What typifies my work is the reference to representations of the landscape, of the architecture, of the space, whether inside or outside, spaces surrounding a figure, perhaps an observer. These are subjects that have always been with me and which do not function in opposition.
When i make drawings with references to architectural objects, i am satisfied when the lines and colour fields interrelate. So, i carry out works in which the colours do not come to the forefront in a clear and evident way. Actually, the two situations coincide, or work in parallel, with situations in which they are interpenetrated and in which the space of the colour and that of the line sometimes compete, sometimes come together and are contaminated.
Art depends on the reading of minimum spaces, reading spaces that are hidden because they are between things, undefined, obscure zones that allow us to develop the work of painting. I have been seeking small stratagems to capture this zone “between”. many of the choices i make are determined in relation to the surrounding space of the architecture, to the space of the landscape.
My major concern is always the discussion of the edges of painting. I want the picture to extend beyond those. In a determined space my paintings together form a single piece that i cannot imagine being broken up in different walls. Each painting goes beyond itself, each wall is a painting by itself; this does not allow the gaze to be fixed, it is all around. the fact is that your look dominates the reason why you keep looking at a painting; the eye takes over control of the way in which we look at a picture. Reason invokes a discourse made up of these fragments of vision. you penetrate/enter the painting by the invoking of its own details. it is not the general idea of a painting that is important, but the small stroke or line. what is important is the particular, the detail.
