003e (2016) the vertical lines and then the west-sloping lines of letters were overpainted. (Hence the image of the compass needle.) In \u003cem\u003eLe diamant de Juju\u003c/em\u003e (2016) a drawing is festooned with those short lines used to add force to an extraordinary apparition in a comic strip. Some of these little lines are used as borders of the last layer of paint. In the painting \u003cem\u003eIn the Kitchen\u003c/em\u003e (2016) the proportions of the canvas don\u0026rsquo;t correspond to the proportions of the imitated drawing (a found object). Consequently, the reproduced drawing overlaps with the painted, red border, which follows the proportions of the canvas. The resulting effect reminds us of careless printing. Thus, many compositions comply with laws or agreements which fall outside the field of aesthetics. But not all of them. In \u003cem\u003eMature\u003c/em\u003e (2016) a certain yellow colour appears three times: once as the imitation highlight of an abstract, oval form, once as an oval form and once as a strip of colour. When I point to the amusing highlight and the equally amusing recurrence of the colour in the strip of colour, the painter tells me that Claire Fontaine believed every colour used should reappear somewhere else in the same painting. The oval, he added, was the simplest, non-angular form he could make if he wanted to obtain a nicely edged area with a painter\u0026#39;s knife.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Scrumble 2 (2006), the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife was used to hide the bad parts of a painting (a dirty criss-cross of different coloured lines).\u003csup\u003e60\u003c/sup\u003e The resulting composition is reminiscent of the way in which gallery walls are repaired after an exhibition: all of the holes are filled and hidden under a smooth, rectangular plane. Because this \u0026lsquo;composition\u0026rsquo; is controlled by an unpremeditated, but ultimately inevitable structure, Swennen calls this an \u0026lsquo;autogenetic\u0026rsquo; composition.\u003csup\u003e61\u003c/sup\u003e Thus we see how the particular state of a painting (coloured criss-crossing lines that form dirty junctions), combined with a certain technique (the application of paint with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife), can result in a non-random, new composition.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDrawings\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMany of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings consist of enlarged reconstructions of found or self-made drawings, of which the figurative elements are usually described, even by the artist himself, as \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo;. I suspect he does this because, of course, they are not drawings: they are not drawn, but reproduced with paint. Some authors think that the drawings are derived from comic books, but this is rarely the case. Nor can you say that they resemble \u0026lsquo;comic-book drawings\u0026rsquo; because, after all, not every comic book is drawn using clear lines. The drawings used by Swennen nearly always possess great linear clarity (without shading or shadows), and often feature solid silhouettes. One of the overriding characteristics is their lack of perspective or modelling, so that they seem to exist within a flat space. If the drawings depart from this formula, then it is because the very first paintings are an exception to this \u0026lsquo;rule\u0026rsquo; (see for instance the reproduction on p. 164) or because the used drawing was found and contains a particular flaw. For example Nan\u0026#39;s Still Life (2015), which is based on a drawing by Swennen\u0026rsquo;s wife, in which the splitting of the word \u0026lsquo;fran\u0026ccedil;ais\u0026rsquo; into syllables indicates that the draughtsman was thinking instead of looking. (As a comment, Swennen added a blunt shadow.) Some drawings come from book covers, game boxes, stickers, packaging and so on. Others are derived from doodles or related, small-scale works on paper.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nCertain writers enumerate and organise these drawings by theme, in much the same way that others add up the number of metaphors in the work of Mallarm\u0026eacute;. Of this, Mannoni writes: \u0026lsquo;The mistake of thematic analysis lies in (\u0026hellip;) the fact that images are approached in the first place, as a signified, and only afterwards as a signifier, when it\u0026rsquo;s too late.\u0026rsquo; And a few pages later he adds: \u0026lsquo;We cannot imagine how thematic analysis (\u0026hellip;) can give an account of irony.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e62\u003c/sup\u003e Some exegetes see, for example, an image of a king holding a lit cigarette in the vicinity of his genitals. Others see a flat drawing based on a playing card that has been embellished with the depiction of two moving objects: a burning, glowing cigarette and a plume of smoke. Some people see, for example, a ghost. Others see a figure whose non-painted eyes offer a glimpse of the painting\u0026rsquo;s background. As I mentioned above, in a note, Swennen says today that he might add \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo; to his paintings to satisfy the viewer, so that he can go on painting (just like Mallarm\u0026eacute; who, according to Mannoni, introduced recognisable images into his work just to be able to play with words). This remark, however, ignores the role played by the drawings and letters in the creation of the painting, as coincidental but essential indicators of where to apply the paint. In this sense, it concerns very literal \u0026lsquo;signifiers\u0026rsquo;: empty shapes that can be filled with colours and textures.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOf course, none of this means that the drawings cannot, or may not, mean anything to the artist and viewer. It is precisely this unusual convergence of forms, textures and meanings that lends Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings their richness. What it amounts to, however, is the complex interweaving of all these layers, and the continuous attempts to do this in a new way for each painting. Each painting is trying to be different; each painting strives to disclose, once more, how it is made; each painting endeavours, at the same time, to remain beyond our reach.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nColour\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen mainly uses black, white, grey, yellow, light blue, red and variations of red, such as orange, English red and brown. Very often he mixes these colours with small amounts of other colours to make them slightly impure. \u0026lsquo;There are no primary colours\u0026rsquo;, he once told me. In practice, this means that if a type of paint contains a shade that is reminiscent of the primary colours, it will suffice. In retrospect, you could say that Swennen mostly paints with the colours of Mondrian, although he has replaced dark blue with light blue. I write \u0026lsquo;in retrospect\u0026rsquo; because this was probably not the intention, and perhaps more the result of a desire to ude mainly the primary colours (or shades that resemble them). Sometimes, when finishing a painting, he spoils the applied colours. Two Egyptians (2015) was finished by adding colours directly from the tube, mixing them with water and afterwards cleaning the canvas, scrubbing more around the figures. The red spot resembling a love bite was an unforeseen result of this action. A few years ago, Swennen set himself other boundaries by defining a colour spectrum, the shades of which he would always use in the same order. This spectrum was hung on the studio wall in the form of a strip, to remember the order. It is typical of how he works: he defines rules, endeavours to apply them and then cheats. The use of a limited number of colours lends great consistency to his oeuvre, which makes a vivid and uncluttered impression. It is precisely these limitations that facilitate an impressive, but readable diversity.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWords and letters\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn earlier texts, I pointed out that when Swennen was five, his parents decided to speak another language and send him, accordingly, to a different school. This meant that, from one day to the next, his world became incomprehensible. In all probability, the spoken language must have made an absurd and hostile impression upon him. And at school, the written language probably seemed very strange, or at least at first, when he was unable to link the written characters with a familiar sound or meaning. These circumstances have had an undeniable impact upon his relationship with language, but I do not think they provide a sufficient explanation for his virtuosity.\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The Belgian is afraid of conceitedness\u0026rsquo;, Simon Leys writes in an essay on the \u0026lsquo;belgitude\u0026rsquo; of Henri Michaux, \u0026lsquo;especially the conceitedness of spoken or written words. Hence his accent, and the famous way of speaking French. The secret is this: Belgians think that words are conceited.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e64\u003c/sup\u003e While Leys has a point, he is also mistaken. What seems to characterise the Belgians (and not only French-speakers, but also the Flemish with their supposedly droll kind of Dutch) is probably common to all people who speak or write a language which, in a different geographical location, is linked to a dominant culture (with its specific social, economic and political influence). This place need not be nearby, like France and the Netherlands in the case of the Belgians. I suspect that some English-speaking inhabitants of North America, in centuries past, deliberately rejected the standard linguistic norms in their use of the language, just as today, Canadians, Australians, and English-speaking South Africans and Indians will resist the influence of American English. Wherever an element of language is associated with social, economic, political or cultural dominance, a deviant version will emerge. This is certainly true in the ghettos of the United States, also in Brittany, Alsace, Provence, the French Basque Country and French-speaking Canada. A deviating use of language expresses a different set of values.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen Swennen speaks, you sometimes hear that his Belgian accent becomes more pronounced. In sociolinguistics, the act of switching to a language variant that deviates more from the norm is described as downward divergence. It is used, for instance, to emphasise the pedantry of your interlocutor. Swennen, who is fascinated by argot (as in French translations of American crime novels, for example), is annoyed by the fact that his French-speaking acquaintances listen to French radio stations. Deviating language is not irrational, it just gives shape to a different set of values. What Leys noted is a phenomenon that undoubtedly exists in China as well, but which we cannot hear. You can only probably hear it in your own language, just as you can only truly grasp literary works that are written in your mother tongue. And herein lies the truth of Leys\u0026rsquo; remark, for a poetic language can only be appreciated as a deviation from a standard language. Every literary language is perverse, capricious or, at the very least, unusual.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat Swennen does with words is wonderful. He allows them to collide and merge, he isolates or suppresses them, turns them upside down or mirrors them (or mirrors only the letters, which remain in the usual order). He deploys all of the techniques described by Freud and Shklovski: shifting, inversion, duplication, repetition and condensation.\u003csup\u003e65\u003c/sup\u003e He uses words for their sound and for their shape, and he uses them because of their meaning. He lets them turn and tilt, he uses and abuses them, he tells lies and he says what he thinks. Language has become form: a collection of unreliable sounds that can always mean something else, as in our dreams, but also an almost endless collection of typographies and characters (Roman, Cyrillic, Chinese\u0026hellip;). We see the words, and we read them. We think we see words, but in fact we see coloured surfaces that no \u0026lsquo;abstract\u0026rsquo; painter could ever imagine or justify. \u003cem\u003eConnard\u003c/em\u003e (2014) contains three invectives, in which some of the letters are upside down or mirrored. \u0026lsquo;I thought that if I made the words a little less legible\u0026rsquo;, Swennen told me, \u0026lsquo;I could buy the painting a few seconds of extra time during which it could prove itself. Because when people recognise an image in a painting, or read a word, they walk straight on past. Now, the husband will pause for a few seconds to decipher the words, so his wife will have just enough time to poke him in the ribs with her elbow and whisper: \u0026ldquo;Look at the beautiful colours!\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhoever looks at these fragmented remains of our languages might consider them to be a form of resistance to rationality and related, life-threatening moral forces. This would reflect the views of Freud, who believed that fulfilling sexual experiences were incompatible with the conditions of civilisation, making it mandatory for our unconscious urges to resort to secrecy (for instance, by hiding the truth in illogical jokes). If we look at portmanteaus such as \u0026lsquo;famillionaire\u0026rsquo; (Heine quoted by Freud) or \u0026lsquo;beggar-millionaire\u0026rsquo; (Shklovski) they might indeed seem illogical but, in my view, they are constructed according to laws which are also used by \u0026lsquo;rational thought\u0026rsquo;, or any other form of productive thinking. They are the result of the same \u0026lsquo;condensation\u0026rsquo; that leads Francis Bacon to tell Sylvester that Michelangelo and Muybridge have become one and the same artist in his mind. Ultimately, even the laws of nature, which are amongst the highest fruits of rational thought, are forms of condensation, because they bring together at least two different physical units in the form of an equation. It does not matter how you arrive at an idea or a formulation, so long as the thought or formulation bears fruit.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf we do not consider these language games to be an irrational opposition to reason and morality, but as an unreliable, stubborn, irritable, stained, tainted, messy, quirky, idiosyncratic and independent way of thinking that, above all, is inextricably linked to the material concepts of the painting, then we see a connection with the philosophy of Max Stirner, from whom Swennen recently gained a new maxim: \u0026lsquo;Mein Widerwille bleibt frei\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;My disinclination remains free.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e66\u003c/sup\u003e In contrast to general reasoning, Stirner defended the right to a personal \u0026lsquo;unreason\u0026rsquo; which was real to him, because he himself felt real. Heralding Gombrowicz\u0026rsquo;s plea for immaturity and opposition to Form, he wrote: \u0026lsquo;The thought of right is originally my thought; or, it has its origin in me. But when it has sprung from me, when the \u0026ldquo;Word\u0026rdquo; is out, then it has \u0026ldquo;become flesh\u0026rdquo;, it is a fixed idea. Now I no longer get rid of the thought; however I turn, it stands before me. Thus men have not become masters again of the thought \u0026ldquo;right\u0026rdquo;, which they themselves created; their creature is running away with them.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen\u0026rsquo;s recalcitrant language can also be set against the background of Lacan\u0026rsquo;s belief that we are made of language, and that language has alienated us from both our bodies and the world. Man would be a \u0026lsquo;language-being\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;parl\u0026ecirc;tre\u0026rsquo;) with a hopeless, irreparably distorted sexuality, exiled in a world of unreliable, manipulative words, which cannot touch the core of reality, le r\u0026eacute;el. Reading Lacan is a wonderful, amusing adventure, and it is not without significance that Swennen has been influenced by him, but I prefer not to delve into this here.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAbout flat paintings and pictorial space\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe lack of modelling and (correctly applied) perspective in the drawings used by Swennen would seem to suggest that he wishes to create flat paintings. Strictly speaking, this is not the case. His paintings are not all-over or polyfocal. Nor do they evoke a flat image that seems to hover in front of the canvas, as wished for by Greenberg. So what does, in fact, happen? The drawings themselves are flat, constituting one of the planes that are combined into a painting. Sometimes these planes seem to situate themselves at different distances from the viewer, thus creating a pictorial space, but at other times not.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his book on Bacon, Deleuze distinguishes between the optical and haptic use of colour. Optical use of colour segues from light to dark, includes shades (values) of the same tone, and is used in what Greenberg called \u0026lsquo;sculptural\u0026rsquo; painting (which reached its apogee in the seventeenth century). Haptic use of colour does not involve shades of the same tone, but juxtaposes different colours in the knowledge that their \u0026lsquo;cold\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;warm\u0026rsquo; character will create an impression of lightness or darkness, and closeness or distance.\u003csup\u003e68\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBecause Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings lack perspectival elements and do not rely upon the optical use of colour (values of the same tone, shadows), unless as a joke (for example, the shadow of a letter, or the shadows in found drawings which are usually selected because they contain a flaw), one might say that his work is an innovative variation on the artistic traditions that consciously renounced \u0026lsquo;modelling\u0026rsquo; (by way of lighting effects) as an approach to reality, and that \u0026lsquo;went on reducing the fictive depth of painting\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e69\u003c/sup\u003e Greenberg noted that such a deliberate negation of the \u0026lsquo;realistic\u0026rsquo; approach had only occurred twice: first in Byzantine art and, secondly, as a result of the radical, late-Impressionist paintings (including those by Monet) that can be considered as the first \u0026lsquo;all-over\u0026rsquo; paintings. According to Greenberg, painters such as C\u0026eacute;zanne, Gauguin, Matisse, Picasso, Braque and Klee were the first to adopt this approach, with Mondrian following later. But since it aimed \u0026lsquo;to reaffirm the flatness of pictorial space\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e70\u003c/sup\u003e, the approach was only fully realised, in his view, in the work of the painters that he personally championed such as Pollock, Rothko, Newman and Still.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSome people claim that Mondrian strove to make \u0026lsquo;flat\u0026rsquo; paintings: works in which, to the eyes of the viewer, the blue and red surfaces do not appear to recede or advance but, thanks to the addition of a black or grey grid, all of the coloured fields appear to situate themselves at the same pictorial depth. I do not know if this was actually Mondrian\u0026rsquo;s intention because I have not read his writings, but it is undeniably true that the red and blue do indeed seem to be at the same depth in some paintings. For Greenberg, however, Mondrian was but a precursor, whose work but signalled all-over painting: \u0026lsquo;Dominating and counter-posed shapes, as provided by intersecting straight lines and blocks of color, are still insisted upon, and the surface still presents itself as a theater or scene of forms rather than as a single, indivisible piece of texture.