Fine arts
24. 12. 2019
Mirjana Đošić

Illusions

Illusion stands for the deception of the senses, with an object being
observed differently than it seems to be in reality. Illusions involve
all senses, but most often they involve visual senses, namely, the eyes.
I use a mirror in my work, as well as the eyes as a certain kind
of mirror, to create my own space which does not necessarily have
to be a reflection of the real space that you think you are looking at.
My space represents a modern “mirror” which is related to the ar-
rangement in the picture of reality that we all carefully create about
ourselves on social networks. By subtle interventions within my art-
istic creativity, I tend to point out changes that happen to us in our
contemporary society and to our view of things. In my works, which
I perform using various techniques, I compose the scattered frag-
ments of everyday life. It is only at first sight these images radiate
with peace and silence, but at the same time they hide a certain in-
consistency that does not conform to our usual expectations.
I have been studying face, eyes and lips for quite some time now,
as well as the frozen moments that these faces represent in time and
space. I follow my own illusion by trying to present it as the truth. I
try to confound you, the observers, and to make you believe me.

The Phenomenon of Reflection as a Method of Own Artistic Research
In the course of my studies, the research I did was predominantly
related to self-portrait. In this case, I am using the word self-portrait
in a relative meaning as, in a way, it represents but does not necessar-
ily imply a self-(re)presentation of my image. The eyes see the world
around them, but at the same time create a personal impression of
that world, so they play a double role. Self-portrait mainly comes at
certain stages of life and can be the expression of ego showing us
our own imperfections. Precisely through the frame of the eye I have
tried to visualize my inner self, take a stand and ask questions to
myself and the world around me. I must admit that at the very be-
ginning I was not fully aware of the symbolism the eye in the form of
self-portrait could represent. Simply, one day, a look at my reflection
in the mirror made me think that precisely my own image was what
I wished to explore.
People face their mirror image every day – whether they like it or
not – and, looking at it, most of us feel like changing a thing or two
about our face or body, even if only a tiny detail, visible to no one but
ourselves. We are living in a world dominated by commercials that
keep telling us what we should actually look like. The faces and bodies
of people we see on TV look too perfect to be true. We are aware that
it is a kind of illusion created by the mass media and yet we comply.
To our complete frustration, we even struggle to live up to the surreal
bodies and faces gazing at us from screens and billboards. Of course,
this mission impossible creates a sort of uneasiness and very few end
up satisfied with what they see in the mirror. Unlike Narcissus 1) , we
are in no danger of falling in love with ourselves. The eye of God has
been substituted by the eye of the media, guiding us and shaping our
opinions and moral attitudes. Although I believe that beauty matters,
we apparently live in a society that not only mercilessly and inces-
santly promotes beauty, but also sets the unattainable standards of
beauty, forcing us either to fit the mold or die trying.
So, where does all that leave me as an artist? Perhaps my position
is somewhat superior as I, like a kind of plastic surgeon, feel free and
have the opportunity to change the face looking back at me from the
mirror. I also have the freedom to represent only the parts of my face
and body that I like best. Even to change them at will. I must admit
that I have rarely resorted to such tricks and mostly transferred the
truth to canvas. And yet, I did have a wish to make it likable. I believe
that it is intrinsic of art to please the eye, one way or another. An
image should trigger a kind of emotion with the viewer, I should say
– a positive emotion. Most artists today opt for provocation irrespec-
tive of whether their work provokes love or fear, hatred, repulsion
or no matter what, as long as there is a reaction from the audience.
Therefore, when I look in the mirror these days, I wonder what I am
actually looking for. How much of the things I have found would I
like to convey to the people and the world around me, or how I want
them to react. Is self-portrait a study of my personality or a kind of
fantasy? Indeed, the source of it all is nothing but love for oneself and
one’s image, the wish to be liked by others, too. Probably there is also
a bit of self-love, vanity and other, not highly positive qualities.
Maybe I was just trying to keep up with the times and show
myself in the most beautiful light possible. To match my own illusion
and hide the imperfections of which I was fully aware. That was how
it started; in the beginning I did not give much thought to whether
I wanted to achieve anything. It was enough for me to paint my own
image on canvas as true to life as possible and feel satisfied with the
result. To present beauty for beauty’s sake, to admire and let others
admire it.
__________________________
1) Narcissus was a hunter in Greek mythology, son of the river god Cephissus
and the nymph Liriope. He was a very beautiful young man who fell so
much in love with his image in the creek, that he died of desire for himself;
later on gods turned his body into a flower named after him; fig. a man in
love with himself, a beautiful young man.

