This is bricolage, babe!!! ...in other words, this is an outrageous oxymoron!!!
All monsters are a deviation from the latin monstrare which means to show, to present something to others and receive their attention, their looks. This passivity, however, is very much in contrast with the insistence of a deliberate peeping activity from the one that always gets shown. To peep is to look while trying not to be caught in the act of looking. This contradiction is for some, simply, a way of being.
Despite the fact that my work has been described as a "continued effort to treat the ubiquity of the visual regime as a consented submission to a discipline —that one of the eye—", and, in doing so, "stirring a comical collapse of contemporary culture that carries down with it all its intent to attain universal transcendence", I believe that the challenge of attempting a cohesive account, and of organizing into a consistent narrative the disparity of interests that I am drawn to examine, always, in my case, falls bellow the important role a liquid, dissolved and meandering attention has on the core of contemporary thought. If the results are evidence enough of a kind of restlessness, and a nomadic pattern of fascination that unleashes a kind of polymorphic authorial drifting that makes itself difficult to domesticate and pinpoint, I like to argue, however, that this unsettling has no other choice, and simply takes advantage of what I call "cultural opportunism". I hope this pick of words will foreground the kind of critical operation I try to exert on today's discourses of art.
Cohesive notions of work risk to be taken as suspect today. Many notions have fallen to the voracity of that "dialectic of disinhibition" that Sloterdijk spoke of, but none so as the notion of fidelity to self. I care little about the creator myth of the individual, or, I should say, about the overblown emphasis and nostalgic aura given to it. I prefer, instead, to dig into the cultural symptomatology that the public sphere exhibits. It is under the entitlement of "relevance" that the art world props and supports its products, and it is under that entitlement that a dialectical engagement is set forth rooted solely on the establishment of an extensive quotational rhizome. Today's creative efforts are simply very busy finding exploitable niches of relevance, nothing more. This is my point of departure. One can begin to see, then, how in the present context, one of lack of grand ideological conceits, opportunism is king. Within it, choices tend toward conceptual lacunae and the overlooked. Indeed, the linking of these disconnected niches, if anything, take us right into the pulsing schizoid narratives that best suit our sense of contemporary dissolve.
This means, in fact, the welcoming of further disinhibition. Contradiction and oxymoron can become, in this context, an interesting and sustainable cultural lifestyle. This way, fragmentation of narrative, and of grand accounts, will continue to feed the necessary activities of forgetting, allowing for spaces where repetition and copy —our natural points of reference in the endless landscapes of today's dissolve— can be felt as true originals again and again. I have often the feeling, for instrance, that an inexhaustible obsession with tropism summarizes the whole activity of our cultural environment, and that a major practice can be constructed just from it. That unsettled momentum becomes, then, nothing more than a solvitur ambulando. The logic of that assumption seems to account for a most fundamental necessity, an ultimate compulsion, one central to the economy of the symbolic, and that aims, at any cost, simply to avoid impasse, paralysis and entropy.