Luz Sepúlveda
Pedro Diego Alvarado. Transmutations.
One of the most noteworthy aspects of Pedro Diego Alvarado’s painting
is the fact that it happens to be painting at a time when this medium’s
legitimacy is being questioned. The clear rift between abstract and figurative
painting that occurred during the first half of the twentieth century eventually
evolved into a critical controversy between two-dimensional painting and conceptual
art after wwii and especially during the 1960s. It is true that—with the
exception of a few notable cases—conceptual art practically eclipsed painterly
practice during the 1960s and 70s; however, in the 1980s and 90s it once again
became prominent and consequently acquired primacy in the art hierarchy. It
is obvious that the most significant shows of the last twenty years have featured
a substantial amount of painterly works, whether their content was primarily
figurative or clearly formal and inspired by the discourse on abstraction. But
how many times has it been insinuated—often with bated breath—that
painting is dead? I believe that only the apocalypse-minded can assert such
a thing, as the history of art obviously renews and rejuvenates itself, strengthens
its foundations and thus allows painting or other media to reappear, forever
seeking to reassert their artistic supremacy.
Even
though heated debates regarding the validity of painting continue today, in
an era when practically any object can be represented—in photography for
instance—or else invented—on the computer screen—, Alvarado
keeps his distance from such diatribes and reveals his predilection for the
brush. This artist’s technique, working method, talent (whether inherited,
acquired or achieved through study), the forms he invents and the skill with
which he works and of which he displays the results make him an important component
of Mexico’s contemporary art panorama. Alvarado observes nature, grasps
its splendor, abstracts its essence and captures it on canvas. Antiquated? It
has been said that the art world would be boring and sterile if it were not
for the “ins and outs” dictated by fashion; there has been talk
of avant-garde art which challenges viewers’ expectations; fingers have
been waved at those who ignore the import of concept in a work of art; and,
in spite of the lucid arguments of “anti-painting” writers, when
exactly did the tradition of painting die? For each vanguard there is a rearguard
as Clement Greenberg once stated. For each mainstream work there exist alternatives.
And if conceptual codes were the alternative in the 1960s and 70s, today they
appear to have been more like a fad which has been yielding ground—in
terms of the quest for the intangible, the unreachable and the innovative—to
painting.
Figurative
painting has always been tied to the concept of representation. Nowadays, it
is hard to establish a hierarchy of representation since practically our entire
cognitive universe is bombarded by images. As Baudrillard warned, the sign has
taken power over the signified. The sign’s underlying meaning no longer
matters as long as the sign itself is well represented—indeed, meaning
has become irrelevant since only that which we are able to see is true. We see
images, representations, icons and simulacra which mean nothing: Baudrillard
calls this “the perfect crime.” And in a world where representation
has taken the place of ideology, the irony of history has kept a paradox in
store for us: it is precisely now that the issue of representation is most important.
A
representation, like a symbol, has a meaning, but unlike symbols, its meaning
is transcendent. Alvarado, besides working on the problematic of representation,
problematizes reality by transmuting it. What he considers problematic or, to
use a gentler term, challenging, is not the representation in and of itself,
nor its signifying process, but reality itself. Alvarado’s painting can
be seen as an attempt to solve problems, as a quest to transform a reality that
has become unsubstantial in a meaningless universe of representation. If images
are simulacra of reality, then Alvarado’s paintings are transmutations
of it. What do you do in an image- dominated world? How do you transcend the
here and now to thus be able to behold the substance of representations? Through
abstractions of reality? Or, as Alvarado’s paintings indicate, through
formal transmutations? His painting clearly points out that one can gain access
to a wide range of interpretations based on the schism between the real object
and its representation. This is expressed in most of his series: prickly pears,
agaves and organ cactus, vegetables and flowering trees, landscapes, fields
and skies full of clouds. The breadth of his repertoire is not only evident
in the finished piece as a whole, but also in the individual treatment given
to every little detail that makes up Alvarado’s canvases. How can one
make seemingly trivial paintings at a historical moment when any attempt at
dialogue is thwarted by violence? Alvarado answers promptly, but not unthinkingly:
he makes paintings which he himself enjoys, so spectators might also enjoy themselves,
at the precise moment when what we need the most is time for meditation. Gillo
Dorfles called this fragment of time—into which the artist hurls us so
we may experience aesthetic ecstasy—”the lost interval.” Without
this “diasthematic pause,” all thoughts and considerations are eradicated
when an action is performed. And then art would be useless. We need silence
to be able to process everyday chaos, and Alvarado’s paintings grant us
this period of quiescence that is a fundamental strategy of survival.
