EXAT 51
Cultural and Historical Chronology
1948 – Cominform Resolution – On 28 June 1948, the Cominform (Information Bureau of the Communist and Workers’ Parties) issued the resolution which expelled the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (CPY). After months of conflict, the CPY was accused of deviation from Marxism- Leninism and of an anti-Soviet attitude. Yugoslavia had a relatively independent foreign policy that was at odds with the Stalin-Churchill agreement (1944) on the post-war division of Europe. Immediately after the resolution, the USSR terminated all bilateral agreements with Yugoslavia, withdrew its credit, and broke the supply chains vital to the survival of Yugoslav citizens. The occupation and liberation struggle during World War II left Yugoslavia in ruins with the majority of industrial plants in the predominantly rural country damaged or destroyed. In 1947, the CPY had declined help provided by the Marshall Plan. Therefore, it could not ask for any support from the West without provoking a military intervention by the USSR. Living conditions at the end of the 1940s and the beginning of the 1950s were extremely harsh. In the field of the visual arts, there was a dearth of the basic materials required for art production at the academies and in studios throughout the country.
1948-1950 – Design of Yugoslav pavilions at international trade fairs – After the break with the USSR, Yugoslav foreign policy aimed to increase the visibility and prominence of the country. It pursued clear financial objectives as a result of an economic and security crisis, which urgently made the re-establishment of relations with the West necessary. Thus, Yugoslavia encouraged participation at numerous international trade fairs. Held all over Europe to support the process of post-war reconstruction, the fairs maintained fairly flexible standards of presentation. In order to use the available financial means in the best possible way, the Chamber of Commerce organized a series of competitions for the design of Yugoslav pavilions between 1949 and 1951. Architect Vjenceslav Richter, along with artists Ivan Picelj and Aleksandar Srnec, who were joined on a few occasions by Edo Murtic´, won some of these competitions and planned the pavilions at the trade fairs in Vienna, Stockholm (1949), Hanover, and Chicago (1950).(1) These exhibition designs were considerably different from other contemporary projects and generated a new formal and (re)presentational code which was full of references to the historical avant-gardes (Bauhaus, Russian Constructivism, Surrealism) and infused with the spirit of modernity. This confirmed a radical departure from Soviet visual practices. After 1950, Yugoslav participation at international trade fairs declined, prompting Richter, Picelj, and Srnec to direct their collaborative experimental work towards more demanding projects.
1949 – The Academy of Applied Arts in Zagreb was established on 18 December 1949, following a decision of the Croatian Council for Culture and of the Ministry of Science and Culture of Yugoslavia. The first professors of the academy were Branka Hegedušic´, Ernst Tomaševic´, Đuka Kavuric´, Kosta Angeli Radovani, Željko Hegedušic´, and Marin Studin, who initiated the foundation of the Croatian Association of Artists of Applied Arts a few months later. Developed according to the Bauhaus approach of integrating art, crafts, and technology, the curriculum was adapted to the technical and material circumstances of post-war Yugoslav society. The academy provided education in the applied arts and architecture.(2) In 1954, it was shut down after lengthy discussions and negotiations at the federal level and after educating only one generation of students.
1950 – Food shortages – In summer 1950, Yugoslavia was hit by drought. The USSR blockade and an increase in prices after the outbreak of the Korean War exacerbated the situation. Food supplies were allocated to the Yugoslav Army that was stationed along the country’s borders and in a state of alert due to constant Soviet military provocation. As a consequence, the civilian population suffered from serious food shortages. To prevent famine, the Yugoslav government requested assistance from former Western allies. This resulted in a tripartite food donation from the UK, USA, and France. It came at a decisive moment for the »survival of the revolution« and greatly helped the CPY’s efforts to defuse the dangerous internal political situation. In addition, the donation initiated a change in Yugoslavia’s political relations with the West.
The Basic Law on the Management of State Economic Enterprises and Higher Economic Associations by the Workers’ Collectives, or the Act on Handing Factory Management to Workers, was passed by the Yugoslav People’s Assembly on 6 June 1950. It laid the foundation for »workers’ self-management«, an experimental model of political and social practice. Already in the mid-1950s, it was regarded as a »Yugoslav version« of socialism. Unlike the economies of the Soviet Union and Eastern European communist countries, the Yugoslav system was based on enterprises collectively managed by the workers themselves who also had the right to decide on the conditions of production and on the distribution of surplus value. After the initial stage, the system had to pass through several structural reforms before the law was fully implemented. The principle of self-management was applied to all areas of social organization, including science and culture.
Beginning of de-Stalinization process in arts and culture – Petar Šegedin’s address to his fellow writers at the 2nd Congress of the Yugoslav Writers’ Union, entitled »About Our Literary Criticism«, marked the beginning of the deconstruction of socialist realism. His address was followed by Krsto Hegedušic´’s paper »A Word about the Organization of Art Criticism«, which was delivered at the annual conference of the Croatian Association of Artists, held at the end of the same year in Zagreb. This was the first public attack on the aesthetics and doctrine of socialist realism in the visual arts, requesting freedom of artistic expression and triggering wide public debate.
Participation at the 25th Venice Biennale – The presentation of Yugoslav contemporary art at the Venice Biennale in the summer of 1950 was the first appearance of Yugoslav artists at any international art exhibition after WWII. The writer and literary critic Petar Šegedin acted as curator. He had no previous experience with curatorial work and selected a range of sculptures, paintings, and graphic designs. This selection was representative of the local version of socialist realism. As the first socialist country to take part in this international exhibition, the Yugoslav national selection gained an enormous and completely unexpected international publicity. From 1950 onwards, the SFRY (Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) regularly and more or less successfully participated at the Venice Biennale, and at other major international art exhibitions (São Paulo Biennale, Alexandria Biennale, Tokyo Biennale, Documenta, etc.).
1951 – West European/US economic and military support – The severe economic crisis and military provocations by the Soviet satellite states continued along the borders in 1951. In April, Yugoslavia again asked the UK, USA, and France for assistance. A donation of raw materials worth 50 million dollars was agreed upon. This was sufficient to sustain the country’s industrial production until the end of the year. Further economic support followed as a result of the Agreement on Military Cooperation signed between the USA and Yugoslavia on 14 November. On the very same day, the UN Political Committee published its decision confirming that Yugoslav complaints against the USSR, filed a few months before, were justified. US donations in weapons and military technology reduced the threat of Soviet invasion and irrevocably changed Yugoslavia’s foreign policy.
Decree on the Reorganization of State Administration – A few days before Yugoslavia requested help from its Western allies, the Yugoslav government issued the Decree on the Reorganization of State Administration. It launched the process of »decentralization, de-bureaucratization, and democratization«. The decree was supposed to deconstruct an important section of the state’s institutional infrastructure which had been taken over unquestioningly from the Soviet political administration in the early post-war years. It was followed by strong criticism of mismanagement in the repressive judicial apparatus.
Declaration of Critical and Creative Freedom – On 4 June 1951, the Central Committee of the CPY issued the Declaration of Critical and Creative Freedom. This was part of a series of decisions which were essential to the ongoing process of de-Stalinization and to strengthening relations with the West. The declaration was interpreted as an indirect call for a »battle of ideas« aiming to reduce the influence of those individuals and institutions who still supported the Stalinist model of culture.
1951-1956 – »Battle of ideas« refers to a series of passionate, often unpleasant public disputes, launched at the end of 1950 and set in motion by the Declaration of Critical and Creative Freedom. After socialist realism had been deconstructed without the involvement of the CPY, the »battle of ideas« was intended to »clear the air« in the arts and culture. Subsequently, political support was withdrawn from institutions and individuals who had been decisive in imposing socialist realism. This created a rather tense situation. From 1946 to 1950, public discourse on culture and cultural politics had been strictly controlled. The call for a critical approach now unleashed a pent-up dissatisfaction which surfaced in the public arena in an unexpectedly harsh manner. Since it was also a »battle« for the redistribution of power within the national world of arts and culture, undergoing the first major reconstruction after WWII, the stakes were high. They involved the introduction of a completely new set of aesthetic values. An answer was urgently required to the question as to which direction Yugoslav cultural production should take after the demise of socialist realism. A central issue of the visual arts concerned the relationship towards European modernism as a possible field of reference. Contemporary art was ever more frequently relying on artistic practices that were still perceived as unacceptable, because of their »roots in the bourgeois culture of the West«. While art historians, theorists, and art critics were just starting to discuss the matter, the local art scene had already articulated its response. It confirmed – by the example of EXAT 51 – that it was not only possible to establish continuity between inter-war and contemporary art, but also a necessary precondition in order to approach the trends of the international art scene critically and fulfil the »plastic requirements« of contemporary (socialist) society.