Fine arts
24. 12. 2019
Jelena Vojvodić

The Phenomenon of Reflection as a Method of Own Art Research

Belgrade, in the course of my studies, the research I did was pre-
dominantly related to self-portrait. In this case, I am using the word
self-portrait in a relative meaning as, in a way, it represents but does
not necessarily imply a self-(re)presentation of my image. The eyes
see the world around them, but at the same time create a person-
al impression of that world, so they play a double role. Self-portrait
mainly comes at certain stages of life and can be the expression of
ego showing us our own imperfections. Precisely through the frame
of the eye I have tried to visualize my inner self, take a stand and ask
questions to myself and the world around me. I must admit that at
the very beginning I was not fully aware of the symbolism the eye
in the form of self-portrait could represent. Simply, one day, a look
at my reflection in the mirror made me think that precisely my own
image was what I wished to explore.
People face their mirror image every day – whether they like it or
not – and, looking at it, most of us feel like changing a thing or two
about our face or body, even if only a tiny detail, visible to no one but
ourselves. We are living in a world dominated by commercials that
keep telling us what we should actually look like. The faces and bodies
of people we see on TV look too perfect to be true. We are aware that
it is a kind of illusion created by the mass media and yet we comply.
To our complete frustration, we even struggle to live up to the surreal
bodies and faces gazing at us from screens and billboards. Of course,
this mission impossible creates a sort of uneasiness and very few end
up satisfied with what they see in the mirror. Unlike Narcissus 2) , we
are in no danger of falling in love with ourselves. The eye of God has
been substituted by the eye of the media, guiding us and shaping our
opinions and moral attitudes. Although I believe that beauty matters,
we apparently live in a society that not only mercilessly and inces-
santly promotes beauty, but also sets the unattainable standards of
beauty, forcing us either to fit the mold or die trying.
So, where does all that leave me as an artist? Perhaps my position
is somewhat superior as I, like a kind of plastic surgeon, feel free and
have the opportunity to change the face looking back at me from the
mirror. I also have the freedom to represent only the parts of my face
and body that I like best. Even to change them at will. I must admit
that I have rarely resorted to such tricks and mostly transferred the
truth to canvas. And yet, I did have a wish to make it likable. I believe
that it is intrinsic of art to please the eye, one way or another. An
image should trigger a kind of emotion with the viewer, I should say
– a positive emotion. Most artists today opt for provocation irrespec-
tive of whether their work provokes love or fear, hatred, repulsion
or no matter what, as long as there is a reaction from the audience.
Therefore, when I look in the mirror these days, I wonder what I am
actually looking for. How much of the things I have found would I
like to convey to the people and the world around me, or how I want
them to react. Is self-portrait a study of my personality or a kind of
fantasy? Indeed, the source of it all is nothing but love for oneself and
one’s image, the wish to be liked by others, too. Probably there is also
a bit of self-love, vanity and other, not highly positive qualities.
Maybe I was just trying to keep up with the times and show
myself in the most beautiful light possible. To match my own illusion
and hide the imperfections of which I was fully aware. That was how
it started; in the beginning I did not give much thought to whether
I wanted to achieve anything. It was enough for me to paint my own
image on canvas as true to life as possible and feel satisfied with the
result. To present beauty for beauty’s sake, to admire and let others
admire it.
Living at the turn of the 21st century, we are witnessing an exciting
and transformative period which has changed the entire human race,
a new era which is blurring the lines between the local and the global,
roots and mobility, work and free time, culture and a spectacle. These
changes are occurring as a direct result of new communication and
supervision systems, consumer society, globalization and its main
technological tool – Internet, which has, over the last 20 years, spun
its web over the entire planet, turning our eyes to the computer or
smartphone – in other words, to the screen and our own reflection in
it. Mirjana Đošić is an artist who uses subtle artistic touches to depict
the space in front of the screen and behind it, and various changes
occurring to all of us, changes in our views and experiences of living
in a community.
Her early works already featured certain motives and actions that
would later reappear in her work in various forms. This includes, in
particular, framing and magnifying of an eye/eyes, committed inter-
est in perspectives, (non)intermediate view, and optical reflection. In
her works – oil paintings, pastel paintings, collages or combinations
of all three of these techniques – she uses fragments of everyday life
and memories to make new compositions, creating new perspectives,
drawing images that emanate peace and quietude while at the same
time hiding something inconsistent or “unnatural”– and thus play-
ing with our assumptions and expectations. In the first stage of her
work, she carefully chooses between the multitude of her own paint-
ings or those by other artists, which she is exposed to every day, and
which easily and quickly travel throughout the planet. She frames
and magnifies their details, creating the sense of long periods of time,
and providing the “time for reflection”, which we all seem to lack
nowadays, in this era of superficiality and commotion. She turns her
paintings into collages, adding fragments of newspapers and adver-
tisements, imbuing it with the physicality, words, colours and rules
of the “real” world. Most often, she places magnified sunglasses with
a reflecting glass surface at the centre of the composition, creating a
space for a verification of the realness of the environment, in which a
visual game is played with the viewer. The image seen in the glasses
is not always a true reflection of the environment, thus becoming a
special, hybrid reality, one that only appears to be natural, indicat-
ing that simulations and mirages are becoming more “real” than the
reality itself. As the artist herself states in an article, glasses are used
as a “replacement for eyes and for a mirror”, leaving room for inter-
pretation of the object as an allusion to the surface of the screen, the
window into the world of today, so ubiquitous that we sometimes rely
on it more than on our own senses and physicality. This new, modern
“mirror” can be found in the artist’s digital self-portraits – her play
on a self-portrait as a combination of a selfie and a staged personal
reflection – the frequently narcissistic and carefully edited collages of
images of ourselves that we create on social networks and online in
general. Perhaps most attuned to the time are those pictures where
the human eye may be glimpsed through the glasses – pictures indi-
cating the mature technological idea of intermediate view and visual
networking of human vision with the screen/interface.
Mirjana Đošić and other contemporary artists are still privil-
eged as viewers into the world, and, working in the medium, they
are likely to be more sensitive to optical and cognitive changes which
may go unnoticed by others. As creators of “another reality”- actions
directly affecting the reality, they are the best at noticing paradigms
shifts and directions of technological development, which increas-
ingly participates in our subjectivization.
_________________________
2) Narcissus was a hunter in Greek mythology, son of the river god Cephissus
and the nymph Liriope. He was a very beautiful young man who fell so
much in love with his image in the creek, that he died of desire for himself;
later on gods turned his body into a flower named after him; fig. a man in
love with himself, a beautiful young man.

