Wow, never though I would see an artists admit that "it doesn't mean anything". Like, seriously, have you ever seen any other artists say that phrase so honestly and directly? Gotta give him credit for his humility.
When art is morphed into a business, many artists are compelled to create convulated stories to support and elevate the artwork that might have originally been formed out of a meaningless but powerful passing idea or a thought that's analytical and dull.
Wonderful interview. I love that he says his art is to show a mood. Let people bring away what they feel. I agree that he is just being honest in a world of people who think they need to "explain" things to you.
That's the art I like, but art is all of that and more. I think every person should be able to express art, even if it's an idea, well done executed maybe.
"I never wonder why I draw a bird on a shoulder... It doesn't mean anything." What a pure attitude of creation -- creating something just to be created.
Even if he wasn't interested in deeply analyzing his own creative output, it still came from a human mind, and so there must be some psychological significance to his work, even if for him it was all merely operating on a subconscious level. The paintings didn't just appear out of thin air. Fascinating interview nonetheless.
Im 34 I recently discovered that drawing helps me relax. I am learning. I have no idea what Im doing and i don't care what I draw as long as it makes me feel something when it's finished. I've always been fascinated by Beksinski's art. Such a humble man he was.
Proof I think, that art interpretation is best left to the observer. Not being in any way educated in the understanding of "art appreciation", I find his paintings full of the contradictions of religion versus the reality of human suffering and the torment of life and the unbearable grief that humans can experience. My un-educated opinion only. I welcome any differing ideas!
Yeah, but you know, he really didn't meant any of that because as you say, he did not intended any specific interpretation of his work and instead focused on mood, therefore, all of your interpretations are just ramblings from your own mind rather than actual interpretations of his work, as valid as anything.
@@asgoritolinasgoritolino7708 except of religion vs reality rest of his interpretation are emiotions which mean they are making mood. Beksiński was creating a mood in terms of music so it means emotional not rational interpretation... In music everyone have its own interpretation and no one is asking musician what this chorus means? It is allegory of religion at death? Normal fans are focused on their own experience with this song and not wondering what this band wanted to say to us.
Really interesting. Living in Austria, I find deep symbolism in much of his work - whether intentional on his part or not - I'm awestruck by his visions of the mechanisms that control us (my interpretation of course).
Yup. Sometimes any form of art should just be admired. You should ask yourself and ponder what it would be like to be in his shoes, how was he feeling what mind set was he going through then. I like thinking of that
@@terremoto6663 While I agree I do think he meant his statement in the beginning. Symbolism sadly can make a viewer go right too their personal dealing rather than whats being "mooded/felt" if thats the word lol
What a remarkable man, but saying that his paintings has no symbolic "meaning" sounds like a constructed thought. My guess he, like Lynch first do the work then analyze it afterwards.
Thanks a lot for this channel. I'm a visual artist from Poland, living in Australia. I haven't found some of those interviews on any Polish channel before. Great job :)
I was listening to a podcast and this dude said that Beksinski didn’t like to talk about his art just like he probably didn’t like to talk about all the fucked up shit he saw growing up in nazi occupied Poland Made sense to me when he said it
He didn’t like to talk about it because journalists and many critics didn’t understand what he had to say and many people interpret his art the wrong way. Also he communicates the most through his primary form of artistic expression- visual arts. He got tired of explaining to people that there is no “secret” or “hidden meaning” to verbally tell
Growing up in Poland is fkdup even without Nazi occupation... ;) know from practice. But to be bit more serious, no wonder, he was attacked in communistic Poland as messed-up weirdo that creates art from grave...
I can finally lift some questions out of my mind. I really love looking at his paintings and they intrigue me so much. I always wonder what might they mean or what they symbolize about life. Thank you so much for uploading this interview. You are the one who lead me to appreciate paintings more Mr.Zdislaw. I can't even spell or pronounce your name properly but you'll forever be in my heart❤.
