Interview with Maximilian, Part 1



"The Ayganyan Project is like drawing a map of my brain"

A conversation with Maximilian, first part

Question: Max, how could you describe the Ayganyan Project?
Max: The virtual Ayganyan Project is a dynamic, philosophical art project. It opens the doors to new spaces and perspectives, shows new ways to enter reality and, at the same time, uses them as methods when it comes to research or making decisions. You can call this project an artistic form of cosmological philosophy.
Question: Looking at the atlas, it's so complex one can't help getting the impression that it's all about building up some kind of alternative world...
Max: The roots of the project come from of this world and, therefore, change it. The project does not just have the same attributes my alternative world would have. It uses the structural possibilites of this world. I am the reference. It consists of potentials which are already there and, at the same time, it creates new ones. The project is part of this world because it's part of its potentials. And I am a part of it, too. It's all the same.
Question: Why do potentials need such precise and exact forms? Are both precision and complexity necessary to make people understand your work?
Max: I do nothing else but use the spaces between the quantum movements inside my own neuronal network as a playground. The Ayganyan Projects is like drawing a map of my brain and this exploration leads me to all those precise forms I've been collecting for about 20 years now. However, they've changed through all those years of course. Time is a creative phenomenon.
Question: The different levels of abstraction within the project are not always easy to understand.
Max: I've been facing this problem, too. And I still do. And it's the same for the Ayganyay, the Tsippin, the Koolay and the Phulgayn. There's no way to avoid this situation. The problem of abstraction arises at the point where we have to accept that the dimensions accessible for us do not always provide the right tools to describe what's happening and what we experience, as well as they do not help us predict all the consequences of what we're doing. In these moments it really doesn't matter if you're playing the role of a creator or the one of a creature. If I was a two dimensional creature like a circle, I would, despite of my completely different point of view, have a similiar problem a sphere has desperately trying to tell me what it looks like. To me it will always appear as a thin line. Therefore, the problem of abstraction can't be solved.
Question: But in addition expressions like Magdogi Knot, Possible Potential, Nikomi and Koy-Ogi-Structure don't make it easier to understand the whole theory behind it all ..
Max: That again is understandable. But since there were no terms that described the main structures of the ayganyan philosophy in the specific way I want them to, they had to be made up. It's simply necessary to think in terms of Madogi Knots if you want to localize chance as a form of potential geometrically, as physical matter. Maybe the concept of the "materialized idea" is easier to understand for the visitor if we take it to the more imaginable level of synapses in a brain, even if the comparison doesn't fit exactly. Right in there, just like in Madogi Knots, you find the interaction of vacuum potentials, time and space. They are the source of what we use to call ideas.
Question: Ayganyan as an ideal?
Max: Ayganyan is not supposed to be a general ideal. Ayganyan is the result of all the very personal research based on the philosophy of the project. In this respect, there is no better way of expressing this special content in a more precise (or easier) way. At least not for me...
Question: There seems to be an idea behind it all that sees the artist as a magician, playing the role of the untouchable creator.
Max: No, it's not the untouchable. It's more the role of an eternal searcher. Imagine you are a young boy walking through the woods, looking for mushrooms. Suddenly you find a very special one that, after a closer look, emerges as a sparkling diamond. You run back home immediately and you show it to your father, having those great expectations... after all he opens some kind of old closet showing you his own huge sparkling diamond mushroom collection. First of all you'd be of course frustrated, but then you get to a point where you see that what makes your sparkling mushroom most fascinating and precious is that it can be seen in the reflections of all the others. You realize that any of them is a mirror. That's magic.
Question: Are you trying to tell us that you don't put it past yourself to go through a really creative process?
Max: In the end you don't even need a creative process. I think, just like Rupert Sheldrake does by the way, that our brain is not a storage media for information content but a receiver of it. This is not only reasonable economically, especially if information is being stored holographically somewhere outside the brain, but it also explains phenomena like déjà vus or intuition. When we think and learn we don't save information within the structure of our neuronal network. We only learn how to access it. There's no neurologist or psychologist who could tell the place where this unbelievable amount of information we need even in our daily life could be stored inside our body or inside our brain. That's because the keys to understanding phenomena like thinking or idea are the knowledge of the structure and the ways to get access to resources from the networks that lie beyond what we call our physical body. At the same time those keys explain the development of concepts, philosophy and art. Anyway, creation continues all the time. And it's nice to take part in it.
Question: Do you sometimes get the feeling that you're living outside of your brain or beyond it?
Max: Yes, I often do, and it's essential, because otherwise the world would come to me like a cage a human being doesn't need to be living in.

Continue to the second part of the interview

Back to the Introduction Page