Özkan Eroğlu

A Conference: Point A:Giotto, Point B: Duchamp, Point C:

Notes for a conference

In July, now four or five months ago, when I was busy making arrangements for an exhibition on Figure-Emancipation I happened to be in Paris where the artistic atmosphere caused me to decide to give a conference to be called “Point A: Giotto, Point B: Duchamp, Point C: ?” I don’t know how familiar you participants may be with these artists so I thought I should give you a few basic facts about them. Giotto, who lived in Florence during the years 1267 to 1337, was a fresco-painter whose talent was discovered by his master, Cimabue, when Giotto was a shepherd grazing the village flocks on the mountainside. In this talk, it is not the artistic qualities of these two painters that I wish to dwell on but the philosophy which shaped these. If we look at the years in which each was born, we see that there is a gap of 620 years between them. Here a fresco painter is contrasted with an artist of the ‘ready-made’. However radical Giotto’s paintings of Assisi or Padua may have seemed in his day, so in 1913 did Duchamp’s work called “A Bicycle Wheel”. Briefly, why did I say “Point A: Giotto, Point B: Duchamp, Point C:?” In order for the search for this talk to be the answer to this question and to stay in your minds, I’d first like to make this introduction.

In the history of art, it is necessary to distinguish between universal and individual changes or developments. Every person in the world of art may or may not be innovative. This is the case from Leonardo da Vinci to Picasso, from Fontana to Baselitz. What is important is to see whether a person is affected by the general or the personal.

There is a belief that an artist may through divine inspiration bring about a radical change. Giotto and Duchamp have both put their signature on such an era of radical change, something that few artists can claim. We must distinguish this from the radical changes we see in a Leonardo da Vinci or a Michelangelo.

It is the effort to initiate a movement and continue the subsequent cycle of change which is important. In this instance, Giotto gave new life to the art of the Middle Ages which lacked spirit, the power to communicate and the feeling of space. One of the most radical changes was to make the sky blue. The work of Duchamp was to mystify and conceptualize. In fact what emerges is that Giotto spontaneously transformed art from being dependent on the power of the ruler or of the religious authorities to being in the hands of the artist himself. If one looks at his period in history, one can see the deficiencies both in him and in his period, deficiencies which people have striven to remedy from then to the present day. Another side of art history has developed from this.




“Point A: Giotto, Point B: Duchamp, Point C: ?”


Before “Point A: Giotto”


In this phase we will emphasize the need to understand what artistic problems Giotto had to overcome.


1. An intuitive response (nature as the main source)

Intuitive art, when art breaks free of the universal, is able to be felt. İn fact, this is the true art. Art that is deficient in feeling can be clearly perceived. In fact, before Giotto the artist was more like a craftsman. It was not the name of the artist but the work that he did that was the foremost consideration, and in art history we see this view continued until the 14th century. For example, one may come across a sentence praising the carvings on the door of Notre Dame but not one concerning the person who carved these.


2. Symbolic Fantasies

One meaning of symbol may be a routine way of being mysterious. “Come, figure me out, you should be able to”, is the situation between the work and the viewer. However, Giotto sees the need above all for the actions and the physical appearance of his figures to be distinctive.


3. Calligraphy and Art (Egyptian and other cultures)

For a long time before Giotto, one of the most important developments was that of hieroglyphic writing. In this, although each figure may seem like a symbol, each represents the ruler or wielder of power.


4. Allegory and Art (Greek and other cultural art)

By this time various myths had begun to be created about art. The pantheism of the Greeks and Romans made it easy to express these graphically.


5. The struggle between monotheism- pantheism and art (the art of the catacombs)


6. State, religion and art (byzantine and other cultural art)

In this type of society the logic behind art was “The power of the state has commissioned me to do this, so I will.” It was difficult for the artist to present himself as an individual within the art developed in such a society.


Point A: Giotto


1. Religious and state connections paramount

These connections were undergoing review at this time. An artist would pause and take stock, asking himself, asking: “I can continue to follow the way dictated by religion, but in that case what can I give of myself?” This question came into Giotto’s mind also. In the history of art this marked the beginning of a serious and radical interrogation which in religious art led to the question,” Does art have to be totally bound to the holy book? Isn’t it possible to change within the unchangeable?”


