Andrzej Mazur

Anna Szewczyk - traces of imitation

When talking about the work of Anna Szewczyk, one should first of all bear in mind that it is the artist  who has been consistently developing the problem of identity in her work with regard to the antinomic relationship between the original and the copy. The scope of this issue is deeply rooted in the context of intentions identical to reflections, which most often include philosophical reflection based on the canvas of cultural traces. As the curator of the project - the artistic group of Silesium, Anna Szewczyk is the video creator  topics of exhibitions and plein-airs, all of which take place where a clear trace of not only culture, but also the existence of this place, becomes an attractive material for transformations, interpretations and artistic searches. It is no different when it comes to the individual creative path of Anna Szewczyk. The monochrome painting, most often based on a symmetrical arrangement, can be associated with both experimental action, where a broken, divided, obliterated and literally matted reflection is merged into the centrifugal nature of the newly created whole. The content of the reflection in question is rescaled in the paintings of Anna Szewczyk and polished like a parquet, consisting of fragments of vaults decorating cornices and facades of historic buildings. The manneristic multiplication of the language of bourgeois pseudo distinction is somewhat revised in the artist's painting in the form of a geometric composition, which is to justify itself anew. Anna Szewczyk uses in her opinion ossified structure, coffered kitsch and over icing facade.

In one of the paintings, which make up the diptych Anatomy of Imitation, diagonal stripes are placed in the fields of the quarters, the arrangement of which gives the impression that the entire composition is organized by four parts. This is as clear as that the diagonal paths touch each other at the centrifugal point. The first image that makes up the diptych can be described as four-element, the second has been divided into eight parts, but in such a way that it culminates in the middle four, which are the carriers of centrifugalism. The other four that are closer to the horizontal, upper and lower boundaries of the picture open up the possibility of interpreting it as a symmetrical mosaic with reduced color. Nevertheless, the divisions of the two pictures that make up the diptych give the impression of a four-part mirror image defining the whole. The point, however, is not to describe something that is clear enough in terms of its formal construction, but to emphasize that the intention to achieve this result is not, in fact, based on strict consistency. It is also quite obvious, especially to the recipient, who pointed out that the parallel lines running along the stripes forming the graphic x sign or alternatively a cross do not meet centrally. Moreover, they do not correspond to each other in width or quantity . 

A part is incomplete, and the systems based on various elements create a specific structure. Do fragmenty  cease to have the identity of their original wholes? Does the newly formed structure make them different from what they were originally? It seems that they are being lost and reborn in equal measure, that both possibilities are justified. In Antinomy of emotions  the symmetry of the mirror image brings us only closer to the reflection that the most similar to each other will not become the same as it was as different. However, the duplication and copying of other patterns is so common that various mosaics are created. Beginning with the digression that nowadays, the originality  is more and more often synonymous with the duplication of influences, it is easy to unmask another dimension of antinomy, namely that there is no original without a copy. It is not at the same time that the original is founded on the reflections. It is often built of many shattered mirrors, where the small and multitude has already lost its original perspectives of reflections. In the face of blurred perspectives, people want to regain the whole in a daring way, simulating its old pathos, shape and meaning. The return to the creation of the whole, ennobling what is broken within the plurality is as much due to fear as to the need for expression, contesting the opposition to a given order or system . 

Anna Szewczyk seems to saturate her painting with the element she is critical of. In other words, the artist's statement consists of what she wants to contest, what she disagrees with, what she considers barbaric or abusive. A clear example of this is the work Ornament and Crime, where we see the artist dressed in her own fur and facing her image. On the one hand, this work reveals the kitsch and cruelty of trophies, which usually intertwine with the pseudo-palace bourgeoisie, rich in facades and poor in taste and taste. On the other hand, the intrusive process of mass justification of the aesthetic ideal, and perhaps also the ideal of a specific tradition, is exposed. The author is dressed in a cultural dress code, which in the context of this work seems to be imposed on her involuntarily. The original reflection, which became a blurred mosaic, creating a palimpsest of illegibility, may concern the lifting and recapitulation of what has become obliterated, and it is quite special that the artist thus reveals the contexts of both crime and beauty, often pointing to ambivalence, or more precisely very close to her antinomy.

The production entitled Do it yourself, in a way, sums up the reflection accompanying Anna Szewczyk and refers to our times in a very clear way. The pieces of the puzzle ultimately define Poland's two territorial shapes, thus two possible preferences and two possible choices. Poland after Lviv, be the real one. A further digression qualifies for a broad journalistic study on another topic, and the presence of a two-mental way of being is now too obvious. By reducing the possible critical overtone of this work, something different and perhaps more important is intriguing. To what extent the pursuit of the ideal, whatever it is, determines  originality, and to what extent is the process of copying? After all, everything that becomes the original is a transformation of some vestige. Perhaps it is worth asking yourself the question: what is the role of copying in processing, and will not what is to be created as original, ultimately turn out to be a cluster of fascinations, influences, and perhaps interests? This question is extremely necessary for art, not only today, it should be universal and timeless for it. It concerns the dimension of creativity, but in the equal  measure of curatorial activities, criticism and reflection on art, all beliefs with excessive subjectivity or, worse, pragmatism.