Artist statement

Courtesy of Althuis Hofland Fine Arts

What the eyes of artist Bart Kok catch on his daily strolls is what you see directly
reflected in his bright and whimsicle paintings. Paintings that flirt with pointillism,
expressionism and Art brut, but foremost explore the digital translation of the
landscape in colors and contrast, closely related to Pop-art and graffiti-culture.
Simultaneously with his recent move from the vibrant City of Antwerp (Belgium) to a
deserted little rural Dutch town called Lochem, the landscape shifted from backdrop
to main subject in his works. Previously the city of Antwerp and its art (historical)
scene, museums and people inspired Kok to focus on general existing romantic
ideas about “the artist” and formed an exploration into artist clichés such as the
tragic, the heroic, the lonely soul, the drunk and the philosopher. Whilst the absense
of such a scene in his new environment forced the artist to solely concentrate on
what his eyes where left with; being primarely nature. A seeminly simple and obvious
subject, that is evidently deeply rooted in art history, but forced the artist to focus
more on the act of painting itself, and being more free and open to what the scape of
the Dutch land had to offer.
"What struck me about the dutch landscape is that it’s in a way very restricted.
Because of our dense population and lack of mountains we don’t have large vistas.
We are always limited in our experience of nature. We don’t usually feel
overwhelmed or small like we would be when experiencing a wide open view on top
of a mountain.
The only way to imagine yourself in nature and sort of by yourself is in the forrest.
Because of the density of the trees your field off vision is limited. And because of this
you can experience a sense of mysticality. You never know what could lie behind the
next corner or could be lurking behind a three. For me this stimulates my imagination
and that is something I also find within the paintings I make."
Kok photographs these mystical encounters during his walks and collects them in an
archive that functions moreover as a side note guideline during the painting process
and relies more on formal painterly decisions than on physical principles. By using
high contrasts and oversaturated colors and by dividing them evenly on the canvas,
he wants to create the illusion of the light coming through the back of the canvas and
in a way mimic the way a computerscreen works. In a way bolding what he saw,
similar to principles of Pop-art, and art-brut, close to his first love Grafiti, yet playfully
referencing pointillism and expressionism.


(excerpt from the publication ‘Notes and anecdotes on painting(s)’)

During my time as an Art student, a teacher once said to me that the problem most painters have is that they are too much in love with their materials. To prove his point he told me that during his time as an Art student, most of the painters he knew were just sitting around in their studios all day, smoking pipe and looking at their own work. He exclaimed that this was laziness and cockiness from their part. In his opinion they where so self-fulfilled with their own paintings that they lingered on them for too long and forgot to move on. I thought that this anecdote was really funny and it stuck with me. I kept thinking about this imagery of the painter sitting in the studio, smoking pipe and looking at their work, was their anything to it? Then I started thinking that maybe what he perceived as painters being cocky and lazy about their work was a misconception on his part. Maybe he got caught up in a Fordist way of thinking about the act of working, that because they weren’t producing they where not working. What he perceived as them doing nothing but being lazy and acting cocky about their work, was perhaps a critical moment of reflection on that which was painted. The role of the pipe for him just added to the notion of doing nothing because of the fact that smoking a pipe is mostly considered leisure.

This moment of reflection is as, or maybe even more, important than the physical work itself. It’s the process within painting that requires the most time and dedication. It can be a tedious job, sitting in your studio looking or maybe not even looking directly at the work. Being present in the studio without constantly looking at the work can be just as important. One right glimpse at the work while just being around can make the right connection and give a new insight into the work. It can look ridiculous or even arrogant to others if they see you just sitting around in your studio. They might think that you are doing nothing and, in a way, they’re correct- this method doesn’t fit with a general understanding of doing “work”, where the act of thinking is not seen as work and valued as such. This act can be compared with the act of walking. With walking I don’t mean traveling to get from point A to point B, but walking in the sense of having a stroll around without a destination. One does just wander around to stumble on things he accidentally encounters. This approach is not about searching or trying to find something. It’s about opening up to things, about looking as objectively as one can be at the things that surround you, in order to really think, to let the mind wander and to empty everything out. This way of looking can make a painter forget that the work is his. It opens up a possibility for him to see the individual qualities of the different parts within the work and how they all function as a whole. I think it has to do with training your senses. Change the way you deal with “doing nothing”. Turn “doing nothing” into an important factor within the process of painting. I don’t think that I can come up with something new by thinking really hard about it, but eventually I can get to new ideas and approaches by just wandering about. This is because it’s a different mode of thinking, an unforced mode of thought. As I think of it now, this mode is also applied within the physical act of painting. When I’m painting, I just try to wander about on the canvas to find new things. When I do, I try to counter these things and compare them to the things I already know, as to give them a place within my world of painting and painterly ideology. By following this approach of dealing with the act of painting, the ideology of Pipe smoking is a big contribution to painting in general. (Bart Kok, 2017)

Jury report Royal Award for Modern Painting 2016

Kok’s submission took the jury by surprise. Because he studied in Antwerp his recent work was unknown. Kok’s paintings deal with the art of painting and bear witness to courage, self-confidence and a sense of humour. The paintings are modest in size and subject matter. This modesty reveals maturity: the artist does not lose himself in over-ambitious flexing of muscles. Whit a humourous outlook Kok reflects on the various movements in art history. In brush technique he cites extensively from the rich stylistic repertoire of art history. Moreover, in an intelligent manner, he succeeds in combining such references with todays’ digital visual culture.