Foundation of EXAT 51 – Due to their work as designers of the Yugoslav pavilions, Richter, Picelj, and Srnec had the rare privilege of travelling abroad. This brought them into contact with European contemporary art and architecture, as well as with the heritage of the historical avant-garde. Among all the international art trends which they encountered on their travels and in the available foreign journals, the proposal of a synthesis of the arts attracted the particular attention of the Croatian artists. This idea, developed by the Bauhaus, had regained momentum after WWII, primarily through the discussions held at the International Congresses of Modern Architecture (CIAM). Organized across Europe, these debates opened up many new perspectives. The idea of synthesis soon reached other geographic locations, for instance, Latin America, where it coincided with the emergence of concrete art. Discussions on synthesis were particularly vibrant in France and resulted in the formation of the Groupe Espace, in June 1951. Founded by architect André Bloc and painter Félix del Marle, Groupe Espace advocated a synthesis of the arts as a conceptual and technical framework for a collaborative, experimental approach to the »problems of the human environment«. Simultaneously, these ideas also emerged as a point of interest for Richter, Picelj, Srnec, and a group of young architects who gathered around the studio located at Gajeva ulica 2, in Zagreb. Since they had fairly accurate and up-to-date information on the events occurring in the French art scene, the foundation of Groupe Espace may have been an important incentive for their decision to establish, only five months later, Experimental Atelier 51 (EXAT 51). The attitudes and goals presented in the manifestos of both groups were similar in many respects. In fact, they were published only a few months apart. It is remarkable that both advocate »non-figurative art«, emphasize the synthesis of the arts as the main precondition for the »harmonious progress of human activities«, and highlight that such progress is unattainable without a close connection between arts and industry. Although integral to post-war social and industrial modernization, such attitudes might have been acceptable in France, but presented to a Croatian public, they sparked public controversy and contributed to the already heated atmosphere in the local art scene.
EXAT 51 Manifesto – Adjusted closely to Yugoslav political practice, Exat’s manifesto was presented to the public on 7 December 1951, at the annual conference of the Croatian Association of Artists of Applied Arts. Considering that the local public had little experience with the ideas of the avant-garde, Exat’s decision to use a manifesto to communicate its program was symbolic and unusual. It was symbolic in the sense that it took the inter-war avant-garde as its point of reference; thus Exat claimed for itself a similar position in the contemporary art scene. It was unusual because it rejected – at least partially – the local modernist tradition in favour of a formal conceptual framework. From the point of view of both the professional and general public the manifesto was – first and foremost – disturbing. The reasons for the disturbance were multifarious: the manifesto provided a negative assessment of mainstream art production on the grounds that this art did not aim to achieve »the synthesis of all arts and, secondly, to emphasize the experimental nature of artistic activity«. It demanded the eradication of the »difference between the so-called fine and the so-called applied arts«, and it stressed the »plastic requirements« of society. In addition, it aspired »to fight against outdated ideas and activities in the area of the fine arts«. Still another particularity of the manifesto was its author’s awareness (it was most probably written by Vjenceslav Richter) of the tensions marking the historical moment at which EXAT 51 was entering the realm of Croatian art. There are references to those tensions in the concluding paragraph of the manifesto stating that Exat »considers the establishment and activities of the group to be the practical and positive result of the development of the battle of ideas«. The wording may also be interpreted as an expression of Exat’s sincere support of the expected internal reorganization of the local art scene. However, considering the controversies that followed, such expectations proved to be rather naïve.
1952 – Critical responses – The views expressed in Exat’s manifesto attracted the attention particularly of the academic community which was concerned about the concept of abstract art and the absence of any consensus on the future development of the visual arts. Their anxieties were summarized in a series of (semi) public debates on the meaning of abstraction and on the relation of abstract art to socialist visual culture. These debates were organized by the editorial board of the scientific journal Pogledi and held at the Club of University Workers in Zagreb. They lasted for an entire semester – from the beginning of February to mid-June 1952 – and involved art historians, art theorists, art critics, and members of EXAT 51. According to Vjenceslav Richter,3 instead of a »systematic debate« Exat’s manifesto was met with a wide array of improvised arguments revolving around the meaning and the (class) origins of the inter-war abstract artists. Moreover, the local modernist tradition was viewed as an »unnatural environment« for any type of abstraction. Other than that, the discussions at the Club of University Workers provided only a few objections to the manifesto, the same which had already been voiced in the popular press. These were quite general and mirrored the contemporary critical discourse on geometric abstraction in other European countries at the time. Regardless of whether it was seen as »incomprehensible« and »deprived of any human content«, or »cheerful« and »visually attractive«, the majority of European art critics saw geometric abstraction as a means to »provide visual pleasure«, yet considered it too remote from the reality of post-war Europe. Croatian art critics shared this attitude towards abstract art. They agreed that neither geometric abstraction nor the concept of synthesis, had the potential to advance contemporary visual culture. While art critics categorically rejected the manifesto, Croatian architects responded fairly favourably. Well-informed on CIAM’s post-war debates and rather hesitant towards the »battle of ideas«, they supported EXAT 51 by providing the space for the group’s first public exhibition, held only a year later at the beginning of 1953, at the Croatian Architects’ Association.
Exat’s attempt to gain a place in the international art scene – In mid-1952, EXAT 51 staged a small exhibition for a circle of friends in Zagreb. A spontaneous and private event, it served as a general rehearsal for the participation of three Exat painters – Ivan Picelj, Aleksandar Srnec, and Božidar Rašica – at the seventh Salon des Réalités Nouvelles, the largest and most influential exhibition of geometric abstract art in post-war Europe which was held a month later in Paris. At the beginning of 1952, Picelj, Rašica, and Srnec submitted their application for the Salon, and after it was accepted, they shipped nine paintings, selected by the jury, to the French capital. According to the rather strict state policy on foreign travels at the time, the attendance at the Salon was deemed a private journey and the artists had to remain in Zagreb. Although Exat’s painters were not individually mentioned in critical responses to the Salon des Réalités Nouvelles, they were listed – together with the rest of the 300 participants – in a special issue of Art d’aujourd’hui, and a painting by Božidar Rašica was featured in the book published to highlight the exhibition.(4) The Salon was perceived as a stronghold of post-war European concrete art. Therefore, by deciding to take part in its annual exhibition, EXAT 51 made an important move towards establishing itself in the international art scene in close proximity to art groups and movements such as the French Groupe Espace, the Italian MAC, or Argentinian Arte Madí. These groups pursued similar objectives and shared a similar ideological perspective. It is not known whether this early step into the international art scene was part of some carefully crafted strategy, or if it was the result of an impulsive decision. In any case, the attendance of Exat painters at the Salon des Réalités Nouvelles had far-reaching consequences and a direct influence on the group’s future.
The speech of the Croatian writer Miroslav Krleža at the 3rd Congress of the Association of Writers of Yugoslavia in Ljubljana (October 1952) marked a de native break with socialist realism in Yugoslav culture.This speech became the central methodological (and ideological) point of reference in the ongoing process of modernist reconstruction. A number of new literary journals launched immediately after the Congress published the first translations of West European contemporary authors.They seized the opportunity to broaden their scope beyond literature into the entire eld of thought, allowing a diversity of previously »inappropriate« theoretical and philosophic discourses to enterYugoslav culture.
The 6th Congress of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia was held in Zagreb, in November 1952. On this occasion, Stalinism was sharply criticized and the name of the party was changed into the League of Communists of Yugoslavia. This signified the transformation of the CPY from a political party into a political movement – the »ideological avant-garde of the working class«. It also initiated the gradual process of transforming a state-run by party bodies – a legacy of WWII and appropriate for that specific historical situation – into a more complex administrative organization, ready to meet the challenges of socialist self-management.
1953 – The death of Stalin on 5 March 1953 removed the threat of a potential USSR military intervention which had continued to loom even after the Agreement on Military Cooperation with the United States had been signed. In June 1953, diplomatic relations between Yugoslavia and the USSR were reestablished, but this did not automatically improve relations between their communist parties.Yugoslavia’s self-conscious foreign policy in the post-Stalinist period strongly relied on economic growth which was based on the help from France, the UK, and the USA. It amounted to a total of 492.9 million dollars by the year 1954.
