Land scape
Liana Psarologaki
CONTEMPORARY ART REVIEW
Room in 1961. Since then and perhaps even at times before that, the objet d’ art to be viewed has been de-centred and made way for the situation, the spatial articulation, and the cultural event. Now, the agenda is shifting again towards an architecturally and technologically reliant art that is close to all disciplines including science, IT, the creative industries and the humanities.
While your work provides the visual experience with an augmented multisensorial feature, it also seems to challenge the blurry boundary between spatial consciousness and cognition, marking the complete installation with a subtle symbolic value. German multidisciplinary artist Thomas Demand once stated that " nowadays art can no longer rely so much on symbolic strategies and has to probe psychological, narrative elements within the medium instead ". What is your opinion about it? And in particular how do you conceive the narrative and especially the unity for your works?
It would be naïve for a maker to demand the aphorism of the symbolic value of something the reading of is clearly intimate and therefore unique. There will be connotations carried by the artwork even so when the latter demands spatial cognition as related to memory and localised events. These connotations however may be orchestrated almost by chance as the work has been developed, intuitively as well as methodologically and may become apparent even in the most abstract of works. This is not a paradox, on the contrary an ontological characteristic of art that is indeed associated with the psychological – I would say psychosomatic – experience of the audience. I find the expression of‘ symbolic strategy’ quite an oxymoron in this context. Art making must continue to be a vital and veomatic process much more than business – just like breathing( to oddly quote Marina Abramovic). As per the symbolic dimension of my work, my intention is to subtly and somehow sporadically approach the metaphor as a method of poesis. It allows the interplay between the virtual and the actual to take place – something that I am very interested in.
Inviting the visitor to explore the elusive nature of immaterial enclosures and invisible boundaries, your work allows an open reading, a multiplicity of meanings and we daresay that rather than attempting to establish any unified sense, you seem to urge the viewers to elaborate personal associations: how much important is for you that the spectators rethink the concepts you convey in your pieces, elaborating personal meanings?
The multiplicity of affect evoked is very important for me as a maker. I feel the success of each project reflects on the gamma of responses and readings received – not necessarily documented or narrated. My belief in the intimacy of the artistic experience is strong; we – as space consumers – are what we bring with us. If we bring nothing we feel nothing. That is a response as well – it unashamedly confirms the absence of feeling, which eventually brings the longing for it. The unification the work attempts is perhaps one of sensory cooperation; a phenomenon Brian Massumi calls‘ hinging’ of the sensory faculties’ activity. In Cryptopology for instance air is the mediating agent; allows