ON PAINTING
Inscribed in the film of the paint one finds a world made of oblique relations characterized by an interplay of abiding inscrutability; A world built out of the familiar but transfigured.
Although accessibility seems to be highly granted, the image stays in distance, resists the attempts of appropriation. In the climax of opposing forces, via the tension of difference and similarity an intrinsic logic is constituted aiming for things to show off a different than apparent being. As a matter of fact the image is kept in a state of still being in the process of realizing itself. Piling up, layer over layer, creating something that at the same time seems to have already deconstructed itself the work states a paradoxical condition. And rather due to a self-effacing impact than its de facto substantiality it is delivered to our senses. In essence this corresponds to an impulse to continuously invent itself anew.
Overt, problematic, coincidental is the imminent status quo of the making of the painting and decisions regarding its realization can be seen as a preconceived strategy of finding meaning by loosing meaning. In that sense the technique substantiates meaning as precise formal placements; The surface serves as an apparitional epicentre of an epitomized inwardness and the resentfulness of the multi-layering embodies as mediator a perceptible aftershock. As a sublimated dissatisfaction this causes a negative pleasure whereby “something deeper” is issued.
At the intersection of having been and going to be, the moment the brush strikes a difference is torn open that becomes its own present. The strike of a stroke serves as the demarcation line where all the moments of time disappear, so that the present appears. The starting-point of this contact will always stay absent and only when the moving-intentionality is removed the image appears. In its realization into the visible this involves the coming up of the absent; A gesture of being put in question that marks a break per se. As a referential gap such a distance can never be closed. In the fraction of the semantic and visual an argument space is opened up – a gap between understanding and comprehension, imagination and reasoning.
Ute Müller, 2009