2. New plastic form in the background (this concept is important and valuable)

The blue Giotto used as the colour for his sky was a defiant contrast to the gold leaf of religious painting, and a rebellion in favour of naturalism. Perhaps the plain blue of the space representing the sky may be called a plastic form beyond the new figurative element. This approach would recognise the important development of the artist towards a critical and individual attitude. The pioneer in all of this was Giotto. The subject was still religious but the form as well as the language of communication had to be new. This gives rise to a new formula: Giotto= Newness of form


3. Inference

Inference can quickly be recognised in new figure- combinations within the new shape of art. The situation in a figurative painting at present is not to create an implicit balance but to demonstrate elements with definitive shapes.


4. Figure

The tendency is for form to be concrete. Figures are now individuals but also new figurative forms. For example, Saint Francis can now be portrayed as an ordinary person as the hegemony of religion over form has begun to disappear. New figurative forms are on the agenda. When we look at paintings from before Giotto, not only do the figures not have their feet firmly on the ground, there is no feeling of space either. Now anatomy begins to be put into perspective. The figures no longer carry just a religious feeling. With Giotto, the figures in the painting know what it is to laugh and weep. They can shout if they feel like it, or sleep or fly up into the sky if they want to. The relationship between a figure and space or emptiness is no longer the question. A figure is now understood in relationship with the whole environment and is shown in its true place within this. This can be seen as a window opening onto the art of the Renaissance where the figure has a rational relationship within nature. To give an example of our own, saints and devils can be seen side by side, or the blue used for the sky is there together with satanic figures. Figures are no longer part of a pattern. The most obvious example of this is seen in the relationship of clothes with the anatomy. Anatomy and the clothes which cover it are no longer there simply as a convention, as was the case before Giotto when everything was uniform and schematic, like a potato-cut. Giotto puts the figurative and the non-figurative side by side. As soon as the blue of nature enters the painting this juxtaposition is a possibility.


5. The use of objective form as a means

This implies the concept of creating a ‘space within a space.’ For example, the new-born holy child can be placed not on the floor but within a manger. It is from this point on that a box- the manger- is used objectively as a means.


6. The meeting of natural and non-natural form

The best example of this is again satanic figures against the blue of the sky.


7. The continued emphasis on symbol

The animals warming the new born holy child suggest the image of Jesus, the Good Shepherd.


8. An approach towards impressionism

In the painting mentioned, the clouds surrounding Saint Frances and rising as he ascends are impressionistic.


9. Questioning the third dimension

Now the space between the elements can be realised. This is achieved through the development of perspective.


10. Filled and empty space conceptualized

Whether intentional or not, the detail of massed clouds through which the spirit, tied to this world, ascends to the other, create a fullness. Giotto found the courage to create through this impression of fullness a symbol of the connection with the world beyond, thus arousing the concept of counter-attraction, a concept connected with filled and empty space.. Filled or empty space in a work either attracts or repels the viewer and may indeed change places.


11. Lyrical feeling aroused

It can be seen that in the natural scene, a person speaking aloud or reading a passage from the holy book arouses a wonderfully lyrical atmosphere. This has a particularly great effect if the painting where such lyrical impressionism is present is seen in the church to which the painting belongs,


12. The power of the imagination

This can be found in all of Giotto’s paintings, great or small; for example, the extent of this can be seen very powerfully in the painting of repudiating the devil.


13. The introduction of something previously non-existent or unknown (religion and art intertwined)

Giotto was the first to take up this important subject. To see this, let us turn to ‘The Birth in Grecchio”: at first glance, the haloed child and the haloed figure placing Him in the cradle seems to belong to a different atmosphere from that of the animals. This juxtaposition deserves our consideration since it suggests both a temporal and a divine state. Moreover the space filled by the look between them can be called artistic empathy, suggesting that feeling can be conveyed by appearance as well as touch.


14. Movement and form

It is not only the figures that move, there is movement everywhere. The interior movement is implicit in the form. It is as though, according to Giotto’s way of thinking, “The teachings of the Holy Book are there but they are given shape by me.” Further to this, Giotto’s individuality of form develops towards Giotto’s individual conclusions. So the interior movement declares that “content follows form.”

The artist is now steadily moving towards independence. Giotto is first representative of this movement, both in form and concept. Duchamp, the subject of Point B, represents a second pioneering movement. Giotto, the subject of Point A became the pioneer of the movement as after him the artist began to behave like an artist. To foresee change and develop became the norm. It is at this point that we see his skill to surprise us when what had previously been the known path had to be put aside. “Religion? Keep your religion but I come first,” says the artist and this can be seen in his works. This is a radical change, indeed, a revolution. The truth of this revolutionary period declares itself in Giotto’s philosophy of art: Stop, think and ponder many questions.


