The Artist

I like to describe my work in three words: experimentation, change and failure. As a person, and especially as an artist, I hardly feel that feeling of complete satisfaction with my work. Such is the cross and delight of every artist. Dissatisfaction, that perennial feeling of failure, is both the main torment of the artist, but at the same time also his greatest stimulus. What I try to achieve through my work is the complete and utter absence of meaning. It is not the artist’s task to claim to tell the public what is to be seen in the work and what must be proved in front of it. As much as the creator of the work can strive in this sense, there will never be an unambiguous interpretation of it, as it is the observers who, through their previous knowledge and their emotions, complete the work potentially attributing it from time to time a meaning and an identity completely and unexpectedly different from the one that had guided the artist in his realization. The artist, therefore, is not the ultimate creator of the work, but the stimulus that generates the work of art itself. So does it make sense to commit to instilling some kind of meaning or message into something so changeable and polysemic? Is it also possible to prevent the unintentionally endowing of the work of any meaning? What is the right approach to try to overcome this intrinsic limit of the human being? These are the questions I want to try to answer with my work. There are two ways to succeed in my aim: to achieve extreme simplicity in the content, depriving the work of any visual stimulus, or overloading it with divergent and irreconcilable informations. The two approaches are completely different, on the one hand there is the attempt to deprive the work of meaning, on the other hand there is to attribute multiple, accepting the polysemic nature of the artistic product. In the first case the objective is essentially to counteract this spontaneous process of attribution of meaning to the work, however I do not consider it valid for two reasons: first of all it is impossible to create something hermetically closed and complete in itself; Since even the desire to give meaning to the artistic product is in itself a generator of meaning, according to then a blank sheet can not be considered a work of art by anyone who does not have a degree in art history, but only a signifier whose only meaning and precisely the claim to have no meaning, making it difficult to appreciate the work also visually as well as conceptually. It remains therefore only to abandon its purpose of depriving or endowing the work with a single meaning, accepting its polyème nature, urging the process itself through the conception of a series of elements deliberately discordant, ambiguous and confused, which can act as stimuli for the observer, who can from time to time find multiple and equal keys of interpretation to that changing entity that we define as a work of art.