A number of the hottest, weirdest, relentlessly provocative, and a lot of accomplished paintings such as the vivid, shimmering, and that is seemingly gelatinousвЂќ (1997) and also the brute вЂњUntitledвЂќ (circa 2003), where a farcical girl bird dominatrix appears to be as much as one thing ominous may actually are suffering from out from the device like repetitions observed in the 1989 drawing вЂњUntitledвЂќ (1989). These works provide the impression to be impacted by the ancient, many breasted Ephesian Artemis fertility goddess.
Whether or not the kinds recommend straightforwardly constrained solitary intercourse types or androgynous, blended areas of the body, every thing in Paradox of Pleasure talks if you ask me associated with radical human anatomy politics of cyberpunk energy, intercourse, and physical physical violence.
That churning anima of desire places it along with H.R. GigerвЂ™s famous 1973 artwork вЂњPenis LandscapeвЂќ (aka вЂњWork 219: Landscape XXвЂќ). But unlike GigerвЂ™s alien visual, FernandezвЂ™s success is a reinvention of romanticism, where in fact the performative in addition to seem that is ingenious connected. A lot more to the stage, FernandezвЂ™s foreboding paintings share within the sliced body looks well-liked by Robert Gober and Paul Thek, specially ThekвЂ™s technical Reliquaries show, which include вЂњMeat part with Warhol Brillo BoxвЂќ (1965). Such as these designers, Fernandez appears to take pleasure in an inventiveness which can be morally negligent, gnarly, brooding, unfortunate, eccentric, and emotionally going in a manner that is maddeningly difficult to explain without mentioning brutality that is cold. It isn’t for absolutely absolutely absolutely nothing any particular one of his paintings, вЂњDГ©veloppement dвЂ™un dГ©lireвЂќ (вЂњDevelopment of the delusion,вЂќ 1961) that will be maybe perhaps maybe not in this show ended up being showcased within the 1980 Brian de Palma film Dressed to destroy (a movie beloved by particular designers for its Metropolitan Museum of Art scene, lushly scored by Pino Donaggio).
Agustin Fernandez, вЂњUntitledвЂќ (1997), oil on canvas, 103 x 132 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Daniel Pype) Agustin Fernandez, вЂњLe Roi et la ReineвЂќ (вЂњThe King and also the Queen,вЂќ 1960), drawing written down, 175 x 122 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Farzad Owrang)
Aesthetically, FernandezвЂ™s paintings of armored, pansexual closeness develop a vivid psycho geography that may be a little lumbering in quite similar means as Wifredo LamвЂ™s, Roberto MattaвЂ™s, and AndrГ© MassonвЂ™s mystical paintings. But, that is something which FernandezвЂ™s drawings, like вЂњLe Roi et la ReineвЂќ (вЂњThe King together with Queen,вЂќ1960) which calls in your thoughts Marcel DuchampвЂ™s painting that is famous Roi et la Reine entourГ©s de Nus vitesвЂќ (вЂњThe King and Queen in the middle of Swift Nudes,вЂќ 1912) have the ability to avoid. However in both mediums, also in their collages (like the startling вЂњMalcom XвЂќ from 1982), you can find complicated identifications going on that blur organic with inorganic kinds.
Duchamp first made mention of the device cГ©libataire (bachelor machine) device in a 1913 note written in planning for his piece вЂњLa mariГ©e mise Г nu par ses cГ©libataires, mГЄmeвЂќ (вЂњThe Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, also,вЂќ 1915вЂ“23), which accentuates psychological devices that really work away in the imaginary, deconstructing the Hegelian tradition of intimate huge difference founded as a dialectical and natural opposition of masculine and feminine. FernandezвЂ™s sex that is enigmatic bondage, which probes the shameless vagaries of individual desire with Duchampian panache, is an indirect outgrowth regarding the arriГЁre garde, male dominant French Surrealist preferences demonstrated into the 1959 Eros event arranged by AndrГ© Breton and Duchamp in Paris. But it addittionally shows an even more modern, tautly eroticized and flesh that is virtualized banking institutions for a hyper sexed, electronic corporeality that is synthetic, bionic, and prosthetic essentially an updated extension regarding the re territorialization of body, identification, and appearance depicted early into the feverish cyborg looks of Oskar Schlemmer and Fernand LГ©ger.
As perversely droll and symptomatic because it is to see the rhapsody of FernandezвЂ™s loveless and lopsided sadomasochistic cybernetic pleasures playing in the male mystique, i possibly could perhaps not assist but additionally see the nasty permissiveness of Paradox of Pleasure in the bright light of creative misogyny that shines from Kate MillettвЂ™s seminal 1970 study intimate Politics right through to todayвЂ™s TimesUp movement. In his many alluring compositions, Fernandez imagines the effective castration regarding the privileged male musician in relationship to your manipulated female body. Therein lies the paradox that is pleasurable. Agustin Fernandez, вЂњUntitledвЂќ (1976), drawing anchor written down, 74 x 56 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Farzad Owrang) Agustin Fernandez, вЂњMalcom XвЂќ (1982), collage, 91.7 cm x 64.5 cm (courtesy and Agustin Fernandez Foundation; picture by Daniel Pype)