All information about the Minoan culture on: www.fhw.gr/chronos/02/crete/en/index.html
The Unchristian or Neolithic cross is, according to the American author Riane Eisler, „gylanic“ a symbol of the
femininity, fertility and cooperation of partnership, replacing the existing models of concurrence and domination.
In connection with the work exhibited here, it is allowed to be understood as an independently conceived creation
that is not influenced by any ideology. In this way, „gylanic“ concepts become visible that have been prominently
present in the work of Ginestet since the 80‘s. His dialogical art simply finds another academic reference and
explanation.The “tight-rope dancers”, in their aesthetic as well as their conceptual completion are the best
evidence for a androgynous spirit. In this context, the „Elan“ completes the first visible and concrete realization .
The Neolithic cross is a symmetrical, not a formally aesthetic Christian cross of suffering, but it serves the
Egyptian as well as the Christian cross as an example, although it‘s meaning in the Christian version is reversed.
In the Egyptian version the variant of the up-side-down elliptic drop or „Loop“ can be found. Later on, many other
crosses appear in the modern art, in which they are emptied of their Christian meaning and in this way, liberated.
Antoni Tapies has decisively contributed to this subject, but the work of Malevitsch is also to be understood in this
concept, even if the interpretations of modern art claim otherwise. In this way, the Ginestet cross is an advanced
version of the already known, that differentiates itself from the already known in that it reaches a grade of
distinction, as described by Pierre Bourdieu. The cross of Ginestet is either very slightly asymmetrical, so that it is
barely notable, or created so that it resembles so much the contents of the Christian cross that it can only be
distinguished gradually by the title and recognized by the central figure in the cross of light. This closeness to the
Christian ethos has been chosen consciously. Through this the relation to the original message of Jesus is
clarified. The cross is proportioned to the depicted body, not the Christian proportion. The Christian cross usually
is the cross of torture of Jesus, the cross to which he allegedly was nailed high above the crowd.
Where the Christian cross takes on other proportions, it evades the androcratic principle, as Riane Eisler would
write, and nears itself to the original cross.
Minoan cross simply
made in stone, symmetric
Ginestet crosses, asymmetrical and on a coloured background, made in the
sculptural Photo-technique. The cross is shorter on the right side and longer on
the left side. The difference is hardly perceptible.
The cross is drawn as cross by the limitation of space within the picture, by the
drawing of fields of light and colour. The cross itself is a cross of light, and the
woman in the picture implores the light, as told by the title of the work. The
proportion of the cross is such that it does not touch or cut the aura of the body.
One of the results of the research done by Ginestet is the conclusion that one of
the criteria why a painting feels more or less anxiety or pleasure depends on the
inclusion or exclusion of the aura in the painting.
imploración de la luz
– tríptico negro.
Example for the
combination of two
postures on black.
imploración de la luz de día – exhalación + inhalación + exhalación – Example for the same combination on white
The posture of the figure by Andrés Ginestet
The following pictures indicate a connection that was created ex-post. Ginestet has worked on his creation since 2001, since
9.11.2001 to be precise.
In connection to his scientific work, through which he was making an effort to characterize and create pictures, it is to be
understood that that he opposes the latent and visible violence to take position clearly, as it is also reasoned in his essay
„Epoch“. The fragment is supposed to be revitalised, create life-embracing spaces for soul and body and to retrieve them from
ignorance. Freedom is won through participation. His figural creations were formed, as already explained, as a part of his whole
work that is dedicated to the androgyny principle. It did not make sense, in the political and cultural surroundings in which the
author was situated, to create publicity. As always, art is the encoded key of a message. The redundancy aims to clarify the
cryptographic contents, as this automatically implicates the translation and the lexical definition.
In fact, the artist and scientist has been working inexhaustibly for years, together with his wife, to stop violence, in the scientific
as well as the artistic environment. Consider that the varying enrichment of the art-and-science couple is a method and not pure
show. It is part of the concept, like so often in art, of not just the final result but also the way to it: the working method. Also,
other scientists take the works of Ginestet for their own use as well as for a dialogue between theory and praxis. Accordingly, it
happens as in the present case, that a scientist sees the work of art, indicates the artist a defined trail, names a book title and
the artist then investigates and searches again what is written there, to, like in this case, discover the Minoan culture and Riane
His sculptures, in this way, transform along with the creation of the bust Lisa (1999), to which an equally named essay was
written „Lisa” or the “untouchableness of the untangible“ (2003). From that moment onwards starts a new cycle, that leads to
the results before you. The choice here is directly connected to the subject that is also shown theoretically.
His photographic work was created from the summer 2004 onwards, following the sculptural search of new vital contents,
regardless that it also holds a emancipation of photography as medium technically speaking.
Even more shocking is therefore the clearly visible connection between the Minoan art works and the art works of Ginestet. It is
almost as if a certain type of spirit leads inevitably to a certain aesthetic.
An owl and two snakes
• Minoan sculpture, showing the strength, the • The woman in this picture has exactly the same attitude as
attitude and the position of any woman in Minoan the woman in the sculpture, only that the Minoan woman
society. She wears the owl and the snakes as holds symbols of wisdom, and Ginestet’s hands take or offer
symbols of wisdom. This sculpture in particular is light, or, call it transcendence. The similarity of concepts
an example of the late Neolithic refinement of the between the Minoan and the work of Ginestet is astonishing
Minoan culture. Her naked breasts are not enough, knowing that the artist took the picture in 2005, a
precisely a sign of weakness. The reader may year before he ever heard of Riane Eisler. The difference
ask himself for the reason it had to be? between the two artworks is the reference in Ginestet’s work
to modernity, his context.