Fine arts
24. 12. 2019
Maja Olić

Reflection of View

One of the most interesting interpretations of my work at the time
was written by an art historian Maja Olić, in the catalogue of the
exhibition “Refleksija pogleda” (Reflections of the View), held in Trs-
tenik (September 9 to October 6, 2010): “As a reaction to conceptual-
ism, in the second half of the 20th century, hyperrealism was born
from artistic research, asking many questions on the existence of art
and artist in the universe as the place of origin in the broadest sense.
It was questioned and condemned by many critics, who judged it to
be the “art of silent majority, art of exultation, acceptance and adu-
lation of symbols and myths of contemporary USA”, according to
Giorgio di Genova. Until recently, it was considered cold, trapped
in its technical perfection, allegedly representing a false reality more
real than the real one. But is this really true?
This artistic genre does not preclude spiritual communication,
as evidenced by the oeuvre that Mirjana Đošić has presented to the
public. At first glance, she reminds us of Chuck Close and his in-
terpretation of photography: “Many believe that only one painting
may be created on the basis of one photo. However, many different
paintings may be created on the basis of one photo, just like on the
basis of reality.” By magnifying the picture to larger-than-life size,
he questions the reality of the displayed portrait. Mirjana goes even
further in her exploration. She displays the entire visible reality as a
reflection of the apparent reality. Her precise, fine and exact model-
ization is just a mirror to all the emotional states of a young artist,
which help her to find her way on the road to discovery of the real-
ity around her, and the reality within herself. Similar to Velázquez’s
court portraits, where the artist’s self-portrait is hidden in the mirror
facing the model, her reflection appears in the mirror of someone’s
eye. If we believe that eyes are the windows to the soul, then every eye
is a place of meeting – a bridge where traditional and modern princi-
ples clash, without any prospect of either winning.
All of the above indicates that an interpretation of the artistic
experience of Mirjana’s oeuvre is a much more complex issue than
critics at the end of the last century believed. The technical artistry
is not what makes the picture interesting. Beneath all the perfection
lies a web of various experiences, whose importance goes beyond
the apparent reality, revealing a double door into a new manner of
speaking to oneself and others. The central place in it belongs to the
human, while the city lights are just a reflection on the sunglasses.”