Exat’s first public exhibition »Kristl – Picelj – Rašica – Srnec« was staged on the premises of the Croatian Architects’ Association in Zagreb, early in 1953.(5) It was the first public group show of EXAT 51. According to a statement given by Vjenceslav Richter at the exhibition opening, Exat had postponed the event on the grounds that the group’s »exhibition focusing on the topic of synthesis and connecting architectural concept, plastic [art], and painting« had not been possible for some time »because of the lack of material foundations«.Therefore, Exat decided that it was both »justi ed and necessary to go public with the works that were made possible by the available intellectual and material resources«, and it opted – once again – for the group’s painterly production. As expected, the exhibition achieved succès de scandal, causing a storm of public reaction and receiving the same critical remarks which had been made with regard to the group’s manifesto. There were few favourable responses, and they got lost in the flood of articles, critical reports, caricatures, and cartoons that were published in daily newspapers and weekly magazines attacking and ridiculing Exat’s painters.The reviews were followed by public discussions and controversies involving art critics, artists, writers, and a number of »common citizens« deeply concerned with »aberrations in socialist culture«.The exhibition was almost immediately transferred to Belgrade, but the positive reactions it received there did not affect the controversies at home. They lasted up to the end of 1954 when geometric abstraction became just one new art movement among several others that all required public attention
Discussion at the Ritz Bar – At the beginning of 1953, the city authorities appointed Vjenceslav Richter to redesign the interior of the Ritz Bar, the only nightclub in Zagreb back then.The wall decorations were entrusted to Edo Murtic ́, a rising star of gestural abstraction. In the course of this collaboration, certain architectural ideas clashed with the painterly solutions.The conflict resulted in the most vehement public debate in Croatian art in the whole of the 1950s: held on 22 October 1953, it focused on the definition of »genuine« abstraction and was the first public manifestation of the irreconcilable differences between the advocates of geometric abstraction and the supporters of gestural abstraction.The two groups were divided along the (ideological) line of a »socially conscious approach to the ‘plastic requirements’ of socialist society«. Offensive and humiliating, the discussion at the Ritz Bar contributed to the negative public perception of EXAT 51 and generated permanent tensions in the Croatian art scene, which – rather paradoxically – became an important source of its vitality.
1953-1957 – High level of industrial growth –Yugoslav socialism, based on workers’ self-management and their collective ownership of the means of production, resulting in a higher standard of living than in other communist countries.The rate of industrial growth in the 1950s, followed by a steady rise in employment, ranked among the highest in the world (100% in 1953, 128% in 1954, 162% in 1956). It enabled Yugoslavia already in the mid-1950s to leave the group of the so-called »underdeveloped« countries.The explosion in industrial activity required an appropriate growth of the workforce, causing continuous migration from rural areas to the new urban centres. This resulted in a serious housing crisis and created general dissatisfaction with the availability and quality of consumer goods.The situation contributed to the transformation of the Yugoslav industry and its closer collaboration with architects and designers.
1953-1954 – »Normalization« of abstraction –The exhibition Kristl – Picelj – Rašica – Srnec was the first and also the last art show of EXAT 51, just as the discussion at the Ritz Bar was its last public appearance as a group. Subsequent to the controversies caused by both events, debates on geometric abstraction were transferred from the daily newspapers and popular magazines to specialized journals. In the period that followed, these publications provided an important stimulus to contemporary art criticism and inspired a more complex, theoretically informed type of analysis.They exhibited certain sympathies for Exat’s attempt to attribute a new meaning – consistent with the experimental nature of the »Yugoslav version« of socialism – to geometric abstraction and the avant-garde heritage. However, the common argument of those reviews was that neither Exat’s conceptual framework, nor its results were particularly convincing. As if it was trying to add fuel to such criticism, the group started to drift away from the idea of collaborative experimental work. By 1954, Exat had declined to some loosely linked individual interests. The group’s dissolution which had begun after the discussion at the Ritz Bar, or – according to Richter – after the 1953 exhibition, continued for almost three years. It was a consequence of changes both in the group’s dynamics and in the Croatian art scene.
Compared with the early post-war years, the material conditions of art production significantly improved towards the mid-1950s.The opening of new exhibition spaces, the appearance of new professional magazines, and the introduction of foreign art fellowships prompted an influx of information about the international art scene. In 1954, a »normalization« of new artistic trends – including different variants of abstraction – was underway. Art critics voiced fewer and fewer objections and, by the mid-1950s, critical discourse on abstract art fell silent.The political leadership of Yugoslavia kept its promise and did not interfere with events in the visual arts. Gradually, domestic and foreign policy moved in a direction that led to an atmosphere of tolerance in the field of culture and in society in general.
1954 – Treatise on synthesis – An extensive essay entitled Prognosis of Existential and Artistic Synthesis as the Expression of Our Epoch, interpreted as Richter’s »treatise« on synthesis, rst appeared as an introduction to his book Sinturbanizam (Synthurbanism), published in 1964.(6) According to Richter’s remarks in the foreword, the essay was written in 1954, while the »discussions held at the Club of UniversityWorkers in Zagreb were still relevant«, and was »inspired by the urgency to move away from an improvised discourse, conditioned by the nature of such discussions, towards a more systematic con- sideration [of synthesis], that promised an exit from the dilemmas of the time«. In the mid-1950s, Richter understood the concept of synthesis first and foremost as »the organic part of the synthetic view of the world«, that would bring about a fundamental transformation of the human environment through the application of »structurally formed« plastic entities. Unsurprisingly, the idea of synthesis was incompatible with the autonomy of the individual disciplines. Its supporters demanded the dissolution of the boundaries between painting, sculpture, and architecture as a precondition for a singular »general visual activity«.This activity was supposed to have the capacity to embrace »human life in all its richness and complexity«, closing the gap between artistic and other practices.The early and heroic attempts of the Bauhaus and De Stijl to bring art into the everyday life of man failed – in Richter’s opinion – because of the historical circumstances. But the situation changed after WWII: new social, philosophical, and aesthetic values were adopted, creating new historical conditions.These were more supportive of raising awareness for plastic phenomena and the experimental nature of the synthesis of arts. Richter was already enthusiastic about the concept in the period when he was writing the essay, but he became even more so towards the end of the 1950s. His enthusiasm culminated, in the 1960s, in the invention of Synthurbanism, an utopian proposal for a »town-planning synthesis«. It was based on the rational, spatial distribution of 10,000 self-managing, multifunctional residential units.The plan demonstrated Richter’s experimental, research-based approach, as well as his intention to expand »general plastic activity« towards society in general and the entire architectural environment.
The magazine »Man and Space« (Covjek i proctor – CIP) was launched in 1954 by the Croatian Architects’ Association. It was strongly influenced by the »ideology« of EXAT 51 and belonged to another wave of periodicals released after the break with the USSR.They were issued with the intention to meet the specific interests of the different communities in the Croatian cultural scene. Initially, following the example of the French journal L’Architecture d’aujourd’hui, CˇIP was conceived as a forum for architecture, design, and the visual arts. It published articles on contemporary professional and social issues.The range of topics covered by the magazine was de ned by the problems related to industrial modernization, urban growth, and the ongoing housing crisis. In addition, it addressed the lack of functional and well-designed objects for personal use, as well as the difficulties in establishing a closer collaboration between contemporary architecture, design, and industrial production which would have solved some of the problems. Suffused with an activist spirit, which also marked the ethos of EXAT 51, and fully aware of the contemporary theoretical and technical debates, Cˇ IP also published a series of contributions referring to the immediate reality of Yugoslav society in the 1950s.They contained practical advice on »modern urban living« and interior design and sometimes featured a blueprint for cheap, handmade furniture, designed according to the principles of simplicity, functionality, and aesthetics, in line with the Bauhaus’s understanding of design. Cˇ IP rapidly became a highly respected professional periodical, which retained its prestigious position for decades.
Establishment of the Zagreb City Gallery of Contemporary Art (CGCA) – Founded in December 1954, CGCA was conceived as an institution dedicated to documenting and promoting contemporary art. Parallel to its establishment, there was a fierce quarrel between the representatives of the Yugoslav Academy of Science and Arts, and a group of independent art critics, curators, and theorists, who stubbornly refused to adjust their views to the conservative values of the most powerful cultural institution in Croatia at the time. Consistent with its initial mission to support contemporary and more radical forms of art, CGCA became a safe haven for the generation of artists, art critics, and young academics who were slowly, but fundamentally changing the internal order of the Croatian art scene. As a result of an open-minded exhibition policy and high professional standards, CGCA became a chief partner of the Federal Commission for Cultural Exchange in organizingYugoslav presentations at international art exhibitions. Ivan Picelj and Vjenceslav Richter were much involved in the gallery’s activities throughout the 1950s and 1960s.
1954-1955 – The first visit of Josip Broz Tito to Asia and Africa – In London, in October 1954, Yugoslavia, Italy, the UK, and the USA signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the Free Territory of Trieste, splitting the former free zones under the jurisdiction of the Allies between Italy and Yugoslavia. After resolving the territorial issues with Italy, Josip Broz Tito set off to India, Burma, and Egypt. He met with the political leaders of these countries which had recently gained their political independence.They were struggling for economic emancipation and trying to prevent the superpowers from exploiting their natural resources.Tito’s journey was actually an exploratory one leading to the »discovery of theThirdWorld«. In the following years, Yugoslavia maintained a policy of equidistance from both political blocs and observed thepoliticaldevelopmentsinAfrica, Asia,andLatinAmericawithgreaterattention.Yugoslav foreign policy carefully added the notion of »peaceful coexistence« to its main principles.This was part of the government’s plan to prepare a conceptual framework for building stronger ties with the ThirdWorld.