If you still wonder what they “symbolize” that means you didn’t listen to the interview. Also no need for addressing Zdzisław Beksińskk because he passed in 2005
@JBB you're right. I'm involved with the art world and nobody knows who the fuck he is. Maybe because he was skilled but didn't talk enough wank and actually rejected intellectualism - a complete inversion of the current trend.
what he imagine on the classical music as big strongs old figures mostly humans from the past now dead , if he wasn't born as a painter then was born as musician
Wow, an artist who is not pretentious as hell. I personally dislike finding meaning when there is none. I appreciate surrealism( be it art, movies, song lyrics etc) just because of its strange imagery. Finding meaning kinda ruins the "magic"
Depends on what you mean by "finding meaning". Trying to answer the question "what does the artist want to say to us with his art?" when he clearly has no deeper intent is pointless, yes. But finding your own meaning in the art, imagining what the colours, objects, symbols could mean, asking why things in the painting are how they are is part of the fun of looking at art, especially intentionless art. Being able to invent your own background story for the painting, imagining the world behind it, is what makes the art interesting.
@@cerostymc thats what i dislike. If i see my own meaning in somebody's work, it is just a fake meaning. Who am i to interpret somebody else's work? If i were an artist, and somebody gave my work meaning that i didnt intend, i would find it laughable
@@arte0021 I think you are completely missing my point. When I'm talking about "finding your own meaning" I'm not saying "if I'm interpreting the painting in this speific way, it's definitely the way the artist intended the painting to be and everything I'm saying is right". In fact, there is no "fake meaning" or "right meaning". There are only two meanings. The one the artist puts into his artwork and the one the viewer sees in it. And both are equally "right", because they're both subjective. Even if the artist has a clear message and intent which he puts into his piece of art, it will never be completely accurately communicated to the viewer. So, what even is art? What is its purpose? I would define it as anything made to create meaning, using a type of medium like music, language, images etc. So if art is made to create meaning, then we could say anything can be considered art that is made with the intent of being art. But when the meaning the artist creates is not the meaning the observers receive, this raises the question what the point in making art even is. And there are mainly two options. Either the artist creates art for himself, taking on both roles, the transmitter and receiver. This is the only way the intended meaning can accurately be transmitted. Or he makes art for its observers, to let them create their own meaning. Any piece of art that is purposefully shared with others, be it by selling it, posting it on social media or any other way, will have this effect and therefore was created with this intent. Any artwork which is not meant to be interpreted by anyone is no true art because it holds no meaning and meaning is the essence of art.
@@cerostymc my worldview is completely different. In it only the person who creates the work who can give it meaning. Any meaning found that is not intended by the author is invalid. Good example I went to the website Songmeanings looking for Radiohead songs and what they might mean but i found a crock of shit, where each post interpretes the songs differently and some give them meanings that are obviously completely wrong. It just left me annoyed
@@arte0021 it's interesting to read your view on art. But I think I haven't explained my position well enough. I actually kinda agree with your example. But that is because these people try to find the "real" meaning / the artist's intent and failed. What I understand as "finding your own meaning" in a piece of art is something different. It's not trying to figure out what meaning _the artist_ might have wanted to implement in his work. With my approach, we can actually fully ignore the artist and everything he intended. We view the painting just as the painting itself. And we don't try to figure out any intentions. I hope you understand it with this example: Let's assume we're looking at a painting that contains a foggy forest and a ruin of a castle in the far distance on a hill. A small lake with a surface as clear and flat as glass is embedded into the forest and a small path leads to the castle. The painting conveys a mysterious and lonely atmosphere. Wouldn't you ask yourself why the castle is a ruin? Who lived there? Why are they gone? Is there still someone using the path to go swimming in the lake? Where even is this landscape? is it on our earth or in an entirely different world? Maybe the inhabitants of the castle got killed in a tragic incident. Or they moved away and the castle became forgotten over the years... You only ask question, wonder what happended, you just invent theories what all this could mean, you don't pretend like what you think _is_ right, because you don't know what the artist might have intended and what not. You can only observe and wonder... At least that is what I like about art. That you can imagine an entire world around the painting which makes it a lot more alive and fun to look at. And this is the reason why I create art myself; it can inspire someone and become alive in the minds of those that look at it. Anyways, thanks for reading and discussing this topic with me!
In my opinion he wanted us to experience his work as music and thats all but some 'know it all' from artistic world (mostly critiques) have to put his work in some boxes to have words to describe it as themselves are more sophisticated and higher edutated in art... He only wanted to make the art... As beatles wanted to do music and everyone classify them in music genres... Which also they were annoyed by
His favourite was Alfred Schnittke. Check him out... Generaly, Beksiński liked classic music from early 20 century. Also heavy rock ( Deep Purple, etc ). You can find an interview about it on my channel.
