Over the years, I have been working, researching and trying to catch up with the market dynamics, with the social rules that today connect or destroy the relationship between the painter and the audience. I asked myself a few questions. Most of the answers ended up to converge into a fundamental question: does painting still make any sense? I used the comparison as a method to find answers. I compared my ideas with reality, my job with its resources, the present with the past.
The ultra-liberal laws of the market end up no longer affecting only art trade, but also the artistic methods and processes that constitute art, the ways in which artistic works are spread and perceived.
Therefore a certain part of the market becomes elitist and the largest part of the common public is driven to be a passive spectator of great events, kept somehow far from the artistic production and the artists. And finally, the general cultural level is impoverished, the public taste is completely flattened and, as an icing on the cake, even the word “artist” is somehow emptied of meaning, too often used inappropriately.
Yet artists, in my opinion, should be part of groups, currents, movements. In this way they would be continuously recognized, challenged, excluded or legitimated, and surely they would help art in growing and evolving in much more diffused and differentiated ways. But we seem to have lost the habit of being part of groups. And apparently also the desire to belong to them. As if the individualistic model of our society had distorted the art world, in which collaboration used to be a fundamental part of the whole process.
For these reasons today, above all, I think that painting is a form of resistance. It requires courage