In conversation with Elena Rubinova
Mikhail Krunov (born 1954) belongs to the generation that replaced the nonconformists of the sixties. He started as a classical painter, but soon realized that scientific knowledge can be the basis for plastic solutions and discoveries. He has developed his own unique pictorial style at the intersection of figurative art and abstraction. In recent years he has been engaging with his ‘Arithmetic Combinatorics’ series, developing geometric abstractions and figurative canvases with symbolic images. He has participated in the numerous exhibitions in Russia and Europe (the UK, Switzerland). His works are part of esteemed collections such as the collection of the State Russian Museum (St. Petersburg), the Marc Chagall Museum (Vitebsk), the Bakhrushin State Theatre Museum (Moscow) as well as of private collections abroad.
Mikhail Krunov speaks with our art observer about digitalization and the magic of numbers, his fascination with India and Eastern philosophy, and the transition from abstractionism to science-art.
Elena Rubinova: You always mention the distinguished artists of the 1960s, Alexei Kamensky and Yuri Zlotnikov, being among your teachers. Since then, you have moved further and wider. How important was their legacy for you and to what extent did it determine your path in art?
Mikhail Krunov: The influence of these artists and my current affinity to science-art in its modern sense is undeniable. For Yuri Zlotnikov, in particular, the rapidly developing cybernetics, computer science, and physics were the main sources of creative ideas. His most iconic of series called ‘Signal System’ is deeply rooted in science. A pioneer of post-war minimalism in the Soviet Union, he was immersed in cybernetics and communicated with mathematicians. At that time, science was his support, protecting painting and art from becoming a tool of ideological manipulation. Of course, the term science-art, as it is interpreted today, did not exist, but art born in contact with science has always existed, or at least, from a long time ago.
Mikhail Krunov, Yuri Zlotnikov, Vladimir Andrienkov
at the exhibition ‘Arithmetic Combinatorics’, 2019,
in the Moscow office of MacDougall’s Russian Art Auction, London
In this sense, even Leonardo da Vinci was engaged in science-art of his time. Later, the search for the fourth dimension and the new approach to the laws of a classical perspective inspired artists of the XXth century. Many Cubists, including Picasso, studied the works of the mathematician and physicist Henri Poincaré, who considered Euclidean geometry not as an objective truth but one of many possible geometric configurations. I would even say that the influence of technology and science on a larger scale can be found in both the Cubists and Impressionists.
Once society begins to operate with big scientific projects, art cannot stay away and goes through transformation with society. But there are also simple things that we do not usually think about. For instance, the birth of plein air as a method was the result of technology. When paint could be put in a tube, the technique of plein air spread widely!
ER: You say that you are trying to test the boundaries of painting. Have you questioned yourself it has been worth doing so? Why not get into other media?
MK: By pushing the boundaries of painting I was, first, exploring myself. I wondered how far I could go beyond even if I stayed within the traditional mediums. Pushing my own boundaries, I wanted to observe my own evolution. And to try to anticipate the future. Nowadays, traditional painting, especially in a new context, is sometimes perceived as archaic. Plastic language is not some finished thing, but first and foremost a living matter. An artist necessarily develops when his vision changes: it happens under the influence of teachers, under the influence of a larger culture and technology, or because of one's own experience. Maybe excessive entropy is not always a good thing, but I believe in evolution. It is happening and I am open to that change.
Winter Landscape, oil on canvas, 2000
ER: It is generally accepted that art has always been the domain of the individualistic intuitive approach and hands-on production. What do you retain in your artistic practice?
MK: In my view, painting is a somewhat physiological, sensual process. You may get tired of a certain habitual technique and switch to something else – from oil to acrylic or tempera – for a change. As an artist you first accumulate stereotypes and techniques, and then you destroy them. And I tried to overcome these stereotypes. Just as our language changes under various social factors, so does pictorial language.
Sometimes one event, one exhibition turns your consciousness upside down.
I remember when Giorgio Morandi’s art was first brought to the Soviet Union in 1979. And suddenly there were ‘Morandists’ in Moscow – a whole herd of artists following his style. Change does not always come through destruction, through breaking, but rather through evolution. Just as language changes under the influence of many processes, so too does pictorial language.
Horizon, oil on canvas, 1988
From the Nadya Brykina Collection
Early on, the focus of my art practice was on plein air landscape painting. Then I realized that the world was much more integral – landscapes were transformed into ‘horizons’ –sky, earth, forest. It was a period of geometric minimalism that rendered converged colour relationships and generalizations. The ‘Horizons’ series has stretched over for many years. I often joke that ‘Horizons’ calmed me down so much that I arrived an outright monochrome. All my white works come from that time.
Genetic Code, oil on canvas, 1999
ER: When was your first encounter with India and its culture?
MK: My first trips to India go back to the mid-1980s. The first place I visited was Madhuban, a small town in the state of Rajasthan. But it would not be an exaggeration to say that my spiritual journey began much earlier. I was very interested in Indian philosophy and teachings and got interested in yoga and Zen Buddhism. Little did I know that this would be a life-long experience that would have a major impact on my art.
ER: As far as I know, your Kalpa series was born precisely as a result of this; shall we call it, your ‘Eastern period’? Which of the teachings are especially important for you?
MK: The concept of Kalpa has both philosophical and ritual significance in Hinduism. It is also used in Indian astronomy and cosmology to measure the age of the universe. Works from that series became a symbol for me, a sign of the movement of time, and the theme developed into a plastic formula. In this large series, colour signified the cyclical change of cosmic epochs, and the boundaries between individual canvases in blocks signified singularity in the process of development.