1955 – Ivan Picelj’s first visit to Paris – ln the two months he spent in France – from October to December 1955 – Picelj established contacts with a number of artists and curators who would significantly contribute to the advancement of his international career. His contact with Denise René Gallery was of particular importance. In the late 1950s, the gallery became the most important location for artists pursuing research in geometric abstraction and kinetic art in Europe and Latin America. Denise René organized the exhibition Le Mouvement at her gallery from 6 to 30 April 1955, the first exhibition after WWII exclusively dedicated to kinetic art. It was groundbreaking for a younger generation of artists, some of whom were going to participate a few years later in the first exhibition of New Tendencies in Zagreb. Picelj did not manage to see the exhibition but thoroughly researched the novelties in graphic design. He returned home with a new technique of silkscreen printing which laid the foundation for the well-known »Zagreb serigraphy school«, established in the early 1960s.
Exat’s involvement with industrial and graphic design – From a present-day perspective, the first public presentation of the group’s paintings was a rather unhappy decision. It firmly linked Exat’s activities (and its legacy) to the local responses to geometric abstraction, and also – quite opposite to its programmatic orientation – to the medium of painting.The group’s painterly production attracted most public attention, overshadowing the rest of Exat’s activities which were diverse and covered almost the entire eld of visual culture, in particular, graphic and product design. Bernardo Bernardi, Zvonimir Radic ́, Ivan Picelj, and especiallyVjenceslav Richter played a pivotal role in establishing the theoretical and methodological framework for modern Croatian design.They determined the key concepts and terms outlining its eld of operation. In fact, Exat’s theoretical discourse integrated the very idea of »designing for industry« into the Yugoslav social and economic order and adapted it to the objectives of socialist self-management.This was not the outcome of some self-imposed, ideological narrative, but rather resulted from a shared conviction in art’s potential to respond to the existential needs of contemporary society. Such theoretical explanations only became popular in the mid-1950s, when Yugoslav society had to face the consequences of an accelerated post-war industrial modernization. Huge migrations from the rural to urban areas, the subsequent growth of the urban population, and the first major housing crisis created an urgent need for standardized residential projects. Moreover, functional, high-quality, and aesthetically pleasing products were required to equip these new apartments. In the opinion of the designers and architects who supported Exat’s views, industrial-design had to be recognized as a field of artistic production essential to the establishment of »harmonious social relations and production standards« in order to solve the pressing problems.
Taking part in public debates on modern housing, the members of EXAT 51 – in particular Bernardi and Richter – were continuously pointing to industrial design as »an important instrument of cultural modernization in the wider socio-political context« and to its social function de ned in terms of »designing a new living landscape – a new visual, plastic, and spatial medium for a new man.«(7) Industrial design was inseparable from the process of industrial production.The artist participating in that process also had to be »a completely new type of artist«. He would not be able to successfully »cope with the visual problems of industrial production with the psychologic mindset of the Academy.«(8) Thus, the closure of the Academy of Applied Arts in 1955 did not create much of an upset.The Studio for Industrial Design (SIO), founded by Richter in the same year, and the almost simultaneous launch of the ZagrebTriennial of Applied Arts, involving Richter, Picelj, Bernardi, and the architect Neven Šegvic ́, completely changed the dynamics of the Croatian design scene. Both initiatives aimed to »improve design application in industrial production and in trade, as well as to achieve progress in the culture of living of the socialist man«.They were integral to a specific, activist spirit also present in numerous articles published at the time in the magazine Cˇ IP and in a series of events involving members of EXAT 51. However, such efforts and their results were not explicitly attributed to the group and are overlooked in most accounts of its achievements. Many analyses focus on Exat’s painterly production – due to the already mentioned, unhappy decision made in 1953 – and neglect to see the group’s engagement in the synthesis of arts.
1955-1956 – Improvement inYugoslav-Soviet relations and its consequences – In May 1955, the President of the USSR Nikita Khrushchev visited Yugoslavia. After Khrushchev’s public apology for Stalin’s mistreatment of the CPY, the two countries signed the Belgrade Declaration. It was followed by Tito’s return visit to Moscow in 1956.This rapprochement raised the anxieties of theWest which feared that Moscow was trying to bring Yugoslavia back under its wing. Playing upon these fears and expectations, the Yugoslav political leadership further strengthened its independent foreign policy, and President Tito travelled to Egypt a second time to forge closer ties with African and Asian countries.
1956 – High modernist abstraction became the formal, cultural (and ideological) means of socialist Yugoslavia’s self-presentation in the visual arts – Between 1952 and 1956, West European and American modern art exhibitions had been staged in Yugoslavia.This openness continued visibly in the national selection for the international biennial exhibitions held in 1956, in the first international exhibitions held independently of the Federal Commission for Cultural Exchange in 1955 (1st Graphic Biennale, in Ljubljana) and 1956 (Salon 56 in Rijeka), and in the large exhibition Yugoslav Modern Art, organized by the Commission, which traveled through western Europe and Poland at the end of 1956 and in 1957. Exat’s proposed synthesis in connection with geometrical abstraction had failed to achieve a dominant position in the Croatian art scene much earlier, but the group’s ideas left their traces in the local visual culture.
Summit at Brijuni – Josip Broz Tito, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Gamal Abdel Nasser met on the Brijuni Islands, Yugoslavia, to discuss the situation of Asian and Middle-Eastern countries which were determined to retain a distance to both political blocs. On this occasion, the leaders of Yugoslavia, India, and Egypt signed the Brijuni Declaration.T hey confirmed their support of the principles of the Bandung Conference (a meeting of Asian and African states, which took place in April 1955) and condemned the partition of the world between the superpowers. It wasYugoslavia’s most important step towards the Non-Aligned Movement.The Yugoslav political leadership, pursuing international ambitions, further relaxed control over cultural production and scientific investigation, and slowly opened up the borders to allow its citizens to travel abroad.
The uprising in Hungary, in October 1956, was a massive rebellion against the Hungarian position within the Eastern Bloc. It was crushed by the Red Army. On the evening before, Khrushchev visited Brijuni to ask Tito’s opinion on the matter. Tito’s decision to give his approval to the intervention was publicly attacked and condemned by his former friend and ally Milovan Đilas, who had already been expelled from the CPY in 1954 after he had criticized the lack of democracy in the party. Đilas was arrested and sentenced to three years in prison.
AICA General Assembly and Dissolution of EXAT 51 –The eighth general assembly of AICA (Association Internationale des Critiques d’Art – International Association of Art Critics) was held in Dubrovnik in September 1956. Alongside this meeting, the national AICA section organized an exhibition of Yugoslav modern art, and the Croatian Association of Artists simultaneously prepared an overview of national art production.With regard to Exat’s history, the international photo-exhibition was more interesting: staged in Dubrovnik on the occasion of the AICA Congress, the exhibition was dedicated to the concept of synthesis and to the projects that resulted from its application in the 1940s and early/mid- 1950s. It was probably prepared at the UNESCO headquarters in Paris and sent to Dubrovnik. Apart from snippets of information in documents related to the AICA Congress, found in the archives of the Federal Commission for Cultural Exchange, and a small notice in the local press, the photo-exhibition on synthesis does not seem to have attracted any attention from Croatian art critics.The lack of public interest in the project of synthesis might be among the reasons why the participation of Exat’s painters – Ivan Picelj, Aleksandar Srnec, and Božidar Rašica – at the AICA exhibition in Dubrovnik was the last public event of the group, which was officially dissolved at the end of the year.The AICA exhibition aimed to tell the story of Croatian modern and contemporary art.Therefore, Exat’s geometric abstraction had to feature in that selection.The exhibition concluded a rather complicated story; it becomes even more complicated when trying to understand what it really means to disband an art group which only had one exhibition prior to its breakup and very few other group projects.
Taking Exat’s collective effort to advance the theoretical foundations of a synthesis of »all plastic arts« as a measure, the group’s lifespan, according to Richter, was much shorter and lasted merely from the moment of its establishment to that first (and last) exhibition.The arguments in favour of such an opinion can be found in the personal biographies of Exat’s members, testifying to a diversity of personal interests and activities.The group was only brought together on rare occasions, such as the AICA exhibition in Dubrovnik. However, if one takes into account all the individual oeuvres, »plastic investigations«, and collective engagements in a wide area of the arts – even though these activities were not explicitly assigned to Exat – as well as the group’s famous »spirit« or »ideology«, which refers to a particular set of (ethical) values and (methodological) approaches, then it is justified to claim that EXAT 51 outlived itself, keeping that spirit alive for years after its formal dissolution.
