AN ARTIST WHO QUESTIONS THE LIFE CYCLE OF A HUMAN: KAAN CANDURAN

We talked with Prof. Dr. Kaan Canduran, one of the professors of Hacettepe University, Faculty of Fine Arts, Ceramics and Glass Department, about his perspective on ceramics and art education. Canduran's art practice is based on questioning the life cycle of a human, social movements and individual existence.

FATMA BATUKAN BELGE

How did you become interested in ceramics and why did you want to study ceramics?

My interest in art dates back to my childhood, but this interest really took shape during my high school years. At that time, with the encouragement of my math teacher, I realized my talent for drawing, and this allowed me to seriously get acquainted with art. However, my acquaintance with ceramics came later, when I entered university. When I was accepted to the Ceramics Department of Hacettepe University, Faculty of Fine Arts, I discovered the power of expression inherent in clay. I began to see ceramics not only as a material, but also as a tool for thought. The possibilities offered by clay as a material deepened my relationship with it. Therefore, studying ceramics was a turning point in my life, not only for gaining technical skills, but also for developing an artistic form of expression. Ceramics offered me the opportunity to shape my thoughts, create layers and meanings; each touch was a door opening to a new discovery.

You are a child of Ankara and you received your university education in the capital. Then you went to another capital, Washington, for your master's degree. Can you compare the two cities, their university and art environments? What did the USA bring to you?

Ankara was a city that shaped me academically and intellectually. My education in ceramics here provided an important foundation for the development of my art practice. However, going to Washington was one of the most decisive turning points in my career. The USA, especially The George Washington University, provided me with a different perspective on the art and academic world. Washington’s artistic atmosphere provided an environment where different cultures coexisted, innovative ideas and collective creative processes came to the fore. Art practice in the USA had an understanding that pushed the material and technical boundaries of ceramics without adhering to traditional methods. Technological possibilities and raw material diversity provided artists with the opportunity to experiment without limits. In this environment, I developed my own artistic language by building a bridge between the traditional and the contemporary. I also had the opportunity to think deeply about how art evolved in social and cultural contexts. This made my artistic understanding nourished not only by form and aesthetics, but also by cultural and social meanings.

When we look at your works, you seem to give equal weight to both form and technology, namely the technique of ceramics. Can one exist without the other?

Ceramics is, in a sense, a point where technology and art meet. The relationship between form and technique should be seen as a balance that coexists. Form is the expression of the artist's intellectual world, but for this expression to become reality, the right techniques and firing processes are needed. Form and content both determine the meaning of the work and its interaction with the viewer. However, without technique, form only has potential; a form can be created, but in order for this form to become a form of expression, the firing process, materials and techniques used must be applied correctly. The power of a work is hidden not only in aesthetics and form, but also in how this form is created, with which materials and techniques it is brought to life. In other words, form and technique cannot be considered independently of each other; the meaning of one without the other remains incomplete.

I was going to ask which one do you give more importance to between form and content, and I got a partial answer…

Content has always been at the forefront for me. The form of a work of art should facilitate the understanding of its content, but form is only a tool. Content determines the depth of the work and the connections it establishes with the viewer. In this context, content directs form, while form concretizes content. In my art practice, content involves questioning the human life cycle, social movements, and individual existence. My forms are the visual reflection of these questions. For example, my transition from baby figures to female figures symbolizes a journey from the beginning of life to its different stages. Form is a tool that represents this transition. Therefore, instead of establishing a hierarchy between form and content, I think that they should be seen as two equal components that support each other.

How would you define contemporary ceramic art today?

Contemporary ceramics is a form of expression that transcends the traditional boundaries of the past. Ceramics is no longer just a field of handicrafts, but has become an art form that deeply examines social and cultural meanings. Today's ceramic artists present their own narratives in a much richer and more multi-layered way by blending the relationships they establish with materials with technological innovations and social questions. Ceramics has become, in a sense, both a traditional and a modern language of expression. At the same time, the firing techniques and surface workmanship used in ceramic art reveal new aesthetic searches that emphasize traces of nature, random beauties and the relationship between man and nature. Therefore, contemporary ceramics can be defined as a multi-dimensional form of expression and a powerful tool of social criticism.

As an an academic, can you evaluate the level of fine arts education in our universities?

Fine arts education in our universities has shown significant development in recent years. The quality of art education has increased, but there are still some structural difficulties and inequalities. While a strong balance has been established between artistic production and academic research in some of our universities, some institutions still adopt approaches that separate these two areas. Art education in our universities should interact more both nationally and internationally, and should be integrated into the global art world. A strong aspect of academic art education is that students develop interdisciplinary thinking and creative processes. However, I believe that these processes should not only be nourished by traditional methods, but also by innovative ideas.

Accordingly, if I were to ask you about the new generation of students… They are different from all of us; how do they view art, education, and ceramics?

The new generation of artists, as children of the digital age, are interested in art with a more free and experimental approach. They use technology as a tool, develop their artistic production in a digital environment, and even combine ceramics with technological innovations. However, their respect for traditional materials and techniques continues. This generation sees art as a form of social criticism and individual expression rather than merely an aesthetic object. Young artists establish their relationships with art on a more personal and meaningful level. I think education should also be shaped in this direction. An innovative and open-minded education should be one of the most important areas of development for young artists.