The idea of the space between what was possible before and what could be possible later; after a crisis or a major historical event, is related to what I consider the appropriate territory for my art practice. A ‘crisis’ can be understood as an inner struggle (thesis) and ‘historical event’ as an outer socio-political struggle (antithesis). The instantaneous contradiction of each (inner-struggle and outer-struggle) enables me to engage with an unknown outcome in synthesis: a body of work. If we can identify their connections and if we critically investigate our individual relationship with the ‘dominant mode of production’ with social hierarchy, then we can unfold their complex positionality in relation to power. Once the limitations and contradictions of art practice have been determined, the obligation is to express with the incorporation and expression of these limits – the art must embody a state of reflexivity – at once of thesis/synthesis/antithesis.

 

​

Being a Propagandist artist of our time:

​

The dominant side of the “propaganda model” of the state/capitalists/privileged groups/Brahmins/white supremacists/patriarchal-military-nation supplements physical coercion with a calculated “manufacture of consent”. Therefore, if the truth of contemporary reality lies in much-censored narratives of violence and corporal suffering, the ethical and political task of the propagandist is not merely to report or represent them from a comfortable outsider’s position, but to leave oneself exposed to the brutality of the world in the course of transforming it. However, limits of the self, as well as the limits of the art practice, institution’s superficial criticality has provoked me to rethink interrogating other models for counterpropaganda.

 

This would not simply be a tool in the hands of an organized ideology, but a fearless propagator of an unsettling truth, which no discourse can contain without collapsing itself. What ‘I’ think as ‘truth,’ is a product of internal contradiction of the subject of engagement. I am aware of the need to find new aesthetic strategies of ‘with-nessing’ and testifying the truth. I intriguingly find myself trapped between the mutually contrary acts of violence and testifying truth, victimization and witnessing. Thus, the productive tension unleashed here tests, expanding and materialising my artistic capacities, which are the basis of my material production.

​

Approach and Methods: 

​

Everyday documentation of my research mostly consists of taking visual and written notes on my journal, which incorporates the experiences gathered from the socio-political resonances of my quotidian journeys, as well as social media information and interactions. Making digital/handmade posters, festoons, banners, signages, graffiti etc. for different socio-political movements, where I try to articulate and give form to my visual propaganda, be the core modality of my practice.

 

Apart from displaying in demonstrations and public places, my works have also been strategically shown at art gallery setups. However, through these strategical locations of my work, I am bound to create ‘Excess’. ‘Creating’ for me is not revealing the potentiality, as ‘potentiality’ in every compass is determined by the forces of capital. Rejection of this given potentiality can be called ‘impotentiality’; resistance against the underlined normative in art practice. ‘Excess’ comes out of realizing the representational impossibility of the subject. The subject is a synthesis of form and flux. Here carving impossibility, is precisely an act of understanding one’s own limits. This generates ‘inarticulateness’ of the subjective-self and subject-scheme. Representational impossibility is an amphibological proposition. Through this proposition, my attempt is to dismantle the contemporary hegemonic discourses and the existing empirical validity of the propaganda model.

​

I primarily draw-paint images on cheap and mobile surfaces. Through organising images and texts with different size and surfaces I create my poesis. Space, as I imagine, is an irreal entity of contrast and diversity; a world within, paralyzed and blurred by the very notion of it. Space where the idea of diversity incorporates multi-layered foliage, while the idea of 'unity' has been moulded to become a canon that ricochets.

​

Interaction between ‘text’ and ‘image’ is central to my work’s visual presence. In terms of the plastic quality of my pictorial surfaces are expressionistic but I defer from the historical ideological specificity rather such an approach allows me to draw faster, which is utilitarian or requirement for everyday basis propaganda making but aesthetically I chose certain formalistic genre to capture the contemporary ‘precariousness’ of the working-class body. This expressionistic approach allows me to address ‘incompleteness;’ the ‘Incompleteness’ of my ability to understand the ‘Other;’ or the power of ‘Other’, the excess of emotions and experiences of the precarious subject’s inarticulateness. Imagining ‘power’ in relation to ‘equality’, which is inherently absent, therefore thinking towards ‘counter-hegemonic power’ lead me to seek a different path to my propaganda practice.