art.
Some artists believe that their works should stand on their own, without the need for extensive —or even art-critical— explanation. I reveal the process through which my works come into being, not to determine their meaning, but because their conceptual and existential genesis is inseparable from the work itself. Making this process visible is therefore not an explanation added afterwards, but part of the artistic practice. The viewer is under no obligation to follow this path; each work remains open to being encountered and interpreted through the viewer's own experience.
For me, this is also a matter of intellectual honesty. I want to reveal myself through my work. No pretence. No cultivated mystery. What I offer is an invitation to accompany my way of seeing — not a request to do so.
For me, the most profound capacity of ART. lies in its ability to render both the detail and the whole simultaneously present. Within a work of art, there exists no hierarchy between the parts and the totality; each presupposes and conditions the other. In this reciprocal relation, the work’s intrinsic harmony gradually reveals itself as an ongoing inquiry.
Yet this is not its only excellence…
In the role of the ART.ist — whether in painting, sculpture or composing music — I perceive a particular responsibility, inherent in the act of creation itself. The artist determines every detail of the work. Even when engaging with a reference, the authorial and decisive force remains within the artist at every stage of realization. Where else do we encounter such a high degree of responsibility and self-efficacy?
One could argue by pointing to inventors of new technologies (such as the printing press, the light bulb, the telephone, etc.). However, I would disagree, as such inventions are driven by a concrete problem that needs to be solved. This problem does not arise solely from the creative imagination of the inventor.
A work of art, by contrast, is shaped —when pushed to the extreme— exclusively by the artist’s abilities and sense of beauty, as well as the chosen material. The only “problem” to be addressed is the existence of the artwork itself and the pursuit of beauty (as well as the initial question: What is beauty? and Who —or what— has the authority to decide?).
This profound responsibility stands in contrast to the pervasive conditioning of the modern, technologized world — a world in which the experience of self-efficacy and agency become increasingly elusive. It is a responsibility also reflected in the duration of the creative act itself, unfolding within a 21st-century human existence defined by extreme velocity. The reduction of information into material or tonal presence, and the resulting deceleration, returns the artist to what may appear to be human limitations, yet may equally constitute humanity’s greatest strengths.
Such a responsibility can be either overwhelming or liberating.
(Even if this pursuit of agency and responsibility may be, at the same time, the finely wrought sketch of an exquisite illusion.)


Merely a Painting of the Tip of the Iceberg, oil on paper, 100x70. 2026
The well-known idiom, "That's just the tip of the iceberg," is deliberately extended beyond its conventional meaning. The viewer is not confronted with the ballerina — the iceberg's visible summit — but only with its painted image. In doing so, the work underscores the immeasurable depth of a woman's inner reality, most of which inevitably eludes perception. Every human encounter reveals no more than the slightest trace of her true essence and grandeur, while the overwhelming remainder remains hidden beneath the ocean's surface.

Letter to the River
Oil on circular canvas, Ø 30 cm, with accompanying literary text. 2026
Dear friend,
I dreamt last night. Of you. It was a beautiful dream.
I was lying beside you. You wrapped yourself around me, holding me with a tenderness that needed no hands. It felt as though I existed only there. Nothing of my former life had followed me. No one needed anything from me, and I, too, needed nothing. Absolutely nothing.
I felt an emptiness—but not the emptiness of absence. It was the emptiness of abundance. Such a complete emptiness that it seemed life itself wished to come to an end in that very moment.
But you were there. And for that reason alone, I knew there was still something beyond it. For despite that boundless fullness, there was still your flowing—quiet, unwavering, powerful.
After a while, I felt only you. And it was precisely there that I discovered once more that your boundaries left an opening behind them. Within that opening, my gaze returned to myself.
Now I could see us both. I saw fullness and flow, and nothing else. I feel the passage of time only when what is mine brushes against what is yours. When I become part of you, instead, time dissolves. But the moment I perceive a boundary between us, it returns. Time.
And you begin to flow once more. You show me that I am mistaken. That nothing comes to an end. Ever.
Then, suddenly, I saw that you needed me. You need someone who is able to stand still, so that you may keep flowing. And in that instant, the emptiness vanished.
For someone needed me. And I needed someone.
That is what I dreamt last night. Of you. It was a beautiful dream.
With love,
me.
In my work “Letter to the River” —a synthesis of visual and verbal language— I explore the perspectival perception of the hybrid nature of time (time's dual ontological status). On the one hand, time is experienced as an absolute entity unfolding in a linear progression; on the other, it is equally a relational phenomenon that emerges only through its relation to another system. Particularly in an era shaped by artificial intelligence, society experiences the passage of time under the immense transformative force of exponential acceleration.
Letter to the River reduces the human condition to its most fundamental essence, revealing the reciprocal dynamics of needing and being needed as a foundational prerequisite for the experience of time. The river functions as a metaphor for those generative forces of the world within which human existence is embedded, transformed and continually constituted.
By framing the encounter as a dream, the work liberates this abstract plane of experience from the necessity of objective verification. Instead, it embraces a consciously subjective perspective, underscoring the profoundly human experience of lived existence at the intersection of the physical and the mental.


