I took painting classes at Ahuva Slimowiczs’ st udiobetween the ages of 16 and 19. Ahuva had been Guillermo Kuitca’s teacher, and I was his assistant for a couple of years. Another side of my formation has to do with Edgardo Chiban, a philosopher who I got to work with, and who has deeply influenced me.
In 1990, at the age of 23, I had my first solo exhibition at the Spanish Cultural Center in Buenos Aires; in 1992 “Les Allumees Nantes-Buenos Aires”, Nantes, France and at Ruth Benzacar gallery (Buenos Aires) with Harte, Pombo, Ballesteros and Siquier. In 1994 at the C.A.Y.C. and at the Fucares Gallery of Madrid, Spain. In 1996 at Fucares, Almagro, Spain. In 1997 at Fucares, Madrid. In 1998 and 2005 at Ruth Benzacar gallery (Buenos Aires).
Vision of art
1. Choose a work that represents you, describe it in relation to its format and materiality, its relation with time and space, its style and theme; detail its production process.
I don’t think there is one single work that could supplant all the others in order to represent me. I’d rather talk about one work which I’m interested in and that represents my actual work. “Model head” [“Cabeza modelo”], 2005. Oil on canvass, 180x160 cm. This work took part of my last exhibition at Ruth Benzacar gallery (Buenos Aires). It’s a head on its side on which a hand is searching for the right position trying to project a shadow that matches with the face’s side, a kind of living model for a Chinese shadow. This shadow is treated as a piece of information that could be given in any way, in this case as a reticular blue pattern that gets on the face founding with the paint beneath and loosing it’s reticular shape. The wall has the same treatment, but with a most rigid pattern to indicate immobility, and the hand`s pattern is almost dissolved since it’s the source of major movement in the picture. In the illuminated areas of the head and wall, there are some smaller white and yellow patterns, as a correction of value and color.
2. In general terms, how would you suggest to approach your work?
When it comes to reading a piece of art, we are all equal. The more interesting interpretations have very little to do with what I know about the picture.
3. In reference to your work and your position in the national and international art fields, what tradition do you recognize yourself in? Who are your contemporary referents? What artists of previous generations are of interest to you?
I identify myself with any kind of ‘realism’, understood as the need to represent new lives in new ways; which result are particular worlds, related and strangers at the same time. In a referents random list, both contemporary and past but with a certain influence in me, I could mention Courbet, Balthus, León Ferrari, Morandi, De la Vega, Siquier, Pablo Suárez, Berni, Bruce Nauman, Pombo, Hockney, Clementel, Gordín; Kuitca, Kacero, Bonnard, Fontana, Freud; García Uriburu, Magritte, Currin, Richter, Xul Solar, Rachel Whiteread y otra vez Balthus. From now-a-days generations, I’m interested in Erlich, Estol, Bianchi, Strada, Da Rin, Vecino.
4. Choose works or exhibitions from the last ten or fifteen years which in your opinion were very significant and explain why
The first that comes to my mind are: Gordín at the Spanish Cultural Center in Buenos Aires lobby with a model lighten by a light coming from his forehead at the moment of the inauguration he was supposed to take part of; the exact work at the exact moment. Kacero at the Borges Cultural Center (Buenos Aires, Argentina), lucid and moving. León Ferrari at the Spanish Cultural Center in Buenos Aires, because of the enormous potential of that little exhibition. Siquier at Ruth Benzacar gallery, for the depth and fragility of his drawings. García Uriburu at the same gallery, the up-side-down maps seemed to me as a type of intelligent politic art. Suárez at Maman gallery, Kuitca at Julia Lubin.
5. What tendencies or groupings from common elements do you see in argentine art of the last ten or fifteen years?
Generally I perceive a great artistic production in quality, quantity and variety, which doesn’t have the social or institutional repercussion that it deserves.