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e71\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGreenberg did not appreciate paintings in which certain areas stood out and thereby resembled a \u0026lsquo;figure\u0026rsquo;, or those in which patches of colour were strewn around in a contrapuntal way. Nor did he like paintings that seemed to retreat into the wall, like a window. He preferred paintings in which the \u0026lsquo;pictorial effect\u0026rsquo; was uniformly dispersed and appeared to hover in front of the canvas.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf we use Greenberg\u0026rsquo;s criteria as a way of better understanding Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, we find that the artist does, in fact, play with all of these elements. The absence of modelling and (correctly applied) perspective might create the impression that Swennen wants to make flat paintings, but they often contain prominent elements that seem to leap to the fore. He does not use modelling or perspectival depth, but evokes pictorial depth through the haptic use of colours (tonal contrasts). In a conversation that was published in 2007, he says: \u0026lsquo;I have always found the condemnation of illusion and depth to be deplorable. Even a blank canvas has depth. The good thing about painting is that you can decide whether or not you want to utilise that depth.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e72\u003c/sup\u003e In April 2016, when Swennen and I looked at an unfinished painting that contained four different shades of white, it seemed obvious that one of these, an ivory-toned hue, came more to the fore than the others. I asked Swennen if this was intentional, and whether he had observed the effect. Twice he answered negatively. If anything, he was annoyed by the question. Didn\u0026rsquo;t I know that paintings are flat? And that they have a texture like puff pastry?\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe point is that Swennen will always oppose the habit of confusing the result of a practice with a so-called intention. It is not because a finished painting contains a certain image that this image found itself at the origin of the painting. The same applies to texture and pictorial space. It is certainly enlightening to see Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings from the stance of Greenberg, but at the same time we must realise that what we see has never been pursued by the painter as part of a programme. He has always tried to paint whatever. Rejecting any kind of programme in terms of content or personal expression,\u003csup\u003e73\u003c/sup\u003e Swennen has devised a free way of working in order to come up with unprecedented paintings. Even if we have the impression that he is \u0026lsquo;playing\u0026rsquo;, this is not the result of an intention. His paintings are not anti-perspectival or anti-modelling in a programmatic way, but they are, in a very concrete sense, pro-painting. They are not the result of intentions, but the results of a number of parameters that he uses to construct his painting-objects.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat are these parameters? Actually, it mainly comes down to habits. In 1990, he told Bart De Baere that his drawings remind us of comic books because he learned to draw by copying them. For the specific \u0026lsquo;space\u0026rsquo; of his paintings, it seems essential that Swennen uses a clear line and makes line drawings that do not suggest volume (the opposite of Chinese painting). But he himself will never call it a clear line. He will never formulate it as an objective. It is simply a habit that can be put to good use.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo me, Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings reflect\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e74\u003c/sup\u003e upon the possibilities of flat paintings and pictorial space. This thinking is free. It is not bound to intentions, stylistic principles, or a programme. It stems from the radical principle of painting whatever, from a number of habits and from a tactical approach that allows for provoked accidents.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nStill Life\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Swennen\u0026rsquo;s work we find moving cars, smouldering cigarettes, falling men and sprinting athletes. I always see these figures as funny allusions to the impossibility of representing movement in a painting.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMalcolm Morley -\u0026ndash; a painter whom Swennen admires (for instance because of the white borders, which indicate that he does not depict three-dimensional space in his work, but two-dimensional images)\u003csup\u003e75\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026ndash; describes his paintings, which are based on models, postcards and other pictures, as still lifes.\u003csup\u003e76\u003c/sup\u003e Gilson considers the still life to be a genre \u0026lsquo;in which painting reveals its very essence and reaches one of its points of perfection.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e77\u003c/sup\u003e He describes The Intervention of the Sabine Women by David as an unsatisfactory attempt to suggest movement. But probably, he continues, this was never the artist\u0026rsquo;s intention. Accepting the immobility of paintings, he probably sought to evoke an illusion of movement through a play with lines: not the depicted people move, but the composition. This effect is even more pronounced, says Gilson, when we compare David\u0026rsquo;s painting with Vel\u0026aacute;zquez\u0026rsquo;s The Surrender of Breda. \u0026lsquo;In this masterpiece\u0026rsquo;, he writes, \u0026lsquo;there is hardly a trace of motion left. Time seems to have come to a standstill. Human beings themselves, however well painted they may be, are only second in importance to the patterns of the lines and to the balance of the masses.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e78\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen I recently asked Swennen to elucidate two paintings that contain the image of a propeller, he said that they were still lifes, because they were based on an existing fan. In \u003cem\u003eSchroef\u003c/em\u003e (2014), we discern a number of white spots along the edge of the blades. Why are they there? Ruminating upon the existence of left- and right-handed propellers, Swennen had the idea of covering the image of a propeller (an outline drawing) with a white drawing of the same object, but mirrored. Not happy with the result, he erased the second outline. At the points where it intersected with the first outline, which was still wet, the paint could not be erased, so the white spots remained. Why a propeller? Probably because the object that ended up in Swennen\u0026rsquo;s studio has a pleasing shape. Perhaps because it reminded him of his father, who was an engineer and worked in the docks for a long time. Perhaps because the propeller is an invitation to engage in bricolage. Finally, because a propeller is essentially a moving object and paintings cannot depict motion. The movement is not depicted, but it is contained within the painting, which bears traces of an obliterated gesture.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe imperfect perspective\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe irreverent way in which Swennen deals with perspective is reminiscent of the tricks that Rogier van der Weyden employed in The Seven Sacraments Altarpiece and The Descent from the Cross. In the first painting, the central figures are much larger than the others. If we compare the size of Christ with the architecture, he would, in actuality, be five metres tall. The result of van der Weyden\u0026rsquo;s trickery is an impression of great proximity that, in an incomprehensible way, seems quite obvious.\u003csup\u003e79\u003c/sup\u003e In the Descent, the entire narrative takes place within an altarpiece cabinet that is approximately a shoulder-width deep. Yet this scene plays itself out in five successive layers: closest to the viewer is the apostle John, who supports Mary. Behind Mary, already a little deeper within the scene, we see the body of Christ, which has been passed to Joseph of Arimathea and is already being carried away by Nicodemus. Behind these men stands the cross and, deeper still, the servant who, on top of a ladder, has freed Christ and lowered him. While this servant should, by rights, be situated two metres further behind, the nail that he holds in his right hand advances out of the altarpiece cabinet.\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e This use of perspective to create a phantasmagorical space probably had a symbolic function related to a specific world view.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to the art historian Dirk De Vos, there was no clarity of meaning to the symbolism of the Middle Ages. \u0026lsquo;Everything could be used or interpreted in multiple directions. Indeed, the multifaceted world was God\u0026rsquo;s Being in multiple disguises. If we read the philosophical, theological or moralistic tracts, or the mystical writings, then we are faced with a profusion of images and symbolism, as the only means by which to communicate the unspeakable. (\u0026hellip;) As the mastery of this technique advanced, insight into the world became increasingly complex and ambiguous, which would ultimately lead to divine revelation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e81\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Erwin Panofsky\u0026rsquo;, writes De Vos, \u0026lsquo;has called this \u0026ldquo;disguised symbolism\u0026rdquo; because of the underlying events that the depiction does not immediately divulge. Through too literal detective work into these symbols, however, this term often leads to a system of iconographic statements that actually negate the spirit of the visual revelation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e82\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nNo one knows the technical and stylistic origins of the oil painting techniques used by the Flemish Primitives. Sometimes it seems as though these painters were possessed of a sudden urge to depict polychrome sculptures in a flat manner, at other times it would seem that the similarities between these two art forms is more related to the desired ambiguity of the paintings. According to De Vos, the paintings probably originated out of the flourishing studios of the Flemish-French miniature painters, whose \u0026lsquo;nature and perfection can explain for (the beginnings of) panel painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e He points to formal factors such as the \u0026lsquo;illusionistic, anti-decorative and anti-hieratic evolution of the miniature: the small size, for example, that implies a clarity that intensifies the possibilities of imagery; the fact that a miniature always resembles a \u0026ldquo;window\u0026rdquo; as a result of the prominent frame, which serves to highlight the illusory nature of the image.\u0026rsquo; Anyway, whatever its origin, \u0026lsquo;the independence of the painted image has finally manifested itself in material form. A portable \u0026ldquo;wall unit\u0026rdquo; was created, especially designed to house a painted representation. It is a form common to fifteenth-century painting: a filled and mounted panel, as smooth and flat as a mirror, set like a piece of glass in a window frame, a kind of flat viewing box that allowed the visual enchantment to be carried from room to room.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e84\u003c/sup\u003e In other words, these paintings were not born of a desire to detach frescoes from their architectural supports, or as a way of creating flat reproductions of polychrome sculptural groups, but as ingenious illustrations from books turned into monumental paintings. Could it be a coincidence that something similar happened with Walter Swennen? Perhaps the specific, flat space of his paintings, in which coloured surfaces meet words and drawings with clear lines, spring from the doodles of a distracted reader? This is probably too strong. Yet there must be a grain of truth in it. The amazing freedom of his works, on a material, compositional and \u0026lsquo;non-programmatic\u0026rsquo; level, can, in part, best be explained from the perspective of the freedom within certain comic books, the doodles in the margins of ponderous writings and the scattered words and phrases that are left over from the reading of an inspiring book.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFinally, I would like to share some nonsense about the perspective-less, pictorial space of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, starting with some reflections by Daniel Arasse on the invention of perspective in the fifteenth century. According to Arasse, perspective cannot simply be considered as a symbol for a world without God, as Panofsky has proposed, nor merely as a prerequisite for a place that facilitates action (as Pierre Francastel posited). In Arasse\u0026rsquo;s opinion, perspective, which was originally called \u0026lsquo;commensuratio\u0026rsquo;, was used to shape the world to the scale of the human figure, a world that was measurable. For that reason, perspective was often used to give form to the mystery of the Incarnation: the infinite God becoming measurable and tangible. He points, for example, to a pillar in an Annunciation by Ambrogio Lorenzetti that is dated to 1344. This pillar, a common symbol of Christ, is rendered with perspective at the base, but while it ascends, it gradually merges into the Divine gold leaf of the background.\u003csup\u003e85\u003c/sup\u003e In the perspective-less space of Swennen, it seems, no Incarnation is possible. Fortunately, Lacan would sigh, since the Incarnation is the source of all misery.\u003csup\u003e86\u003c/sup\u003e And we remember that Freud, according to Lacan, was drawn to the God of the Old Testament because He stood for the Word and an invisible, masculine Law, in contrast with the feminine Reality, which is round and made of flesh. In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s work seems to be no place for the feminine reality: everything seems to be spectral and thin, like a pneumatic, spiritual adventure (cosa mentale). Everything? No, in this ghostly world, there is something that offers resistance, like a gallstone. And that something is the painting.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTurning the nonsensical into an enigma\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn the collected wordings Hic Haec Hoc, Swennen describes making paintings as transforming the nonsensical into an enigma.\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e Before we take a closer look at this statement, we would do well to recall what Mannoni wrote about Baudelaire: that it was his destiny to \u0026lsquo;incessantly touch upon obscure questions, without promising explanation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e88\u003c/sup\u003e This is reminiscent of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s remark that the art historian Paul Ilegems was correct to describe him as \u0026lsquo;a pain in the neck\u0026rsquo;. Just as the enigma is a challenge thrown to the people by a god\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e89\u003c/sup\u003e, so Swennen presents us with paintings as aporias, works that compel us to accept a kind of \u0026lsquo;deferred meaning\u0026rsquo;, of the type that Mannoni found in Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s poetry. \u0026lsquo;From the first reading,\u0026rsquo; Mannoni writes, \u0026lsquo;there is a promise of meaning, there is the mystery of the twenty-four letters: as long as the sentence is incomplete, we supposedly still have multiple meanings... this state, in which we are more undecided than lost, continuously coalesces and disintegrates as we proceed. This is called the reading. Only Mallarm\u0026eacute; makes this a state without end...\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e90\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat does an experience of the nonsensical actually entail? Swennen\u0026rsquo;s first exposure to meaninglessness probably occurred his parents decided, from one day to the next, to speak a different language as a way of breaking with the wartime past. Many a child has been forced to learn a new language. But how many people, during their childhood, suddenly found that they could no longer understand their parents? The experience must have been abysmal.\u003csup\u003e91\u003c/sup\u003e Yet it seems that Swennen survived this situation by not taking it seriously, by giving it a twist. Disconnected letters, sounds, words and meanings may have engendered an ever-shifting inner world, a realm that few discover.\u003csup\u003e92\u003c/sup\u003e This is what I suspect, for the very reason that it lays the foundations for a second crucial experience of \u0026lsquo;meaninglessness\u0026rsquo;, namely his discovery that the \u0026lsquo;non-representative\u0026rsquo; elements of a painting (\u0026lsquo;between the terra cotta saucer and the signature\u0026rsquo;) do not \u0026lsquo;mean\u0026rsquo; anything anymore; it is only a \u0026lsquo;painting\u0026rsquo;. A pleasurable, endless activity suddenly opened up to him, one that extended beyond language and meaning.\u003csup\u003e93\u003c/sup\u003e \u003csup\u003e94\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nObjects have something to say, not because they speak to us, but because we start talking to ourselves when we see them. We consequently experience them as meaningful. Works of art can also have meaning; only the significance does not have to result from an intention of the artist. The meaning does not derive from the things, but from a human need. Meaning watches over us in the depths of the night.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMannoni noted that the point of a joke makes the wordplay (out of which the witticism is born) bearable.\u003csup\u003e95\u003c/sup\u003e We seem to find it intolerable when words are confused. The disorder makes us feel uneasy. Jumbled words lose their meaning. A world that is named with meaningless words seems just that, meaningless. But if we weren\u0026rsquo;t able to tinker with words, we would become trapped in them. The psychoanalyst tinkers, the poet tinkers, the painter tinkers. But they rarely admit this. And quite often, they do not know it themselves.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his book Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, Freud endeavours to show, in elaborate detail, that jokes are established in the same way as dreams, driven by the unconscious. Via a subtle detour he tries to lead us towards new evidence for the existence of the unconscious, which is something that he regards as a given, as he admits at the end of the volume. If we set Freud\u0026rsquo;s topological meanderings aside (the question where the drives are actually located, how they are repressed, which site is \u0026lsquo;occupied\u0026rsquo; by the psychic energy and through which gaps this energy escapes in order to satiate a still forbidden lust), then we understand that he views the joke as a statement that initially seems to make sense, then turns out to be senseless, but ultimately possesses a deeper hidden meaning. This meaning, which differentiates the joke from the games of children and the noncommittal jest, would reside in the fact that it disarms rational criticism and allows for the utterance of obscene, aggressive, cynical and sceptical thoughts because of a witty formulation (that briefly makes sense and subsequently turns out to be nonsense).