In this historical picture and representation
it is not just a piece of clothing that is
being represented. It is a whole concept of
life. This is not the only form of life that
has been transmitted from the past. One
of the most interesting aspects is the
representation of what could be meant as
These pictures drawn by Ginestet show the second collection of
cereals on the skirt.
·Picadoras” as he designed it. Any comment can be spared. The similarity
The architectural structure within the skirt
of concepts is obvious, as much as the small differences are. Mainly, the
also tells a lot about the spirit and the
female body is standing loose in a skirt that is “rigid” and self sustaining.,
intellectual capacities of the Minoans.
as culture is.
First sketch from 2002 of the theme „Picadoras“ that holds a clear connection to 9-11. It deals with the architectural design-
alternatives concerning the Twin Towers New York as well as the designs of Liebeskind, which express more pain than
anything else. Although being understandable as a model, his designs are a torture as an actual piece of architecture. These
sketches instead do not want to show any architecture, but aesthetic principles, that could be the base of the architecture.
Architecture is a relevant part of communication between genders through all times. Architecture is an expression of the “zones
of influence” of genders, be it communication-,work-,society-,or freedom zones. Architecture, more than any thing else,
structures communication. For this reason Ginestet creates his architecture as a mirror of the communicational ability and the
quality of dialogue between genders. Architecture is an articulated speech following shapes, materials, colours, sound, smell
This is nothing more than a clarification of what is presented in his sculpture „Seiltänzer“. It is the second human stage after the
emancipation, which serves as basis for the dialogical capability. Verbal and real fully responsible communication is only
possible after emancipation. Previously, all form of dialogue is to be attributed to the process of definition of personality. In
these sketches a clear attribution of the genders and of dialogue is constructed. In contrast to this idea, the consideration in the
previously realized collection „Picadoras“ serves for emancipation and personality-definition.
A third Life-work is intentional, of which the plan is not even an existing idea. These works were all constructed during large
periods of time and will continue being created in this manner.
Three more examples of
the development of the
second collection of
Another example for the similarity between the works of Ginestet and the Minoan art is the choice of materials.
Ginestet, as well as those ancestral Minoan artists, work in gold and precious stones, putting the emphasis not
only on the value of the materials, but mainly making sure that the quality of the materials will carry the message
that they express a long way, lasting through times.
Further, not only the attitude of the women is similar, dancing and holding arms up, but also the fact that all the
women are bear-breasted and wear skirts down to the floor, dresses that are even very carefully made and
similar, containing representations of fertility as decoration in the Minoan case and being a symbol of male
fertility and strength represented by the bull’s horn in the Ginestet work..
Two Minoan rings in gold with different Three different representations of bare-breasted women, richly embellished
representations of women and clothing, all and ornamented, wearing no head cover, but with a very embellished
bare-breasted and all dancing or acting in hairstyle, fitted with jewels and dressed in transparent sensual clothing.
The position and behaviour of the woman in this photograph shares a similarity to the one of the Minoan statue, self embracing.
The single horn and it’s meaning
The clear up-date in comparison to the Minoan objects
consists in that Ginestet creates his statuettes out
of two separate elements: The horn and the torso of
the woman, that form a unity together. With this, the
articulation of the figures, as representatives of
seven emotions, feelings and handlings, which are
an advance to creative work, as well as not entirely
obvious gender - determinated beings, therefore
androgynous beings, are obviously to be classified
with the Elan and emancipation.
It may seem to many a visitor as if the artist is dressing
himself and his art in a tight corset.
But the artist is merely following his free interpretation of
the world, as he cannot live according to the ideal. It
is and will stay as an expression of desire and
First collection „Picadoras“ in created with bronze, gold and precious stones. The 7 positions are held in the following
photographic works as well as being explained in the following text.
The imploration and import of the light
• These works are dedicated to the „Admiration of light“ and its seven main colours.The
seven colours appear in seven precious stones in another collection of the artist and
symbolize seven feeling or emotional levels, meant for any kind of creation, be it
artistically or humanly.
• The installation encases nine pages. The first - the white one - represents daylight.
The last - the black one- is a symbolization of night. In between you will find:
• Orange is for pre-disposition.
• Pink is for inspiration.
• Blue is for development.
• Green is for perfection.
• Violet is for reflection.
• Yellow is for Happiness and vanity.
• Red is for emancipation.
• The grey tones of the cross awaken the „Admiration of light“. Grey lights awake a
longing for colours. Grey is the absence of colour. The picture “light-flower II” then
becomes a revelation and a completion of what “light flower I and III cannot complete.
Light-flower II becomes coloured light, because there the connection between the two
negatives reaches closer to perfection and becomes something “new”, so that the
image itself becomes something vital. The cross is a wide-spread artistic symbol, and
in this case slightly asymmetrical.
imploración de la luz – siete cristales más día y noche
Over-layering of embraces
The over-layering turns into the picture in the next page. This photo
will become a new sculpture and by these means becomes the photo
itself a sketch, and photography a new way of sketching.