Vision of art
1. Choose a work that represents you, describe it in relation to its format and materiality, its relation with time and space, its style and theme; detail its production process.
I think the work that represents the best is a series of ink drawings I developed on yellow leaves, striped and small notebooks, it functioned as a diary from 1998-2001, including "Are you telling me this is it?” They are approximately 30 images with illustrated phrases. They are pretty quick sketches that emerged as a counterpoint to ideas into a quasi-autobiographical statement. Most of the time the image had no direct relationship with the text, but it did help reinforcing a detour in the narrative.
2. In general terms, how would you suggest to approach your work?
I think most of my work should be read as if going through a magazine or like watching a movie trailer. I'm always interested in the phenomenon of editing in film and how an image can be tainted by another one resulting in different possible levels of meaning. In the hanging of a showing or at an installation I seek to encourage the viewer to generate a guiding thread of his own.
3. In reference to your work and your position in the national and international art fields, what tradition do you recognize yourself in? Who are your contemporary referents? What artists of previous generations are of interest to you?
Nahuel Vecino, Tim Gardner, Collier Schorr, Hernan Salamanco, Kaye Donachie, Rosana Schoijett, Muntean / Rosenblum, Cary Kwok, Katy Moran, Hernan Bass, Karen Kilimnick, John Singer Sargeant, De Laszlo, Anthony Van Dyck, Prilidiano Pueyrredón, Max Gomez Canle, Ripamonte.
All European artists under the principles of the last century that are auctioned in auction houses. Academicism of second rank.
Professional portrait makers and those standing in the parks.
Amateur porn directors.
Bruce la Bruce.
Some fashion photographers.
4. Choose works or exhibitions from the last ten or fifteen years which in your opinion were very significant and explain why
I confess I missed a lot of exhibitions that would have surely appeared on this list if I had seen them. The things I saw and I remember: The house of Agustin Inchausti and Fernanda Laguna in the early '90s. It was packed with works, and had a painting of a couple kissing on the mouth and had a planet. It ruled the path of my work during the last years of school.
A retrospective of Garabito at the CC. Recoleta and the retrospective at the MNBA. He was my first teacher and 10 years later he still seems unbelievable to me.
An exhibition of the Subscription Group at the Goethe Institute. There was an incredible video and wonderful little notes that inspired me to end a relationship of 6 years.
Nahuel Vecino at the Rojas and at Recoleta. The one at the Rojas was painfully contemporary, there was a portrait of a dog that I had wanted to have, because it would have looked incredible good against a background of brocade and velvet drapes I had, it is one of those exhibitions that one would have loved to do. The Recoleta's showing because you have to show the work of 5 years and make it a coherent development.
Samples in Duplus during 2000 Peloche / Salamanca / Estrada-Ballesteros-Iuso-Maculan-Iriart-Vilela and White gallery. They were places that made me feel I could not have picked a better time to return to Bs.As..
The work of Salamanca at Open City 2005 and the exhibition "Gardens of May" in the House of Cultures in 2006. Those showings helped me a lot on putting my own work in perspective and reminded me of something that I was starting to forget.
Veronica Romano at Braga Menéndez. First, because I think she is one of the strongest artists concerning Argentine contemporary sculpture along with Schiavi and Dorr Bairon. And second because each of her installations made me think of work to do.
