“Self portrait” has been probably the most popular theme in painting history. In this experience the artist recreates his or her “self”.
But “The Self” is a multilayer concept. One interpretation picture it as a subject of my consciousness, as which persist through time and as the source of my activities. Understanding in this way, “The self” seems to be a single, coherent and persistent entity. But this approach can be put into question.
“Selves” are “selves” in part because they have the capacity to become “other” than what they are. They can stand outside themselves, assess what they see, and within limits choose to accept or alter or abandon what they perceive. Self hood involves self- consciousness. So a “self” can be “other” to itself. But how can you be an “other” to yourself unless there is some sense in which yourself is not identical with you?
Perhaps the “self” is a rather of being which is continually being created and recreated in interaction with “others” and environments.
Many of our states like shame, love and hate have essential need to others. Without them, these experiences could not exist. As such, the self would then not be a fixed entity with definite boundaries but a process whose nature was fluid and changeable depending on the sorts of self-referring undertaken. “The self” is not a noun but a verb and exactly here it needs “the other”.
“The other” is the main theme of the current exhibition. Figures which are merged and solved in each other in a non seperatable form although one can distinguish them separately. Each figure creates the other one and all together create the whole picture.
I have no physiological look to models. More than that, I show my”self” in their figures. The border between “painter” and “model” is as liquid as the border between “the self” and “the other”.