Lights 1965

Curator: Upon initial viewing, I'm struck by the drawing’s enigmatic and somewhat brooding character. Editor: That's interesting. The graphite medium lends a starkness, doesn't it? We are looking at "Lights," a 1965 work by Tihamer Gyarmathy. It presents a fascinating study in geometric abstraction. Curator: Indeed. The repetition of lines and blocks immediately recalls architectural structures, perhaps even circuitry. The formal structure appears almost obsessive in its precision. I wonder about the intended reading of "lights." Is it ironic? Is it meant to denote illumination of the technological age? Editor: Perhaps it refers not only to physical illumination but also to the cognitive light shed by advancements of the mid-20th century? I'm particularly interested in how Gyarmathy physically achieved this image, using graphite in layers, to almost conjure light and shadow across the surface of the paper. Consider also the labor invested in meticulously creating such intricate designs with limited means. It feels like both an embrace and an indictment of mechanization. Curator: Certainly, one can decode elements within its visual vocabulary using structuralist methodologies. Those dark squares, for instance, interrupt the uniformity, introducing focal points which complicate any singular reading of 'light' as mere enlightenment. Their shadowy character seems to trouble this assumption, as if indicating potential areas of blockage or points of control in this imagined construct. Editor: Agreed, the tactile impression of the graphite—its potential smudging and layering—serves not just to render forms but conveys, equally, information related directly back the hand of the artist, imbuing what initially seems detached in fact connects deeply to the practice. In the end, despite Gyarmathy's seemingly rigid abstraction, we are still provided access back the very act of production, no matter how subtle! Curator: Precisely. The piece rewards prolonged consideration of its underlying formal dynamics. Editor: It provokes a reconsideration of simple classifications separating conception, materials, and creative output as singular occurrences; here we witness something simultaneously industrial yet handcrafted.