NOTES_01 _02 _03 _04

Assuming that human thought reflects the structure of the physical world around us: can we assert that the world is a manifestation of unequivocal rationale? When I say something is rational I mean “it corresponds to logical arguments”, therefore I might as well formulate my question like this: is the world surrounding us rational, and if so, to what extent? I myself am trying to conceptualise the rationality – or irrationality – of the world, interpreting and organising the conceived notions via my own limited resources.

I believe the essence of my activity to be found in its community-creating role, rather than in the primacy of the visuals themselves. My paintings leave irrevocable traces behind, formulate their own laws, and are able to represent a sort of fictitious future. Anybody may take an active part in this future, since the visuals in themselves are capable of making the viewers aware of their socially conditioned compulsion in response to an artwork. My further intention is to then trigger certain reactions and urge them to formulate their own responses; it is irrelevant to me whether they are positive or negative. The role of my work is that of a catalyst that starts the process but does not give any markers that might in some way restrict their freedom of approach. The processes of human thinking are linked to the human brain, while brain functions are dependent on physical laws, as well as on the nature of the physical world that we know around us. What we call common sense, is the result of thought patterns embedded in the human psyche – presumably because these patterns assist us in various everyday situations. I base my work on a human thought process that surpasses these items of knowledge; by placing the familiar icons into new surroundings, I try to divert the viewers from their learnt mode of thinking.

For me no closed form and unity exists in the traditional sense; the myth of beauty confined firmly by convention does not exist; the only existent for me is the continued, perennial desire for action. Neither is the process of image-construction linear or chronological: my paintings are continuously being constructed, and then intentionally deconstructed so that they appear to be surfaces which are over-coloured, or one may even say “polluted with colour”. Within the superimposed surfaces, each layer depicts a different mood ; actually, they are mixtures of signs, symbols and dispositions independent of time. My primary task is to delay the recipients’ reaction. An integral factor in achieving this is the application of actively superimposed layers of surfaces, their codification, and continuous “superscription”. In this way the present wanes into the past, while future is being born, presenting for me a state of “presence”.

If we postulate that the world is rational, we must also consider it to be ordered. Events are no longer arbitrary: they have to correlate in some way to one another. This interconnection between events produces a sense of causality in our minds. The unchanging constellation of events that are causally interrelated is so familiar to us that we tend to endow the material objects themselves with a causal “force”. It implies a sort of determinism that implicitly postulates that the state of the world as we find it at a given moment suffices for defining it at any subsequent moment. And since this successive state infinitely defines newer and newer states, anything that happens at any time with the Universe is taken in its entirety as the corollary of the present state.

If we were capable of finding ‘the’ complete and universal theory, in time we could make everyone understand the most significant thoughts; thus art, too, would become a part of the public domain, instead of belonging to the private domain of a select few. And then we could join the company of scholars, artists and everyday people to collectively investigate the question of why the Universe and we exist. Arriving at a collective answer to such questions would be a major triumph for human intelligence, for then we could perhaps also understand the thoughts of God.