In
a prior series from 1999–2000 entitled Still Geometry, the artist used
as models the same figures as in the current show (primarily fruit, vegetables
or plants) but his execution of the paintings was quite different. If, like
the title indicates, he placed objects as in a still-life, in the current exhibition
Transmutations, the effect created within the painting is that of unhurried
movement—elements are much more free of a certain stiffness that existed
in Still Geometry. Indeed, the canvases are just as well composed but have lost
the rigidity of the earlier work. They are more obviously permeated with a particular
atmosphere, in the same way that the “transmutations” reveal a texture—in
the tactile as well as visual sense—which speaks of a much purified technique.
The refinement, visible at first glance, is due to the laborious persistence
of someone who knows his craft and who, at the same time, has evidently allowed
himself greater creative freedom. In the apparently modest landscape Tequila
Agaves, for instance, rows of agave plants in the foreground vanish into the
distance, in a composition whose classic perspective is crowned by two hills
with the sky as a backdrop. The piece’s stillness recalls de Chirico’s
metaphysical paintings, though Alvarado does not allow himself to be absorbed
by the aura of mystery prevalent in the Italian painter’s work. On the
contrary, he gives shapes room to breathe: spaces allow waves of air to caress
the plants; nonetheless, the viewer is gripped with a sense of deathly silence.
In this same tone, Vertical Datura and Horizontal Datura are excellent pieces
featuring close-ups against carefully rendered backdrops which permit the main
figure to stand out and evince the smallest details. The space is more confined
but does not seem to cramp the dancing flowers. The works Unripe Bananas and
Watermelon and Pineapple and Grapefruit lend quite a different impression, possessing
a “moving (as opposed to still) life” quality which the earlier
work did not reveal. In the first painting, a bunch of bananas rests on a watermelon
while in the foreground juice trickles out of the flesh of another watermelon,
sliced open. In the second, the sliced fruit (melon and pineapple) are also
dripping with juice, flesh and fiber. In both cases the texture is exquisitely
painted, and what distinguishes these two pieces is the fact that they are at
once close-ups and reworkings—appropriations and recontextualizations—of
previous pieces of Alvarado’s, making them even more interesting in terms
of form and conceptual structure.
Fruit Stand and Vegetable Stand are of a different vein and larger size, depicting fruit and vegetables the way they would normally be displayed: arranged in crates, rows or mounds in order to appeal to shoppers. Although these pieces are more conventional both in terms of their content and effect, their process of execution recaptures the flowing, dynamic movement of other pieces. Color, form and the general composition bespeak of an exercise in which the artist did not ignore a single detail in the painting in order to achieve truly outstanding results.
There is another series, entitled Emblems, that Pedro Diego Alvarado painted in 2001, between the two aforesaid series. Here the artist swore off geometry but did not leave out the deliberate tranquillity present in all of his other works. Prickly Pear from Teotihuacan, Oaxacan Organ Cactus, Plantains or even certain contrasting pieces such as Mitla, Spirit and Substance or Crucifixion are a foretaste of what the artist presents in Transmutations. Open spaces and flat backgrounds in subdued colors underpin soaring figures depicted in all their splendor, revealing every single detail filled with textures, waves, light, shadows, reflections and formal density. Recent works like Mameyes and Pomegranates are related to this series insofar as they are also close-ups of represented objects in which the fruits’ shadows blend into the canvas’ background, allowing the main figures’ shapes to stand out.
Transmutations also includes a series of works made in a square format. In a certain way, the images’ closeness distorts the viewer’s vision as the images’ proportions seem to grow; similarly, the artist depicts fragments of other elements—vegetables, fruit, baskets, shelves, etc.—which forces us to focus our attention on his exquisitely—crafted details, while the fragmentation also reveals his thorough knowledge of a given form’s structure.
Whether it is a nopals, pears, pitahaya or pomegranate, cauliflower, leeks or radishes, each form’s intrinsic elements are used by Alvarado as a pretext to represent them in their entirety and face the viewer with a prolonged “interval of silence” thanks to which we may allow ourselves a moment of aesthetic catharsis.