Fine arts
24. 12. 2019
Vesna Knežević

Mima’s Cake

Take a photo, tear it apart and join the pieces together again – and
you will create a new picture with small white lines connecting or
separating the integral area, providing a new view of the scene, and
introducing a new meaning into the observed view. This simple at-
tempt to create new meanings through a variety of visual art practi-
ces typical of collage also includes associative capabilities of both the
creator and the consumer.
Miracles happen in collages, and instead of the real and the fam-
iliar, they open the door into another world. The background, which
only hints at all the opportunities it presents, provides proper recom-
mendations for the way to view the displayed situation, as a repeated
occurrence of the personal act through a personal experience of the
fragmented reality. The magic and the newly won freedom allow the
artist to embody the role of a wise man who shakes the world and,
playing with reality, achieves new goals.
And so we come to Mima and her fine and passionate playful-
ness with collages. With her long, slender fingers and sharp eye, she
travels through the realms of other people’s writings on life and all
the different forms of life, and then slowly and carefully cuts the im-
portant parts with her eyes, body and soul, and weaves them into a
whole. And lo and behold! A new life and new forms slowly emerge
in front of us.

ДОНАЦИЈЕ

Претплатите се и дарујте независни часописи Људи говоре, да бисмо трајали заједно

даље

Људи говоре је српски загранични часопис за књижевност и културу који излази у Торонту од 2008.године. Поред књижевности и уметности, бави се свим областима које чине културу српског народа.

У часопису је петнаестак рубрика и свака почиње са по једном репродукцијом слика уметника о коме се пише у том броју. Излази 4 пута годишње на 150 страна, а некада и као двоброј на 300 страна.

Циљ му је да повеже српске писце и читаоце ма где они живели. Његова основна уређивачка начела су: естетско, етичко и духовно јединство.

Уредништво

Мило Ломпар
главни и одговорни уредник
(Београд, Србија)

Радомир Батуран
уредник српске секције и дијаспоре
(Торонто, Канада)

Владимир Димитријевић
оперативни уредник за матичне земље
(Чачак, Србија)

Никол Марковић
уредник енглеске секције и секретар Уредништва
(Торонто, Канада)

Уредници рубрика

Александар Петровић
Београд, Србија

Небојша Радић
Кембриџ, Енглеска

Жељко Продановић
Окланд, Нови Зеланд

Џонатан Лок Харт
Торонто, Канада

Жељко Родић
Оквил, Канада

Милорад Преловић
Торонто, Канада

Никола Глигоревић
Торонто, Канада

Лектори

Душица Ивановић
Торонто

Сања Крстоношић
Торонто

Александра Крстовић
Торонто

Графички дизајн

Антоније Батуран
Лондон

Технички уредник

Радмило Вишњевац
Торонто

Издавач

Часопис "Људи говоре"
The Journal "People Say"

477 Milverton Blvd.
Toronto ON,
M4C 1X4 Canada

Маркетинг

Маја Прелић
Торонто, Канада maya.prelic@hotmail.com

Контакт

Никол Марковић, секретар
т: 416 823 8121


Радомир Батуран, oперативни уредник
т: 416 558 0587


477 Milverton Blvd. Toronto,
On. M4C 1X4, Canada

rabbaturan@gmail.com nikol_markovic@hotmail.com casopisljudigovore@gmail.com ljudigovore.com


ISSN 1925-5667

© људи говоре 2026