Ver versus ver
Sabrina Amrani is pleased to present Ver versus ver, a group exhibition that invites to reflect about what is beyond the visible, including works by :mentalKLINIK, Manal AlDowayan, Joël Andrianomearisoa, Amina Benbouchta, Gabriela Bettini, Zoulikha Bouabdellah, Babak Golkar, Alexandra Karakashian, Waqas Khan, Nicène Kossentini, Timothy Hyunsoo Lee, Mónica de Miranda, Dagoberto Rodríguez, Jong Oh, Edison Peñafiel and UBIK.
Marcel Duchamp said that he was interested in ideas, and not in visual products. In this same sense, he also despised thoughts when they depended on words. But before and after Duchamp, many pages have been filled, precisely with words, to talk about abstract thought, how ideas work, the conditioning of language or the background of the concepts that words contain. The same happens with images: even knowing just one worth a thousand words, as the saying goes, they are also contained in a reality that can tell us very different things depending on the moment, the person or the place. If we do not know how to see, perhaps we are condemned to be deceived by the world. We cannot even trust what we see as categorical truths without questioning what we are seeing. Without reflecting, without looking beyond. Knowing how to see and questioning ourselves about it is an essential skill in life and art. Because the same happens with art: an artwork is not an image in itself, nor a set of techniques elaborated with more or less talent, but everything behind it.
A context, an artist and his career, a concept, a whole story that may or may not be told. So is Ver versus ver. We wanted to use a single word with a meaning that has several possibilities. The same way that implies deeper readings. Today we are not interested in the difference between looking and seeing, but between seeing (and perhaps believing what we see) and taking the moment of reflection to reach a deeper meaning. Because seeing art implies reflection. And generally, it generates more questions than answers. But are the questions that inspire our curiosity, those that lead us to experiment, those that generate conversation and also understanding. In our opinion, it is the questions and not the answers that accelerate the learning curve.
So with the same act of different depth, we can also see different artworks. To paraphrase Duchamp again, the works could be a product of the viewer and not the artist. Or are they the product of a story, a trajectory or an idea that the artist tries to communicate? And in the latter case, can we trust our personal experience and our feelings, our perception in general, will not change what the artist wanted to tell? We are convinced that these and other questions are part of the art’s magic (transportable to many conversations) and we leave the door open for everyone to make their own.