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Freud the joke always targets the prevailing morality, the principles of which prevent us from giving free reign to pleasure because all forms of society call for the delayed gratification of our personal desires. The beauty of Freud, in my view, is that he doesn\u0026rsquo;t merely stop there and seems to want to upend the entire world. \u0026lsquo;What these jokes whisper,\u0026rsquo; he writes, \u0026lsquo;may be said aloud: that the wishes and desires of men have a right to make themselves acceptable alongside of exacting and ruthless moral values. And in our days it has been said in forceful and stirring sentences that this morality is only a selfish regulation laid down by the few who are rich and powerful and who can satisfy their wishes at any time without any postponement\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e96\u003c/sup\u003e To introduce his chapter on the hidden purposes of the joke, he reminds the reader of Heinrich Heine\u0026rsquo;s witticism, in which the latter compares Catholic priests and Protestant clerics, respectively, to supermarket employees and independent shopkeepers. Freud writes that he had hesitated about including this joke in his book because he realised \u0026lsquo;that among my readers there would probably be a few who felt respect not only for religion, but also for its CEOs and management personnel.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e97\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Freud the joke is directed against authority figures, sexual rivals and institutions such as marriage, of which he wrote: \u0026lsquo;One does not venture to say aloud and openly that marriage is not an arrangement calculated to satisfy a man\u0026rsquo;s sexuality...\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e98\u003c/sup\u003e The reader is left with the impression that it always must have been Freud\u0026rsquo;s motivation to defend the right to be different: the right to be a poet, a painter, a homosexual or a Jew. Freud is a blessed crook. The whole of Freud\u0026rsquo;s psychoanalysis is a sort of joke, aimed at the formulation of social criticism but which, at the same time, bypasses any authoritarian or moral resistance. Still in the chapter on the underlying purposes of jokes, Freud analyses a joke about a deaf Jew who is told by his doctor that his lack of hearing is due to an excessive consumption of alcohol. The Jew decides to stop drinking. When it transpires that he has fallen off the wagon, he admits that his hearing had improved when sober, but he decided that he was better off drinking because he heard such terrible things. And Freud concludes: \u0026lsquo;In the background lies the sad question whether the man may not have been right in his choice. It is on account of the allusion made by these pessimistic stories to the manifold and hopeless miseries of the Jews that I must class them with tendentious jokes.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e99\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAlthough the joke has a higher purpose, according to Freud, the remarkable thing is that its origins lie in a childlike desire for gratification, which takes the form of a lust for words and a hankering for nonsense (the condensation of words or the exploitation of similarities, for example, would save psychic energy in a way that is tantamount to experiencing lust). \u0026lsquo;But the characteristic tendency of boys to do absurd or silly things\u0026rsquo;, Freud writes (he is silent about girls), \u0026lsquo;seems to me to be directly derived from the pleasure in nonsense.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e100\u003c/sup\u003e Children (just like adults \u0026lsquo;in a toxically altered state of mind\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e101\u003c/sup\u003e) would love to play with thoughts, words and sentences. Later, a price is paid in the name of reason, and \u0026lsquo;only significant combinations of words remain permitted.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e102\u003c/sup\u003e Thus the desire would stay buried and seek gratification through joke-telling, thus facilitating the expression of criticism.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThis does not sound convincing. Rather it seems that jokes are made possible, and have been drawn into our existence, through our disproportionate need for meaning. When our meaning-seeking brain falsely detects a sexual or other interest in a combination of sounds or shapes, we find this combination funny. Ultimately, we laugh at this rummaging brain and, by extension, at all of the institutions that have emerged from our dangerous need for precisely-defined, specific meanings: rules of games, sports clubs, social rituals, fashions, schools, churches, political parties and so on.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThrough its disturbing character, the joke is related to the Greek oracle, as described by Giorgio Colli in Naissance de la Philosophie: ambiguous, elusive pronouncements by an apparently malicious and cruel God. Oracles are passed on to us by seers. Often they take the form of riddles. Only the wise can solve or interpret these conundrums. \u0026lsquo;For the Greeks\u0026rsquo;, Colli writes, \u0026lsquo;the wording of an enigma carries in itself tremendous hostility.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e103\u003c/sup\u003e The gods reveal their wisdom through words, he writes, \u0026lsquo;hence the external nature of the oracle: ambiguity, obscurity, allusiveness, uncertainty\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e104\u003c/sup\u003e For Colli, the divine origin of the oracle is a sufficient explanation for its obscurity. But why must God\u0026rsquo;s word be obscure (ambiguous, uncertain and allusive)? Does God have a speech impediment? Or is it simply that the words, being fundamentally skewed and of human origin, are unfit for divine thoughts? We know the true words of the Christian God; that is a fact. But why is the word of our almighty and infallible God so ambiguous, contradictory and confused? There are several answers to this question. Firstly, the holy books would never have survived, nor have inspired so many people, if they were unambiguous. The inconsistency and muddle-headedness of spiritual texts is a prerequisite for their viability and efficacy. Secondly, the word of God is contradictory and confused because it was aimed at preventing us from believing that we know God. Gods are useful as an instrument of power when their words can only be understood and translated by a select few. Also, spiritually minded people see gods as images representing the unknowable nature of the world and the inadequacy of knowledge. A knowable God cannot be a God.\u003csup\u003e105\u003c/sup\u003e Only as an unknowable construction God can guide us towards humility and a constant awareness of our imperfect knowledge. Societies were made possible through the invention of unknowable gods. Man does not stop being an animal when he learns to speak, but when he keeps remembering that his perceptions are relative, that his words are inadequate and that his thoughts can never claim to be based on a universal truth. Thirdly, therefore, the words of gods are nebulous in order to remind us that our own observations, words and thoughts are muddled and relative.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGradually, however, the enigma was uncoupled from the divine oracle and came to assume the form of a person-to-person intellectual challenge. And later still, says Colli, it gave rise to dialectics. A dialectical conversation in ancient Greece always departed from two contradictory statements (The Being is and the Being is not). The opponent was invited to side with one of these propositions and it was subsequently demonstrated that his position (no matter which side he took) was untenable. The challenger, who formulated the contradiction, always won. For Colli, the dialectic culture of the ancient Greeks was destructive because it undermined all forms of certainty or conviction. Yet it seems to me that in order to overcome prejudice, stupidity, demagogy, dictatorships, absolute monarchies and religious mania, this destruction is indispensable. The predetermined \u0026lsquo;victory\u0026rsquo; of the challenger in the dialectical conflict depended not upon his arguments, but upon the fact that it sprang from a contradiction. No single reality can be approached only from two perspectives. In almost all sciences, progress is the result of a cross-fertilisation between approaches that previously pretended to be exclusive. Does this prevent us from adopting positions? Certainly not, but is it so hard to remember that each position is fundamentally relative? \u0026lsquo;Heraclitus had no criticism of the senses\u0026rsquo;, wrote Colli\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e106\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;on the contrary, he praised sight and hearing, but he condemned the tendency to transform our perceptions into something stable that would exist outside of us.\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The essence of the enigma\u0026rsquo;, said Aristotle, \u0026lsquo;lies in putting together apparently inconsistent and impossible things.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e107\u003c/sup\u003e As Shklovski demonstrated, the same can be said of a narrative that is crafted through the use of prioms: the devices that permit unexpected twists. It is also true for the dream-work and joke-work, which seem to speak about a hidden knowledge that guides our behaviour. And Lacan\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;le r\u0026eacute;el\u0026rsquo; also speaks in riddles.\u003csup\u003e108\u003c/sup\u003e Attempting to guess the nature of Schopenhauer\u0026rsquo;s Will or Freud\u0026rsquo;s Unconscious is ridiculous if one believes that these Things actually exist. But the puzzling itself, the playing with words and images, the rearranging of sentences and the weaving of alternative narratives can turn an unmanageable life into a manageable one. Not because the neurotic has been tamed by his psychiatrist, as the Lacanians believe, and not because the true nature of his or her desires has been revealed, but because a fruitful interaction with a shifting (internal or external) reality requires a constantly self-renewing language game.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen, who undoubtedly discovered a \u0026lsquo;right to nonsense\u0026rsquo; in the writings of Lacan, does not believe in the existence of the unconscious. \u0026lsquo;All we can say is that there\u0026rsquo;s thinking\u0026rsquo;, he says.\u003csup\u003e109\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, there is thinking. \u0026Ccedil;a pense. Colours, shapes, textures, letters, words and figures are woven together to form a new, concrete thought. Not in order to report on a reality that is located beyond the painting, but in order \u0026lsquo;to be\u0026rsquo;: to be visible, to have been made, to have been thought through action, and thus, as an enigma, to indirectly give an account of the miracles of thinking (through action).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Basic research is what I am doing when I don\u0026rsquo;t know what I am doing\u0026rsquo;, wrote Wernher von Braun in The New York Times.\u003csup\u003e110\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;There is no idea, however ancient and absurd, that is not capable of improving our knowledge\u0026rsquo;, wrote Feyerabend.\u003csup\u003e111\u003c/sup\u003e Some tribes or nations in the Brazilian rainforest did not need western science to achieve peace, as Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss has demonstrated, but a collection of concepts, images and associated rituals that, in their own way, led to harmony.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen gives form to concrete thoughts that reveal the prioms and the collage-like structure of all thinking. The young Swennen wanted to become a philosopher. He eventually became a painter to be able to think in a free way. Or so I see it. Everybody is free to think differently.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMontagne de Miel, 30 June 2016\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n"},{"locale":"ru","short_description":"","description":""},{"locale":"de","short_description":"","description":"\u003cp style=\"text-align: justify;\"\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n__________\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHans Theys\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cstrong\u003eNe Quid Nimis\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAbout Walter Swennen\u0026rsquo;s Work\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe primacy of the text (Franz Kafka)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen I was studying Franz Kafka\u0026rsquo;s novels and short stories in the mid-1980s, it struck me that all attempts to interpret his work seemed to overlook the fact that it can never be reduced to one meaning or conclusion and always seems to speak of an unknowable world and impenetrable texts. At the same time, the text\u0026rsquo;s form imposes itself as necessary. In this sense, one can consider Kafka\u0026rsquo;s work to be a continuation of the Talmud and the Midrash. In the never-ending, Jewish biblical exegesis, our interaction with an unknowable world and an intangible God is doubled by incoherent, contradictory, symbolic and unfathomable texts. The texts themselves, however, are not called into question, but cherished. The core of Jewish culture consists of an essentially endless series of interpretations or hypotheses that can be formulated, questioned and tested. \u0026lsquo;When two or three Jews studied the Torah together, God was in their midst\u0026rsquo;, summarised Karen Armstrong. Strangely enough, all of this can also be read in Kafka\u0026rsquo;s texts: \u0026lsquo;Don\u0026rsquo;t misunderstand me\u0026rsquo;, says the priest to Joseph K. in \u003cem\u003eThe Castle\u003c/em\u003e, \u0026lsquo;I\u0026rsquo;m only telling you the different opinions there are about it. You mustn\u0026rsquo;t pay too much attention to them. The scripture is unalterable and the opinions are often merely an expression of despair about this.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e In the novel The Castle, in which the suspected swindler K. pretends to be the new village surveyor, the only piece of evidence upon which he can depend is a letter from an unattainable official. The clearest pronouncement about this missive is made by Olga, the messenger\u0026rsquo;s sister: \u0026lsquo;Assessing the letters correctly is impossible because their value changes continuously, they give rise to endless contradictions, and only chance decides where we stop, that\u0026rsquo;s to say, opinion is a matter of chance.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMy study of Kafka\u0026rsquo;s writings left me with the impression that his oeuvre was not an attempt to express anything more than what was in the text, which was sufficient. Everything is there, in black and white.\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e There is no need for anyone else to offer an explanation or interpretation. When I first met Walter Swennen in October 1988, I understood that the same holds true for paintings. If they have something to \u0026lsquo;say\u0026rsquo;, then it is in a material sense, not in the form of a code that needs to be deciphered.\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings articulate their form. Their thinking takes place in the way they are constructed, even if they contain images or words.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe primacy of texture (Viktor Shklovski)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen\u0026rsquo;s views on the primacy of texture have evolved considerably since the late 1980s. Back then, he was interested in a collection of essays by Viktor Shklovski, which was published in French in 1973 under the title La marche du cheval.\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e For Shklovski, a work of art does not provide a translation of an artist\u0026rsquo;s inner language into one that can be understood by the viewer. \u0026lsquo;In art\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;new forms appear to replace old forms that have lost their artistic value.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e But what constitutes this artistic value? In order to explain this, he cites Broder Christiansen who noted in his book The Philosophy of Art: \u0026lsquo;When we experience anything as a deviation from the usual, from the normal or from a certain guiding canon, we feel within us an emotion of a special nature (\u0026hellip;) Why is the lyrical poetry of a foreign country never revealed to us in its fullness even though we have learned its language? We hear the play of its harmonics; we apprehend the succession of rhymes and feel the rhythm. We understand the meaning of the words and are in command of the imagery, the figures of speech and the content. We may have a grasp of all the sensuous forms, of all the objects. So what\u0026rsquo;s missing? The answer is: differential perceptions. The slightest aberration from the norm in the choice of expressions, in the combination of words, in the subtle shifts of syntax\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;all of this can only be mastered by someone who lives among the natural elements of his language, by someone who, thanks to his conscious awareness of the norm, is immediately struck, or rather, irritated by any deviation from it.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFurthermore: \u0026lsquo;In order to transform an object into a fact of art, it is necessary first to withdraw it from the domain of life. We must extricate a thing from the cluster of associations in which it is bound. It is necessary to turn over the object as one would turn over a log in a fire.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFrom this it follows that you cannot make a work of art without shifting, repeating, multiplying or compressing things\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e in order to achieve artistry. Both the form and the \u0026lsquo;content\u0026rsquo; of a work of art are the result of technical necessity and the potential of the material available.\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e Thus Shklovski contends that Dido did not conquer an island by cutting a cowhide into a circle, because this ruse belonged to the narrator\u0026rsquo;s culture (as ethnologists and sociologists believe), but because this ruse is a \u0026lsquo;priom\u0026rsquo;: a device that facilitates the telling of a surprising story. (For how else could the narrator astonish his or her own people with this tale?) Likewise, it is nigh on impossible to write a story that does not involve love or murder. (This is an example I concocted myself.) But who do you love, or murder? Someone you know, like the postman\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e, neighbours or family members, or a random passer-by? Because the latter is highly improbable, except in The Phantom of Liberty by Bu\u0026ntilde;uel, protagonists will either kill their relatives or sleep with them. Proof of Sophocles\u0026rsquo; genius lies in the fact that Oedipus took the life of a stranger who later turned out to be his father, not in the Freudian interpretation of this priom.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf this reasoning were applied to a painting, then all so-called references to the external world (whether it be ideas or perceptible things) could be regarded as mere material which can be used to construct a painting. And this is precisely what Shklovski did. \u0026lsquo;Paintings are not at all windows onto another world\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;they are things\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;the artist clings to depiction, to the world, not in order to recreate the world, but rather to be able to use complex and rewarding material in his art.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e C\u0026eacute;zanne echoed his words. His paintings were attempts to give form, through colour, to the spatial and optical effects of the perceived world (le \u0026lsquo;motif\u0026rsquo;). For him, painting was not about the perceived object, nor about his own way of seeing (his specific \u0026lsquo;optique\u0026rsquo;, which was certainly essential), but rather about the manner in which he transformed his experiences into colour, his own way of doing things, which he described as his temperament,\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e or his \u0026lsquo;petite sensibilit\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;A picture doesn\u0026rsquo;t represent anything. It doesn\u0026rsquo;t need to represent anything in the first place but the colours\u0026rsquo;, said C\u0026eacute;zanne to Gasquet.