The key concept connected with the new works of Vladimir Martynov is indefinite variety, with both words carrying emphasis. The works are not combined into strong series. Using the concept borrowed from geology it is better to compare it not with the works but with the material which can not be measured till it is worked through. Being unmeasured, it can be perceived as a metaphysical huge monolith in comparison with which any solitary work looks as a small fragment.
When you look at any of his works an oriental carpet comes to mind and if you watch them one by one you feel that the carpet comes to life, cinematically changing the colors, pattern, depth, but not the style formed by the metallic gloss of photo plastic, transforming any image into liquid virtual sight. Such style appears to be very successful godsend. Rarely one manages not only to break through the banality of this printing technique but to achieve strange and, following from this strong beauty of the image using the technique. However, such 'beauty as it is" is just an effect. The origin here is the precise correspondence between the metal plastic style and the indefinite character of the image.
Due to the total ambiguity, one can speak about the image only relatively. The works are as much abstract as objective (like the music is both abstract and objective). All the elements here are computer-generated forms which do not depict anything but exist as they are. They also create the illusion of an image and are similar to many things. This is the core oddity of Martynov's stratum and his major intrigue. Being computer graphics it simulates the photography showing unreal "non-photographic" pattern-world. Thus the unbelievable combination of presence and imaging, presentation and reflection appears which gives a hallucinatory effect to artist's works. To look at them is alike to catching the structure of drawing and remembering that is can not exist.
Martynov works' paradoxicality is not only their obvious advantage but doubtlessly a problem. They resist sorting into any art genre or type. Moreover, being created by using multiplying technique they can not be considered unique notwithstanding they are precious (thus, do not contain valuables or invaluable). Obviously, the elusive nature of these works leads to some difficulties of perception. One likes them and the more he/she looks at them the more so, but they can create perplexity and even stupor. This can be applied not only to an "average spectator" but also to the professionals used to be lead by settled esthetical standards more than their own feelings. Such standards rarely include archaically plane esthetics on the one hand and multilayer composition and viscous-liquid style connected with new media art technical approaches on the other hand. Today, in the era of total computerization, such combination of contradictions should be routine-contemporary. However, yesterday's shocking novelty of digital technology does not transform into today's routine since it turns into triviality. It looks like esthetical new-media opportunities offered by the media are of no interest to anybody. It appears that Vladimir Martynov is too late with his art or has yet waited sufficiently to be evaluated positively. Judging by his confident skill and his arts' contradictory complexity, the second opinion is right.
Apriel 2, 2007