Ljiljana Kolešnik, 2017
See for the related notes and images the publication EXAT 51, Experimental Atelier 51, Synthesis of the Arts in Post-War Yugoslavia
Published by Kunstmuseen Krefeld, Kettler Verlag, 2017
1948-1950 – Design of Yugoslav pavilions at international trade fairs – After the break with the USSR, Yugoslav foreign policy aimed to increase the visibility and prominence of the country. It pursued clear financial objectives as a result of an economic and security crisis, which urgently made the re-establishment of relations with the West necessary. Thus, Yugoslavia encouraged participation at numerous international trade fairs. Held all over Europe to support the process of post-war reconstruction, the fairs maintained fairly flexible standards of presentation. In order to use the available financial means in the best possible way, the Chamber of Commerce organized a series of competitions for the design of Yugoslav pavilions between 1949 and 1951. Architect Vjenceslav Richter, along with artists Ivan Picelj and Aleksandar Srnec, who were joined on a few occasions by Edo Murtic´, won some of these competitions and planned the pavilions at the trade fairs in Vienna, Stockholm (1949), Hanover, and Chicago (1950).(1) These exhibition designs were considerably different from other contemporary projects and generated a new formal and (re)presentational code which was full of references to the historical avant-gardes (Bauhaus, Russian Constructivism, Surrealism) and infused with the spirit of modernity. This confirmed a radical departure from Soviet visual practices. After 1950, Yugoslav participation at international trade fairs declined, prompting Richter, Picelj, and Srnec to direct their collaborative experimental work towards more demanding projects.
1949 – The Academy of Applied Arts in Zagreb was established on 18 December 1949, following a decision of the Croatian Council for Culture and of the Ministry of Science and Culture of Yugoslavia. The first professors of the academy were Branka Hegedušic´, Ernst Tomaševic´, Đuka Kavuric´, Kosta Angeli Radovani, Željko Hegedušic´, and Marin Studin, who initiated the foundation of the Croatian Association of Artists of Applied Arts a few months later. Developed according to the Bauhaus approach of integrating art, crafts, and technology, the curriculum was adapted to the technical and material circumstances of post-war Yugoslav society. The academy provided education in the applied arts and architecture.(2) In 1954, it was shut down after lengthy discussions and negotiations at the federal level and after educating only one generation of students.
1950 – Food shortages – In summer 1950, Yugoslavia was hit by drought. The USSR blockade and an increase in prices after the outbreak of the Korean War exacerbated the situation. Food supplies were allocated to the Yugoslav Army that was stationed along the country’s borders and in a state of alert due to constant Soviet military provocation. As a consequence, the civilian population suffered from serious food shortages. To prevent famine, the Yugoslav government requested assistance from former Western allies. This resulted in a tripartite food donation from the UK, USA, and France. It came at a decisive moment for the »survival of the revolution« and greatly helped the CPY’s efforts to defuse the dangerous internal political situation. In addition, the donation initiated a change in Yugoslavia’s political relations with the West.
The Basic Law on the Management of State Economic Enterprises and Higher Economic Associations by the Workers’ Collectives, or the Act on Handing Factory Management to Workers, was passed by the Yugoslav People’s Assembly on 6 June 1950. It laid the foundation for »workers’ self-management«, an experimental model of political and social practice. Already in the mid-1950s, it was regarded as a »Yugoslav version« of socialism. Unlike the economies of the Soviet Union and Eastern European communist countries, the Yugoslav system was based on enterprises collectively managed by the workers themselves who also had the right to decide on the conditions of production and on the distribution of surplus value. After the initial stage, the system had to pass through several structural reforms before the law was fully implemented. The principle of self-management was applied to all areas of social organization, including science and culture.
Beginning of de-Stalinization process in arts and culture – Petar Šegedin’s address to his fellow writers at the 2nd Congress of the Yugoslav Writers’ Union, entitled »About Our Literary Criticism«, marked the beginning of the deconstruction of socialist realism. His address was followed by Krsto Hegedušic´’s paper »A Word about the Organization of Art Criticism«, which was delivered at the annual conference of the Croatian Association of Artists, held at the end of the same year in Zagreb. This was the first public attack on the aesthetics and doctrine of socialist realism in the visual arts, requesting freedom of artistic expression and triggering wide public debate.
Participation at the 25th Venice Biennale – The presentation of Yugoslav contemporary art at the Venice Biennale in the summer of 1950 was the first appearance of Yugoslav artists at any international art exhibition after WWII. The writer and literary critic Petar Šegedin acted as curator. He had no previous experience with curatorial work and selected a range of sculptures, paintings, and graphic designs. This selection was representative of the local version of socialist realism. As the first socialist country to take part in this international exhibition, the Yugoslav national selection gained an enormous and completely unexpected international publicity. From 1950 onwards, the SFRY (Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) regularly and more or less successfully participated at the Venice Biennale, and at other major international art exhibitions (São Paulo Biennale, Alexandria Biennale, Tokyo Biennale, Documenta, etc.).
1951 – West European/US economic and military support – The severe economic crisis and military provocations by the Soviet satellite states continued along the borders in 1951. In April, Yugoslavia again asked the UK, USA, and France for assistance. A donation of raw materials worth 50 million dollars was agreed upon. This was sufficient to sustain the country’s industrial production until the end of the year. Further economic support followed as a result of the Agreement on Military Cooperation signed between the USA and Yugoslavia on 14 November. On the very same day, the UN Political Committee published its decision confirming that Yugoslav complaints against the USSR, filed a few months before, were justified. US donations in weapons and military technology reduced the threat of Soviet invasion and irrevocably changed Yugoslavia’s foreign policy.
Decree on the Reorganization of State Administration – A few days before Yugoslavia requested help from its Western allies, the Yugoslav government issued the Decree on the Reorganization of State Administration. It launched the process of »decentralization, de-bureaucratization, and democratization«. The decree was supposed to deconstruct an important section of the state’s institutional infrastructure which had been taken over unquestioningly from the Soviet political administration in the early post-war years. It was followed by strong criticism of mismanagement in the repressive judicial apparatus.
Declaration of Critical and Creative Freedom – On 4 June 1951, the Central Committee of the CPY issued the Declaration of Critical and Creative Freedom. This was part of a series of decisions which were essential to the ongoing process of de-Stalinization and to strengthening relations with the West. The declaration was interpreted as an indirect call for a »battle of ideas« aiming to reduce the influence of those individuals and institutions who still supported the Stalinist model of culture.
1951-1956 – »Battle of ideas« refers to a series of passionate, often unpleasant public disputes, launched at the end of 1950 and set in motion by the Declaration of Critical and Creative Freedom. After socialist realism had been deconstructed without the involvement of the CPY, the »battle of ideas« was intended to »clear the air« in the arts and culture. Subsequently, political support was withdrawn from institutions and individuals who had been decisive in imposing socialist realism. This created a rather tense situation. From 1946 to 1950, public discourse on culture and cultural politics had been strictly controlled. The call for a critical approach now unleashed a pent-up dissatisfaction which surfaced in the public arena in an unexpectedly harsh manner. Since it was also a »battle« for the redistribution of power within the national world of arts and culture, undergoing the first major reconstruction after WWII, the stakes were high. They involved the introduction of a completely new set of aesthetic values. An answer was urgently required to the question as to which direction Yugoslav cultural production should take after the demise of socialist realism. A central issue of the visual arts concerned the relationship towards European modernism as a possible field of reference. Contemporary art was ever more frequently relying on artistic practices that were still perceived as unacceptable, because of their »roots in the bourgeois culture of the West«. While art historians, theorists, and art critics were just starting to discuss the matter, the local art scene had already articulated its response. It confirmed – by the example of EXAT 51 – that it was not only possible to establish continuity between inter-war and contemporary art, but also a necessary precondition in order to approach the trends of the international art scene critically and fulfil the »plastic requirements« of contemporary (socialist) society.