\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e Shklovski wrote that \u0026lsquo;the outside world does not exist. Things replaced by words do not exist and are not perceived (\u0026hellip;). The outside world is outside of art. It is perceived as a series of hints (\u0026hellip;) devoid of material substance and texture.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;For a painter, colour is the only truth\u0026rsquo;, asserted C\u0026eacute;zanne.\u003csup\u003e17\u003c/sup\u003e And he added: \u0026lsquo;I detest all these stories, this psychology, and all this intellectual humbug about them. For God\u0026rsquo;s sake, it\u0026rsquo;s all in the paintings, painters are no imbeciles. But you have to see it with your eyes\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;with your eyes\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;do you understand!\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e18\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The whole effort of a poet and a painter\u0026rsquo;, says Shklovski \u0026lsquo;is aimed first and foremost at creating a continuous and thoroughly palpable thing, an object with a texture (\u0026hellip;) Good and bad in art is a question of texture. (\u0026hellip;) Texture is the main distinguishing feature of that specific world of specially constructed objects, the totality of which we are used to calling art.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat does this mean? What is the significance of these words? Of what do they speak? Firstly, it concerns the idea that the value of a painting is not to be sought in what it represents, but in the manner in which it was created. In the case of C\u0026eacute;zanne, it is about the way that he attempted, for example, to model by means of colour, while simultaneously trying to avoid his paintings disintegrating (become inharmonious or incoherent). In the case of Swennen, it involves the specific way in which he combines techniques, supports, materials, colours, inflated drawings, words and letters, and weaves them together in order to arrive at new objects or concrete thoughts.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe aesthetic and the artistic existence of the painting\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn the mid-1990s, Swennen discovered a reference to \u0026Eacute;tienne Gilson\u0026rsquo;s work L\u0026rsquo;\u0026ecirc;tre et l\u0026rsquo;essence in Deleuze\u0026rsquo;s book on Spinoza. He also discovered Gilson\u0026rsquo;s treatise Painting and Reality, which was based on a lecture series, and the related book that followed some years later, Peinture et r\u0026eacute;alit\u0026eacute;. In these works, Gilson distinguishes between three forms of existence of a work of art: the purely physical, the aesthetic and the artistic. As a physical object, a work of art is no different from any other object. As an aesthetic object, it is dependent upon the viewer\u0026rsquo;s relationship with it. A gallery attendant, a transporter, an insurer, a painter or a philosopher will all have their own individual way of looking at a painting.\u003csup\u003e20\u003c/sup\u003e As an aesthetic object, the work of art presents itself to the viewer as a \u0026lsquo;modus\u0026rsquo;, as a representation, which everyone views differently. Because these representations are infinite, Gilson considers the aesthetic point of view to be a hopeless approach.\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e The aesthetic form of existence of the work of art is phenomenological in nature because it tells us nothing about the object itself, but only about how it appears to us (and how this appearance is determined by our abilities and expectations).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo define a work of art (as distinct from any other object) without using aesthetic criteria, Gilson described it as an object that is created by an artist in the context of his artistic activity. This artistic form of existence is therefore determined ontologically, from its cause. For Swennen, Gilson\u0026rsquo;s distinction implies that the artistic value of an work of art does not depend upon the eye of the beholder. It affirms the autonomy of the artist and liberates the work of art from the expectation that it needs to express or mean something.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn addition, Gilson\u0026rsquo;s distinction is obviously and inextricably linked with a profound focus on the material existence of a work of art. One of the consequences of taking an aesthetic approach towards a work of art is that people will inevitably equate reproductions or images with the authentic object, rendering the original imperceptible to the eye and diminishing the experience. Thus a leading art historian recently defined Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, in all innocence, as \u0026lsquo;final images\u0026rsquo;. Not only are paintings often experienced as \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo;, but there is also the supposition that the goal of a painter is to make images. Gilson warned of the dangers of reproduction as early as 1957. He drew attention to the folly of reducing paintings to images, and the tendency to absorb the world of art in books. He called this the \u0026lsquo;dictatorship of literature\u0026rsquo;. \u0026lsquo;A printed word is still a word\u0026rsquo;, he wrote, \u0026lsquo;but a printed painting is not a painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e Moreover: \u0026lsquo;To be part of a book, a painting must rid itself of its materiality.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e23\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nReproductions have always existed. But those who once looked at an engraving of a work of art did not forget that it was an engraving. And the least that can be said about black-and-white reproductions is that they do not pretend to be true to the actual colours. \u0026lsquo;The style of painting is inseparable from the technique\u0026rsquo;, wrote Gilson, \u0026lsquo;we know that it is inseparable from matter. Eliminating the material comes close to negating the work of art. Any study of styles based upon reproductions of visual works is based upon ghosts.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThis gives rise to the misunderstanding that art historical learning and knowledge of art are one and the same thing. An understanding of art is acquired through practical effort. \u0026lsquo;Is the knowledge of art history\u0026rsquo;, said Gilson, \u0026lsquo;in any sense of the term, a knowledge of art? It certainly is knowledge about art, but its object is not art, it only is its history. (\u0026hellip;) To limit ourselves to painting, it is not rare to see parents of goodwill undertake the artistic education of their children as early as possible, dragging them to art galleries\u0026hellip; This is not the beginning of an artistic education; it is the beginning of a historical education.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAuthors such as Giorgio Agamben and Boris Groys have spoken in recent publications about the possibility of devising an approach to art that starts from the makers and the making, although they themselves have not risen to the challenge. \u0026lsquo;Perhaps nothing is more urgent\u0026rsquo;, writes Agamben, \u0026lsquo;than a destruction of aesthetics that would, by clearing away what is usually taken for granted, allow us to bring into question the very meaning of aesthetics as the science of the work of art. The question, however, is whether the time is ripe for such a destruction, or whether instead the consequence of such an act would not be the loss of any possible horizon for the understanding of the work of art and the creation of an abyss in front of it that could only be crossed by a giant leap.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003e I admire Agamben\u0026rsquo;s work, but the idea of annihilating the aesthetic approach seems somewhat childish. Let us acknowledge, instead, that it would be wise to remember that we are always viewers and that, as such, we should occasionally endeavour to look at a work of art from the perspectives of the maker, the techniques and the materials used.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nPainting whatever\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOn his fortieth birthday, Swennen decided to stop thinking of himself as a poet, and to consider himself a painter. The difference being, he told Bart De Baere, that poetry is fundamentally concerned with nostalgia, and thus with the past and transience. Painting, he continued, is about the future. I believe that we should take this statement literally, in the sense that, for Swennen, a painting is an object that needs to be lured into existence through actions. It does not pre-exist.\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFor Philip Larkin, \u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; to write a poem is to construct a verbal device that would preserve an experience indefinitely by reproducing it in whoever reads the poem.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e This was not the case for Mallarm\u0026eacute;. His poems were trying to conjure new events. But what next? How much further can you go? Paul Celan, whose thinking evolved from Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s, attempted to articulate atrocities via such hermetically sealed texts that it was impossible to imagine when reading them, or afterwards, that one had actually \u0026lsquo;seen\u0026rsquo; these things. But then? Broodthaers made poems with objects.\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e And Swennen starts to write and draw upon canvas. He begins to create paintings. And he discovers and formulates a way of painting that is not focused on the past, but takes place in the present: \u0026lsquo;Done with nostalgia, nostalgia is good for the young. (\u0026hellip;) Painting interests me, because it has nothing to do with the past. It is more epic than lyrical. Each painting is a story that unfolds in the present.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e30\u003c/sup\u003e Only now. Just for today.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nLater that same year, in October 1986, Swennen wrote a letter in which we read, \u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; succeed in painting whatever; that is the ideal. Whoever lacks experience in saying whatever, can interpret this statement as a witticism. Yet it is my ideal, the most difficult thing imaginable. (\u0026hellip;) The key: premeditation is always an aggravating circumstance.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea to try to paint whatever reminds me of Nietzsche\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;discovery\u0026rsquo; of the eternal return. It is an absurd image, but it works. If you imagine that all of your actions will be repeated infinitely, they acquire an unexpected gravitas, perhaps even meaning. Some ideas seem to strengthen our grip on reality. Of course, you cannot create ex nihilo, but if you can find a way to enable objects to \u0026lsquo;think\u0026rsquo; in your place, then you do not have to perpetually steer them\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea of painting whatever comes from the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, who replaced Freud\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;ground-rule\u0026rsquo;, whereby patients were requested to share with their analyst \u0026lsquo;whatever they thought of\u0026rsquo;, with an invitation \u0026lsquo;to say anything, without fear of stupidity\u0026rsquo;. It was an exhortation based on the rationale that the source of a patient\u0026rsquo;s discomfort is unknowable and unimaginable. We comprehend that this discomfort is intimately bound up with language, because we are speaking beings, but this is precisely the reason why language lets us down as a conscious and focused research tool. The analyst and the patient set sail on a sea of directionless, interwoven stories, shifting and inverting words, until something happens. Because the patient\u0026rsquo;s conscious use of the language is insufficient, words are considered to be sounds that can have alternative meanings. They become hollow shells, which might lead to new experiences or insights through fresh associations and connections.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen tries to make paintings that remain \u0026lsquo;unimaginable\u0026rsquo; until they actually exist. He employs materials, tools, techniques, colours, shapes, inflated drawings, words and letters, and he strives, as far as practicable, to keep them separate from a \u0026lsquo;meaning\u0026rsquo;, thus deploying them as hollow forms or signifiers. For example, letters have beautiful shapes that are quite independent of the sound they represent, or the meaning that is associated with the sound. A triangle can be read as a flag, as a roof or a hat. A top hat can be read as an inverted \u0026lsquo;T\u0026rsquo;.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;, explained Mannoni in Clefs pour l\u0026rsquo;Imaginaire ou l\u0026rsquo;Autre Sc\u0026egrave;ne (1969), \u0026lsquo;was undoubtedly a poet, even though he had nothing to say; consequently, the poetry was to be found elsewhere, rather than in what was said. From the very outset, it was an experiment about language, not an existential one.\u0026rsquo; \u0026lsquo;What makes literary criticism so awkward in the case of Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;, he continued, \u0026lsquo;is that the treasure is concealed behind the meaning (as he himself has literally said) while an \u0026ldquo;ingrained habit to want to understand\u0026rdquo; compels us to search for meaning behind the words. The treasure is the richness, the jewels and the pearls of language effects in all their unembellished glory\u0026thinsp;\u0026mdash;\u0026thinsp;puns, assonance, ambiguity, metaphors, metonyms and so forth.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e32\u003c/sup\u003e And if there is still a clear meaning to be found within the poem, says Mannoni, then that is only in order to render it tolerable as a play with words. Thanks to this recognisable element, the poet and the reader can bid a satisfied farewell to one another, because they are both free to do as they please (create something or discover a meaning).\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his essay Po\u0026eacute;sie et pens\u0026eacute;e abstraite, Val\u0026eacute;ry recounts an anecdote that Edgar Degas has conveyed about Mallarm\u0026eacute;. One day, in a conversation with the poet, Degas had emphasised his admiration for Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s mastery by mentioning that he himself had a great many ideas for poems, but was unable to develop them. \u0026lsquo;You do not make poems with ideas, my dear Degas\u0026rsquo;, Mallarm\u0026eacute; had replied, \u0026lsquo;but with words\u0026rsquo;. Two pages later, Val\u0026eacute;ry describes how a phrase, which has cropped up in ordinary conversation, has acquired a life of its own in his head. \u0026lsquo;It has obtained a value\u0026rsquo;, he says, \u0026lsquo;a value at the expense of its limited meaning\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e34\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Mannoni, one should not search for specific meanings in Mallarm\u0026eacute;, which would be hidden behind the abstract and evocative use of language, but for the effects created by the word play, syntax, spelling and typography. Whoever clings to meaning will fail to find the treasure. This not only applies to Lacanian analysis, but also to art historians, and especially to the makers of paintings and poems.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHaving been in analysis, Swennen immediately realised that his new \u0026lsquo;method\u0026rsquo; (to try to paint whatever) was little more than a crutch, because it is very difficult to say or do whatever. Of crucial importance is that this idea provided him with a way of creating work that was wholly conceived from the point of view of the maker (as opposed to that of the spectator), freed from the so-called necessity to express, share or demonstrate something.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAt the same time, we know that everything we do is inevitably coloured by the traces of our past, our education and our upbringing, the things we have seen, those we have rationalised or repressed, and the seemingly ordinary things that we might have forgotten.\u003csup\u003e35\u003c/sup\u003e All of our words, creations, actions, and even our inactions, speak of something, whether we like it or not. But this is hardly a problem, so long as we do not confuse their story with a so-called meaning or, worse, with an intention or an idea that might have been at their origin.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nProvoked accidents\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;For the artist\u0026rsquo;, wrote Shklovski, \u0026lsquo;the external world is not the content of a picture, but material for a picture. The famous Renaissance artist Giotto says: \u0026ldquo;A picture is \u0026mdash; primarily \u0026mdash; a conjunction of coloured planes.\u0026rdquo; (\u0026hellip;) The realistic painter Surikov used to say that the \u0026ldquo;idea\u0026rdquo; of his famous picture The Boyar\u0026rsquo;s Wife, Morozova occurred to him when he saw a black bird on the snow. For him this picture was primarily \u0026ldquo;black on white.\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e36\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;One of the pictures I did in 1946\u0026rsquo;, Francis Bacon tells David Sylvester, \u0026lsquo;the one like a butcher\u0026rsquo;s shop picture, came to me as an accident. I was attempting to make a bird alighting on a field. And it may have been bound up in some way with the three forms that had gone before, but suddenly the lines that I\u0026rsquo;d drawn suggested something totally different, and out of this suggestion arose this picture. I had no intention to do this picture; I never thought of it in that way. It was like one continuous accident mounting on top of another.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e37\u003c/sup\u003e Time and time again, Bacon does his best to impress upon Sylvester that he is striving to paint likenesses, but without using anatomically correct or mimetic elements. It is difficult, he explains, because you do not know what the searched for elements should actually look like.\u003csup\u003e38\u003c/sup\u003e Sylvester\u0026rsquo;s resistance to this idea is strange, but we need not attach much importance to his attitude here. The bottom line is that a beautiful book exists, one in which a practitioner attempts to explain that it is the act of painting itself that leads to unpredictable results.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Things always happen differently to what you expected.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e39\u003c/sup\u003e This statement, quoted occasionally by Swennen, is taken from a book by the German physician Viktor von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, who sought to develop a dynamic theory of medicine and to prove that a great many insoluble medical problems are linked to inadequate questioning which, in turn, leads to obsolete, paradoxical conclusions. A dynamic theory, he seems to say, would take account of the fact that physiological symptoms are dynamic themselves, because they respond (via the brain) to a world that is in constant movement and, in turn, is influenced by the physiological reactions in question. A scientist needs to think like a chess player, he states, a person who, even if he knows the rules, can never predict what will happen, and whose every move has an impact upon his opponent\u0026rsquo;s possibilities.