gallery 1
| home | gallery 2 | 3 | artist statement | academic profile | books | papers | presentations | contact |

Art poses a political dilemma to what it is supposed to be doing.

(...) a first-person concept of art-making limits art to an elusive oneness that entertains a notion of art within a misplaced context of phenomenological origins. This solipsistic arkhé reinforces the myth of grounded being. It legitimates instrumentalization, where art is expected to make something so that we can “learn” from its artefacts as referents of “our culture”; thus reinforcing the first-person impression that distinguishes what is “ours” from what is “theirs”. Apart from perceiving art from a personalized productivist télos, this approach traps art within a cultural mechanism that remains accountable to cultural-educational remits that are open to fascistization.

Even when art’s making is deemed as an object of beauty or delectation, art’s objects hardly have anything to say or do for us. This is because while artists do art by making objects, to simply state that this is what art is all about would mean that one could only legitimize art by its products and thus implying that art must have a teleological logic. Apart from a distortion of art, politically and aesthetically this invariably leaves us nowhere.

John Baldacchino, Art's Way Out, p. 174.