Lol! I also am curious if the master was aware of the existence of dark ambient, post-industrial and heavy metal.. Turns out he's into less dark stuffs
@@adrianbenedictmendoza6818 He had some drum 'n bass CD's in his collection. He liked pre-metal bands such as Rainbow, Deep Purple. Also others, Pink Floyd, Mick Jagger, etc.
Maybe I'm missing something but this dude seems a bit uptight. If you're going to feature crosses a lot , and bodies splayed out and merging into them, and death and pain and gothic elements and you're going to do it for years and hope people take an interest in it and buy your pieces.. then it's reasonable to ask 'what's it all about?'
I think he accepted the question and answered it, he seems to deny any intended meaning about his paintings. Our thoughts have of course a deeper meaning (regardless of our own perception about the meaning), which is influenced mainly by the culture we grew up in (speaking of crosses, Poland is probably one of the most catholic countries on Earth), he just seems not to be interested about it. As of being uptight, that's probably a personal thing, he wasn't the most internally serene person I believe.
It's fair enough in a way. He doesn't have to explain anything or justify anthing to people- a painting's a painting. But as you say, thoughts have meaning and when people are curious about an artist's painting they'd like to know what he's trying to express.. And if he wasn't interested in Christianity you'd think it wouldn't impinge on or affect him enough to portray it. I mean, they've found some sadistic sexual paintings of his too haven't they? Plus, at one time he destroyed some paintings he said were 'too personal' for people to see.. So they express some innermost thoughts, they reveal something about him that he doesn't want people to see. I like his work by the way, although I wouldn't hang it on my wall. Spending so many years as a prolific artist, focused on death and decay just because.. he likes to? I read on wikipedia that he saw a lot of his work as optimistic and funny.. But then in an interview he said the general feel of them was solemnity, so I guess I think he's holding something back.
@@Rutley7 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dxRB4sdbIcw.html I'm not sure if this will help answer all your questions, but maybe it could help you understand a little?
@JBB Yes, I watched another documentary on him, it is what it is I guess. It suggested the eerie blue he used alluded to the poisonous residue left behind by zyclon B (if I named it right) and it makes sense. He didn't like interpretations because he didn't want his paintings to end up defined and classified in one way.. so he wanted them to be open to interpretation.. But it seems kind of paradoxical. The moment you put some meaning into words it's to be rejected.
Deleted because a certain Polish Tri-City pseudo-director of B-class movies, has demanded RU-vid to remove it. The guy usurps the exclusivity of this footage, as it is a part of his documentary. So the footage will end up forgotten in the archive, just like that loser 'director'.
@@andyteszner You are right , you are the first guy who write the sad true ,claiming rights is the most stupid thing you can do with your content, at the end you will be a nobody, in the 80s 90s this was called FREE PUBLICITY!!! nowadays seems to be the opposite..... what an irrational society , fault of the RU-vid monetization system...
@@camelazo A funny note on this subject. Tomasz, Beksiński's son, was a well-known radio journalist. He used to broadcast entire music albums (!) on the national Polish Radio Channel 3. One album every day. I remember, in autumn 1988, within under a week he aired an entire Depeche Mode discography, 6 albums, so everyone could tape-record. He also translated all lyrics. Simply, western music was unavailable to buy in Polish music stores, because of so called Soviet 'Iron Curtain'.
diosmioooo no se mucho ingles pero se ruso uwu y no c bien que idioma es ese pero xD entiendo un monton, parece ruso pero un poco raro pero es como el ruso uwuwuwu
Meaning is only a factor in art, there is also emotion and beautyness, and those two are not lacking in belinski’s artworks. Also I think it’s more of an artistic expression to paint something based on what you feel and focus on making it look good rather than to paint something with the sole propuse of imposing an ideal or belief. because if you only wanted to say something about what you think you could just write it or say it. And you wouldn’t be focusing on making it artfull because you wouldn’t be taking advantages of the posibilities of a paknting, because it would end up being an ugly and emotionless painting. (Sorry if I had bad English)