Foundation of EXAT 51 – Due to their work as designers of the Yugoslav pavilions, Richter, Picelj, and Srnec had the rare privilege of travelling abroad. This brought them into contact with European contemporary art and architecture, as well as with the heritage of the historical avant-garde. Among all the international art trends which they encountered on their travels and in the available foreign journals, the proposal of a synthesis of the arts attracted the particular attention of the Croatian artists. This idea, developed by the Bauhaus, had regained momentum after WWII, primarily through the discussions held at the International Congresses of Modern Architecture (CIAM). Organized across Europe, these debates opened up many new perspectives. The idea of synthesis soon reached other geographic locations, for instance, Latin America, where it coincided with the emergence of concrete art. Discussions on synthesis were particularly vibrant in France and resulted in the formation of the Groupe Espace, in June 1951. Founded by architect André Bloc and painter Félix del Marle, Groupe Espace advocated a synthesis of the arts as a conceptual and technical framework for a collaborative, experimental approach to the »problems of the human environment«. Simultaneously, these ideas also emerged as a point of interest for Richter, Picelj, Srnec, and a group of young architects who gathered around the studio located at Gajeva ulica 2, in Zagreb. Since they had fairly accurate and up-to-date information on the events occurring in the French art scene, the foundation of Groupe Espace may have been an important incentive for their decision to establish, only five months later, Experimental Atelier 51 (EXAT 51). The attitudes and goals presented in the manifestos of both groups were similar in many respects. In fact, they were published only a few months apart. It is remarkable that both advocate »non-figurative art«, emphasize the synthesis of the arts as the main precondition for the »harmonious progress of human activities«, and highlight that such progress is unattainable without a close connection between arts and industry. Although integral to post-war social and industrial modernization, such attitudes might have been acceptable in France, but presented to a Croatian public, they sparked public controversy and contributed to the already heated atmosphere in the local art scene.
EXAT 51 Manifesto – Adjusted closely to Yugoslav political practice, Exat’s manifesto was presented to the public on 7 December 1951, at the annual conference of the Croatian Association of Artists of Applied Arts. Considering that the local public had little experience with the ideas of the avant-garde, Exat’s decision to use a manifesto to communicate its program was symbolic and unusual. It was symbolic in the sense that it took the inter-war avant-garde as its point of reference; thus Exat claimed for itself a similar position in the contemporary art scene. It was unusual because it rejected – at least partially – the local modernist tradition in favour of a formal conceptual framework. From the point of view of both the professional and general public the manifesto was – first and foremost – disturbing. The reasons for the disturbance were multifarious: the manifesto provided a negative assessment of mainstream art production on the grounds that this art did not aim to achieve »the synthesis of all arts and, secondly, to emphasize the experimental nature of artistic activity«. It demanded the eradication of the »difference between the so-called fine and the so-called applied arts«, and it stressed the »plastic requirements« of society. In addition, it aspired »to fight against outdated ideas and activities in the area of the fine arts«. Still another particularity of the manifesto was its author’s awareness (it was most probably written by Vjenceslav Richter) of the tensions marking the historical moment at which EXAT 51 was entering the realm of Croatian art. There are references to those tensions in the concluding paragraph of the manifesto stating that Exat »considers the establishment and activities of the group to be the practical and positive result of the development of the battle of ideas«. The wording may also be interpreted as an expression of Exat’s sincere support of the expected internal reorganization of the local art scene. However, considering the controversies that followed, such expectations proved to be rather naïve.
1952 – Critical responses – The views expressed in Exat’s manifesto attracted the attention particularly of the academic community which was concerned about the concept of abstract art and the absence of any consensus on the future development of the visual arts. Their anxieties were summarized in a series of (semi) public debates on the meaning of abstraction and on the relation of abstract art to socialist visual culture. These debates were organized by the editorial board of the scientific journal Pogledi and held at the Club of University Workers in Zagreb. They lasted for an entire semester – from the beginning of February to mid-June 1952 – and involved art historians, art theorists, art critics, and members of EXAT 51. According to Vjenceslav Richter,3 instead of a »systematic debate« Exat’s manifesto was met with a wide array of improvised arguments revolving around the meaning and the (class) origins of the inter-war abstract artists. Moreover, the local modernist tradition was viewed as an »unnatural environment« for any type of abstraction. Other than that, the discussions at the Club of University Workers provided only a few objections to the manifesto, the same which had already been voiced in the popular press. These were quite general and mirrored the contemporary critical discourse on geometric abstraction in other European countries at the time. Regardless of whether it was seen as »incomprehensible« and »deprived of any human content«, or »cheerful« and »visually attractive«, the majority of European art critics saw geometric abstraction as a means to »provide visual pleasure«, yet considered it too remote from the reality of post-war Europe. Croatian art critics shared this attitude towards abstract art. They agreed that neither geometric abstraction nor the concept of synthesis, had the potential to advance contemporary visual culture. While art critics categorically rejected the manifesto, Croatian architects responded fairly favourably. Well-informed on CIAM’s post-war debates and rather hesitant towards the »battle of ideas«, they supported EXAT 51 by providing the space for the group’s first public exhibition, held only a year later at the beginning of 1953, at the Croatian Architects’ Association.
Exat’s attempt to gain a place in the international art scene – In mid-1952, EXAT 51 staged a small exhibition for a circle of friends in Zagreb. A spontaneous and private event, it served as a general rehearsal for the participation of three Exat painters – Ivan Picelj, Aleksandar Srnec, and Božidar Rašica – at the seventh Salon des Réalités Nouvelles, the largest and most influential exhibition of geometric abstract art in post-war Europe which was held a month later in Paris. At the beginning of 1952, Picelj, Rašica, and Srnec submitted their application for the Salon, and after it was accepted, they shipped nine paintings, selected by the jury, to the French capital. According to the rather strict state policy on foreign travels at the time, the attendance at the Salon was deemed a private journey and the artists had to remain in Zagreb. Although Exat’s painters were not individually mentioned in critical responses to the Salon des Réalités Nouvelles, they were listed – together with the rest of the 300 participants – in a special issue of Art d’aujourd’hui, and a painting by Božidar Rašica was featured in the book published to highlight the exhibition.(4) The Salon was perceived as a stronghold of post-war European concrete art. Therefore, by deciding to take part in its annual exhibition, EXAT 51 made an important move towards establishing itself in the international art scene in close proximity to art groups and movements such as the French Groupe Espace, the Italian MAC, or Argentinian Arte Madí. These groups pursued similar objectives and shared a similar ideological perspective. It is not known whether this early step into the international art scene was part of some carefully crafted strategy, or if it was the result of an impulsive decision. In any case, the attendance of Exat painters at the Salon des Réalités Nouvelles had far-reaching consequences and a direct influence on the group’s future.
The speech of the Croatian writer Miroslav Krleža at the 3rd Congress of the Association of Writers of Yugoslavia in Ljubljana (October 1952) marked a de native break with socialist realism in Yugoslav culture.This speech became the central methodological (and ideological) point of reference in the ongoing process of modernist reconstruction. A number of new literary journals launched immediately after the Congress published the first translations of West European contemporary authors.They seized the opportunity to broaden their scope beyond literature into the entire eld of thought, allowing a diversity of previously »inappropriate« theoretical and philosophic discourses to enterYugoslav culture.
The 6th Congress of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia was held in Zagreb, in November 1952. On this occasion, Stalinism was sharply criticized and the name of the party was changed into the League of Communists of Yugoslavia. This signified the transformation of the CPY from a political party into a political movement – the »ideological avant-garde of the working class«. It also initiated the gradual process of transforming a state-run by party bodies – a legacy of WWII and appropriate for that specific historical situation – into a more complex administrative organization, ready to meet the challenges of socialist self-management.
1953 – The death of Stalin on 5 March 1953 removed the threat of a potential USSR military intervention which had continued to loom even after the Agreement on Military Cooperation with the United States had been signed. In June 1953, diplomatic relations between Yugoslavia and the USSR were reestablished, but this did not automatically improve relations between their communist parties.Yugoslavia’s self-conscious foreign policy in the post-Stalinist period strongly relied on economic growth which was based on the help from France, the UK, and the USA. It amounted to a total of 492.9 million dollars by the year 1954.
Exat’s first public exhibition »Kristl – Picelj – Rašica – Srnec« was staged on the premises of the Croatian Architects’ Association in Zagreb, early in 1953.(5) It was the first public group show of EXAT 51. According to a statement given by Vjenceslav Richter at the exhibition opening, Exat had postponed the event on the grounds that the group’s »exhibition focusing on the topic of synthesis and connecting architectural concept, plastic [art], and painting« had not been possible for some time »because of the lack of material foundations«.Therefore, Exat decided that it was both »justi ed and necessary to go public with the works that were made possible by the available intellectual and material resources«, and it opted – once again – for the group’s painterly production. As expected, the exhibition achieved succès de scandal, causing a storm of public reaction and receiving the same critical remarks which had been made with regard to the group’s manifesto. There were few favourable responses, and they got lost in the flood of articles, critical reports, caricatures, and cartoons that were published in daily newspapers and weekly magazines attacking and ridiculing Exat’s painters.The reviews were followed by public discussions and controversies involving art critics, artists, writers, and a number of »common citizens« deeply concerned with »aberrations in socialist culture«.The exhibition was almost immediately transferred to Belgrade, but the positive reactions it received there did not affect the controversies at home. They lasted up to the end of 1954 when geometric abstraction became just one new art movement among several others that all required public attention
Discussion at the Ritz Bar – At the beginning of 1953, the city authorities appointed Vjenceslav Richter to redesign the interior of the Ritz Bar, the only nightclub in Zagreb back then.The wall decorations were entrusted to Edo Murtic ́, a rising star of gestural abstraction. In the course of this collaboration, certain architectural ideas clashed with the painterly solutions.The conflict resulted in the most vehement public debate in Croatian art in the whole of the 1950s: held on 22 October 1953, it focused on the definition of »genuine« abstraction and was the first public manifestation of the irreconcilable differences between the advocates of geometric abstraction and the supporters of gestural abstraction.The two groups were divided along the (ideological) line of a »socially conscious approach to the ‘plastic requirements’ of socialist society«. Offensive and humiliating, the discussion at the Ritz Bar contributed to the negative public perception of EXAT 51 and generated permanent tensions in the Croatian art scene, which – rather paradoxically – became an important source of its vitality.
