3.
#5 It is in such a context that this exhibition of Čemerski happens; it is multi-meaningful and it should emphasize several important aspects.
It is, first of all, an exhibition by an (un)known Čemerski, i.e. an exhibition of pieces already presented worldwide, but not in Skopje and Macedonia. A great part of them are created out of the country (in the USA, France, etc.) during his working visits to those countries. They are interesting in many aspects. For example, to see how the “artistic logic” of Čemerski functions outside the “sunny Macedonia”; or, similarly, to see what and how other environments emanate, to notice the other potential sources of inspiration in the artist’s work; whether the apple trees are equally impressive in Prespa and on the Bald Head Island and whether the sirens in this environment are similar to the ones in Ohrid; to see how the apocrypha and the knights behave in their eternal struggle with the snakes in distant worlds,6F etc.
#6 On the other hand, this exhibition also shows two (most) important segments in the artistic oeuvre7F of Gligor Čemerski: the painting and the drawing. No matter how different they are in their (conditional) treatment, they almost ideally supplement each other, mix with each other, explain each other…, while the drawing is not “just the beginning” or “a sketch for…”, but it is a full-colored, autonomous and self-sustained piece of art.
#7 At the end, this exhibition by Gligor Čemerski should definitely remind us and show us that we need a more serious, more profound cultural policy (not only) in art. This exhibition should suggest us that we need representative, monographic, retrospective, luxurious… editions/monographs on Macedonian artists of Čemerski’s type (and, of course, many others!). It is not an obligation of the artist; it is a debt of the society, of the state towards the artist and his work! Only in this way can Macedonia approximate the serious European/world culture states!
4.
#8 What is most important in this moment, besides anything else, is the fact that we see a very complex, energetic, fresh and, sometimes a euphoric Čemerski. His painting (and I also think of drawing here!) seems to be in its full youthful strength– strong and exalted, experienced, but also probing, rhapsodically resonant and coloristically explosive – “a very strictly controlled storm in an artistic manuscript which is always recognizable“8F. As Pissarro said, it is just like narrating the secret of one’s own work to the world, while the world is ready and expectedly opens for it.
#9 The division of the exhibition (in relative terms) in two blocks – paintings and drawings – does not imply anything, but it can suggest “something”. For example, it can suggest a challenge to parallelly “assess”, consider, compare… the two media. Or to consider them separately, independently of each other. It is certainly, not always possible because Čemerski’s drawing is a painting and the painting is a drawing! It does not mean that the author of this article does not consider the differences important and that the artist does not know and respect the specific features of the two disciplines. However, Čemerski has always been known by his art, regardless of the discipline/medium in which it has been presented.
#10 These differences are almost insignificant or even negligible with Čemerski. And again, the painting is a drawing and the drawing is a painting in Čemerski’s work! The elementary stimulus and inspiration are very similar (or same), the internal tension and the external echo, the magic of the move and the sound of the color. In fact, by giving the (working) title “The Hand Can See” to this exhibition, I believe that Čemerski suggests the inside-outside, stimulus-realization, impulse/thought-move, etc. Because, in this case, the hand “can see” anything that can be seen with the spirit, it will react to each internal impulse, it will register and move (on the canvas or the paper) the excitement of the thought or the feeling, the impound of the sight or the vibrations of the experienced! And it is exactly the hand of Čemerski that “sees” in series: the bloomed fruitful apple trees in Macedonia and the equally fertile and eroticized Evas in them/through them; the reminiscences / syntheses of the mosaic world of Heraclea Lyncestis and the strange, magic birds or the red Cerberus in them, the other wild animals or the sea fauna; the deeply personal and frequently ironic experiences of the beloved Ohrid, the Ohrid men/women and the Ohrid sirens; these last years the favorite topic of St. George and the Dragon, i.e. the Knight and the Snake, as a possible personification of many personal and collective conditions, the eternal topics of the Good and the Evil… etc. In fact, the topics are equally present in the paintings and the drawings. There are no exclusivities, and there seems to be a primary feeling, some kind of a spark which lights in the moment of creation and it is being transferred to the medium – the canvas and the paper. It is therefore noticeable that a topic/series logically begins with the drawing and later on it is being transformed and expanded into the painting and the reverse – it is very frequent that a topic/series might be initiated in the painting first and later on it appears and it is being treated in the drawing. This confirms the thesis that Čemerski does not insist on prevailing of one discipline over another, nor can it be considered that the painting is preferred to the drawing and the opposite. In fact, history of art confirms that this is a case with the great masters!
5.
#11 At the very end, and with an open admiration for the artistic energy, the author of this article believes that it is about time to seriously reconsider some of the general attitudes about the post-war painting in Macedonia, by focusing exactly on the oeuvre of artists such as Gligor Čemerski. There should be a general reconsideration of the state’s attitude toward their work. “The art of Gligor Čemerski is genuine because of the author’s personality, his ideas and esthetics, the volume and the power of the oeuvre”9F. In this direction, Čemerski is one of the few, and he already positioned high at the peaks of the historical context of art in Macedonia, a true Macedonian bard whose art can be taken as an esthetic example of the post-war painting in Macedonia.
Translated by: Marina Tuneva
Edited by: Elizabeta Bakovska
#b
6. For example, Čemerski has exhibited complete series of art pieces on the topics: sirens from Bald Head Island, the Knight and the Snake, Apocrypha etc., at the exhibition in the Museum of Art in Fayetville, USA.
7. It should not be forgotten that Čemerski is a painter, graphic artist, mosaic producer… essayist, critic…
8. Петре М. Андреевски, Големиот сонувач, предговор во каталог: Чемерски, Струшки вечери на поезијата, 1992.
9. Д-р Кирил Темков, Творец на волшебни дела, (предговор во каталог) Чемерски, Музеј-Галерија Кавадарци, 2006, стр. 19.