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