1953-1957 – High level of industrial growth –Yugoslav socialism, based on workers’ self-management and their collective ownership of the means of production, resulting in a higher standard of living than in other communist countries.The rate of industrial growth in the 1950s, followed by a steady rise in employment, ranked among the highest in the world (100% in 1953, 128% in 1954, 162% in 1956). It enabled Yugoslavia already in the mid-1950s to leave the group of the so-called »underdeveloped« countries.The explosion in industrial activity required an appropriate growth of the workforce, causing continuous migration from rural areas to the new urban centres. This resulted in a serious housing crisis and created general dissatisfaction with the availability and quality of consumer goods.The situation contributed to the transformation of the Yugoslav industry and its closer collaboration with architects and designers.
1953-1954 – »Normalization« of abstraction –The exhibition Kristl – Picelj – Rašica – Srnec was the first and also the last art show of EXAT 51, just as the discussion at the Ritz Bar was its last public appearance as a group. Subsequent to the controversies caused by both events, debates on geometric abstraction were transferred from the daily newspapers and popular magazines to specialized journals. In the period that followed, these publications provided an important stimulus to contemporary art criticism and inspired a more complex, theoretically informed type of analysis.They exhibited certain sympathies for Exat’s attempt to attribute a new meaning – consistent with the experimental nature of the »Yugoslav version« of socialism – to geometric abstraction and the avant-garde heritage. However, the common argument of those reviews was that neither Exat’s conceptual framework, nor its results were particularly convincing. As if it was trying to add fuel to such criticism, the group started to drift away from the idea of collaborative experimental work. By 1954, Exat had declined to some loosely linked individual interests. The group’s dissolution which had begun after the discussion at the Ritz Bar, or – according to Richter – after the 1953 exhibition, continued for almost three years. It was a consequence of changes both in the group’s dynamics and in the Croatian art scene.
Compared with the early post-war years, the material conditions of art production significantly improved towards the mid-1950s.The opening of new exhibition spaces, the appearance of new professional magazines, and the introduction of foreign art fellowships prompted an influx of information about the international art scene. In 1954, a »normalization« of new artistic trends – including different variants of abstraction – was underway. Art critics voiced fewer and fewer objections and, by the mid-1950s, critical discourse on abstract art fell silent.The political leadership of Yugoslavia kept its promise and did not interfere with events in the visual arts. Gradually, domestic and foreign policy moved in a direction that led to an atmosphere of tolerance in the field of culture and in society in general.
1954 – Treatise on synthesis – An extensive essay entitled Prognosis of Existential and Artistic Synthesis as the Expression of Our Epoch, interpreted as Richter’s »treatise« on synthesis, rst appeared as an introduction to his book Sinturbanizam (Synthurbanism), published in 1964.(6) According to Richter’s remarks in the foreword, the essay was written in 1954, while the »discussions held at the Club of UniversityWorkers in Zagreb were still relevant«, and was »inspired by the urgency to move away from an improvised discourse, conditioned by the nature of such discussions, towards a more systematic con- sideration [of synthesis], that promised an exit from the dilemmas of the time«. In the mid-1950s, Richter understood the concept of synthesis first and foremost as »the organic part of the synthetic view of the world«, that would bring about a fundamental transformation of the human environment through the application of »structurally formed« plastic entities. Unsurprisingly, the idea of synthesis was incompatible with the autonomy of the individual disciplines. Its supporters demanded the dissolution of the boundaries between painting, sculpture, and architecture as a precondition for a singular »general visual activity«.This activity was supposed to have the capacity to embrace »human life in all its richness and complexity«, closing the gap between artistic and other practices.The early and heroic attempts of the Bauhaus and De Stijl to bring art into the everyday life of man failed – in Richter’s opinion – because of the historical circumstances. But the situation changed after WWII: new social, philosophical, and aesthetic values were adopted, creating new historical conditions.These were more supportive of raising awareness for plastic phenomena and the experimental nature of the synthesis of arts. Richter was already enthusiastic about the concept in the period when he was writing the essay, but he became even more so towards the end of the 1950s. His enthusiasm culminated, in the 1960s, in the invention of Synthurbanism, an utopian proposal for a »town-planning synthesis«. It was based on the rational, spatial distribution of 10,000 self-managing, multifunctional residential units.The plan demonstrated Richter’s experimental, research-based approach, as well as his intention to expand »general plastic activity« towards society in general and the entire architectural environment.
The magazine »Man and Space« (Covjek i proctor – CIP) was launched in 1954 by the Croatian Architects’ Association. It was strongly influenced by the »ideology« of EXAT 51 and belonged to another wave of periodicals released after the break with the USSR.They were issued with the intention to meet the specific interests of the different communities in the Croatian cultural scene. Initially, following the example of the French journal L’Architecture d’aujourd’hui, CˇIP was conceived as a forum for architecture, design, and the visual arts. It published articles on contemporary professional and social issues.The range of topics covered by the magazine was de ned by the problems related to industrial modernization, urban growth, and the ongoing housing crisis. In addition, it addressed the lack of functional and well-designed objects for personal use, as well as the difficulties in establishing a closer collaboration between contemporary architecture, design, and industrial production which would have solved some of the problems. Suffused with an activist spirit, which also marked the ethos of EXAT 51, and fully aware of the contemporary theoretical and technical debates, Cˇ IP also published a series of contributions referring to the immediate reality of Yugoslav society in the 1950s.They contained practical advice on »modern urban living« and interior design and sometimes featured a blueprint for cheap, handmade furniture, designed according to the principles of simplicity, functionality, and aesthetics, in line with the Bauhaus’s understanding of design. Cˇ IP rapidly became a highly respected professional periodical, which retained its prestigious position for decades.
Establishment of the Zagreb City Gallery of Contemporary Art (CGCA) – Founded in December 1954, CGCA was conceived as an institution dedicated to documenting and promoting contemporary art. Parallel to its establishment, there was a fierce quarrel between the representatives of the Yugoslav Academy of Science and Arts, and a group of independent art critics, curators, and theorists, who stubbornly refused to adjust their views to the conservative values of the most powerful cultural institution in Croatia at the time. Consistent with its initial mission to support contemporary and more radical forms of art, CGCA became a safe haven for the generation of artists, art critics, and young academics who were slowly, but fundamentally changing the internal order of the Croatian art scene. As a result of an open-minded exhibition policy and high professional standards, CGCA became a chief partner of the Federal Commission for Cultural Exchange in organizingYugoslav presentations at international art exhibitions. Ivan Picelj and Vjenceslav Richter were much involved in the gallery’s activities throughout the 1950s and 1960s.
1954-1955 – The first visit of Josip Broz Tito to Asia and Africa – In London, in October 1954, Yugoslavia, Italy, the UK, and the USA signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the Free Territory of Trieste, splitting the former free zones under the jurisdiction of the Allies between Italy and Yugoslavia. After resolving the territorial issues with Italy, Josip Broz Tito set off to India, Burma, and Egypt. He met with the political leaders of these countries which had recently gained their political independence.They were struggling for economic emancipation and trying to prevent the superpowers from exploiting their natural resources.Tito’s journey was actually an exploratory one leading to the »discovery of theThirdWorld«. In the following years, Yugoslavia maintained a policy of equidistance from both political blocs and observed thepoliticaldevelopmentsinAfrica, Asia,andLatinAmericawithgreaterattention.Yugoslav foreign policy carefully added the notion of »peaceful coexistence« to its main principles.This was part of the government’s plan to prepare a conceptual framework for building stronger ties with the ThirdWorld.
