Art is an intellectual challenge

”Simple is beautiful” says artist Markus Kåhre. He likens the beauty of mathematics and logic to beauty in art.

Contemplation in the studio does not help Markus Kåhre in brainstorming – the ideas for his works occur unexpectedly. ”I can still remember the moment when I became consciously aware that an idea occurred to me. I was just eating my porridge in the morning. The next idea came to me on a bus. No doubt the motifs had been concealed in my subconscious, but they surface as if out of the blue.”

The point of departure in Kåhre’s work is seeing the familiar in a new light and finding previously unacknowledged connections. Often the ideas are so powerful that they refuse to leave the artist alone. After this, it is the question of putting them into practice. The idea must be processed; it needs to be functional and answer the question, Can the idea be translated into a work of art?

”The best ideas are simple. In mathematics and logic the uncomplicated is beautiful: the aim is to solve a problem as simply as possible. The same applies to works of art: the simpler the realisation, the better it works.”

Putting an idea into practice also involves a risk of failure. If the idea is not challenging enough, Kåhre soon loses interest. ”In an ideal situation, one is able to experiment between different alternatives so that every-thing is ready already in the studio. The conditions, however, are sometimes such that even when I am mounting a major exhibition I cannot be sure how everything will work.”

Kåhre thinks that he is probably regarded as naive since he does not produce several versions of his ideas. But several versions would be uninteresting. He is aware of the shortcomings in his old works but regards them as rather touching. Nothing can be gained by producing new versions of the old idea, even though recycling them could be financially wise.

DO-IT-YOURSELF

Kåhre aims at creating his works from beginning to end on his own. He finds that the end result is easier to control if he produces all the pieces in his own studio. He also considers the ability to curb costs and flexible schedules important. ”I’ve never been very handy but this profession left me no choice. I find it easier to weld myself than send the piece needing alteration to some workshop.”

Doing things alone is also closely associated with Kåhre’s way of perceiving his works as solutions to problems. In one of his works he needed light to function in a specific way. Contacting companies in the field proved futile as they found the idea impossible. Kåhre rummaged through old optical books and got on with it. First he had to find out why the work was difficult to put into practice and then, find out how to make it work. ”Converting an idea into practice also requires brute force. I’m not saying that welding or working with a circular saw is fun in the long run. But it is something that is unavoidable. If I didn’t do these jobs, I might miss this aspect.”

AN ARTIST BY ACCIDENT

Markus Kåhre tells it was sheer co-incidence that he ended up an artist. In the upper secondary school his mind was occupied with other professions: he wanted to become a physicist or study in the University of Technology. A disagreement with the music teacher at school drove him to arts classes and, all of a sudden, he found himself applying to the University of Art and Design, Helsinki. Philosophical studies interested him as well, and he studied the subject for several years. ”I became interested in mathematics because of its inherent beauty. The creativity needed in solving mathematical problems is similar to that needed in art.”

Kåhre found similar aesthetics in mathematics as in the arts. A road in logic, however, soon ended. As his art studies progressed, Kåhre concentrated increasingly on sculpturing. Art was the medium through which he was able to exploit his creativity and formulate the questions he wanted to answer.

”I remember this particular idea from my philosophy lectures: there are philosophers who come up with answers to the existing questions. The next level invents new questions. The philosophers who have influenced philosophy as science are on the third level. This can be directly translated into art. At the first level one ponders how something should be processed, on the next what is being processed, and on the third level, the entire concept of art changes.”

Kåhre takes art as an intellectual challenge. ”Even if I failed to define what art is, it is interesting as a challenge. I would rather aim high than settle for less. When I was studying, everyone used to say that there is nothing new under

Piia Laita