The path to depth begins from the surface.
From the ‘Kalpa’ series, oil on canvas, 1989, 2020
Red, oil on canvas, 2024
ER: What other areas of scientific knowledge are important sources of information for you?
MK: The shift was, of course, philosophical. It occurred twenty years ago or so. Information space broadened, and openness also played its role. I started listening to Sir Roger Penrose's lectures and became acquainted with his views on evolution. Then I discovered the works of British cosmologist and astrophysicist John Rees. His string theory was poetry to me. By the way, his book has recently been translated and published in Russian. One of the immediate episodes that gave impetus to the search for new images were my impressions after visiting the academy town of Pushchino (note: a town in the Moscow Region, an important scientific center of the Russian Academy of Science) and meeting geneticists. The biologists showed me their laboratories, told me about the problems they were dealing with.
In the microscope I saw how they isolate DNA structures. In the 1990s these complex technologies were already available. That's how I started the ‘Genetic Code’ series. I now see it everywhere, be it in linguistics or biology.
Genetic Code, oil on canvas, 1999
ER: How true is it to say that art has always followed technology? Where is science-art in this line of thought?
MK: It's a mutual process – not only has science influenced artists, but scientists also have brought their knowledge to art. In 2021, I participated in the exhibition ‘The Magic of Supertechnology’, when professional artists in collaboration with SKOLTECH (note: a scientific cluster at the outskirts of Moscow) scientists created art objects, installations, and paintings. Quite unobvious things and phenomena of natural sciences, including nanotechnology, acquired images and meanings are accessible to the viewer. And the field of science-art is constantly expanding.
From the series ‘Arithmetic Combinatorics', 2020
From the Sarah Vinitz Collection
ER: Does digitalization help you, and if so, in what way?
MK: Digitalization certainly helps. And now we also have AI in our arsenal, which can respond to your demand. It is as if another interlocutor has come in and you enter into a dialogue. This has always fascinated me. I often do my compositions digitally at the beginning. I should mention that the digital format is particularly helpful when preparing for exhibitions – it is very important to see yourself on the wall, in space. And in 3D we can easily see all the options and our path. This new digital context is very important because I see myself differently on the screen. It's not just something printed, but you really go into a different space. It's interesting that, for example, in a Moscow gallery and, say, in Zurich, my work looks completely different.
Making and observing are two parallel processes in art. They go side by side and there is a very thin line between them, like between the two hemispheres of the brain. There is a particular transition. Many artists are into doing, but there is no work on vision. It’s a special practice.
Mikhail Krunov at his exhibition at Ark Gallery (Moscow)
ER: For the last ten years you have been developing complex works that involve combinatorics. What new knowledge and competencies has this required from you? What is the magic of numbers for you?
MK: The mystery itself excites me. I don’t understand the mystery of numbers.. Maybe it is elementary for every schoolchild but it's still a mystery to me what prime numbers are – even-odd, imaginary. The aesthetic side is a consequence of these mathematical riddles. Sometimes, as far as the mathematical apparatus allows me, I have to count! Sometimes I solve some specific task – for example, the Fibonacci series. Or construct a series of geometric sequences. But sometimes I feel the limit and look for new ways of solving.
‘Fibonacci Series’, oil on canvas, 2023
ER: Could you describe who can be the ideal curator for you?
MK: A scientist with a passion for art. My dream is to work with the mathematician and astrophysicist Martin Rees. He loves art and understands it. They have halls at the university and doing an exhibition there would be the best reward. The works from the Arithmetic Combinatorics series have so far only been exhibited in group projects – at the JART Gallery. Interestingly enough, as part of that exhibition curated by Alexander Korytov, Yaya Kusama’s ceramics were showcased – her dot patterns also contain a certain numerical rhythm. I see some of her works, including mirror works, as science-art. I see her as a superbiologist.
From the cycle ‘Arithmetic Combinatorics’, oil on canvas, 2020
Exhibition in the gallery JART Gallery, 2022, Curator Alexander Korytov
ER: Your works are in many collections and museums. How do art collectors react to the change of trend?
MK: There is a strange paradox. Sometimes, collectors earn a name, and sometimes artists seem to be lifting and pulling along both the viewer and collectors. I have often encountered a certain lag in interest in what I do -- now the works I did 15 or 20 years ago are attracting the interest of young people, the new generation of collectors.
ER: What would you like to show to an Indian audience if you got the chance?
MK: Back in the 1990s I participated in a major show at the Lalit Kala Akademi in Delhi. It was a group show of Soviet artists from the Union of Artists. But it was a different epoch. Now I believe that the Kalpa series would be most appealing to Indian viewers. The series continues, but it is being transformed into new forms. Today it is not only painting, but also art objects. Like Time itself, this series is infinite.
Translation by Elena Rubinova from the original article by her in Russian published on the website artandyou.ru
(All photos courtesy of the artist Mikhail Krunov and Elena Rubinova, unless mentioned otherwise.)
Elena Rubinova is a Moscow-based art journalist working across media, professional philologist, teacher, and translator. She started her career as an English language teacher before joining ABC News as a translator and producer. She has produced documentaries for BBC, National Geographic, Arte, Discovery Channel to name a few, including the three-part series The Art of Russia (BBC2, 2009). She has been a regular contributing writer for Russian magazines and on-line media such as ArtandYou, Artguide, Dialogue of Arts, International Life, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Russia Profile, Passport Moscow.
Comments