ARTIST OF THE MONTH

PAOLO ADVANCES

1. QUESTION: You are quite an eclectic person having various cultural interests. How did you come to painting?

ANSWER: I started painting about twenty years ago. Around the age of forty. I have not taken any painting course. In this I am absolutely self-taught. From the beginning I proceeded by trial and error, letting myself be guided by instinct.

I started with watercolors, then I moved on to multi-material. For a couple of years I made some works on plastic with enamels and combustions which were also exhibited at the Sandretto della Plastica Museum in the Canavese area. From plastic I returned to the figurative. But the fluid and mobile three-dimensional concept typical of plastic has remained with me. So much so that I applied it to my Pop Art style production and in the following one. In fact, it comes naturally to me to enhance a sense of plasticity in the subjects I represent. As if behind their two-dimensional nature there was a bodily essence.

The turning point came in 2006, when after various experiments I arrived at the style that characterizes me. I do not deny that I was influenced by Photography and the potential of Digital Art. Even if on a historical level I believe I was influenced by the masters of Italian Futurism such as Boccioni and Balla. What fascinates me about their works is the kinetic power and at the same time the multi-perspective overview of their subjects. After more than a century, these works continue to keep their innovative charge intact.

What I try to do, in my small way, is to pursue a path that makes me recognizable in my research, taking a cue from Pop Art and Futurism.

2. QUESTION: What do you intend to express with your works? Is there a message you want to carry on?

One aspect that strikes me about everyday reality is the fragmentation, in communications (textual and visual) and in values. Fragmentation that is often combined with the concept of redundancy. We are continually bombarded by the mass media and social networks. The information, but also the images themselves, are repeated and transmitted to us from often conflicting perspectives and this confuses us, stuns us. I wanted to recreate this sense of fragmentation and distortion in my production. Whoever observes my works has the impression of seeing the figures, which I represent, as though through a mirror or a deforming glass. Everyone tells me this. Beyond the distorting effect, the impression I would like to convey is precisely this sense of precariousness and multiplication. The estrangement and bewilderment experienced by the observer are comparable to what I feel in the face of present reality. It is so complex, variable and dynamic that it is hard to understand it.

3. QUESTION: Are there any particular technical complexities in the realization of your works?

My works are like puzzles, with the added difficulty (not insignificant) that in each tile or square the perspective varies continuously, even if slightly. So there is almost always a minimum of overlap between one tile and the adjacent one. If distortion is added to the fragmentation, the complexity increases further.

A further element to manage is the recognition of the figures which must be guaranteed despite the fragmentation of the same. In fact, there is the risk that the figures or shapes I represent (if too fragmented) are not identifiable by the observer. And to do this, I greatly differentiate the background from the figure by using, for example, light and dark colors or color contrasts.

It is therefore a fairly complex procedure that requires well-defined figures and backgrounds. If not, there is a risk of creating a jumble of colors that confuses the observer.

4. QUESTION : What role do you think the artist should have in today's society?

Yesterday, like today, the artist should make a critical contribution to stimulate consciences too often asleep in a sort of mental torpor. Having many tools of knowledge available (many more than in the past) is not a sufficient condition for active participation in social and productive processes.

I have the impression that we often fall into a somewhat simplistic and superficial approach, perhaps as a reaction to excess complexity or redundancy of information. We take what suits us, what amuses us immediately and without many problems. This is not to say that the artist must be a pedantic and pallid intellectual. We should be able to attract and involve the everyday man using the leverage of fun and entertainment, but at the same time offering content that makes you think. Therefore, stimulate perspectives different from the banal and reassuring ones of common sense.

When an observer is baffled by my paintings, it seems to me that I have taken the right step in this direction. In short, in my small way, I prefer to provoke and "hit" rather than satisfy with a "nice" painting.

I believe that questioning is essential to raise the level of people's awareness. And the artist must set a good example by demonstrating humility and commitment, even at the risk of not being understood or being sidelined.