Jean Decoster: when matter speaks
Art has reflected upon itself since the beginning of last century. Each answer given through
visualisation has in fact grown into a style, generally labelled with a name ending in ‘-ism’.
The kind of art Jean Decoster is handling has escaped that suffix. One does not label it
materialism but matter-art.
In fact, these searches for the essence consist often in the absolute approach of one element, in
this case matter – material. It shows itself in its meaning producing power: as matter, as texture, as fabric where construction visualises through traces of destruction. Touching leads to scanning with the eye from a distance.
This inclusion of what the essence of art should be implies exclusion. One who states that the most
important element of art is matter, orphans at the same time the essence of the other substances: medium, content, shape and subject. Actually, if matter-art negates medium; is the art of painting to be considered as sculptural art ? Nature or
artefact ?
The content does not disclose itself and therefore opens itself to a multitude of interpretations. It refuses equally to adopt a fixed form and therefore has been named ‘informal art’.
It is impossible to speak about content. Matter speaks for itself. Its rhetoric becomes powerful
because paint merges with nature’s elements and culture products: sand, tar, objects, fabric, wood, stones,
metal, straw and glass. Founders of this type of art are, amongst others: Dubuffet, Bogart, Tapiès and Burri.
It is obvious that Jean Decoster is not a follower of these gentlemen. My classification may be
wrong. However, is my statement therefore unacceptable ? Art does not fall out of the sky. That explains the above
approach
Jean Decoster has a lot in common with the general rules of matter-art, but there are also interesting differences. His art is shaped out of handmade paper: actually a double fashioning.
This is important because, during what one call his first period ( 1980-2001), he mainly worked with
paper. Obviously not with industrially produced paper but with handmade paper.
This self shaping is close to nature. Paper made from reeds produce material
with a raised texture. The relationship between paper skin and its
origin, the paper-vegetal fibres is very important in Jean
Decoster’s work.
This shaping is different from the destructive method which typical of the first generation of
matter-artists. They would layer paint and than scrape it (Bogart) or scratch it (Tapiès) or burn it (Burri).
His creations as shaping paper-acts provide his work with a religious dimension. The adoration of
matter leads easily in that direction. A pantheistic touch is not foreign here. God of Nature, it was called by Spinoza. Let us not forget that the word ‘matter’ houses the word ‘mother’. His works
from that period can be used as attributes for a mother goddess culture. Spinoza has been accused of atheism on
this basis but I suspect that the religeous dimension I allude to Jean Decoster’s work has no religious basis.
Jean Descoster might go along with the anarchist cry cheristed by Louis Paul Boon, ‘no
God, no Master’. It is mainly the second refusal which has played an essential role in his recent work.
He is more and more concerned about the increasing non-freedom in society- his social engagement does not date from yesterday. Acts are limited, free opinions are suffocated at inception as in the bad old days. To enforce this
feeling of powerlessness and emptiness, Jean Decoster has enlarged his matter-art towards with a few other media. Paper works are allowed to continue their progress but are complemented with paintings, etchings and objects. The latter are often composed of objects found in nature and culture. This creates an interesting tension. At moments he even becomes figurative and acknowledges Magritt-surrealism. His etching is closely linked to material processing from his earlier works. It is obvious why paper is the barrier. However the paintings are the ones that best illustrate best the bounderies mentioned earlier. Monochrome surfaces are dotted, stained with paint strokes in a different colour. Canvas is punctured and metal wrapped. Another series consists of polychrome roses obtained by distorting sydeways a geometric sketch; spectators start wondering about the close-distant mood.
Often nature is present as well, represented by a pebble or a piece of driftwood, symbols of man’s quest.
His works are not cartoons, nobody is shocked. Cultures are not in opposition to the pictorial traditions of other cultures if there is respect. Throughout his work one feels his existential engagement in total solitude.
Willem Elias
Professor VUB
Chairman College of Arts |