The exhibition of Ukrainian and Slovakian artists "Spaces of Gravity" visualizes one of the brightest and most interesting tendencies that can be traced in modern art, namely the artists' aspiration to work with the topics and characters of the environment, endowed with the qualities of mythological heroes, those being sacral, supernatural, and magic properties. This tendency has deep roots in the world cultural heritage. However, religious painting and historic pictures, on the one hand, and contemporary art, on the other hand, offer different methods of interpretation and visual embodiment of the classical myth of the creation of the world, human nature, and destination. In the 20th century, due to the fundamental change of the aesthetic and ideological paradigms, there emerges a notion of the "other" mythology, which is a deliberate construction of a new myth, creation of new pictures of dispensation, systems that have the objective of the transcendental reconsideration of the relationship between humankind and space. Today, it is not only the development of space as a territory, penetration into the depths, rush to the heights, but also the development of various kinds of energy and the creation of virtual spaces that acquire a global nature. Globalization creates an illusion of expanding humankind's personal field; however, it makes the space increasingly more vulnerable, which is known as the environment and generally thought of as a constant, something, which has been given primordially and, as it seemed to us, would never change. The vulnerability of constants – this is how the knot of the exhibition can be identified.
The original name of the project in the Ukrainian language is "Prostory tyazhinnya", which implies both the spaces of attraction and spaces of gravitation, as the Ukrainian word "tyazhinnya" involves both meanings. Thus, it will be more accurate to speak about the notion of "attraction-gravitation" – attraction of spaces and gravitation of spaces, human attraction, and human gravitation. This is because, to our mind, it is the dynamic coupling of humankind and space that is the momentum of both the process of cognition and the process of co-creation and, therefore, of the process of the creation of a work of art.
We speak about space because there is no such thing in nature as a point or line proper. However, there is space, endless in its manifestations and forcing humankind into permanent metamorphoses. Painting and sculpture, being traditional kinds of fine art, had different tasks and canons of criticism at different times. With the development of technologies, the requirement to capture the image of space has lost its actuality, and along with this a number of canons of criticism connected with it, which are the reference points identifying the "quality", have disappeared. Today, the artist does not reflect, nor does he or she depict the object. He or she creates pictorial spaces. Existence as a dynamic focus of freedom leads to a situation where space forms a co-act with the artist insofar as he or she can unite with them. (This possibility of free sojourn near (or in the middle of) the objects' sensual substrata, is probably what is called the artist's ultimate priority.) Thus, "watching the watched" acquires a different sense, as the looks of the one who watches and the one who is being watched are directed at each other. Both, the one who is watching Caspar David Friedrich and the one who is watching Boris Grebenshchikov (BG) become co-creators of the reality, which is being watched. Likewise, the reality proper (the mystic spirituality of nature with Friedrich – mystic ephemerality of cognition with BG) out of the one, which is being cognized, once comprehended turns into the one, which cognizes.
The image of the cognizing reality is one of the priorities of the "Spaces of Gravity" project.
One can speak about hidden reality as a visible reality with Olexander Babak, the female contour as a reference point, and rhythm with Olexander Zhivotkov, shape and sense, when inside all of the foregoing there is a subsequent one with Anna Gidora. The color and line of Badri Gubianuri, consciousness (reality) and sub-consciousness (possibility of other realities) of Yaroslav Prysyazhniuk, water and its inhabitants of Oleksii Lytvynenko, accessibility of possibilities and difficulty of the choice of Oleg Yasenev, social illusion and vision of harmony of Anatolyi Tverdy, space of light and trace of the light bearer of Petro Bevza, anthropomorphous shape and space "in" within outer objects of Mykola Malyshko, formal gesture and space "out" in the installations of Nina Denysova are the dynamic pairs of a single image.
The nearest parallels are the Thinking Ocean and researcher in "Solaris" by Stanislaw Lem, forest of Miracle and St. George in "St. George's Miracle" by Albrecht Altdorfer (...).
The artists of the project are the representatives of the same generation and the same school of painting, which formed under the conditions of a change (cardinal at first glance) from socially agenda-driven art of the past (socialist realism) to, in fact, the same socially agenda-driven by the market contemporary art.
However, neither the message of dispensation nor the logocentristic scepsis of relativity are inherent to them. A lack of a socially committed temperament makes it possible to find something different in the formation of one's image as a part of the all-embracing image, and, as a result, find it in one's creation, which is the heart of the love of the spaces of attraction.
The artists try to co-feel, co-experience, co-suffer, and co-act not with the spaces with their agenda-driven by the social forces of the society, but rather with the spaces free of those, marked by the culture as archetypes.
The creation of an image of space is a sort of appropriation of this space. The Byzantine iconoclasts rejected the images to segregate the divine from the materialization. The "Spaces of Gravity" project affirms the idea of avoiding the appropriation of the divine, but rather interweaving, inscribing into it. The appropriation of space differs from assimilation by the fact that the latter does not assume the proprietary claims, i.e., the desire to possess, but on the opposite side, it assumes the co-action of the two principles of the divine: inside of the nature and inside of the human.
The Ukrainian philosopher Sergey Krymsky asserted the key archetype of slavonic peoples is the wisdom of being, which is the unity (co-union) of the creator, creation, and the creative process.
We perceive this partnership as the co-creation of the spaces of gravity, an act of will in the place of phenomena reflection.