What makes an object recognizable? One might believe it is its form: a form not restricted to appearance or sight, instead bound to mental schemes and classifications. Images, as manifestations of objects, are compounds: part sensation, part classification. My work is nourished by the relation between the uncharted and unstructured sensations or associations and taxonomy, an inherited codification of the world.
Exploring the deep relation between physical matter’s expressiveness and visual representation has been the core of my recent artistic projects. There are two ways in which one can approach this relation. The first is to start from visual images that are already recognizable in virtue of their form and our mental understanding. Some of my past projects tried to dissolve the individuality of images by swapping various key details. The second approach is more process-based. I start from considering physical matter as a medium that guides the image-making. This route is fruitful because matter has all sorts of embedded rules. You cannot know all of them in advance, and new rules are discovered during the practice.
I am constructing, creating and re-assembling different visual tokens. My works are populated by hybrid objects, contrasts, imitations and simulacra – sex mimicking love, living tissue mimicking dead tissue, transformation mimicking movement. Images undergo various transformations: their representation becomes manifold; textures are mixed, details are swapped. This process is designed to challenge their primary function or meaning, dissolve their individuality and rethink the relationship that might occur between part and whole. Individuated sensation and perception is more important to me than following a purely conceptual route; this results in works that are rather emotional and describe the visceral experience of perceiving an image.