In April 2009 Sciam has sent an extract of his Mondrian studies to the "Fondazione Filiberto Menna" in Salerno (Italy). Sciam has had Filiberto Menna as professor at the university of Rome.
As of March 2010 Sciam's book "Piet Mondrian, An Explanation of the Work" has been added to the Online Catalog of the NYC MoMA Library, Archives and Study Centers.
Once again Sciam has unsuccessfully tried to contact Hans Janssen at the Haags Gemeentemuseum who seems unable to establish a constructive cooperation. The reason? Artist Sciam dares to explain to professor Janssen aspects pertaining to Mondrian's oeuvre which remained unexplained to him. Outrageous!
These are the facts:
In 1991 Bruno Zevi had published on his monthly architectural magazine "L'Architettura" the first essa Sciam wrote about Mondrian's Broadway Boogie Woogie.
In 2006 Sciam had completed his essay covering Mondrian's entire oeuvre. With this work Sciam could finally show and explain, step by step, the evolution process which has guided the Dutch master from 1899 to 1943.
While scholars and institutions reacted positevely to Sciam's studies, the above mentioned person did not even answer.
Finally the "professor" sent this letter to Sciam.
"too formaalistic"...pontificated the "professor"
So Sciam wrote back asking "What did Mondrian do all along his life if not translating nature and life into forms and colors?
No answer ever came from the "professor" - a specialist on Mondrian - as he likes to define himself.
"My dear friend.. this is a mafia.. and you the artists are the victims.. It has alway been like this in the past hundred years.."
"The less they know, the more they pretend.. The smaller they are the bigger they want to appear.."
These were the encouraging messages coming from a german friend who has been working for a museum..
He did not know what to say so again non answer came
Regardless to the substantial content of my studies, he described my doing as one of an "amateur"..
This are the kind of people who listen to you only if you have a title.. Same as those who refused the new art of..
NOw, if "amateur" means someone who loves what he does, well then yes.. I am an "amateur".. but if this means someone who dose thing in an approximate way then look at the explanation he gave of the two checkerboard with light and dark colors.. or the meaning of a square in Pier and Ocean 4.. or.... or...
Who is the "amateur" here?
And when I tried to explain to him what "remained unexplained to him" he got mad at me.. Look at the e-mail he has sent to me:
He escapes.. Quite pathetic for a 64 years "professor"..
On 27 March 2019 Sciam has sent the following mail to Mr. Janssen:
Dear Mr. Janssen,
I read with pleasure some essays of yours on Piet Mondrian’s oeuvre.
At pages 154-155 of the catalogue for the 2005 Mondrian exhibition at the Vienna Albertina Museum (Prestel) you write about the Checkerboards with Light and Dark Colors. Your explanation refers to a letter Mondrian wrote to van Doesburg. Based on what Mondrian wrote, you assume that a night and a daylight sky could be the source for these two works. Your explanation goes on saying that if the colors of the dark version evoke nightlight, then the colors of the light version may hint to a daylight motif. To corroborate this interpretation you focus on a larger dark-blue rectangle in the dark colored version (a supposed evidence for the night sky) and a light pink rectangle in the light colored version (presumably evoking daylight). You then set a relation between these rectangles and a square visible in the upper central area of Pier and Ocean 4. You talk about that square as an empty space suggesting the sky. You finally point out that a significative difference between the two Checkerboard compositions lays in the tones of gray and white of the light colored version which are absent in the dark colored one and conclude that this difference remains somehow unexplained. The book showing the results of my studies on Mondrian, which I have sent to you in 2006, provide, among others, some explanations to the above. I now take the liberty to submit the same to you again through the following link: http://www.pietmondrian.eu/english/individual-works/checkerboards-1919/checkerboards-light-dark-colors.html
In the letter you have sent to me, you rightly point out that, “what artists talk about isn’t necessarily what they actually do in their paintings”. I agree with you as I think that Checkerboards with Light and Dark Colors have little to do with night or daylight, rather, with the fundamental issue of multiple and one Piet Mondrian has been dealing with throughout his entire life. Further details on this theme can be found, if you wish, at http://www.pietmondrian.eu/english/mondrians-oeuvre/0-an-overview.html
Going back for a moment to Pier and Ocean 4, I do not think that the square in the upper-central area of the composition evokes the sky, rather, I see in that square proportion the interpenetration between the spiritual (symbolized by the vertical pier) and the natural (the boundless horizontal extension of the sea). More on this at http://www.pietmondrian.eu/english/individual-works/pier-and-ocean-5/pier-ocean-5.html
In the catalogue for the Mondrian exhibition at the Wiesbaden Museum you describe Composition with Large Red Plane, Yellow, Black, Gray and Blue (1921) and talk about a “module”. May I suggest that this module is in fact a square proportion?
For further details please visit: https://www.pietmondrian.info/lifetime-evolution/lifetime-evolution.html
The square proportion, which first appeared in 1914-15, became a constant pattern in almost all the compositions Mondrian realized from 1920 onward. A flexible ever-changing pattern, constantly evolving and finally dissolving into the more dynamic and fully colored unity MOndrian was able to express in Broadway Boogie Woogie; a dynamic equivalence of opposites the artist has been searching for since 1915. For details please visit http://www.pietmondrian.eu/english/individual-works/broadway-boogie-woogie/broadway-boogie-woogie.html
Don’t you think Mr. Janssen that it would be fair and to everybody’s advantage if a museum which owns one of the most significant Mondrian’s collections would consider my contribution to the understanding of his oeuvre?
I am open to any proposal.
With best wishes,
Michael Sciam
Any intellectually honest person would have aknowledged Sciam's suggestions which are not just his personal opinions but visual facts that can be verified.