The most conceptual of all existing art forms
Por Lucas Castor em 5/5/25
Why is potentially the most conceptual of all existing art forms, to continually rethink their place, hence the polyhedral character of, the intrinsic nature of, does not seek to establish hierarchies or dominant positions in the evolution of, to highlight its hybrid nature and the simultaneous complexity of its contemporary forms, the artistic foundations of the artists present, it has managed to contain the most diverse formal and conceptual distances in the pictorial universe, all these tellings should come to the same conclusion, historically, is the most conceptual of all existing art forms, capable of expanding, contracting and reinventing itself without ceasing, what is important to understand is, when we speak of painting after painting, following the loss of its hegemony or dominance in the history of, above all about a type of halfway between the ideas of endurance and survival, so present in the philosophical reflections of Walter Benjamin and Aby Warburg in their interest in understanding history and its culture, and which contemporary theory practitioners have adopted in their attempts to examine the renewed energetic state of, with which the museum aims to contribute to the understanding of the history of recent art via a two-way approach, as both an exhibition and a publishing project, one of the most influential conceptual artists of, his poetical and political work is grounded in sophisticated visual ideas sustained by, after more than a decade of experimentation exploring various extra-pictorial supports, with the idea of challenging traditional, with his work making its way to the world’s most important art centres, constructs a kind of counter-narrative that distances itself from official history, enabling it to be clearly read as an anticipation of the decolonial practices that have inundated the cultural scene of our day, here is where artistic practice denotes deep reflection on the limits of, its materiality and its circulation, along with ways of understanding the relation between local and global and centre and periphery, all the while questioning canonical discourses on identity, origin and history, this fragmentary, evocative stance defies viewers to reconsider their own perceptions of memory, time and visual narrative, gives new meaning to historical and cinematographic images, creating narratives that delve into limits between memory, fiction and perception, these compositions invite visitors to immerse themselves in reflections on the distortion of reality and the many layers of meaning that arise from the work, choosing not to restrict himself to literal representation, creates works that function as spaces for reflection on the construction of history and the meaning we attribute to past events, remakes imagery and plays with visual falsehood, challenging the viewer to question authenticity and the origin of what is viewed, compositions steeped in nostalgia and critique bring us to a realm where reality and fiction are intertwined, does more than solely propose a critical revision of how we construct and perceive history, it also serves to confront us with our own realities, perceptions and truths, through this experience, has us became active accomplices to narrative, reminding us that the past can find new meaning and be reinterpreted indefinitely, with the connections between disciplines giving rise to new languages and transformational perspectives.
Não me entenda mal: eu não saio de uma cidade sem conhecer o museu de arte contemporânea local (ou saio, mas não devia). Como diria Shklovsky (bença, pai), não é o filho que aprende do pai, mas o sobrinho que aprende do tio. Ele quis dizer que um artista tem mais a sugar de outra forma que não a de sua prática. Para escrever melhor, não é ler mais: é assistir filme, olhar foto, ver quadro, ouvir música, dançar balé, tomar um susto com performance. Como escritor tenho mais a ganhar olhando para um quadro de Antonio Roseno de Lima do que lendo Mário de Andrade.
Tá bom. Chega de me desculpar, hora de bater. Se é legal interagir com as obras de um museu de arte contemporânea, ler os textos explicativos que as acompanham é outra coisa. Quase sempre, é chato pra caralho. É mal-escrito, pretensioso, vago (vem acompanhado de três qualificativos). Não diz nada. Existem exceções, mas são exceções. Ofereçam cursos de escrita criativa onde quer que se formem os curadores.
O texto insuportável que vocês leram acima é uma caricatura dos textos explicativos que vão ao lado das pobres obras nesses museus. Foram trechos tirados desses textos. São control cê control vê contorcer. Espero que tenha lhe provocado dor física e acendido uma faísca para que, na próxima vez que você for ao seu museu de arte contemporânea, ao se deparar com um belo exemplar deste animal grotesco, jogue querosene nas paredes com promessas de reinterpretação poliédrica da narrativa memorial, linguística e perspectiva.
