I define my work like fiercely anti-nostalgic and anti-sentimental with a total refuse to what is considered "beauty" and the emotions such a doubious impression produces. So, what counts for me is the place between the image and the eye - the only and last frontier wich still remains interesting for an artist not compromissed with good taste.
It is a widely accepted notion among painters that it does not matter what one paints as long as it is well painted. This is the essence of academicism. There is no such thing as good painting about nothing. - Mark Rothko Very seldom do we find that algorithmic artists have an eye on reality. In fact, most artists of our medium are very reluctant to abandon the vain belief that "beauty" is the only goal achievable by art. But how do we work exclusively for "beauty" in the context of political violence, terrorism and childhood trauma? How can the beautiful-only forms be made visually appealing in these times of sexual vulgarization and AIDS? It's clear isn't it, that art isn't rolling over an empty and free road of pure beauty anymore, but instead, a major issue among artists now is how to reconstitute beauty in a contemporary context of fear and social deception? I strongly believe that fractals are a useful tool for making the hidden, visible, but I als
Comments