The work of Jiří David shows a clear inclination towards the fragmentarization of the painted surface, the use of symbols, the exploitation of medial, existential, intimate, horrifying, historical, artistic, banal, and vulgar images of the world. At the same time, everything is combined and interconnected, meanings are multiplied, disappear, wander. David’s approach to art grew out of the postmodern discourse, which in its fragmentarization reflected diverse layers of the present. Over the years, his work has diversified into numerous techniques and approaches. Besides paintings and drawings, he also works with photography and creates objects and installations – and more recently, also glass vases. In any medium, the result is almost always a convincing Davidesque aesthetitc that tries to warp or empty established rules of “beauty” while also, in a paradoxical dichotomy, aesthetically reinforcing them.
(absolute zero, at which all particle motion stops)
Art is in its superposition, that is, it is and is not existing due to an external observer whose sense perception determines how it really is. It exists or takes place in a process at a certain point only on the basis of probability after it is observed...
When, therefore, we are no longer sure whether art is alive (has meaning) or dead (has lost its meaning), we are not sure what is or is not in the container (i.e., in a kind of capsule or shell of mutual agreement, a vault, but especially an incubator).
Whether it remains forever hermetically sealed in absolute zero (impregnable, uninhabitable) for the environment(perceiver, observer), leaving only ideas present, or unfulfilled expectations, desires, space for metaphorical sharing? Or does it ever manage to be reasonably opened and its contents seen revived? But is it not completely empty from the beginning, pretending to be full, to be fulfilled, to be meaningful?
To whom is it addressed, where is it going?
Is the hoisted white flag really a sign, a present symbol of final defeat, collapse, surrender, a sign of death, or is it, on the contrary, a tactical manoeuvre into the future? In other words, is what we are seeing, and precisely because we are seeing it, art in process? Probably yes, for art capitulates and thus necessarily simultaneously emerges. This conscious, or controlled, capitulation makes contemporary art present not only within the anthropological vision of the observer's subject. When, in a closed space, subsets of form with changing shapes emerge independently, which then stage speculative illusions, traces of parallel activities in desires for intense proximities. This is followed by a time of a priori visibility, i.e. the presence of art at its centre.