Point B: Duchamp


When in 1913 Duchamp nailed a bicylce to a stool, art critics all around the world were astounded. What was he trying to do? Already before inventing this ‘art of the ready-made’, this artist had startled the world with his impressionism and cubism. In 1917 when a urinal was exhibited as art under the signature of Richard Mutt, the world of art was once more shaken. How could an object one urinated into become a work of art? This was the question every member of the art world was asking. Then, later, the woman portrayed by Leonardo da Vinci as the Mona Lisa was printed in a medical journal with the addition of a goatee and a moustache. These were the mosy radical of Duchamp’s works.

I can add that I don’t give much importance to Duchamp; before him Giotto had made the first most radical move. These kind of artists are constantly changing the goalposts. It is common knowledge that from 1923 onwards Duchamp devoted himself to chess. This must have been a kind of madness. It seems as though art contains a kind of manic behaviour, concealed or otherwise. And an artist is one who is not quite right in the head. Art is not the profession for a normal person. In order to be called an artist, a person must start from an unusual psychological point and shelter under a credible naturalness


1. Duchamp called on the impressionists to desert the seen in favour of the unseen

By portraying the Mona Lisa in a different light in a medical journal, the artist came down strongly in favour of showing the unseen rather than the seen.


2. Imressionism and the invisible existed but it was Duchamp who made these concepts noticed

Thus autonomy in art was set aside. That is to say, the links between art and god, state etc were snapped. A kind of fragmentation, previously only implied, now came into being, leaving behind form, natural form, as concepts to transport or be transported. Just as Giotto caused a revolution in form, so Duchamp caused one in meaning. The understanding of a work of art changes according to the individual. Duchanmps opened the way to a multiplicity of language for the meaning and, consequently, the understanding of a work of art


3. The museum concept breaks down

In its place comes the concept of the ‘virtual museum’ under which we should draw a thick line. For example, the internet which is, at present, being given increasing weight allows everyone to establish his own virtual museum. The person who instigated this is Duchamp.


4. The artist regains independence

From Giotto until the time of Duchamp, for many different reasons, the artist gradually lost his independence. With Duchamp the flag of freedom waved once more and at the same time established the similarity between Point A and Point B. The connection between the mind, which can say “I will take time off from art for chess”, and art can be left to the imagination.


5. Opposition to art made clear by the artist

One is forced to consider the question, Does Point C make it clear that the work is contrary to art?” Today when anything is recorded on a CD -Rom one can easily access whatever part of it one wishes. It is of use to consider this point. In fact one may say that art has been taken out of the hands of the artist.


6. Not everything is a statue or a painting


7. If what is universal was accepted as a way of communication, the aim was to prove the opposite

There is a hiatus in the concept of the universe as a way of communication so its meaning is still being pursued. When a urinal has a place in an art gallery it suggests a topsy-turvy world. This emphasis brings together both Point A and Point B.


8. A multiplicity of theories bring alchemy into the picture

Duchamp rejected the alchemy of symbols but perhaps was himself an alchemist without knowing it. At this point it should be said that, in each of his works, Duchamp gives each of the elements the function of displaying his alchemy. In each of Giotto’s paintings, development is seen whereby Giotto demonstrates his philosophy of art. Duchamp does the same. Giotto rejects the dictates of religion while Duchamp plainly rejects what he makes clear against his will, ‘the alchemy of symbols’. Duchamp was unconcerned about how his work would be interpreted and it was not easy to get him to speak about it. His work made great demands on Duchamp and the viewer alike. He developed the idea of the artist as magician. Later, we often come across the emphasis on the ‘transformer’ in the movement towards Art Povera, Video Art and Land Art, all of which show that the artist has become a supernatural being able to transform what he touches. Duchamp loved to deceive. He would give silent, evasive answers and loved to bewilder his viewers.


9. The constant dream of a fourth dimension

We can call this fourth dimension ‘added meaning. The philosophy on which this is based is “Every three-dimensional object, dismissed as unimportant, may be a projection of the unknown fourth dimension”. It is characterized by conceptual meaning. In the light of this, impressionism gains a subtle strangeness. In 1905 efforts towards thinking in impressionistic terms began and reached the stage where it became a movement in the hands of painters such as, in particular, Kandinsky.


