Liquefied Presence (of the Ubiquitous Content) (2014)
group exhibition "Can't Go On, Must Go On / Võimatu minna, kindlasti minna" Tallinn Art Hall
(ENG)
How to continue from a situation, where skills that are developed during a long period of time do not have much of a value anymore? How to approach the process of painting, without covering a certain surface using your own personal (therefore subjective) brush strokes? Is it possible to turn the process of making a painting more objective/ universal if we eliminate one's personal touch, which in general is the point of contact between human and the physical reality of painting? How to interpret anonymous content being a mediator and an originator at the same time?
These and many other problems characterize my creative period at the moment, where I have to ask myself these unavoidable questions: how to paint in a situation where it is sort of impossible to go on, but it is essential to keep on going because there is no way back? How to avoid regression as a person?
Engaging in new and interesting topics, I have taken the responsibility to try to implement painting as a medium to explain to myself in particular, the need and ability to function in different situations. In this exhibition, the installation "Liquefied Presence (of the Ubiquitous Content)" is the sequel to the topics studied in my Master's thesis. My exhibition is flirting with the concept of anonymous stock imagery that is shared online as freeware. I work with the freely disseminate materials, mutating and transforming their visual identity. The computer software performs the role of an anonymous pattern generator. By applying painting techniques that I have acquired during the years, new, unique visual shapes have been installed in a gallery room. From this point I leave these questions hanging in the air:
Why can't we determine an art piece that is digitally constructed as a painting, if the approach to the work of creation is no different from the traditional execution methods? After all, painting as a medium, as well as the existence of the artwork, as a whole, does not depend on the method with/in which it is created. The final result, in either case, is a surface that is covered with color.
Liquefied Presence (of the Ubiquitous Content) (2014)
group exhibition "Can't Go On, Must Go On / Võimatu minna, kindlasti minna" Tallinn Art Hall
(ENG)
How to continue from a situation, where skills that are developed during a long period of time do not have much of a value anymore? How to approach the process of painting, without covering a certain surface using your own personal (therefore subjective) brush strokes? Is it possible to turn the process of making a painting more objective/ universal if we eliminate one's personal touch, which in general is the point of contact between human and the physical reality of painting? How to interpret anonymous content being a mediator and an originator at the same time?
These and many other problems characterize my creative period at the moment, where I have to ask myself these unavoidable questions: how to paint in a situation where it is sort of impossible to go on, but it is essential to keep on going because there is no way back? How to avoid regression as a person?
Engaging in new and interesting topics, I have taken the responsibility to try to implement painting as a medium to explain to myself in particular, the need and ability to function in different situations. In this exhibition, the installation "Liquefied Presence (of the Ubiquitous Content)" is the sequel to the topics studied in my Master's thesis. My exhibition is flirting with the concept of anonymous stock imagery that is shared online as freeware. I work with the freely disseminate materials, mutating and transforming their visual identity. The computer software performs the role of an anonymous pattern generator. By applying painting techniques that I have acquired during the years, new, unique visual shapes have been installed in a gallery room. From this point I leave these questions hanging in the air:
Why can't we determine an art piece that is digitally constructed as a painting, if the approach to the work of creation is no different from the traditional execution methods? After all, painting as a medium, as well as the existence of the artwork, as a whole, does not depend on the method with/in which it is created. The final result, in either case, is a surface that is covered with color.