Born in Rosario, 26 July 1948.
At the age of 15 he started to take classes in drawing and painting with Juan Grela. The painter Anselm Piccoli also played an important role in his formation.
His career begins in the 60s with an active participation in the development of the Argentina avant-garde of this decade, manifested through exhibitions such as "Primary Structures II" (1967), "Rosario 67" (1967), "OPNI" (1967 ), "The Art for Air" (1968). He was the first exhibitor at the "Cycle of Experimental Art," organized by the Vanguard Group of Rosario and sponsored by the Di Tella Institute in 1968. In this context, he starred in several of the leading mass demonstrations of Rosario and was one of the makers of Tucumán Arde, emblematic work of 1968 which deserved numerous comments from critics and historians from Argentina and abroad and which still continues to rise important research works.
He then went from using his camera as a tool for documentation and denunciation to a footage that was acquiring particular features over the years. Among his works outstand: the portraits of artists, the series 'Never Again' (1984), his self-portraits, photographed still life, photos emulsified by hand with paper and "Argentine Cielitos" presented in 2003 at the National Museum of Fine Arts.
He exhibited individually and collectively in various galleries, museums and institutions of the country and abroad. His works are in various institutions and private collections in Argentina and abroad.
For his career he was awarded with the Leonardo Award 2001 given by The National Museum of Fine Arts. In 2002 he received a diploma of merit in photography from the Konex Awards.
For personal decisions he never sent his works to participate in awards or lounges.
Lives and works in Rosario.
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 lean my choice as a matter of affection towards this work. It was produced for a thematic exhibition, "Still life" in 1987, two things led me to do it: the very slogan of the sample, and the fact that my father had died shortly before and that's why I titled it "Still Life photographed”. Several factors distinguish this work from the rest of my production. I could resolve it only through a sequence, more linked to movies or short stories. The passage of time is determined in three consecutive frames, leaving a still camera during the period that flowers decay and recording the various chapters of a book (“The Name of the Rose", which is named with the liturgical hours). Three pictures of my father in three stages of his life and a shadow or silhouette included as a self-portrait. It was the only time I used this resource and I've questioned myself for it, perhaps influenced by the premise that photography, in the foundational meaning of the term, is the moment captured in one image. All throughout my work I have used various techniques handling negatives or digital files. I made a large copy, at the maximum of the width of the coil from the photo paper that was sold in those years: 103 x 323 cms, and whenever it was exposed I did it by nailing to the wall paper and letting it get deteriorated as it was being handled. You can see the patching holes and the smashes. If my father had grown old and gone physically, why not to let the work also suffered over time? And thus, it has been changing over nearly 20 years and those wounds and scars have added a dose of drama to the work.
2. In general terms, how would you suggest to approach your work?
I do not consider that the work can be "read" at least not in one way. Neither I would suggest to anyone how its assessment should be. I do think it has many possible approaches: emotional, reflexive or plastic. For instance talking about the work chosen for the previous question: the theme, the way it was produced, the size, the black and white choice, the darkness… are all elements that help the observer get closer the proposal: the becoming and death. So dear to every photograph.
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?
I belong to a generation and in particular to a group of artists who were strongly influenced by the events and the works carried out in the 60s. "Tucumán Arde" was a group show. But not collective in the sense of a curator choosing a group of artists for an exhibition. Collective, in the sense of a common purpose of a group that felt that no more could they remain aside of what was happening outside the confines of the exhibition halls. This experience marked me and I do not want to be the one who says what tradition I am in, but the people, who will locate me within a tradition of commitment to life and art.
4. Choose works or exhibitions from the last ten or fifteen years which in your opinion were very significant and explain why
Answering this question is not easy for me; there is a large and excellent production of works and exhibitions of Argentine artists, both historic and contemporary. I cannot help thinking that as these events are in the category of "highly significant", some others could be pointed by frivolity and pastime, bequeathed from the 90s and the neoliberal government.
5. What tendencies or groupings from common elements do you see in argentine art of the last ten or fifteen years?
I believe that this question was very cleverly answered by Noah on one hand and by Jacoby and Prior on the other, in Ramona No. 50. I would add a very special appreciation for future discussions: a lot of artistic production of recent times, instead of swelling the history of art, will be useful for an anthropological approach to the years of hyper globalization.