\u003csup\u003e40\u003c/sup\u003e Chess is perhaps an unduly static example and, furthermore, one that immediately conjures up negative connotations in an artistic context. Nevertheless, it encapsulates the idea of ever-changing unpredictability. A better illustration, and one which Swennen has quoted in a different context, is of someone who crosses the street and, in order to avoid an oncoming car, either slows or quickens his pace.\u003csup\u003e41\u003c/sup\u003e Unfortunately, both of these examples also describe conscious processes, while Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker, instead, is concerned with the countless invisible, impalpable and unconscious agents of perception that might influence physiological processes. Moreover, he is concerned about the way in which scientists unconsciously distort the subject of their research through the processes by which it is viewed and formulated. Scientists ought to be aware of the fact that they create reality through the way they measure it or think about it.\u003csup\u003e42\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBoth of these levels can naturally be found in painting. In the first place, at the moment when a painting is created from a series of mutually influencing observations, actions and events (for example, the way in which the paint behaves: flows, covers or dries), and subsequently when an outsider thinks about the said painting and, by reducing it to a simple relationship between cause and effect (original idea and result), for example, misapprehends the work.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip; Many things are only seen by humans after a learning process, and what we do not learn to see is indeed not seen\u0026rsquo;, writes Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker. \u0026lsquo;Painters and sculptors know more about this apprenticeship than physiologists.\u0026rsquo; At the same time, Weizs\u0026auml;cker continues, painters are unable to depict an epileptic seizure or a person who is suffering, because they do not know how a man moves in an objective sense (in physical or pathological terms). \u0026lsquo;When simply looked at, the body and movement are revealed differently to the artist, the tailor, the gymnast and the physician.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e43\u003c/sup\u003e In these sentences we recognise Gilson\u0026rsquo;s ideas about the phenomenological or aesthetic approach to art, and the difficulty of seeing things from the perspective of their objective \u0026lsquo;cause\u0026rsquo;. Painters, gallery attendants, removal men, removal men, insurance clerks and art historians will all see a painting differently.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf you have not learned to look at a painting as a painter, then you cannot see it as a painter. The artistic manifestation remains invisible. This is what Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker teaches us. But, of course, this is no bad thing. You can also look at a painting as a bookworm who has never made anything with his hands. But you would need to remember that a large part of it falls outside your field of vision.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhoever wishes to learn to see paintings from the standpoint of their makers, will encounter an obstacle, which we will now consider from the perspective of Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker\u0026rsquo;s ideas about the perception of a world in motion by a moving observer. \u0026lsquo;Many scholarly books have been written about poetry\u0026rsquo;, said Czesław Miłosz, \u0026lsquo;and those books find, at least in the West, more readers than the poems themselves. (\u0026hellip;) A poet who wishes to compete with these mountains of erudition should pretend to have more self-knowledge than is allowed for poets. (\u0026hellip;) Honestly, I have spent my whole life in thrall to a daemon, and how the poems he dictated came about, I have no idea.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e44\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhenever we wish to consider the artistic existence of a work of art (the work considered from the standpoint of the maker and the making), we are hindered by the fact that an artist rarely knows exactly what happened during the creative process.\u003csup\u003e45\u003c/sup\u003e He or she, in some cases, might remember something. But independent of the question as to whether or not an experience is mutilated by the memory through the process of classyfying and \u0026#39;saving\u0026#39; it, there is always the problem that \u0026ndash;because it involves a multidimensional occurrence, both in psychological and physical terms (during which the material and the maker are equally active) \u0026ndash; the creative moment can never be articulated without conferring a one-dimensional, linear and seemingly teleological character to it. One immediately discerns that ideas, intentions, decisions and criteria seem to have been involved, which might indeed all be present, even if only out of habit, but these play less of a guiding role than you might imagine, especially when, as an outsider, you think about it afterwards.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe painter does not know why he or she makes certain decisions. To make something happen? Or to avoid it? The man who slows or quickens his pace to avoid a car when crossing the street does so because of a collision that has only existed in his head. According to Swennen, Deleuze was interested in the fact that C\u0026eacute;zanne noted that a painter\u0026rsquo;s work mostly took place before putting a brush to the canvas, namely in determining what will not be painted. It goes without saying that a painter who wishes to make innovative work must constantly shy away from things (pictures, compositions, textures, connotations) that will suggest or impose a solution. You do not know what has to happen, but you know what you don\u0026rsquo;t want to happen. \u0026lsquo;A painting\u0026rsquo;, says Swennen, \u0026lsquo;changes in relation to a state that has already been reached, not to a state you want it to have in the future.\u0026rsquo; You react to what is already there, and hope to elicit an event that will carry you further along.\u003csup\u003e46\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nActing tactically (System D)\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nHerbie Hancock tells us how, during a tight concert in Stuttgart, he played a wrong chord in the middle of a solo by Miles Davis. Terrified, he covered his face with his hands. In that split second, he heard Davis hesitate for one second, and then start to play a series of notes that turned his \u0026lsquo;wrong\u0026rsquo; chord into a right one.\u003csup\u003e47\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe idea of a multi-dimensional space in which the artist simultaneously moves, thinks and acts brings to mind the challenges faced by dancers, actors, musicians and singers during public performances. For they too are dealing with ever-changing, never entirely predictable factors: the character and potential of their instrument; the interpretation of the score or the text; the renditions by the other players, the architecture of the theatre, the reactions of the public and so forth. The pleasure in being part of a mobile space, which is affected by your own movements, decisions and actions, undoubtedly adds to the lure of any musical, dance or theatre performance, or sport, and perhaps also painting. Not in a \u0026lsquo;gestural\u0026rsquo; way, which is what Sylvester seems to do when he compares Bacon\u0026rsquo;s actions with the speed of a tennis player\u0026rsquo;s arm (already moving before a decision has been made).\u003csup\u003e48\u003c/sup\u003e The resemblance between these several fields is not a matter of speed (or expression), but of a particular way of spatial thinking, which can also be a very slow process, as is usually the case with Swennen.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA painting by Swennen occurs as the result of a limited range of interventions, usually staggered over time, and in which each new action is a response to the results of the preceding actions and events. Born from a strategic desire to provoke unimaginable and unpredictable accidents as part of a multidimensional interaction with the materials of matter and thought, this way of proceeding can only be tactical. The painter has initiated a practice that allows for accidents and manifests itself in a form of vigilance, one that ensures that the opportunities that present themselves are correctly appreciated. Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings are built up slowly, and involve long periods of apparent inactivity, during which time he primarily reviews what has emerged. This slowness is not in contradiction with a tactical approach beyond preconceived ideas or intentions.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA pertinent example of this type of tactical thinking is bricolage\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e49\u003c/sup\u003e, as defined by Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss: the accumulation of a wealth of objects, which are hoarded without any knowledge of what they might be needed for. Even though the use to which the stored object is ultimately put might be determined by an earlier function or a number of associated attributes, it is nevertheless deployed in a new and surprising manner. This entire process, in terms of both the collection and the use of objects, is tactical. Levi-Strauss employed this concept to explain the way in which myths were probably composed out of fragments of other, older cultures, where \u0026lsquo;something that used to be a goal now assumes the role of means: the \u0026ldquo;signified\u0026rdquo; becomes the \u0026ldquo;signifier\u0026rdquo; and vice versa.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e50 \u003c/sup\u003eRadical, tactical action sets no store by traditions, functions and meanings. It reacts. It puts things straight. It seeks solutions for self-inflicted problems. \u0026lsquo;My paintings\u0026rsquo;, said Swennen during a lecture in April 2016, \u0026lsquo;evolve from repair to repair, from patch to patch\u0026rsquo;. \u0026lsquo;When you paint\u0026rsquo;, he told Bart De Baere in 1990, \u0026lsquo;you should always respond to the things that penetrate from outside, something that you yourself established but a moment before. You respond to what is already there. You have brought it forth yourself, but it is there, and all you can do is enter into a dialogue with it. So it constantly changes.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e51\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThinking back to Von Weizs\u0026auml;cker\u0026rsquo;s image of a perception that influences and even shapes the observed reality (whether it concerns a pedestrian crossing the road, an observing physician, a painter at work or an art historian who scrutinises), it becomes clear that the arts have perhaps always developed in a tactical way. There are several good examples of this to be found in the book How Music Works by the musician David Byrne. He points out that certain people claim that African drums owe their unique shape to the availability of materials, which are inevitably poor, and the limited technical resources. Byrne, on the other hand, believes that the instruments are meticulously developed, constructed, handled and played in response to the physical, social and, in particular, acoustic environment. The percussion music that ensues is unsuitable for our stone churches with their echoes. In these places, however, we have developed a modal music that relies upon long, sustained notes. In a comparable way, Mozart\u0026rsquo;s chamber music needed to compete with the noise generated by a crowd in a confined space. The only way of amplifying the sound, at the time, was to expand the size of the orchestra, which is exactly what happened. The ever-increasing scale of the concert halls that were built during the nineteenth century led to greater contrasts and the use of timpani in musical compositions (in order to reach listeners at the back of the auditorium). Around 1900, it became illegal to eat, drink or make noise during a classical concert. As a result, musicians could compose much softer passages. In all probability, the solos and improvisations associated with jazz music arose from the limited musical material available and the need to keep people dancing for a whole night. Also in jazz, the banjo and the trumpet started to play a greater role because they were louder. (Throughout this development, it is also evident that musical evolutions may also have triggered spatial modifications.) Great technological advances have been made in recording techniques since the late nineteenth century and these, in turn, have influenced the way that music sounds. Byrne, for example, notes that the midi technique was more suited to the digitisation of piano and percussion, than for guitar, brass and string instruments. As a result, composers began to create more melodies and harmonies using piano chords. Another key influence is related to the emergence of insulated sound studios and the habit of recording the musicians separately, and so on.\u003csup\u003e52\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn a comparable way, developments in the art of painting were influenced through the invention of portable, enlarged miniatures, the building of museums, art education, the art trade, photography, reproduction techniques and the invention of new materials. Thus, the creation of art books featuring coloured reproductions and, later, the creation of catalogues undoubtedly influenced the development of modern and contemporary art.\u003csup\u003e53\u003c/sup\u003e Watching films and looking at works of art on laptops and smartphones has led to new paintings. With regard to Swennen, we might also suggest the comic book as an influence, but more on this later. The painter stands, therefore, in the midst of a world in movement, a milieu that is affected by his or her own actions and those of everyone else. Yet the reaction to this world does not simply occur within a psychological, actual (as in the exhibition space) or virtual space (of books, television or the Internet). It also occurs, most specifically of all, in the physical space of the painting. It is there that the totality of a world in movement is reprised in a tangible shift, a tangible condensation, a tangible confluence, a tangible obfuscation or revelation, a tangible displacement of the physical, and thus mental, boundaries. Without the development and distribution of comic books, Swennen would not have been able to learn to draw by copying the characters contained within. And if he had not learned to draw by copying comic books, perhaps he never would have developed the habit of drawing with a clear line, or later gone in search for specific techniques through which to transform inflated drawings into paintings in a \u0026lsquo;non-drawn\u0026rsquo; way.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe texture itself\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s poems are not composed of ideas, but words, then Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings are made, in the first place, out of layers of paint that are applied to a support, most usually paper, wood, canvas or metal. It is impossible to compile an exhaustive list of supports, because Swennen, unlike some artists, does not limit himself to certain practices. The first work of art that he exhibited was a beer crate filled with painted bottles. In April 2016, he created a flag by painting upon a piece of rose-coloured fabric; a week later he painted a representation of a brick wall upon a section of a door. Recently, he was given a metal stove cover as a gift because he is fond of painting on them; others have given him failed paintings and wine crates. Ten years ago, he told me that he first used to rub metal stove lids with garlic because he had heard from a restorer that this would facilitate the adhesion of the oil paint. One of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s stovetop paintings comprises a drawing that was made with an electric, metal brush. And so on\u0026hellip;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn recent years, Swennen has also taken to painting with acrylic paint, a medium that rivals oils in terms of the range of fascinating effects that can be achieved. The greatest advantage of acrylic is that it dries quickly. As a consequence, there are things that can be done in this medium that cannot be achieved in oil paint. Thus Swennen has made, in recent years, several paintings that feature a type of stain with sharp edges; a shape that is created by removing a puddle of paint that has started to dry. Because the edges dry first, a sort of contour emerges that can be viewed as an abstract form, or a \u0026lsquo;window\u0026rsquo; within the painting. This technique makes it also possible to give letters a differently coloured edge, one that cannot be obtained in any other way: you paint over them using acrylic paint, allow this to dry for a few minutes, and then remove it again. The shorter drying time also makes it possible to take risks that, in the past, were less obvious. Swennen recently obtained a beautiful sky-blue surface by first coating a canvas with Payne\u0026rsquo;s grey and then painting over it with zinc white mixed with a touch of titanium white. In order to obtain a gradated effect in the original, dark grey surface, he tilted the painting four times: the paint flowed slowly towards the centre, becoming thinner and more transparent at the edges. Swennen likes to let the paint stream slowly over the surfaces of his works because it triggers effects that cannot be foreseen (although he tries to avoid drips, which have an expressive connotation). He told me how pleased he was with the background of the painting To Mona Mills (2015), because he had managed to paint a kind of chaos, which is impossible. He had created it by placing the canvas on the ground and applying paint and water, which he subsequently attempted to mix using a squeegee, all the while taking great care to minimise the amount of water and paint that trickled over the edge of the canvas.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nA technique that Swennen has developed for the transfer of drawings or letters onto a painting is to first apply the paint with the brush, or directly from the tube, onto a plastic sheet. Using this sheet, the image is then printed onto the painting. The first painting in which this technique was used contained a crude representation of a spruce-fir that had been applied with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife. Because he wished to add a letter to the uneven surface, which would be nigh on impossible using a brush, he first painted the letter onto a sheet of very thin, flexible plastic film. Using a wad of fabric, he was able to press this film into the chinks of the underlying paint. Not only are the effects of this printing technique always different, they are also inexplicable if you don\u0026rsquo;t know how they were made.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAnother specific texture in Swennen\u0026rsquo;s oeuvre stems from his fondness for painting with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife, a technique that he borrowed from Claire Fontaine, with whom he took painting lessons for three years, beginning in 1962. Fontaine painted schematised landscapes in the style of Nicolas de Sta\u0026euml;l in which a tree, for example, is depicted by a rectangular green surface that has been smeared onto the canvas with a knife. From her, Swennen learned that paint can be applied with the knife and then subsequently worked with a paintbrush.