1955 – Ivan Picelj’s first visit to Paris – ln the two months he spent in France – from October to December 1955 – Picelj established contacts with a number of artists and curators who would significantly contribute to the advancement of his international career. His contact with Denise René Gallery was of particular importance. In the late 1950s, the gallery became the most important location for artists pursuing research in geometric abstraction and kinetic art in Europe and Latin America. Denise René organized the exhibition Le Mouvement at her gallery from 6 to 30 April 1955, the first exhibition after WWII exclusively dedicated to kinetic art. It was groundbreaking for a younger generation of artists, some of whom were going to participate a few years later in the first exhibition of New Tendencies in Zagreb. Picelj did not manage to see the exhibition but thoroughly researched the novelties in graphic design. He returned home with a new technique of silkscreen printing which laid the foundation for the well-known »Zagreb serigraphy school«, established in the early 1960s.
Exat’s involvement with industrial and graphic design – From a present-day perspective, the first public presentation of the group’s paintings was a rather unhappy decision. It firmly linked Exat’s activities (and its legacy) to the local responses to geometric abstraction, and also – quite opposite to its programmatic orientation – to the medium of painting.The group’s painterly production attracted most public attention, overshadowing the rest of Exat’s activities which were diverse and covered almost the entire eld of visual culture, in particular, graphic and product design. Bernardo Bernardi, Zvonimir Radic ́, Ivan Picelj, and especiallyVjenceslav Richter played a pivotal role in establishing the theoretical and methodological framework for modern Croatian design.They determined the key concepts and terms outlining its eld of operation. In fact, Exat’s theoretical discourse integrated the very idea of »designing for industry« into the Yugoslav social and economic order and adapted it to the objectives of socialist self-management.This was not the outcome of some self-imposed, ideological narrative, but rather resulted from a shared conviction in art’s potential to respond to the existential needs of contemporary society. Such theoretical explanations only became popular in the mid-1950s, when Yugoslav society had to face the consequences of an accelerated post-war industrial modernization. Huge migrations from the rural to urban areas, the subsequent growth of the urban population, and the first major housing crisis created an urgent need for standardized residential projects. Moreover, functional, high-quality, and aesthetically pleasing products were required to equip these new apartments. In the opinion of the designers and architects who supported Exat’s views, industrial-design had to be recognized as a field of artistic production essential to the establishment of »harmonious social relations and production standards« in order to solve the pressing problems.
Taking part in public debates on modern housing, the members of EXAT 51 – in particular Bernardi and Richter – were continuously pointing to industrial design as »an important instrument of cultural modernization in the wider socio-political context« and to its social function de ned in terms of »designing a new living landscape – a new visual, plastic, and spatial medium for a new man.«(7) Industrial design was inseparable from the process of industrial production.The artist participating in that process also had to be »a completely new type of artist«. He would not be able to successfully »cope with the visual problems of industrial production with the psychologic mindset of the Academy.«(8) Thus, the closure of the Academy of Applied Arts in 1955 did not create much of an upset.The Studio for Industrial Design (SIO), founded by Richter in the same year, and the almost simultaneous launch of the ZagrebTriennial of Applied Arts, involving Richter, Picelj, Bernardi, and the architect Neven Šegvic ́, completely changed the dynamics of the Croatian design scene. Both initiatives aimed to »improve design application in industrial production and in trade, as well as to achieve progress in the culture of living of the socialist man«.They were integral to a specific, activist spirit also present in numerous articles published at the time in the magazine Cˇ IP and in a series of events involving members of EXAT 51. However, such efforts and their results were not explicitly attributed to the group and are overlooked in most accounts of its achievements. Many analyses focus on Exat’s painterly production – due to the already mentioned, unhappy decision made in 1953 – and neglect to see the group’s engagement in the synthesis of arts.
1955-1956 – Improvement inYugoslav-Soviet relations and its consequences – In May 1955, the President of the USSR Nikita Khrushchev visited Yugoslavia. After Khrushchev’s public apology for Stalin’s mistreatment of the CPY, the two countries signed the Belgrade Declaration. It was followed by Tito’s return visit to Moscow in 1956.This rapprochement raised the anxieties of theWest which feared that Moscow was trying to bring Yugoslavia back under its wing. Playing upon these fears and expectations, the Yugoslav political leadership further strengthened its independent foreign policy, and President Tito travelled to Egypt a second time to forge closer ties with African and Asian countries.
1956 – High modernist abstraction became the formal, cultural (and ideological) means of socialist Yugoslavia’s self-presentation in the visual arts – Between 1952 and 1956, West European and American modern art exhibitions had been staged in Yugoslavia.This openness continued visibly in the national selection for the international biennial exhibitions held in 1956, in the first international exhibitions held independently of the Federal Commission for Cultural Exchange in 1955 (1st Graphic Biennale, in Ljubljana) and 1956 (Salon 56 in Rijeka), and in the large exhibition Yugoslav Modern Art, organized by the Commission, which traveled through western Europe and Poland at the end of 1956 and in 1957. Exat’s proposed synthesis in connection with geometrical abstraction had failed to achieve a dominant position in the Croatian art scene much earlier, but the group’s ideas left their traces in the local visual culture.
Summit at Brijuni – Josip Broz Tito, Jawaharlal Nehru, and Gamal Abdel Nasser met on the Brijuni Islands, Yugoslavia, to discuss the situation of Asian and Middle-Eastern countries which were determined to retain a distance to both political blocs. On this occasion, the leaders of Yugoslavia, India, and Egypt signed the Brijuni Declaration.T hey confirmed their support of the principles of the Bandung Conference (a meeting of Asian and African states, which took place in April 1955) and condemned the partition of the world between the superpowers. It wasYugoslavia’s most important step towards the Non-Aligned Movement.The Yugoslav political leadership, pursuing international ambitions, further relaxed control over cultural production and scientific investigation, and slowly opened up the borders to allow its citizens to travel abroad.
The uprising in Hungary, in October 1956, was a massive rebellion against the Hungarian position within the Eastern Bloc. It was crushed by the Red Army. On the evening before, Khrushchev visited Brijuni to ask Tito’s opinion on the matter. Tito’s decision to give his approval to the intervention was publicly attacked and condemned by his former friend and ally Milovan Đilas, who had already been expelled from the CPY in 1954 after he had criticized the lack of democracy in the party. Đilas was arrested and sentenced to three years in prison.
AICA General Assembly and Dissolution of EXAT 51 –The eighth general assembly of AICA (Association Internationale des Critiques d’Art – International Association of Art Critics) was held in Dubrovnik in September 1956. Alongside this meeting, the national AICA section organized an exhibition of Yugoslav modern art, and the Croatian Association of Artists simultaneously prepared an overview of national art production.With regard to Exat’s history, the international photo-exhibition was more interesting: staged in Dubrovnik on the occasion of the AICA Congress, the exhibition was dedicated to the concept of synthesis and to the projects that resulted from its application in the 1940s and early/mid- 1950s. It was probably prepared at the UNESCO headquarters in Paris and sent to Dubrovnik. Apart from snippets of information in documents related to the AICA Congress, found in the archives of the Federal Commission for Cultural Exchange, and a small notice in the local press, the photo-exhibition on synthesis does not seem to have attracted any attention from Croatian art critics.The lack of public interest in the project of synthesis might be among the reasons why the participation of Exat’s painters – Ivan Picelj, Aleksandar Srnec, and Božidar Rašica – at the AICA exhibition in Dubrovnik was the last public event of the group, which was officially dissolved at the end of the year.The AICA exhibition aimed to tell the story of Croatian modern and contemporary art.Therefore, Exat’s geometric abstraction had to feature in that selection.The exhibition concluded a rather complicated story; it becomes even more complicated when trying to understand what it really means to disband an art group which only had one exhibition prior to its breakup and very few other group projects.
Taking Exat’s collective effort to advance the theoretical foundations of a synthesis of »all plastic arts« as a measure, the group’s lifespan, according to Richter, was much shorter and lasted merely from the moment of its establishment to that first (and last) exhibition.The arguments in favour of such an opinion can be found in the personal biographies of Exat’s members, testifying to a diversity of personal interests and activities.The group was only brought together on rare occasions, such as the AICA exhibition in Dubrovnik. However, if one takes into account all the individual oeuvres, »plastic investigations«, and collective engagements in a wide area of the arts – even though these activities were not explicitly assigned to Exat – as well as the group’s famous »spirit« or »ideology«, which refers to a particular set of (ethical) values and (methodological) approaches, then it is justified to claim that EXAT 51 outlived itself, keeping that spirit alive for years after its formal dissolution.
Ljiljana Kolešnik, 2017
See for the related notes and images the publication EXAT 51, Experimental Atelier 51, Synthesis of the Arts in Post-War Yugoslavia
Published by Kunstmuseen Krefeld, Kettler Verlag, 2017
| rz_druckdaten__2017_9_18_schutzumschlag.pdf |
