Pensamiento

An artist must be very clear about the concepts of anonimity and protagonism if he wants the results to be as pure as posible within his limitations. Why use the words anonimity and protagonism? Because I am convinced that when an artit is working on a canvas nad forget it’s him who is bringing it to life, he Works only thinking about the end result and sets aside his protagonism. That is how the idea in his mind can come to life on the canvas. The protagonism of the artist takes away from the work of art’s own freedom. A work of art must be born pure and all on its own… only when the artist accepts his supporting role as an instrument in the birth of a work of art, will it be born completely free. 

When a new exhibition is opened, showing the works of an artista over a certain period of time, we often make the mistake of undermining or distorting, mostly by accident, what i son display. Sometimes this is due to the explanations and answers given by artists themselves. How can we synthesize the contents of a whole exhibition in a few words? How can we comment on a corpus of fourty paintings as if it were a “frittata”, so to speak? How can we make up our answers to the sometimes stupid questions that commentators and gossips pose, on the go? 

We do… we answer them… and that’s the problema, that we speak and speak tirelessly. We even speak about that which we have no clue about. We often say silly things and try to explain the inexplicable. What must artists do then? Not answer? My response here is categorical: no; we mustn’t answer the question directly, but rather encourage the interviewer to have a dialogue with the autor and the work of art.  

Yes to dialoguing about the work, no to aswering questions. Yes to anonimity, no to protagonism. 

We must protect artists’ freedom in the momento of creation as well as in the moment of dialoguing about their work. We must encourage those interested in our work to have a dialogue with it. 

Jorge Rando, London, May 2008