While a part of painterly production—especially that where authors insist on the “easel painting”—finds itself in a critical position, not all possibilities of graphics have been exploited. Namely, oil on canvas of a chamber format is gradually losing its roots in the soil on which it lives. Demand is falling, and this decline is very symptomatic and reflects itself, on average, even in the stylistic and methodical difficulties of painters, which difficulties give birth to the weaknesses of the work. The graphic sheet, on the contrary, does not yet have enough of those who create it, nor have all those paths been found that would lead it with certainty and sufficient breadth to the buyer. There are several signs that the buyer—sometimes consciously, and other times with less clear concepts—needs, desires, and expects a graphic work.

The exhibition at the Art Pavilion shows that among graphic artists we possess a series of undeniable talents. Moreover, in the field of graphics, some painters have begun to solve those visual questions of individual practice more securely and effectively than they can master on canvas. A considerable number of the exhibited works represent fresher visual potentials than those that are average in “easel painting.” Several individual appearances certainly belong among the most valuable capacities of our visual life in general. — It must be noted, however, that a sensitive number of graphic artists whom we know and who work and create intensively are missing from this exhibition. Once again, organizational weaknesses have caused these gaps. Missing are: Pregelj, Mihelič, Sedej, Debenjak, Tršan, and Pogačnik from Ljubljana; Srbinović, Vujaklija, Maskareli, and Anastasijević from Belgrade are not here. Svertasek, Pintarić, and some others from Zagreb are also not exhibiting. Not all exhibitors are most fortunately represented, nor are all numerical ratios of exhibits realistic. A certain number of sheets represent only a burden for the exhibition. But the general profile of all the material and the qualitative average are at a higher level than those of other similar exhibitions, and therefore it is a positive date in the development of graphic culture on the visual horizon of our terrain.

Variations on the theme of the intimate miracle in the poetic reality of tangible objects are increasingly appearing as the framework of the main aspiration in modern graphics on the domestic level. These are the fruits of the second and third harvests in the field sown more than thirty years ago by surrealism. Somewhere nearby must also be those visual interests that are most current, as proven by the most ideal and reliable reaches of realization at this exhibition as well.

It is no coincidence that six engravings by A. Oprešnikova certainly represent the most valuable works of this entire exhibition, and it seems that currently, this is the optimum in our field of vision in general. Authentic poetry of the motifs, the deep justification of the composition’s structure, and the excellent technique of these sheets deserve a very rare assessment of their value. — Not far from these engravings are also three etchings by the young painter Bernik. His invention, however, is still saturated with impressions before the sculptures of Chadwick and Moore. But the sum of the results of the author’s efforts is still enough for us to give him special recognition. The value of Bernik’s “Acrobat on Horseback” is quite exceptional. — Among the young lithographers who build their expression on themes with figures, Luković has once again shown how his thought hardly connects compositional wholes, but in details, he is truly inexhaustible. The figure of the “Orator,” the rooster next to him, the “Wooden Rooster” itself, and some figures in “The Clown’s Funeral” could stand independently as examples of unusually vivid imagination and technical mastery of the best kind. Stevec has also realized a new reach of his talent precisely in the technique of lithography. His linocuts are valuable, but the lithographed “Still Life” is more interesting and its effect will be more lasting. — Z. Hegedušić and Detoni continue their tradition. Hegedušić is certainly more secure when he remains on the rhythm of the pure line itself than when he engages in complex compositions of lines, hatchings, and tones. Detoni’s “Night in a Big City” is above average, perhaps a continuation of the author’s inclination towards dark visions that have already appeared in earlier portfolios. It seems they now seek concentration, stricter selection in the excessive abundance of details, and liberation from the autobiographical tone of the idea. — Borčić’s “Sorrow and Joy of the Forest” means almost a transition to abstraction. Although not everything is yet settled in that work, it still belongs among the most interesting things the author has been able to exhibit so far. — Restek has reached further with his technique than the limits of his own invention. He has outgrown his own previous average with the combined engraving “Night Shadows.”

Abstraction is represented quite abundantly. Dogan, Kulmer, Lipovac, and partly Murtić, Petlevski, and Kršinić are active in this field. However, no work in the sense of non-figuration has reached the level we could already expect. Sometimes efforts stall on technical questions, and other times the author’s invention is tired or insufficiently independent. Nevertheless—Petlevski, Kulmer, and Lipovac promise the most. — Technical problems in a direct or indirect way burden the work of Kinert, Posrušnik, and Prica. Kinert has not found his way on large formats, and it is also seen that engraving with a needle on a metal plate is closer to him than lithography. Prica is a stranger on the lithographic stone. And Postružnik, with his three linocuts, has discovered interesting sides of his experiments. The raw forms of the figures could have received much more life than happened. Now they are still empty, schematic, and without the charm of a full-blooded graphic print. — Karanović is not fortunately represented. Only the lithography “Treetops” informs us of the author’s potential possibilities. Celić wanders into semi-abstraction, which is foreign to him, and in it, all the sensitivity and all the thoughts of the author follow in empty formulas.

R. PUTAR

Narodni list, May 22, 1958.