\u003csup\u003e54\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife is often used to create a layer which clearly distinguishes itself from the other layers and, via its deviating texture, demonstrates the collage-like, interwoven structure of the painting. In addition, this thicker layer, no matter how it is applied (whether it is dabbed, patch by patch, or smeared in a sweeping gesture), can also provide a diverting optical effect. In \u003cem\u003eBlitz\u003c/em\u003e (2015), a broken yellow stripe, reminding some of lightening, visually comes to the fore. Because this stripe was applied with a trowel between two parallel strips of tape, it bears a close resemblance to the actual tape, which gives rise to an attractive sculptural reversal that is as deceptive as it is funny. For another recent painting an effect was created by repeatedly cleaning the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife against the canvas using broad, sweeping gestures. Executed in different types of red, the result was immediately reminiscent of Diana\u0026rsquo;s red tunic in The Death of Actaeon by Titian (National Gallery, London). Later, as is Swennen\u0026rsquo;s wont, he tempered this stunning effect by applying a layer of white.\u003csup\u003e55\u003c/sup\u003e The work was called \u003cem\u003eTransformations\u003c/em\u003e (2016), referring to the habit to whiten shop windows during a renovation.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo date, Swennen has only used the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife to apply oil paint, principally because he has not yet found a satisfying technique to thicken acrylic paint. This brings us to another textural difference in his paintings, which has nothing to do with the manner in which the paint is applied, but with the employed paint itself. In addition to the difference between oil and acrylic paint, we must also take account of the numerous additives that can lend the paint a glossier, duller, coarser, smoother, more fluid or viscous texture. The addition of oil makes the paint shinier, whereas white spirit deadens its sheen. One of the new qualities of acrylic is that you can dilute it with water and use it to make transparent layers (glazes), which enable the artist to gradually build up his paintings in a quest for the perfect value of a tone. In some of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s works, coffee was added to the white background in order to render it more mottled. Sometimes, he has added ink, gouache, cigarette ash or dust from the vacuum cleaner to the paint. (I quote from memory, this is by no means an exhaustive list.) When, in 2006, he started to paint on top of another artist\u0026rsquo;s abandoned paintings (paper collages on canvas), he attacked them with a broom. As a result, small scraps of paper ended up being mixed into the semi-abraded paint.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAs a final example of the textural differences that Swennen makes use of in his paintings, I would like to discuss the work entitled Pirate (2007), which is based upon a gouache that he painted when he was ten years old. The work consists of three individual panels. The two panels on the left-hand side are made up of two different \u0026lsquo;backgrounds\u0026rsquo; that were waiting in the studio. There are always \u0026lsquo;backgrounds\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;des fonds\u0026rsquo;) in abeyance. Often, they are so beautiful that you hope the artist will leave them untouched. In this particular case, he felt so inclined, and came up with the perfect solution upon noticing that, when placed together, the two works were the same length as the right-hand panel (a piece of board with unusual proportions for a painting). When we take a closer look at the latter, we notice that certain sections of the \u0026lsquo;drawing\u0026rsquo;, such as the lines that suggest the lapels of the jacket, are not painted, but created by leaving them unpainted. This does not hold true for the pirate\u0026rsquo;s shirt collar, however, which is a touching invention of the young boy. The contours of the top of the boots, on the other hand, are indeed \u0026lsquo;drawn\u0026rsquo;, while their surface is spared: another pleasing reversal, which reminds us of the fact that Swennen studied etching at the academy. The drawing contains a somewhat awkward but poignant spatial suggestion, which is enhanced by the splayed legs, the semi-obscured right arm, and the sabre that runs behind the legs. We also discern three solid surfaces, which together provide an additional, haptic or pictorial space: the yellow hilt, the white area of the face and the pale blue \u0026lsquo;background\u0026rsquo;, the latter of which was painted around the figure afterwards. Finally, there are the small black discs that float before the pirate, and which were applied to the places where the board, in the area occupied by the figure, contained knots; yet another example of haptic, pictorial depth. Swennen told me that these black spots reminded him of bullet holes, which also allows us to perceive the figure as a paper human target on a shooting range.\u003csup\u003e56\u003c/sup\u003e Thanks to the material reason for the placement of the black disks, however, we understand that this final \u0026lsquo;image content\u0026rsquo; is not what lies at the basis of the painting\u0026rsquo;s construction. It is the result of a series of successive decisions that are linked to the creation of a beautiful mati\u0026egrave;re, the transformation of an existing drawing that possessed certain physical (and emotional) qualities, the application of graphic reversal techniques in terms of transferring the drawing, the creation of a haptic effect through the addition of areas in white, yellow, light blue and black, and the completion of the painting by uniting three different panels.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFiguration and abstraction\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn 1990, Swennen explained to Bart De Baere that he had struggled for some time with the concepts of figuration and abstraction, but had reached the conclusion that it was a false problem \u0026lsquo;because a painting is always an image of a painting. No matter what it depicts, it is always about a painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e57\u003c/sup\u003e Nowadays, I struggle to understand what he might have meant by that first sentence. I think we can say that things were still confused. In a text from 1994\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e58\u003c/sup\u003e, written after several conversations with the artist, I argued that Swennen created paintings in which figuration and abstraction could meet, and which abolished the so-called differences between the two approaches. In 2007, I refined this further by suggesting that this encounter was made possible through the un-modelled, perspective-less space that is specific to Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings.\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e I still believe this to be true, even today, although I would no longer express it in such a way; simply because the terms are too restrictive to help us think about painting. They prevent us from seeing, in the first place, that Swennen weaves textures, and that it is the materials he uses, be they rectangles, drawings or letters, which primarily determine where to apply paint. That these drawings and letters might also mean something, and can evoke images, narratives, thoughts and feelings within the viewers (and Swennen), and at the same time form part of the painting\u0026rsquo;s genesis, is equally important. But the terminological distinction between figuration and abstraction causes us to forget that it always boils down to material additions. All that the distinction between figuration and abstraction means, ultimately, is that one thing is recognisable and \u0026lsquo;says\u0026rsquo; something while the other does not. But colours, shapes and textures can also say something; they just seem to speak less loudly.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nComposition\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSome painters try to obtain balanced compositions, while other painters try to counter any balanced composition that comes too easily. Swennen endeavours to lure into existence compositions he could not possibly have conceived in advance, by applying both intrinsic and external parameters. If we look at Spider (small) (2014) and Spin van Marius (Marius\u0026rsquo; Spider, 2014), two paintings based on a square drawing by Swennen\u0026rsquo;s grandson Marius, we see that the first time he transferred the drawing to the square cover of a cooker. The second time the part of the canvas that falls outside the square surface was painted blue. How unexpected to find this surface at the top of the painting! In \u003cem\u003eStolen Name\u003c/em\u003e (2016) the vertical lines and then the west-sloping lines of letters were overpainted. (Hence the image of the compass needle.) In \u003cem\u003eLe diamant de Juju\u003c/em\u003e (2016) a drawing is festooned with those short lines used to add force to an extraordinary apparition in a comic strip. Some of these little lines are used as borders of the last layer of paint. In the painting \u003cem\u003eIn the Kitchen\u003c/em\u003e (2016) the proportions of the canvas don\u0026rsquo;t correspond to the proportions of the imitated drawing (a found object). Consequently, the reproduced drawing overlaps with the painted, red border, which follows the proportions of the canvas. The resulting effect reminds us of careless printing. Thus, many compositions comply with laws or agreements which fall outside the field of aesthetics. But not all of them. In \u003cem\u003eMature\u003c/em\u003e (2016) a certain yellow colour appears three times: once as the imitation highlight of an abstract, oval form, once as an oval form and once as a strip of colour. When I point to the amusing highlight and the equally amusing recurrence of the colour in the strip of colour, the painter tells me that Claire Fontaine believed every colour used should reappear somewhere else in the same painting. The oval, he added, was the simplest, non-angular form he could make if he wanted to obtain a nicely edged area with a painter\u0026#39;s knife.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Scrumble 2 (2006), the painter\u0026rsquo;s knife was used to hide the bad parts of a painting (a dirty criss-cross of different coloured lines).\u003csup\u003e60\u003c/sup\u003e The resulting composition is reminiscent of the way in which gallery walls are repaired after an exhibition: all of the holes are filled and hidden under a smooth, rectangular plane. Because this \u0026lsquo;composition\u0026rsquo; is controlled by an unpremeditated, but ultimately inevitable structure, Swennen calls this an \u0026lsquo;autogenetic\u0026rsquo; composition.\u003csup\u003e61\u003c/sup\u003e Thus we see how the particular state of a painting (coloured criss-crossing lines that form dirty junctions), combined with a certain technique (the application of paint with a painter\u0026rsquo;s knife), can result in a non-random, new composition.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nDrawings\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMany of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings consist of enlarged reconstructions of found or self-made drawings, of which the figurative elements are usually described, even by the artist himself, as \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo;. I suspect he does this because, of course, they are not drawings: they are not drawn, but reproduced with paint. Some authors think that the drawings are derived from comic books, but this is rarely the case. Nor can you say that they resemble \u0026lsquo;comic-book drawings\u0026rsquo; because, after all, not every comic book is drawn using clear lines. The drawings used by Swennen nearly always possess great linear clarity (without shading or shadows), and often feature solid silhouettes. One of the overriding characteristics is their lack of perspective or modelling, so that they seem to exist within a flat space. If the drawings depart from this formula, then it is because the very first paintings are an exception to this \u0026lsquo;rule\u0026rsquo; (see for instance the reproduction on p. 164) or because the used drawing was found and contains a particular flaw. For example Nan\u0026#39;s Still Life (2015), which is based on a drawing by Swennen\u0026rsquo;s wife, in which the splitting of the word \u0026lsquo;fran\u0026ccedil;ais\u0026rsquo; into syllables indicates that the draughtsman was thinking instead of looking. (As a comment, Swennen added a blunt shadow.) Some drawings come from book covers, game boxes, stickers, packaging and so on. Others are derived from doodles or related, small-scale works on paper.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nCertain writers enumerate and organise these drawings by theme, in much the same way that others add up the number of metaphors in the work of Mallarm\u0026eacute;. Of this, Mannoni writes: \u0026lsquo;The mistake of thematic analysis lies in (\u0026hellip;) the fact that images are approached in the first place, as a signified, and only afterwards as a signifier, when it\u0026rsquo;s too late.\u0026rsquo; And a few pages later he adds: \u0026lsquo;We cannot imagine how thematic analysis (\u0026hellip;) can give an account of irony.\u0026rsquo;\u003csup\u003e62\u003c/sup\u003e Some exegetes see, for example, an image of a king holding a lit cigarette in the vicinity of his genitals. Others see a flat drawing based on a playing card that has been embellished with the depiction of two moving objects: a burning, glowing cigarette and a plume of smoke. Some people see, for example, a ghost. Others see a figure whose non-painted eyes offer a glimpse of the painting\u0026rsquo;s background. As I mentioned above, in a note, Swennen says today that he might add \u0026lsquo;images\u0026rsquo; to his paintings to satisfy the viewer, so that he can go on painting (just like Mallarm\u0026eacute; who, according to Mannoni, introduced recognisable images into his work just to be able to play with words). This remark, however, ignores the role played by the drawings and letters in the creation of the painting, as coincidental but essential indicators of where to apply the paint. In this sense, it concerns very literal \u0026lsquo;signifiers\u0026rsquo;: empty shapes that can be filled with colours and textures.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nOf course, none of this means that the drawings cannot, or may not, mean anything to the artist and viewer. It is precisely this unusual convergence of forms, textures and meanings that lends Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings their richness. What it amounts to, however, is the complex interweaving of all these layers, and the continuous attempts to do this in a new way for each painting. Each painting is trying to be different; each painting strives to disclose, once more, how it is made; each painting endeavours, at the same time, to remain beyond our reach.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nColour\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen mainly uses black, white, grey, yellow, light blue, red and variations of red, such as orange, English red and brown. Very often he mixes these colours with small amounts of other colours to make them slightly impure. \u0026lsquo;There are no primary colours\u0026rsquo;, he once told me. In practice, this means that if a type of paint contains a shade that is reminiscent of the primary colours, it will suffice. In retrospect, you could say that Swennen mostly paints with the colours of Mondrian, although he has replaced dark blue with light blue. I write \u0026lsquo;in retrospect\u0026rsquo; because this was probably not the intention, and perhaps more the result of a desire to ude mainly the primary colours (or shades that resemble them). Sometimes, when finishing a painting, he spoils the applied colours. Two Egyptians (2015) was finished by adding colours directly from the tube, mixing them with water and afterwards cleaning the canvas, scrubbing more around the figures. The red spot resembling a love bite was an unforeseen result of this action. A few years ago, Swennen set himself other boundaries by defining a colour spectrum, the shades of which he would always use in the same order. This spectrum was hung on the studio wall in the form of a strip, to remember the order. It is typical of how he works: he defines rules, endeavours to apply them and then cheats. The use of a limited number of colours lends great consistency to his oeuvre, which makes a vivid and uncluttered impression. It is precisely these limitations that facilitate an impressive, but readable diversity.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWords and letters\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn earlier texts, I pointed out that when Swennen was five, his parents decided to speak another language and send him, accordingly, to a different school. This meant that, from one day to the next, his world became incomprehensible. In all probability, the spoken language must have made an absurd and hostile impression upon him. And at school, the written language probably seemed very strange, or at least at first, when he was unable to link the written characters with a familiar sound or meaning. These circumstances have had an undeniable impact upon his relationship with language, but I do not think they provide a sufficient explanation for his virtuosity.\u003csup\u003e63\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The Belgian is afraid of conceitedness\u0026rsquo;, Simon Leys writes in an essay on the \u0026lsquo;belgitude\u0026rsquo; of Henri Michaux, \u0026lsquo;especially the conceitedness of spoken or written words. Hence his accent, and the famous way of speaking French. The secret is this: Belgians think that words are conceited.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e64\u003c/sup\u003e While Leys has a point, he is also mistaken. What seems to characterise the Belgians (and not only French-speakers, but also the Flemish with their supposedly droll kind of Dutch) is probably common to all people who speak or write a language which, in a different geographical location, is linked to a dominant culture (with its specific social, economic and political influence). This place need not be nearby, like France and the Netherlands in the case of the Belgians. I suspect that some English-speaking inhabitants of North America, in centuries past, deliberately rejected the standard linguistic norms in their use of the language, just as today, Canadians, Australians, and English-speaking South Africans and Indians will resist the influence of American English. Wherever an element of language is associated with social, economic, political or cultural dominance, a deviant version will emerge. This is certainly true in the ghettos of the United States, also in Brittany, Alsace, Provence, the French Basque Country and French-speaking Canada. A deviating use of language expresses a different set of values.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen Swennen speaks, you sometimes hear that his Belgian accent becomes more pronounced. In sociolinguistics, the act of switching to a language variant that deviates more from the norm is described as downward divergence. It is used, for instance, to emphasise the pedantry of your interlocutor. Swennen, who is fascinated by argot (as in French translations of American crime novels, for example), is annoyed by the fact that his French-speaking acquaintances listen to French radio stations. Deviating language is not irrational, it just gives shape to a different set of values. What Leys noted is a phenomenon that undoubtedly exists in China as well, but which we cannot hear. You can only probably hear it in your own language, just as you can only truly grasp literary works that are written in your mother tongue. And herein lies the truth of Leys\u0026rsquo; remark, for a poetic language can only be appreciated as a deviation from a standard language. Every literary language is perverse, capricious or, at the very least, unusual.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat Swennen does with words is wonderful. He allows them to collide and merge, he isolates or suppresses them, turns them upside down or mirrors them (or mirrors only the letters, which remain in the usual order). He deploys all of the techniques described by Freud and Shklovski: shifting, inversion, duplication, repetition and condensation.