Georges Koutsandreou " 2007  oval target : " ski nautique 81x65

Perpendicular conjunction of the passages :

 We assert that passage of the figure over the rectangular format is in a perpendicular conjunction with the second passage through  the canvas  ( in two dimensions) by the target symbolizing tunnel effect.

 At the start of 2005, we published  the first assertions of Supranaive Figuration to Internet. Two years later, the movement enters in a second phase, adding a new concept to the previous ones. (April 2007 )

We firstly asserted :  While “ declaring” space, the passage of the figure over the rectangular format expresses third dimension without using perspective.

We add to the first passage of the figure a second one by target to tunnel effect.

To understand this new concept requires to call  to mind  Kenneth Noland ‘s targets  implying  the idea of the passage by tunnel effect i.e  a passage through the canvas towards “another universe” ( conceptually speaking and in scientific anticipation).

Scientists would demontrate tunnel effect with spiral example Target is pictorial representation of spiral in only two dimensions; It is a way to express depth without recourse to perspective

Supranaive Figuration applies this concept to figuration.

In both pictorial processes we newly  express passage of the figure into  “another universe”by means of tunnel effect target  from which figure is passing  “through” the canvas.

In Georges Koutsandréou‘ s  new  painting  tunnel effect targets are oval . Rotating speed  of tunnel is added by unevennes of ellipsoïdal rings..

In Martina Charbonnel’s  new artworks,    tunnel effect targets are rectangular. Her recent paintings represent  a detail of  center of target. Difference of colours  between the epicentre and  the target sides is showing different consistencies of tunnel walls.

In both cases, there is a perpendicular conjunction of  figural passage over the format  with passage “ going inland” ( by tunnel effect target ) through the canvas ( the format).

That perpendicular conjunction over  and through the rectangular format is  a fundamantal assertion, which never has been applied into painting not even  in abstract.

It these times when the artistic circles (in France) show disregard for the painters, it becomes urgent to propose new prospects. People who consent to accept painting if it not theorize delude themselves and mislead us.

Should we recall that since centuries painting only had progressed from successive concepts? While going back at least until medieval times, we can realize that it was already a place of invention in resonance with science. Painters were researchers. Later, they among others discovered the composition thanks to the golden number, the divine proportion, the principles of the light and shade and the different perspective lines. More close to us, since the impressionists, there was a succession of paintings theories. Thus, many artists think they could not find anything new in painting.

It is true that the heritage left by our predecessors could seem heavy. It is however comfortable enough to enjoy it with complete freedom and to simply paint for the pleasure. Thus, one can think in good faith to avoid the embarrass about any concept.  That kind of artists only follows the way of their predecessors who precisely brought concepts to painting. It is their right to do homage to the great masters. For all that, they are not authorized to give any lesson to the artists continuing to experiment in painting. Research is the only attitude, which allowed painting to remain. The only painters engaged in an innovative conceptual reflexion contribute to make evolve their discipline.

A movement is a meeting of several artistic processes around the same basics theories defined by a Manifeste. The number of initiators imports less than the relevance of the concepts and the potentialities, which they  trace.  The group however gives to a movement a greater visibility and contribute to enrich the reflexion.

Anyway, a movement allows the artists to stand and decide if they recognized it or not.  Thus, they can either join it or contradict it. This reference point takes part in questioning of contemporary painting of which it reinforces dynamic.

In century 21th, the creation of a movement meets a certain adversity (especially in France) because the institutions preferring consider it as a backward- looking art. 

post extract from the “FORUM DE LA FIGURATION SUPRANAIVE » : Category  Contre-courants : « Est-ce possible de lancer un mouvement au 20^e siècle ? » 21 09 2005

Photo : Georges Koutsandréou 2005 : "Ancien grec" acrylic son canvas

site: http://supranaiv.figuration.site.voila.fr

Supranaive figuration is an artistic movement, which writes a new chapter in the painting history. To date, painting never has asserted the synthesis of conceptual painting (Minimalism or Support- Surface) and the figuration. The number of the initiators is of no great importance because it joins together two artistic processes, which are each other very assertive.
Premises of development of this orientation also exist in some artist’s works, but less systematized. Until there is proof to the contrary, the supranaive figuration is the first painting movement of the 21e century.

By considering all attacks undergone by the painting for twenty five years (especially in France), to lay the foundations of a painting movement is more difficult than before. However, Internet facilitates the communication and offers to the movement new possibilities of international development.

In what a painting movement is still useful in our era?
The other artists who choose painting can use a movement as reference points. Historically, the supranaive figuration comes after the "Figuration libre" By the choice of the figuration we seem to ensure a certain extend its continuity. However, the integration of some concepts issues from the minimalist painting with witch  "Figuration libre makes a break contradict that continuity.

While posing the principles of the supranaive figuration, we allow the other painters to question themselves about their own pictorial process. They can ignore this movement or adhere to it. They can reject the principle of any painting movement. They can also contradict the figuration supranaive or exceed it. Anyway, we take part in the questioning about painting history.

As regards the unpleasant remarks about our movement, it appears that criticizing people  seem  to have  lost the keys to understanding of a conceptual painting. They give the impression that for them painting has became a dead language.
People who have tried to eliminate painting share the responsibility of the lost understanding of an important part of contemporary painting history. The whole history of the half part of the last century has been influenced by the cultural revisionism. Il seems necessary to explain some essentials points for giving a rudimentary knowledge of the contemporary painting :

From the Renaissance until Matisse, the pictures were painted in perspective ( in three dimensions). Matisse has came back in two-dimensional painting.
The minimalists American painters, Newman, Kelly Noland have continued to paint in two dimensions. However, in their works, the third dimension is suggested by "material" painting coming from space, tracing one or more passages in the rectangle and going out again to space. Without using the trompe-l’oeil techniques, painting expresses three dimensions in only two plans. Of course it cannot be confused with the primitive painting, which is unaware of the third dimension. This is the only way to tackle the contemporary painting. The supranaive figuration can only be understood from those references points.
The only fundamental discovery justifies by itself the proclamation of a new movement.

Insofar as the cultural institutions attached an increasingly larger importance to  installations,  performances and computer art, painting seems to have become an art of the past. However, there never were as many painters today. The question that arises then is to know if this artistic discipline can still innovate. Far from burying painting, the movements that followed one another in the Sixties contributed to its transformation. The return to the figuration of the Eighties shows that painting minimalist did not extinguish the need for figurative representation nor its capacity for renewing itself. For more than ten years, our researches in the figuration prolong the minimalist interrogations in painting or the passage in the white rectangle.
The " Figuration libre" is a rupture with the minimalism.
We choose to integrate it into our pictorial process and we pose the principles founders of a new movement called "figuration supranaive" Why supra-naïve? It is to answer a critic of art who entitled "conceptual naïve her article about Georges Koutsandréou’s exhibition called "Anti-perspective dans l’espace".

Today, we take up the challenge. Can an artistic process be at the same time conceptual and naive? It is one of the questions posed by our movement. By the assertion of new principles in painting, we take part in the continuation of its progression.

January 2005

 photo: Martina Charbonnel  2005 "Desir"70x70 acrylic on canvas

 from the site  http://supranaiv.figuration.site.voila.fr