10. The long-held dream of seeing opposite sides, lower and upper, simultaneously

In a two-dimensional picture, one can arrive at the third dimensional, even if only theoretically, through perspective. One can walk around a three dimensional sculpture. But however hard one tried, one could never entirely experience all of its possibilities. It is here that Duchamp interposes his development of ideas.


11. Nature and naturalism rebel against slavery

Thus an artistic movement takes shape as pure thought. Duchamp was neither a naturist nor a naturalist. Rather than the appearance of things, he was interested in the thought behind them. He wished to involve the intelligence in art once more. In my opinion, the first half of the 20th century brought many important developments to light, each of which could be considered and discussed at length. Cubism and Futurism were products of the mechanical world. In Cubism the subject became fragmented. In Futurism the element of speed was integrated and the shape of the subject changed through this factor. So both of these acquired a mechanical following, to such an extent that it was almost impossible to oppose its mechanical aspects.


12. “Conflict between perspective and true dimension is complemented by the conflict between appearance and reality”

Those who say this clearly such a support such a philosophy and declare “What one sees is not the reality”. This declaration brings with it a revival of the special place of metaphysics in art


13. “Every ordinary three–dimensional object has within it the many aspects of a four-dimensional figure”

Duchamp supported such an idea. He felt it was necessary to construct the fourth dimension through perspective reflection. If we consider this, there is a clear value to the many interpretations open to the viewer so that the thoughts put forward by each viewer are infinite. That is to say, each fills a void. This situation suggests a logic which annihilates the object as such and exalts the meaning. This is the same as saying, “the true colours are ideal, the colours one sees merely to do with the appearance”.


14. Every form is the reflection of somethingin this world, the essence of which is as yet uncomprehended

So every colour is the negative appearance of a secret source of light. At this point let us return to our thoughts on Point B: Duchamp’s view of this is very similar when he says, “It is impossible not to draw a connection between these ideas and the development in the Middle Ages of the Gothic stained-glass window with its plasticity of form and idealisation of colour and light”. That is to say, the logic of Duchamp is concealed within that of his forerunner. Here we see a mathematical truth and thus a dialectic in art is established.


Doesn’t Duchamp’s philosophy conceal this explanation? 1 is a single number, 2 is a dual number and 3 is a multiple number. To put it another way, the number twenty million and the number three are the same thing. It is as if Points A B and C were describing themselves: Point A is 1, that is to say, Giotto; Point B is 2, that is, Duchamp and Giotto together make a pair, and Point C is 3, that is twenty million or rather a multiple number.


Concluding argument


Now let us put together all the clues from Points A and B. For the followers of Duchamp, even of Giotto, polyphony was important. In this conference it is important for me reach a polyphony with the help of your points of view. You have come here on a Saturday and closeted yourself here with me to hear my views and I thank you all very much


Özkan Eroğlu.: Do you agree with this system of points? I’d like to have your views

Audience.: It’s impossible not to agree. I wonder if we can start to see everything as art as Duchamps did?

Ö.E.: I see what you’re saying. You’re asking, “From now on is everything art or, if art is in everything, what is art?” I think that art will, at least, go back to Giotto’s idea which is that whether the dialectic goes in a circle or in a straight line, the perceived result doesn’t change. However, we mustn’t forget that the problem of multiplicity of art can continue which will give the critics a lot to do. It seems to me that a return to figurative art will seem right. We said there were 620 years between Point A and Point B. We may have to wait the same length of time (to recover from Phase 3 will be that easy). Even if may seem utopic to us now, such a thing is to be considered. Refinement and clarity in art are not easy to obtain. It is important for them to be purified through time. As for Point C, it is impossible not to agree with Baudrillard’s views. Tireless thinkers alive today, such as Baudrillard and Sontag, have given and will continue to give input on this subject.


A.: What kind of work did Duchamp do before becoming a radical?

E.E.: Duchamp did not shrink from saying that his impressionistic work was weak, and he stresed this in different ways. Until 1912 he produced unremarkable work in the styles of imressionism, cubism and constructivism.


A.: Duchamp made a name for himself. How did he do this?