\u003csup\u003e65\u003c/sup\u003e He uses words for their sound and for their shape, and he uses them because of their meaning. He lets them turn and tilt, he uses and abuses them, he tells lies and he says what he thinks. Language has become form: a collection of unreliable sounds that can always mean something else, as in our dreams, but also an almost endless collection of typographies and characters (Roman, Cyrillic, Chinese\u0026hellip;). We see the words, and we read them. We think we see words, but in fact we see coloured surfaces that no \u0026lsquo;abstract\u0026rsquo; painter could ever imagine or justify. \u003cem\u003eConnard\u003c/em\u003e (2014) contains three invectives, in which some of the letters are upside down or mirrored. \u0026lsquo;I thought that if I made the words a little less legible\u0026rsquo;, Swennen told me, \u0026lsquo;I could buy the painting a few seconds of extra time during which it could prove itself. Because when people recognise an image in a painting, or read a word, they walk straight on past. Now, the husband will pause for a few seconds to decipher the words, so his wife will have just enough time to poke him in the ribs with her elbow and whisper: \u0026ldquo;Look at the beautiful colours!\u0026rdquo;\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhoever looks at these fragmented remains of our languages might consider them to be a form of resistance to rationality and related, life-threatening moral forces. This would reflect the views of Freud, who believed that fulfilling sexual experiences were incompatible with the conditions of civilisation, making it mandatory for our unconscious urges to resort to secrecy (for instance, by hiding the truth in illogical jokes). If we look at portmanteaus such as \u0026lsquo;famillionaire\u0026rsquo; (Heine quoted by Freud) or \u0026lsquo;beggar-millionaire\u0026rsquo; (Shklovski) they might indeed seem illogical but, in my view, they are constructed according to laws which are also used by \u0026lsquo;rational thought\u0026rsquo;, or any other form of productive thinking. They are the result of the same \u0026lsquo;condensation\u0026rsquo; that leads Francis Bacon to tell Sylvester that Michelangelo and Muybridge have become one and the same artist in his mind. Ultimately, even the laws of nature, which are amongst the highest fruits of rational thought, are forms of condensation, because they bring together at least two different physical units in the form of an equation. It does not matter how you arrive at an idea or a formulation, so long as the thought or formulation bears fruit.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf we do not consider these language games to be an irrational opposition to reason and morality, but as an unreliable, stubborn, irritable, stained, tainted, messy, quirky, idiosyncratic and independent way of thinking that, above all, is inextricably linked to the material concepts of the painting, then we see a connection with the philosophy of Max Stirner, from whom Swennen recently gained a new maxim: \u0026lsquo;Mein Widerwille bleibt frei\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;My disinclination remains free.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e66\u003c/sup\u003e In contrast to general reasoning, Stirner defended the right to a personal \u0026lsquo;unreason\u0026rsquo; which was real to him, because he himself felt real. Heralding Gombrowicz\u0026rsquo;s plea for immaturity and opposition to Form, he wrote: \u0026lsquo;The thought of right is originally my thought; or, it has its origin in me. But when it has sprung from me, when the \u0026ldquo;Word\u0026rdquo; is out, then it has \u0026ldquo;become flesh\u0026rdquo;, it is a fixed idea. Now I no longer get rid of the thought; however I turn, it stands before me. Thus men have not become masters again of the thought \u0026ldquo;right\u0026rdquo;, which they themselves created; their creature is running away with them.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e67\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen\u0026rsquo;s recalcitrant language can also be set against the background of Lacan\u0026rsquo;s belief that we are made of language, and that language has alienated us from both our bodies and the world. Man would be a \u0026lsquo;language-being\u0026rsquo; (\u0026lsquo;parl\u0026ecirc;tre\u0026rsquo;) with a hopeless, irreparably distorted sexuality, exiled in a world of unreliable, manipulative words, which cannot touch the core of reality, le r\u0026eacute;el. Reading Lacan is a wonderful, amusing adventure, and it is not without significance that Swennen has been influenced by him, but I prefer not to delve into this here.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAbout flat paintings and pictorial space\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe lack of modelling and (correctly applied) perspective in the drawings used by Swennen would seem to suggest that he wishes to create flat paintings. Strictly speaking, this is not the case. His paintings are not all-over or polyfocal. Nor do they evoke a flat image that seems to hover in front of the canvas, as wished for by Greenberg. So what does, in fact, happen? The drawings themselves are flat, constituting one of the planes that are combined into a painting. Sometimes these planes seem to situate themselves at different distances from the viewer, thus creating a pictorial space, but at other times not.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his book on Bacon, Deleuze distinguishes between the optical and haptic use of colour. Optical use of colour segues from light to dark, includes shades (values) of the same tone, and is used in what Greenberg called \u0026lsquo;sculptural\u0026rsquo; painting (which reached its apogee in the seventeenth century). Haptic use of colour does not involve shades of the same tone, but juxtaposes different colours in the knowledge that their \u0026lsquo;cold\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;warm\u0026rsquo; character will create an impression of lightness or darkness, and closeness or distance.\u003csup\u003e68\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nBecause Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings lack perspectival elements and do not rely upon the optical use of colour (values of the same tone, shadows), unless as a joke (for example, the shadow of a letter, or the shadows in found drawings which are usually selected because they contain a flaw), one might say that his work is an innovative variation on the artistic traditions that consciously renounced \u0026lsquo;modelling\u0026rsquo; (by way of lighting effects) as an approach to reality, and that \u0026lsquo;went on reducing the fictive depth of painting\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e69\u003c/sup\u003e Greenberg noted that such a deliberate negation of the \u0026lsquo;realistic\u0026rsquo; approach had only occurred twice: first in Byzantine art and, secondly, as a result of the radical, late-Impressionist paintings (including those by Monet) that can be considered as the first \u0026lsquo;all-over\u0026rsquo; paintings. According to Greenberg, painters such as C\u0026eacute;zanne, Gauguin, Matisse, Picasso, Braque and Klee were the first to adopt this approach, with Mondrian following later. But since it aimed \u0026lsquo;to reaffirm the flatness of pictorial space\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e70\u003c/sup\u003e, the approach was only fully realised, in his view, in the work of the painters that he personally championed such as Pollock, Rothko, Newman and Still.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSome people claim that Mondrian strove to make \u0026lsquo;flat\u0026rsquo; paintings: works in which, to the eyes of the viewer, the blue and red surfaces do not appear to recede or advance but, thanks to the addition of a black or grey grid, all of the coloured fields appear to situate themselves at the same pictorial depth. I do not know if this was actually Mondrian\u0026rsquo;s intention because I have not read his writings, but it is undeniably true that the red and blue do indeed seem to be at the same depth in some paintings. For Greenberg, however, Mondrian was but a precursor, whose work but signalled all-over painting: \u0026lsquo;Dominating and counter-posed shapes, as provided by intersecting straight lines and blocks of color, are still insisted upon, and the surface still presents itself as a theater or scene of forms rather than as a single, indivisible piece of texture.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e71\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGreenberg did not appreciate paintings in which certain areas stood out and thereby resembled a \u0026lsquo;figure\u0026rsquo;, or those in which patches of colour were strewn around in a contrapuntal way. Nor did he like paintings that seemed to retreat into the wall, like a window. He preferred paintings in which the \u0026lsquo;pictorial effect\u0026rsquo; was uniformly dispersed and appeared to hover in front of the canvas.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIf we use Greenberg\u0026rsquo;s criteria as a way of better understanding Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, we find that the artist does, in fact, play with all of these elements. The absence of modelling and (correctly applied) perspective might create the impression that Swennen wants to make flat paintings, but they often contain prominent elements that seem to leap to the fore. He does not use modelling or perspectival depth, but evokes pictorial depth through the haptic use of colours (tonal contrasts). In a conversation that was published in 2007, he says: \u0026lsquo;I have always found the condemnation of illusion and depth to be deplorable. Even a blank canvas has depth. The good thing about painting is that you can decide whether or not you want to utilise that depth.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e72\u003c/sup\u003e In April 2016, when Swennen and I looked at an unfinished painting that contained four different shades of white, it seemed obvious that one of these, an ivory-toned hue, came more to the fore than the others. I asked Swennen if this was intentional, and whether he had observed the effect. Twice he answered negatively. If anything, he was annoyed by the question. Didn\u0026rsquo;t I know that paintings are flat? And that they have a texture like puff pastry?\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe point is that Swennen will always oppose the habit of confusing the result of a practice with a so-called intention. It is not because a finished painting contains a certain image that this image found itself at the origin of the painting. The same applies to texture and pictorial space. It is certainly enlightening to see Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings from the stance of Greenberg, but at the same time we must realise that what we see has never been pursued by the painter as part of a programme. He has always tried to paint whatever. Rejecting any kind of programme in terms of content or personal expression,\u003csup\u003e73\u003c/sup\u003e Swennen has devised a free way of working in order to come up with unprecedented paintings. Even if we have the impression that he is \u0026lsquo;playing\u0026rsquo;, this is not the result of an intention. His paintings are not anti-perspectival or anti-modelling in a programmatic way, but they are, in a very concrete sense, pro-painting. They are not the result of intentions, but the results of a number of parameters that he uses to construct his painting-objects.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat are these parameters? Actually, it mainly comes down to habits. In 1990, he told Bart De Baere that his drawings remind us of comic books because he learned to draw by copying them. For the specific \u0026lsquo;space\u0026rsquo; of his paintings, it seems essential that Swennen uses a clear line and makes line drawings that do not suggest volume (the opposite of Chinese painting). But he himself will never call it a clear line. He will never formulate it as an objective. It is simply a habit that can be put to good use.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTo me, Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings reflect\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e74\u003c/sup\u003e upon the possibilities of flat paintings and pictorial space. This thinking is free. It is not bound to intentions, stylistic principles, or a programme. It stems from the radical principle of painting whatever, from a number of habits and from a tactical approach that allows for provoked accidents.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nStill Life\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn Swennen\u0026rsquo;s work we find moving cars, smouldering cigarettes, falling men and sprinting athletes. I always see these figures as funny allusions to the impossibility of representing movement in a painting.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMalcolm Morley -\u0026ndash; a painter whom Swennen admires (for instance because of the white borders, which indicate that he does not depict three-dimensional space in his work, but two-dimensional images)\u003csup\u003e75\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026ndash; describes his paintings, which are based on models, postcards and other pictures, as still lifes.\u003csup\u003e76\u003c/sup\u003e Gilson considers the still life to be a genre \u0026lsquo;in which painting reveals its very essence and reaches one of its points of perfection.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e77\u003c/sup\u003e He describes The Intervention of the Sabine Women by David as an unsatisfactory attempt to suggest movement. But probably, he continues, this was never the artist\u0026rsquo;s intention. Accepting the immobility of paintings, he probably sought to evoke an illusion of movement through a play with lines: not the depicted people move, but the composition. This effect is even more pronounced, says Gilson, when we compare David\u0026rsquo;s painting with Vel\u0026aacute;zquez\u0026rsquo;s The Surrender of Breda. \u0026lsquo;In this masterpiece\u0026rsquo;, he writes, \u0026lsquo;there is hardly a trace of motion left. Time seems to have come to a standstill. Human beings themselves, however well painted they may be, are only second in importance to the patterns of the lines and to the balance of the masses.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e78\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhen I recently asked Swennen to elucidate two paintings that contain the image of a propeller, he said that they were still lifes, because they were based on an existing fan. In \u003cem\u003eSchroef\u003c/em\u003e (2014), we discern a number of white spots along the edge of the blades. Why are they there? Ruminating upon the existence of left- and right-handed propellers, Swennen had the idea of covering the image of a propeller (an outline drawing) with a white drawing of the same object, but mirrored. Not happy with the result, he erased the second outline. At the points where it intersected with the first outline, which was still wet, the paint could not be erased, so the white spots remained. Why a propeller? Probably because the object that ended up in Swennen\u0026rsquo;s studio has a pleasing shape. Perhaps because it reminded him of his father, who was an engineer and worked in the docks for a long time. Perhaps because the propeller is an invitation to engage in bricolage. Finally, because a propeller is essentially a moving object and paintings cannot depict motion. The movement is not depicted, but it is contained within the painting, which bears traces of an obliterated gesture.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe imperfect perspective\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThe irreverent way in which Swennen deals with perspective is reminiscent of the tricks that Rogier van der Weyden employed in The Seven Sacraments Altarpiece and The Descent from the Cross. In the first painting, the central figures are much larger than the others. If we compare the size of Christ with the architecture, he would, in actuality, be five metres tall. The result of van der Weyden\u0026rsquo;s trickery is an impression of great proximity that, in an incomprehensible way, seems quite obvious.\u003csup\u003e79\u003c/sup\u003e In the Descent, the entire narrative takes place within an altarpiece cabinet that is approximately a shoulder-width deep. Yet this scene plays itself out in five successive layers: closest to the viewer is the apostle John, who supports Mary. Behind Mary, already a little deeper within the scene, we see the body of Christ, which has been passed to Joseph of Arimathea and is already being carried away by Nicodemus. Behind these men stands the cross and, deeper still, the servant who, on top of a ladder, has freed Christ and lowered him. While this servant should, by rights, be situated two metres further behind, the nail that he holds in his right hand advances out of the altarpiece cabinet.\u003csup\u003e80\u003c/sup\u003e This use of perspective to create a phantasmagorical space probably had a symbolic function related to a specific world view.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to the art historian Dirk De Vos, there was no clarity of meaning to the symbolism of the Middle Ages. \u0026lsquo;Everything could be used or interpreted in multiple directions. Indeed, the multifaceted world was God\u0026rsquo;s Being in multiple disguises. If we read the philosophical, theological or moralistic tracts, or the mystical writings, then we are faced with a profusion of images and symbolism, as the only means by which to communicate the unspeakable. (\u0026hellip;) As the mastery of this technique advanced, insight into the world became increasingly complex and ambiguous, which would ultimately lead to divine revelation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e81\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;Erwin Panofsky\u0026rsquo;, writes De Vos, \u0026lsquo;has called this \u0026ldquo;disguised symbolism\u0026rdquo; because of the underlying events that the depiction does not immediately divulge. Through too literal detective work into these symbols, however, this term often leads to a system of iconographic statements that actually negate the spirit of the visual revelation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e82\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nNo one knows the technical and stylistic origins of the oil painting techniques used by the Flemish Primitives. Sometimes it seems as though these painters were possessed of a sudden urge to depict polychrome sculptures in a flat manner, at other times it would seem that the similarities between these two art forms is more related to the desired ambiguity of the paintings. According to De Vos, the paintings probably originated out of the flourishing studios of the Flemish-French miniature painters, whose \u0026lsquo;nature and perfection can explain for (the beginnings of) panel painting.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e83\u003c/sup\u003e He points to formal factors such as the \u0026lsquo;illusionistic, anti-decorative and anti-hieratic evolution of the miniature: the small size, for example, that implies a clarity that intensifies the possibilities of imagery; the fact that a miniature always resembles a \u0026ldquo;window\u0026rdquo; as a result of the prominent frame, which serves to highlight the illusory nature of the image.\u0026rsquo; Anyway, whatever its origin, \u0026lsquo;the independence of the painted image has finally manifested itself in material form. A portable \u0026ldquo;wall unit\u0026rdquo; was created, especially designed to house a painted representation. It is a form common to fifteenth-century painting: a filled and mounted panel, as smooth and flat as a mirror, set like a piece of glass in a window frame, a kind of flat viewing box that allowed the visual enchantment to be carried from room to room.