L. Kovásznai Viktória: Modern magyar éremművészet 2. 1976–2000 (A Magyar Nemzeti Galéria kiadványai 2004/4)

MAJORS TRENDS IN MODERN HUNGARIAN MEDALLIC ART 1976-2000 The upswing of Hungarian medallic art, which started in the mid-1960s, look new momentum ten years later, but it did not resolve the contradictory situation of the art type, notably its isolation among the rest of the branches of visual art. Although medallic art abounded in works and events within its boundaries (note the work of the Medal Section of the Association of Hungarian Artists and Designers, the regular showings of the Sopron Medal Biennial, the presence of Hungarian artists in FIDEM's [Federation Internationale de la MedailleJ two-yearly exhibitions), this had no repercussions in either the general art life or the media. All the response they have elicited includes a few far from sympathetic reports, which, fortunately, have not upset the artists devoted to the medal. The state and achievements of medallic art have to be examined independently of this attitude. The interesting, innovative pieces have to be picked for evaluation from a highly diverse stock. This approach, however, does not mean concentration on the best works. This method is required by the circumstance that medallic art is a creative activity the product of which is most adversely influenced by the misconception claiming that medals can be made without special preliminary training and that medal making is not money-intensive. In the first phase of the studied period, growing social demand (name-giving medals, seniority medals, etc.) boosted commissions, but the expectations and taste of the clients often exerted a negative influence and the pieces were also multiplied. On the other hand, the so-called "anti-medals" have also left a slain on the reputation of the art form, underlining the blind-alley of certain ideas. Even István Haraszty's effect-rich mobiles raised certain doubts, as they did not give the impression of medals. It became imperative for the latter half of the 1970s to step forward and break away from the traditional interpretation of the medal. Objects that were medal-like and could be handled as medals but ignored all classical rules mushroomed. To be able to objectively evaluate them, one has to analyze the peculiarities of the art form the omission of which does not necessarily lead to the negation of the medal, or conversely, the preservation of which - like a thread - still ties a work to the art of the medal. This method also allows some "extreme" works to be subsumed in the category of the medal. It has long been commonly agreed that the original, commemorative function (perpetuation of collective events) is not a basic requirement, nor have the medals to be regular, flat or made of metal. What is indispensable is the intimateness and the intellectual content, and only rarely may the artist relinquish the requirement of artistic execution, too. By the second half of the '70s, the nature symbolism unfolded more than ten years earlier had been deflated; only a few artists had something new to say - and only for a short time - in that language. The emphasis shifted from a lyrical tone and the quality of the material to form. The formal experiments triggered off a temporary upswing, which, in turn, brought along new questions: it is namely difficult to formulate the sense of unity between man and nature in an idiom grown out of the achievements of European abstract art. On the other hand, the expressive force of this formal language often vanished on the small surface of the medal. When, again, the surface of the medal was enlarged to allow for more powerful forms, the boundaries of the medal as a branch of art were trespassed. Consequently, there was a a very limited scope of form in which these novel pieces could fund ion as medals. As mentioned earlier, social demand also gave a boost to the production of traditional medals. Several unsuccessful attempts have been made to assess them, although these are almost exclusively the pieces that society encounters. Medals made according to the traditional rules of the art are not justifiable unless the artist can bring his personality, some accentuated trait of his character to bear, by which feature he/she can be identified. Such are Mária Osráib's portraits of a sensitively elaborated surface and Emma Sz. Egyeds no less subtly wrought medals featuring meticulously elaborated yet monumental and dignified buildings of the past. IS