I Am AnOther

The proposition that the body is an inherent part of a human might sound completely ineloquent and banal but is the body always understood as an established fundamentality? The most disturbing fact is that this inheritance is sexual and attacked by different, even brutish sexual desires and conflicts. The body can be found in the middle between itself and an other. This material of reality is dedicated to art,  conflict and sharpening lust.

The body was squeezed into many of my photography series: From Guys Life (2009 – 2018 m.), In The Village of Granny (2009 – 2018 m.), Conversations About The Love (2011 – 2013 m.), Antropology of Kitchen (2010 m.) etc.

It can be perceived as a spatial text, which opens and at the same time conceals  a polysemantic story. The body doesn’t tell about itself, doesn’t talk only about sexuality. It also touches questions of existence, nostalgia, belief, death etc. revealed through pose and relation with environment. With a little bit of knowledge, meaning starts to move into the wide network of cultural texts, gets to the unreachable horizon.  It is symbolic that a polysemantic body is presented in the theater, a place where the body is the first and the last material of artwork.

I Am Other was strongly influenced by fragments from the Bible. However, my photos don’t fully-illustrate them. A devouringly deep black color, posture and title transfer the viewer into a text, which is behind the Bible. The body, which can be seen in the photos, and references to the texts of the Apostles consolidate the position of a sexual, fleshy and greedy man. However, it is wrong to think that I am opposing the Bible to my artwork. On the contrary, I am just not able to separate sexuality from belief as it is impossible to believe without having a body.

I would like to accept that my photography suggests homosexuality but I can predict that many viewers will find some kind of connection and rebel against it. Unfortunately, viewers resents the images because of themselves without understanding them. To be accurate: works, which can be seen now in the exhibition, are influenced by the nowadays reality. I only bring back the result. There is no myself in the exhibition, so the viewer contacts only the artwork. It would be too rash to think about the erotics of men’s bodies as homosexual or to connect the idea with me. Still, this possible connection proves that distance between artwork and the viewer is very narrow. The viewer finishes the idea himself. There is no me as author in this process, only the artwork – a mirror, which reflects either positive or negative attitudes towards homosexuality. In this case both (you and me) are others.