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e84\u003c/sup\u003e In other words, these paintings were not born of a desire to detach frescoes from their architectural supports, or as a way of creating flat reproductions of polychrome sculptural groups, but as ingenious illustrations from books turned into monumental paintings. Could it be a coincidence that something similar happened with Walter Swennen? Perhaps the specific, flat space of his paintings, in which coloured surfaces meet words and drawings with clear lines, spring from the doodles of a distracted reader? This is probably too strong. Yet there must be a grain of truth in it. The amazing freedom of his works, on a material, compositional and \u0026lsquo;non-programmatic\u0026rsquo; level, can, in part, best be explained from the perspective of the freedom within certain comic books, the doodles in the margins of ponderous writings and the scattered words and phrases that are left over from the reading of an inspiring book.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nFinally, I would like to share some nonsense about the perspective-less, pictorial space of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, starting with some reflections by Daniel Arasse on the invention of perspective in the fifteenth century. According to Arasse, perspective cannot simply be considered as a symbol for a world without God, as Panofsky has proposed, nor merely as a prerequisite for a place that facilitates action (as Pierre Francastel posited). In Arasse\u0026rsquo;s opinion, perspective, which was originally called \u0026lsquo;commensuratio\u0026rsquo;, was used to shape the world to the scale of the human figure, a world that was measurable. For that reason, perspective was often used to give form to the mystery of the Incarnation: the infinite God becoming measurable and tangible. He points, for example, to a pillar in an Annunciation by Ambrogio Lorenzetti that is dated to 1344. This pillar, a common symbol of Christ, is rendered with perspective at the base, but while it ascends, it gradually merges into the Divine gold leaf of the background.\u003csup\u003e85\u003c/sup\u003e In the perspective-less space of Swennen, it seems, no Incarnation is possible. Fortunately, Lacan would sigh, since the Incarnation is the source of all misery.\u003csup\u003e86\u003c/sup\u003e And we remember that Freud, according to Lacan, was drawn to the God of the Old Testament because He stood for the Word and an invisible, masculine Law, in contrast with the feminine Reality, which is round and made of flesh. In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s work seems to be no place for the feminine reality: everything seems to be spectral and thin, like a pneumatic, spiritual adventure (cosa mentale). Everything? No, in this ghostly world, there is something that offers resistance, like a gallstone. And that something is the painting.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nTurning the nonsensical into an enigma\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn the collected wordings Hic Haec Hoc, Swennen describes making paintings as transforming the nonsensical into an enigma.\u003csup\u003e87\u003c/sup\u003e Before we take a closer look at this statement, we would do well to recall what Mannoni wrote about Baudelaire: that it was his destiny to \u0026lsquo;incessantly touch upon obscure questions, without promising explanation.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e88\u003c/sup\u003e This is reminiscent of Swennen\u0026rsquo;s remark that the art historian Paul Ilegems was correct to describe him as \u0026lsquo;a pain in the neck\u0026rsquo;. Just as the enigma is a challenge thrown to the people by a god\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e89\u003c/sup\u003e, so Swennen presents us with paintings as aporias, works that compel us to accept a kind of \u0026lsquo;deferred meaning\u0026rsquo;, of the type that Mannoni found in Mallarm\u0026eacute;\u0026rsquo;s poetry. \u0026lsquo;From the first reading,\u0026rsquo; Mannoni writes, \u0026lsquo;there is a promise of meaning, there is the mystery of the twenty-four letters: as long as the sentence is incomplete, we supposedly still have multiple meanings... this state, in which we are more undecided than lost, continuously coalesces and disintegrates as we proceed. This is called the reading. Only Mallarm\u0026eacute; makes this a state without end...\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e90\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nWhat does an experience of the nonsensical actually entail? Swennen\u0026rsquo;s first exposure to meaninglessness probably occurred his parents decided, from one day to the next, to speak a different language as a way of breaking with the wartime past. Many a child has been forced to learn a new language. But how many people, during their childhood, suddenly found that they could no longer understand their parents? The experience must have been abysmal.\u003csup\u003e91\u003c/sup\u003e Yet it seems that Swennen survived this situation by not taking it seriously, by giving it a twist. Disconnected letters, sounds, words and meanings may have engendered an ever-shifting inner world, a realm that few discover.\u003csup\u003e92\u003c/sup\u003e This is what I suspect, for the very reason that it lays the foundations for a second crucial experience of \u0026lsquo;meaninglessness\u0026rsquo;, namely his discovery that the \u0026lsquo;non-representative\u0026rsquo; elements of a painting (\u0026lsquo;between the terra cotta saucer and the signature\u0026rsquo;) do not \u0026lsquo;mean\u0026rsquo; anything anymore; it is only a \u0026lsquo;painting\u0026rsquo;. A pleasurable, endless activity suddenly opened up to him, one that extended beyond language and meaning.\u003csup\u003e93\u003c/sup\u003e \u003csup\u003e94\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nObjects have something to say, not because they speak to us, but because we start talking to ourselves when we see them. We consequently experience them as meaningful. Works of art can also have meaning; only the significance does not have to result from an intention of the artist. The meaning does not derive from the things, but from a human need. Meaning watches over us in the depths of the night.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMannoni noted that the point of a joke makes the wordplay (out of which the witticism is born) bearable.\u003csup\u003e95\u003c/sup\u003e We seem to find it intolerable when words are confused. The disorder makes us feel uneasy. Jumbled words lose their meaning. A world that is named with meaningless words seems just that, meaningless. But if we weren\u0026rsquo;t able to tinker with words, we would become trapped in them. The psychoanalyst tinkers, the poet tinkers, the painter tinkers. But they rarely admit this. And quite often, they do not know it themselves.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nIn his book Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, Freud endeavours to show, in elaborate detail, that jokes are established in the same way as dreams, driven by the unconscious. Via a subtle detour he tries to lead us towards new evidence for the existence of the unconscious, which is something that he regards as a given, as he admits at the end of the volume. If we set Freud\u0026rsquo;s topological meanderings aside (the question where the drives are actually located, how they are repressed, which site is \u0026lsquo;occupied\u0026rsquo; by the psychic energy and through which gaps this energy escapes in order to satiate a still forbidden lust), then we understand that he views the joke as a statement that initially seems to make sense, then turns out to be senseless, but ultimately possesses a deeper hidden meaning. This meaning, which differentiates the joke from the games of children and the noncommittal jest, would reside in the fact that it disarms rational criticism and allows for the utterance of obscene, aggressive, cynical and sceptical thoughts because of a witty formulation (that briefly makes sense and subsequently turns out to be nonsense).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Freud the joke always targets the prevailing morality, the principles of which prevent us from giving free reign to pleasure because all forms of society call for the delayed gratification of our personal desires. The beauty of Freud, in my view, is that he doesn\u0026rsquo;t merely stop there and seems to want to upend the entire world. \u0026lsquo;What these jokes whisper,\u0026rsquo; he writes, \u0026lsquo;may be said aloud: that the wishes and desires of men have a right to make themselves acceptable alongside of exacting and ruthless moral values. And in our days it has been said in forceful and stirring sentences that this morality is only a selfish regulation laid down by the few who are rich and powerful and who can satisfy their wishes at any time without any postponement\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e96\u003c/sup\u003e To introduce his chapter on the hidden purposes of the joke, he reminds the reader of Heinrich Heine\u0026rsquo;s witticism, in which the latter compares Catholic priests and Protestant clerics, respectively, to supermarket employees and independent shopkeepers. Freud writes that he had hesitated about including this joke in his book because he realised \u0026lsquo;that among my readers there would probably be a few who felt respect not only for religion, but also for its CEOs and management personnel.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e97\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAccording to Freud the joke is directed against authority figures, sexual rivals and institutions such as marriage, of which he wrote: \u0026lsquo;One does not venture to say aloud and openly that marriage is not an arrangement calculated to satisfy a man\u0026rsquo;s sexuality...\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e98\u003c/sup\u003e The reader is left with the impression that it always must have been Freud\u0026rsquo;s motivation to defend the right to be different: the right to be a poet, a painter, a homosexual or a Jew. Freud is a blessed crook. The whole of Freud\u0026rsquo;s psychoanalysis is a sort of joke, aimed at the formulation of social criticism but which, at the same time, bypasses any authoritarian or moral resistance. Still in the chapter on the underlying purposes of jokes, Freud analyses a joke about a deaf Jew who is told by his doctor that his lack of hearing is due to an excessive consumption of alcohol. The Jew decides to stop drinking. When it transpires that he has fallen off the wagon, he admits that his hearing had improved when sober, but he decided that he was better off drinking because he heard such terrible things. And Freud concludes: \u0026lsquo;In the background lies the sad question whether the man may not have been right in his choice. It is on account of the allusion made by these pessimistic stories to the manifold and hopeless miseries of the Jews that I must class them with tendentious jokes.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e99\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nAlthough the joke has a higher purpose, according to Freud, the remarkable thing is that its origins lie in a childlike desire for gratification, which takes the form of a lust for words and a hankering for nonsense (the condensation of words or the exploitation of similarities, for example, would save psychic energy in a way that is tantamount to experiencing lust). \u0026lsquo;But the characteristic tendency of boys to do absurd or silly things\u0026rsquo;, Freud writes (he is silent about girls), \u0026lsquo;seems to me to be directly derived from the pleasure in nonsense.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e100\u003c/sup\u003e Children (just like adults \u0026lsquo;in a toxically altered state of mind\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e101\u003c/sup\u003e) would love to play with thoughts, words and sentences. Later, a price is paid in the name of reason, and \u0026lsquo;only significant combinations of words remain permitted.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e102\u003c/sup\u003e Thus the desire would stay buried and seek gratification through joke-telling, thus facilitating the expression of criticism.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThis does not sound convincing. Rather it seems that jokes are made possible, and have been drawn into our existence, through our disproportionate need for meaning. When our meaning-seeking brain falsely detects a sexual or other interest in a combination of sounds or shapes, we find this combination funny. Ultimately, we laugh at this rummaging brain and, by extension, at all of the institutions that have emerged from our dangerous need for precisely-defined, specific meanings: rules of games, sports clubs, social rituals, fashions, schools, churches, political parties and so on.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nThrough its disturbing character, the joke is related to the Greek oracle, as described by Giorgio Colli in Naissance de la Philosophie: ambiguous, elusive pronouncements by an apparently malicious and cruel God. Oracles are passed on to us by seers. Often they take the form of riddles. Only the wise can solve or interpret these conundrums. \u0026lsquo;For the Greeks\u0026rsquo;, Colli writes, \u0026lsquo;the wording of an enigma carries in itself tremendous hostility.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e103\u003c/sup\u003e The gods reveal their wisdom through words, he writes, \u0026lsquo;hence the external nature of the oracle: ambiguity, obscurity, allusiveness, uncertainty\u0026rsquo;.\u003csup\u003e104\u003c/sup\u003e For Colli, the divine origin of the oracle is a sufficient explanation for its obscurity. But why must God\u0026rsquo;s word be obscure (ambiguous, uncertain and allusive)? Does God have a speech impediment? Or is it simply that the words, being fundamentally skewed and of human origin, are unfit for divine thoughts? We know the true words of the Christian God; that is a fact. But why is the word of our almighty and infallible God so ambiguous, contradictory and confused? There are several answers to this question. Firstly, the holy books would never have survived, nor have inspired so many people, if they were unambiguous. The inconsistency and muddle-headedness of spiritual texts is a prerequisite for their viability and efficacy. Secondly, the word of God is contradictory and confused because it was aimed at preventing us from believing that we know God. Gods are useful as an instrument of power when their words can only be understood and translated by a select few. Also, spiritually minded people see gods as images representing the unknowable nature of the world and the inadequacy of knowledge. A knowable God cannot be a God.\u003csup\u003e105\u003c/sup\u003e Only as an unknowable construction God can guide us towards humility and a constant awareness of our imperfect knowledge. Societies were made possible through the invention of unknowable gods. Man does not stop being an animal when he learns to speak, but when he keeps remembering that his perceptions are relative, that his words are inadequate and that his thoughts can never claim to be based on a universal truth. Thirdly, therefore, the words of gods are nebulous in order to remind us that our own observations, words and thoughts are muddled and relative.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nGradually, however, the enigma was uncoupled from the divine oracle and came to assume the form of a person-to-person intellectual challenge. And later still, says Colli, it gave rise to dialectics. A dialectical conversation in ancient Greece always departed from two contradictory statements (The Being is and the Being is not). The opponent was invited to side with one of these propositions and it was subsequently demonstrated that his position (no matter which side he took) was untenable. The challenger, who formulated the contradiction, always won. For Colli, the dialectic culture of the ancient Greeks was destructive because it undermined all forms of certainty or conviction. Yet it seems to me that in order to overcome prejudice, stupidity, demagogy, dictatorships, absolute monarchies and religious mania, this destruction is indispensable. The predetermined \u0026lsquo;victory\u0026rsquo; of the challenger in the dialectical conflict depended not upon his arguments, but upon the fact that it sprang from a contradiction. No single reality can be approached only from two perspectives. In almost all sciences, progress is the result of a cross-fertilisation between approaches that previously pretended to be exclusive. Does this prevent us from adopting positions? Certainly not, but is it so hard to remember that each position is fundamentally relative? \u0026lsquo;Heraclitus had no criticism of the senses\u0026rsquo;, wrote Colli\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e106\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;on the contrary, he praised sight and hearing, but he condemned the tendency to transform our perceptions into something stable that would exist outside of us.\u0026rsquo;\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;The essence of the enigma\u0026rsquo;, said Aristotle, \u0026lsquo;lies in putting together apparently inconsistent and impossible things.\u0026rsquo;\u0026thinsp;\u003csup\u003e107\u003c/sup\u003e As Shklovski demonstrated, the same can be said of a narrative that is crafted through the use of prioms: the devices that permit unexpected twists. It is also true for the dream-work and joke-work, which seem to speak about a hidden knowledge that guides our behaviour. And Lacan\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;le r\u0026eacute;el\u0026rsquo; also speaks in riddles.\u003csup\u003e108\u003c/sup\u003e Attempting to guess the nature of Schopenhauer\u0026rsquo;s Will or Freud\u0026rsquo;s Unconscious is ridiculous if one believes that these Things actually exist. But the puzzling itself, the playing with words and images, the rearranging of sentences and the weaving of alternative narratives can turn an unmanageable life into a manageable one. Not because the neurotic has been tamed by his psychiatrist, as the Lacanians believe, and not because the true nature of his or her desires has been revealed, but because a fruitful interaction with a shifting (internal or external) reality requires a constantly self-renewing language game.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen, who undoubtedly discovered a \u0026lsquo;right to nonsense\u0026rsquo; in the writings of Lacan, does not believe in the existence of the unconscious. \u0026lsquo;All we can say is that there\u0026rsquo;s thinking\u0026rsquo;, he says.\u003csup\u003e109\u003c/sup\u003e In Swennen\u0026rsquo;s paintings, there is thinking. \u0026Ccedil;a pense. Colours, shapes, textures, letters, words and figures are woven together to form a new, concrete thought. Not in order to report on a reality that is located beyond the painting, but in order \u0026lsquo;to be\u0026rsquo;: to be visible, to have been made, to have been thought through action, and thus, as an enigma, to indirectly give an account of the miracles of thinking (through action).\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026lsquo;Basic research is what I am doing when I don\u0026rsquo;t know what I am doing\u0026rsquo;, wrote Wernher von Braun in The New York Times.\u003csup\u003e110\u003c/sup\u003e \u0026lsquo;There is no idea, however ancient and absurd, that is not capable of improving our knowledge\u0026rsquo;, wrote Feyerabend.\u003csup\u003e111\u003c/sup\u003e Some tribes or nations in the Brazilian rainforest did not need western science to achieve peace, as Claude L\u0026eacute;vi-Strauss has demonstrated, but a collection of concepts, images and associated rituals that, in their own way, led to harmony.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nSwennen gives form to concrete thoughts that reveal the prioms and the collage-like structure of all thinking. The young Swennen wanted to become a philosopher. He eventually became a painter to be able to think in a free way. Or so I see it. Everybody is free to think differently.\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u003cbr /\u003e\r\nMontagne de Miel, 30 June 2016\u003cbr /\u003e\r\n\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n"},{"locale":"es","short_description":"","description":""},{"locale":"el","short_description":"","description":""}],"actors":[]}