rythm, acryl on paper, 20x29. 2026


A men's friendship, oil on paper. 2026
Being an individual, yet never alone. Not feeling your presence, but knowing you're behind me.
Our eyes are fixed on life — each on his own path, yet in the same direction. Quiet confidence.


Who is the therapist? oil on canvas, 60x80. 2026
In Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche describes the three transformations of the spirit: the camel (the spirit of burden), the lion (the spirit of liberation), and finally the child (the spirit of creation).
Nietzsche regards the camel as the necessary point of departure for the individual who is willing to bear burdens and to say “yes” to duty and authority. From the camel emerges the lion. The lion struggles; it challenges authority and liberates itself from established values. Yet it is only the child—considered the highest stage—that possesses the capacity for creation, for creativity, and for new beginnings. It is here that the creation of new values becomes possible, once the lion has dismantled the old.
My work, Who Is the Therapist?, explores precisely this question. Today we often speak of healing the inner child. Drawing on Nietzsche’s reflections I ask whether it is not, rather, the inner child that heals us. Might it be that where supposedly unquestionable values dissolve, it is the inner child — through its renewed affirmation of life, playfulness, and spontaneity — that becomes the true therapist, awakening new creativity and the birth of new values?


high costs anyway, oil on paper with textile layer, 100x70. 2026
This painting embodies the simultaneous presence of a decision that remains entirely unresolved. To cut or not to cut — once articulated through language, the question already implies a hierarchy, as one option must inevitably be named before the other. In this visual composition, however, only the question itself exists. Both potential outcomes remain equally present, culminating in the title, High Costs Anyway. The work suggests that both choices — letting go and continuing to carry the emotional burden — ultimately exact the same price. Neither offers relief; each entails its own form of loss. The relationship between mother and son emphasizes the profound intimacy of this bond, while the umbilical cord functions as a metaphorical lifeline connecting them. The mother is depicted as perpetually young, emotionally suspended at the moment of childbirth, whereas the son has grown into adulthood yet remains dependent upon the very veins that sustain him. Although the mother–son relationship serves as a paradigmatic example of such attachment, the work extends beyond this specific constellation. It speaks equally to intimate partnerships and to any relationship in which emotional dependency becomes so deeply rooted that separation carries a cost equal to remaining entangled.
The painting is obscured by a veil that alludes to the concept of the Veil of Ignorance, introduced by the philosopher John Rawls in his influential thought experiment on justice. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls argues that the principles governing a just society should be formulated from an "original position," in which individuals are deprived of knowledge about their own social status, abilities, interests, or identities.
By analogy, the veil covering the painting invites viewers to suspend identification with one position or perspective represented within the work. The observer is encouraged to engage with it from a position of openness and impartiality.


Sisyphus' daughter, oil on paper, 62x46. 2026
Did you know that Sisyphus has a daughter? Her name is Sisy. She loves skipping rope.
Venice for socials, oil on canvas, 70x50. 2026


Dancing to the same music, oil on canvas, 50x40. 2026
The more closely the inner music of two people resonates, the greater the harmony of their interplay.


still life, oil on canvas, 30x40. 2026

through the eyes of a child, pencil and acrylic ink on paper, 14x9. 2026


Vorzeit, mixed media, 29,5 x 19,5. 2026
In Vorzeit (Pre-Time), the loss of the human face—and with it, the vulnerability and fallibility of human existence—is set in dialogue with a second plane: pre-time. Here, pre-time refers not merely to the past, but to a condition that precedes the very existence of time itself. This primordial dimension permeates human existence across all levels and is rendered through an abstract network of gestural lines. The figurative drawing occupies a separate layer, executed on translucent paper that folds over the pre-temporal dimension beneath it. While both layers are inseparably intertwined, each remains confined to its own realm, simultaneously shaping and depending upon the other without ever fully merging.


Die Sichel, acryl on paper, 12x12. 2026


no windows — just mirrors, oil on canvas, 24x30. 2026


still life monochrome, oil on canvas, 30x40. 2026

father and son, 25x17. 2026


The field, acryl, 12x12. 2026


a peach. oil on canvas, 30x24. 2026


upcoming, acryl, 14x40. 2026


still life, past and present of rural reality, graphite on paper, 28x20. 2026
to be continued...


