From "Nicosia Water Tanks" Project
A research needs a field (and we are really in the interior of a well defined field, a space, a place or a building) but a research is also haunted by the rationale of some possible find, always oriented towards some discovery of an important promised space. A formula describing this series of works would be "impossible research" but still this will give immediately the idea of a desperate move towards the viewed field. These works are described better as "creations of finds". I don’t believe we have a process driving somewhere. Process introduces in a well structured form of a path that we know where it ends. But I believe that we have here neither a constructed type of research neither a place of destination. The selection or the installation of a collection does not really takes into consideration the chosen pieces but on the space formed by their interval. The void in between the collection pieces is more significant than any piece of the collection itself. What is interesting thus in such collections or archives is not the fragmented captures taken out of a so-called continuous process. On the contrary, the fragmented character is intrinsic for the works. The fragmented character anticipates any research methodology. We are looking for a glorification of it. Furthermore this creation of a specific void in the centre of a field is the only possible target. But still very vague, defined only by its character and not by the mere fact that a void is finally installed there. The creation of finds is a work that transubstantiates unimportant pieces to simulacra of research remains. This series of documents and representation pieces is proved more interesting and complicated than a collection of fragments collected from a real coherent research. It seeks a reading and this question of the origin of the collection installs what could be called “esthetic dimension” of the work. This transubstantiation of the pieces to a collection is a work of art, but also this passage from the fragments to a collection is the way we can think about philosophy or theory today: we remember the Benjamin description of his work as a collection of text’s fragments put in line and elaborated on the articulations that rule their connections. Furthermore there is today a quest for the meaning of piled, heap constructions because of the plethora of production in all domains. It is for this reason that the transubstantiation does not allow in these works the idealization of any collected piece. The finds are created as finds not to be honored as important documents detached from an unimportant mass but in order to shape a space that could also be created through the use of different material. There is a void that is shaped the in between space of the created finds that is important, not the material per se.