Janos Szasz SAXON
The idea of immaterialisation I could only model in painting by using such elements as even in themselves represent the supremacy of pure sensation. Thus two basic suprematist elements, the square and the cross through which the square is divided into four parts, have served as points of departure. In this case, the square bears a yellow colour symbolising existence, whereas its opposite, the cross is characterised by a white tone that creates an impression of emptiness. During the construction of the picture, i.e. the deconstruction of the yellow square, I came to set up a polydimensional net. The net that connects micro- and macro-worlds, stretched in infinite dimension structures as a hyper-filter, incessantly attempts to jettison the imperfect objects (yellow squares) of existence from its ’body’.
From a mathematical perspective, we can say about a point that it is the smallest unit, an axiom. On the other hand, these infinitesimal points which do not even have an extension constitute lines, planes, space, our physical world, and our infinitely large Universe as well. This is the real dimension paradox. We could represent this with a hierarchical model of the world, in which the lower-level systems combine to form higher-level systems. From this point on, it is merely a question of agreement between universes whether we can consider the atomic particle a point compared to the globe, the globe in turn compared to the Milky Way, the Milky Way compared to the immeasurable worlds built up of sets of Galaxies, or, to take a more tangible example, the (inseminated) ovum compared to a human being. Should this agreement be reached, we could define the point as a multidimensional phenomenon, as the condensation of all dimensions and dimension structures.
All of us have probably observed already that the trunk of a tree branches in two or three directions, the thicker branches in turn divide into boughs of smaller circumference, down to the thinnest twigs at the end of which we can find the leaves. If we continue our observation, we may see that the capillary vessels within the leaves reflect the image of a small tree. Taking our contemplation even further, we might conclude that the divisions of our own body resemble those of the tree—the limbs (boughs) extending from the trunk end in fingers (twigs). Of course, the divisibility of trees does not stop at the level of their capillary vessels; it carries on in the flow of molecular and atomic particles: the vital energy itself is radiated to the leaves straight from the star called Sun in the form of light. This is how the smallest and the largest we are capable of perceiving are connected: the worlds of atoms and stars in relation to a tree—and, evidently, in relation to us, too.
If we place geometrical elements of varying size or proportion, but of similar form, on a sheet of paper, our eyes will perceive the connections between large, small and even smaller elements in perspective. If, however, we connect and combine the same forms, perspective ceases to be effective, and we arrive at new structures constituted by the different forms attached to one another. The “poly-dimensional fields” thus emerging are able to model the abundance of nature (trees, blood and water systems, crystals, cell division, etc.) and the infrastructural growth of human civilisation (networks of roads, pipe systems, networks of communication, etc.). On the other hand, they can represent the dimension structures of atomic and stellar systems, which have a similar structure, but are realised on extreme scales. As a matter of fact, this excessively visual attitude in art can be considered at least as “nature-based” as Flemish landscape painting.