László Moholy-Nagy exhibition at the Hungarian National Gallery
MúzeumCafé 6.
László Moholy-Nagy’s responsive, intellectual personality and brilliance surmounts the contradiction between what it means to be Hungarian and becoming globally accepted. This is partly due to Canadian art historian Olivér Botár’s The Early Moholy-Nagy (1916-1923) Reconsidered/Technical Detours and his committed work. Botár says that the artist’s creativity absorbed ‘isms’ like a sponge. His dynamic drawing, reflecting a perceptive interpretation of construction and structure is fascinating. Moholy-Nagy’s educational attitude, his desire to learn and to teach, his perfectionism and experimenting zeal are exemplary. He had the ability to identify with Western trends, while also sharply understanding the characteristically Hungarian conditions. His wealth of genres and forms, endeavouring to renew the language of fine art and photography, are brilliant. He can be characterised by both experimentation and a respect for traditions, cosmopolitanism and patriotism, a desire to belong to a group and have the artistic power to a≠ect public opinion, as well as committed individualism. His striking creative intelligence, his ability to fit in and yet rise above the determinations of history, his rational, conscious and yet highly enthusiastic personality all place Moholy-Nagy among the greatest. This is a beautiful, representative and versatile exhibition, resulting from Olivér Botár’s consistent work and Mariann Gergely’s activity as curator. Moholy-Nagy’s early years were spent in Hungary (1916-1919). The development of his oeuvre and his relationship to his contemporaries involve the viewer in a special adventure. Through an outstanding artist’s progress, we understand the genetics of an artistic generation’s development, the relentless and final logic which through works of art teaches us to feel and make decisions, in other words grasp everything good in art.
Olivér Botár’s respect for the artist is practically overwhelming. He does not ‘take away’ the artist from Hungarians, but strengthens and enforces Hungary’s acceptance and by placing Moholy-Nagy in an international context and providing an overview of the artist’s oeuvre he displays an exemplary attitude. While it is also obviously and naturally a business, art – and we are slowly taking it in – is work, an industry and a branch of business. It is somewhat, but only somewhat, more lasting than anything else.
The exhibition is characterised by a powerful concept and humble work. It shares and makes available a plenitude of works on loan from private collections. I say hats o≠! Finally, some words of criticism. I would have given a di≠erent, simpler title to the exhibition – perhaps Moholy-Nagy’s work in Hungary, his first years, his intellectual search for direction or the initial years. Commonplaces, perhaps, but I think “reconsidered” for Hungarians is not reconsideration or reinterpretation. We go through our everyday lives in an intellectually and morally intensified situation, passionately and complicatedly. I think Hungarian intellectuals already know and understand Moholy-Nagy, but he does not get closer to a broad audience with this exhibition. Moholy-Nagy had the excellent ability to adapt, a communication strategy, a self-realising technique and a polished theoretical programme. We can and are very proud of him. Nevertheless, I do not sense any ‘reconsideration’ but feel I have seen a nice, correct and powerful exhibition, which may hopefully generate some ‘reconsideration’ in contemporary Hungarian art.