.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
拍品專文
Leoncillo Leonardi’s Taglio, 1961, is a molten pour of solidified lava, an exploration of matter and space. Shaped and slashed, voluminously modelled and permanently striated, the forceful manipulation of the surface reveals the very nature of creation: Taglio is an exceptional example of Leonicillo’s ceramic sculptures and dedication to an experimental ethos, who curator Luca Massimo Barbero described as a ‘polymorphic interpreter and the richest according to traditions and innovations in modelling the earth’ (L. Barbero, ‘Shaping Ceramics’, in C. Reptto and P. Repetto, Postwar Italian Ceramics: Fontana, Garelli, Leoncillo, Melotti, exh. cat., Repetto Gallery, London, 2014, n. p.). Leoncillo’s abstracted language was determined entirely by the clay’s potential; Taglio lessens the gap between static and spatial through which Leoncillo reached for a multidimensional image.
After studying at the School of Mafai and Cagli in Rome, Leoncillo followed in the footsteps of his contemporary, Lucio Fontana, and specialised in ceramics, then considered a low art form. He developed a style characterised by bright colours and asymmetrical geometries rooted in a post-Cubist aesthetic. Leoncillio’s evolution accelerated after collaborating with Fontana at the 1954 Venice Biennale. Like Fontana, Leoncillo set out to uncover new dimensions in a larger quest to produce a radical visual language; Taglio is the realisation of years of artistic experimentation and innovation. Describing Leoncillo’s mesmerising ceramics and their art historical inheritance, historian Cesara Brandi wrote, ‘The cut, materially executed in clay, as if it were incised by a cleaver, is the clear demonstration of Leoncillo's Cubist intelligence: it represents the decomposition of naturalistic volumes into a series of chromatic and luminous planes, in which the object is simultaneously portrayed – as anything but natural – together with its syntactic elaboration into a form that goes far beyond that of a natural object. On the contrary, in this object the act of substitution through which Leoncillo creates a new nature is clearly evident in his precious glazes and stoneware finishes, which became colour and light, colour that incorporates light just as precious stones do. For this reason, Leoncillo could not use anything but clay, exalting it from its artisanal status to its most autonomous and rarefied form’ (C. Brandi, ‘Destino di Leoncillo’¸ Rome 1982, reprinted in C. Spadoni, Leoncillo, Rome 1983, p. 7).
After studying at the School of Mafai and Cagli in Rome, Leoncillo followed in the footsteps of his contemporary, Lucio Fontana, and specialised in ceramics, then considered a low art form. He developed a style characterised by bright colours and asymmetrical geometries rooted in a post-Cubist aesthetic. Leoncillio’s evolution accelerated after collaborating with Fontana at the 1954 Venice Biennale. Like Fontana, Leoncillo set out to uncover new dimensions in a larger quest to produce a radical visual language; Taglio is the realisation of years of artistic experimentation and innovation. Describing Leoncillo’s mesmerising ceramics and their art historical inheritance, historian Cesara Brandi wrote, ‘The cut, materially executed in clay, as if it were incised by a cleaver, is the clear demonstration of Leoncillo's Cubist intelligence: it represents the decomposition of naturalistic volumes into a series of chromatic and luminous planes, in which the object is simultaneously portrayed – as anything but natural – together with its syntactic elaboration into a form that goes far beyond that of a natural object. On the contrary, in this object the act of substitution through which Leoncillo creates a new nature is clearly evident in his precious glazes and stoneware finishes, which became colour and light, colour that incorporates light just as precious stones do. For this reason, Leoncillo could not use anything but clay, exalting it from its artisanal status to its most autonomous and rarefied form’ (C. Brandi, ‘Destino di Leoncillo’¸ Rome 1982, reprinted in C. Spadoni, Leoncillo, Rome 1983, p. 7).