Ö.E.: It’s very simple. İf you are seeking for answers by creating paradoxes and using found objects and by going beyond the boundaries of ideas about two-dimensional art or three-dimensional figures, you will make yourself accepted within a certain time. If you persist, without forgetting to separate the real from the ideal in your work, or what it is you are trying to achieve, , history will one day have to accept you. For example, apart from two of Manet’s paintings, the rest are all impressionistic. The two paintings in question, “A Country Breakfast” and “Olympia”, are quite different because of the reaction in art which took place at that time. Duchamp went beyond the surface reality of things. Reaction towards art is important. The person showing this may seem intractable or disquieting but what is important is his desire to stir things up. I don’t believe that anyone who is incapable of being aroused can become an artist, and it is difficult to find an example of this in the world of art. Duchamp is capable of surprising us even in the pose he assumes when being photographed. The one in which he is wearing false teeth is, in my opinion, as effective as his urinal and shows the difference in his way of thinking. There is a well-known phrase, ‘Art is hidden in the details’ but the idea that ‘one must go deep into the given detail’ begins with Duchamp. This makes comparison necessary. One can explain every aspect of a run-of-the-mill artist or sculptor. But artists such as Giotto or Duchamp cannot be explained in the same way and one is forced to compare these two, as I know all too well. I thought I could work in a general way on Giotto but, in the end, I became obsessed with 25 of his paintings in Assisi and did a detailed study of just these If I had wanted, the book might have been even longer. With painters like Giotto it is not easy to put limits to their brilliance. As Giotto and others like him are the forerunners of their age, the scope of this work made it impossible to finish until 1999.


A.: I guess to be like Duchamp, one has to be a rebel?

Ö.E.: One might perhaps say, rebellious by nature. Whatever comes from within, comes from the heart. One cannot be rebellious simply for the sake of being so; the true spirit of rebellion must be inherent in the person’e character.


A.: I am against ugliness in art and art which is unaesthetic. I think art should have some connection with an understanding of what is beautiful. What do you think?

ö.e.: The answer to your question is another question. An impressionistic painting, for example, a Sisley or a Renoir usually seems to us like a pleasing reflection of beauty: it is in the nature of it. However, for example, doesn’t the subject of a urinal give an idea of beauty in accordance with where it stands or is placed? Doesn’t it give us the message that the world is being defiled and made ugly? Just like an impressionistic work, the message may not be overt and, moreover, the interpretation is in your hands. The message is concealed, but if an ugly, disgusting object happens to appear at the right time and with the right interpretation, this is not a problem. In my opinion, when ugliness is used in place of impressionism, it gives more food for thought. Another idea may be more acceptable: the concept of beauty, in my opinion, is the natural obstacle to thought and consideration since it gives the public no opportunity to find those deficiencies which in general are thought of as the negative state. .


A.: We are made uncomfortable by non-thinkers or people who do not know how to think. The mistakes made by them are apparent. Wouldn’t it be better to motivate them through philosophy rather than art?

Ö.E.: Monet can be separated from the other impressionists, in particular by his paintings from the first half of the 20th century. Why? The only reason is his development of the dimension of thought. I always give this example: when Kandinsky first saw Monet’s “Haystack,” he said: “If I hadn’t seen the signature on this painting I would never have thought it was a haystack.” In this way he pointed out the difference between impression and impressionism. Where form is exiguous, inference takes over: conceptual thought and, consequently, philosophy. At least, it is useful to think like this. There is no doubt that a painter who paints a haystack in an impressionistic manner illuminates it in a different way. The blurring of light puts impressionism in place of an impression. It is in this way that impressionism makes one think about what one sees, in brief, affects us in a different way. When we ask ‘Why is this?” we see that art has not broken away from philosophy but in fact is still very much involved with it. In this case, the thing to do is not just to glance at a picture but to consider it deeply.


A.: Then we must say this: The more art says, the more philosophy it demonstrates, the more it becomes a work of art and, at the same time, the more it becomes more than just a work.

Ö.E.: Of course, sincerity is a pre-requisite for any work of art. A sensitive, sincere and knowledgeable viewer will comprehend the worth of the work of art and communicate with it. A genuine and sincere work of art will give the viewer a sight of its inner self, But you can still be fooled by even the things you call beautiful. This is something that everyone should be aware of. But if you say “I won’t examine everything that is called beautiful,” just as the artist’s character pursues divinity, so the viewer is expected to “clear the doors of perception”. The ability to perceive is very important. It is not just being aware of the image of the object left on the retina as is often stated, but goes beyond this.


A.: The eye which perceives the ideas the artist is putting forward in his work will understand what the artist’s work is without actually seeing it.

