top of page

Should an entirety be broken? 

- All that is taken for granted 




As an artist, one of my main concerns is how an idea or a concept, a thought or a personal interest can be translated into a clear visual image that embodies some universal interest or common ground.  
In this particular work I want to explore the possible power-related-relation between language and artistic visual imagery. Given the diverse formalistic approaches of language and it’s implications I’m exited to playfully experiment with language as discour and/or art medium in combination with different kind of artistic media. Starting from the idea that everything is a mediation, amongst others language itself, I would like to explore the tension between the potential level of autonomy of a visual piece of art, it’s contingent indispensable dependency on a theoretical discours and how language can become image as well.


I would like to create a visual that goes into dialogue with Susan Sontag’s words, stating that art should tend toward the ‘elimination of the “image”’. 


“As the activity of the mystic must end in a via negative, a theology of God’s absence, a craving for the clouds of unknowingness beyond knowledge and for the silence beyond speech, so art must tend toward anti-art, the elimination of the subject (the “object”, the “image”).


However, Sontag statement must be read in the context of the abolition of artist relation with his audience and his own oeuvre. In this work, I choose to take her words into account and use them as an inspiration only, specifically I want to find a image that encounters it’s own abolition. An image that doubts it’s own premisses, an image that questions the legitimation it’s own existence. 


How to eliminate any self-evidence aspect of this future visual image  in an attempt to create in a categorical void.  This could become a metaphorical dialectic image representing the concept of the self-evident; the notion of the obvious and at the same time the abolition of it’s own self evidence. My research is therefore to a certain extend aesthetic. I want to find the most-close-to-perfect metaphorical image of an entirety and at the same time, I want this image to doubt it’s own self-evident-being. Maybe this image doesn't look interesting at all;  maybe it’s a visual that doesn’t make any sense to spill any thought on. Maybe this image could be a broken cup of coffee. 


In a second stage, by using language as a conceptual medium I want to question if there is any value in breaking an entirety. And Why? How can this research be contextualized in the ontology and deconstruction of visual culture? What means destruction? Is there any constructive value in destruction? What is the ontologie of construction, deconstruction, destruction and reconstruction and so forth?


In a way, I want to research how much is there to say about nothing? I tend to do that playfully and carefully. I want to be very serious in not being serieus. At the same time I want to break down all seriousness to see what is left when you try to take everything away. When you question legitimately all that has been taken for granted, the uselessness, the spilling of time. I think maybe there is a great value in everything that is nonsense and thereforeI want to explore.



#ontology, #phenomenology, #humor, #senselessness, #art, #translating, #media, #Visual, #metaphor #concept #aesthetics #theory,  #playfullness #dialetism #contradiction 


bottom of page