flagelacion_charro.jpg (33962 bytes)

      My individual social function as is to be a hacedor of images. It is to make an iconography of a time. One does not finish understanding that the images are part of a little while historical and that until the vísceras that one eats they change according to the time at which it is lived.

    I propose the relectura of a fact that people see constantly in the slaughter, in the street, every day. That people stop to think that has vísceras, that have devices, and eat devices, it eats vísceras, and that with that can become images; that is interesting as introspection at collective level and to obtain is necessary it to cause that the image circulates.

    The image is a totality of visible facts and in that totality it can have escultóricos elements; the man fundamentally is a hacedor of images. Lamentably, the contemporary society has been causing the division of the image concept. It is not assumed that the sculpture, the painting, the ceramics, the photography, is a same fact of image, where are concepts to deepen; one goes away only to the formal part. That concept of divided image I believe that it is an aberration.

    The more important creative fact is to be able to transform and to visualize concepts that a society still does not accept. Why an image can get to bother, because he is breaking the schemes of a declining society that needs values like misses, the super men; and to who, evidently, bothers to him that the established thing is questioned.


    The great problem of the photography in Venezuela, at this moment, is that after a massive boom and an assumption nonoficialismo, has happened to be a perfect art for the moment of economic crisis: a exhibition of photography is much more cheap and less complicated than a exhibition of painting or sculpture, for that reason the photography in many museums and galleries has been fomented.

    This has done that the photography leagues together to the negative part of the art, filling of a group of " exquisite " which they are not plastic photographers but " artists ", yet the negative that is to be plastic artist and not to be hacedores of images. The result is that the photography is lost the character of a field and has not finished acquiring the force of the other.

    One of the most important qualities of the photographic image is to be a reproducible fact, not a unique fact. In the contemporary photography every time this has minor weight; what commands is original " and unique the photography as it builds in himself, ".

    The tendency of badly called the curadores ones is to look for artists, nonphotographers; then now everybody wants to be artist, by consequence, if there is no a clear reflection with same himself and it is not acted based on the own investigation is possible to be arrived at an impasse, where has the obligation of being artist and the work becomes based on pleasing a jury, a curador, or a market.

    The problem is that there is no investigation, is work of no factory, is no a permanent process of self-criticism of the own work. Lamentably, in the photography and the art in general the mentality that is predominating is the one of miss Venezuela and the one of the lottery.

    It worries to me when I see young people acting like ministry bureaucrats. When they make a work, when they participate in a Hall, are calculating to whom they write to him, to whom they call, with whom are connected; they go " doing the cut ". That amount worries to me all about young people who are doing the cut, in the halls, in the Pirelli.

    It is necessary to follow an investigation process permanent, although there is no taking activism. The problem is not to produce in amount, but that is a permanence, certainty in the work; that without halls, premiaciones, no external governmental stimulus there is a permanent work. To go deep in the office, the discipline, the methodology of work, certainty and investigation; not to remain as much in the formal part, but to go more to the bottom, the language. The photography this taking more towards the effect of the impact of the object, without concerning the content.

    It is important to raise alternative to face the process of general decay that affects the expositivos sites. The Biennials and the Halls have been considered like the only possibility of exposing, when what is it is a way without exit where the predominance of the criteria of the curadores determines the alignment of the artists, accepted with so exposing, waiting for the acceptance of the curadores or the premiación and doing that remain certain centers of art like hegemonic temples. It is important to expose in the places that are not part of that central axis.

    It cannot be that the exit to the problems of the art proposes the deprived company, raising forums on where and how to obtain who finances the work; the art cannot be reduced to a problem of financing and " cultural management ".

    The artists have transformed into a cord of bureaucrats gathering the breadcrumbs of the private company and the government. He cannot be that the central problem of the art is reduced to how being able the " ticket " to make works. This must produce a declining art, because it does not discuss if there are problems of conceptual order, if the art responds to the necessities of the country.

    Who shuts up grants. The art in Venezuela remains in front of in silence the problematic national. There is no a voice that rises to criticize the state of the things and the crisis of the country. The problem has been reduced to see how every one is solved personally; there is no a collective conscience.

    The artists are new farándula, new miss Venezuela, they hide in the silence of the declining complicity and that is what they are teaching to him to the young people in the institutes of art formation; they are teaching to them that that is the only possibility of surviving.

    It is necessary to overcome the fear to commit themselves and to risk. If one serves so that those that come back say, if, it is possible to be resisted, already that it is important. One if it can survive without doing componenda, without falling in the traps. It is necessary to play it to it.

    To know the limits is to begin to know that one does not have limits. It is necessary to be realistic and to try to reach the impossible thing. Through the own limitations it is that one manages to discover that is limitless; knowing and breaking its limits.

    Nelson Garrido.

| Photography | Press | Comments | Special-Guest | Post-cards |