In the domain of the post-industrial globalised culture, mechanised action, which in its brief history in humanity has been made in the imitation of and support to human life, gradually replaces man’s direct involvement in production and other paid labour, both manual and mental, while it progressively mediates between humans and vital natural resources.

Statistical prognoses suggest further withdrawal of large numbers of human operators from industry, while the work skills in demand will be limited to engineering and technical upkeep. 

The analogy defeats humans to mechanical apparatus, rendering manual work-skills impractical. This is an interesting contrast to think of while considering the origin of the word ‘practical’ which literally means to do (Greek prattein/ praxis).

In my own work, I use the scheme of antithesis to contrast current forms of culture with its own means. I am interested in how something created by humans can be the means to perform their own disruption or even destruction. Furthermore, how progressed aspects of culture of immaterial manifestation can be overlooked due to our prior reliance on that which is visible.

Interestingly enough, the word 'matter' linguistically relates to mother (Latin mater/ materia) alluding to the origins and source. Until today it has maintained both material and immaterial meaning (printed material, matter of fact) expanding beyond the perceptible to intelligible forms. I capture both properties engaging them in dialectical schemes which result in the art work, rendering them all practical again. This process focuses at the active conceptual properties inhabiting intellectual and physical forms, reagardless whether they are visually perceived or not. Intelligible properties are not bound by physical objects but rather address the relationships created between beings and things and the social surrounding.

The subject as individual human matter is physically absent in my works. It is evoked remotely through mechanical and mechanised operations of manufactured objects and immersed in commodities and commodified labour.  Instead of being identified with a face and a person, is perceived as an agent, a processor in action, an intelligible form which is existent, active and potent. Approached as an intelligible form, the human is recalled as category while being evidenced through his/her productive effects they evoke and merge with the productive capacities of the spectator.


The object is usually represented by an industrial product, an accumulation of objects, a result of a mechanical activity or as a commodity and ready-made forms of life possessions.

Developed through such process the art work becomes an escalating dialectical progression of readable linguistic components.

While my work has appropriated the visual tradition of drawing, painting and photography, like Happenings, it is primarily concerned with participation and the relations that the art work can initiate inside and along with the viewer. How s/he can be encouraged to move physically and intellectually from the passive reception of reality or even banality towards an inter-subjective status of existence.

Following up the Art As Life aspiration, I bring forward the environments, performances and events of daily social routines were the humans enter and already enact social roles. In my work I often take the initiative to enter intuitively in different roles and ultimately dissolve the belief that the human -and artist in particular- is a linearly constructed entity.

This element is stated through artworks which clearly reflect the production conditions of the hosting place (office, urban environment, my studio) and derive from my interest in the form that Happenings or Performance could take today along with their possibilities to expand beyond the artistic tenure.

How can Happening be recognised and not branded as such, from the office routine to the urban, social action, to the roles which we unconsciously enter and reproduce (re-enact). The art work can suggest an already active position which does not debate the fall of the (‘fourth’) wall between the artist and the audience but rather takes place in an area of no walls where the artist and the spectator are both acknoledged of their productive force and beyond.