In the postmodern moment the entity of the “artist,” as maker, as producer, and even more important as worker, has a much problematized existence within the greater international working-class and even within particular forces in the art world. My art practice is an attempt to align the notion of everyday existence, the erasure that is produced within various social relations, and the art spectacle, with a criticism that asks, "How do we configure a system or institution which allows for a notable aesthetics of picture making and an inclusionary development of the art space at the same moment?"
Through this thinking, the supplemental making of the art object becomes a proposal, a converted imaginary where notions of specific processes are conjured up; and by way of the simple act of making; including the particularities of craftsmanship, trial and error, and historicity there is an exchange that takes place between object and “man”. What my art practice attempts to ask is, what is this convergence? Is it simply traditional aesthetical thinking, making an attempt to build off of what has lied before (and sometimes making a complete withdrawal from), or is it a problematic which asks, is the process and plight of making the art object the true interest of “man” as “artist”?
That said, ideology, brick throwing, and painting the perfect line have massive commonalities, in that they have the opportunity to construct how we perceive our own contemporary world, and even at times how we provide for a new future imaginary within the present. It becomes a condition of relativism, and through that relativism we are able to explore, deconstruct, and reassemble notions of identity; thereby making and developing an acknowledgment of systematic modes of reproduction, and thus bringing to the surface what becomes intuitive in our daily lives.
In this mundanity of the everyday what is built up is a silent veneer of banality, of sameness, of a particular attributable consciousness of normativity, and it is through this that the art object thus provides for a penetrating criticism of the self. This self-critical instrumentalism of the art object; its process, and the manner in which it reproduces and defines entities within the social is the principal characteristic of my ongoing art practice.