Ö.E.: You’ve got the right idea. But we might put it this way: the artists who create the kind of works you describe and truly deserve the name of artist are few. As a natural consequence, the viewers who can successfully perceive this are also few. It is important to explain things to the masses who are becoming increasingly alienated from what is going on or to make them, at least, sense this. Something which is not perceived in every part of the world and something that we cannot overcome is that, in general, the media, (radio, television etc.) do not go into the heart of things. There is one reason for this: those in control of the afore-mentioned media are, unfortunately, unaware of this.


A.: I went a photography exhibition at S. Michele in Paris. .Someone came up to me and asked, ”What do you see in the photographs?” I said,” I see a letter written in parallel lines on a piece of A4 paper.” The man stopped and said”. I never thought of that,” before he went away. Later I learned that he was the photographer whose work was being exhibited

Ö.E.: That’s just what I was about to say a few minutes ago: when you go round exhibitions in the west, interesting things can happen. For example, someone can up to you with a tape-recorder and ask you for your views which you may later see relayed through the media. That’s similar to your experience. It seems to me that people in the west give a lot of importance to this kind of thing which gains in value for not being extreme.


A.: You may not disagree with the artist’s description or interpretation. But, even when you can perceive the feeling that is there in a work and it stirs your imagination, that’s as far as it goes. For example, you can set up a virtual museum only to the extent of what you have in hand. I agree with Duchamp in his views on virtual museums. I am one of those who believe that everything that can be done in art has been done. If i ask myself what can be done, my reply is that perhaps something may be done in architecture. Art will experience a return to the past, which means a return to figurative art, in my opinion.

Ö.E.: We must all agree that there is no conflict in our opinions here. We can’t help but say this. Just as both circular and straight lines lead to the same conclusion so does what you say. But art will never accept this.


A.: In my opinion, it is impossible to create anything new without having a knowledge of the past. At least, we must notice individuals.

Ö.E.: One cannot jump suddenly from one place to another. It’s a question of dialectic. But, for example, four years of education can be compressed into one as this is a matter of the intelligence of the individual.


A.: Let’s look first at Miro and Matisse. Then let’s look at the four years of education we went through. Somebody said to me: “I forgot what I learned in those four years and later I was still able to understand what Miro and Matisse wanted to say.” What I want to say here is this: There is no doubt that an obligatory four years of education endured unwillingly is harmful and useless. I don’t believe that the term figure-emancipation mean necessarily having nothing to do with figure. Each new concept is a new figure. Consequently, figure/emancipation can occur in any age so any innovation can be called by this name. So I’d like to make clear that I support the idea you stressed in this conference of “pioneers of an age”.


A.: We are now in an age of emancipation. Nowadays young people don’t want to conform to certain rules. I am wondering how the past is regarded today or how there can be a going-back.

A.: So are we going to put aside everything from the past? Isn’t the other side reducing everything to simple basics?

Ö.E.: As long as art history is considered a serious subject, this is not possible. We can say that there will be a visible increase in the number of people interested in research. The West has recently begun to make full use of its traditions. This can be underlined in red. This will logically bring with it a reduction to basics. I am not saying this just about art but in general, and I would like to add that it is necessary to bequeath a legacy of what is good and right. The future will judge the quality or lack of it in every work. It is true that there is a generation in the world composed of young people who are receiving a sound education and have a wide enough vision. The most concrete example of this is that, in the last month, two young people have applied to the magazine I edit asking to be allowed to contribute articles or do translations. When I see this kind of thing, I am encouraged. Young people of this kind will apply their evaluation to every kind of work, let no-one have any doubts on that. After seeing that the youth of today are critical of the negative currents in the air around them, I don’t think there is anything to be afraid of. They feel they have the inner strength to criticize a bad scene or decor which means they have a detailed awareness of what is good. In fact, the name of something which has a close connection with art and which should be discussed is: “Idealism is within a community”. So we should protect the few representatives of this kind and help them increase. It is becoming ever more necessary to warn and criticize.


Conference: Nelli Sanat Evi, Teşvikiye, Istanbul, 2004

Lecturer: Özkan Eroğlu

English Translation: Angela Roome

Photographs: Genco Demirer

Sanat Eleştirmeni Özkan Eroğlu

Sanat Eleştirmeni Özkan Eroğlu

Sanat Eleştirmeni,Tekhne Yayınları Genel Yayın Yönetmeni


2 Critical Selection from Antwerp 2021


Mimarlık Üzerine Düşünceler

Henüz your yapılmadı.


E-posta hesabınız yayımlanmayacak. Gerekli alanlar * ile işaretlenmişlerdir